Re: Death in the Wizarding World AND Harry sparing V’Mort

[erisedstraeh2002]

No: HPFGUIDX 46484

Pip!Squeak ("bluesqueak") wrote:

> The attitude of the books towards killing someone because of what 
> they've done is absolutely clear. It's wrong.

Now me:

I completely agree (and want to point out that when I brought this 
same opinion up before, I was accused by a Wolf-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named 
as engaging in "metathinking!").  In PoA, when Harry decided to spare 
Pettigrew, he tells Peter:  "I'm doing it because - I don't reckon my 
dad would've wanted them [Sirius and Remus] to become killers - just 
for you" (Ch. 19).  So, even when killing is justified (which I think 
many would agree it would have been in this circumstance), Harry 
doesn't allow it to happen because it would mean that Sirius and 
Remus would become "killers."  And in GoF, Sirius tells Harry, Ron 
and Hermione in the cave that during Voldemort's first reign, "The 
Aurors were given new powers - powers to kill rather than capture, 
for instance" (Ch. 27).  This is given as an example of Crouch Sr.'s 
ruthlessness, as Sirius says (in the same chapter of GoF): "Well, 
times like that bring out the best in some people and the worst in 
others.  Crouch's principles might've been good in the beginning - I 
wouldn't know.  He rose quickly through the Ministry, and he started 
ordering very harsh measures against Voldemort's supporters."

Pip!Squeak again:

> 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.

Me again:

Once again, I completely agree, and once again, when I made this same 
point previously, that same Wolf-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named argued that 
Harry didn't use the AK because he didn't know how, and because 
Voldemort was playing mind games with him to get him to use weaker 
duelling club tactics instead of his stronger wandless power.  But I 
still think the fact that it never occurred to Harry to try the AK 
when he *knew* Voldemort was going to throw it ("He knew he was 
facing the thing against which Moody had always warned...the 
unblockable Avada Kedavra curse" [Ch. 34 GoF]) suggests that JKR's 
message is that killing is wrong, regardless of the circumstance in 
which you find yourself.  And I'm not convinced that Harry would have 
been unable to throw the AK if he had tried - after all, he can throw 
a lot of other complicated charms/spells/hexes/curses (the Patronus 
Charm, for example) and is one of the few who can intuitively resist 
the Imperius Curse.

Pip!Squeak again:
 
> 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.

Me again:

Great idea - perhaps the sword Voldemort will be impaled upon will be 
the recorporation potion which is presumed to be fatally flawed 
because he used Harry's blood?

~Phyllis