GoF 27

[pauraque_bk]

GoF 27: Padfoot Returns

And so do we. By popular demand, I think I can fairly say!

[Rita's article:] However, it might not be Miss Granger's doubtful natural charms which have captured these unfortunate boys' interest.

'She's really ugly,' says Pansy Parkinson, a pretty and vivacious fourth-year student, 'but she'd be well up to making a Love Potion, she's quite brainy. I think that's how she's doing it.' (444)

If you like the theory that Ginny's using a love potion in HBP, here's more foreshadowing.

'I told you!' Ron hissed at Hermione, as she stared down at the article. 'I told you not to annoy Rita Skeeter! She's made you out to be some sort of -- of scarlet woman!'

Hermione stopped looking astonished and snorted with laughter.

'Scarlet woman?' she repeated, shaking with suppressed giggles as she looked round at Ron.

'It's what my mum calls them,' Ron muttered, his ears going red again. (445)

Certainly reminiscent of Ron's "D'you think I want peo­ple saying my sister's a--" in HBP, though I doubt he was going to say "scarlet woman" that time. Ron is very worried about the girls he cares about being seen as sluts.

'If that's the best Rita can do, she's losing her touch,' said Hermione, still giggling, as she threw Witch Weekly onto the empty chair besdie her. 'What a pile of old rubbish.'

She looked over at the Slytherins, who were all watching her and Harry closely across the room to see if they had been upset by the article. Hermione gave them a sarcastic smile and a wave[...] (445)

I don't know whether this should be a surprising reaction from her. Instead of getting upset at the petty bullies, she later exacts her revenge on Rita, the one who's really done her wrong.

'Ah ... reading magazines under the table as well?' Snape added, snatching up the copy of Witch Weekly. 'A further ten points from Gryffindor ... oh, but of course ...' Snape's black eyes glittered as they fell on Rita Skeeter's article. 'Potter has to keep up with his press cuttings...'

The dungeon rang with the Slytherins' laughter, and an unpleasant smile curled Snape's thin mouth. To Harry's fury, he began to read the article aloud.

'Harry Potter's Secret Heartache ... dear, dear, Potter, what's ailing you now? A boy like no other, perhaps...'

Harry could feel his face burning now. Snape was pausing at the end of every sentence to allow the Slytherins a hearty laugh. The article sounded ten times worse when read by Snape. (446-447)

It's a pretty long article, too! I hope no one was actually trying to, you know, do some schoolwork while Snape was hamming it up. This is one of those times where you can't really justify Snape's behavior; he's just being an ass.

Interestingly, we get no reaction shots from Hermione here. Perhaps because the entire performance is really directed at Harry, as we can see when Snape moves Harry to sit in front of his desk, and carries on:

'You might be labouring under the delusion that the entire wizarding world is impressed with you,' Snape went on, so quietly that no one else could hear him [...] 'but I don't care how many times your picture appears in the papers. To me, Potter, you are nothing but a nasty little boy who considers rules to be beneath him.' (447)

Which is nothing we haven't heard before from him, though every time Snape complains about Harry "breaking rules" it sounds very disingenuous to me. Snape doesn't hate Harry because he thinks rules are beneath him, but because of James (and I don't think he hated James because he "broke rules" either).

Anyway, this segues into:

'So I give you fair warning, Potter,' Snape continued, in a softer and more dangerous voice, 'pint-sized celebrity or not -- if I catch you breaking into my office one more time--' (448)

'[...]But unless you watch your step, you might just find that my hand slips --' he shook the crystal bottle slightly '--right over your evening pumpkin juice[...]' (449)

Though the context is not the same, I'm surprised at how closely the dialogue here matches the "closet scene" in the movie. Of course, the movie doesn't convey Harry's reaction very well:

He didn't like the sound of that Truth Potion at all, and nor would he put it past Snape to slip him some. He repressed a shudder at the thought of what might come spilling out of his mouth if Snape did [...] there were all the other things he was concealing ... like the fact that he was in contact with Sirius ... and -- his insides squirmed at tthe thought -- how he felt about Cho ... (449)

Nice foreshadowing of the Occlumency plotline in OotP, how strongly he resists Snape's intrusion into his memories of kissing Cho -- ie, his sexual feelings (the ones that make him feel all squirmy inside! my goodness). Snarry isn't my favorite pairing, but I will totally grant that there's a wealth of relevant canon to make it more interesting.

