Tweak

InsaneJournal

Tweak says, "i read about the afterlife"

Username: 
Password:    
Remember Me
  • Create Account
  • IJ Login
  • OpenID Login
Search by : 
  • View
    • Create Account
    • IJ Login
    • OpenID Login
  • Journal
    • Post
    • Edit Entries
    • Customize Journal
    • Comment Settings
    • Recent Comments
    • Manage Tags
  • Account
    • Manage Account
    • Viewing Options
    • Manage Profile
    • Manage Notifications
    • Manage Pictures
    • Manage Schools
    • Account Status
  • Friends
    • Edit Friends
    • Edit Custom Groups
    • Friends Filter
    • Nudge Friends
    • Invite
    • Create RSS Feed
  • Asylums
    • Post
    • Asylum Invitations
    • Manage Asylums
    • Create Asylum
  • Site
    • Support
    • Upgrade Account
    • FAQs
    • Search By Location
    • Search By Interest
    • Search Randomly

oryx_leucoryx ([info]oryx_leucoryx) wrote,
@ 2009-07-23 22:31:00

Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
Reply to meesha1971:
This is in reply to meesha1971's post on paperflowered's Slytherin essay

Severus was prejudiced against Muggles just like 100% of the wizarding world, from Tom Riddle to Albus Dumbledore. He disregarded her just like all wizards disregard Muggles. This is the mainstream wizarding view. In fact it is the only wizarding view on the topic. We have no evidence he hurt her on purpose, unless you consider Harry blowing up Marge a deliberate act. He was angry, his anger caused magic. It is a common occurrence with magical children.

As for Lily - Severus was aware that anti-Muggleborn prejudice existed in the wizarding world, but he did not buy into it until he lived in a subculture where such attitudes were the norm. He believed she could be in Slytherin, for Merlin's sake. (My guess is Eileen thought Tom Riddle had been a Muggle-born, so it seemed possible.) The one who completely disregarded someone's feelings in that pair was Lily who wouldn't pay attention to what he had to say when he was nearly killed. And the way she used his humiliation as an opportunity to flirt with James rather than being helpful disgusts me. As for trying to control feelings - just listen to James! He attempts to coerce her into dating him by threatening her friend! And 'Don't make me hex you' - placing the responsibility on her if *he* hexes her - those are the words of an abuser. Which is one reason I don't buy the 'James matured' claim without evidence. One does not grow out of abusive tendencies just like that. The whole 'stalking' thing is completely dubious - he was a lonely and under-socialized kid looking for company. Really horrible.

Dark Arts: Major BS. We do not have any definition of what Dark Arts are, by anyone in canon. Dark Arts are whatever Gryffindors say they are, but only when non-Gryffindors do them. We have Aurors who are supposed to be Dark wizard catchers, but we have Dark Arts shops operating legally. Per Rowling's web pages curses are Dark Arts and hexes are close to Dark Arts, but Petrificus Totalus is the Body-Bind Curse, in canon. So I don't care if anyone calls a spell Dark or non-Dark, I care to what use it is put and how much harm it causes when used like that. James was using a household cleaning spell to waterboard Severus. Severus uses a potentially lethal spell in a controlled manner (non-verbal and very little wand movement to limit the damage) to inflict a minor cut that left no scars. In any case, of the spells we know Severus wrote in his book Sectumsempra was the only one more harmful than what typically goes on at Hogwarts, he intended it 'for enemies' at a time he already nearly died at their hands and he used it with careful judgment, even when extremely provoked. (As for it being his 'specialty' - looks like another one of Remus' over-dramatized descriptions. Since Sirius did not know Severus was a Death Eater, Remus must have been referring to their school days, and we see how and when he used it then.)

Adult Severus: What blatant favoritism of Slytherins? He never gives them a single House point in our view. He never takes any points from them either, but then, they behave respectfully in class. He once(!) praised Draco's work, but Hermione's grade was higher than his in the end. Slytherins have the brains to only misbehave when his back is turned (and we see them looking out). He takes points from Gryffindors when they are disrespectful, come unprepared to class, arrive late, talk out of turn, yell at him, attempt to tell him how to run his class. All good reasons. He gives detentions for similar behaviors. (We don't know how his lessons with Ravenclaws and Hufflepuffs go - probably rather smoothly, between those who might find the subject interesting and those who believe in the value of work and are naturally respectful of authority.)

