Snape and moral courage WAS: Re: The Houses, Finally

[pippin_999]

No: HPFGUIDX 184645

> > Zara:
> > I would add, that we are discussing apologies in the context of
this  thread because they are a way of accepting guilt and taking 
> > responsibility. 
> 
> Alla:
> 
> Do we? I thought we were discussing the kind of behavior itself that
 one makes oneself humble to the person he wronged. But I would really
 ask Pippin to clarify what she had in mind now. Pretty please Pippin?

Pippin:
::clears throat:: 
First, I accept the definition of "moral courage" that Alla put
forward. But I think the interpretation she gave is too broad to  be
useful. IMO, the definition should  distinguish between moral
cowardice and moral apathy, because unless a person is as divided in
nature as Gollum, it's difficult to display both at the same time.

IMO, you have to be morally engaged, have some  inclination towards
doing the right thing,  before you can give in to moral cowardice and
fail to do it. There's a difference between James and Sirius, who
don't seriously consider whether they have any right to bully Snape,
and Lupin, who is certain that it's wrong and does nothing.

James and Sirius are morally engaged generally.
They've thought about the big issue of whether it matters how wizards
use their power. It just didn't matter to them whether Snape was the
appropriate target for their general disgust with dark wizardry. 

Generally, moral engagement is a sine qua non for Gryffindor, the
house of chivalry, and a problem for Slytherins. The morally engaged
are not going to believe that they should "use any means to achieve
their ends." If, in our quest for the good in Slytherin, we define the
good solely as a tendency towards moral engagement as exemplified by
our heroes, we are going to come up short. 

But moral courage, IMO, is a problem for Gryffindors and a sine qua
non for Slytherins, whether they know it or not. 

It isn't only that Snape apologizes freely and makes amends without
trying to justify himself or blame someone else for the consequences
of his fall.

Or that Snape risked more than any Gryffindor ever did to right a
wrong once he realized he'd  committed one. 

It's that no Slytherins,  IIRC, ever did what Pettigrew did. We never
see them knowingly betray or desert their real friends, anyone they
care about, to save their own skins or for personal gain. Phineas
claims they will. But we never actually see anyone do it. 

There are people associated with the House who did such things: Merope
and Karkaroff. But as far as we know, they were never Hogwarts
students and can't have been Slytherins themselves.

Snape acted against the Death Eaters once he had defected, but they
were no longer his friends. As far as we know he had personal loyalty
only to the Malfoys, whom he continued to protect. 

Slytherin left his House, but as the Chamber of Secrets shows, he
never really abandoned it.

The Slytherins left in DH, but we can hardly say they were abandoning
their friends. And one way or another, they came back. Whether they
took part in the battle or not, the House continued.

Slytherins have  betrayed numerous people they *should* have cared
about. Riddle certainly did. But that is moral apathy, not moral
cowardice. See the difference?

> Alla:
> 
> And I was talking about Snape apologizing to Harry for mistreating
him  in school in any event.

Pippin:

 Snape's dislike of Harry is grounded in prejudice, not reality: he
can see nothing in Harry that doesn't remind him of James. But I do
not see that either indifference or cowardice is the cause. 

I too do not see where Snape had time to make a formal apology. Nor do
I see any moral value at all in pretending to like Harry. It certainly
would not have helped the ruse.

 Snape could hardly claim that he'd been nice to Harry because he knew
Dumbledore was attached to him, and he was  planning all along to
betray Dumbledore when the Dark Lord returned. Snape is supposed to
think that Voldemort is not coming back, and Voldemort is supposed to
think that Harry is nothing personal to Dumbledore. 

Many of Snape's memories show him at his weakest moments, abject and
miserable; he could hardly have humbled himself more if that had been
his desire. He could have made himself look a lot more heroic with
some editing, and Harry would still have known what he had to do.

Try an experiment. Start with the ring curse, cut from "That is
essential" to "You will have to give Voldemort the correct date,"
eliminate Lily's letter and finish with  Snape conjuring the silver
doe. Harry would have seen  Dumbledore helpless and totally reliant on
brave and resourceful Snape. 

That Snape included the rest, IMO, is Snape's acknowledgement that
maybe Dumbledore was right, and Harry's deepest nature is closer to
Lily's than James's. Even if he could never bring himself to believe
it, Snape must have realized that if that is not the case,  Harry will
never be able to do what Dumbledore asked of him, and it will all be
for nothing in the end.

Pippin