Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows
discussion
Lily Evans - goes from one bully to another.
message 1:
by
Laurie
(new)
-
rated it 5 stars
Sep 04, 2011 09:30AM
I wouldn't call James and Severus "exactly alike." James was a bully because he thought he was better than everyone else. Severus became a bully because he was bullied when he was younger. If James had never bullied Severus, then Severus wouldn't have become a bully later in his life; he just would have been a "racist" against Muggles, just like he was raised to be. His "racism" would have become dampened through Lily's influence.
reply
|
flag
Tenae wrote: "I find Lily Evans extremely stupid. She calls James Potter and arrogant toerag to Severus Snape - who is also an arrogant toerag - and then fucking marries the bloke. I recently posted in a dis..."
WHAT? WHAT? WHAT? *breaks down, starts crying, then looks for a gun because Hina wants to commit suicide*
Adrianja, *breathes* I think it's because I wrote a very long post on the other thread and now this. But yes I agree with your post completely.
Litera,I envy your ability to express things much quicker. :D
Tenae wrote: "I find Lily Evans extremely stupid. She calls James Potter and arrogant toerag to Severus Snape - who is also an arrogant toerag - and then fucking marries the bloke. I recently posted in a dis..."
I'm sorry but this is ridiculous. The James we saw in Snape's memory was 15 years old. He was extremely immature and arrogant. He wasn't an all around bully - he was just enemies with Snape. Did you just want him to be perfect all his teenage years? Everyone makes mistakes and goes through a learning period - it's what makes them human and real. Harry beat up Malfoy when he was 15. James did some growing up, and was a fantastic person. As was Lily, who liked Severus before he was turned awful and James after he matured. And why are you so in favor of Snape? He was brave, he was capable of love just like every other human, whatever, but he was a terrible person. You can't deny that.
James was never like Draco, Draco had cruelty in him. James was just messing around and being a show off, trying to get attention. Obviously you have a very twisted and mistaken view on who James is (and Lily, for that matter) and I feel sorry for you.
Katherine wrote: "Tenae wrote: "I find Lily Evans extremely stupid. She calls James Potter and arrogant toerag to Severus Snape - who is also an arrogant toerag - and then fucking marries the bloke. I recently p..."
Yes, thank you! i was just thinking the same thing. The majority of stuff we actually see of James at school is through Snape's memories. And considering they hated each other, they're not going to paint him in a favorable light.
James and Snape were nothing alike. I wouldn't go as far as to call either one a bully. At least not at that stage - Snape,later on.
James was arrogant and showing off to impress a girl. It just didn't particularly work.
Sirius was basically just like him - best friends often are, that's usually why they get so close - but I don't hear anyone picking on him. Because we are able to see him and get to know and love him even though he did some stupid things when he was younger.
And the big difference between them was, James was on the right side, Snape wasn't. He only "saved the world" later on to atone for his guilt. He wasn't doing it because it was the right thing or to save a bunch of people, he was doing it because he felt guilty and still loved Lily. Which is admirable, but it wouldn't have even been necessary, if his actions didn't set things in motion in the first place. James fought against Voldemort from the beginning.
I think that says alot more about the kind of people they were than a few random memories from their adolescence.
Katherine and Kristen, you both are awesome and I second your posts.
Honestly, all kids are dumb. We all did stupid stuff, and then grew out of it. Unfortunately though, some people don't. James grew out of it, it seems like Severus never let go of what James did to him so he took it out on Harry. I agree with the person that said that he changed for Lily, and that's what people do when they are in love... they change and make each other better. Maybe if Severus got some lovin' (not from Lily) then maybe he would have been a better person, but he only ever loved one person and would do anything for her. That's kind of Heathcliffish.Neither James nor Snape are inherently evil like Voldemort, or even Crabbe and/or Goyle, whichever one started the fiendfyre--that's just demented.