His major fault as a teacher is that he is inflexible in his methods. He knows one way to teach, it works with some, not others. I see his strictness partly as his nature and partly as his way of making sure that even the less aware students would be safe in his class, out of fear of him if not out of understanding the procedure and its dangers. As a result he is exasperated with students who do not respond as expected. Yes, he insults students. Big deal. I had plenty of teachers insult me and my classmates. If they knew their stuff, if they had something of substance to say to us we shrugged the insults off. Probably the only time he seriously crossed boundaries with insults was with Hermione's teeth. He had good reasons to be embittered with her after she had committed crimes against him and betrayed his trust several times already, but he shouldn't have taken it out on her like that. As for Neville's toad (in case you bring it up) - we know it was not the first time his toad was present in class and it really had no business being there, it was dangerous, whether as a distraction or as a potentially unexpected ingredient if it were to hop into a cauldron. And by leaving Hermione within Neville's hearing range Severus knew the potion would turn out safe. (We also know he has antidotes at hand.)

Shrieking Shack: No, he did not know Sirius was not the traitor. Voldemort had 3 spies (Severus, Peter and Rookwood), and the logical thing is not to let them know of each other's identity (even if they knew of the existence of other spies) to keep them from giving one another in if caught. Don't forget Death Eaters were cloaked and masked when they gathered (and we don't even know when Peter got his Mark - logically it would only have been after he brought the secret of the Potters to Voldemort because before that there was risk of discovery). Ron and Peter were the first to enter the tunnel, by the time Severus saw Remus on the map Peter was no longer visible. His words to Harry about how he could have died like his father out of trusting Sirius is evidence he did not know who the spy had been (when he loses control in anger Severus yells the truth, to lie he needs to be in control of himself).

What Severus knew was that Remus wasn't safe, because he was delaying taking his potion to the last minute (as we saw him do earlier that year) and instead of being where Severus could reach him in time he went on the grounds when the moon was about to rise. So either Severus went to the Shack with the intent of locking Remus in for the night or he assumed that he was going to meet with Sirius based on his understandable belief the two had been in collaboration (after all Remus was indeed hiding information about Sirius, though not for the reason Severus suspected). When he found Harry's cloak he knew the kids were there too, so he went in to save them from the unsafe werewolf and the mass murderer. (Or if he saw Harry or Hermione on the map then he went to the Shack with the intent to protect them in the first place.) Since from outside the door he didn't hear signs of violence or any immediate danger he slipped in. And he heard Remus admitting to being a serial liar (mostly by omission) and the Marauders to have repeatedly committed a crime that got Hagrid expelled (setting a XXXXX Dark Creature loose in a populated area). And the kids trust the two of them! They even go and attack him, who came to protect them! Obviously they must have been Confunded to show such stupid lack of judgment! Why would anyone in hir right mind trust Remus or Sirius?

Yes, he intended to bring Sirius to Fudge, to be taken care of by the law (note that he did not sic dementors on him when he had the opportunity to do so) - exactly what Harry intended to do with Peter, exactly what any responsible citizen was expected to do.

As for Severus being vengeful - he talks about revenge, but actually he behaves in the most forgiving and compassionate way to people who nearly killed him, to an employer who repeatedly undermined him in front of students and to ungrateful bratty kids who attacked him several times (PS and POA), stole from him and endangered their peers in his class (COS). If you ever get him fired from a school in your area, send him over to mine.

Percy: Percy's familiarity with Harry is the entire point because there was no reason for him to think that Dumbledore - however careless he thought he might have been - would stoop to trying to control Harry just to pretend Voldemort had returned.

Excuse me? Dumbledore is a Machiavelian manipulator and Byzantine plotter. Other than killing people at his own hand he stooped to pretty much everything, including betraying his own supporters (I include James, Lily, Alastor and Severus at the very least, possibly Emmeline too as well as some of the other Order deaths in the first war). He collected people, bought their undying loyalty with very little effort on his part and *he* had the temerity to warn Harry from Slughorn. Even if we limit ourselves to what Percy knew, Harry was implicated in the escape of the mass-murderer who had injured Ron. As for Arthur and Molly - I am sure Percy believed they were sincere in their trust in Dumbledore, and mistaken.

