JKR, Harry Potter, and the Nature of Evil

[Scott]

No: HPFGUIDX 19543

Wonderful post as always Ebony, and lots to ponder as well!

"If you're choosing to write about evil, you really do have a
moral obligation to show what that means."-J. K. Rowling

Ebony:
"Last week's edition of the U.S. newsmagazine *Newsweek* contained a 
very interesting article... "The Roots of Evil". Evil in the Harry 
Potter books comes in many forms.  We have argued about whether or 
not many characters are truly evil or have the propensity to cause 
intentional harm--Voldemort and Lucius Malfoy often come up in these 
discussions for obvious reasons, but Draco Malfoy, Gilderoy 
Lockheart, Severus Snape, Crouch-as-Moody, Ron Weasley, and even 
Harry himself have been mentioned in our ongoing discussions about 
morality--or the lack thereof."

--Firstly everyone go read this article. It is really thought 
provoking and especially relevant to HP. The question I am now asking 
myself is just who is evil in the canon. No one is going to argue 
that Voldemort isn't evil, of course he is, but what makes him evil 
in our eyes? Is it desire to destroy anyone who gets in his way? Is 
it his desire for world domination and immortality? Or is it the 
"Kill the spare!" line? The fact that he has such a disregard for 
human nature, even people who are no threat to him. The article 
points out that- 

"Answering that requires that they first define evil....that evil 
probably includes an intent to cause emotional trauma, to terrorize 
or target the helpless, to prolong suffering and to derive 
satisfaction from it all. That list suggests a key trait in many 
evildoers: they lack the capacity for empathy. They are unable to 
understand with the mind and feel with their gut the pain and terror 
of another human being. "They cannot see the self in the
other," says Dr. Carl Bell, a psychiatrist at the University of 
Illinois."

--So Voldemort feels no empathy and that's why we believe he's evil? 
It's not that simple is it? Lockhart feels no empathy for those whose 
memories he destroys  and yet many of you don't see him as evil. He's 
ready to erase Ron and Harry's memories, and let Ginny die if it 
means he'll sale more books. 

So what characterisics do V. and Lockhart share? The most obvious is 
greed. People often misunderstand the Bible passage that says money 
is the root of all evil. I don't believe that, but I do believe that 
the overwhelming desire for anything, money included, can lead us to 
evil acts. 

So if greed is a characteristic of evil, then are greedy people 
always evil? No, take Ron for example. I don't think Ron is greedy, 
but he certainly has the potential for great jealousy and therefore 
greed. (I'm not saying that Ron is the only 'good' character who has 
the potential for 'evil' so don't flame me Ron-fans, read my next 
point first!)

Ebony wrote:
"Anne Frank wrote in her diary, "I believe in the good in man."  I 
emphatically do not.  Yes, there is kindness and goodness everywhere, 
but I  do not believe that goodness is the natural state of mankind.  
Every man, woman, and child has a dark side.  Our natural tendencies, 
if unchecked by a moral compass, often persuade us to serve the self 
rather than the other."

--Anne Frank also wrote in her diary "Despite everything I still 
believe people are good at heart." A famous line which Disney 
decidedly left out of their recent mini-series. I understand their 
reasons for leaving it out; I also agree with Ebony. I'd love to 
believe Anne's words which whether written out of naivete or great 
faith are beautiful, if not always true. 

I do believe that people are good but I also believe they are evil. 
It comes back to Dumbledore's wise words "It is our choices far more 
than our abilities that determine who we are." We are in a constant 
struggle with ourselves; we are our own worst enemy. Take Harry for 
example in CoS. He is being ostracized by the majority of the school, 
and even begins to doubt himself. He wonders if he shouldn't have 
been in Slytherin after all. (Of course this is resolved because 
Harry realises that wanting to be different from Tom Riddle is what 
makes him different.) 

Ebony wrote:
"The secular nature of the Harry Potter series is all well and good, 
as it  allows people from all ideological backgrounds to enter into 
the world that  JKR has created. The downside of this is that it 
leaves the issue open for debate.  Exactly  *what* is evil?  What is 
good?  If we do not define our terms prior to the debate, what we 
have is not reasoned discourse but chaos... which may be a 
reason why readers of the books view various characters in such 
radically  diverse ways, and are passionately convinced that their 
interpretations of  their favorite characters are always *right*.
<snip>
"I am not surprised--she used to be a teacher.  One does not have 
> to be a member of the religious right to be horrified about the 
increasingly arbitrary value system of today's youth--which is 
directly the fault of their parents and schools.  To many, "evil is 
what I say it is", but when we get to such a point, civilization 
itself breaks down IMO."

--I understand how this is both a good and a bad thing, and 
understand that evil isn't "what I say it is", but what else can it 
be? Evil, and by that same nature good, can only be mesured by our 
own values, and experiences and beliefs. I'm not going to get into 
religious beliefs, but I don't believe in a Satan or demons that are 
tempting me to do evil, but I do believe in my own weakness, and 
ability to do evil if I let the desire for it overcome my own good. 
Because Harry's world doesn't define for us how good and evil are 
measured we have to decide for ourselves. That's why I love these 
books and this list, because there are so many views and none of them 
are wrong.

Ebony wrote:
"Which is ridiculous--we are what we write in one way or the other, 
but I do question why we are so uncomfortable with heroes that are 
less than perfect and villains who are less than contemptible... for 
no one is completely black or white in their character (don't get me 
started on color symbolism), but varying shades of gray."

--I don't know. I don't have any problem with the fact that Harry 
isn't perfect, because it only makes him more realisitc and 
endearing, but I got the feeling Richard Abanes did. Is there a 
problem with the hero lying or breaking rules, and then getting in 
trouble for it (and even sometimes not, but that too is a reality of 
life)? Not IMO, but there is a problem with  the hero not 
doing it and thereby become some perfect unreachable ideal. Heros 
like Harry are everywhere everyday, and they aren't any different 
from the rest of us, except for that fact that given the chance they 
do something great. With that in mind everyone can be a great hero.

Ebony wrote:
"My question is this:  What *is* evil, and how is it expressed in the 
Harry Potter books?  Conversely, where's the "good" in the series?  
Is it always diametrically opposed to "evil"... or do they sometimes 
exist in the same  context, the same scene... even in the same 
person?"

--Good is choosing to be. Likewise evil is choosing to be. No that's 
not right. Voldemort doesn't say "I am evil" he tells Quirrell "There 
is only power and those to weak to seek it." Argh! As usual I am left 
with more questions than answers. I think HP and JKR has a lot to say 
on this subject, and yet we can only find the true definition of good 
and evil inside ourselves.

Thanks again for the wonderful post.

Scott