St Mungo's
St Mungo's
Home | Profile | Active Topics | Members | Private Messages | Search | FAQ
 All Forums
 First Floor.......................Canon Obsessions
 Philosopher to Hallows
 Snape is a Nasty, Underhanded Slimeball (SINUS)

Note: You must be registered in order to post a reply.

Screensize:
UserName:
Password:
Antispam question: Who is the Hogwarts groundskeeper?
Answer:
Format Mode:
Format: BoldItalicizedUnderlineStrikethrough Align LeftCenteredAlign Right Horizontal Rule Insert HyperlinkInsert EmailInsert Image Insert CodeInsert QuoteInsert List Spell Checker
   
Message:

Smilies
Smile [:)] Big Smile [:D] Cool [8D] Blush [:I] Blink [blink]
Tongue [:P] Evil [):] Wink [;)] Clown [:o)] Speechless [:u]
Black Eye [B)] Hare [hare] Frown [:(] Shy [8)] Spin [88]
Shocked [:0] Angry [:(!] Excited [excited] Sleepy [|)] Loud [()]
Spam [spam] Approve [^] Disapprove [V] Sigh [sigh] Wink2 [;)]
Hijacked [hijacked] Kiss [xox] Bugout [8~o] Bag [bag] Cry [:-[)]
Wizard [magic] Wub [wub] Wizard [wizard] Vanish [vanish] Unsure [unsure]
Squid [squid] squee [squee] Snape [snape] Snake [snake] Slytherin [sly]
Read [read] Ravenclaw [rav] Pirate [pirate] pirate2 [pirate2] Paw [paw]
Hug [hug] Hufflepuff [huf] Hogwarts [hogwarts] Hermione [hermione] Harry [harry]
Happy [happy] Gryfindor [gry] Fool [fool] Dry [dry] Hide [hide]
Woot [woot] Coffee [coffee] Bleh [bleh] Badger [badger] Ron [ron]
Dragon [dragon] Huh [huh] Ponder [ponder] Rolleyes [rolleyes] Darkmark [darkmark]

   -  HTML is OFF | Forum Code is ON
  Check here to include your profile signature.
    

T O P I C    R E V I E W
AMC Posted - 06/15/2006 : 14:26:18
There, I just needed to get the S.I.N.U.S. club established in its new home.
30   L A T E S T    R E P L I E S    (Newest First)
AMC Posted - 07/21/2008 : 01:33:34
I would swap with you in a minute, Bee - it's been so long since I've had my fill of rain, I think I'd even be willing to stay swapped for a while.
Bee Posted - 07/20/2008 : 17:11:52
You can swap with me if you like, AMC. All the rain you could wish for, and then some.
AMC Posted - 07/20/2008 : 16:20:06
Any elf-made wine to share with us, Martje? Or rat-like house boarders? Not that I want to share in any of those, you can keep them if you've got them. Just wondering exactly how Snape-like your abode really is.

The scenery out my windows is almost always sun-drenched. Believe it or not, I long for rain.... And fog and wind. I live in the WRONG place.
Starling Posted - 07/20/2008 : 13:45:13
Ok, it's not scenery, it's another row of houses. A bit like Snape's abode. A lot like Snape's abode, actually.
Starling Posted - 07/20/2008 : 13:22:22
Hey, I can see rain-soaked scenery out of my own windows, thankyouverymuch!
AMC Posted - 07/20/2008 : 01:09:54
Sigh.

The place is deserted. The village is a shadow of its former self. The SINUS club is a lonely spot.

BUT.. to look on the bright side, it's very peaceful here. And since I never seem to be able to set even the smallest section of my own house aside for my own "space", I might was well enjoy this.

*ZZZZZZZZap* (creates a new side room with lots of windows, all of which look out on beautiful rain-soaked scenery)
Let's see.. nice calm soft rugs. Yoga mats. No Yoga music.. ick. How about some Dire Straits? Excellent.
Now.. some herbal tea.. and cookies.

Lovely.

If anyone comes by, looking for a nice game of Snape darts, I'll be in the meditation room, stretching.
AMC Posted - 04/24/2008 : 02:26:10
Since I've had a nice day and a nice Snog with Harry over on the Kissing Game thread, I thought I'd wander in here for a pint.

