Unite

Oct 15, 2006 22:25

I'm bored out of my mind tonight, so we'll make it a two-fer. Make up for me ditching these things for two weeks, right? Nah.

Untie )

prisonerofazkaban

Leave a comment

bubonicplague October 16 2006, 05:02:31 UTC
Ok, now, as a blatant Snape apologist, I have to say that his behavior here really did throw me - though actually less than his ranting spittle-throwing tirade at the end of the book.

Still, I have to concede that he has just as much reason to be a big baby...or, at least as much reason as Harry does, except Harry gets away with it. When Harry goes into capslocky-justification mode and does inane crap, he is lauded for it. Poor Snape is stuck trying, but he gets jack shit.

I mean, the very fact that Snape was lured in by an inane and juvenile prank does not speak too well for his cognition (for who would listen to his worst enemies about a rendezvous?) and yet, I feel a bit sorry for his plight. They did try to kill him, and what happens? They become Dumbledore's favorites, get away with illegal activity, and Lupin gets his own little house for good. While Snape is told to shut up and suck it up.

Yeah, he wants revenge. That's a better motive than protecting Harry, anyway. Really, if Snape were a hero, he'd ley Harry do ( ... )

Reply

dv8nation October 16 2006, 05:08:20 UTC
They didn't try and kill him. It was a prank that got out of hand.

Reply

bubonicplague October 16 2006, 05:09:25 UTC
Umm...they tell someone to go to a certain location in the hopes that he would get eaten by a werewolf. That's not exactly a prank.

Reply

dv8nation October 16 2006, 05:33:48 UTC
It's been my observation that wizards have somewhat sadistic senses of humor in general. But since James stepped into save Snape they clearly didn't want him dead. More likely they wanted to give him a good scare and thought he could handle anything really nasty. When things got out of hand James stepped in.

Reply

bubonicplague October 16 2006, 05:40:25 UTC
Yes, so, say I want to make you wear a wetsuit, pour chum down it, and then stick you in a tank of great whites. And then I say "oops, no, I changed my mind". That makes me a hero?

Reply

dv8nation October 16 2006, 05:48:44 UTC
I never said James was heroic. That was a real asshole thing to do. But I think the line about getting eaten by a werewolf isn't something that should be taken 100% seriously.

Reply

bubonicplague October 16 2006, 05:51:21 UTC
But...why not? I mean, Snape was lured into finding out what the marauders were up to, and there was a big fucking werewolf there. I don't think that qualifies as a prank gone wrong, I think it qualifies as attempted murder, even though James oh-so-capriciously decided to save Snape. Yes, it also makes them all complete dumbasses.

But I do get where Snape is coming from, here.

Reply

merenwen_81 October 16 2006, 14:17:42 UTC
Do we know that anyone exept Sirius even knew about the prank before it was already happening? I don't understand how Sirius thought Snape either learning Lupin's secret or getting turned or killed was a great idea, but I don't see the others going along with it. Not even Peter and he's a pretty sick fuck. Maybe Sirius really wasn't thinking or Snape was right and Sirius really wanted him dead.

So, DD makes Snape keep the secret and James gets to be the Head Boy, but I don't think Sirius got rewarded for what he did. Dumbledore defended Snape after the first war, but let Sirius rot in Azkaban.

Reply

bubonicplague October 16 2006, 16:00:53 UTC
Well, Lupin certainly wasn't at fault. I was under the impression, for some reason, that both James and Sirius were involved and that Peter just wasn't mentioned at all - though that is Snape's account.

Still, I really can't see any legitimate excuse for that "prank", no matter who changed his mind later. And the fact that Sirius even got to stay in school was a reward. I like Dumbledore's character, but he really is a manipulative jerk.

Reply

suzene October 16 2006, 08:08:39 UTC
I'm willing to give Snape the benefit of the doubt for his irrationality where Black is concerned, but he's also willing to throw Lupin to the Dementors and let one of Voldemort's people, one who's got a body count in the double digits, go free to get even for something that happened when they were all shit-for-brains teenagers. I think that Snape comes off looking worse than just assholish here and starts edging into psycho territory.

Reply

bubonicplague October 16 2006, 10:46:47 UTC
Huh, I never got the impression that he was there to just let Peter go free; after all, Snape hated him too.

Eh, not psycho to me. Childish and irrational? Yes. Insane? No.

Reply

jim_smith October 16 2006, 23:37:36 UTC
Still, I have to concede that he has just as much reason to be a big baby...or, at least as much reason as Harry does, except Harry gets away with it.

I'm pretty sure the fact Snape is a grown man and Harry is a child has a great deal to do with the double standard of which of them gets to act like a child.

(My understanding of Snape apologetics is that the classic response to this point is "Well, Harry's supposed to be the hero and this is supposed to be a coming-of-age story, so he should be acting like a man!" No arguments there, but the fact that Harry ought to be acting older than his age and isn't doesn't mean Snape is entitled to also act Harry's age.)

When Harry goes into capslocky-justification mode and does inane crap, he is lauded for it. Poor Snape is stuck trying, but he gets jack shit.I grant that lauding Harry for it is kind of lame, but even so I don't think that gives Snape a free pass to do it. I mean, in this all-caps diatribe in this chapter, he might as well add "WHY WON'T YOU TREAT ME LIKE A THIRTEEN-YEAR- ( ... )

Reply

bubonicplague October 17 2006, 10:24:28 UTC
See, you are approaching this in a logical fashion and Snape's problem - and what makes him an interesting character - is that he is completely irrational about Harry and his father. Does he have cause to be? Well, yeah, a bit. James Potter and Sirius Black first pantsed him when Snepe was minding his own business, he started hating them, he started following them around, and they tried to off him. Immature on all parts? Sure, but I'd be a little bitter about that as well ( ... )

Reply

mindset October 17 2006, 17:11:48 UTC
....then why do you read a book *about* him?

For all that Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince = "Harry Potter and Snape", he's still the protagonist, the star of the show, the one the book is *named* after. Expecting not to hear much about Harry in a book named after Harry is, I'm afraid, remarkably stupid, or at least counter-logical.

This no doubt explains much about Harry Potter fandom.

Reply

bubonicplague October 17 2006, 20:39:08 UTC
I read the books for a handful of characters that I do like. Since when does one have to enjoy books for the protagonist? Seems a silly rule to me.

Reply

merenwen_81 October 17 2006, 22:19:45 UTC
Well, since Harry is in nearly every scene, I can't really blame Brucha for thinking it might not be worth it for someone who'd "rather not hear much about him at all". I'm sure you're not the only one in the fandom who feels like that, but it seems silly/masochistic. I finished His Dark Materials despite Lyra though, so I'm hardly one to talk.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up