The Train Stomp vs. Dissin' The Slyths WAS Re: [HPforGrownups] Re: House points

[Eileen]

No: HPFGUIDX 51313

 --- "Jim Ferer <jferer at yahoo.com>" <jferer at yahoo.com>
wrote: 
> Tarnished? After what Draco and his cronies said? No
> way. They showed
> admirable restraint.

Well, that's a new one. I certainly hadn't thought of
cursing someone and then walking over them as
restraint. I suppose they could have done worse
things. Beat them to a pulp and then threw them out
the window. But I can't see how this can be construed
as restraint.  

> This connects strongly with something that's a real
> issue for me. We
> live in a cynical age, which we have created and
> sustained by holding
> up people to inhuman standards of behavior which can
> only be
> disappointed. As we tear people down because they
> couldn't reach
> impossible heights, we get more cynical.

It's a cynical age because we've raised our standards
of behaviour? If so, give me cynicism. As a student of
history, especially the early Middle Ages (aka Dark
Ages), I really think that quite a few people back
then would have benefitted from a little "cynicism" or
rather, a higher standard of behaviour. I don't know
if humanity has exactly approved - the history of the
20th century might suggest otherwise - but our
standards certainly have. And, again, I think that's a
good thing, even if we sound more "cynical." 

How do we avoid actually being cynical? Not by
lowering our standards, certainly. By recognizing that
people can fail our standards and still be good
people. 

Harry and Ron fail my standards so often during the
books, that's it's incredible, but I still think
they're inherently good people, and they'll grow up to
be decent adults.  

> Take it down to the scene on the train. I can't
> imagine 99.99999% of
> the people on Earth being able to endure that
> provocation - gloating
> over the murder of a good person? It's monstrous,
> and unquestionably
> "fighting words," (a legally recognized concept of
> words so
> provocative a reasonable person can't be expected to
> endure them). 

The law is very necessarily not the same thing as
morality, though the two are very connected. There are
many things that the law quite rightly does not punish
at all or punishes lightly that are not really good
things to do. 

The fact that 99.99999% of the world's population
would be provoked by someone like Draco doesn't make
the fact less troubling. In fact, it makes it more
troubling. Would I be able to keep my temper in a case
like that? Judging by my track record, no. 

And that's a bad thing. It says things about the human
condition that aren't very positive. It points to the
fact that we are so easily, almost inevitably
corrupted.

Which was what I thought GoF was about, actually. 

> In another age, among (adult) gentlemen, Harry's
> friends would have
> visited Draco's friends to demand satisfaction.  We
> don't duel
> anymore,

Yes! And that's a very good thing, because duelling
was a bad thing! In the wizarding world, of course,
they do. :-) 

> but do you consider the Trio "tarnished" by
> giving those vile
> odious excuses for humanity part of what they
> deserved?  They'd have
> been tarnished if they hadn't.

So, blessed are not the peacemakers and those who
peacefully resist? Do you really believe that only
violence can be a response to hateful remarks? 

> JKR seems to understand and accept the concept of
> rough justice, and
> I'm glad she does.

I don't think she does. In one way, the text does
support rough justice, in that I think the authorial
voice does approve of Draco or Dudley getting their
just deserts. 

But I'm not entirely sure that she approves of people
meting out the just deserts. 

It's like the Shrieking Shack. Heaven knows Peter
deserves a lot, but it's not right for Sirius and
Lupin to kill. 

And, in the context of GoF, the Train Stomp is not
exactly free from from thematic questions. This is a
book which emphasizes at every corner the dangers of
fighting "violence with violence." Of becoming as
"cruel as many of those on the Dark Side." 

The signs of subtle moral failure at the end of the
book is therefore rather frightening. My gut feeling
is that someone, probably not the trio or Fred and
George, is going to end up doing something very bad. 

>We know that the trio and Fred and George are not
>evil people. 

Yes, I completely agree. But decent people can do bad
things. It'd be a lot easier, really, if it weren't
that way.  

Eileen

______________________________________________________________________ 
Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca