Secrets (Long) OLD POST REPOST

[montavilla47]

No: HPFGUIDX 186443

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" <dumbledore11214 at ...> wrote:
>
> Montavilla47:
> But the thing is, Alla, we KNOW that Dumbledore is hiding the truth
> because we see Dumbledore promise Snape that he will do just that.
> What Snape doesn't know when he demands that promise is that
> Dumbledore will hide the truth by telling Harry something that Snape
> considers humiliating. <SNIP>
> 
> Alla:
> 
> Yes, we know that Dumbledore is hiding the truth from Harry that Snape loved his mother. We also never in the books as far I can remember at least hear Dumbledore say direct lie – lie by omissions a plenty of course, but never something that did not happen. So I do not see how what Dumbledore says about James and Snape is proven to be a lie, you know?
> 
> Montavilla47:
> <SNIP>
> Snape, by throwing in James here, is no more showing a grudge
> against James than Harry did when he threw James into Snape's
> face back in PoA.
> 
> Alla:
> 
> I am confused. Snape talking about James in PoA is not showing a grudge, but Harry is showing grudge when he is talking about James? Against whom? Against James? 


Montavilla47:

I didn't say that Harry was showing a grudge against James.
I'm showing an example of  Harry throwing James into Snape's 
face in PoA, even though it would be absurd for Harry to be 
holding a grudge against his dead father.

I'm doing that to support my contention that using A in an 
argument against B does not necessarily mean that you're
holding a grudge against A.  It can mean any number of 
things, including that it's an effective bit of ammunition.


> 
> Montavilla 47:
> 
> Snape has no reason to need any grudge against James to fuel
> his rage at this moment. He's got all the ammunition he needs,
> including his anger at Harry. Who is right there and not dead.
> 
> 
> Alla:
> 
> You are right, Snape has a lot of reasons to be angry in this scene, however the reasons he **says** that he is angry about are :
> a)	Harry is using his spells against him;
> b)	 His filfy father was using his spells against him.

Montavilla47:

Well, it's not like Snape can stop and explain to Harry
that what he's really upset about at the moment is the
fact that he was forced to kill the one person who didn't
consider him scum.

Alla:
> There are no other reasons that Snape gives us that he is angry about. So I guess I am asking why you would substitute the reasons that he gives for other reasons .

> I mean, sure Snape has no NEED to feel a rage against James, but he says that he does and well, it is good enough for me.

Montavilla47:
Well, for one thing, they would give away that big "Snape isn't
evil" twist that JKR is setting up for DH.  In other words, this is 
deliberate misdirection on the part of the author--with the 
hint about Snape looking like he's in pain while he's shouting
it.  That's clues us in that what Snape is really upset about isn't
Harry's feeble attempts to duel him.  

Alla:
> I mean, maybe I am concentrating too much on one quote, but I am really not. I mean, I totally get why it is desirable that Snape does not hold grudges, that it makes him nobler person and even though I was always convinced that he does and still convinced, I certainly am willing to entertain the possibility that it was a red herring, if canon is being shoved down my throat. But so far you are just arguing that what characters said do not really mean what they say, no? And you have absolute right to your intepretation of course.
>

Montavilla47:
I think it's a bit too hard to argue Snape as a noble character--
in the sense of being forgiving or magnamious.  I don't see him 
as being forgiving at all--least of all to himself.  But if you don't 
re-examine his character in light of the Prince's Tale, then you're 
holding onto a false interpretation of his character.  The whole 
point of the Prince's Tale is to  change our view of Snape.  


Alla:
> But I just do not see that after DH.  Snape Loved Lily and fought Voldemort – for sure, but where does it say that he did not hate James, I do not know. I think this quote showed that really it was not a misdirection, that loved Lily as he did, he was that  person who was willing to spend his life hating a dead man who had a nerve to win Lily and save his life. Again, please show me where does it say that Snape did not hate James when he was alive and when he was dead. 

Montavilla47:
There's no point where Snape says, "I do not hate James."  And there's 
no point where he says that he does.  But when Dumbledore scolds
Snape for not trying to save James or Harry from Voldemort, Snape's 
reaction is indifference.  Not anything about how he'd be happy 
if James died, or how James deserves it, or even how he much he
feels in James's debt about that saving his life thing.  James is 
*nothing* to him at that point.

Moreover, Snape denies in PoA that James was doing anything
but saving his own skin during the Prank.  He obviously feels
no debt at all to James about it.  Which makes what Dumbledore
told Harry a lie.


> Montavilla47:
> <SNIP>
> > I'm not saying that Snape doesn't hold grudges.  He obviously
> > held them against Harry--who responded in kind until he 
> > realized what Snape's true motivations were.  
> 
> Alla:
> 
> And I am saying that Snape's grudge against Harry was because he looked like James and was son of Lily.

Montavilla47:
Which, I think is a valid interpretation.  But it is only
an interpretation.  Nobody in the entire series ever states
or even implies that Snape is primarily thinking about 
Harry as the manifestation of James having sex with Lily.

I mean, it's an obvious reason to resent Harry's very 
existence--so I'm not going to deny it.  But nobody ever 
says that--and Harry is careful in his duel with Voldemort 
to stress that Snape loved Lily *as a friend.*

Not to say that Snape wouldn't have had a romantic 
relationship with Lily if she would have been willing--but 
it seems really clear to me that Snape knows that *he*
blew it with Lily.  It wasn't that James won her--it was
that Snape lost her.  

> 
> Montavilla47: 
> > But I don't see him holding a grudge against the dead 
> > Sirius and the "grudge-holding" against James only comes
> > out in relation to Harry--which means that the ninety
> > percent of his world that doesn't have to do with 
> > Harry is probably free of any James grudging at all.
> 
> Alla:
> 
> To whom else it supposed to come out? Of course it comes out with relation to Harry, poor kid has a nerve to look like James. We do not know if Snape mentions his grudge to James to outside world, if he has any friends besides DE there, maybe he does? We just do not know IMO.
> 
> I think that if you take Snape's ability to hold grudges from him, I really do not think he will be same character, but again my opinion.
> 

Montavilla47:
Well, a lot of the people in the books hold grudges.
Sirius, even when he's bent on killing Peter Pettigrew, has 
time to growl about how much he hates Snape.  (Who did
what to Sirius exactly?)

Most of the Weasleys hold their grudge against Percy
until the moment when he apologizes--something I 
find amazing considering that he's family.  Of course,
he seems to be holding his grudge, too.

Harry holds his grudge against Ron in GoF until Ron
apologizes  As of HBP, Harry is still holding a grudge
against Marietta.  He continues to hold a grudge against
Umbridge--he even extends his grudge to include
Scrimgeour.  I would guess that Harry would have 
continued the grudge against Scrimgeour if he hadn't
heard that Scrimgeour died protecting him.

So, I don't think Snape's ability to hold grudges
is that unique.  If it were the defining trait for his 
character then we'd be hard pressed to pull him
out of a crowd.