sistermagpie | The man who didn't come to dinner

Current Mood: silly

Entry tags:

The man who didn't come to dinner

I had a stray thought today while reading the various theories of Sirius being poisoned, mostly about why I like

Personally, in case anyone's interested, I don't think Sirius was poisoned, nor do I think he was acting reckless when he died. I tend to think that line about the potion is there so that *Harry* can start suspecting Snape of doing some reckless poisoning later, if it's there for any reason at all. Or perhaps the potion will come up later. Heh. It's like fanfic. Everybody knows when Snape introduces a potion in class *somebody* will be accidentally ingesting it by the end of the fic, and it will probably lead to sex somehow.

Anyway, one thing that's been brought up with regards to Snape poisoning someone is his not eating any food at Grimmauld Place--something one might avoid if one knew the food was poisoned. I think again, that would be a little too obvious, like in We Have Always Lived In The Castle when a character is widely considered a murderer because her family was poisoned through the sugar bowl and everyone knows Constance never takes sugar. Regardless, what's interesting is how the topic of Snape's not eating has become an issue.

Technically, I don't think we know he doesn't eat anything at Grimmauld Place, though I suspect he doesn't. I think we're just told he "never stays for dinner." People have said, reasonably, that he doesn't stay for dinner because he doesn't want to socialize with these people any more than he has to. For all we know he's also got a truckload of other responsibilities somewhere. Maybe he's moonlighting at a fast food place in Hogsmeade. We don't know.

But I realized another reason I like the idea of Snape not eating at the place. I'm pretty sure there's a passage in The Count of Monte Cristo, that deals with the hero not eating. Now, I read CoMC (hmm. same initials as Care of Magical Creatures...) in French so for all I know I made up the entire scene through my bad translation and Edmund really refused to remove his galoshes indoors, but I seem to remember that what happened was the Count went to a party at the home of his former fiancé and her husband, one of the conspirators who got him sent to prison for 19 years. Mercedes, his former love, recognizes him as Edmund. She keeps the secret but gets very upset when he refuses an hors d'oeuvre. I mean, seriously upset. She's just frantic that he try her canapé--wtf?

Later it's revealed this is because refusing to eat is a point of honor--you do not accept food in your enemy's house. It appears to be something one could start a duel with if one wanted. Now, it's kind of funny to draw a parallel between Snape and Edmund, since in this story the character most like Edmund would be the guy who spent 13 years in prison for a crime he didn't commit and then broke out. Snape isn't responsible for putting Sirius in prison, though, and Sirius doesn't seem much for archaic traditions. Snape, otoh, I can definitely see holding a Monte Cristo-type grudge and privately vowing never to eat food served in the house of his enemy. Not that anyone would notice--well, other Slytherins might, but they’re not going to be invited to dinner by Molly either.

Snape is, after all, the character in canon who feels bound by a life debt because James Potter was moved to stop a prank by his best friend that never should have happened to begin with--I suspect if there were a fair court of law about such things Snape would be cleared of any life debtedness. Harry, by contrast, appears to feel under no such obligation to Snape for his protection. So if somebody were going to do something like this it would be Snape, imo. I doubt this was the author's intention, but it just seems very Snape to me.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

I can't help thinking that Severus, verbally unpleasant though he may be, hasn't really got the heart to do anything physical towards even his deadliest foes for no justifiable reason any more.

Hmmm. I agree with you, but I wonder if it's not so much that he doesn't have the heart, as he knows how badly any sort of phsyical display would be interpreted/received by Dumbledore and/or anyone else aware of his past history. I've always thought it rather significant that, for all his verbal/emotional abuse of Neville and Harry, and his hatred of Remus and Sirius, the only time he ever does anything physical to any of them in present-day canon* is the incident with Harry and the pensieve, when he was in an extreme rage.

I mean, I can *so* see Snape gleefully using Umbridge's pen with both Harry and Neville if he thought he could get away with it, you know? Or Filch's 'Old Punishments.'

*Excepting the Shrieking Shack scene, of course, but Snape thought Sirius was an escaped murderer and Remus his accomplice at the time...

It's like Dumbledore says in PS, I think, that Snape has always disliked Harry, but he never wanted him dead. Clearly Snape is capable of great violence because he was a DE, but there are plenty of situations where he can be angry without wanting to kill anyone.

Of course, the thing with Sirius was when they were kids, which could also be a factor. He may still remember it as he was back then, when it was more about Sirius being able to do anything and still have everybody think it was sort of cute. So it's not necessarily about murder but humiliation, and the way Snape wasn't important enough to make that much of a fuss over.

