On the perfection of moral virtues.

[julie]

No: HPFGUIDX 168904



> 
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "eggplant107" <eggplant107@>
> wrote:
> 
> > Snape's trust? I was not aware that Snape trusted anyone, least 
of 
> > all Harry. And if Harry violated Snape's privacy it was only 
after 
> > Snape violated Harry's first, and rubbed his nose in it... 

Meghan:
> So, two wrongs make a right? I do think that Snape should've given
> Harry a chance to remove any especially painful memories before
> starting his lesson. However, Harry had absolutely *no* right to go
> snooping around someone else's memories. IMO, it's the lowest thing
> Harry's ever done, including Sectumsempra. 

Julie:
This has been the crux of many debates about HP. Whether a wrong
is a wrong is a wrong, or whether the wrongness of the act is
dependent on *who* is performing the act. Should the good guys
be given a pass because they are "good" or should they be
held to the same (or even a higher) standard because they 
are the good guys and should behave better than the bad guys?
I think the latter, but not everyone does.

Eggplant:
> > ("Who's dog was it?" Snape said just to make sure Harry knew 
he'd  
> >  seen humiliating incident).

Meghan:
> That is your interpretation, you're entitiled to it. Mine (and I am
> not a big Snape fan) is that Snape might possibly, maybe, been 
feeling
> the tiniest bit of sympathy for Harry. 

Julie:
This scene probably the best example of how different 
perspectives lend different conclusions. In my reading,
I contrasted Snape's behavior here ("That is not a bad
as it might have been," his mere observation rather than
usual openly scathing remarks when seeing Harry's memories)
as a clear improvement over his earlier behavior toward
Harry, whereas other fans simply read it as *more* of the
same if (perhaps) to a lesser degree.

And so the debate continues ;-)

Julie