HP morally questionable? Discuss...

[Scott]

No: HPFGUIDX 17104

I'm responding to this thread in general, and as always on the tail 
end of a discussion...anyway-

Rebecca wrote:
Is it true that 'in each of the stories' evil would not be    
defeated unless Harry broke school rules?"

eggplant responded:
Certainly, and a good moral lesson it teaches too, don't just blindly 
follow orders. Far, far, more evil in the world had been cause by 
people following orders than by people disobeying orders. Think for 
yourself!"

--Not at all. Sorry Eggplant but I really disagree here. I mean I do 
not refute (in fact I readily agree) that blind faith is extremely 
dangerous, but I do not see how you can justify that evil couldn't 
have been defeated without Harry breaking rules. As someone else 
pointed out in GoF Harry isn't breaking any rules by praticipating in 
the TWT or in fighting V in the graveyard scene. True in PS/SS he 
broke the rules, but it could have been resolved otherwise had that 
choice been made, the same goes for CoS, though to a lesser extent 
IMHO, but in PoA they were following Dumbledore's orders (sort of), 
not breaking rules. I guess I'm just confused.

I do not believe that by having our "troika" lie or break rules JKR 
is glorifying such behaviour. I'd say she's just making it more 
realistic. I mean who doesn't lie or break rules sometimes (c'mon 
really...). I would have a hard time finding the Harry Potter 
characters interesting and true to life if they didn't.

I also think JKR is making another important statement here too. That 
what you truly believe is right, whether it is smiled or frowned upon 
by others is ok. However I really didn't like the idea of Harry 
killing Voldemort (i.e. using evil for greater good. Ultimately it 
can't happen IMO). Now I'm contradicting myself about it! I'll shut 
up! 

I can however see how, on the surface the book might seem immoral. 
For example in the first book Harry breaks the rules to get to the 
stone and save the day. (Immoral?) In GoF Harry's most noble decision 
(side question- Does nobility equate morality?) leads to the death of 
a friend. Yes, I see where these people are coming from. But I don't 
see how they can ignore the fact that no matter what choice is made 
the consequences good and bad are felt. The stories aren't about 
black and white values. Those shades of grey that we love to discuss 
are the include the idea that what seems right isn't always perfect, 
and what might seem wrong doesn't always lead to destruction...It's a 
sticky subject, eh? 

As usual I have so many more questions than anwsers now that I'm 
think about this. That's why I love Harry Potter.

Scott 

> >Or told lies?
> 
> "Harry, I'm the warden at Askaban, do you know where Sirius Black 
is?"
> The only moral answer to this question is "no". You don't have a 
> right to know everything I know and for some questions silence is 
the 
> equivalent to an answer so I'm fully justified in telling lies. Ask 
> me no questions and I'll tell you no loes.
> 
> >2. Does Dumbledore really "overlook Harry's misconduct,"
> 
> What misconduct? 
> 
>  
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "Morag Traynor" <moragt at h...> wrote:
> > Rebecca wrote:
> > 
> > >1.  Is it true that "in each of the stories" evil would not be 
> defeated
> > >unless Harry broke school rules and/or told lies?
> > >
> > >2.  Does Dumbledore really "overlook Harry's misconduct," as 
> charged?
> > >
> > >My personal response would be "no" to both questions.
> > 
> > 1.  I can't think that Harry broke any school rules to defeat V 
in 
> GoF, 
> > unless you count the blatant cheating, encouraged by authority 
> figures, 
> > throughout the tournament.  But that was not directly connected 
> with V, and 
> > was part of the increasing moral complexity of Harry's world.
> > 
> > 2.  Dumbledore knows what to overlook and when.  For instance, I 
> think he 
> > knows perfectly well that some of the Slytherins are not joining 
in 
> the 
> > toast to Cedric Diggory in the leaving feast, but also knows this 
> is not the 
> > time for a confrontation.
> > 
> > My personal response to the points raised in the article is "so 
> what?"  Show 
> > me a classic of children's (or any other) literature where our 
hero 
> or 
> > heroine wins out by trusting adults to make all the decisions, 
> strict 
> > adherence to rules and regulations and never, ever conceals 
> anything and 
> > I'll show you a *very* dull book.
> > 
> > Even Little Women (one of the preachiest books ever written - and 
> still 
> > actually read) contains this immortal exchange:
> > Amy: I hate unladylike behaviour.
> > Jo: And I hate affected, niminy-piminy chits!
> > Way to go, Jo.
> > 
> > 
> 
______________________________________________________________________
> ___
> > Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at 
> http://www.hotmail.com.