Yes, I know - it's been somewhat deserted since we got infiltrated by Snape-lovers but we've aired it out for a bit now and the place is back. Nice gleaming bar, lovely red squashy leather chairs... big honking greasy nose to aim for in the center of the dartboard. There's really nothing like the S.I.N.U.S. thread for a pleasurable evening.

Slushy? Make mine a double please! And a nice fresh set of extra-pointy darts to throw. Thanks ever so much.
Theowyn Posted - 02/07/2008 : 15:01:12
I doubt that I will ever read DH again. The plot contrivances really do ruin it for me, though I know that's not true for everyone. I think HBP still holds up well, however, and I even find it more interesting in light of DD's true character. He was the grand manipulator from the very beginning of the book: the way he used Harry to get Slughorn to return to Hogwarts and again to get the memory of Riddle. And he never needed to show Harry all those memories. He could have explained everything to Harry about Riddle and the horcruxes in an afternoon and Harry would have believed every word. But he knew that he needed to draw Harry in, make him feel involved and needed. DD was very, very good at what he did.

quote:
Not "playing the game", I think Rowling changed her mind on certain plot points and didn't always think through the ramifications of what characters said when she put words in their mouths. Yes, she knows her characters, but worrying about a painful death when you're asking someone to split their soul really doesn't jive with numerous other DD statements throughout the series.
Yes, I'm convinced that you're right. Rowling clearly didn't believe DD to be as dark as she wrote him to be.

quote:
quote:
This is another one of those things she just expected us all to know and understand as she does, but she may have misjudged how it all would read from the "outside." (Similar to her treatment of the characters of James and Lily Potter.)
Yes, she does seem to suppose that just because SHE feels a particular way about something, she does not need to be careful to write the story in a way that WE feel that way. I was amazed at how she treated James and Lily in the story. Sheesh, James died without firing a shot--how useless does that make him? And he attacked Snape AFTER Sirius had almost killed him in the Shrieking Shack! I know y'all here would argue that Snape could be just as nasty, but when it comes to what we SEE of their teenage interactions, that is certainly not SHOWN. And then Rowling wonders why people don't view James as the hero she believes him to be.
I was stunned at Rowling's treatment of James. To have him die without firing a shot - what was the point of that?! It made no sense within the story or in the way she clearly views James as a hero. And it's one more inconsistency since I'm sure I remember Quirrelmort telling Harry in PS that his father fought bravely. With what, his bare hands?

Teenage Snape is another great example. He didn't come across as anywhere near bad enough. When Lily has to berate him for what his friends are doing, then clearly he isn't doing anything awful himself. He was fascinated by the Dark Arts, hung with a bad crowd and used a foul name for Muggle-borns. In other words, he was a posturing teenage male who thought that being a dark wizard would make him cool. Stupid, but hardly worthy of being sent to face a werewolf or pants in front of half the school by James and Sirius.

Whatever Rowling had in her head regarding these boys, it simply didn't come across in her writing and she really would have benefitted from an editor willing to tell her so.

quote:
quote:
I think that Rowling, like Dumlbledore, worked a little too hard at being clever and not hard enough at being genuine. She liked the power she held over us, and sometimes deliberately miseld us and played with our emotions, all for the sake of her "surprise" twist at the end. Personally, I'd have rather had less sensationalism and more moral fortitude.
I think you really hit the nail on the head, Pesky, when you say she wanted to "surprise" us too much. And this led to a lot of the problems with her characterization. By trying to trick us, she ended up being dishonest with us. And the final book lacked the emotional impact it should have had because of that.
Agreed, Rowling is quite unique. Most authors, even best-sellers, don't interact with their readers on anything like the scale that she has and I do think that she got a bit carried away with the adoring crowds hanging on her every word. Who wouldn't? But this puts her in the position of having not only her work criticized, but her own behavior as well - and she is very like Dumbledore.

The line you point out as being untrue, SH, "I will not, of course, lie to you" is very like something JKR once said - that she would mislead us, but never trick us. And yet, in the end she did just that and this is one of the cardinal sins an author should avoid. I know that many people will argue that it's her story so she can write whatever she wants, but there are limits to authorial license. I'm not talking about the general plot. The over-arching story is indeed the author's and it's not up for a vote. If the author chooses to kill off everyone's favorite character, fans can mourn or get angry, but they can't say that it's wrong.

