Snapedom

Reply to sailorlum about Remus, because the comments were getting tl;dr

The World of Severus Snape

********************
Anonymous users, remember that you must sign all your comments with your name or nick! Comments left unsigned may be screened without notice.

********************

Welcome to Snapedom!
If you want to see snapedom entries on your LJ flist, add snapedom_syn feed. But please remember to come here to the post to comment.

This community is mostly unmoderated. Read the rules and more in "About Snapedom."

No fanfic or art posts, but you can promote your fanfic and fanart, or post recommendations, every Friday.

Reply to sailorlum about Remus, because the comments were getting tl;dr

Previous Entry Add to Memories Tell a Friend Next Entry
I didn't want to take up any more of the thread in terri's post, or make other commentators there uncomfortable, so I've moved my reply here.

ETA to avoid any misunderstanding: THIS IS NOT A STAND-ALONE ESSAY. It is a REPLY to a long discussion on terri's Remus as Parent post. Please, if you think something is missing or unclear, please read back in the discussion to be sure, for the sake of avoiding misunderstandings. Link is

http://asylums.insanejournal.com/snapedom/260607.html?thread=2032639#t2032639

Thank you.

There are a couple of points I want to make, sailorlum. I was trying not to tl;dr but I did it again. Sorry. :( Thank you for not taking my rantiness personally.

The first point that occurs to me reading your response is "how could Remus NOT assume he'd be traumatized to some degree?" Not, let me be clear, that Remus ought to be able to judge the specific degree of it to a millimeter. Just that, knowing the *fact* that Severus had nearly lost his life to a werewolf, Remus could reasonably be expected to assume that maybe Severus might have a less than enthusiastic response to living in the same castle as the werewolf again, and that this would need to be respected and addressed somehow.

And no, Severus wouldn't have cried about it in front of everyone. That's not the point. It's a normal, standard human reaction to deeply impacted by such a near miss, even if you don’t talk about it constantly. So much that we would consider abnormal someone who *wasn't.*

But. People do heal, yes. Usually, after such a near miss, when they have a good deal of support and counseling and time. Which Severus didn't have. But, as you point out, Remus hadn't been in contact with him (as far as we know) for over a decade. He wouldn’t necessarily *know* he still hurts. Ok. Maybe he thought Severus had gotten over it? Let's start over, again assuming the best. Let's assume Remus did not *know* how traumatized Severus really was. I'll do more that take that as my new starting point, I'll grant you without retraction that, up through the end of that scene, it's as possible/valid as the reading that he did *know.* As you say, he hadn't been in contact with Severus in years. So you’ve adjusted my thinking with that.

But. My second point, after having considered how your point affects my previous argument: What did he do, upon returning to Hogwarts and encountering Severus again? Did he (from the indications in the text), in re-establishing his relationship to Severus, attempt to discern how the man really felt, now that he was present? (Regardless of how Severus might have responded, did Remus *try*)? Did he give an indication of considering *the possibility* that Severus, still wary and suspicious of him, might be reacting to the presence of the werewolf who nearly mauled him? That is, did he even once attempt to put himself in Severus' shoes and think about the *possibility* that the man was still suffering?

No. He made *assumptions* about Severus. He *assumed* that Severus either was not traumatized (as a normal person would have been) or that he was over it. There is no sign in the text that he attempted to get confirmation of this fact from Severus, no sign that he ever accorded Severus the human respect of *asking* him how he felt. Even if Severus wouldn't have responded well, that's not the point - Remus had a duty to think of the situation from Severus' POV for a moment rather than make assumptions about the feelings and state of mind of another person regarding a life-threatening incident.

His failure here is exactly the same at base as if he had *known* for certain. He failed to accord Severus the human respect of thinking of him as a separate person who can feel pain, who has his own POV on things, and whose pain *matters.* He failed to consider Severus' possible pain as real or *worthy of thought* - whether he knew for certain that Severus was in pain or whether it was merely possible that he was, based on a normal person's reactions to things. He did not think of the mere possibility that Severus might hurt as something *he needed to investigate,* however minimally. He assumed. And acted, on the basis of that assumption, to deny and invalidate Severus' pain when he was brought face to face with it - regardless of motive or of his conscious awareness that that was what he was doing.

