Betryal (was Rowling and Philosophy)

[asandhp]

No: HPFGUIDX 53876

Responding to Tom Wall first and Lynda after:

Tom Wall replied:

The Admiring Skeptic wrote:
So, starting at the bottom, we have Draco offering many unprovoked
insults for the singular purpose of putting people down. HRH never do
that. They respond in kind very often, but they never put people down
out of the blue.

TW:
Well, they I'm not sure I agree here. Maybe in contrast with Draco,
okay, although I really see that comparison in terms of two equally
opposed and antagonistic groups. But as for them not putting people
down, I mean, what about Ron's talk when prepping for the Yule Ball?
In fact, I'd say I have to disagree with you on Ron, in particular,
here. Ron puts people down a lot.

"And my names's Malfoy. Draco Malfoy."
Ron gave a slight cough, which might have been hiding a snigger.
(PS/SS, US paperback, Ch.6, 108)

"It's no wonder no one can stand her," he said to Harry as they
pushed their way into the crowded corridor, "she's a nightmare,
honestly."
(PS/SS, US paperback, Ch.10, 172)

"She just didn't want to go with Neville... I mean, who would?"
(GoF, US hardcover, Ch.22, 399)

So, I'd argue that Ron is often found insulting others. We wouldn't
be told that his cough 'might have been hiding' a snigger unless it
probably was.

T.A.S re-replying:
All these are examples of Ron talking about people behind their backs,
except for the cough, which was, after all, *hiding* a snigger. He 
wasn't
sniggering outright. Now bad-mouthing people is not right, but it's
different from insulting them to their faces, which Draco does all 
the time.

Back to TW:
So, in that sense, Ron really starts it there. Draco's
the one retaliating.

TAS:
No. When an author tells you a cough "might have been hiding a 
snigger"
instead of "was hiding a snigger" all you know is that it was very 
likely to
sound like a hidden snigger to Draco and that Ron is not too angelic 
to be
suspected of sniggering. But in any case, Ron can't be blamed for an
involuntary snigger, especially when he tries so hard to hide it that 
it can
only be described as "might have been."

More TW:
And on Hermione, well, I agree that she came off
as having mildly annoying behavior in the beginning of PS/SS. But
still - she heard it, and she had really not done anything to Ron.

TAS:
Ron didn't know she was in earshot and he felt somewhat bad for her 
having
been hurt. That doesn't make him a great person, but he can't be 
accused of
puposely trying to hurt her feelings.

TW:
And imagine saying that about Neville. What has Neville ever done to
Ron to warrant that? IMHO, that's downright awful of Ron to say such
a thing.

TAS: Yes, but he didn't say it *to* Neville. *To* Neville, he's always
encouraging. He *never* insults Neville directly. He doesn't want 
people to
feel put down, even though he has negative opinions that he shares
(improperly) with others.

The Admiring Skeptic (originally) wrote:
Draco has minions, not equals, for "friends." HRH are quite equal.
Draco tattles to teachers; HRH do not. Draco tries to get Hagrid
sacked; HRH try to save the stone from Snape, but they don't report
him to anyone in order to get him fired. (They wish it, but they take
no action to accomplish it.) Draco and co. unfairly sabotage the
Quidditch game in PoA; Harry helps Cedric improve his chances in GoF.
Draco's prejudiced against Muggle-borns; HRH aren't.

TW replies:
You make a lot of points here, so I'll kind of handle them one at a
time. Just the Draco/HRH ones, though, since I do agree with your
stand-alone points about Harry's morality (like re: Cedric.)

On minions: We don't know that for sure. Just because Crabbe and
Goyle are silent doesn't mean they're Draco's minions. Yes, they are
portrayed that way, and I would agree that most of the indications we
get from JKR would support that position, but let's face it, we don't
know that. In CoS, when Harry and Ron polyjuice into Crabbe and
Goyle, I mean, Draco does appear to expect them to converse with him -
 so it's not like all he does is demand adulation from them. They do
have some kind of dialogue going on behind the scenes.

