Snape and Harry and expulsion LONG

[montavilla47]

No: HPFGUIDX 188855

> Alla:
> 
> First of all thank you for such well thought out and easy to understand post, I definitely had couple of light bulb moments while reading it, I definitely understand the reasoning "why Snape did not want to expel Harry" much better now, I still have few issues with it though and accordingly with reconciling DH with it.

Montavilla47:
You're welcome.  I'm glad I could help.

Alla:
> First and foremost I cannot stress enough that as far as I am concerned  if Snape wants to expel Harry and whatever follows from it means that Snape should be less evil than I view him, not more...

Montavilla47:
I'm not exactly sure what you're saying here, but if it's that 
Snape's sincerity in wanting Harry expelled has little bearing
on whether or not he's "evil," then I think I agree.  I mean, 
I suppose he'd be more evil if he wanted Harry *dead.*  But
if you want to think him evil for scaring Harry, rather than 
evil for truly wanting Harry out of Hogwarts, go ahead.  

No skin off my nose.

Alla:
> Moving on to your post.
> 
> I completely totally agree with you  that `Prince's tale" meant to explain Snape's motives (and IMO confirm or shatter some of the beliefs that we had as my belief  and desire of Snape being Voldemort's servant was shattered, but my belief in Snape hating Harry was confirmed in spades).
> 
> So here is what I get from Prince's Tale RE : Snape motives, in no order of importance to me.
> 
> 1.	Snape promised to protect Harry's life.
> 2.	Snape hated Harry.
> 3.	Snape did not want Harry dead (I would think that his desire not see Harry dead evaporated pretty fast, but I fully agree that without Dumbledore's forcing the issue Snape wanted Harry alive for Lily's sake).

Montavilla47:

I agree with all three conclusions.  Including the one about
Snape getting over Harry dying pretty quick!  

Alla:
> What I do **not** see in Prince's tale and what you seem to be seeing there is that Snape's promise to protect Harry became the most important thing for him and something that he on his own without Dumbledore to prompt him into it really wanted to do.

Montavilla47:
Hmm.  Well, I think that his protest to Dumbledore is a
strong indication of the importance he placed on that 
promise.  He seems genuinely shocked, appalled, and then
angry at Dumbledore about the idea of alllowing Harry
to be killed.

If he were simply waiting for that burdensome promise
to be lifted, then I would think he'd be a lot more agreeable
to the idea.


Alla:
> See what I am saying? Where does Prince's tale show that if Snape could he would not have wanted to get out of it? I am NOT disputing that he does not want Harry dead, I totally agree with it. I just do not see that Snape really cares if somebody else will do the protection part IF he could get out of it without breaking promise on technicality.

Montavilla47:
I think you may be right about that.  If, for example, 
Dumbledore had said that McGonagall was taking over the 
job and Snape was free to leave, then I'm sure Snape would 
have loved to jump at that.

But I'm not sure that Dumbledore had the power to free
Snape from the promise, since the promise was only made
to Dumbledore as a proxy to Lily.  As Snape makes clear
in that scene, he's not doing it for Dumbledore.  He's doing 
it for Lily.

Which is why I think (although I have nothing else to back
it up) that it did take Snape some time to reconcile himself
to Dumbledore's final plan.  I think he would have had to 
think it through and decide for himself that *Lily* would have
thought it more important for Voldemort to be gone than for
Harry to live.  

I've never seen anyone tackle that in a story, but it's quite
an emotional journey.  I'd be interested to read something 
like that.


Alla:
> Oh, so I said I had a min light bulb moment and I did and I definitely need to think about this one more, thank you for that, maybe I will eventually talk myself into Snape not wanting Harry expelled lol. See, for some reason in my brain I was trying to reconcile Snape promising to protect Harry v him wanting to expel Harry (in my view) and Snape being upset over Dumbledore wanting Harry dead for some reason was hanging sort of separately, not sure how to explain it better. But as you say this also should be part of the dilemma and this is I guess even harder to reconcile. So anyway, thank you.

Montavilla47:
Again, you're very welcome.