But when we look at how an author tells their story, there's a great deal that we can objectively judge to be right or wrong. Would we read some dreadful, Mary Sue fanfic and say, "Well, the author can write whatever they like, so it's great!"? Of course not. We'd rip it to shreds. An author has a duty to her characters, her story, her readers and the craft of writing itself. Characters must be real and stay in character; events and actions must be believable and logically consistent; the author can't resort to contrivances that would earn a student in a freshman creative writing course a scathing rebuke from their professor. And an author can't lie.

Rowling made all of these mistakes in DH. She was too enamoured of her "surprise" ending and when it became apparent that everyone had figured it out, I don't think she was happy at all. I think this disappointment led her to lie and affected her writing of DH, causing her to emphasize the new bits we didn't know about while all but ignoring long-standing plot threads that needed resolution. It often felt as though she thought, "Well, they've already worked that out, so why bother spending time writing about it." It almost seems that Rowling lost track of her real purpose and was more focused on surprising her fans than telling her story to its fullest.
sunsethill Posted - 02/07/2008 : 11:47:06
quote:
Originally posted by Pesky Pixie

Keep in mind that while Rowling was framing the overall plot in her mind, she lost her own mother to a terrible extended illness. After that experience, she may well have believed that saving a beloved character from such a painful death was a completely conscionable, if not noble act. I think this element of intent is how she justifies that Snape's soul would not be terribly damaged by the killing, at least not nearly so much as Draco's, if Draco was killing in cold blood.


Interesting point, Pesky. I do know that her mother's death hit her quite hard and have even seen other people speculate that since she has not really come to terms with it herself, it colored how she was able to deal with that strong theme in the books.

quote:
This is another one of those things she just expected us all to know and understand as she does, but she may have misjudged how it all would read from the "outside." (Similar to her treatment of the characters of James and Lily Potter.)
Yes, she does seem to suppose that just because SHE feels a particular way about something, she does not need to be careful to write the story in a way that WE feel that way. I was amazed at how she treated James and Lily in the story. Sheesh, James died without firing a shot--how useless does that make him? And he attacked Snape AFTER Sirius had almost killed him in the Shrieking Shack! I know y'all here would argue that Snape could be just as nasty, but when it comes to what we SEE of their teenage interactions, that is certainly not SHOWN. And then Rowling wonders why people don't view James as the hero she believes him to be.

quote:
I actually recently re-read DH and enjoyed it much more than in July. I think the book reads much better when taken over a ten- or twelve-day period, with digestion time built in, than when read all in one or two nights. But I think that Rowling, like Dumlbledore, worked a little too hard at being clever and not hard enough at being genuine. She liked the power she held over us, and sometimes deliberately miseld us and played with our emotions, all for the sake of her "surprise" twist at the end. Personally, I'd have rather had less sensationalism and more moral fortitude.
Your experience of liking the book better on a slow reread is encouraging. I may give it a try since there were parts that I liked the first time around. But I think you really hit the nail on the head, Pesky, when you say she wanted to "surprise" us too much. And this led to a lot of the problems with her characterization. By trying to trick us, she ended up being dishonest with us. And the final book lacked the emotional impact it should have had because of that.
n/a Posted - 02/06/2008 : 16:31:46
Keep in mind that while Rowling was framing the overall plot in her mind, she lost her own mother to a terrible extended illness. After that experience, she may well have believed that saving a beloved character from such a painful death was a completely conscionable, if not noble act. I think this element of intent is how she justifies that Snape's soul would not be terribly damaged by the killing, at least not nearly so much as Draco's, if Draco was killing in cold blood.

However, I agree with sunsethill that within the context of the rest of the story, this idea doesn't quite work, or at least it doesn't work nearly as well as Rowling thought it would. This is another one of those things she just expected us all to know and understand as she does, but she may have misjudged how it all would read from the "outside." (Similar to her treatment of the characters of James and Lily Potter.) To me, Dumbledore's request is but one of the many out-of-character moments and contrivances that were necessary to put the whole "grand plan" into motion. As a result of those inconsistencies, what Rowling thought was a brilliant plot piece left me feeling very cold and not a little bit jerked around.

I have not re-read HBP since DH was released. I've been putting it off, actually. I had thought HBP was such a well-written and enjoyable book, but now I'm afraid that knowng the contrived background plot will diminish my enjoyment. The book has already lost some credibility in my mind.