Katherine wrote: "James was never like Draco, Draco had cruelty in him. James was just messing around and being a show off, trying to get attention."I think a couple of you are downplaying bullying. He bullied Snape and others since first year. He hung Snape upside down, in front of a large crowd, and Snape's robes fell over his head and his underwear was showing. Then he made fun of him for that too.
He also endangered Snape's life when he tricked Snape into meeting up with Lupin as a werewolf. Yeah, at the last minute he finally realized how wrong it was and "saved" Snape, but he still did it.
If you like the character and think he matured as an adult and think he deserves Lilly then that's fine. But it's pretty clear that he was a bully and did have cruelty in him, and wasn't just trying to show off and get attention. There are better ways to get attention. Like doing GOOD things and not hurting people.
Fortunately (not unfortunately) people are allowed to have different opinions. If Tanae doesn't want to like James then she doesn't have too. I don't either! It doesn't matter to me that he supposedly matured later on. I still don't like him.
Okay, but I think we have a different opinion on what cruelty is. I see it as wanting people hurt - truly enjoying causing pain. I feel that the Malfoy's, and definitely Crabbe and Goyle, all have some of that in them. And obviously Snape, he became a Death Eater.Yes, obviously James made some serious mistakes. I am in no way saying that publicly humiliating or endangering the life of another person is a light matter. And saying "he was a teenager..whatever" isn't exactly an excuse. But I really do think he was a good person, and he made mistakes as he was growing up and figuring out who and what he was going to be. Look at Harry - he used the Sectumsempra curse on Malfoy, and nearly killed him. He's done stupid things, bad things. And also, Harry debated this very thing about his father, after seeing Snape's memory. It was concluded that..well..basically everything I've just said. I just think it's ridiculous to hate him based on some stupid mistakes he made when he was 15. Obviously there was a lot more to him than that. The Snape we saw in that memory? Well, of course there was a lot more to HIM than that too. And we sure get to see it :)
James is consistently praised throughout the series...do you think everyone was just making things up? I'm sorry but I refuse to pity Snape...as a little boy, sure. But look at the person he turned out to be, and I can't believe you're defending him and demeaning James.
And thank you, I am very aware that everyone gets their own opinion, that's why I was giving mine.
I think she showed us James through Snape's memories to point out how bullying can affect a person and how they can turn out in the end. A defeated person, bullying to get back at the world. Obviously this is not always the case, but it does/can happen. Kind of a hidden lesson about why you shouldn't bully. I almost wonder if James was praised because he was murdered by Voldemort and his son is the boy who lived.
I personally didn't like James Potter. And I didn't like Snape in the beginning. There are so many ways to look at the relationship between these two characters, which is probably why the author wrote it out the way she did.
Katherine wrote: "Okay, but I think we have a different opinion on what cruelty is. I see it as wanting people hurt - truly enjoying causing pain. I feel that the Malfoy's, and definitely Crabbe and Goyle, all have ..."I totally agree - there's a big difference in doing one or two stupid things - maybe even mean things - and being a 'bully' or a bad person. And that's all it really was - one or two big things that Snape remembered. And understandably so.
James wasn't terrorizing the school, he was arrogant and felt better than Snape and wanted to humiliate him. And that's just SO unusual for teenage boys. They're always so sweet and caring to the other guys they hate....right....especially when that particular guy is close with the girl he likes.
I don't think anyone is excusing his behavior at the time, but it wasn't really all of who he was.
But anyway, wasn't it Sirius' idea for that part where James changed his mind and wound up saving him?
I don't remember for sure. But wasn't he just going along with it and then change his mind when he realized how dangerous it was?
Stephanie wrote: "I think she showed us James through Snape's memories to point out how bullying can affect a person and how they can turn out in the end. A defeated person, bullying to get back at the world. Obvi..."Eh....maybe...but I tend to think the part about James was just for us to understand why Snape hated him so much. That and how he lost Lily.