> Montavilla47:
> 
> It seems to me that you are asking people to prove a negative here.
> There are a million times that Snape *doesn't* bring up Harry being
> expelled. For example, he doesn't bring up Harry being expelled for
> breaking into Umbridge's office. Seems like a perfect time. Umbridge
> is aching for an excuse to expel Harry. I'm sure she'd do it if Snape
> asked her.
> 
> He also doesn't bring it up when Harry, Hermione, and Ron attack him
> in PoA.
> 
> He also doesn't bring it up when he thinks Harry has stolen Gillyweed
> from him.
> 
> He doesn't bring it up most of the days he teaches Harry, when he's
> usually mad at Harry for some reason or another.
> 
> The default mode is Snape *not* demanding that Harry be expelled
> (even if he may be *thinking* about it). It's only a few times that he
> does, and those can be explained by other motives than a sincere
> desire to have Harry expelled.
> 
> 
> Alla:
> 
> Sorry, I do not understand how is that asking people to prove the negative. I am not asking people to prove that there are times when Snape catches Harry when he breaks the rules and does not bring the expulsion, sorry if I gave that impression. I am asking people to prove that he does not bring the expulsion when it is so warranted. Oy, I am looking at my upthread posts and maybe I did not qualify that, sorry. I mean obviously we do not know all Hogwarts rules that warrant expulsion and in fact maybe breaking in Umbridge's office warranted that indeed, I grant you that, or maybe not.  And see my response to Pippin, IMO Snape bringing up suspension during PoA is pretty much the same as bringing up expulsion, that time IMO is definitely very serious and if Snape would not have demanded things there, I would have agreed. Does that make sense? Like I know when In PS Snape takes a book from Harry he does not bring expulsion (well as you know I think he made up that rule, but even if he does not, IMO bringing up expulsion there would have made Snape look crazy).

Montavilla47:
I don't think we can know for sure which offenses are 
worthy of expulsion and which aren't.  I would think that
nearly killing a student is expulsion-worthy.  

On the other hand, it wasn't when Sirius was in school and 
he wasn't the Chosen One!  So, go figure.

Maybe violating the Statute on Underage Magic is a more 
serious crime.  

The only other time I can remember expulsion being officially
on the table is when Hagrid got his wand snapped for raising 
an Acromantula that was accused of killing a student.  He was
supposed to be expelled, but Dumbledore was able to lessen
the sentence and get him hired as a servant of the school.

Oh, and there's the threat of expulsion for getting on a 
broomstick without a teacher present during Hooch's class.  
Something which both Harry and Draco do--but neither are 
expelled for it.  Or even punished.

So, from these examples we know that *killing* a student
is an offense worthy of expulsion.  Nearly killing a student?
Not so much.

We also know that other teachers besides Snape have played
the Expulsion Card in order to bluff.  Which, in my mind, 
strengthens the case that Snape *was* bluffing in CoS.

I'm not so sure that he was bluffing with Fudge.  I think he
was pretty mad.  On the other hand, I've seen it pointed out
that the moment Dumbledore tells Snape (in a slyly coded
question about time-traveling) that Hermione and Harry
misused the time-turner, Snape immediately shuts up.

Now, had Fudge realized that Hermione had misused the
time-turner, she would have been in *real* trouble.  (At least,
that's the way it's described by Herimione when she talks about
how hard it was to get it in the first place--and the strict rules
about using it.)

> Montavilla47:
> To conclude is to examine both premises: That Snape *does* want
> Harry expelled and that Snape *does not* want Harry expelled. Then
> to look at the evidence of the text, weigh the contradictory evidence,
> and *then* decide which is more likely.
> 
> Once we do that, we can address the question of *why* he's either
> bluffing or asking for something that contradicts his vow.
> 
> But we have to start with either one or the other position. No reason
> is going to cover both.
> 
> 
> 
> Alla:
> 
> Of course! Snape either wants Harry expelled or he does not. That is not the contradiction I was interested in though. The contradiction was: Snape wants Harry expelled, but also swore to protect him, how that could be reconciled.
> 
> I totally understand how my contradiction is very easily reconciled by Snape indeed NOT wanting Harry expelled, I am just not quite convinced of that yet.
> 

Montavilla47:
No problem!  Take your time. :)