People are often emotionally dumb, as you put it, and far far too often fail in exactly this way. They fail to think of other people as truly, fully *human* beings who feel pain and have their own perspectives. It's a very very common failing, and I do not exclude myself from that. It is also, most of the time, not a particularly conscious failing. That still does not excuse it. It may be human to fail in this way - I'm not saying Remus is the worst person in the world for failing like this. He’s not Voldemort, and he has positive traits. But it is a failing, and I won't let him off the hook for it even when I assume the best motives.

Regarding your argument that he later realized what he'd done and tried to make up for it...well, perhaps it holds in the moment. No longer. It doesn't actually impact his behavior - because he again fails to respect Severus' pain even after this incident. He again makes Severus track him down with the potion at the last minute. And we get words from his own lips, that second evening, that confirm that he *still* does not think Severus' pain (which, in your argument, he was now conscious of) worthy of regard. He is still failing to respect Severus as a human being that evening. Because, having seen that Severus is indeed still traumatized and hurting, he explicitly tells Severus *to his face* that he needs to get over it, that it is just "a schoolboy grudge." Here it's not a question of not realizing Severus was hurt; Remus (now) knows he's hurt. He simply thinks, and says, that Severus has no *right* to be hurt. He trivializes the impact of a life-threatening encounter, to the man's face. Severus' pain *does not matter to him.*

As you say, Remus certainly minimized the Prank in his own mind. That is precisely my point, overall. He minimized another person's life-threatening experience, and in so doing necessarily minimized the meaningfulness of that person’s pain. An action which, conscious and deliberate or not, is a step towards dehumanization. And he continued to do this even after seeing for himself that the person was still hurting. You can argue that, before the tussle over the potion, it was merely a failure to do his human duty and consider things, not a deliberate act. I...don’t entirely agree with that reading, but it’s certainly possible. But after that encounter he ought to have realized and acted, but he did not. And in the Shack, when he explicitly acknowledged and then dismissed Severus’ pain to the man’s face, it utterly ceased to be a passive failure. At that point, if not before, it was willful refusal. A refusal we never see him apologize for, nor recant. - Had he repented and changed, that we could see, I would not come down so hard on him. I would also be more willing to accept arguments that it was unconscious, passive failure most of the time, such as in the first tussle over the potion. The fact that he never significantly alters his attitude or behavior (speech is another thing) that we see inclines me to read it as a consistent aspect of his character, not an unconscious failing he’d likely repent once awoken to it.

See, I understand that you want to give him the benefit of the doubt, that you like him and want a flawed but human Remus. Of course that’s your right. Even more than that, I agree that he *is* flawed but human. He is not Voldemort, and does have good points. He’s willing to risk his life to defeat Voldemort, for one thing. He’s loyal to his friends (for better or worse). For those in his pack, he does care, even if he is not always perfect about fulfilling his responsibilities to them. He wants to make the WW a better place. And he suffers, yes, decidedly, and sometimes beyond anything deserved. But he has his flaws. This is exactly my point. He has flaws, and these are his flaws. He can be insensitive to other people. He has recurring moments of moral cowardice that he repeatedly gives into. And if you aren’t in his pack (like Severus), he can fail to accord you the respect due another human being, at times willfully. The *reasons* for these failings, and his various motives at any point in time, may add shades of grey, but they don’t excuse his behavior towards Severus. Perhaps we see him at his worst with Severus. If you want to grant him that, I’ll go along with it. It’s these complexities that make characters fascinating to me - and I am fascinated by Lupin, even if I *like* him less and less with time.

I don’t mean to pick on Remus. None of the characters in the books are shining angels, Severus included. But I tend, personally, to point out the flaws in seemingly-blameless characters like Remus, and to emphasize the pain of those like Severus who are discarded by other characters, for a reason. If we go along with the bias that the narrative voice, and JKR’s pronouncements, encourage and tolerate or cover over failings like the one I’ve described because the characters are otherwise sympathetic to us, we fall into a trap that IMHO is very, very dangerous. The books encourage us (in behavior) NOT to think of other people as human beings unless we *like* them, or if they are close to us in some way. The people who might seem unpleasant - bitter, or pompous (Percy), or what have you - are shoved off to the side, and we are encouraged to distinguish between our & our friends’ pain (real, terrible, worthy of vengeance) and the pain of people we don’t particularly like (exaggerated, they need to get over it, they have no right to criticize US). When, IMHO, it is our human duty to at least try to put ourselves in other people’s shoes even for a moment, to respect a fundamental baseline humanity in every person. When a character fails at exactly this, and the narrative either whitewashes it or *encourages* us to go along with it, I hit the brakes. (And, obviously, go tl;dr on everyone. ;) ) It’s a common failing that I’m sure I’ve been guilty of myself, but when I am conscious of it I won’t tolerate it. And I see it in these books.