Next comes the Trio's visit to Sirius's Cave of Angst and Rat-Eating. I always found this scene sort of pointless, and didn't resent it not being included in the movie, but now that I look more closely at it, it's actually very nice as a character interlude.

[Harry says Crouch Sr has been ill.]

'Getting his comeuppance for sacking Winky, isn't he?' said Hermione coldly. She was stroking Buckbeak, who was crunching up Sirius' chicken bones. (453)

Hermione's protectiveness of Winky is obliquely compared to affection for an animal, not a human being. Clever.

Sirius paced all around the cave in silence. Then he said, 'Harry, did you check your pockets for your wand after you'd left the Top Box?'

[...]

'Are you saying whoever conjured the Mark stole my wand in the Top Box?'

'It's possible,' said Sirius.

'Winky didn't steal that wand!' said Hermione shrilly.

'The elf wasn't the only one in that box,' said Sirius[...] (454)

Indeed not. But as usual, Sirius's advice is of mixed value. He raises some valid points and introduces a lot of information, but also casts doubt on a number of innocent characters.

'Oh, I know Crouch all right,' he said quietly. 'He was the one who gave the order for me to be sent to Azkaban -- without a trial. [...] Crouch used to be Head of the Department of Magical Law Enforcement, didn't you know? [...] Crouch fought violence with violence, and authorised the use of the Unforgivable Curses against suspects. I would say he became as ruthless and cruel as many on the Dark side.' (456-457)

It's not clear whether Crouch had special wartime powers that someone in his position wouldn't normally have. Ron gasps along with Hermione at the revelation that Crouch imprisoned Sirius without a trial, but is it the act that shocks him, or the person who committed it?

'Most go mad in [Azkaban], and plenty stop eating in the end. [...] You could always tell when a death was coming, because the Dementors could sense it, they got excited. [...] Crouch never came for his son's body. The Dementors buried him outside he fortress, I watched them do it.'

Sirius threw aside the bread he had just lifted to his mouth, and instead picked up the flask of pumpkin juice and drained it. (459)

That last is surely significant. The Trio brought that pumpkin juice, so it's not spiked, but doesn't it seem that Sirius reaches for a drink out of habit, subconsciously wishing to dispell the horrible memories he's just relived? Very much the Sirius of OotP who smells of stale alcohol, I think.

The image of Dementors burying a corpse is perhaps a little strange, but they are corporeal, so it's not completely absurd. The point is that a human gravedigger would have noticed it wasn't really Crouch Jr, but his mother, I expect.

'So you think Snape could be up to something, then?' asked Harry, but Hermione broke in.

'Look, I don't care what you say, Dumbledore trusts Snape--'

'Oh, come off it, Hermione,' said Ron impatiently, 'I know Dumbledore's brilliant and everything, but that doesn't mean a really clever Dark wizard couldn't fool him--'

'Why did Snape save Harry's life in the first year, then? Why didn't he just let him die?'

'I dunno -- maybe he thought Dumbledore would kick him out--'

'What d'you think, Sirius?' Harry said loudly, and Ron and Hermione stopped bickering to listen. (460)

This exchange works on two levels. With an example of his occasional uncanny intuition, Ron tells us the truth, but in a form we don't recognize.

Simultaneously, Ron and Hermione speak as Harry's inner voices, arguing back and forth until Harry himself has to yell for them to shut up, seeking a second opinion outside his own head. (Someone he sees as wise, though we may not agree.)

'[Snape] was part of a gang of Slytherins who nearly all turned out to be Death Eaters.' (461)

That's Rosier, Wilkes, Bellatrix, Rodolphus, and Avery. If we take what Sirius says in OotP into account, we can add Lucius to the "gang", I reckon. Whether Snape was really friends with any of these people, or was more like their "lap dog", is up for debate.

'He showed Snape something on his arm?' said Sirius, looking frankly bewildered. [...] 'Well, I've no idea what that's about ...' (461)

The practice of marking Death Eaters wasn't and isn't widely known, even to someone who has every reason to know a lot about the DEs. It's sort of hard to imagine how the secret could be kept, unless you accept that the mark could be hidden at will.

