Evil--Lewis and JKR

[Schlobin at aol.com]

No: HPFGUIDX 19972

--- In HPforGrownups at y..., "Amy Z" <aiz24 at h...> wrote:

> > I think what set *my* bells off is when McGonagall says to 
> Dumbledore 
> > in the first chapter of PS/SS that Voldemort was only afraid of 
> Albus 
> > Dumbledore.  "You flatter me, my dear...Voldemort had powers I 
never 
> > will."  "Only because you're too *noble* to use them," McGonagall 
> > shoots back.  Well, wouldn't this imply that people who break the 
> > rules are the ones with the real power?  



Amy Z says:> 
> Evil has power that good will never have; torture and terrorism, 
for 
> example, are undeniably powerful weapons.  Dumbledore cannot use 
them, 
> not because he doesn't know how but because he is too good.
> 
> That doesn't mean that evil is ultimately more powerful, however.  
> Good has power that evil does not.  "Hatred will never cease by 
> hatred, but only by love" (The Dhammapada, a Theravada Buddhist 
text). 
>  If Voldemort is to be truly overcome, it will have to be by those 
who 
> refuse to use his own weapons.  Otherwise he will be crushed, but 
the 
> evil he practices will continue to thrive.  One can't defeat the 
> enemy with the enemy's means.  JKR is clearly not writing a novel 
of 
> Gandhian nonviolence, but she does assert that some forms of 
violence 
> cross the line, e.g. Aurors killing when there are less extreme 
> measures at their disposal, and she has one of the heroes, Sirius, 
say 
> that this can be just as bad as being a Death Eater--strong words 
(GF 
> 27).
> 
> Good people often have to sacrifice themselves to remain good; 
> Christians (and Buddhists, too, in a different sense) believe that 
> this sacrifice itself has a power that will overcome evil.  Thus 
Aslan 
> on the Stone Table (not to mention Jesus going quietly to his 
> crucifixion) . . . the Witch is defeated because she believes that 
> killing Aslan will bring her victory.  What she doesn't understand 
is 
> that the self-sacrifice of a willing victim will defeat the one who 
> kills him.  That, at least, is the Christian belief, as I 
understand 
> it.
> 

Well, and it's the pagan belief. Of course, blood letting releases 
magical power to be used, but any moral pagan would never use it.
The cost to pagans would be too high because once you use/invoke 
evil, it comes back upon you threefold, and you become corrupt, evil
(and unhappy imho). But the royal sacrifice, the willing sacrifice,
unleases tremendous power that can be used for good (some pagans 
believe that the Spanish Armada, and Hitler's invasion of Britain 
were turned back by such sacrifices)

In a more mundane sense, tyrants who kill patriotic leaders soon find 
themselves out of a job because the leaders have become martyrs and 
their deaths have inspired their followers. True courage and 
resistance to tyranny always inspire others.

In addition, we have examples of the French and Russian Revolutions 
where the revolutionists started using the weapons of the oppressors, 
and themselves became oppressors. 

Susan