As for not recognizing the difference in Crouch's behavior - Percy only knew him for 2 months before the Imperius. The entire Department of Magical Law Enforcement was incapable of telling who was really Imperiurized in the first war and who wasn't. The entire village of Hogsmeade wasn't able to notice Rosmerta had been Imperiurized for many months. And Dumbledore himself couldn't notice that his old friend and comrade at arms was being impersonated by another. So I don't see why anyone would expect more from an 18 year old newbie. You may not think Percy did much in his first year in the Ministry, but his perception was that he rose to a challenge that was dropped on him unexpectedly and pulled it off.

Ernie: I don't see that Harry liked him, he merely tolerated his presence even when he was one of the few people who believed him.

Cedric: I do not think he is exceptional for Hufflepuff, because the traits for which Dumbledore eulogizes him are the typical traits of Hufflepuff - especially the fairness which he exhibits time and again. The Triwizard Tournament is a curious event: it is a competition between individuals, but especially for young people success depends not only on the ability of the champion but largely on the network of support s/he manages to recruit in order to prepare for the tasks. Harry only lasts because he has the unfair support of an insider, his natural support network consists of just Ron and Hermione, who really aren't up to it. I would expect a Hufflepuff to be the most suited for this kind of competition (followed by Slytherin, Gryffindor and lastly Ravenclaw) because they are best at the social skills.

Luna: She is a kind person with a well-developed moral sense but her irrationality drives me crazy. I wouldn't have been able to spend much time in her presence.


(Post a new comment)

meesha1971 responding
(Anonymous)
2009-07-24 08:39 pm UTC (link)
My response will have to be broken up into parts - sorry, I don't have a journal account here.

For me there is a distinction between the "muggles are scum who deserve to be tortured/killed" attitude of Snape - and the other Death Eaters and the "muggles are innocents who need to be protected" attitude of the rest of the wizarding world. Acknowledging limitations is not prejudice. Hating someone just because they're different is. That's the difference between Arthur Weasley and a Death Eater. He doesn't hate muggles just because they can't do magic - the Death Eaters do.

The difference between Snape and Harry is the fact that Snape grew up knowing that he was a wizard and - like young Tom Riddle - he had a great deal of control over his magic at the age of 10. Harry had a lot of accidents because he didn't know he was doing magic and could not control it. Blowing up Aunt Marge was an accident due to him losing his temper - not a deliberate act that he had control over. Snape dropping the branch on Petunia's head was a deliberate act because he had control. He was angry and his response was deliberate violence. Lily knew that he had done that deliberately and called him on it - and she could tell that he was lying when he tried to say he didn't. So could Harry for that matter.

Snape's actions with Lily demonstrate that he fully believed that muggleborns were inferior - Lily was the exception to him because she had "loads of magic". He lies to her when she asks - demonstrated through his hesitation in responding. As you pointed out yourself, it is likely that a lot of people thought Tom Riddle was muggleborn because he was an orphan and grew up in a muggle orphanage. Snape thinking Lily could be sorted into Slytherin does not reveal his views on muggleborns in general. His ordering her to get sorted into Slytherin does demonstrate that he did not see her as an equal or even acknowledge her as a person. She was a thing to him - an object for him to mold into the image of what he thought she should be. He didn't care about who she really was.

Snape never listened to Lily's opinions and never showed any regard for her feelings. When she tries to explain to him her concerns about the horrible things Mulciber and Avery are doing, he completely blows her off - and completely ignores everything else she says once she agrees that James is a jerk. When she was crying on the train because Petunia was angry with her - for something Snape convinced her to do in the first place no less - Snape did not care and completely disregarded that she was upset. He never acknowledged his own culpability, never apologized to her, and never offered her even the slightest bit of comfort. He disregards her being upset completely and orders her to get sorted into Slytherin instead.



(Reply to this) (Thread)

Re: meesha1971 continuing
(Anonymous)
2009-07-24 08:41 pm UTC (link)
continuing ...

