musings about things, mostly PoA Chapter 17

[joym999 at aol.com]

No: HPFGUIDX 21450

I think that the reason many of us like the HP books (aside, of 
course, from wanting to be wizards or witches and go to Hogwarts, or 
just wanting the world to be a more magical place) is because of 
JKR's strong sense of social justice, and the powerful yet never 
preachy, often metaphorical, treatment of some important political 
and moral issues.

Some of those issues are more obvious than others.  There are obvious 
parallels between racial prejudice and the prejudice of some 
pureblood wizards against those with muggle blood.  There are some 
issues which are not metaphorical at all; such as the ineptitude of 
bureaucracies and bureaucrats and the disdain that the rich often 
have for the poor.

Then there is the whole house elf mistreatment issue, which may be a 
metaphor for how certain groups of humans have been known to treat 
other groups of humans, or it may be a metaphor for how humans treat 
certain species of animals (whales?), or it may be something else 
entirely.  But that's not what I want to talk about.

There is another issue which I believe that JKR treats metaphorically 
in PoA.  In her summary of Chapter 17, Marianne asks "What stopped 
Harry killing Sirius?"  I believe that Harry does not kill Sirius, 
and later does not allow Sirius and Remus to kill Peter Pettigrew, 
because he realizes the moral implications of doing so.  I think that 
this whole chapter is a metaphorical argument against the death 
penalty.  I am basing this conclusion not only on the text, but also 
on the fact that we know that JKR's political leanings are to the 
left and that she once worked for Amnesty International, an 
organization which is adamantly and actively opposed to the death 
penalty.

Harry is, at one point, consumed with anger and convinced that he 
wants to kill Sirius Black.  However, when the opportunity is 
presented to him, something prevents him.  He "knows" that Sirius 
Black killed his parents, is the right-hand man of a mass murderer, 
and is the cause of much of the misery and pain he has experienced in 
his young life.  Yet he pauses, perhaps wondering if he has the right 
to kill Sirius, perhaps thinking that maybe it is wrong to kill no 
matter what Sirius has done, or even that maybe there is no way of 
knowing for sure that Sirius is guilty.  Then again, maybe Harry 
pauses because he realizes that he's a 13-year old wizard who doesn't 
know enough magic to actually kill anyone.  Anyway, he pauses long 
enough for Crookshanks to get in the way.  This ups the ante.  Now, 
in order to kill Sirius Black, Harry will also have to kill an 
innocent cat who has befriended Sirius, which will in turn cause pain 
to his close friend Hermione, reminding us (IMHO) that if you kill 
one person, you will also injure anyone who cares for him or her.

And of course it turns out that Sirius Black is not guilty at all, 
reminding us that just because everyone believes something doesn't 
make it the truth.  We find out who is really responsible for James 
and Lily's deaths, who is really Voldemort's right-hand man.  But 
Harry stops Sirius and Remus from killing Wormtail, despite the fact 
that he admits his guilt and clearly (again, my opinion) deserves to 
die.

There are several reasons why people are opposed to the death 
penalty.  (There are also a lot of reasons why people support the 
death penalty, which I won't recount here, not because I am biased 
but because I am trying to explain only what I think it is that JKR 
is trying to say.)  Some people feel that any killing is wrong.  
Others feel that justice systems do not always reach the correct 
conclusions about guilt and innocence, therefore one can never know 
for sure if the person executed is truly guilty.  Just before Timothy 
McVeigh's execution, Helen Prejean (the nun who wrote the book "Dead 
Man Walking," who was played by Susan Sarandon in the movie) said 
(not her exact words) "The question is not whether Timothy McVeigh 
deserves to die but who deserves to kill him."  

This is my opinion on the issue, in case anyone cares.  I am 
convinced that there are times when killing is necessary, and there 
is no doubt in my mind that there are people (too many, 
unfortunately) without whom the world would be a much better place.  
I'm just not convinced that I, or anyone else (especially a clearly 
prejudiced court system) has the right to make that decision.  I also 
think that anyone who kills suffers greatly, even if they kill 
someone who deserves to die and/or if the killing is state-sponsored.

OK, back to HP.  I think that Harry goes through some of the same 
thought processes I have just recounted.  I think he gains a 
tremendous amount of maturity and knowledge in this process, and this 
is why I think that this chapter is the most powerful and moving in 
what is my favorite HP book so far.  I don't think that Harry 
necessarily becomes convinced that killing is always wrong – I think 
that probably Harry will, eventually, kill Voldemort.  (And good 
riddance to him, IMHO.)  He just realizes that the best decisions are 
not made in anger, and that there are tremendous moral consequences 
to killing someone, whether or not they deserve to die.  He decides 
that although Peter Pettigrew probably deserves to die, Remus and 
Sirius do not deserve to have to kill him.

Well, anyway, that's my point – that JKR is arguing against the death 
penalty in this chapter.  I hope my analysis is coherent.

--Joywitch