Bang! You're Dead. (was:Voldemorts animus...)

[justcarol67]

No: HPFGUIDX 86185

-> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67"
<justcarol67 at y...> wrote:
> > 
> > You didn't mention me, Kneasy, but I think I'm the one who brought up
> > the topic. In any case, I also have no interest in or connection with
> > New Age or "touch-feely" theories. I simply think that the distinction
> > between good and evil must be maintained and that Harry must not
> > succumb to the temptation to kill or inflict pain for pleasure. He
> > must not become Voldemort's pupil like Bellatrix. The Unforgiveable
> > Curses are unforgiveable for a reason, and I can't see JKR changing
> > the rules and allowing him and his friends to use them. He must find
> > some other way to kill Voldemort, either by causing Voldemort's own
> > spell to backfire, or, if you prefer, in a fair, heroic, by-the-rule
> > fight using Godric Gryffindor's sword. Maybe that's the reason the
> > sword was introduced in the first place. 
> > 
> > Carol, who also thinks that Fawkes the Phoenix will somehow be
involved
> 
> 
> OK, Carol, sorry to have ignored you in my blanket swipe at those who
> I consider are being unnecessarily  squeamish. Consider yourself
included.

Thanks, but please understand that I don't think Voldemort is going to
be killed by an act of mercy or love. If anything, those are the
forces that protect Harry against him.
><snip>
> No, Harry's Crucio! in the MoM wasn't very successful because he
hadn't done 
> it before. When has he ever got a  spell  right first  time? Bella
was playing
> mind games. 

<snip> 
Carol: You still haven't answered Geoff's argument
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/85985 regarding
the canonical evidence against having good guys use the unforgiveable
curses. Surely they are unforgiveable and illegal for a reason, and,
if so, JKR will need to provide some alternative to having Harry
perform a curse that would send him to Azkaban. I don't think she
believes that "all's fair in love and war" and that she will put
herself in the tricky situation of having defined the rules and then
decided to change them. She has clearly established a distinction
between good and evil in the WW and it seems to me that she needs to
maintain it. Geoff's quotations illustrate that distinction quite
clearly, as do certain statements by Dumbledore that I will hunt up if
necessary when I have more time. JKR has said in an interview that
Dumbledore is "the epitome of goodness,"
http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/quickquotes/articles/2000/0700-cbc-solomon.htm
which I hope is sufficient evidence that his assertions matter in
thies discussion.

Kneasy: 
> No, it'll be *me*  that  takes pleasure in Voldy coming to a sticky
end. 
> Harry will just feel relief, as will  everybody else in the WW.

Carol:
Exactly.

> 
> Fair fight is out. Voldy will never fight fair. Fawkes and the sword
have
> already been used once, and when does JKR repeat plot devices for the
> resolution of crises? The wands won't work; the conflict occurs at
*both*
> ends, not just with Harry. <snip>


I agree that the wands won't work, but I have nothing against Harry
being healed a second time by Phoenix tears. And I never said that
Voldemort would fight fairly, only that Harry should. The moment
Voldemort raises a wand or other weapon against him or a friend, Harry
has the right and responsibility to fight defensively. That's what
DADA is for; Hogwarts, unlike Durmstrang, does not teach the Dark Arts
themselves, only *defense* against them. So Harry must find a way to
destroy Voldemort without resorting to Dark weapons, including
unforgiveable curses, himself. I have never said that he should take
pity on Voldemort, much less love his enemy. I have only said that he
must not muddy the distinction between good (Dumbledore) and evil
(Voldemort) that JKR herself has established.

You may be right about Bellatrix's comments being a red herring, but I
don't think so. She and Voldemort appear to enjoy inflicting pain and
death. If, indeed, that feeling is required to make the curses
effective, then the reason they're "unforgiveable" is clear. They can
be cast only by someone who is already cruel and well on his or her
way to becoming irreversibly evil.

Carol, who hopes that you'll quote canon this time instead of calling
those who disagree with you "touchy-feely New Agers." We just don't
share your view of a satisfactory ending. And BTW, it won't hurt your
argument to concede a few points. :-)