Snape's always right! I know! I had teachers just like him!
Over on

marionros posts a rather interesting view of Harry and Snape.

theregoesmygun responds:

Hmm. On the one hand, I think Snape can often be very astute about situations. On the other hand, he is completely revolting to Harry from the first day they meet for no reason, and he often executes his prejudice against Harry in a way that disadvantages him greatly and unfairly.

I think Snape is a great example of a character who provides a more negative commentary to Harry, but I wouldn't go as far as to say that he's spoiled. Like Ginny, who probably gets a bit more slack than others due to her traumatic possession, I think people cut Harry a bit more slack similarly out of sympathy. It's not particularly fair, but his case is quite extraordinary in comparison to that of other students too.

And

marionros proceeds pull out the stops..

In the middle of a long reply: So, disregard Harry's feelings on matters. Disregard what the narrator thinks about matters. Look at what really *happens* and you'll get another story.

And from that same reply:

McGonagal snubs Neville several times, and in such a way that the other children laugh at him. Snape snubs Neville several times, but no one laughs at Neville. Read the scenes where he does this again, dispassionately. If that's bullying... I grew up with a bully. A bully wants to see his or her victim cry, in total shambles. But what does Snape do? He berates Neville for botching his potion, telling him *why* (didn't put in porcupine quills or something like that - I don't have the text in front of me at the moment), then he turns on Harry next to Neville, berates Harry for not telling Neville about the quills, takes five points from Gryffindor and strides away. If this is what is meant by 'bullying Neville' I can only say that Snape is a lame bully.

Snape's and McGonegal's method of 'come on boy, grow a spine' has been fruitful. After three years Neville has grown into a fine wizard.

Um. Okay. I'm backing away slowly, now.

ETA: More ~~WTFery~~ insight from

marionros:

I'm a historian. We get trained in our first year to question our sources. Who wrote/said that? Why did s/he write/say that? Is this a reliable source or not? Is this hearsay or experience. Is this experience coloured by political preference or by ignorance of the facts? Etc. Etc.

I'm also, like JKR, very fond of Agatha Christie mysterie novels. You just know that you can't go by first impressions. Link to full comment

I think in

marionros' case, we can make an exception on the 'first impressions' thing.