[HPforGrownups] Midnight in the Garden of Good & Evil (Nel Question - LONG)

[Laura Huntley]

No: HPFGUIDX 38304

Well..I have about an hour before Newfoundland Raiders training, so I thought I'd write a little (ha!) response to this..(BTW..I'm not actually going to Newfoundland, I'm just subjecting myself to the same torture as the kids that are going are.  Why, you ask?  Because I'm masochistic?  Honestly, I don't know..It's *sleeting/blizzarding/rain/hailing* out right now. Oooo..oh well..I guess it's an excuse to wear my silk underwear ^_^)


Heidi Tandy:
>The Secret Sharer
>Named after the Joseph Conrad story by the same name, the protagonist
>recognizes a part of himself in the double and therefore feels he has
>a secret kinship with his double.

While it hasn't be explored much as of yet...perhaps Harry will begin to feel this same kind of kinship with Tom Riddle/LV?  We already know he has (resolved?) issues with the "strange likenesses" Tom pointed out in CoS.  Perhaps he hasn't quite come to terms with this yet.  Maybe as he starts asking those questions JKR promised in OotP and starts learning more about his parents (especially Lily) and background, the similarities between Tom and him will become harder to explain away.

Perhaps he will notice the similarities in personality that he and Tom share, the circumstances and experiences they hold in common.  Perhaps he will find it therefore harder to paint Volde-Tom as completely evil in his head, maybe he will have doubts about where his own loyalties should lie (although I think this last is very unlikely, Harry inherently a very good person -- I don't think he could be evil if he tried.)

Heidi again:
>The Antithetical Self
>Often the most obvious kind of double, this double stands in an
>antagonistic relationship with the hero but nevertheless is very much
>like the hero, as if they were opposite sides of the same coin. (Post
>38132 addresses the Harry/Voldemort connection rather well.)

Hey that was me!! *is excited* I'm in part of the Official Phillip Nel Discussion Question.  Oh, wow. ^_~ *glows*

...What *exactly* is the Phillip Nel Question, anyway?  I mean, besides what I'm replying to..

But yes, it is apparent that Harry and Voldemort (or Tom Riddle) have this connection, at least.  IMO, JKR is trying to show us (again), in a more subtle way, how *what you choose* matters more than the personality traits/abilities you were born with.

>Fragmentation of the Mind
>Represented by _Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde_ and _The Three Faces of 
>Eve_,
>this kind of doubling results from dissociation, in which different
>parts of the mind begin to act independently of one another.

Hmmm...I have always kind of thought that Crouch Jr. was sort of hosting a couple different personalities in there somewhere, now that you mention it..I mean, the man was obviously pretty unstable -- so how did he pull of the part of a caring mentor so convincingly?

Answer:  He actually *became* Mad Eye in his mind.  He took on all of Moody's traits and made them his own.  I wouldn't be surprised if even *he* didn't know he wasn't really Moody at times.  As far as I know, grafting another person's personality on like that is perfectly feasible, especially if one is already unstable at the time.  Of course, it's very unhealthy.

>Voldemort personified evil, that is clear. We have never seen him, 
>in any of his incarnations, do anything that could be deemed 
>deliberately good or helpful (although an argument can be made that 
>he was inadvertently helpful to the students of Hogwarts back in the 
>40s, when he managed to get Aragog out of the castle).

However, in his Tom Riddle persona, he does have traits meant to draw sympathy from the reader.  He is, after all, an orphan who was in a very bad situation.  I think, as readers, JKR means for us to feel bad for Volde-Tom, but ultimately remember that past injustices to not render one's present-day actions OK.


>Perhaps Lily will be the complete exemplar of goodness - but for us 
>to accept that now would mean concluding that she didn't know that 
>her husband was an unregistered animagus, which would then say 
>certain things about *their* relationship, or that there is no 
>obligation to turn in an unregistered animagus.

Oh, but following the law has nearly nothing to do with inherent Goodness or Evilness.  In fact, the reason the laws are *there* are to steer people whose own sense of Good and Evil are not sufficient to keep them from harming themselves and others.  JKR does not mean for us to look down on James because he was an unregistered animagi -- in fact, she paints even this aspect of him as the noble and brave stag.  Likewise, Lupin's fault is not that he didn't tell the authorities that his friends were breaking the law -- but rather he didn't tell *Dumbledore* when the information was vital to the current situation.  And he didn't do it because he was *scared* and it would have been emotionally hard for him to admit to Dumbledore that he had been withholding pertinent information.