Snape was already a mess by that point because of his home life. Which as you said, might have had a side message of the effects of bullying. But I don't think James' treatment of him had much of anything to do with how Snape turned out - he was already on his way to being a death eater at that point.
Kristen, I agree with all of that, thank you.I really, really don't think Snape became a Death Eater because of James...
And yeah, I'm a little hazy on who played what part in the whole werewolf prank thing, but James never meant to kill or really harm Severus... Was he being stupid, thoughtless and mean? of course. But he meant it as a bad joke. He saw it would go too far and stopped it. That's very typical teenage guy behavior. Like Kristen said, that's basically how all teenagers act at some point or other. Especially in books, where everything is more dramatic...
And if James was so bad, why wasn't he in Slytherin? Gryffindor is for the courageous - Snape was outstandingly brave, yet Slytherin won out. That definitely says something.
A person could write their dissertation discussing the relationships and the possible meanings of those relationships on this series alone. She put so many layers into a "childrens" book that it is just mind boggling to think of all the possible meanings.
Katherine wrote: "And thank you, I am very aware that everyone gets their own opinion, that's why I was giving mine."Sorry, I didn't mean to come off as rude. That was in reaction to someone else above who said it was unfortunate that people have their own opinions. lol.
Katherine wrote: "I see it as wanting people hurt - truly enjoying causing pain."
Lupin implied that James used to enjoy bullying. "Hexing people for the fun of it" or something like that. I consider intentionally causing emotional or mental pain to be cruel too. But I guess this comes down to the question of whether or not James knew how he was making his victims feel. I think most bullies do. That's why they do what they do. But maybe there's a few who are different.
Katherine wrote: "and I can't believe you're defending him and demeaning James"
I never defended Snape. I do happen to like the character, but I would never defend the bullying aspect of his personality. I was just mentioning what James did to him, and my post was meant to be just about James. I didn't imply that what happened to Snape is an excuse to bully, because it's not. If anything he should know better than James did, and not bully, because he's already been through it and should know it's wrong.
Kristen wrote: "I totally agree - there's a big difference in doing one or two stupid things - maybe even mean things - and being a 'bully' or a bad person. And that's all it really was - one or two big things that Snape remembered."
One doesn't even have to do "big things" to be a bully. Continued minor harassment can really get to a person too, and I consider people who do this to be bullies. And I believe James did these "little things" as well, as was suggested in the books.
Snape and James are very different people. James was a show off and very arrogant but it wasn't him who told Snape about Lupin; it was Sirius. James saved Snape's life. Also 'hexing people for the fun of it' sounds more like the practical jokes peeves uses (which I know were unpleasant), you know silly spells that actually turn you yellow. James was popular at school so he can't have been that mean spirited. No matter how much high school tv shows try to makes out that the popular people are all extremely secluded pretty people... Real popular people get on with nearly everyone.
When I was at school there were some arrogant boys who thought it would be funny to make fun
of the 'weirdos' but by the time they left they didn't seem like bad people.
And James did 'accomplish things' too. He and Lily faced Voldemort three times before they died and was part of the order.
Also he seemed like a friendly, upbeat sort of person while Snape was self-pitying. I'd choose a little arrogance over self-pitying any day of the week.
Plus in his 5th year he'd already started going over to the dark arts and lily felt uncomfortable with that. She tried to stop he but he wouldn't listen.
Katherine wrote: "And if James was so bad, why wasn't he in Slytherin?"That's house prejudice. lol. :P If you pay attention to some minor characters in the books and also read some of J.K.'s interviews then one would know that Slytherin doesn't mean bad. And there are also bad people in the other houses.
I think when Hagrid and Ron gave their opinion/prejudices on people in Slytherin in book one too many readers took their opinions as fact. But I think that was just meant to be character development for those two.
There are also bad people who are against Voldemort. These books aren't so black and white.
There are horrible, violent people who are against Hitler and would have fought against Germany if they were in the right time and place, but that doesn't wave off their bad deeds and make them a good person.
