Sadism or not WAS: Re: Lack of re-examination

[mesmer44]

No: HPFGUIDX 186617

"a_svirn" <a_svirn at ...> wrote:
>
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" <dumbledore11214@> wrote:
> >
> > > > Alla:
> > > > 
> > > > Are you saying that Snape does not **practice** inflicting emotional pain and that is why he cannot be called a sadist or are you saying something different? 
> > > 
> > > a_svirn:
> > > I am saying that if someone, let say Snape, needs and finds an outlet for his inner needs, so much so that it's become a habit even, then the whole in heart/in practice thing is totally redundant and only obfuscates the matter at hand. If he's cruel that's because he chooses to *act* cruelly. Is heart as cruel as his actions? More cruel? Less cruel? Does it matter? Would it matter if he had a heart of gold if he still bullied Neville mercilessly?
> > >
> > 
> > 
> > Alla:
> > 
> > Ah, ok, sorry I misunderstood you. I thought you were saying that Snape is not a sadist because he does not practice it.  And while I acknowledge that to make a case for Snape as sadist enjoying physical pain is hard, I think that to make a case for him as sadist enjoying emotional pain is a piece of cake, for me of course.
> > 
> > I am following the thread, but do not know if I want to get involved into a whole "murderer at heart" thing. Partly because yes I think it does matter when the person slips and does something bad say once under stress, I would still think that person who is not predisposed to do something has less chance to slip up next time if any.
> 
> a_svirn:
> Which is exactly why I find this "murderer at heart thing", as you say, so disturbing. I believe saying that bullying Neville and making him suffer emotionally constitutes sadism does rather stretch a conventional definition of the term. What bothers me though is that McGonagall who delights in bullying Neville and making him suffer emotionally every bit as much as Snape does somehow escapes the same "sadism" charge. Why? Is it because we are told that she is really a "big softie" very deep down? This is a nice circular argument we have there: because she is not "predisposed" to sadism she is not a sadist and therefore what she does is not sadism by definition.

Steve replies:

Where in canon did it say that McGonagall delighted in bullying Neville and making him suffer emotionally evdry bit as much as Snape does? I don't remember that.  Furthermore, IMO, although  McGonagall was a no nonsense, strict teacher, I didn't see her as delighting in bullying students, but rather holding them accountable for their actions so that they would learn their lessons better and not transfigure themselves into a Volkswagen by mistake. 
>