Lily stood up to James and Sirius in defense of Snape and Snape paid her back by calling her a "filthy mudblood". His behavior was a hundred times worse than anything James or Sirius did, IMO. He was supposed to be Lily's friend and she was trying to help him - he slapped her in the face for it. I don't blame Lily for walking away - Snape did not deserve her friendship or her help with the way he treated her. The major distinction there is that Snape claimed to be Lily's friend - they were supposed to be "best friends" and had known each other for over five years. James was merely a boy in her house that she was attracted to - and even then Lily made it perfectly clear that she was not willing to date James at that point because she did not approve of his behavior. James had to grow up first because - at that point - he was a childish, arrogant berk. And his behavior reflects that because it was extremely immature. Of course, he was also 15 years old - I expect 15 year old boys to be immature. I've raised two of them myself - and I dread when my youngest gets to that point. LOL

James saying "don't make me hex you" is not a sign of a future abuser - if that were true, he simply would have hexed her and been done with it. He liked her - he didn't want to fight with her over Snape. That was the point. Lily was not impressed and made that clear - telling him exactly what it was about his behavior that she did not like. The difference between Snape and James is that James actually listened to her and worked towards changing his behavior because he valued her opinion - he grew up where Snape never did. Even at the age of 36, Snape still behaves like an immature child. And, yes, I would agree that Sirius did too - though Sirius at least had good reason for being developmentally stunted after spending 12 years in Azkaban. Snape had no such justification for never growing up.

Snape was a loner by choice - he hated muggles and did not want to associate with them. Lily was the only other magical child who lived near him so he condescended to make an exception for her because he felt she had "loads of magic" - that made it okay. He needed that justification for it to be acceptable to associate with a muggleborn. He stalked her and spied on her - which was shown on page. Harry's description of Snape hiding in the bushes to spy on Lily and staring at her "greedily" like she was a shiny new toy he wanted to possess was quite disturbing - personally, I'd be calling the police if I saw a kid doing that in our neighborhood.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

Re: meesha1971 continuing
(Anonymous)
2009-07-24 08:42 pm UTC (link)
continuing...

The Dark Arts - I agree that can be confusing because pretty much any spell can be used negatively. However, there are distinctions made regarding what a spell does. The Full Body Bind for example - that would be categorized as a "dark" spell technically because of what it does. But it can be used in a positive manner as well so it is minor in terms of it being dark. That would apply to pretty much any defensive spell they learn - all of them are going to be somewhat dark because they're spells designed for fighting and defense. The same can be said for any fighting technique - say Martial Arts for example. The proponent is that it will only be used for defense, but it is still learning to fight violence with violence and can be used offensively by "bad" people. It comes down to how it is used in the end. With magic there are exceptions because some spells have no other use but to hurt or kill someone - but I addressed that in the other post so I won't go into it here because this is going to be long as it is. But - in general - the majority of magic is going to come down to how/why the person uses it in determining the level of darkness or whether it is dark at all.

James literally washed Snape's mouth out with soap because he was using swear words. Now, I agree that it was not James' place to do that and James was certainly in the wrong and being very immature. However, washing someone's mouth out with soap is not something that will hurt a person - parents have been using that to punish kids for swearing for years. My own parents used that and - while it's a horrible taste that I will forever remember - it didn't hurt me at all. It didn't hurt Snape - but it did embarrass him. Snape's response to being embarrassed was violent - trying to use Sectumsempra on James when his back was turned. If Sirius had not spotted him and called out warning so James moved, James would have found himself with his back split open and bleeding to death. And Snape was the only person who knew the countercurse for that - which is a major distinction between James and Sirius using magic to pull pranks with spells that Madame Pomfrey - or anyone else for that matter - could undo in seconds. Snape purposely invented a spell that he could use to hurt/kill others that nobody would be able to undo because he was the only one who knew how to reverse it. Even years later - after he had supposedly switched sides - Snape never bothered to share that countercurse with anyone else.