So when people say "oh, but he was in slytherin." or "Oh, but James was against Voldemort so he must be a good person." I don't really judge a character on those things because it means nothing to me.
I'm not trying to relate James to horrible, violent people. I don't believe he was that bad. Maybe I would like him if I knew more about him. After all, I like Snape despite his major flaws. But all I know about James is what we were given. There just wasn't anything he did or anything his friends said about him that has made me like him better.
Alright well, I'm done here. I guess I feel that while James's actions were at times cruel, his intentions were not. Now all of you can start tearing that apart and saying how wrong I am. And the house thing - ookay, I just meant that as a contributing factor. A lot of the slytherins are mean. And "there's not a wizard who went bad who wasn't in slytherin" or whatever. (although I've always found that slightly mistaken - at that time they all thought Sirius was bad.) Anyway, I've always admired this book for it's non-black and whiteness. As Sirius said: "The world isn't divided between good people and death eaters." (paraphrasing there.) You don't need to lecture me about it. I just find it interesting that you're putting so much energy into bashing James when J.K. Rowling really meant him as a wonderful character. And she herself said she doesn't understand why everyone loves Snape, because as I said, he was a terrible person.
Anyway, I hope I haven't come off as rude because I basically have a zero rudeness tolerance on here, it's so unnecessary. I know I won't change anyone's opinion because you certainly aren't changing mine, just putting in my views.
Oh and for what it's worth, Lily Evans/Potter is downright amazing, and I really, really feel sorry for people spending their time hating on her. There are plenty of stupid, cruel, twisted, and downright evil characters for you to do that with. Lay off the Potters.
Katherine wrote: "Alright well, I'm done here. I guess I feel that while James's actions were at times cruel, his intentions were not. Now all of you can start tearing that apart and saying how wrong I am. And the..."
'like' lol
I guess, I won't say anymore about James vs Snape either, since there's another thread for that - although I probably won't check that out. I purposely avoid longer topics b/c I'm too lazy to go back and read everything.
Well, I won't say anything other than I think it's a little ignorant to judge a person's character based on one moment in their adolescence. Especially when viewed through the mind of someone who hated that person. And in light of the fact that all other evidence about him suggest he was a decent person.
Anyway, just wanna add something about the house 'prejudice'.
While, I don't agree that everyone in a particular house is a certain way - again it's ignorant to assume that. But the majority tend to be a certain way. That's why the labels are there.
Slytherins weren't put in their houses because they were evil, they were put there because they exhibited qualities that Slytherin valued. I can't remember what they are at the moment. But they all sort of have that desire to get ahead and alot of them have that superiority complex - the whole pure blood thinking nonsense.
Gryffindors were chosen for their bravery and loyalty, etc.
And within those qualities, there's the tendency to lean more towards definitive 'good' and 'bad'.
For someone to be courageous, they generally have to have something worthwhile to fight against. And in that world it was Voldemort, which would put them in the 'good' category. Likewise, Slytherines, wanting to get ahead would see Voldemort as a means to do that. They assumed he would take over and wanted to be on the right side. And again, of course his view on non pure bloods.
But of course, there would also be those who were misplaced. The hat wanted to put Harry in Slytherin, but since he asked it not to, he went to Gryffindor. I think that's probably what happened with Peter, since he never had a backbone and all. But of course, Harry had the qualities for Gryffindor too.
And along the same lines, someone said something about support for or against Voldemort doesn't make someone a good or bad person. I highly disagree.
The people who were in the middle or just agreed or disagreed with him, were the ones to keep their heads down. They hoped not to be involved. The one's taking a stand in either direction, made a clear choice. The death eaters obviously were bad. But those who fought against him - those in the Order - also took a clear stand. They put their lives at risk because what he was doing was wrong. They acknowledged the fact that they, themselves weren't as important as the cause. Which in my book makes them pretty darn good people. Considering they very likely thought it was a death sentence and all.
