[HPforGrownups] Re: Snape as Neville's teacher / JKR's sexy men roll call

[Magpie]

No: HPFGUIDX 168562

Dana:

And if it isn't the same as you imply then why is it enough for Snape
to want to try to settle the score? If it meant nothing and he did
not owe James anything then there is no score to settle.

Magpie:
For the reason Dumbledore said--people are funny sometimes. If Snape owed 
anything, he owed it to James, who is dead. Dumbledore, btw, did not say 
that Snape tried to save Harry because he owed James, he said he believed 
that was the reason Snape "worked so hard" to keep Harry safe, which is 
slightly different. Snape can very much feel a bond to James he can never 
undo, a magical version of the emotional tie you would feel to a person in 
that situation.  But I don't think that necessarily undercuts Snape's 
actions, making them magical compulsions.


Montavilla47:
> Let's see.  He claimed to have aided in the deaths of two people:
> Emmeline Vance and Sirius Black.  He killed Dumbledore.

Dana:
You are forgetting James and Lily here and it almost killed Harry.

Magpie:
But he also took steps to try to undo that.


Dana:
I do not count OotP because in my opinion he is still as much at
fault for this ordeal happening in the first place so that cancels
out his action of saving those 6. I would have been happy to count it if he 
had done something to prevent Harry facing the DE's if Snape
had risked his cover by informing the Order of LV's plan but he did
not and I still believe Snape was very aware when Harry went of to
the DoM when it was mentioned that Snape knew Harry was in the Forest with 
Umbridge which in my opinion he could not have known if he did not see them 
go in himself)

Magpie:
I know it's pointless my making this objection again, but it's just hard to 
believe you would be "happy to count it" when you've come up with such, imo, 
flimsy and non-canonical reasons for not counting it.


Dana:
I do not count Narcissa's life because it was never at risk and he
might have put her more at risk with taking the vow and LV finding
out she went against his whishes just as Draco's lifesaving can't be
counted because Draco is still at LV mercy and was never at risk from dying 
by DD's hand.

Magpie:
A UV is a risk no matter which way you slice it, period. It doesn't have to 
be a risk for a good reason, but you can't have characters putting 
themselves under spells that will potentially kill them and call it not a 
risk.


Dana:
He never puts his own life at risk once and to be honest I believe he 
notified the Order but also notified LV that he did it for LV to show up at 
the DoM and covering his own butt. Tell me how else did LV know the DoM 
ordeal went sour for him to go in himself? Mhhh interesting thought isn't 
it.

Magpie:
That's a new one. So why isn't Snape in as much disgrace as Lucius? LV 
certainly didn't need Snape to tell him anything to have ways of knowing 
what was going on at the Ministry.

Alla:

Ah. I see. I was confused too, sorry. But in that case let me assure
you that favoritism is **not** the most important reason why I
believe Snape should never teach. I mean do not get me wrong, I do not like 
at all  that he picks favorites and would prefer Slughorn
did not do it either, but to me it is what Snape **does** to his non-
favorites students is the main reason why I detest him so much.

Magpie:
I see now--and that's what I thought in general on the thread.

Alla:
If he ignored them, did not give them as much
attention as he gives Draco, while still grading fairly which I
believe Slughorn does, it would have bothered me much less.

Magpie:
Actually, I don't know whether Slughorn grades fairly. This is such a fuzzy 
area in the way it only seems to matter what they do on exams, and Snape and 
Slughorn both seem to grade normally that way, I guess. But if it comes to 
just being a jerk with what the kids get in their classes, so that Snape's 
giving Harry a zero on a Potion he dropped was grading unfairly, I'd have a 
hard time believing Slughorn isn't giving higher marks to his pets. That 
seems to be the implication when he looks at everyone's Potions at the end 
of the classes, and the reason Hermone gets frustrated.

> Alla:
> >
> > When people who need the class, may not be able to get in it
because
> > of how Snape teaches. Like what Phoenixgod said - setting unfair
> > classroom. But sure, OWLS are the key.
>
> Magpie:
> And the same is true for every other class. Why point out only
Snape for
> this?  He doesn't even seem to be a teacher particularly
struggling with
> getting his kids to focus and take his class seriously.