Snape wasn't important enough to make that much of a fuss over.

I think that's an important point. Personally, I think that Sirius wasn't consciously trying to kill Snape, but that what he did nonetheless qualifies as attempted murder. Additionally, I think Snape, who's had a rough upbringing, and at this point has already considered his place in the war and knows James and Sirius's views of anyone who uses the Dark Arts, would be extraordinarily hard-pressed to see this as anything *but* attempted murder. But then, I also think there's a part of him that maybe wants to see it as attempted murder, because then, at least somebody cares, right? Enough to actually kill him, rather than just not think about it, which has got to be harder to take emotionally.

Oh yes. Attempted murder, at least, is almost viewing Snape as an equal - he has to be eliminated, he's a threat to MWPP.
The alternative is much more humiliating - it's all one big joke; Sirius not only didn't view Snape as a threat, but thought that the idea of him being scared, possibly injured was funny; and James Potter is forced to rescue helpless Snape like a little child.

Yes, that's how I see it too. I don't think Sirius had murder on his mind at all, but I would HATE to have been Snape in that situation. I imagine he wound up feeling like Dumbledore was almost in on the joke too--I mean, feeling like the Gryffindors were just one big happy family and one of the boys had done something rather naughty but there there, wasn't James fantastic and let's all have cocoa. And meanwhile here's Snape who probably got scolded for trying to get the Gryffs in trouble (Dumbledore does tend to have quite the double standard on sneaking and initiative that way) and joshed about not taking everything so seriously and let's praise James some more. There are so many things for him to feel bitter about.

And meanwhile here's Snape who probably got scolded for trying to get the Gryffs in trouble (Dumbledore does tend to have quite the double standard on sneaking and initiative that way)

I'm now imagining a McGonagall style 'Well, then you both get in trouble' resolution, with Sirius and James smirking and Snape PLOTTING TO KILL THEM ALL!11 ;)

One of the best fanfic takes on this I've read (which is actually set the next day) has several teachers having a conference with the boys present to discuss punishment, with very little said about the genuine risk to a student's life. The end result (which seems pretty likely) is that Sirius loses 100 points for putting a student in danger, James gains 50 points for a heroic rescue, and Snape loses 30 points for being out of bed. Net result, as Snape sees it, is that his life is worth 20 points. The fic ends with Lucius (written pre-OotP) feeling genuinely very bad for Snape but also being quite pleased because it will make recruiting him *so* much easier.

And so many Slytherins joined the side opposing Dumbledore because they're innately evil and the Gryffindors are innately good. Riiight.

I just have to say that sounds like a *fabulous* take on it and very very believable. I can imagine decades later that Snape is the only one who could still recite exactly how many points were given or taken for what reason.

Where is this fic? It sounds fascinating.

http://www.fanfiction.net/s/558566/1/ - "In the Land of the Gryffindor" by Grey-Eyed Athena.

Having just reread it, I realize that I misremembered the point totals (actually *over*estimated them). Also, since it's set the next day, the actual conference is off-stage, but you pick up the main points of what was said. Most of this author's HP works are connected, so there are various references to things explained elsewhere (especially the one long fic, "Nemo Me Impune Lacessit"), but reading it alone shouldn't be a problem.

It was more about Sirius being able to do anything and still have everybody think it was sort of cute.

Heh. *coughs at Harry* Oh, the parallels.

So it's not necessarily about murder but humiliation, and the way Snape wasn't important enough to make that much of a fuss over.

It kinda reminds me of a more serious version of the Buckbeak incident.
Dangerous animal, only threatening to certain people (because of course, MWPP were safe around Werewolf!Remus, presuming the prank was post-Animagus transformations.
Which may account for the outright stupidity of the prank - 'Why, me old mate Remus' ((why is Theoretical!Sirius in my head is a Cockney, I don't know)) 'wouldn't hurt anyone! He's always fine with us!'
And with all the PoA DVD furore, I forgot one of the parts I hated most - Buckbeak after unleashing talons, goes up to Harry and nuzzles him. Aw. You see? It only attacks meanies! Poor fluffy ickle Buckbeak.)
And of course, in both cases, the victim bears responsibility for their own troubles - Snape got lured, but it was his own spite in wanting to catch out the loveable MWPP that caused his experience.
Draco didn't know the animal was dangerous, but it was him insulting it that caused his injury.
And again, in both cases, the victim's undeniable responsibility is blown up.
Not only are they not victims at all - the victims are viewed James (risked his life) and the attacking animals themselves; but the meagre amount of suffering acknowledged to them is attributed to them, with the rest dismissed as exaggeration ("For god's sake's, man, it's a silly grudge!")
I mean, I don't think that the Prank was attempted murder, and I don't think 'Oh poor tragic Snape/Draco, how they've suffered' but I do think that they were probably very frightened (dude, you let James Potter help you/Hagrid carry you? You probably truly believe you're dying!), that their bitterest enemies saw them at their worst, and that they have a point: everything was whitewashed away for our loveable heroes by ~~Machievelli~~ Good Old Albus.