Katherine wrote: "Alright well, I'm done here. I guess I feel that while James's actions were at times cruel, his intentions were not. Now all of you can start tearing that apart and saying how wrong I am. And the..."
Well, yes, and also Draco Malfoy didn't turn out exactly, EVIL, but just a lil messed up. Hehe :)
I think James Potter was a great man WITH MAJOR FLAWS. And so was Severus Snape. They were both bullies who turned out to be really great people. Lily Evans made her own choice. What would you have done? Chosen Snape or chosen James? It's a hard choice! Lily knows whether she made the right choice, I guess, but she only experienced one of the choices. The Potter's rock! Don't tear them apart! They all died! Then Harry came back to life, but still! Don't insult people who died.
Vio_Blossom wrote: "I think James Potter was a great man WITH MAJOR FLAWS. And so was Severus Snape...."As was Dumbledore. He was no prize when he was that age, either.
Has anybody else noticed that the person who started this thread hasn't responded yet?
Kristen wrote: "Vio_Blossom wrote: "I think James Potter was a great man WITH MAJOR FLAWS. And so was Severus Snape...."As was Dumbledore. He was no prize when he was that age, either."
Exactly! I loved the Harry Potter series, but was vaguely annoyed that almost every character went through a dynamic change at some point in their lives. Dumbledore, Snape, James, Neville, Percy, etc. EVERYONE! Sometimes it gets a little old. JKR was really kinda sneaky about it though. I didn't realize it til I was half way into reading the series... THE SECOND TIME.
Kerri wrote: "Has anybody else noticed that the person who started this thread hasn't responded yet?"Yes, actually. I noticed that.
Vio_Blossom wrote: "Kristen wrote: "Vio_Blossom wrote: "I think James Potter was a great man WITH MAJOR FLAWS. And so was Severus Snape...."As was Dumbledore. He was no prize when he was that age, either."
Exactly!..."
I don't think they all had major life changes. They were all flawed, which I find realistic. They just all grew up the way people do. Or should, lol
Dumbledore grew up when his sister died. James grew up when he realized Lily didn't appreciate the immaturity. Percy basically just had a rebellious phase.
What major change did Neville have? I just saw him becoming more confident and, again, growing up.
The only one who had a drastic change in their lives was Snape since the direction his life was headed got Lily killed. He went from being a death eater to a good guy.
Well, him and a few minor characters like Sirius' brother.
Kristen wrote: "Especially when viewed through the mind of someone who hated that person. And in light of the fact that all other evidence about him suggest he was a decent person."Not really. I just read the end of that other thread, and there's one post that mentions Sirius telling Harry that James continued to bully Snape after he started dating Lily. He just hid it from Lily. I totally forgot about this, but now I think I remember reading something like that. If this is true (I haven't read the books in a while), then he was an asshole at least right up to his last year. And we have no proof that he changed or felt sorry for what he did in the few years he had left after school. And this information is coming from his friends, not someone who hates him.
This also means that he actually didn't change for Lilly. He was just being a sneaky little prat.
And as was stated in this thread before, Lupin also mentioned James bullying. So no, snapes memories wasn't the only evidence. And even if it was, so what? He still did what he did.
And I'm not talking about one moment, but rather James's whole time at Hogwarts. He was a bully since first year.
A couple of people keep mentioning that I shouldn't judge him on one or two things. But even if he did only harass someone one or two times, again, so what? That's one or two times too many and I have a right to not like a character because of it. That doesn't make me ignorant.
Holly wrote: "Kristen wrote: "Especially when viewed through the mind of someone who hated that person. And in light of the fact that all other evidence about him suggest he was a decent person."Not really. I ..."
I'd like to ask what evidence you have of James being a bully to anyone else besides Snape? I do not recall any memories or stories about James bullying anyone else in the series. Ever. If I'm wrong, please let me know.