[Sirius:] 'And don't forget, if you're talking about me among yourselves, call me Snuffles, OK?' (463)

Aside from just sounding silly, does this actually make sense? Why wouldn't they just call him Padfoot? Or, say... Bob. If you overheard people talking about "Snuffles", wouldn't you be more likely to ask who that was, not less?

Well, aside from that, this is a very nice chapter. I wish they were all like this.


Previous GoF posts are saved in memories here. I should probably go read them too, since it's been so long...

Comments

[pilly2009.livejournal.com]

I think we still have what we might call a "fruitful disagreement" that's worth going another round on!

Hey, I'm game. :)

And there is still a lot that I agree with in your posts here, but I think we may be looking at it from slightly different perspectives. Yes, I definitely agree that my own range of possible responses to a hostile situation was rather limited, but I was trying to work within the ranges that we have actually been given in canon, and this is the extent of them. From all the characters, young or old. I can think of very few characters in these books who would seriously consider your third option, let alone act upon it. Everyone from the Trio to the elder Weasleys to Voldemort himself is a child in many ways. Even Lucius, for all he may be the most "adult" of the Death Eaters, has his golden moments (that CoS brawl might as well have taken place at Hogwarts twenty-five years ago). Dumbledore is possibly the only one who would consider the option of talking out his problems with his nemeses...but this is doubtful, as we haven't actually seen him do this. He's okay with laying out his own faults in front of Harry, but rarely seems to address the issues that his antagonists have with him...and you know, he wasn't all that diplomatic in his approach to the Dursleys in HBP.

So, do I consider your third option to be by far the best response? I really do (believe me, you have no idea how badly I dream of Harry telling Snape that he's not his father); but do I expect to see it actually used in HP? Book 7 may remedy all of this, but as things stand in the canon, I haven't expected to see anyone act so mature in the HP books, and am not exactly shocked to see how HP doesn't deliver. Do I think it's a character deficiency of Harry's that he's unable to look at things this way? Definitely; and while I would love to pull the age-card ("He's only fourteen!1!1"), as I tend to be fond of doing, it really is a response that I'd expect to see a nearly-seventeen year old considering, if not acting on; and yet Harry is still unable to do so. Of course, I would expect to see 35+ year-olds using this response as well, but this isn't happening in the HP-verse. So many of these characters seem to be stuck in the constraints of childhood...I don't pretend to understand why, though I've seen many theories on it.

I mean, it's all very well and easy to be the one to make the overture, lay out your problems with the other person and expect them to take up the offer by self-reflection on their part. There's no self-reflection required on your part, and especially in this case, you have the extra bonus of getting in an insult or two. The problem is, though, that however self-aware Snape may be in other areas, he hasn't come anywhere close to the level of self-reflection about his past with his Marauders that would be required to even begin addressing this issue. However valid he may be in telling Harry that he's an arrogant ass, and Harry would do well to work on that, if it ultimately comes down to "I hate you because I hated your father"...well, there's not a whole lot Harry can do about that, and Harry knows it. This was drilled into him during his first interaction with the man, that Snape would hate him no matter what he did...and so why bother fixing problems that only Snape seems to call him on, or even talking them through with Snape isn't ultimately going to resolve their relationship? This kind of gets back to the first "boss" example, where the boss may be picking on you because he has a problem that has very little, if anything to do with you -- this isn't something you can humanly control, and if his own issues are leading him to pick on you, there's not a lot you can do.

(cont'd...)

[pilly2009.livejournal.com]

We know now that Snape's attitude in festering over his schoolyard days is perfectly understandable, that he is more correct in his analysis of James's character than Harry ever was. Of course, we also know by said festering that these issues and differences were clearly never resolved, or talked over between Snape and Sirius (duh), Lupin, or even James I suspect. And it's really basically the classic Carrie story, only with far less violence and the grudges being held for much longer...yes, the mindset is understandable and sympathetic, but that doesn't make it any more healthy, or even productive for anyone else who would have to deal with the situation.

This isn't meant to sound like "Well, Snape didn't do it, so Harry doesn't have to do it either"...it's more that Snape didn't do it, and therefore Harry can't really do it, either...which is only making things worse with Harry's character.

