Harry's detention in HBP /Slytherins LONG READ AT YOUR OWN RISK

[dumbledore11214]

No: HPFGUIDX 168303

> > >>Sherry:
> > Yeah, noble guy Snape.
> > <snip>
> 
> Betsy Hp:
> I actually do think Snape is a pretty noble man.  He's never 
struck 
> me as the type to torment innocents just to get his jollies.

Alla:

I am **honestly** trying to understand the view that Snape would 
never torment an innocent just to get his jollies, I really am, but 
when from so many pages I see Snape doing just that and in something 
which I just don't see how it can be interpreted differently, it is 
really hard to understand where you are coming from. I understand 
your POV so much better now on quite a few issues, I think, but I am 
afraid this one will always be a great mystery for me.

The following could be read as sarcastic, it is actually **not**, 
truly. It is more like utter disbelief I am feeling when I am typing 
it. Like if you think of something which is canon fact for you and 
somebody comes out with some interpretation which I am trying to 
figure out and have no clue how.  Same thing for me here. Respect 
your view and all that, but feeling a bit frustrated that am unable 
to understand.

I mean Snape would never torment an innocent just to get his 
jollies. I mean, would he attack a boy who just came to the whole 
new world on his lesson, even when the boy is quite likely to be 
nervous?

I mean, who Snape? <g> I mean, would he take away the book from that 
boy who was reading outside? No, because that would be silly. Would 
he belittle boys' father to his face, whose death he took part in? 
No, he is too noble for that, LOL.

And Snape would never make fun of that boy, who wants Dumbledore 
help to help the dying man, no, that would be so not Snape. :)

And Snape would never break the potion that the boy made, no, he 
would never do it. After all, grown man exercising vengeance on the 
child, would be just that - tormenting innocent?

Oh, and of course Snape would never threaten to poison another boy's 
toad and would never assign him a detention to cut those other 
lizards/toads.


And I see Snape actually enjoying not just the fact that Harry 
reading James and Sirius' detentions - NO, I see him enjoying 
reminding Harry that they are both dead ( the record of their great 
achievements remains).

I mean, Harry still may be grieving, but let's rub it in Snape. I 
find so very despicable, sigh.

I mean, as I mentioned couple of times before I am able to grasp 
when people see different degree of wrongness of Snape's treatment 
of Harry. Like I see him as disgusting child abuser and somebody 
sees him like a jerk and even a jerk on DD side, I get it.

But when Snape's treatment of Harry is characterized as **nobble**, 
I find it mind boggling, personally. Sorry! Again, respect and all 
that, just do not get.

But that is of course just my opinion.

Betsy:
<SNIP>
> So I think that was more Snape's motivation than any scheme to get 
> Harry to dislike James.  Just get Harry to pay attention to the 
fact 
> that he's being punished.  That no matter how his fans spin it 
(and 
> they *do* spin it, that very same day) what Harry did to Draco is 
> causing Harry some bad times and therefore he might not want to do 
> something like that again.

Alla:

And the record of their great achievements remains. I think him 
saying speaks to the fact that Snape was first and foremost enjoying 
reminding Harry that his father and his father figure are dead.

I find it especially ironing that we know that Snape took part in 
the death of James, at least claims to take part in the death of 
Sirius and AKed Dumbledore - Harry's last remaining father figure.


> Magpie:
> I'm not telling you what *you* mean at all. I know *you* just mean 
> that the Slytherin would be shown doing noble things whether or 
not 
> they had anything to do with Harry. I was making a comment about 
the 
> way things usually seem to work in canon so far, not on any hidden 
> meaning in your post. There are even characters who are basically 
on 
> Harry's side, or at least not against him, who still get slotted 
as 
> not good because they're not good enough on that score. So I 
realize 
> what you're saying, I'm just saying that the way the books have 
been 
> so far we don't usually see people just being presented as 
generally 
> good who don't usually also wind up pretty cool with Harry. Just 
as 
> Regulus, if it turns out he struck a blow for Voldemort, will 
> probably be cool by Harry (he is an ally even if he didn't know 
it, 
> and was never an enemy). I know that *you* can appreciate a 
> Slytherin doing a good deed without being a friend of Harry. 

Alla:

Oh sorry. I see what you mean now. Sure it is often true, because I 
do believe that often enough standards of being on good side are 
applied as being good.

I disagree that it is always true though, because while I see what 
you mean for example about Regulus, who may become Harry's ally and 
friend, etc, I think Andromeda's rejecting purebloodism and marrying 
mugleborn is likely to have nothing to do with Harry. I can be wrong 
of course. But even if it has nothing to do with Harry, I think it 
is a wonderful example of showing that Slytherin rejecting their 
philosophy that muggleborns are second hand, etc.