Also, Snape was rude to James as well. It was mutual dislike, as stated in the book. It wasn't a case of one a**hole beating up on someone who was totally innocent and nice. Snape called his own best friend and the woman he loved a mudblood. That is unforgivable.
Holly wrote: "Kristen wrote: "Especially when viewed through the mind of someone who hated that person. And in light of the fact that all other evidence about him suggest he was a decent person."Not really. I ..."
Ok, first of all, I wasn't calling anyone ignorant. I just meant to base your judgment of a person - any person on one incident is a little narrow minded.
That would be like if all we ever saw of Harry was his use of that curse on Malfoy and the hearsay of other people - even his friends about how he acted around Draco. He wasn't best buddies with him either.
I'm fairly certain if all we saw of Harry was similar to what we see of James, people would be having this discussion about him too. But we see alot more of Harry, first hand.
My point was, we don't see much of anything of James. It's just Snapes memories and what people said about him - most of which was positive.
Yes, James did those things, but Snape was his nemesis. And they were kids. Not that it's an excuse, but it's understandable.
I don't recall anyone saying he ever 'bullied' him. I do recall something about him using hexes, but as someone else already pointed out, that was more of the practical joke type thing like Fred and George would do.
Somewhere it talks about how Ginny was particularly good with certain hexes. Does that make her a bully too?
James wasn't cruel and malicious. If he was, I'd agree with you that he's a bully. But he was just an arrogant, mischievous kid. kind of a jerk that one time.
But if he really wanted to harm him - like a bully would - he wouldn't have stopped him that one time when he was going to run in to Lupin as a werewolf (that's what that was about, right? It's also been a while for me...)
And you can see the difference in the way they thought. When Snape was being humiliated, he lashed out at Lily and called her a Mudblood. James reacted, not because it was directed at her, but because it was a cruel and hateful thing to say and was intended to hurt her.
His actions, although wrong, were not intentionally cruel for the sake of causing pain. He just thought he was being funny. Wrongfully so, yes, but still his intent is not that of a bully.
And yes, I agree. I don't know that he had a complete turn around. But that just makes him normal - to hold onto his hatred for his enemy. And it's not like Snape never did anything to him either. I'm sure it went back and forth. Even if it didn't, that doesn't mean he was a bully. A jerk maybe, but not a bully. Snape was hardly helpless. And as I said, James wasn't malicious.
I'm actually a little confused as to why he needs to 'repent' and feel bad for what he did. If he did some real damage, sure. But honestly, Snape was humiliated, not maimed. And yes, I know that's not pleasant, but it's hardly a capital offense. As I said, Snape wasn't helpless.
Still, I think there's way more to take into account than just his treatment of Snape. I daresay most people probably treated him that way, on some level. He wasn't your all around nice guy or even very likable. Lily was just a really loyal friend.
But take into account the kind of friends they both had - Snape had Lily until he pulled away from her to chase after Voldemort and then he had his fellow death eaters. No one else is mentioned.
James had Sirius, Lupin, Lily later on, and was liked by most other people.
I think that says more about their character. Especially Lily. She wasn't impressed by his actions then. I don't think she just overlooked his 'bullying tendencies' because she thought he was hot. I think he had to have been a good person to have earned her love.
But yes, you are entitled to hate whichever characters you want. I never said you couldn't.
Chelseabelle wrote: "Holly wrote: "Kristen wrote: "Especially when viewed through the mind of someone who hated that person. And in light of the fact that all other evidence about him suggest he was a decent person."..."
Yes, exactly.
You were so much more concise than me, lol
Kristen wrote: "Chelseabelle wrote: "Holly wrote: "Kristen wrote: "Especially when viewed through the mind of someone who hated that person. And in light of the fact that all other evidence about him suggest he wa..."Haha!! I almost broke my brain reading some of the posts in here.. I could have written a novel, as you so elegantly did, but I just don't have the energy for it anymore. Arguing against bad logic/reasoning is so draining.