*sigh* I don't mean to sound so negative. I actually recently re-read DH and enjoyed it much more than in July. I think the book reads much better when taken over a ten- or twelve-day period, with digestion time built in, than when read all in one or two nights. But I think that Rowling, like Dumlbledore, worked a little too hard at being clever and not hard enough at being genuine. She liked the power she held over us, and sometimes deliberately miseld us and played with our emotions, all for the sake of her "surprise" twist at the end. Personally, I'd have rather had less sensationalism and more moral fortitude. But I still enjoyed the book very much ... I simply accept some of the ideas as hers and not particularly mine.
sunsethill Posted - 02/06/2008 : 14:27:06
quote:
Originally posted by Theowyn
Personally, I prefer DD as a compulsive liar rather than as someone who could have such utter disregard for an ally.


Unlike Pesky, I am not happy to have had my view of DD downgraded, and I really don't want to think of him as a compulsive liar, Theo. But if we "play the game" and assume that Rowling consciously wrote his characterization in these moments, you may be right. He certainly "lied" to Harry in PS/SS when he told him Snape's motivations for saving Harry. Which makes the statement "I will not, of course, lie to you" another compulsive lie.

Not "playing the game", I think Rowling changed her mind on certain plot points and didn't always think through the ramifications of what characters said when she put words in their mouths. Yes, she knows her characters, but worrying about a painful death when you're asking someone to split their soul really doesn't jive with numerous other DD statements throughout the series.
Theowyn Posted - 02/06/2008 : 12:16:35
Snape was definitely a passionate fellow, ruled by emotion, but that still doesn't really explain DD's request. Surely, appealing to Snape on Draco and Harry's behalf would have been at least as effective at tugging Snape's emotions. So yes, asking Snape to kill him to spare him pain seems very OC and, honestly, I'm beginning to think that sometimes DD lied just for the sake of lying, as if that was simply his default response. Instead of revealing that he desperately needed Snape to save Draco and help Harry, he chose to deflect Snape from that truth by claiming that he didn't want to die a painful death. Bizarre as that seems, I can see DD's mind working this way. Lying was so engrained in him. And I'd actually rather think that he was lying than that he was being sincere.

Because DD wasn’t a coward. If he had been; if I could believe that he was truly afraid, then I could forgive him. But, his actions in the cave (which chronologically came after his appeal to Snape) prove that he was perfectly willing to endure the worst for a good cause. He cared next to nothing for his own suffering. Are we to believe that he cared even less for Snape? If DD’s main reason for wanting Snape to kill him was to avoid suffering, then he truly did care nothing for the man. Personally, I prefer DD as a compulsive liar rather than as someone who could have such utter disregard for an ally.
sunsethill Posted - 02/05/2008 : 15:28:07
quote:
Originally posted by Theowyn
What did bug me - a LOT - was the reason DD gave to Snape when he asked Snape to kill him. I expected something along the lines of, "You need to save Draco..." or "You need to convince Voldemort that you are his most trusted servant..." These would have been important goals worthy of Snape's sacrifice. But for DD to ask Snape to throw his life away simply to provide DD with an easier death... talk about cowardly and selfish. I wanted to slap DD for that.

Interesting point, Theo. I have avoided rereading DH so I had forgotten that an easier death was the reason given. It's not very IC with DD's characterization before DH--the whole "death is the next great adventure." We know that those other things had to have been considered, but it is rather strange that DD picked that particular reason. It lends credence to the view that Snape was actually a very emotional guy who worked hard to button them up so they didn't get away from him, rather than the logical, thinking machine often portrayed in fanfic.
Theowyn Posted - 02/04/2008 : 12:54:39
Oh, I don't know about Snape not being whitewashed in canon. Harry's reassurance to little Albus Severus, that his namesake was the bravest man he ever knew is surely worthy of the sappiest fanfic. Not because it isn't true - it is - but rather because we never see Harry's feelings for Snape shift from utter loathing to the kind of respect it takes to name your child after someone. I would have gladly forfeited a page or two of the camping trip to get some insight into Harry's thoughts after the final battle.

I, too, was initially disappointed with Lily being Snape's raison d'etre. I argued against it for years because it is soooo cliche. But as soon as we found out that Lily had been a whiz at Potions in HBP, the writing was on the wall, so I'd gotten used to the idea by the time DH came out and it didn't bug me during the book.