They are nearly direct products of each other, Snape and Harry...Snape is the only one bringing up perfectly valid points about Harry's worst traits (yes, I do agree that at certain times he can be right on the mark about Harry), but Harry isn't listening because Snape wiill hate him no matter what he does (thereby rendering his points invalid, in Harry's opinion) due to his father; and Snape can't let go of hating James because James was so horrible to him, and God only knows why James was so horrible to him...but it's a long and ugly cycle. I keep emphasising it here because it's perhaps the main representation of the essential futility of childish outlooks on fighting, that nothing can be resolved until someone takes on a truly adult mindset, and hopefully it's the one example of this that will actually get resolved in the books...but you see this sort of thing inherent in all the characters in this series, this inability to actually talk through problems in a rational manner: you see it between Molly and Hermione in GoF, between Fred and George and the Slytherins, between Hermione and Pansy, even between the main founders of the series (Slytherin, who supposedly dropped a deadly monster into his Chamber and then left the school altogether because he had a fight with Gryffindor).

So, I hope I'm making myself clear here. Yes, it's a sign of a lacking character that Harry can't even consider the option of talking out his problems with Snape, but I strongly believe that the context in which he's being judged (ie, the HP-verse, where it's supposedly illogical to think as an adult) has to be taken into consideration when assuming what the best course of action would be in a conflict. The range of options is limited in these books, limited between ignoring someone or duking it out -- of the two, I still believe the former to be the best option. Not the best option in existence, perhaps, but the best option of those given in HP.

And damn, I know this sounds like "They don't do it, so he doesn't have to do it either", but it's really the way I see things in this series right now.

[pilly2009.livejournal.com]

Coming back to something you brought up:

I don't agree that he has tried this. When he's "talked" to Snape in the past, he's basically just mouthed off. There's no acknowledgment that Snape has an issue with him, that needs dealing with.

PoA, p. 209: "My dad didn't strut...And nor do I."

That's basically part of the main issue right there, isn't it? "You have a perception of my father and I that I don't agree with." (Whoever had the more correct perception is, IMO, irrelevant, but it was something that needed to be addressed.) And yet it was an example of insolence, of mouthing off, possibly because (again, surprises, surprises), it wasn't addressed in nearly mature enough a way...but was then shafted by discussion of the Prank, and then the Map.

Of course, Harry wasn't exactly speaking up to explain anything, but what he said was something he clearly felt was worth trying to get through to Snape (at least, I'm assuming so, as he said it "before he could stop himself".)

PoA, p. 265: "YOU'RE PATHETIC! JUST BECAUSE THEY MADE A FOOL OF YOU AT SCHOOL YOU WON'T EVEN LISTEN--"

Again, insolence and mouthing off. Again, a core issue is being addressed. Though admittedly, the issue being addressed probably isn't between Harry and Snape, but rather between Snape and the other Marauders, it could be taken the same way, I think. Sirius and Lupin aren't the only ones that Snape isn't listening to in this scene. Circumstances are a little more critical here. Harry wasn't exactly given much choice of whether or not he wanted to get his viewpoint across to Snape -- he had to, this time, or Sirius would go to the Dementors -- but that's basically what he was doing here, which Snape was again brushing aside, and yes, again things disintegrated into chaos.

These are the two instances of Harry's direct insolence to Snape that stick out most clearly in my mind (pre-GoF, anyway), and both times a key issue was being addressed, that nevertheless didn't change either the insolent tone of the interaction, nor the final outcome. Both examples did nothing to advance the situation between them, partly because Harry refuses to take into serious consideration the points Snape does raise (ie, the Prank), partly because Snape either brushes Harry aside (ie, from example A) or flies off the handle once the whole thing is addressed (Example B). Neither of these examples come close to a rational discussion about differences of opinion, and both tend to diverge from the main point, but I still think said main point is in there somewhere.

God, this is so long...

[black-dog.livejournal.com]

Hey, long comments are a blast! This one may be shorter, though, because I'm getting sleepy, but I really love your points here -- I think you're absolutely right, one of the most marked features of JKR's world is its severe and critical adult-deficit. Everybody in this world is so messed up and emotially stunted that you just want to scream and knock their heads together. (How's that for a mature, adult response?)

Honestly, though, I'm not sure what to make of your argument that we should evaluate Harry's behavior only by the standards that seem to prevail in this world. I could understand an argument that it explains his behavior, in terms of empathizing with him -- he has no examples of better behavior, so as a given character, in his own given situation, he can't be expected to know any better. But I don't see the point of ending the argument there. I mean, as a reader, reacting to the book, what do we make of that?