Lupin identifying Sectumsempra as being Snape's specialty is given as a canon fact - there is no evidence to contradict that and nothing that even remotely suggests that he is wrong. On the contrary, the text shows us that Lupin is right because Snape did invent that spell and he was the only person who knew how to reverse it. It has nothing to do with Snape being a Death Eater as an adult because Snape invented that spell while he was a student - before he became a Death Eater. What that shows us is that Snape was practicing and perfecting his use of the Dark Arts for torture and killing while he was still a student by using them on other students - he was already planning to become a Death Eater at that point after all. The text is quite clear on that issue. Lily was in extreme denial as to what Snape was doing, which she admits herself when she finally comes to her senses - and I'm sure he went to great lengths to hide his activities from her - but the Marauders did know and that was a large part of the mutual rivalry between them.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

Re: meesha1971 continuing
(Anonymous)
2009-07-24 08:45 pm UTC (link)
continuing ...

Blatant favoritism towards the Slytherins - that was established in the first book with Snape having a reputation for showing favoritism towards his own house with all the students talking about it. It was shown throughout the series. Draco comes in late to class and Snape merely says "settle down" and Draco takes his seat. Harry comes in late to class and Snape gleefully takes points away from Gryffindor and threatens Harry with detention. The Slytherins are rude and disrespectful in class - towards the other students - and Snape says nothing or gives a mild reproach along the lines of settle down. A student from any other house engaging in the same type of behavior gets points removed and/or detention. Harry and Draco get into a fight and accidentally hex Goyle and Hermione. Snape sends Goyle to the hospital wing, but cruelly insults Hermione - whose teeth had grown past her chin - by saying "I see no difference" when it was suggested she needed to go to the hospital wing as well. Draco was not punished at all for his behavior. Harry and Ron got detention and points were taken away from Gryffindor. The Slytherin Quidditch team continually tried to attack members of the Gryffindor Quiddtich team and Snape ignored all of it - even when there were eyewitnesses reporting that the Slytherin seeker had hexed Katie Bell from behind. Snape ignored all of the eyewitness reports and accused Katie of putting the hex on herself. His favoritism was blatant and obvious.

His major fault as a teacher is that he mocks and insults his students - it is pretty clear that he hated being a teacher and he wasn't good at it. When a teacher opens a class by announcing that he's probably wasting his time because they're probably all a bunch of dunderheads anyway, that's not the sign of a good teacher. And not all of the mocking and insults was deserved - he singled Harry out in the first class to ask him questions that he knew that none of the first year students would know the answer to yet - except for Hermione who is not an example of the average student - because he wanted to humiliate him. And he makes his motive known when he tells the other students they should be writing it down - he knew that none of them would know that information yet. Likewise, he punishes Harry for NOT helping Neville with his potion in the same class - taking points away from Gryffindor. Later, he punishes Hermione for the opposite because she did help Neville - he was furious at the loss of the opportunity to poison Neville's toad. And since that was not the first time Neville took his toad to any class, we know it was not against the rules for him to do so. McGonagall never threatened to kill Trevor because Neville had him in Transfiguration - nor did Flitwick when he brought him to Charms. Neville having his toad with him in class was not dangerous or breaking the rules in any way. And whether Snape had antidotes on hand is irrelevant - you don't test a poison on a student or threaten to kill their pets. That's reprehensible. He could not know if the poison they brewed would be compatible with the antidotes he had on hand - they were students and could have made any number of mistakes that would have resulted in someone dying because Snape was irresponsible enough to test a poison on them. His instructions and the examples set are contradictory because he makes the rules up as he goes along to allow him to punish the students more often rather than actually teaching them anything. He mercilessly bullied and verbally abused children - except those in Slytherin house - because he took pleasure in causing them pain. And the students in Hufflepuff and Ravenclaw had the same opinion of Snape as the students in Gryffindor because he subjected them to the same abuse. Only the Slytherins liked Snape because they knew he would let them do pretty much whatever they wanted.

As for the teacher we got fired - I don't know what happened to him - though I do know that he lost his license to teach. So I can't send him your way - for which I can only be grateful - I would never subject kids to a teacher like Snape. That would be among my disappointments in Dumbledore actually - he should never have allowed Snape to teach at all.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

Re: meesha1971 continuing
(Anonymous)
2009-07-24 08:56 pm UTC (link)
continuing ...