TAS: All I'm discussing here are JKR's morals and philosophies. If she
protrays Crabbe and Goyle as minions of the "junior bad guy," in 
contrast to
Harry, who, as "junior good guy," has equals for friends, she means 
that
having minions is a bad thing. Which we all agree, of course, but my 
point
is that having minions is a *defining characteristic* *for JKR* of 
evil,
junior to senior. If Draco ever treats them mainly as equals and yet 
remains
the junior bad guy, then my thesis will be disproven. If they break 
loose
and Draco doesn't accept their equality, he still remains an example 
of the
desire for dominance being a large part of JKR's definition of evil.

TW:
On tattling: HRH do tell Hagrid, and several times at that, that they
suspect Snape is going to steal the stone. And Hagrid tells them
they're wrong repeatedly.

TAS: Their aim is generally to save the stone. They're not plotting 
to get
Snape fired.

TW: Also, in Ch.9, Ron's about to tell on Draco
when McGonagall catches Harry flying. The only reason he doesn't
finish his sentence is because McGonagall doesn't let him. So, I'd
say that again, HRH are not squeaky-clean on this point.

TAS: OK. I give in on this one. But all this shows is that JKR doesn't
define tattling as intrinsically evil. Which, truth to tell, it's not.

TW:
On Hagrid: you know, I'd like to point out that Hagrid is not without
fault here - he holds Slytherin house in deep disregard and maligns
them at the drop of a hat, and let's face it, Hagrid *did* choose a
dangerous creature that perhaps would have been better left until
later on in the year. In fact, the Slytherins across the board after
that class think that Hagrid should be sacked, and that's pre-
Malfoy's broken-arm-act. Just because HRH like Hagrid doesn't mean
that the rest of the school does. We do hear that the Gryffindors are
his biggest supporters, and frankly, I think that that explains why
we like Hagrid so much - since our main characters are Gryffindors.
If our lead character was a Ravenclaw, I bet we'd have different
perspectives on a lot of the teachers.

TAS: The question is not whether Hagrid should be fired, but whether 
kids
should be busy engineering teacher replacements.

TW: On sabotage:
Yes, Draco and co. try to sabotage the quidditch game. But let's face
it, in CoS Harry and Ron DRUG Crabbe and Goyle so that they can
polyjuice into them. They deceive Draco into not only revealing the
location of the Slytherin common room (a grievous offense and total
breach of the general sort of "school trust," IMO,) but also talking
about secrets that they have no right to know. All this, because
they've irrationally concluded on their own that Malfoy is not just
mean, but is actually a murderer! Can you *imagine* what they're
reaction would be if they found out Malfoy had been in the Gryffindor
common room? No, I can't give you that one, here. HRH are WAY MORE
out of line in this scene than DCG have ever been, IMHO. DCG are
mean. HRH are out of control when they have their minds made up.
They'll stop at nothing to do what they think is right, even if
they're totally wrong.

TAS: Granted. But what I want to do is line up what HRH did against 
what DCG
do and figure out what about the former JKR thinks is OK and what 
about the
latter JKR thinks is evil. This thread, after all, is "Rowling and
Philosophy," not "Are HRH evil." And all I can conclude is that DCG's
wrongdoing was meant to give Slytherin an unfair advantage in 
Quidditch,
while HRH were irrationally, and "misdemeanoringly," trying to save 
lives.
If HRH had been out to smear Malfoy, they would not have given up the 
Malfoy
chase so completely once they found out he wasn't culpable. They 
would have
looked for some other way to get him blamed. So their intentions were 
*not*
to insult, disgrace or otherwise harm Draco out of hand. They were 
only
going to do that if they discovered a true guilt on Malfoy's part. In 
fact,
one can even give them credit for trying to find out the truth and 
for not
just assuming Malfoy's guilt as fact. That doesn't excuse any of their
methods, but it does show that JKR doesn't consider methods 
sufficient to
label a person evil.

TW: On prejudice:
HRH may not be prejudiced against Muggle borns, but that's not
because they're so virtuous. Both Harry and Hermione ARE half-bloods,
and Ron's Dad loves muggles. So, are they accepting of themselves?
Yes. By association, do they accept other Muggleborns? Yes.

