Again, I read the book, I understood the idea, you don't have to keep repeating it, I just personally find it horribly implausible, even in Rowling's world.
HPSeeker wrote:
Exactamundo!The fact is that he murdered countless numbers of people, so his soul was probably ripped to shreds--literally! He only used 6 parts of it to make Horcruxes. Once blasted by the AK it was impossible for his extremely shredded soul to stay intact at all, and that one drowning piece latched onto Harry's whole soul like a life preserver.
: Donna
ABI wrote:
Plus, his soul was SO unstable after being ripped apart so many times...
---ABI
____________________________________________________________________
HPSeeker wrote:
A piece of LV's soul didn't "fall off"; the backfired AK curse shattered and fragmented his soul into pieces. The AK didn't kill Voldemort because he'd already made six other Horcruxes, keeping him alive, and one piece of his shattered soul from the AK latched onto Harry's whole soul to survive, it was instinctual.
: Donna
ShadowCougar wrote:
As a side note, I find the idea that a piece of Voldy's soul just fell off to be ridiculous, but I have not argued about it, cause well, I find people saying that Snape is a Good Person to be more ridiculous, so I have been busy fighting that battle
I am not looking at Harry through rose colored glasses.
I am looking at Snape as one adult to another, and what I see is a cruel demeaning person who started emotionally abusing Harry from the very first day of class just because he was James' son. No moral person takes his venom out on his enemy's child.
James was dead because of Snape. Lily was dead because of Snape. Harry was an orphan because of Snape. Do we see any indication whatsoever that Snape felt remorse for Harry's plight that was purely a result of his own fascination with the Dark Arts? NO. His only remorse was that Lily was dead; he never gave a hoot as to what effect that might have had on her child.
Harry never trusted Snape because Snape never acted in a trustworthy caring manner toward him. And Harry was right not to trust him... Snape might have desired to keep Harry alive but he NEVER cared about Harry's wellbeing in any other sense and acted toward Harry as though he wished he were dead.
As for Snape being some kind of model teacher enforcing rules, let me remind you that he did NOT do this with the Slytherin kids. They got away with every bit of their bravado, every bit of their misbehavior. He never took points away from his own house for their conduct, and whenever he saw Draco and Harry facing off to eachother, Harry got the punishment. Did he even ASK Draco about using the Cruciatus curse on Harry? No. McGonagall was a law enforcer, and she did so fairly. Snape was just a bully.
Occlumency... Snape never told Harry HOW to block his mind. Never considered that it might be really difficult for a teenager whose life is on the line to "empty his thoughts of emotions". Yelling at Harry and tormenting him time and time again without giving him a CLUE as to how to do what he was being asked to do was what made that Occlumency difficult. Of course Harry failed at it!
He was a bully to Neville, too. Neville wasn't a dunderhead -- he was an intimidated kid who couldn't concentrate under those fear-provoking conditions! Given half a chance and a little encouragement, he did fine. I completely blame his poor performance in Potions on Snape.
That comment he made to Hermione... "capable of mild humor"? What did Hermione ever do to Snape to deserve such a comment? We're talking about an adolescent girl here... he made that comment in order to humiliate her more in front of the Slytherins who saw her as a "Mudblood". Did he ever make similar comments to Pansy? Or Draco?
There is NOTHING that Harry could have EVER done to gain Snape's respect. NOTHING. It was not in Snape's nature to respect Harry. To do so, he would have had to admit that he had been in the wrong the whole time he persecuted him... that he had never given him the benefit of the doubt.
And as for the Marauders thing... Snape knew more Dark Arts curses before he entered school than any of the seventh year students... that is canon. James hated the Dark Arts more than anything. Snape hung around with the group who all became Death Eaters. James didn't force him into that... it was Snape's nature. This was what he wanted. Just because we don't see anything that Snape dished out to James behind his back doesn't mean that he was some kind of misunderstood persecuted saint. James might have been arrogant and a toe-rag, but there was a reason he picked on Snape most of all and that was because Snape was an evil git just waiting to become a Death Eater...
I expect a lot more maturity from adults of Snape's age than kids of Harry's age. Snape was a bully who misused his power.
Harry was just a kid trying to survive... he broke plenty of rules, to be sure, but you never saw him doing it because he was on some kind of joy-ride. Most often, he felt he needed to break rules for a greater good... usually to save someone... or to do something required as part of saving someone...
e.g.
1. The troll encounter... he was protecting Hermione who was crying in the bathroom.
2. The Philosopher's Stone... he had been told that Voldemort could regenerate with it, and that meant his life was already on the line... He DID try to get McGonagall to listen to him about the secret of controlling Fluffy getting out...
3. The Basilisk -- no one else could speak Parseltongue... he DID try to get his teacher to go down and fight the creature and save Ginny, though...
