Death in the Wizarding World AND Harry sparing V’Mort

[bluesqueak]

No: HPFGUIDX 46466



Melody writes:


> Death *is* thought to be better than that kiss. That fact seem to 
> be known in the WW. So if they did *just* kill Voldemort, it is 
> not as bad as if they let the dementor suck out him soul...if in  
> fact he has one.
> 
> Wait, I'm sorry. I'm wrong. He has a soul; he just has no heart.
> 
> So I am one to go out on a limb and say that the WW would allow
> Voldemort to be subject to the death penalty. In a way it is more
> humane than the possibilities. It is a fast remedy to a 
> tremendous* problem.

I fancy the WW has a slightly different attitude to death than the 
Muggle World. `Life after Death' is a matter of faith in the Muggle 
World. In the Wizarding World, people go to school with ghosts. In 
fact, they're *taught* by ghosts. There is no question in their 
minds that existence continues after death – the scary thing is that 
they have no idea *what* that existence is like (`the next great 
adventure'). [Except, of course, for those few unhappy souls who 
choose to reject the adventure, and come back as ghosts].

Death better than the Kiss? Well, if survival of the soul is a given 
in the WW, then having your soul eaten *would* be worse. It might 
well be the WW's equivalent of true end of consciousness, `out, out 
brief candle', `rage against the dying of the light' death.

So,yeah, they might be relatively unconcerned about the death 
penalty in the WW – EXCEPT that there is no mention of convicted 
DE's in the VW1 being executed. 

Black, who was supposed to have killed 12 muggles and 1 wizard got 
sent to Azkaban (without trial). In GoF Ch.27 he lists the fates of 
a few DE's. They got sent for life to Azkaban, and some of them 
decided they'd rather fight to the death than risk the Dementors (or 
the Aurors decided to apply a little unofficial death penalty all by 
themselves). No one is described as being executed.

The attitude of the books towards killing someone because of what 
they've done is absolutely clear. It's wrong. Harry spares 
Pettigrew. Dumbledore only knocks Crouch Jr out. Snape gives 
Karkaroff a chance to stay and fight or run for it. Lockhart, who 
was quite prepared to leave Ginny to die, gets his own memory 
modified when Ron's wand backfires – but he doesn't get killed. 
Quirrel is left to die – by the evil Voldemort. Killing someone in 
self defense might be a bitter necessity; but killing someone when 
you don't have to is wrong.

The WW might well allow Voldemort to be subject to the death 
penalty, for the same reason they allowed the escaped Sirius Black 
to be subject to soul-sucking by the Demetors – fear and panic. 
Sirius Black showed he could escape from escape-proof Azkaban; 
Voldemort would probably be equally difficult to imprison. But 
again, the attitude of PoA proved to be that the Ministry was 
*wrong* in allowing Black to be executed on capture – Black was 
innocent.

It didn't even *occur* to Harry to try Avada Kedavra in the 
Graveyard duel (Chapter 34 of GoF) – not even a momentary thought 
that he wasn't powerful enough to try it. The whole thrust of the 
books to date would be against Harry choosing to kill Voldemort, or 
turning him over to the MoM to be executed.

So, I would guess that if Voldemort does die at the end of the 
books, it will *not* be because Harry deliberately kills him. He may 
well end up like Lockhart, though. 

Impaled upon his own sword.

Pip!Squeak