Shrieking Shack - the books give a lot of evidence showing that Snape knew about Pettigrew. In POA, we learn that all the Death Eaters knew - Pettigrew confirms that the reason he faked his death and spent 12 years hiding as a rat was because he was hiding from the Death Eaters. GOF reveals that Snape was a Death Eater and that Pettigrew was given the Dark Mark during the first war when he spied for Voldemort - his Mark came back after Voldemort regained his body. Karkaroff knew that Rookwood was a spy in the Ministry - and he knew about Snape as well, but wasn't given the opportunity to give any details. The Death Eaters wore masks to hide their identities from the outside world - not each other. They all knew each other - many of them were related and/or had been friends at school and joined Voldemort together. They addressed each other by name, associated with each other outside of being Death Eaters, and Voldemort held "staff meetings" to discuss his plans. They were also connected through the Dark Mark - which identified whoever pressed it to everyone who had the Mark.

Snape's behavior also gives him away. He knows that the trio is in no danger from Sirius or Lupin - demonstrated by him sneaking in and using the Invisibility cloak to hide and eavesdrop on the conversation. His goal there is to find out how much they know. If he thought the trio was in any danger, he would have acted immediately - not hid and eavesdropped. He heard enough to determine that Pettigrew was alive - an obvious conclusion with what he would have heard from them yelling as he came down the corridor and what was said in the room. Sirius tells him where Peter is when he says he'll go to the castle willingly as long as Ron brings his rat - at which point Snape changes tactics and decides to hand Sirius and Lupin over the dementors instead to prevent anyone finding out about Pettigrew. The trio has to knock him out to stop him from doing that. Harry is not yet ready to completely trust what Sirius and Lupin are saying, but he's heard enough to know that there is a lot more going on there and the truth needs to come out whether Snape wants it to or not. He gives them the chance and learns that they are telling the truth.

When Snape comes to, the opportunity to hand Sirius straight to the dementors is lost because Harry has driven them back to the entrance. Snape doesn't know how that happened - he only knows they're gone. However, he does know that it's a full moon and Lupin did not take his potion - so he's running around as a werewolf. That puts Snape in the position of having no choice but to take them back to the castle because he cannot justify taking the time to take Sirius to the entrance to have the dementors administer the kiss and leaving three students unconscious on the grounds with a werewolf running around. And that presents a danger to himself as well. The only thing he can do is take them back to the castle - conjuring stretchers looks good on him with Dumbledore and Fudge as well. It's all about appearances with Snape - as he explained to Draco in HBP, he knows how to act to make things look good for himself.

Back at the castle, Snape proceeds to lie to Fudge - this was deliberate because he knew that the trio had not been Confunded. His goal here is to make sure that nobody - particularly Fudge - will believe anything the trio says about what happened in the shack because he wants the dementor's kiss administered to Sirius. He manipulates Fudge to make sure that the dementors will be summoned and the kiss administered immediately. Dumbledore has already heard the truth from Sirius - and Dumbledore is also a legillimens so he knows exactly what happened in the shack. So he knows that Snape is lying through his teeth, but has no way to convince the gormless Fudge because Pettigrew escaped so he uses Harry and Hermione to save Sirius - and Buckbeak as well. His overall goal that night is clear - particularly once it's revealed that he was a Death Eater. He didn't want anyone to discover that Sirius was innocent and when he realized that they had the means to prove his innocence because Pettigrew was still alive, he took steps to prevent that from happening.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

Re: meesha1971 continuing
(Anonymous)
2009-07-24 08:57 pm UTC (link)
continuing ...

Forgiving and compassionate are not words I would use to describe Snape. Oh, he puts on a really good show for the benefit of Dumbledore or Fudge - and sometimes the other teachers - but it's very clear that he's only putting on a show to make himself look good in those instances. Really, the only person that Snape ever shows any genuine compassion to is Narcissa - and that was quite loathsome considering his compassion was directed at her desire to find some way of murdering Dumbledore without Draco being harmed.