When I get going, sometimes I just can't stop. It's like a sickness. hahaThese were actually really short compared to some of my other posts...lol
Chelseabelle wrote: "I'd like to ask what evidence you have of James being a bully to anyone else besides Snape?Lupin said something like "James stopped hexing people for the fun of it." (But apparently continued bullying just Snape)
Either on this thread, or the James vs. Snape thread, a couple James supporters (of all people) were using this as evidence that James picked on other people besides Snape. I agree with them. I think it's likely that Snape got the worst of it. But from Lupin's word choice James probably bullied others too.
Not that it would matter to me if he only bullied one person. Bully one or bully one hundred, you're still a bully. I don't see why bullying one person would make someone any better than the next bully who has, say, ten victims.
Chelseabelle wrote: "Also, Snape was rude to James as well."
If I'm remembering right, James was the first one to start hostilities between the two, on the train going to Hogwarts for first year. I also don't like people who are mean to me and I occasionally say rude things right back at em. So I don't blame Snape for simply disliking James and being rude to him. But yes, bullying is going to far. I don't remember if Snape ever did anything to James that could be considered bullying though. Did he? Now I feel like re-reading the books again.
Harry was the one that mentioned that, before seeing Snape's worst memory, he assumed that the pranks that James and Sirius played on people were like the Weasley twins. The memory changes his mind. Harry was bullied by Dudley when he was younger. He knows what bullying looks like. In the memory, James starts in on Snape when Snape is reading, so it was completely unprovoked. Snape was also disarmed early in the attack, so, through most of it, he was completely defenseless, not to mention outnumbered.
I don't think it's accurate to compare Snape calling Lily a mudblood out of humiliation and James being horrified by it (really, it's much more classy to make fun of a person's nose, apparently). We never see James being humiliated. The closest we come to it is when he is annoyed that Lily rejects his advances (Remember, he is offering to leave her friend alone if she goes out with him!) and Sirius says that Lily seems to think he's a little conceited and laughs. Because he doesn't get what he wants, we hear him ask the crowd something like, "Who wants to see Snivellus's underpants again?" I'm not sure that's a better reaction.
Holly wrote: "Chelseabelle wrote: "I'd like to ask what evidence you have of James being a bully to anyone else besides Snape?Lupin said something like "James stopped hexing people for the fun of it." (But app..."
You're right.. Lupin did say that. But we don't really know what kind of hexes he used.. technically the twins hexed people all the time, and they aren't looked at as bullies, are they?
In that particular instance (and the memory of Snape's) James was the one to start the hostilities, you're right. The way Lupin and Sirius worded it though, Snape and James hated each other equally, which to me hints that Snape did some nasty things as well.
I'm not trying to say that bullying can be forgiven in any circumstance, whether it's one kid or 10. I'm saying it's not bullying when it's two people fighting at each other over and over.
Snape didn't just say nasty things back to James. He tried to out Lupin as a werewolf, and was stupid enough to run into the situation without any help, with the result that James saved him. That sounds like a vindictive, arrogant person to me.
Don't get me wrong, I love Snape. There is a difference though, between a decent man, and a bad man who does a decent thing. I think the evidence that James became decent is overwhelming (The fact that he was so well-loved by everyone in the original Order.. who were no fools). I see no evidence that if Lily had not been murdered that Snape would have removed himself from the Death Eaters. I believe he only turned away from them because of Lily. That was a decent thing to do, but that doesn't make him a decent man.
Holly wrote: "You know what. I think a lot of the pro James arguments here contain bad logic too, but I wasn't going to say anything about it. Even though your post aren't directed towar..."I'm aware you can read them. Pointing out someone's bad logic is a more efficient and effective way of quelling the debate.
Think about that. :)
(I edited out the "bad word" because Holly did.)