What did bug me - a LOT - was the reason DD gave to Snape when he asked Snape to kill him. I expected something along the lines of, "You need to save Draco..." or "You need to convince Voldemort that you are his most trusted servant..." These would have been important goals worthy of Snape's sacrifice. But for DD to ask Snape to throw his life away simply to provide DD with an easier death... talk about cowardly and selfish. I wanted to slap DD for that.

I was also disappointed that JKR fell back on wise-old-mentor!DD, right down to dead!DD explains all. Sheesh! It would have been much more refreshing to see Harry and his friends work things out for themselves after the battle - the new generation coming into its own. It would have also given them the chance to discuss DD and Snape and their respective faults and virtues. That would have been the perfect opportunity to address DD's moral mistakes.

Lest I leave the impression that I hated the whole book, let me say that DH wasn't all bad. What I found truly impressive was that DD took over Snape's place as the most morally suspect character - a genuine feat on JKR's part. Hmm... wonder if that goes hand in hand with complexity. For all his nastiness, Snape really was the better man. He might have been mean and spiteful, but he didn't lie and use people, nor did he get them killed with his scheming.

n/a Posted - 01/29/2008 : 16:35:33
Oh, I forgot to throw darts at Snape!

*lobs three darts in quick succession*

*plonk plonk plonk*

*somewhere a house elf yelps*

Whoops ... Sorry, Slushy!

Well, to bring the old greasebag back into this, I think it's interesting how Dumbledore has effictively taken over Snape's former position as the most interesting and complex character in the series. Before DH, we all loved and respected Dumlbedore, for the most part unquestioningly. But face it, he was rather boring and one-dimensional, being all-good and all-knowing all the time. After DH, he's a much more brilliant character, even if he's not such a great person. In that regard I'm quite pleased and impressed.

Unfortunatley, that's where the refreshing change ends. Despite all his morally questionable scheming and ruthless manipulation, We still get Dumbledore presented as the ever-wise mentor who has to manage everything behind Harry's back and explain it all later. (Not even a hint that his scheme was an itsy bit wrong.) I had truly hoped that DH would abandon that stale old formula, but instead, it served up another helping of the same cold dish. It even had to bring Dumbledore back from the dead to do it. *groan*

Hmmm ... There's another reason why PoA was my favorite book: No "Dumbledore Explains it All" scene at the end.

Then there's poor Snape. (Not really. ) Reduced from a fascinating, mysterious character to a sadly manipulated love-puppy. Yeah, he was brave, but as for the rest of him ... *yech* and *yawn*. I liked him a lot better when I thought his underhanded nastiness hinted at some sort of backbone or inner guiding principle, albeit a foul one. But instead he just turned out to be an insecure, nasty, unwashed sop who was badly used. In that aspect, I was neither pleased nor impressed. At least the flaws in his character were thoroughly recognized in the books, and consequence was paid. Although he was granted some degree of heroism, he was never whitewashed, at least not in canon. Thank heaven for that, at least.

*lobs another dart*

*actually hits Snape on the ear*

That was for trying to poison Neville's pet, you slimeball!
Theowyn Posted - 01/28/2008 : 23:51:02
I too agree wholeheartedly, Pixie. In the essay I wrote for Scribbulus, I said, "Dumbledore crossed the line from being a stoic leader to a calculating manipulator because he never gave his followers all of the information they needed to make a free choice. He gave them only enough to maneuver them into doing what he wanted them to do."

This is what I can't get past. I can forgive DD for asking terrible sacrifices of Snape. I can forgive him for plotting Harry's death. Sometimes, good people have to do awful things in war. But what I have a very hard time forgiving is the way that he used his loyal followers. It is one thing to ask or even to order someone to perform a horrible task. It is another to manipulate them into doing it by playing on their emotions. And I fully agree that DD thought he knew best. Honestly, I don't think he ever really changed at all when it came to this fundamental aspect of his character. To quote again from my essay:

"Dumbledore’s longing for power was always benevolent. Even while plotting with Grindelwald to gain dominion over Muggles, he convinced himself that he was doing it for the Muggles’ own good. We can see this same paternalistic behavior throughout the books. Dumbledore believed that he knew what was best for everyone, whether it be using Snape’s guilt and grief to turn him to the Light side or lying to Harry to protect him from knowledge of his fate.