Which is why I’m not letting go of your argument. Not that you are consciously doing this, not at all. I understand that you sympathize with Remus, and have your own reading of the books - totally fine and your right. And maybe I’m taking it more seriously than you want to - I tend to get really serious about these things, maybe because I’m a lit student. :) But it seems to me that your argument is still...not really acknowledging the real failing that I see here, nor satisfactorily explaining away the evidence that leads me to see that failing. Really damning IMHO is Remus’ comment in the Shack, and the fact that in the scene before Severus *twice* drew his attention to the potion. Even with your argument that Remus wasn’t aware at first of Severus’ pain, after the potion incident he ought to have realized his failing and acted to change it (knowing and not acting being another kind of failure). But he didn’t. And even if at that point it was not a deliberate *refusal* to see, it was still a *failure* to consider - a passive fault rather than an active one, but very real nonetheless. I’m not asking Remus to be a mind-reader (at least, not anymore. I grant I hadn’t considered the years apart. But he still can be faulted IMHO for assuming rather than considering Severus’ possible POV.) I’m asking him to stop and think of Severus as a real human being for a moment, and act in consideration of that. Something I think every person has a duty to do towards others (and which just about every character in the series, Severus included, at times fails to do). Which Remus repeatedly fails to do. And...I don’t see how your argument acknowledges/gets rid of that lack of consideration here. Which is slightly frustrating for me - I feel like we’re talking past each other. :( Your arguments acknowledge that Remus has his flaws, but discount or explain away every concrete instance of those flaws, which makes the acknowledgment seem hollow.

So how about this, to be fair to you. If, after all this debating, I still haven’t convinced you....Why don’t you give me a couple of concrete instances in which you see Remus really, really failing? What are his worst moments, to you? And I mean tell me in detail - don’t worry about tl;dr. :) The things that you, personally, *can’t* bring yourself to explain away, make light of, or give him the benefit of the doubt on? You say (earlier) that Remus can be passive-aggressive towards Severus, just that the potions scene isn’t an example of it. So what WOULD be an example of it? Give me some real dirt. Convince me that we really do have two very different interpretations of the character, including where his real flaws are. If you don’t want to fill up the thread here, make a separate post or email me - moviemaedchen@gmail.com

If you want to, of course. Obviously this stops having a point when you start to not enjoy it, and I don’t want to wear you out. Sometimes (like Severus), I have a hard time letting go of something. ;) But I do genuinely enjoy debating with you, and if you haven’t convinced me of your reading in toto you’ve still made me consider things from different POVs, and taking more things into account. Which IMO any good debate should do, for all involved. It helps strengthen skill at reasoning, always a good thing, right? :) I thought the Lily thing went pretty well, am I right? I hope I’m not upsetting you, and that I haven’t slipped up somewhere and said something about you personally rather than your argument. I know you really don’t like that, and I can be sensitive that way myself, so I’ve done my best to keep it about the argument. Please correct me if I have - or if I have misunderstood you somewhere along the line.

Thanks for reading and responding to all this. Wow, tl;dr to the tenth degree. *sigh*
  • Re: Oops!

    Good points. :)

    Hmmm, regarding Muggle-borns... I wonder if a lot of them read "Hogwarts: A History" before coming to school (I would want to know a history of the wizarding school I'm going to, esp. if I'm new to the concept of being magical). Assuming that it goes into the basic values ascribed to the Houses, I wonder if the Muggle-borns see the pure-blood value associated with Slytherin and discount it (unless they are quite ambitious and cunning).
    • Re: Oops!

      Hermione read a lot but it isn't clear if she knew there was prejudice against Muggleborns in Wizarding Britain at all before arriving. She did know about the first war, but it isn't clear if she knew it was related to blood prejudice.

      There is no textual evidence for proportion of half-bloods in Slytherin. 17 year old Lucius knew there are no Snapes in 'Nature's Nobility' yet he embraced young Severus.

