The Overarching message - Caning + Mind Reading, of sorts

[Steve]

No: HPFGUIDX 191664



--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jules" <juli17 at ...> wrote:
> > 
> > > Alla:
> > > > ... I also think that Snape mind raped Harry on a regular basis ...
> > > >
> 
> Julie:
> ...
> 
> ... Discerning students feelings and intentions--which seems
> to be the actual effect of Legilimency as we've been told it
> isn't reading someone's thoughts--seems to be just one of the
> many accepted (or at the very least tolerated) methods of 
> addressing suspected misbehavior.
> 
> .... the quick surface reading involved in the Legilimency 
> Snape and Dumbledore seem to practice. (And, no, I wouldn't 
> call the Occlumency lessons mind-rape since they were 
> sanctioned and both Snape and Harry participated freely,
> reluctant though both were to do so.)
> 
> Julie
>

Steve:

You bring up a very interesting point in making a distinction between what Snape and Dumbledore do on a regular basis and the Occlumency lessons. 

Notice that during the Occlumency lessons Harry is well aware of the thought and memories that are being read. However, in those times when Harry intuitively senses that Snape or Dumbledore are reading his thoughts, that self-awareness doesn't happen. 

Also bear in mind that most kids think their mothers can read their mind. Mother seem to know when you've done something wrong, even when there is no possible way they could know. It's is not magic, but merely mother's intuition and experience, and sometimes just a bluff. 

Back to Snape/Dumbledore/Harry, it is entirely possible that Snape and Dumbledore have a strong intuitive sense, similar to Trelawney. They can guess what is on Harry's mind. 

Now, reasonably, we could presume that they do dip into Harry's mind, but given that Harry is not aware of what they are reading, it must be a very gentle and shallow dip. This could be an act of respecting privacy to an extent. They delve just deep enough to get an intuitive sense of the truth of the matter. 

I really don't think what Harry thinks Snape and Dumbledore are doing comes even remotely close to Legilimency, at least not remotely at the level we are seeing in the Occlumency lessons. 

Again, more so Dumbledore, and to some extent Snape, have been teaching a long time, they have seen mischief makers come and go, and I suspect they have both developed a very strong sense of when someone is telling the truth or lying, or just being evasive. Kids really don't hide their emotions very well, so it is not that hard. 

Harry feels like they are reading his mind, but it is very possible, Dumbledore is just good at guessing (from experience) and good at reading the body language of people with very little life experience. 

And, if they are 'reading' a person, they seem to be doing it in a very limited and restrained way. Again, reaching no deeper than necessary to get an intuitive sense of that person. 

Even if it goes no deeper than an intuitive sense, that is still enough to enable a clear understanding of business, political, and social encounters. Which could serve a person very well. If I had it, I certainly would use it. 

Again, I think 'Rape' is hyperbole in the extreme, further it is a socially charged word, and should not be minimized by such frivolous use. However, this is how the person who used the word feels, and he is free to express himself as he chooses. However, much like bringing Hitler, or Nazis, or Fascist into a discussion, it tends to over inflate the statement to the point of diminishing its meaning. 

I, like a few others, think it is a gross overstatement, but, like all hyperbole, it does server to stress a point. I just don't personally think it was an appropriate choice of words, and I think it diminishes the point. But then, that's just me. 

As Shaun points out, you have to accept that just because you think you have made a convincing argument, does not mandate that we have to be convinced. That is part of Internet discussion, knowing when to say when. 

My point on caning and similar physical punishments, is that cruelty, by today's standards, was once very common in schools. In fact, I don't think Caning was completely outlawed in the UK until something like 2003, and they even discussed bringing it back a few years later. I don't see that whipping a kid will do anything to stop poor behavior. If fact, in many cases, the cruelty and unfairness of it, only stimulated more rebellion. 

What is what Snape does compared to whipping a kid with a stick for minor insignificant infractions. Whipping and beating seem pretty cruel, especially when it is left in the hands of other students like Prefects. That, to me, seems like a recipe for cruel and truly abusive disaster. 

Snape looked at Harry's private thoughts, what is that compared to beating him with a stick or 'raping' him? 

Steve/bboyminn