But he had no right to such condescension; no right to manipulate the lives of others, no matter how noble his purpose. Worst of all, Dumbledore used love as his tool. He knew, you see, that nothing binds the soul more surely than love and so he used Snape’s love for Lily and Harry’s abiding love for virtually everyone to persuade them to do his bidding.

Harry and Snape never stood a chance against the master gamesman. He manipulated them both effortlessly and so completely that even when his machinations were revealed they still obeyed. That’s because he used their own natures to ensnare them. He deceived them in the particulars, but he led them where they were willing to go. He laid out an enticing road – the only one in sight – and beckoned them to follow him down it. They couldn’t see the end. He kept that hidden until they had gone far enough that he knew they wouldn’t turn back. Then he stepped aside and pointed the way to the cliff he expected them to jump off.

One might call this a ruthless faith in both Snape and Harry’s better natures. It is horrifying and compelling at the same time. Because Dumbledore was right; there was no other path to take. Still, one can't help wondering if he couldn’t have spared a little more honesty and respect for the two people of whom he asked the ultimate sacrifice."


sunsethill Posted - 01/28/2008 : 11:22:33
I agree almost completely with you, Pesky. I didn't mind DD's early errors, which, as you point out, showed that he needed a second chance, too. It was how Rowling portrayed his older self that really bothered me and is one of the two or three main reasons that I didn't like DH.

Rowling said that DD was the "epitome of good" but we just don't see that in the end. It is one of the main things that call in question the morality of the story that Rowling presented. Yes, Harry is shown to be the better man, but he should not have had so much to forgive if DD had truly been the "good" man Rowling tells us he was. It is another case of Rowling saying one thing, and then writing another in her descriptions of the characters' actions.
n/a Posted - 01/26/2008 : 14:08:51
Dumbledore, what an interesting subject! I'll admit I'm still a bit dissatisfied about how his character played out in the last book. Not because of what he did when he was young; it was a very interesting addition to his character that he wasn't so perfect after all and he needed a second chance too. But what did our champion of second chances do with his own? Sure, he sequestered himself away at Hogwarts, doing good and such while protecting the world from his power-hungry side. But he still manipulated people cruelly, right up until he died. And he never opened up to anyone about his plans. It's very generous to attribute his secrecy to his guilt, but my impression was that he still believed he knew better than anyone and that he thought he should be "boss." He still liked the power of being smartest and pulling all the strings, and pull them he did.

What irkled me the most is that Dumbledore's blatant manipulation of people in his later years is never really condemned in the book. I think what he did to Harry, and to Snape as well, was wrong. I don't care if it was in the context of war: It was wrong, period, to manipulate people like that. But where is the condemnation? Dumbledore still seems to be held up as the all-powerful, all-wise white hat who still has to tell Harry everything in the end (King's Cross). Isn't it funny that the only time he was truly honest was after he was dead, or as I choose to interpret it, when he was a figment of Harry's subconscious, telling Harry what he already knew? Perhaps a few lines do lip service to the fact that Harry was the better man, yet the main thrust of the plot supports what Dumbledore did, grand plan included, and implies that it was heroic and right.

Now, I do love Dumbledore's character and all his backstory. However, my final opinion of him as a person is based far more on his actions leading up to his death than his mistakes as a young man. He wasn't reformed, not really. He certinaly wasn't any "epitome of goodness," except perhaps in Harry's naive eleven-year-old eyes. He did do some good, obviously ... but it was still at great cost through his ever-Machiavellian means. That cost, I think, was not properly recognized in the books, and is what dissatisfied me the most where Dumlbedore is concerned. I did not mind the man he actually was, but don't always agree with the man he was held up to be by the author.

quote:
There's a certain sense of hope when I look at Dumbledore and realize that we don't have to be perfect or even make all the right choices in whatever we do--we just need to try.


Not sure I agree with that. As Yoda told Luke when Luke said he would try: "Do or do not. There is no 'try.'" Trying is only a start ... it's not an objective or end point. It's what you actually do with your efforts that really counts.
JKRisSuperior Posted - 01/24/2008 : 11:43:03
:Wonders in:
:Throws a dart at Snape:

Hey guys, why has the board been so quiet the past few days? Are we using this as the new Teashop?

