Snape Does the Odd Thing Right, but is Not a Nice Man Nevertheless.

[Goddlefrood]

No: HPFGUIDX 169133

> In:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/169110

> Pippin:

> I don't understand the minus one hundred on the morality
> scale. Snape was cleared of charges -- he'd earned his right
> to be considered no more a Death Eater than Albus Dumbledore.
> And no, I don't think Dumbledore was wrong about that. If
> he was wrong about that he was wrong about everything.

Goddlefrood:

The reference is to something that occurs in the Hitchhiuker's 
Guide to the Galaxy series and is a favoured way of expression 
for one Zaphod Beeblebrox.

The Pensieved Council of Magical Law sittings contain too little 
information about Snape to form an adequate conclusion as to 
*how* and *why* Severus was cleared. It goes to the matter of 
whether Dumbledore's trust was jusitified. I've said before that 
as far as Albus himself was concerned Snape's ostensible reason 
for repenting his ways was accepted and *good enough* for Albus.

Whether that then equates to his being no less a Death Eater 
than Albus Dumbledore is a moot point. Snape *is* a Deatrh Eater 
whether or not he is DDM. No one leaves the Death Eaters and 
Snape has convinced Lord Voldemort that he remains loyal. Had 
he not done so he would probably be no more. In other words the 
statement of Albus's at the proceedings seen in the Pensieve 
proves nothing whatsoever.

In many people's eyes in *canon*, and more particularly after 
that business on the tower, he is a Death Eater and a loyal 
one, so where does that then leave the above extract from 
Pippin? IMO, nowhere, that's where.

Snape *has* done some things right. One is the brewing of and 
provision of the Wolfsbane Potion. He is also a good Potions 
teacher, he gets that right, not perhaps for all his students, 
but in general. He is also a somewhat convivial host when 
entertaining the Black sisters in Spinner's End. So he is also 
capable of quite civil social interaction.

I would even go so far as to concede that he did good things in 
Philosopher's Stone, it still does not make him nice, and that 
is a view that I apprehend Mike is trying to impress on this 
thread. It certainly seemed clear enough to me.

> In:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/169111

> Leslie:

> But this brings up an issue with me and the Snape critics, 
> which is that because of what I perceive as an unreasonable 
> anti-Snape prejudice, Snape can NEVER do anything right. 
> Snape's actions, even if they save people's lives, or put 
> his own life in danger, are always somehow wrong or lessened 
> or called into question because of his unpalatable 
> personality.

Goddlefrood:

I criticise Snape and the argument presented herein and 
elsewhere should make that clear enough. Do you see any 
unreasonable anti-Snape bias here? It actually appears 
that, and many's the time when this hypothesis has stood 
up, that the bias is rather the other way around. 

The perception held by our hypothetical individual is that their 
way of looking at things in terms of their disagreement with an 
argument must be *the* way of looking at things. All rather 
subjective, but of course that is human nature. The true skill 
in argument comes from being able to look at matters from 
multiple angles and appreciating the ideas of others, whether 
or not subjectively one would agree or disagree with them.

A handy tip, perhaps.

> Leslie again:

> Snape is not a very nice guy. And I don't like him. But he does 
> the right thing. The facts don't lie.

Goddlefrood:

The facts are what you interpret them to be. They may differ 
with the interpretation of others. I just finished a three day 
hearing and the facts were presented. They are quite simple. 
The Court, using the above statement, would immediately find 
in favour of the claimant as the "facts don't lie". He may 
or he may not, he will decide the outcome based on his 
interpretation of the facts. That is his entitlement, and 
IMO, the entitlement of anyone on this or any other discussion 
forum.

In other words, you'll have to do better than that to convince 
many here, good luck with that.

Snape does not always do the right thing, that a perception that 
he tries to do the right thing from a certain viewpoint, which I 
for one do not share, is not one that should be difficult to 
appreciate, as I do appreciate the argument. I simply disagree 
with it for reasons set out in many and varied posts both here 
and elsewhere in cyberspace.

As one example of a situation where Severus did not do the 
right thing, and because it is a matter that is currently 
under discussion in this thread, it is my view that he did 
not do the right thing in following Lupin into the Shack in 
PoA without notifying anybody else. Perhaps to his catalogue 
of character flaws we should add 'show pony'.

I'll qualify all this with my usual Caveat, which is that I do 
hope that Harry will be assisted by Snape, whatever Snape's 
motives for doing so might be. If Severus is working contrary 
to Harry's stated aims then Harry will almost certainly fail 
in his aims, and that is an outcome to the series that would be 
unsatisfactory and most probably consign it to history rather 
more quickly than if it has a successful outcome for Harry's 
quest.

> In:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/169127

> Leslie:

> But your position neatly illustrates my point, which is that 
> Snape critics believe he can do no right and the characters 
> that are likable can do no wrong. You cede that Snape does 
> good, but then declare that good "irrelevant" to "the moral 
> issues at stake", effectively rendering his goodness 
> nonexistent.

Goddlefrood:

Well, see above and I'll even dispense some further advice. Once 
a point has been made, and assuming the counter to that point is 
only to repeat the earlier point it is of more interest and 
advances a point of view better to simply say, well this is a 
matter upon which we disagree, and then move along to make a new 
point that might advance a discussion.

I certainly do not agree that all the actions of the so-called 
good are right, and surely neither would anyone here. Each 
character has flaws. Albus withholds information, perhaps 
unnecessarily, Lupin has obvious character flaws that have been 
discussed ad nauseam, Sirius is far from the model upon which 
Harry should base his actions, IMO, and had issues with others 
that perhaps were unreasonable. The list could go on, but again 
it comes to the hypothetical person I referred to earlier herein, 
for which see above.

> Leslie:

> You are entitled to believe what you like about Snape. 
> However, if you want to avoid the charge of hypocrisy, 
> and present an argument that is coherent and logical, 
> you will demand the same treatment for those you like 
> that you do for Snape. As you call yourself "Lupinlore" 
> my guess is you will not, however.

Goddlefrood:

My final tip for the day is to say that attacking a person 
rarely advances a discussion. The idea might be one that is 
difficult to understand from a certain perspective, but the 
right to state the idea should cause no controversy. This not 
only includes arguments that might appear illogical. Once more 
I would say that logic is rather subjective.

The simple fact, and this actually is one, remains that each 
person has their own ideas about certain characters. None of 
us will truly know, or be able to convince those with differing 
ideas, before the release of Deathly Hallows. There is too much 
ambiguity in the books for a firmer statement to be made.

On a personal level I do not agree that Snape is a child abuser, 
but for no better reason than I have seen and experienced far 
worse. Severus is mild in comparison, but the more liberal 
minded person might disagree. Let them do so, it is their 
privilege.

Goddlefrood, once more from the ethical viewpoint.