Yes! Like I said above, it would be like having something happen to you and then you're in this room of jolly Gryffindors and everyone's laughing about it and congratulating the person you're the most angry at.

It's sort of like how in a conversation recently people were referring to the "charmed circle"--oh, it was the one about Snape being redeemed by love, which always gets into this idea that Harry's greatest gift is somehow being deserving of love in ways other people aren't, or able to love in ways other people aren't, and unfortunately for all the talk about Slytherins freezing themselves out with their dreadful views on who should be accepted into society, it's more these people that seem to put themselves above the rest of the world, somehow.

it's more these people that seem to put themselves above the rest of the world, somehow.

And i think that JKR is pointing that out. Remember, the chamred circle is broken- even Harry sees it in that picture that Moody gives to him- all these smiling people, and their lives came crashing down on them. Now, they are ina wacky, dirty house, with many of the 'old gang' really not able to do much.

JKR is saying the old, 'arent we so precious and cool' attitude is not going to work. And all that shit you did to people, and never had the decency to admit to, or even be contrite about? Comes back like a tornado. I realluy think that for the adults at least recognition and forgiveness will be very important.( It has started already at the end of OOTP, with Dumbledore realising that he misread Snape quite a bit.)

That's very much where it seems like things are leading, I think. I think that's maybe why I find the adult storylines at this point so satisfying. None of the adults escaped their own actions and pretty much all of them have to own up to their own faults whether they want to or not.

I'm hoping the current generation will be as ultimately satisfying when their story concludes, of course!

Draco didn't know the animal was dangerous, but it was him insulting it that caused his injury.

But the thing is that Draco DID know Buckbeak was dangerous, Hagrid had just explained how to approach a Hippogriff and even had Harry demonstrate, Draco acted like an ass and got a well earned beat down, no sympathy from me.

Yes, and Draco didn't hear the instructions.

"Now, firs' thing yeh gotta know abou' Hippogriffs is they're proud," said Hagrid. "Easily offended, Hippogriffs are. Don't never insult one, 'cause it might be the last thing yeh do."
Malfoy, Crabbe and Goyle weren't listening; they were talking in an undertone and Harry had a nasty feeling they were plotting how best to disrupt the lesson.

Of course he did follow the instructions he did hear, because he was scared of the animal just like anyone else. I'm sure he'd have preferred not to have anything to do with it at all. One of the funniest things about PoA the movie is the way Hagrid himself seems to have been given Draco's action there, yet there it's taken for just what it is--a completely inocuous thing animal lovers do all the time. Actually, if that kind of thing was so stupid shouldn't Hagrid have been killed many times over? He's the one constantly playing with dangerous animals.

There's a big difference between a classroom situation like this one, particularly involving a young person, and an adult aggressively deciding to do something stupid. Though frankly, even when an adult does it sometimes it's okay to have sympathy. I recently read a story about this guy who made one stupid mistake after another in going out kayacking. He almost drown. He was far stupider than Draco and had far less excuse for being so, yet why feel satisfaction if he had actually drowned? I can understand feeling that way *affectionately* or because you are upset that he put himself in that kind of danger, but not coldly. Draco's real crime in PoA is exposing Hagrid's major flaws as a teacher and for that there is no forgiveness. Saving Buckbeak appears to be the same as validating that Hagrid did a great job, which would never fly in the real world.

An interesting article that seems relevant, about sweet pets who turn violent and the owners who insist it isn't the animal's fault.

Yes, I do see a connection between the sort of vanity-based ethics involved in believing it's immoral to destroy a dangerous animal and highly moral to introduce it to children and this incident. Sadly, the women with the pit bull in the article looks like a sworn defender of children next to Hagrid. While she, too, was dealing with a situation that was always a potential danger when she brought a pit bull into that neighborhood, she didn't orchestrate the situation half as carefully as Hagrid did!
And at least she possibly had to face the truth that her desire to keep a pet she considered herself the savior of did not trump the safety of the most irresponsible child in her neighborhood--and nobody blamed the victims.

