Snape's Culpability in the Prank (WAS: James and Sirius as Bullies)

[Mike]

No: HPFGUIDX 181280

> Montavilla47:
> 
> Who is assigning Sirius complete blame for the Prank?  I, for
> one, agree with you that assigning blame is pretty silly.

Mike:
Some people have said simply that it was Sirius' fault. Those are the 
people I'm addressing, like Alla said.


> Montavilla47: 
>  <snip>
> But since Sirius is still growling (twenty years after 
> the fact) that Snape "deserved" what he got, it shows 
> an intention on Sirius's part to put Snape in danger.

Mike:
Deserved what? Sirius was not speaking in hypotheticals here. So, 
what happened to Snape that he "deserved"? He got humiliated because 
he needed to be rescued by James. THAT'S what he deserved, getting 
humiliated because of his hubris in thinking he could just waltz into 
a werewolf lair. That is what actually happened, not what may have 
happened. Most of us don't think that Sirius was trying to get Snape 
killed or bitten (that's if he had *any* intentions in the matter). 
If he was intending to see Snape wet his pants and be humiliated, 
well, that's what happened and he was happy it happened. And his 
saying Severus deserved it does NOT mean any more than he deserved 
what ACTUALLY happened.



> Montavilla47: 
> 
> Incidently, I realized that this Prank had a lot in common with
> the Midnight duel.  In the midnight duel, Draco dared Harry 
> into a situation that would cause Harry harm.  And Harry, 
> knowing that he was breaking rules and with someone telling
> him that it was a set-up, went ahead and snuck out of the 
> dorms anyway.  He ended up facing a dangerous monster, 
> as well, although that was *not* Draco's intention, and, had
> he not been lucky, could have been injured or killed.  Now, is 
> Draco entirely blameless for the danger Harry got into?

Mike:
First, let me say I see a lot of parallels between the Sirius/James 
vs. Severus conflict and the Draco vs. Harry conflict. In that order 
too, just as you've pointed out. The main difference is that Harry 
doesn't get the short end of the stick, in the end, like Severus must 
have in more than one occasion. But otherwise, the character's 
character are strikingly close parallels.

Now, as for Draco's culpability in the duel challenge, nope not 
Draco's fault on many levels. First, Ron points out they don't know 
near enough magic to have a magic duel. Second, being taunted or 
challenged is no excuse for heading out after curfew to have a fight. 
Lastly, as you already said, the encounter with Fluffy was entirely 
accidental and in no way should be traced back to Draco. But, even if 
Draco had challenged Harry to the duel in front of Fluffy's door, 
that still would have made it Harry's fault for being foolish enough 
to rise to the challenge and for being willing to break rules to 
participate.



> Montavilla47:
> Umm.  Because *no one* in the books ascribes to him a more 
> nefarious motive than to get the Marauders in trouble? <snip>

Mike:
Right, that's one of the nasty motivations of which I was thinking. 
Severus is breaking the rules himself to ... what, prove that the 
Marauders are breaking the rules worse? This is one of the few times 
Severus parallels Draco. But Draco wasn't foolish enough to try to 
stun Harry and Hermione to take on the dragon himself.

The problem with the Prank is I have no idea what Severus' motivation 
was because his actions defy interpretation. If his intent was to get 
the Marauders in trouble, why in the hell does he head off down the 
tunnel to meet the werewolf before the rest of the Marauders? How can 
that possibly be interpreted as an attempt to get the Marauders in 
trouble, they're not there to be gotten in trouble? I was thinking 
that maybe he thought they were already there, but that goes against 
canon wherein he tells Lily "What about the stuff Potter and his 
mates get up to?" That and his subsequent remarks indicate he knows 
about them sneaking off to the Willow because he's seen them do it. 



> Montavilla47:
> What I don't understand is why saying that Sirius was reckless
> and stupid, or  that he hoped something bad would happen to
> Snape--which could be as small as Snape getting scared and 
> looking like a wimp, is perceived as assigning Sirius the 
> entire blame for the Prank, or letting Snape off the hook for his
> own part in it.  I don't think that's what the majority of the 
> posters think about the event, but we always seem to get
> pushed into that position.

Mike:
Sorry, I'm not trying to push anyone into a position that they don't 
already hold. I've read your posts Monty, and I don't think you have 
taken that position. And I agree with your summarization above for 
the most part.


> Montavilla47:
> I also don't see why it matters how nasty Snape was a person.
> Unless he was an active danger to the school--in which case
> alerting the authorities would have been the proper course--
> that doesn't make it right to expose him a werewolf.  And it 
> certainly doesn't make it right to expose the werewolf to him!

Mike:
As to your last sentence, I agree, Mr. Snape would have been quite 
hard on Mr. Lupin's digestive tract. He would have had indigestion 
for months. <veg>

But Siriusly folks, I agree with Alla on this point, nobody besides 
Severus exposed Severus to a werewolf. If someone can convice me that 
Severus would have done something different had he gained the Willow 
information via some other means, then I would entertain changing my 
harsh criticism and assignment of blame to Mr. Snape.

Mike, wondering where a werewolf would dare to begin his dining 
adventure on a Sev au grease ;)