Dobby & his family, Snape & Gryffindor, Good & Evil

[saintbacchus]

No: HPFGUIDX 36776

Uncmark asks:
<<
But wasn't Dobby an agent of Lucius Malfoy, who was a
known Death Eater?
>>

No, Dobby had to punish himself for going without
permission.

On a side note, I think Dobby is being completely honest
when he says Harry is a beacon of hope; there's really
nothing in the books to suggest that Dobby knew Harry
before he met him that first time. In fact, house elves
don't seem to be good liars, so unless Dobby is
exceptional in that regard, too, I can't buy the
previous owner theory.


Finwitch writes:
<<
He got it all wrong. Snarling insults at students never
helps them to learn. Besides, he's illogical on how a
Gryffindor is supposed to be. He yells at them when they
don't help Neville *and* when they do help him. Giving
penalty to Hermione for giving correct answers? No -
he's giving them penalties no matter WHAT they do in his
class.
>>

Well, Snape's attitude doesn't help Neville, but I don't
think there's any evidence that the other students are
substantially affected.

When I was in 11th grade English, I had a really nice
teacher. She was very generous with her grades and
didn't make us do much work. Great, but when I got to
12th grade English, I had a wise-ass teacher who wrote
snide comments all over my papers. For me at least, the
drive to get a paper back with no comments on it improved
my essays by years.

Likewise, Snape's constant punishment of Gryffindor
students seems to strengthen their resolve. Harry never
walks away from a Snape-related injustice wondering if
maybe he's just a bad kid; he's more sure than ever of
his moral center.

Which brings me to the main event!


Chyna Rose wonders randomly:
<<
Is there a true, clear line between Good and Evil? Does
a means considered 'Evil' (use of 'dark' magic and
artifacts) automatically become good just because the
'Good' side uses it? And who's to say that they are on
the side of 'Good' in the first place? After all, I'm
sure that V's convinced 100% Right.
>>

Interesting question. Voldemort's philosophy is kind of
difficult to pin down, because it both conforms to the
model of ideological tyranny (genetic purity, in this
case) and, um, doesn't. Voldemort tells Harry that there
is no good or evil, only power, but Harry rejects this
idea, and I think we're supposed to as well.

It seems to me that one of the defining characteristics
of the "Good" characters is that they have a strong moral
compass. Or at least, they have a moral compass. They
believe there is a line between Good and Evil. Lucius
Malfoy, Peter Pettigrew, and Voldemort, OTOH, all seem
unconcerned with such concepts; their beliefs and
allegiences shift depending on what serves them best.
It's been theorized that Lucius wouldn't have minded
Draco and Harry becoming friends because their
friendship is potentially useful to him - nevermind that
this is the boy who defeated Lucius' lord and master.
Contrast Harry, who refuses Draco's friendship - a very
powerful alliance - on principal. None of the "Good"
characters are perfect, but they're all able to feel
shame when they've done something wrong and get back on
track. Lucius, Pettigrew, and Voldemort don't seem to
recognize the concept of "wrong," and that's why they're
able to commit such atrocities.

Now compare that to Voldemort-Era Bartemius Crouch, Sr.
He's so sure that he's in the right that he forgets
what's wrong. And that leads to such intemperate
decisions as giving Aurors free license to kill and
prosecuting his own son without a second thought.
Crouch's philosophy is that if you are right, nothing is
wrong. But as with Voldemort, I think we're led to
believe that this way of thinking is, well, wrong.

You can even apply this theory to the Dursleys, who at
least ostensibly thought they were doing Harry a favor
by beating the magic out of him, and surely think they're
doing right by Dudley by spoiling him rotten. Again,
they're so caught up in what's "right" that they can't
see the wrong.

This is where the series achieves its greatest depth, IMO.
So far, I don't think we've seen a villain who so much
chooses to do evil as chooses not to recognize it. It's
not very comforting, but it is very human.

--Anna
PS: I suddenly feel "very" pretentious, but I had to come
up with a closer. Training from 12th grade English. ^_~