I'm surprised that nobody has mentioned the death of Heath Ledger. I thought that would be a big topic here.
Eeyore Posted - 01/24/2008 : 05:42:16
quote:
Originally posted by AMC

I know. I miss the days when we could be Dumbledore's Men and Women - not questioning his goodness or wisdom. I don't mind that he flirted with the dark side - he was young, he was in love. People make poor choices in life and if they're lucky they live to regret them. DD did plenty to make up for those early poor choices, including giving second chances to many others. But.. he treated Harry like a chess piece. His scheming and lying was all so.. immoral. I just hate that. I hate the whole "the end justifies the means" approach to life - it's the source of all evil.






I agree with you--I don't like that reasoning either. But I took it that JKR was making the point that it's not the right way to do things. Dumbledore understood that his methods were not the ideal, and that's why he kept telling Harry that he (Harry) was the better man. I think it was in HBP that he told Harry that he (Dumbledore) was less valuable than Harry. It also seems to be the reason that Dumbledore didn't confide completely in anyone--even though he was remorseful about his choices when he was young, he still had that mentality that he couldn't trust anyone but himself with the master plan.

He told Harry large parts of his grand plan, and he told Snape some of it, and he told the Order members some of it. But he didn't tell anyone all of it. Didn't he tell Snape that he didn't want to put all his eggs in one basket, or something to that effect? It seems to go back to his youthful mistakes--he couldn't trust himself, so how in the world was he ever going to trust anyone else?

And what we get is a good example of what happens to a person who is manipulative and unable to trust completely. It also shows how a person's adult life can be so influenced by events and choices of youth. We see it with Dumbledore who lived the rest of his life full of regret for the devastation that happened to his family because of his rash and selfish choices when he was young, and we see it with Snape, being remorseful enough to live the rest of his life protecting and helping Harry, but never finding peace and happiness in any of his choices.

Voldemort made choices as a youth and as an adult and didn't have the emotional wherewithal to understand that he should have felt remorse, and that lead to the one thing he most wanted to avoid--his death.

The contrast and example of how we should be is Harry, who can love, as Dumbledore always told him. He makes mistakes, but he doesn't dwell on them so much that they cripple him emotionally, as Dumbledore and Snape did. Along the way, with Dumbledore's encouragement, Harry learns that he can trust and confide in his friends--first in Ron and Hermione, then in some of the others. Harry does follow some of Dumbledore's example in not telling some of them all the details, as when he tells Neville to kill the snake. But it's not so much a manipulation as a necessity of time. They really don't have the time for a long detailed conversation about why the snake has to be killed.

Neville, in going to the MOM with Harry in Order of the Phoenix, and in reviving the DA in Deathly Hallows shows the kind of loyalty that anyone would want if they were in Harry's situation. So there's another example of an ordinary person, not always confident or skilled, who rises above his personal limitations and acts heroically. (I love Neville whenever I think of him in DH.)

I think the other thing I took away from DH after finding that wonderful, good, quirky Dumbledore was so flawed, was that he was another view of what a real hero is. No one is perfect, yet people who have made mistakes or who have big flaws in their character still do things that make a positive difference in the lives of others, sometimes in the world. Dumbledore understood the need for people to have second chances because he himself had needed a second chance. Even though he was able to do that for others, he was never really able to forgive himself and that doubt or guilt must have played a huge part in the reason he wasn't more open and trusting about just what his grand plan was.

There's a certain sense of hope when I look at Dumbledore and realize that we don't have to be perfect or even make all the right choices in whatever we do--we just need to try.
AMC Posted - 01/24/2008 : 01:11:50
Do I have to?
Siobhan Posted - 01/23/2008 : 11:03:39
Yeah, just look at Umbridge.
AMC Posted - 01/23/2008 : 00:24:02
I know. I miss the days when we could be Dumbledore's Men and Women - not questioning his goodness or wisdom. I don't mind that he flirted with the dark side - he was young, he was in love. People make poor choices in life and if they're lucky they live to regret them. DD did plenty to make up for those early poor choices, including giving second chances to many others. But.. he treated Harry like a chess piece. His scheming and lying was all so.. immoral. I just hate that. I hate the whole "the end justifies the means" approach to life - it's the source of all evil.


dobbygirl Posted - 01/22/2008 : 19:54:31
*flops into cushy chair*

Ah, I've missed the old clubhouse! Not much activity, but still nice to be surrounded by like minded people. Glad to see we're still bashing the Greasy One.