And the thing is, I honestly can't figure out what JKR's take on all this is. Really, she frustrates me sometimes so that I want to tear my hair out, one hair at a time. There are times I think she's a satirist and an ironist and she's three steps ahead of us and sees it all, and that the problems and messes and human damage in the books are her point, that she's trying to depict how this happens to people and how awful it is if they can't get out of their own personal traps. And yet, there are other times when I feel like she lets me down as a reader, when I look in vain for clues that she, herself, has any wider perspective than some of her characters. It really is the $64 million question with JKR -- is she in control of all of her effects, or is she what lunacy calls "an extraordinary talented mimetic writer," who seems more complex than she is because of how unconsciously she creates lifelike characters?

I don't know! I keep going back and forth on this!

But I do think that I would find it a very cramped kind of reading, to try to consciously suppress any sort of real-life insight that lets me, as a reader, have some wider perspective on these characters than they have on themselves. I have to believe that the point of the books is to explore what's wrong with all this, and not just to suggest that there's no other way to be, which after all is an empirically incorrect statement about people and their potential.

[pilly2009.livejournal.com]

I'm not sure what to make of your argument that we should evaluate Harry's behavior only by the standards that seem to prevail in this world. ... I mean, as a reader, reacting to the book, what do we make of that?

I get what you're saying here, but I really believe that there are different ways to evaluate a character/theme/etc., from within the context it's presented, and from outside of its context. I do not at all believe that you can only do it one way or the other, and that evaluating one way should negate the evaluation of the other. However, I do think that both ways have equal validity and should have equal consideration.

I mean for example, we know that Harry is fine with showing compassion toward people who love him. So, say that the Potterverse was made up entirely of the Ron/Hermione-types, Luna Lovegoods, Dumbledores and Weasleys and whoever else Harry is friendly with. But none of the Snapes or the Malfoys, or even the Voldemorts who would challenge Harry's ability to be compassionate. Let's say that the entire series was written this way. When applying this text to the real world (as literature is always compared to RL), we can easily point out that Harry does not ever show true compassion in the series, because he's not ever shown to be compassionate to someone whom he dislikes; it's easy to love people who love you back. As an extra-textual analysis, this works, as do any conclusions on his character drawn from it. But can the same judgement placed on Harry from this outside analysis still fairly apply to him as he is written within the Potterverse, within the actual context, where people who don't love him don't exist, and thus the concept of loving people who don't love him back does not exist either? Harry shows compassion to the characters present in the text, he works with what he's got.

Thankfully, the HPverse doesn't actually work this way; it is a ridiculous context and, IMO, a sign of very bad writing, but not entirely unheard of. I haven't read the full Narnia Chronicles for a while now, but I still remember having a problem with Lucy Pevensie for reasons such as this. She loved and was loved by all who came into contact with her (who actually counted), and as such is often defined as a very compassionate character, although she was never really placed in a situation where she loved someone who hated her, and was hard to love (I don't count Edmund, as his own conflict had nothing to do with her directly). I had a problem with this because this argument could be made extra-textually, but am still convinced that it can't be applicable within the context of the books.

To get back to my original point, I'm not entirely certain whether these examples can fully compare to the Harry/Snape battles, and fights in general in the Potterverse. But it sort of seems the same thing. The concept of behaving like a mature adult during conflict seems foreign, if not altogether non-existent in the HP books. Granted, we're only really presented with this theme through the characters at the front of the story, and it may not be entirely fair to judge the entire WW based on this alone. Although, to use another example, in the GoF chapter currently being discussed ('Madness of Mr. Crouch), sending hate mail by the flock filled with jinxes and pus to a fourteen-year-old Muggleborn because of a love story they didn't happen to like, isn't exactly a mark in favour of the WW's maturity level. This may all be overturned in Book 7, but within the story as it's written now, acting like a mature adult seems to be an unheard-of concept. They just don't do it. I doubt I even want to know what JKR is trying to get across with all this, let alone attempt to guess, but that's the way things stand in canon at this time. And I think it's something that should be considered, because with this concept being apparently non-existent, the characters are all working with what they've been given. Passive-agression vs. outright-aggression in conflict. While neither response may be particularly mature, at least one of them will not result in injury and/or punishment by the school. And it's the same one actually promoted by Dumbledore in GoF, between Snape and Sirius.