I think you may have misunderstood me regarding Dumbledore - I do agree that he was Machiavellian and I was also disappointed with Jo throwing his characterization under the bus like that in DH. However, while Dumbledore was manipulative and his methods were questionable, there were lines that he did not cross. He did not lie about Voldemort returning - he had no reason to. He did not control Harry via nefarious means to make him lie about Voldemort returning. And nobody had any reason to think that he would. Percy could accuse Dumbledore of being reckless and careless with his actions in running Hogwarts, but he had no reason to think that Dumbledore would lie about Voldemort returning or do anything to make Harry lie. The lies Fudge told about Harry grew increasingly over time as well - the accusations that Harry was unstable or potentially violent, that he was an attention seeker wanting people to worship him because of his scar, etc... Percy knew those things were not true, but he went along with them anyway just because Fudge said that he should.

In regards to Sirius - Percy would have known the truth about that situation as well. His own brother was there when the truth about Sirius was revealed and Ron personally saw Pettigrew. Percy knows Ron even better than he knows Harry. He had no reason to doubt Ron was telling the truth. The fact is, Percy turned his back on his family because he was blinded by his own ambition. He put getting a promotion at work above his family - going so far as to accuse his father of holding him back at the Ministry. He went along with whatever Fudge said because all he could see at that point was the benefits to himself towards advancing his career. In the end, he realized that he was completely wrong and apologized for his horrible behavior - earning forgiveness from his family by doing so.

In regards to Barty Crouch's behavior - that was not the issue. Crouch wasn't even coming into the office so nobody could see how he was behaving. The issue was the fact that Percy did not alert anyone as to the suspicious circumstances - or even the possibility that Crouch might be severely ill. Again, he was blinded by his own ambition. He was so thrilled with the idea that he was being promoted, he didn't stop to think about how suspicious it was that Crouch - who had put so much time and energy into reinstating the tournament - no longer seemed to care about it and stopped going to the tasks. He didn't stop to consider the ramifications that Crouch - who was so dedicated to his work - stopped coming into the office and merely sent instructions in by owl each day. Percy just did what he was told, how he was told to do it, and never once questioned how odd the entire situation was. That's why he was subjected to a formal inquiry when the truth came out. He had acted inappropriately in the circumstances. He should have reported to a superior so the situation with Crouch could be investigated. He did not do so because he was so blinded by his own ambition. That made him the perfect patsy for Fudge to use in OOTP when he went on his smear campaign against Dumbledore and Harry - as well as Scrimgeour later on when he wanted an excuse to go to the Burrow to try and speak to Harry in person. Percy's ambition made it possible for them to use him - that's what he had to come to realize on his own. His ambition blinded him and he let them use him for their own goals at the expense of his family.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

Re: meesha1971 continuing
(Anonymous)
2009-07-24 08:58 pm UTC (link)
continuing ...

Harry and Ron liked Ernie well enough and considered him among their friends. They weren't BFF or anything like that, but they respected him and knew he was a good person. Harry was hurt when Ernie was suspicious of him in COS and relieved when Ernie came around and realized he was wrong - that was when they became friends. And he was glad that Ernie believed him in OOTP as well, but that wasn't the only reason he liked Ernie - they were friends before all that and remained friends after. Ernie was among those that came to Harry's rescue as well - in OOTP when Malfoy attempted to curse him from behind as well as in DH when the trio couldn't produce their patronuses when they ran into the dementors.

The thing with Cedric was not that he was exceptional for a Hufflepuff individually. What was pointed out on page was that Cedric was the only person who had ever given Hufflepuff house any glory in regards to school activities. Hufflepuff was never in contention for winning the Quidditch cup - until the game where Cedric caught the snitch instead of Harry. And even though Harry had been injured because of the dementors showing up, he could not say it wasn't a fair catch - Cedric got there first. The tournament chose the champions for their individual strengths, but that did indirectly bring glory to Hufflepuff house because Cedric was in that house. The point was that Hufflepuff was always looked down on in general by everyone. Gryffindor and Ravenclaw were the top two - the majority would prefer to be in one of those houses. Slytherin had a bad reputation for putting out Dark Wizards like Voldemort, but the students who wanted Slytherin also looked down on Hufflepuff. So the general consensus was either "I want Gryffindor, but Ravenclaw would be good - I hope I don't get Hufflepuff and I'd rather go home than be in Slytherin" or "I want Slytherin, but I'll take Ravenclaw or Gryffindor and I'd rather go home than be in Hufflepuff". Hufflepuff always seemed to get put down more than the other houses overall - probably because of they were considered the "leftover" house in regards to the traits that were defined with Helga Hufflepuff purportedly saying "I'll take the rest".

