Good/Evil, the Dark Mark, Privet protection, Snape the teacher

[saintbacchus]

No: HPFGUIDX 36828

For the moment, I'm lurking on the subject of Neville.
My mind was boggled by that essay!

Betty opines:
<<
To me, Crouch was right to prosecute his son. Clearly
Crouch had some evidence that his son *was* a Death
Eater. I don't think he would have prosecuted him
without a reason. The biggest mistake, I think, was
releasing him from Azkaban. This move ended up
getting him killed, and it ended up helping bring
back Voldemort. Voldy would have had a hard time
getting to Harry without Crouch.
>>

Apparently, all he has is the testimony of Frank and
...uh, "Mrs." Longbottom, who are both insane. I'm all
for fairness and avoiding favoritism, but doesn't it
strike you as odd that he takes the word of the crazy
Longbottoms over that of his own son? Later, he has a
crisis of conscience (I don't buy Junior's explanation
that his father loved his mother more than him). He
could have avoided the whole debacle by thinking
things through in the first place - and realizing that
while prosecuting his son was probably right, there
was wrong in it too.

Which brings me to Eloise, who writes:

<<
I think he did evil things in the past, but that the evil he now 
embodies is the evil of lack of consciousness, of an unwillingness to 
be aware. In fact I think Dark and Light are much more useful 
concepts. The Light side, being in the light, can see things more 
clearly, including their own faults. The Dark side walk in ethical 
blindness.
>>

Mmm, I agree. Well said. The only thing I have to add is that I think 
all the characters (except Voldemort) can see "good," or at least 
think they can. It's the absence of the balancing force of evil that 
causes problems. Crouch is the best example of this, as he seems to 
think that as long as your motives are good, so is everything else 
you do. After all, if evil doesn't exist - or exists only in "them" - 
how could *I* be evil? It's much harder to accept the existence of 
evil than the existence of good, because accepting evil means 
accepting that it exists in yourself.

Uff da! Now who's being Biblical? ^_~


And about the Dark Mark, Eloise writes:
<<
But this contradicts what Snape himself tells us:
'It was a means of distinguishing each other , and his means of 
summoning us to him.' (GoF 606).
>>

It does, and isn't it strange that Karkaroff and Snape should give 
different accounts of how DEs identify one another? By definition, 
they were both part of Voldemort's elite inner circle, so apparently 
he trusted them both. Or did Voldemort perhaps *know* that Snape was 
a spy?

I also wonder why the MoM couldn't use the Mark to distinguish the 
Death Eaters. Did it just disappear when he did? Good design, V!


J postulates:
<<
I guess that I'd always assumed that much like "music...a magic 
beyond all we do here..." (SS, US Paperback, p. 128) and "...love as 
powerful as your mother's for you leaves its own mark." (ibid, p. 
299), Dumbledore had simply harnessed some ancient magic inherent in 
*family*, and in being in the custody and protection thereof.
>>

That's what I was thinking, but more vaguely...because put this way, 
it kind of suggests that the best way to get to Harry would be to 
kill Aunt Petunia and Dudley. Eek! In fact, what's keeping Voldemort, 
or anyone else, from killing the Dursleys? Something or someone must 
also be protecting them - maybe it's a two-way protection? That would 
explain why the Dursleys keep Harry around, at least.


Finwitch writes:

<<
In Essays, not public - and supposedly not very personal, but about 
the essay.
>>

I suppose I should have mentioned it the first time, but she was just 
as much of a wise-ass in front of the class as on my papers, and her 
comments could get personal. She had no time for people not as smart 
as her, basically.


<<
Contrasting to Snape: calling someone "idiot" on an error and losing 
temper is not helping anyone to learn anything but reluctance to try.
>>

Again, I disagree, but only because you claim that Snape's method of 
teaching is useful to no one. Hermione will learn with or without 
Snape, and I've already said I see Harry as being more sure of 
himself because of Snape. Maybe I'd think differently if I were in 
that class (and bad at it), but I don't see Snape as doing any 
lasting damage to kids who weren't damaged to begin with.

--Anna
Testing new formatting...hope it isn't too ugly or unreadable!