      Blood prejudice in the wizarding world takes many forms. The Weasleys avoid the squib relative. Arthur is fascinated by Muggle technology and objects to the more severe forms of Muggle baiting but doesn't even try to do business with Muggles, befriend Muggles (he only socializes with the Grangers when they come to the Wizarding World) and has no problem breaking into their home through their fireplace without their permission. Molly wants to avoid Muggles completely, 3 of the Weasley sons engage in Muggle baiting at some point. The Weasleys do invite Hermione to their home but I can't help wondering if Molly would have been as fast to believe Skeeter's story about Hermione had Hermione not been Muggle-born.

      Then there is Lucius who doesn't want Muggle-borns at Hogwarts, who doesn't want his son to marry a Muggle but doesn't hold Eileen Prince's choice of husband over her son. And Bellatrix, who is horrified with the idea that Tom might be a half-blood. There is also the question of how many generations one's wizarding heritage must be to be considered a pureblood rather than a half-blood, and the fact that it matters that the Weasleys are *old* purebloods.
      • Nature's Nobility

        Regarding "Nature's Nobility": That book lists the pure-blood families that are now extinct in the male line, so the name Snape not being in there only means that, if there is a pure-blood Snape line, it hasn’t died out in the male line. All we really know is that the name Peverell was in there and died out in the male line, long ago. (DH22)

        As for Slytherin House, I have merely given my opinion based on what I see in the text. I get that you disagree with me.
        • Re: Nature's Nobility

          No, the book contains the list of the lost wizarding families but there is no reason to think that's all it contains. Wizards who want their children to marry pureblods need to know the names of those families still around. Any doubt that at 17 Lucius wouldn't know which family is wizardly and which isn't?

          As for Slytherin House, I have merely given my opinion based on what I see in the text. I get that you disagree with me.

          I'm saying the text doesn't state nor does it provide data to figure out the proportion of purebloods vs others in Slytherin House. It does state that a boy who did not know his heritage was Sorted there as well as one who knew he was half-blood.
          • Re: Nature's Nobility

            No, the book contains the list of the lost wizarding families but there is no reason to think that's all it contains. Wizards who want their children to marry pureblods need to know the names of those families still around. Any doubt that at 17 Lucius wouldn't know which family is wizardly and which isn't?

            This is your opinion. The text doesn't say what else the book contains besides families that have died out in the main line. If you think it's reasonable to assume that it contains more than that, then dandy. I don't see why then, you seem to begrudge me thinking it's reasonable to also make assumptions and extrapolations from the text (like I have with my opinion on Slytherin House). *arches eyebrow*
            • Re: Nature's Nobility

              Ugh, that should have been "male line". Shoo typo faerie, shoo!
            • Re: Nature's Nobility

              If it were only about lineages which had died out, I would think the title would indicate that in some way -- "Nature's Lost Nobility" or something. As is, the title sounds like it's talking about a currently existing phenomenon. I think it's more reasonable to assume that the book does contain other information as well than that it is solely about extinct lineages.

              Oryx is right that we don't have enough data in the text to know the number of halfbloods in Slytherin, especially historically. A good deal of the information on the link I sent you is extra-textual. Sans JKR's website, some interviews, etc. we wind up with a lot of "blood status: unknown".
              • Missing my point

                My point with the book is that we don't know exactly what else it contains, and can only assume what each one of us thinks is reasonable to fill in the blanks. The same thing you (and Oryx) are doing with the book, is the same thing I'm doing with Slytherin House. My point with that is, that it seems a little hypocritical [for anyone] to keep harping on me for doing the same things you/Oryx/various others are doing: looking at what is in the text and what isn't, and filling in the blanks with what one thinks is reasonable.

                Aside from lineages, I don't know what else is in Nature's Nobility. It seems reasonable that there is more, but I haven't formed an opinion as to what that more might be, myself. The book is also very old, so I don't know how updated it is. I don't know how complete it is. Not much concrete information is given in the text, so that leaves some blanks to be filled in with whatever one thinks is a reasonable assumption or extrapolation.

                The same is true of Slytherin House. I made what I thought were reasonable extrapolations and assumptions, based on what information I do have from the text and what I think is reasonable to assume and extrapolate based on that information (taking the totality of what I know from the text, as a whole).

                I didn't claim to *know* how many pure-bloods/half-bloods/Muggle-borns were in Slytherin. I only stated what I *think* based on my interpretation of the text.