Are we also bashing dear Albus, too? Hmmm, I haven't decided (even after all these months) where I really stand on that man. I waffle back and forth.
AMC Posted - 11/08/2007 : 14:31:30
quote:
Originally posted by Bee
I like to think that Albus Severus is Harry's least favourite child.


Oh Bee! That's hysterical and I never even thought about that. Yeah, he only got the name because Harry had a sneaking suspicion that Ginny was doing him wrong with the Floo Powder saleswizard.

We won't be removing the Snape dartboard, I promise. We'll just expand the game's possibilities for anyone who wants to throw sharp, pointy objects at old Albus instead. You can't have too many manipulative, heartless, untrustworthy wizards to throw things at, I always say.


Bee Posted - 11/08/2007 : 12:39:08
*rushes in*

Noooooooooooooooooooo! You can't take away the Snape dartboard!

*throws self in front of it in defense*

*realises this is probably not a good idea*

*decides to have some ale instead*

I like to think that Albus Severus is Harry's least favourite child. And if that makes me a bad person, so be it.
AMC Posted - 11/08/2007 : 10:56:26
To Newguise! We miss her!

But the party continues.

Hmm - are House Elves allowed to join swim teams? That seems like a conflict of interest to me.

I don't think I've completely blotted out DH - I mean, when JKR let loose the relevation that Dumbledore had been in love with whatisname I thought - oh, that makes sense given the bit where Alberforth describes how entirely they were wrapped up in each other - but you're right, the actual neat and tidy resolution of the whole series doesn't connect the way the other books did. I think I've definitely blotted out the last chapter of Book 7 - that should NEVER have been written! Albus Severus - puh!

Ooo - Pixie, you need more ale. I think that last one hit Mr Ben's portrait and he's not too thrilled about it. You got him in a delicate place.

*Thwap* Yes! Right between the beady eyes!

Hmm - you think maybe we should replace out Snape!dart board? I'm so fond of it. And really, as pathetic as he is now made out to be, he's still a nasty bit of work. We could put up a Dumbledore dartboard too, just to give equal time. You know, I really hate Michael Gambon's Dumbledore and so it won't give me much pain to see him revealed to be a manipulative dick in the Movie version of Book 7.
n/a Posted - 11/08/2007 : 06:58:23
*rubs eyes*

Whoa! Is that the Snape dartboard I see, all dusted off and ready to go? So have we decided it's all right to throw darts at a pathetic sad sack? (For the record, I have no problem with it!)

You know, the funny thing is that over the past three months, I seem to have blotted Deathly Hallows from my mind. Not that it's a bad book, but I prefer an open-ended adventure. It's so much more fun that way.

*swigs pumpkin ale*
*grabs a dart*
*takes carfeful aim*
*hits the buffet table*

Nice to see nothing's changed! Slushy may be a bit scarce for a while, though. She's joined the swim team and has to get up at 5:00 every morning for practice. Needless to say we've been dealing with a rather cranky house elf of late.

*adds fresh donuts and cider to the buffet*

I do miss Newguise! I guess we'll just have to consume more ale in her honor.

To Nuggy! *raises mug*
AMC Posted - 11/07/2007 : 23:55:22
It's (finally) starting to feel like Fall - cold and windy (by our standards, I needed a sweatshirt today). So..

Starts to put up festive decorations.. Oh heck, we missed Halloween! Well, we'll do a Harvest theme.

*Places some large colorful squashes around as footstool* *Replaces the Butterbeer on tap with Pumpkin Ale* *Orders up apple/pear tarts*

That was exhausting! Must be time for a rest.

Did anyone ever hear from Newguise?


AMC Posted - 11/07/2007 : 16:29:51
*Yawn*

Sorry, I fell asleep there for a bit.

*Magiks a fire in the grate* that's better!

So, who's up for a game of Snape!Darts?


St Mungo's © 2010 Go To Top Of Page
Snitz Forums 2000
HP Galleries Wing at St Mungo's is in no way affiliated with JK Rowling, her publishers, Warner Brothers, any of its partners within the Harry Potter franchise, or any religious or healthcare institution.