An interesting extension of my thesis...
![[info]](https://www.insanejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small}
but I don't think it quite holds water.
Because James is NOT remembered with unadulterated fondness.
And he (unlike Lily pre-Slughorn) IS remembered.
Hagrid and Sirius are the only ones who EVER make a big deal with Harry about remembering James--and Hagrid is clearly incapable of clear judgment, and Sirius is biased.
NO ONE, ever, comes up to Harry in the Leaky to claim shyly, I knew your father....
Or at Hogwarts, my dad knew yours....
Minerva mentions James ONCE to Harry, praising their joint skill at Quidditch. She never even tells Harry that his father aced her own subject, Transfigurations.
It really seems that what we overhear in PoA is the general opinion: that James Potter was considered a rich, handsome, charming troublemaker. The worst Minerva (who had dealt, from various perspectives, with both Tom Riddle's gang and the Tiwns) had ever encountered.
When James died actively opposing You-Know-Who, "nil nisi" kicked in, especially as James's son became The Chosen One.
But it's only Dumbledore (and we know his motives) and to a lesser extent Sirius, and Remus-influenced-by-Sirius, who attempt to persuade Harry that he's fulfillling his father's legacy.
The Holy Familly has a statue raised to them in Godric's Hollow, true.
But it's Harry, not Lily and not James,who is adulated.
However--James hasn't been erased.
Quirrell and Hagrid clearly show in book 1 that they understand Snape's antipathy to Harry.
But... Hagrid shows, repeatedly, that he will "diss" others on staff, including his undisputed superiors, when he chooses (Filch, B1, Lockwood, B2, UMbridge, B5). And so will Minerva--while maintaining the most rigorous professional decorum, she undermines Lockwood (B2), Trelawney (B3), and Umbridge (B5).
Whenever Hagrid or Minerva want to.
Yet neither will support Harry in "dissing" Snape, EVER, until Dumbledore's murder in HBP.
And both of them try at first to dismiss Harry's damning eyewitness testimony at the end of HBP.
Both Hagrid and Minerva showed signs of grieving for "Lily and James" (in that order) in Book 1.
And neither ever joins Harry in condeming Professor Snape as unreasonabable.
Yet both are seen condemning other staff members, when they find that condemaation to fit!
Either they both consider Snape to be reacting reasonably enough in the present (geven the difference between WW norms and Muggle educatonal theories about best practices). Or they both consider that Snape's reacting as reasonably as can be expected given the past: I.e. that both Minerva and Hagrid think that James's mistreatment of Severus was sufficient to EARN Harry's mistreatment at Severus's hands.
And they trust Severus not to extend the mistreatment past justice, however they (or Severus) define that.
Because James is NOT remembered with unadulterated fondness.
And he (unlike Lily pre-Slughorn) IS remembered.
Hagrid and Sirius are the only ones who EVER make a big deal with Harry about remembering James--and Hagrid is clearly incapable of clear judgment, and Sirius is biased.
NO ONE, ever, comes up to Harry in the Leaky to claim shyly, I knew your father....
Or at Hogwarts, my dad knew yours....
Minerva mentions James ONCE to Harry, praising their joint skill at Quidditch. She never even tells Harry that his father aced her own subject, Transfigurations.
It really seems that what we overhear in PoA is the general opinion: that James Potter was considered a rich, handsome, charming troublemaker. The worst Minerva (who had dealt, from various perspectives, with both Tom Riddle's gang and the Tiwns) had ever encountered.
When James died actively opposing You-Know-Who, "nil nisi" kicked in, especially as James's son became The Chosen One.
But it's only Dumbledore (and we know his motives) and to a lesser extent Sirius, and Remus-influenced-by-Sirius, who attempt to persuade Harry that he's fulfillling his father's legacy.
The Holy Familly has a statue raised to them in Godric's Hollow, true.
But it's Harry, not Lily and not James,who is adulated.
However--James hasn't been erased.
Quirrell and Hagrid clearly show in book 1 that they understand Snape's antipathy to Harry.
But... Hagrid shows, repeatedly, that he will "diss" others on staff, including his undisputed superiors, when he chooses (Filch, B1, Lockwood, B2, UMbridge, B5). And so will Minerva--while maintaining the most rigorous professional decorum, she undermines Lockwood (B2), Trelawney (B3), and Umbridge (B5).
Whenever Hagrid or Minerva want to.
Yet neither will support Harry in "dissing" Snape, EVER, until Dumbledore's murder in HBP.
And both of them try at first to dismiss Harry's damning eyewitness testimony at the end of HBP.
Both Hagrid and Minerva showed signs of grieving for "Lily and James" (in that order) in Book 1.
And neither ever joins Harry in condeming Professor Snape as unreasonabable.
Yet both are seen condemning other staff members, when they find that condemaation to fit!
Either they both consider Snape to be reacting reasonably enough in the present (geven the difference between WW norms and Muggle educatonal theories about best practices). Or they both consider that Snape's reacting as reasonably as can be expected given the past: I.e. that both Minerva and Hagrid think that James's mistreatment of Severus was sufficient to EARN Harry's mistreatment at Severus's hands.
And they trust Severus not to extend the mistreatment past justice, however they (or Severus) define that.