                I don't know why anyone is thinking that I am trying to argue for some great truth, here. I'm not trying to change anyone's mind, even. I'm just explaining what my interpretation is, for whoever to take or leave. If for nothing else, then to add diversity to the group.
                • I don't know why anyone is thinking that I am trying to argue for some great truth, here.

                  I don't think they are, but rather pointing out ways in which what you think of as "reasonable extrapolation" might in fact not logically follow from what we know.
                  • I don't think they are, but rather pointing out ways in which what you think of as "reasonable extrapolation" might in fact not logically follow from what we know.

                    Yes, and I could say the same of what *others* think of as "reasonable extrapolation" (that it might in fact not follow logically from the text). That's my point. "What follows logically from what we know" and "what doesn't" is a matter of opinion. "What we know" can be a matter of opinion, even. (For instance, not everyone accepts the testimony of character x at time y as being truthful, while others do). *shrugs*
                    • (Anonymous)
                      Surely it isn't purely a matter of opinion, but something that can be debated, with facts either from within the text or from knowledge of the world. (The real world or otherwise.)

                      For example, most genealogies would contain more than extinct lineages.

                      OTOH, we certainly don't know that Lucius had read Nature's Nobility at the age of 16-17.

                      On the *other* other hand, if Sirius is right about all the pureblood families being intermarried, then Lucius wouldn't need to read a book to know the names of all the British pureblood families, because they'd be the names of his relatives.

                      But you can challenge that, too. If it only takes all-magic grandparents to be considered a pureblood, then there are probably a fair number of only recently pureblood families in the WW. Lucius might well not know their names. And while the Malfoys might not consider such recent families people they'd be willing to intermarry with, they'd still be likely to draw a distinction between them and half-bloods.

                      So. I don't have a convincing argument either way, or not yet, at least. But "reasonable extrapolation" isn't an endpoint; there's plenty of room for debate.

                      Er, which of course doesn't mean you have to debate it, if you're tired of debating. The way we debate things exhaustively here can be exhausting. ;)

                      Lynn
                      • Er, which of course doesn't mean you have to debate it, if you're tired of debating. The way we debate things exhaustively here can be exhausting. ;)

                        LOL, yes! ;) *hands you a piece of cake*

                        Of course it isn't purely a matter of opinion, and this kind of stuff can be debated, with facts either from within the text or from knowledge of the world. (It can't be "proven", though, IMO. Debated, yes. Proven, not so much.)

                        Me, I'm really more into *discussing* than *debating*. I just get rankled when I feel like I'm being badgered to debate. I'd rather just say what I think and why (to whatever degree I feel like going into), with the goal of being understood or providing another viewpoint, and not the goal of changing anyone's mind (that's a just a bonus, if it happens). And I also enjoy learning what other people think and why (even if I strongly disagree, I find it interesting).

                        With regards to "reasonable extrapolation" my point was that *I do look at the text* and I think I'm making reasonable extrapolations from it (and other knowledge bases). I don't feel like I should have to debate why my extrapolations are reasonable if I don't feel like it, since I'm not trying to change anyone's mind.

                        Also, Some things I don't feel are worth debating. On some of the "big picture" stuff (i.e. is Slytherin a traditionally elite pure-blood bastion or not), I feel like if we don't agree already, we aren't going to (seeing as we've all read the text). If I feel like *discussing* one of these "big picture" things, I might...but I have no illusions of changing anyone's mind or anything.

                        And, if I haven't formed a detailed opinion for myself (like with regards to Nature's Nobility), then sometimes I don't feel it's worth debating or discussing in detail until I have thought about it some more for myself.

                        When I post here on Snapedom, it's just because I feel like sharing my POV, and the most I hope for is understanding (or satiating someone's curiosity as to what goes on in my fevered brain, LOL). Well, and I do like to contribute to the diversity of the group. Wouldn't it be boring if everyone all thought the same thing? ...Of course, I don't want it to get *too* exciting, LOL. Then I end up feeling like a crispy critter.
            • Re: Nature's Nobility

              It doesn't matter to my point what the book contains. My point was that at the time Lucius embraced Severus he had a reason to think Severus was not pureblood because of his last name. Whether he could have obtained that knowledge specifically from Nature's Nobility or some other source is unimportant. We know from Albus' description of Tom's pastime in his first 4 or 5 years at Hogwarts that there are wizarding genealogies. (Since the full title of Nature's Nobility describes it as a genealogy I used it as an example but it is not material.)
Powered by InsaneJournal