I like Luna overall - but I agree her irrationality could be offputting. I think that was the point actually - she was the "anti-Hermione" in that sense and she was supposed to come across that way. But I think it was shown that she was intelligent as well - in some ways more intelligent than others because she was more open minded. Hermione was extremely intelligent, but her tendency to be close minded and refuse to accept things that were not spelled out explicitly in books or "officially proven" held her back - as we see with in DH with her refusal to even examine the possibility of the Hallows existing or the possibility that Voldemort hid a Horcrux at Hogwarts. Had she been more open minded, some things would have been easier because she would have helped explore the possibility rather than deciding point blank to ignore it.

But the point we were discussing was intelligence and Luna was never ostracized because she was intelligent - or even because she was in Ravenclaw house. She was ostracized because of her irrationalities - the same reason you present as something that would drive you crazy. There really wasn't anyone in the story who was ostracized simply because they were intelligent and liked to study.

Finally done - sorry that was so long, but I wanted to address all the points you made. :)

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

Re: meesha1971 continuing
[info]oryx_leucoryx
2009-07-26 07:18 am UTC (link)
My reply can be found at 2nd reply to meesha1971.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

Re: meesha1971 continuing
[info]elethian
2009-07-31 12:35 am UTC (link)
Harry's description of Snape hiding in the bushes to spy on Lily and staring at her "greedily" like she was a shiny new toy he wanted to possess was quite disturbing

It's very similar to the images we're given for Harry's reaction to seeing Lily in the Mirror of Erised (among his other family) and when he uses the Resurrection Stone:

PS: The Potters smiled and waved at Harry and he stared hungrily back at them [...] He couldn’t stay here, he had to find his way back to bed. He tore his eyes away from his mother’s face

DH: He could not speak. His eyes feasted on her, and he thought that he would like to stand and look at her forever, and that would be enough.

Severus is an odd, lonely child whose home life seems to lack care and affection; of course he's going to latch on hungrily and greedily to the opportunity for warm companionship.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

Re: meesha1971 responding
[info]elethian
2009-07-31 12:23 am UTC (link)
the "muggles are scum who deserve to be tortured/killed" attitude of Snape

Whoa, what? What does he say or do that demonstrates he has this attitude?

As for Death Eaters generally, I'm not convinced they all hate, either. Some clearly do (e.g. Bellatrix) but I think others merely find themselves superior and think they can do whatever they like to Muggles -- it's disregard for them, rather than hatred.

Oryx already addressed elsewhere the topic of how we don't know whether Severus was being deliberate in the incident with the branch, but I'll add that while Severus's denial is described as a lie, that doesn't mean it's necessarily so. This scene, as almost everything, is from Harry's point of view, and he can't see inside Severus's head (or Lily's for that matter). So all we know is that Harry thinks Severus must be lying.

Snape thinking Lily could be sorted into Slytherin does not reveal his views on muggleborns in general.

It reveals naivete, is what it reveals; he apparently thinks it'll be no problem. But I'm confused as to where you're getting the idea that Severus "ordered" Lily to do anything. "You'd better be in Slytherin" is not an order; it's expressing a hope that it will come out that way. Besides the grammatical argument, when James and Sirius, two pure-blood children who have not been isolated from wizards and knowledge of wizarding experience, are discussing the topic, they use language like "if you've got the choice" and "hoping to go". Remember also from PS that Ron doesn't even seem to know that the Sorting Hat exists -- apparently neither of his parents nor any of his five older siblings have ever mentioned it -- so I think it's reasonable to conclude that few children know that the Hat may take the child's desires into account. Severus might know this, but I think it's much more likely he doesn't; therefore he can't be ordering Lily to do something he doesn't know is possible.

(Reply to this) (Parent)



Home | Site Map | Manage Account | TOS | Privacy | Support | FAQs