4. The Shrieking Shack -- he went in there to save Ron!
If you love Snape and condone all his behavior, then there is nothing I can really say to convince you. But when the author herself calls Snape a "deeply horrible person" there should be a clue there that that is what she was trying to convey in her books and therefore it should not be surprising to you that many of us readers agree with her!
Merlinspants, I'm very sorry to hear that you had teachers as bad or worse than Snape... in today's environment, such teachers deserve to lose their licenses. I just fail to understand why, after taking all that abuse, you want to defend and make excuses for another such teacher!
It makes no sense to me....
I am looking at Snape as one adult to another, and what I see is a cruel demeaning person who started emotionally abusing Harry from the very first day of class just because he was James' son. No moral person takes his venom out on his enemy's child.
James was dead because of Snape. Lily was dead because of Snape. Harry was an orphan because of Snape. Do we see any indication whatsoever that Snape felt remorse for Harry's plight that was purely a result of his own fascination with the Dark Arts? NO. His only remorse was that Lily was dead; he never gave a hoot as to what effect that might have had on her child.
Harry never trusted Snape because Snape never acted in a trustworthy caring manner toward him. And Harry was right not to trust him... Snape might have desired to keep Harry alive but he NEVER cared about Harry's wellbeing in any other sense and acted toward Harry as though he wished he were dead.
As for Snape being some kind of model teacher enforcing rules, let me remind you that he did NOT do this with the Slytherin kids. They got away with every bit of their bravado, every bit of their misbehavior. He never took points away from his own house for their conduct, and whenever he saw Draco and Harry facing off to eachother, Harry got the punishment. Did he even ASK Draco about using the Cruciatus curse on Harry? No. McGonagall was a law enforcer, and she did so fairly. Snape was just a bully.
Occlumency... Snape never told Harry HOW to block his mind. Never considered that it might be really difficult for a teenager whose life is on the line to "empty his thoughts of emotions". Yelling at Harry and tormenting him time and time again without giving him a CLUE as to how to do what he was being asked to do was what made that Occlumency difficult. Of course Harry failed at it!
He was a bully to Neville, too. Neville wasn't a dunderhead -- he was an intimidated kid who couldn't concentrate under those fear-provoking conditions! Given half a chance and a little encouragement, he did fine. I completely blame his poor performance in Potions on Snape.
That comment he made to Hermione... "capable of mild humor"? What did Hermione ever do to Snape to deserve such a comment? We're talking about an adolescent girl here... he made that comment in order to humiliate her more in front of the Slytherins who saw her as a "Mudblood". Did he ever make similar comments to Pansy? Or Draco?
There is NOTHING that Harry could have EVER done to gain Snape's respect. NOTHING. It was not in Snape's nature to respect Harry. To do so, he would have had to admit that he had been in the wrong the whole time he persecuted him... that he had never given him the benefit of the doubt.
And as for the Marauders thing... Snape knew more Dark Arts curses before he entered school than any of the seventh year students... that is canon. James hated the Dark Arts more than anything. Snape hung around with the group who all became Death Eaters. James didn't force him into that... it was Snape's nature. This was what he wanted. Just because we don't see anything that Snape dished out to James behind his back doesn't mean that he was some kind of misunderstood persecuted saint. James might have been arrogant and a toe-rag, but there was a reason he picked on Snape most of all and that was because Snape was an evil git just waiting to become a Death Eater...
I expect a lot more maturity from adults of Snape's age than kids of Harry's age. Snape was a bully who misused his power.
Harry was just a kid trying to survive... he broke plenty of rules, to be sure, but you never saw him doing it because he was on some kind of joy-ride. Most often, he felt he needed to break rules for a greater good... usually to save someone... or to do something required as part of saving someone...
e.g.
1. The troll encounter... he was protecting Hermione who was crying in the bathroom.
2. The Philosopher's Stone... he had been told that Voldemort could regenerate with it, and that meant his life was already on the line... He DID try to get McGonagall to listen to him about the secret of controlling Fluffy getting out...
3. The Basilisk -- no one else could speak Parseltongue... he DID try to get his teacher to go down and fight the creature and save Ginny, though...
4. The Shrieking Shack -- he went in there to save Ron!
If you love Snape and condone all his behavior, then there is nothing I can really say to convince you. But when the author herself calls Snape a "deeply horrible person" there should be a clue there that that is what she was trying to convey in her books and therefore it should not be surprising to you that many of us readers agree with her!
Merlinspants, I'm very sorry to hear that you had teachers as bad or worse than Snape... in today's environment, such teachers deserve to lose their licenses. I just fail to understand why, after taking all that abuse, you want to defend and make excuses for another such teacher!
It makes no sense to me....
