James and Intent

[julie]

No: HPFGUIDX 187033


> 
> jkoney:
> Sirius says Snivellus softly, so we know Snape didn't hear him. He then packs his bag and proceeds across the lawn. He is near enough that James and Sirius stand up. If their wands were out Harry would have mentioned it. So we know that they are still in their pockets.

Julie:
Even if their wands weren't out at this moment, James clearly had his wand out by the time Snape tried to pull out his own wand. As noted earlier by Carol, James shouted "Exspelleramus!" BEFORE Snape could get his wand all the way out. James couldn't have disarmed Snape if James didn't already have his own wand out and in position. (Remember, wandless magic isn't taught until 6th year, and there is not a shred of canon that implies James--or Snape, or anyone else in their year--was able to perform wandless magic before the subject was even taught). 

James disarmed Snape as Snape was pulling his wand out. Ergo, James already had his wand in hand and in position to perform magic. I am being repetitive, I know, but only to emphasize that this is a canon FACT. Period.

> 
> Carol
>  When James says loudly, "All right, Snivellus?"  it's not some friendly greeting. He reacts by dropping his bag and starting to pull out his wand. There's nothing about James thinking *he's* being attacked. 
> 
> jkoney:
> Yes, James was insulting him. We see Draco do this all the time and no one pulls out a wand. So this is going to be a verbal sparring match until Snape goes for his wand. James is quicker on drawing his wand and disarms him. If someone is pulling their wand on me, I'm going to think he is going to attack. It's a very reasonable assumption.

Julie:
We certainly have never seen anything wrong with Snape's reflexes. At the very least I suppose you could say that they go for their wands at the same time, but even that seems unlikely. Particularly given that Snape had to drop his bag to go for his wand, while James and Sirius were already setting their plan to go after Snivellus in motion. And clearly they must be aware Snape isn't going to just let them do things to him for their own entertainment unless they divest him of his wand first. (Or unless you assume they simply wanted to verbally taunt Snape, maybe along the lines of arguing whose mother wears the largest Army boots. Though I can't see ratty little Peter practically salivating as he does if that's as exciting as he thinks it's going to get!)

I also note that if Snape supposedly walked *toward* James and Sirius with intent to engage them, as you've suggested, why wouldn't such a clever, wary, Dark Arts loving wizard who has tons of experience with these two from their five years of mutual hexing back and forth *already* have his wand out if he wants to engage them? Instead Snape walks deliberately toward a fight, knowing he'll have to DROP his bag and lose precious seconds going for his wand?? Is he really that stupid?

No, Snape obviously assumed he could go his own way. Maybe because they were all in a public area with lots of other students around, and he reasoned the two Marauders wouldn't actually start anything if Snape ignored them and minded his own business. That is until James said "All right, Snivellus?", which Snape obviously took as an indication that James and Sirius were not going to just let him pass (presumably from past experience). At which point Snape went for his wand, but it was already too late, as James was certainly expecting the move and didn't have a bag in the way of reaching for his own ready wand. 

To Harry it is very clear that James and Sirius were the aggressors, intending to taunt and bully Snape (as they flat out stated!), while Snape initially was walking away, book bag in hand and wand stowed in his robe until James called him out. Later, adult Remus and Sirius in no way dispute Harry's interpretation of the incident in question; in fact they are clearly ashamed of it to the point of assuring Harry that James grew out of such shameful behavior. There is no argument on page about who incited this incident or who was in the wrong, so I'm not sure how it's possible to really debate it here ;-)

Whether Snape "deserved" it based on his supposed equal participation in the mutual hexing war between him and the Mauraders, and whether it's okay that James and Sirius bullied an ugly, snarky Slytherin git who was into the Dark Arts and would eventually become a Death Eater (while they were against the Dark Arts and would eventually be on the good side of the battle line) is another matter altogether. 

It might be more interesting though to ask why JKR wrote it this way, i.e., choosing to show teenage James and Sirius as the aggressors against Snape in two different scenes while never showing any moments where teenage Snape is the aggressor. Yet once they are adults we are only told that Snape chose the bad side, and James the good side, without being shown any scenes of their actual actions for those opposing sides, except for Snape giving the prophecy to Voldemort (an act that is relatively indirect--though it obviously had enormous consequences in the end--compared to torturing Muggles or feeding poison to captured Order members, etc).

I don't question that Snape chose the bad side and was responsible for that choice and any pain and death that resulted directly or indirectly from it, nor that James chose the good side and was equally responsible for the lives that were saved directly or indirectly because of his involvement and his defiance of Voldemort. I just wonder why JKR chose not to merely allude to their lives and choices as young adults for the most part rather than actually show them. (And yes, there was only so much she could write into the books, but she did choose to write out the tedious Giant scenes, and various scenes about the welfare of Elves, and other similar side threads to the main story.)

Julie