But what about the prejudices against the giants and the house-elves
that Ron espouses? Hermione is a bastion of tolerance, and Harry
seems to stay out on these subjects a lot, simply because he is
rather ignorant about a lot of this stuff, so he's lucky: he hasn't
been pre-tainted. But Ron, I mean, look at the way he refers to Lupin
in PoA Ch.17 when the professor tries to help him.

"Get away from me, werewolf!" (PoA, US paperback, Ch.17, 345)

He can't just say 'get away from me?' He's just got to use the
bigoted term, right? Nope - I can't give you Ron here. Ron is pretty
prejudiced, truth be told.

TAS: You're right, as I've said before, but you're arguing a 
different point
from mine. If we want to analyze JKR on prejudice, and not HRH on 
prejudice,
then all we can say is that something about Ron's prejudice is 
different, in
her mind, from Draco's. I believe it is Ron's willingness to learn a 
better
attitude, and his lack of desire to rub other people's noses into his
prejudice. But maybe you can figure out better than I can what she 
sees as
the difference between them.

TW: I don't concur with your Lupin/Snape comparisons, because I think
that Harry deserves a lot of what he gets from Snape simply because
he's so disrespectful towards him. Yes, Snape is a little over the
top when dealing with Harry, but Harry is simply not pleasant,
polite, or in any way respectful of Snape - even Dumbledore has to
remind Harry of this from time to time. Harry, IMHO, earns Snape's
scorn, frankly.

TAS: So compare Snape's treatment of scornful Harry to Lupin's 
treatment of
scornful Draco (ignores, apparently) and you'll get JKR's take on how 
evil
vs good teachers treat scornful students.

TW: As for Lupin, I *love* his character (and am therefore so 
dismayed by
Pippin's convining Evil!Lupin argument,)

(TAS: I hate the idea so much I've hardly read any of the arguments, 
but the
bit I've skimmed sound pretty good.)

TW: and I also love his constant
pleasant-ness and upbeat nature. But Lupin does tend to favor Harry a
little bit, for instance, when he makes a cheer to a Gryffindor
victory, then quickly adds that he shouldn't be taking sides, as a
teacher. And Lupin does save Harry's butt when Snape catches him with
the Marauder's Map. So, does Lupin cover for Harry, ala Snape
favoring Draco? Yeah, I'd say that he does.

TAS: Again, compare Snape's methods of favortism to Lupin's and 
you'll get
JKR's take on that too. Lupin has tea with Harry and drinks to 
Griffindor,
but AFAWK, he doesn't deal out points unfairly or insult students.

TW: I do agree with the majority of your other observations on the
series' moral perspectives, particularly the ones about family and
rule-breaking, which are right on the money, IMHO.

TAS: Thank you.

-Tom

Now for Lynda, who wrote:

> Asandhp:
>
> *large snip*
> > Is JKR aiming for a Kantian reunion of the
> > humanities and sciences (and religion, if future books make good 
on
> > that score)?
>
> religion?  Could you elaborate on what you mean here?
>
>
>
> Lynda

Do you mean how Kant combined the humanities, science and religion, 
or how
JKR might? If you mean Kant, I'm not much use. I've learned a bit 
about his
philosophy and I remember that he was the last great unifier of 
philosophy,
including religion and science, but if you want to learn more, go to 
an
expert.

As for JKR, it bothers me that in her universe, fantasy is real while
religion seems to be quite as unreal as today's society makes it out 
to be.
I'm quite religious myself, but the world at large more commonly 
treats
religion like a fantasy than like a reality. When fantasy in HP turns 
out to
be "real" and religion doesn't, it makes religion even less real than
before, because "look - magic, which we knew was nothing, works, but
religion still doesn't do anything."

However, various interviews have included comments that the series 
will end
with some religious components, so the last word is yet to come in on 
this
issue, and I'm hoping that religion will turn out to be even more 
real than
magic. (Though I doubt it will be my religion.)

The Admiring Skeptic