Oh, maybe that would work for me as well - somebody briefly 
mentioning that pureblood from Slytherin dates Muggleborn, **any** 
muggleborn, lol, which has nothing to do with Harry. Would this deed 
be cool by Harry and his side? I guess so, but this is also I 
believe an objective showing, etc. And no, I do not mean Draco and 
Hermione, LOL.

Oh maybe that is too cliché . Maybe even to show that say Seamus has 
friend in Slytherin. Something, anything to show that not everybody 
shares that philosophy.


 
> Magpie:
> I'm talking about these very DE kids. My point is that you are 
> defining "good" as a kid that you put into the good rather than 
the 
> bad category.

 I am saying that the kids you consider to be bad--
> Draco, Crabbe, Goyle, Montague, Pansy, Blaise, Theo and any other 
> faceless kids we have seen, are not simply "bad." That the house 
is 
> defined by these kids we see in it, and that they must be brought 
> back into the fold and the school made whole. It's the potential 
> good in them that matters to me, not potential other students in 
> their house, something I think is backed up by JKR not creating 
ones 
> that break the stereotype much.


Alla:

Ah. Got it now. So you are basically saying that there is good in 
those kids, we just do not see it. Okay, I was just honestly trying 
to make sure that I am not missing anything from canon and not 
missing any kid I forgot about doing something spectacular. You are 
basically talking about those kids doing good things and reader 
seeing it.

Okay, that may well be. Are you talking about rehabilitating them, 
since you said about potential good or you think they are good as it 
is now?

I am just trying to find out how is this potential good you see in 
them can come through in one book?

Maybe it is time to agree to disagree, because if those are good 
kids, then Slytherin house sounds to me like rather sorry bunch of 
losers.

But if they all reject Voldemort at the end of book 7, I will eat my 
yummy crow, I promise again :)

That is why I think so many people wanted to see the good Slytherin, 
because they saw nothing good in the Slytherins we encountered so 
far and I am certainly among those people.

I mean, picture is certainly a bit more diverse among the adults, 
but kids are all losers big time, if you ask me.  I suppose you can 
say that the ideology that they serve does not define them as 
individuals? But to me it really really does, even if they feed 
homeless kittens in their spare time ( Sorry for using that analogy 
again, but I cannot seem to come up with something better) 
Obviously, just my opinion.


> > Alla:
> > 
> > My question is again **who** are they? Forget about Draco Malfoy 
for 
> > a second and tell me which Slytherin kids you met that are not 
bad. 
> > I understand that certainly realistically there are good kids 
there, 
> > they just have to be. But where are they in the book? Whom else 
do 
> > we meet but DE kids?
> 
> Pippin:
> They are the ones who stood to drink to Harry in GoF. We know that
> Malfoy, Crabbe, Goyle and many of the other Slytherins refused.
>  But not all of them. We don't know the refuses by name,
> but then we don't even know two of the Gryffindors in Harry's own
> year.  

Alla:

Well, yes, I agree this would count, but again – not even names for 
them. We don't know who they are, no? Just feels almost like nothing.

Pippin:
> As for whom we've met, Blaise, Pansy, Marcus Flint, Adrian Pucey, 
> Bletchley and Terrence Higgs do not have DE fathers, AFAWK, and 
> that's just from the first book, I suppose there are more. 
> 
> As far as I know, none of the above have done anything terrible. 
> They play a rough game of Quidditch, and Flint took part in 
> trying to distract Harry, but as for thinking that a phony 
> dementor would make him fall off his broom, c'mon.
> 
> They were all on the train with Harry, they know what a real
> dementor feels like, and any kid older than eight who thinks
> they could produce an effect like that just by putting on a 
> costume would be as cracked as Moody's old Foe-glass.

Alla:

They may not have done something terrible, although they did not 
anything good either if you ask me and I do think that every one of 
them who did make an appearance portrayed rather badly in everyday 
life. Didn't Pansy called Ginny Muddblood in HBP or was it Blayse? 
The *name characters** sure, I agree, they could be good kids, but 
that is my point. I want to **see** them doing something, not just 
being named.

And as to Marcus, well, we have to agree to disagree as well and I 
was under impression that he does have DE father, are you sure that 
he is not? But he is such a bully IMO in any event.


Pippin: 
> We also know that the kids in Draco's compartment scarcely dream 
> of joining Voldemort. Doubtless they expect that everyone 
> will have to join Voldemort if he wins, but I don't see
> any of them except Draco plotting to bring that about. When
> Draco boasts of his secret mission, who offers to help?
> Crabbe and Goyle don't seem like eager  volunteers.

Alla:

Sorry, Pippin, but that lovely compartment sounded to me as much 
scene of DE wannabes as it could be. They **liked** to hear what 
Draco was saying, no? As to nobody offered to help, did Draco ask? 
They IMO thought that whatever LV orders should be just done and if 
Draco received that particular honor.