[HPforGrownups] Re: Snape and Marauders WAS :Draco and Intent

[Marion Ros]

No: HPFGUIDX 186867

>> Potioncat:
>> > The more we discuss the James/Severus confict, the more confused I
>> become about James. The sequence of events that I expected were so
>> different from what turned out...It's so hard to understand how or
>> when James became a good person.
>> >
>> > Unless James was just as horrible in his own way as Severus was in
>> his, and it was bravery that redeemed them both.
>>
>> Alla:
>> Why? You think good person could not have been a bully in his youth?
>> And James was just as horrible as Snape? I guess to me it really does
>> matter what views they hold and to me the fact that James joined the
>> Order of Phoenix and Snape joined the band of terrorists is what makes
>> one a better person than the other if nothing else.
>>

Marion:

Ever heard the story of the Good Samaritan? The Samaritans were vilified
people to the ancient Hebrews. Why? Because they believed in a different
god, and were Different and Just Creepy an' Weird and a minority as well.
Well, the parable of the Good Samaritan attempted to show that it doesn't
matter what people believe, it matters what they DO.

The fact that James Potter, rich, pampered Golden Boy, who got pampered at
school by teachers and indulged in his wild, dangerous, bullying ways, the
fact that he was groomed by a nefarous Headmaster (who is more of a
cultleader than an educator) to become a member of said Headmaster's
illegal little club (so he could then go and expand his carousing
vandalism to include harassing muggle policemen) does not impress me of
James Potter's 'goodness'.

James Potter was a smug bully and died a bully. He used the retoric he was
fed to justify his agression against people he didn't like, and never
stopped to think about wether that was ethical or just.
What's the difference between Dudley Dursley and James Potter? (well,
apart from money and looks)
Dudley Dursley at least reconsidered wether his bullying was justified,
wether his victim has 'deserved' it or not (and why shouldn't Harry have
'deserved' being Harry-hunted by Dudley? Harry was weird, and creepy - a
wizard! - and a minority and he looked weird, with that hair, and he wore
crappy clothes and nobody liked him!)
I give credit to Dudley for realizing that his behaviour towards Harry
wasn't justified after all. I give no credit to James Potter.

What did James Potter do what was so bloody wonderful? He was, as I said,
indulged at home and at school. Born with a golden spoon in his mouth.
Petted on the head by his headmaster, been given Head Boy position and
been told lies that confirmed him in his bad behaviour. Things about Dark
Magic and how Slytherins are all Dark Wizards. Things about how 'the
greater good' gives you the right to do morally reprehensible things.
And James Potter swallowed it all, joined Dumbledore's little cult and got
killed when he was barely out of his twenties, still convinced that the
world consisted out of Good Guys and Bad Guys and that he and his fellow
Gryffindors were the Good Guys and Slytherins The Baddies. His beliefs
became his downfall, because they made him blind to the obvious fact that
the groveling toady Gryffindor who used to tag along at school was, in
fact, a traitor.

Lets look at James Potter's beliefs.
James Potter believed that the sun rose and set on his own shoulders.
He believed that he was better than 'dark wizards' and even more better
than muggles
He believed that he had the God-given right to harass others who were
inferior
He believed that Slytherins were creepy Others who totally believed other
things than himself (and therefore wrong and EVIL and not really human in
any way that (*mattered*)
He believed that he was totally justified into hexing Others who believed
different things.
He believed that he was Brave and Heroic in doing so.
He believed that picking out the scrawniest, poorest of Those Icky people,
who had no magical family or moneys to protect him, to harass made him a
Hero (especially when that poor, unkempt, icky person also had the
temerity to be better than him in his studies - the nerve! - and the even
worse temerity to claim to be the friend of a Golden Girl. Why, beating
that workingclass snot up was practically an act of *charity*!)
He believed that the fact that seven years of harrassment might force his
victim to join an club that lashes back at people like him was the perfect
proof of his own beliefs. See! Them Slytherins *are* evil!
He believed that joining the Order of the Phoenix was perfect good fun. It
gave him the opportunity to carrouse on motorcycles with his best bud,
chasing people and hexing them and harrassing policemen, just like old
times at Hogwarts, and it's all justified and for the greater good!

What was so wonderful about James Potter's beliefs that excused his
abhorrent behaviour? More importantly, is the fact that you fight in the
army of the 'good guys' (Us) a carte blanche for torturing, harassing,
pillaging, raping and murdering the 'bad guys' (Them)?

No, James' never raped, pillaged or murdered (as far as we know), but the
frightening moral of the HP books is clear on this; if you belong to the
Good Guys, it's okay, even 'gallant' to torture. What you Belief is far
more important than what you Do. If you belong to the 'bad guys', you are
subhuman, should 'know your place' (nod your head submissively to the
Superior Ubermensch)
I'm sorry, but this is a very dangerous and insidious set of beliefs, and
I will have no part in them.