Snape as Noble teacher/ Snape *not* a Sadist

[horridporrid03]

No: HPFGUIDX 168346

> >>Betsy Hp:
> > This is the first potions lesson in PS/SS.  And I think          
> > everything that occurred there was Snape's normal teaching       
> > method.  I'd bet every first year got to hear that speech and     
> > I'll bet every first year class had near impossible questions    
> > thrown at them.  It's Snape's "pay attention, this will not be an 
> > easy course and I will be *extremely* demanding" moment.
> > 
> > That he singled out Harry (because I'm fairly sure he spread his 
> > questions around normally) has nothing to do with Snape enjoying 
> > watching Harry suffer, IMO.  Snape is going on the offensive     
> > trying to head Harry's ego (and the class's hero-worship) off at 
> > the pass.  
> > <snip> 
> > But I don't see this as Snape enjoying watching Harry squirm for 
> > the sake of making a small child squirm.  Especially since Harry 
> > *doesn't* squirm.  (Actually, I thought he was very Snape-like in 
> > his refusal to fold when faced with overwhelming odds. Oh, those 
> > two. <g>)

> >>Alla:
> But look at what you wrote though :) I am going to say something 
> about this and then just cut all other explanations because you     
> know what you wrote anyways and ask a question.
> 
> How does what you wrote here shows noble teacher's behavior? I     
> mean, teacher is not supposed to downsize child's ego, no?

Betsy Hp:
IMO, actually a teacher *should* "downsize a child's ego" if that ego 
is getting in the child's way of learning.  That's what Snape (IMO) 
feared might have been occurring with Harry.  I mean, the *staff* was 
fainting in Harry's presence.  So Snape played the big dog and made 
sure his class knew that celebrity or not Harry was just as much a 
dunderhead as the rest of them.  I mean, it's not like he left Harry 
in tears or anything.

> >>Alla:
> He is supposed to make him interested in learning, etc.

Betsy Hp:
Exactly.  And in my opinion, this is exactly what Snape does.  He 
gets his class interested in learning.  Either because they want to 
prove their own worthiness (ie Hermione and probably most of 
Slytherin) or they want to avoid Snape's wrath (ie the Gryffindors).  
I honestly see nothing wrong with that.

> >>Alla: 
> And Harry read his books, etc. He is excited, curious. He views    
> Snape as having a gift to keep class quiet and here he comes. But   
> whatever I am just saying that I do not get how this behavior can   
> be considered noble, even in your interpretation that is.
> 
> And with other examples it gets even better. It seems like with     
> scene in GoF we agree that Snape was mocking Harry and that OOP    
> scene was bad as well, we jjust disagree as to "degree of badness", 
> no?
> 
> But then you go ahead and characterize Snape as noble teacher      
> towards Harry. So, I am just not seeing where it is coming from.

Betsy Hp:
Actually, I was characterizing Snape as a noble man.  Period.  I 
think he's got a high sense of principles and that he risks 
everything to make sure that right prevails.  He's an excellent 
example of doing what is right over what is easy. (And I'm not using 
the word "noble" to stand in for "perfect" just to be clear. <g>)

That said, because I think Snape is a good teacher and because I 
think he puts tons of effort into *being* a good teacher, I do see a 
certain amount of nobility in his teaching.  The nobility of taking 
pride in your job and doing it well, I suppose.

When it comes to Harry, however, I definitely agree that both Harry 
and Snape have had their wires crossed for many, many years.  And I 
do agree that the original crossing <g> occurred when Snape misread 
Harry in their very first potions class together.  And I'll even say 
that as the adult Snape carries the responsibility for this 
occurrence. 

> >>Alla:
> And with Neville, I just want to say that IMO JKR showed very      
> nicely by mentioning that Neville had detention with Snape again in 
> GoF that nothing that Snape did in PoA helped Neville one bit.

Betsy Hp:
I totally disagree.  I think we've got the proof of the dog that 
*doesn't* bark (Neville's potions are no longer exploding with 
regularity), and the proof of the dog that *does* bark (Harry 
compares his own potion to Neville's and realizes that Neville's is 
better).  [The barking dog was a bit of Sherlock Holmes humor; I 
apologize for the self-indulgence. <g>]

So I tend to think that JKR showed us that Neville *doesn't* have the 
same sort of problems in Potions that he did back during his crises 
year in PoA.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/168328
> >>Bart:
> Snape IS a sadist. I think JKR has made that much clear.

Betsy Hp:
Argh!  No! I *hate* this pov. (Um, of course you're free to have it. 
<g>)  I think if JKR was trying to make it clear that Snape was a 
sadist she failed miserably.  She clearly showed the sort of pleasure 
Fake!Moody got out of emotionally torturing Neville and physically 
torturing Draco, and the pleasure Umbridge got out of doing both to 
Harry.  She has not done so, IMO, with Snape.

> >>Bart:
> It may ALSO be an effective teaching technique, and he may pretend 
> that this is what he is doing, but he gets joy over the suffering   
> of others. I know the style of teaching he is pretending to use;   
> you are brutally frank with your students. When they fail, you let 
> them know damned well they failed, and WHY they failed. But, if they
> succeed, you also let them know that.
> <snip>

Betsy Hp:
And now I'm confused.  So you're saying teachers that employ that 
method *are* sadists?  That would mean McGonagall is a sadist right?  
I'm not sure I'm getting your definition here.  Because while I do 
agree both McGonagall and Snape use the "brutally frank" method, and 
I agree that both are quite free with delivering punishment to those 
who fail, I don't get the sense that either character really *enjoys* 
seeing their students suffer.  Not like Fake!Moody or Umbridge do.

I mean, I know it's a common argument (Snape *loves* seeing folks 
suffer) but it's one that I've yet to see a good canonical proof 
for.  Gosh, even when Snape kills Dumbledore he neither taunts, 
gloats, nor even hangs afterwords around to revel in the act.

I'm also confused about why you think Snape is "pretending" to use 
the above method.  I'd say he uses it and to good effect.  It's what 
I like about him as a teacher, actually.

Betsy Hp