Yet I know any dog can be unpredictable. Should mine ever harm another person or dog, I would consider myself responsible, except in the rarest of circumstances (if someone attacked me, for example).

This seems like such common sense to me, and it's why PoA bothers me so much. I have so little patience for the ethical contortions people have to get into to absolve the friggin' teacher and owner of the animal for any blame whatsover. Sometimes the scene's just re-written. Malfoy "abused" the animal! He got attacked on purpose!

The guy brings a herd of dangerous animals and orders a herd of 13-year-olds interact closely with them, unsupervised. They all get the basics about making them bow. After making a big show of how sweet the animal is, he tosses off a throwaway, vague threat of, "Just don' insult them or it might be the last thing you'll do," which is missed by at least three kids but probably more, since at any given time some kid is zoning out, which is why any responsible teacher with animals repeats instructions like that repeatedly, makes sure kids understand exactly what he means and then supervises each individual encounter. If you went through the books and found every time Harry or Ron wasn't paying attention in class and assumed they deserved something equally violent as payback, neither of them would have any limbs left. Voldemort wouldn't need to kill Harry. He would have died horribly after he threw a firecracker into Goyle's cauldron in potion or something.

In Hagrid's class, Neville's running back and forth nervously, obviously in need of help but not getting any from his teacher. That kind of skittishness might have guaranteed he was the one attacked if these were real animals. Instead it's the kid who, while petting the thing as instructed, says something "insulting," quite possibly unaware that a) insults cause it to attack you or b) that calling it a "big ugly brute" while petting it would be considered an insult.

Well, the kid is definitely the one that the animal was reacting to, just as the peke was the dog that did the running up to the pit bull in the article and the grandmother and little boy were the ones who ran up and tried to stop it (in fact, they were far more provoking). But acting like it's just the kid's fault and the teacher has no responsibility? What planet does that make sense on? As if anybody would feel that way if it were them or their child who just got mauled: "Well, I told you not to insult him!" "I didn't think it was an insult." "Well, it was. He doesn't like that." "I didn't hear you say it was an insult." "Then it's your own fault for not listening to me." "Oh, gee. Sorry ever so. Maybe you should have the dog's teeth checked to make sure he didn't chip anything on my bone when he ripped my flesh off. Send me the bill."

Looking back, it rather surprises me that I didn't react this way when I first read the book, given that I was in a vaguely similar situation when I was ten. I got a vague warning from a dog owner, acknowledged it but didn't think it sounded serious, and got a fairly nasty (though not maiming, thank God) bite on my leg. The dog's owner promptly came over and made some comment that reeked of "I told you so" while I was on the ground bleeding.

We've got no idea what tone Draco was using with Buckbeak, but most dog owners do just what you said. "You're a stupid puppy, yes you are! Yeah, you're a stupid puppy! Aww, good dog." I could see Draco doing the equivalent of this.

At the very, very least, Hagrid needed to have the kids going up one at a time so he could supervise each individual student.

(no subject)

sistermagpie.livejournal.com - 2004-11-20 16:41 (UTC) - Expand

Yeah and that still his own fault.

I'm not saying Hagrid's a great teacher or anything like that, only with the Buckbeak situation I have no sympathy for Draco, he was the one who screwed around in class and didn't pay attention and it came back to bite him the ass or arm in this case.

What, so not paying attention in class means you deserve to be slashed?
That's a fairly steep punishment (and rules out not only most everyone I know in RL, including me; but almost everyone in the HP!verse, except perhaps Hermione.)

When dealing with potentially dangerous animals then yes. Draco wasn't seriously hurt and like I said it was his own fault that happened in the first place.

Like I said, I respectfully disagree.
I definitely see that he bears a large portion of responsibility, but to me, calling it his own fault simplifies the situation and whitewashes both Hagrid and the creature's own choices.

(no subject)

iczer6.livejournal.com - 2004-11-19 10:12 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

slinkhard.livejournal.com - 2004-11-19 10:14 (UTC) - Expand

And like I heard somewhere (maybe in HPforGU), Snape is always trying to expells Harry while knowing DD will never do it. But when Umbridge is here, he has only one word to say and Harry is out.

And he never said the word.

For the pensieve scene, I even had the impression that Snape was near to be really violent (when he grabs him and begin to shout) and then, he push Harry far of him, and out of his sight.

Like if he knew that he'll be really dangerous and restrain himself just enought to let Harry far of him, of the danger.

At least, he know that he could be dangerous and try (a little) to stop himself before it's too late. But he doesn't managed to do it, so he just gain time and explode when he's alone.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only