Deconstructing Harry/TBAY Apology

[elfundeb at aol.com]

No: HPFGUIDX 39967

This message is really a reply to violetbaudelaire's questions on agency/free 
will, but first I want to apologize for posting my reply in support of 
Cindy's Evil! Moody manifesto to the main list in error, as there wasn't any 
canon in it.  Please accept my humble apology.  I know it was like those 
annoying phone calls I always get from the opposing party reminding me to go 
to the polls and vote for their candidate.  Nevertheless, Cindy could use 
your support, if you're so inclined and haven't voted. . . 

In a message dated 6/15/2002 11:39:42 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
violetbaudelaire2002 at yahoo.com writes:

> Free will, agency, is on shakey ground here because what each 
> character does is, in effect, what the other character has wanted 
> them to do, even planned for them to do. Most notably it is the 
> children in the series who have no free will, or so it would seem. 
> In the first few books it would seem that Harry is easily led (or at 
> least the case can be made as such), but remember- he can 
> easily throw off the Imperious Curse (which, oddly enough, is a 
> rarity- further proof for my "no agency" argument). I'm not sure 
> what to make of that. Maybe children are where the hope lies; 
> they must be the ones to work together to overcome duplicity 
> (diversity is a common theme in the book- in order to overcome 
> all of this duplicity, one must overcome prejudices). It will be 
> interesting to watch Percy, as he is the only character we have 
> seen to date that moves from childhood (or pupildom at least) 
> into the adult world. 
> 
> 

I don't think the children of the Potterverse lack free will at all.  The 
adults do a lot of things to influence their judgment, but that's what adults 
in general do; that's how adults assist in helping children develop their own 
values.  Dumbledore can give Harry all the information and tools that he 
needs, but ultimately Harry makes his own choice to go through the trapdoor 
and protect the Stone.  Snape's actions at the duelling club revealed to 
Harry that he's a Parselmouth, but that was only information that he would 
need *if* he chose to look for the Chamber of Secrets.  In fact, I'm not at 
all convinced that Snape knew Harry was a Parselmouth.  Again, Harry and Ron 
made the choice to go find the Chamber themselves, without any express 
suggestion from anyone.

I think Harry is much closer to being deprived of free will when he is forced 
to compete in the Triwizard Tournament because a "binding magical contract" 
has been created.  Still, Harry retained free will to decide how he was going 
to compete or whether he would try to win or not.  Indeed, he offered to let 
Cedric take the cup.  So, within the constraints of others' actions, Harry 
still exercised free will and nearly thwarted Crouch Jr.'s attempt to send 
him to the graveyard.  This is because what happens to an individual -- any 
individual, not just in the Potterverse -- is not just the result of that 
person's choices, but is the result of the intersection of the choices of 
many.  

There is one other situation in which free will is taken away in the 
Potterverse and that is, of course, the Imperius Curse.  And perhaps that's a 
good reason why it's Unforgivable.  And even with Imperius, the loss of free 
will is not absolute, because it can (evntually) be resisted by those with 
the "strength of character" to do so, as Crouch/Moody says.  That resistance 
begins, as Harry illustrates, with the realization that you don't have to do 
what you're told.  In other words, even in the context of Imperius, you only 
lack free will if you think you lack it.

Debbie


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