Alla:

Why point Snape only? Because I believe he is the worst offender. I mean 
that is IMO obviously and there are other teachers for sure, I
just believe he is the worst in that area, so I am pointing it.

Magpie:
Really? Because it seems to me kids are far more interested in Potions 
classes than they are in other classes, making other people the worst 
offenders. Like Binns, for example.

Alla:
But contrary to what Snape does, I absolutely believe that what
Slughorn does is **not** abuse of his authority. Does it make sense?

Magpie:
I guess I'm probably seeing the same difference between them here. Snape 
uses his greater power as an adult and as a teacher to bully the kids. 
Slughorn is just subtly separating the wheat from the chaff (sp?). I don't 
think I'd refer to it as an abuse of authority, but I think it's potentially 
equally damaging if harder to pin down. But it does remind me of things 
people do protest about in the real world.

Alla:
I believe that as extracirricular activity it is his right to do so,
if that makes sense. While I do not believe at all that Snape is
entitled to do what he does to Harry and Neville in class. I am all
for Slugghorn giving more attention to Ron for example. But the
thing is I do not think he is **obligated to do so**.

Magpie:
I agree that Snape really has no right to pick on Harry and Neville in 
class, and that Slughorn has a right to his extracurricular activities. But 
I also find myself still leaning towards Snape as the better of the two, 
even if Snape's activities are more intensely unpleasant when they happen.

> Magpie:
> It's a coincidence, yes. Slughorn is afraid of the DEs and is
protecting
> himself. But he's fine promoting Blaise, who has the same values,
because
> he's a Pureblood from a good family (and hot).

Alla:

The fact that Blase is not a DE means to me that he does have some 
difference in values. I mean, not much I will agree with that and I
would even say that I will not be surprised if he becomes such, but
to me still not the same thing. I mean he certainly shares pureblood
philosophy etc.

Magpie:
But none of these kids are DEs except Draco, and that is only because of 
unusual circumstances of which Slughorn knows nothing. He's not keeping Nott 
out of his club because he's a DE, but because his father is a DE. And 
anyway, someone not actually being a DE can say more about what they're 
willing to do for their values than what their values are. Lucius wasn't a 
DE from PS/SS--GoF.

Magpie:
If Theo Nott were another
> Sirius Black in terms of rejecting his family's values he'd be
rejected too.

Alla:
He would be? So far Slughorn expresses regret that he did not have two Black 
brothers in his house, one of whom he now knows rejected his family, no?

Magpie:
Yes, he would be. Slughorn was talking about his attitude years ago, before 
he was running from the DEs. He's not interested in the children of Death 
Eaters now. He doesn't say it matters who the child is.

Magpie:
> Sure in Malfoy's case the apple doesn't fall far from the tree,
but there's
> nothing inherently admirable about judging the kids based on who
their
> parents are, be their parents DEs or Muggles.

Alla:

Admirable? I guess not. I was arguing that Slughorn wanting to stay
away from DE and their kids by assosiation is his choice, not
coincidence. I also would find it far more not admirable if Slughorn
did not want to stay away from DE and their kids.

Magpie:
Yes, it is a choice. I was pointing out what the choice was. For instance, I 
would find Slughorn far more admirable if he gave DE children an equal 
chance as other children, but wasn't basically okay with a lot of their 
basic Pureblood Supremist beliefs.

Alla:

Yep, I think so too. My question is what is wrong with it? No, not
with Lucius values. I see plenty of wrongs there. What is wrong with
Slughorn wanting to collect him? I mean, just in general.

Magpie:
Because Slughorn's "collection" is about keeping "the right sort" in the 
positions of power. (I think people tend to focus a bit too much on the few 
girls we know of to prove he's looking strictly at abilities here, but he's 
blatantly not. Even Harry senses the tokenism at work when he talks about 
his mother.) I also don't see how it doesn't undercut what you feel is 
admirable about him in the first place for avoiding DEs in their kids.

-m