Thanks for the edit, I appreciate it. I'll agree it may not have been totally productive to simply say that the arguments in here have been "illogical," without qualifying that. I apologize for that. And for the record, it was the state of the forum in general, I wasn't directing it solely at you. The thing is, forums like this, about characters that people are so passionate about, turn illogical because everyone wants to post their gut reaction to everything. I fall victim to that, too, and end up posting long rants that don't make sense. It's easy to become unkind. I have to check myself as well.
Snape is my second favorite character in the books, and James is such a "guiding light," for Harry that it's hard to not get snappy when talking about them.
"Malfoy attacked him. Harry was defending himself. James attacked Snape. James wasn't defending himself. In both situations, we didn't see only one curse or only a part of what happened. We saw the whole scene. So yes, there is a difference."You have no idea what Snape did before that. And again, it wasn't malicious.
Yes, there is a difference. Harry nearly killed Malfoy. And yes it was in self defense, but James was also acting in reciprocation of whatever Snape did or said before that. They had an ongoing, mutual hate relationship.
"No, just like how someone who's good at karate doesn't mean they go around beating people up."
It also talks about Ginny using her hexes. As it does with the twins. If it had said he was cursing people, that'd be different.
Besides, you can't be good at something if you never do it.
Huh. I thought it was quite civil....it's not really a debate if we all agree is it?
Honestly, I think you guys are being much too sensitive about the whole thing. That one incident was bad, yes. But I don't even think that's what Snape was dwelling on. And he never called James a bully. I doubt he saw himself as a helpless victim. James just one-uped him at the time.
The chapter is called 'Snape's worst memory' or something like that. But I don't think it's his worst memory because of James. Every memory preceding that one was about Lily - when he first saw her, how they met, and random memories where he fell in love with her.
It wasn't the first or last time he got into it with James and it wasn't the first time he was humiliated.
I think the only reason it was even in there was because of what he said to Lily. It was when he threw away his relationship with her. It wasn't James' actions that he was dwelling on, but his own.
Side note: didn't it say, during that incident, Snape tried to use sectumsempra on James? But at the time James was too quick for him? Also, snape wasn't the first one to be levitated like that - they said something about it being almost fashionable for kids to get hoisted in the air randomly.
Kristen wrote: ""Malfoy attacked him. Harry was defending himself. James attacked Snape. James wasn't defending himself. In both situations, we didn't see only one curse or only a part of what happened. We saw the..."I HAD FORGOTTEN THAT HE WAS TRYING TO USE SECTUMSEMPRA!! Good point. Awesome point.
I don't like attacking people on these sorts of discussions because it doesn't promote dialogue, and I can't make you or force you to stop believing/thinking what you want. But some of you need to take a breath! That is all.
...and the killjoys have effectively ended the thread..thanks for the lectures on how to be kind. I'll make sure to tell my Mom what I learned in class today.
LOLThat's ok, I think it was getting pretty redundant anyway.
But really, if you're going to get upset from others opinions, should you really be spending time on discussion boards? It just seems like unnecessary stress to me...
Kristen wrote: "LOLThat's ok, I think it was getting pretty redundant anyway.
But really, if you're going to get upset from others opinions, should you really be spending time on discussion boards? It just seems..."
agreed ma'am.
@Katherine and LiteraHAHAHAHA!! Funny. And you realize that kids can get onto this website, right? If you're going to lecture people about being kind, maybe you should watch your mouth (or typing fingers) and edit out your usage of the B word..
I had to. Hypocrisy really gets on my nerves.
I had to also. And I just find it interesting that you ask me to edit out the B word, and ignore that the person who started this discussion repeatedely used the F word. Which is the first thing anyone's going to be seeing.
I didn't mean to lecture anyone. I realized looking back that I'd overdone it - I was just in a frusterated mood, and was tired of the discussions becoming about the people instead of books. And for the record, I'd had someone else in mind. None of it was even directed at you.
all discussions on this book
|
post a new topic