It seems as if in the Potterverse, the only true crime is fear, the only deadly sin is weakness, etc.

>2. Actions & Words
>On a smaller level, what determines whether an act is "good" 
>or "evil"? Here's a set of examples from Book 3:
>Harry is not supposed to go to Hogsmeade, but sneaks there via the 
>Map, then uses the cloak to stay unseen. Is this good or evil?

Wrong, unwise.  Not evil.  Childish, immature, spontaneous.  Harry acted without thinking of the consequences, and this was wrong -- however to accuse him of "evil" for rule-breaking is hardly fair.  We all break the rules every now and then.

>Draco is allowed to be in Hogsmeade, and when he sees Harry there, 
>knowing that Harry is not allowed to go, he tells on him to a 
>teacher. Is this good or evil?

Hmm..again, neither.  Just a child's wish to get another child he doesn't like in a whole lot of dung.  Petty, not nice, definitely not Good...but not evil either.

>Ron lies to Snape to try to keep Harry from being punished. Is this 
>good or evil?

And yet again, neither -- just self-preservation really (he's an accomplice you know) and the desire to help his friend.  Not angelic, certainly..but, jeez give the kids some room to breathe.  Snape is one nasty *cough* word-that-I-can't-say-on-this-list..

>Snape, who believes Draco's accusation, says mean things about 
>Harry's father while accusing Harry of breaking the school rule. Is 
>this good or evil?

Guuugher...Well, not *evil* per se..but closer to it than anything else mentioned on this list.  Spiteful, Nasty, Mean is the most horrible way possible -- and I don't think he would have cared if he *actually* knew for certain that Harry hadn't been breaking rules (theoretically) -- he'll use any excuse to verbally assault Harry.

>Lupin chastises Harry for breaking the school rule. Is this good or 
>evil?

Yes, it's the action of a responsible adult.

>Lupin, who knows that Harry broke the school rule, does not punish 
>him in the traditional way, with detentions, or a report to his head 
>of house or the headmaster. Is this good or evil?

He's afraid to tell the Headmaster, IMHO -- because this would expose all the things he has been hiding from AD for so long.  And he's afraid to do this.  Afraid of being shameful in the Headmaster's eyes...afraid to admit that he is withholding information about Sirius Black (whom everyone believes is out to get Harry).  Yes, it was wrong -- and being afraid doesn't count for anything.  However, the sin here is, again, Fear.  An unwillingness to do "what is right, instead of what is easy".  However, it is not evil.  


>How does someone's motivation affect whether an act is >good or evil?

Personally, I think it counts for just about everything in most situations.  Some might argue that people such as Hitler had good *intentions* in their own view -- they wanted to rid the world of something they felt was destructive/evil -- however, I do not believe this is actually the case.  Hitler didn't kill millions of people because he wanted to help the world -- he did it because he had an all-consuming desire for power.  The same goes for Voldemort.


>Draco's motivation may've been to get Harry expelled; does a 
>motivation make a "proper" or "good" act evil?

Again, not evil -- but it makes it "not good", IMHO.

>In Book 3, even at the end, did anyone 
>think that Harry's request to turn Wormtail in was anything but a 
>good decision? What would the Diggorys say about that decision at 
>the end of Book 4? 

Ssssss...I don't know.  I think it would have killed something inside Harry to have Peter Pettigrew's "blood on his hands" so to speak -- however, *someone* really should have killed that man anyway.  Remus and Sirius being the prime candidates, of course.  *thinks* I wonder if Hermione could've done it.  We never really get her opinion on the matter now, do we?  At least not that I can remember.  I think, of course, they should have let Harry think and realize for himself that he wouldn't do it -- and then I think Sirius should have blasted him anyway.

It's not pretty, but it's necessary.  People that weak are a threat to everyone.  Sometimes you have to do things like that because you have to..another case of what is Right instead of what is Easy.  And my opinion has nothing to do with how PP's escape eventually led to Cedric's death.  It's useless to judge someone's actions in hindsight.  All you can do is try your best in the present.

laura




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]