The Unforgivables Curses : what about Petrificus Totalus ?

[justcarol67]

No: HPFGUIDX 95063

Del wrote (responding to my post):
> <snip> Well, it seems no agreement has been reached yet then, since
you seem to consider that the Unforgivable Curses are evil in itself,
while others say that it's precisely the intent behind them and their
results that make them Unforgivable. We didn't get anywhere :-)

I (Carol) signed off: 
Carol, who's still certain that the Unforgiveable Curses are
Unforgiveable for a reason

Del signed off: 
Del, who still thinks they should only have been called the Restricted
Curses, or Forbidden Curses, but not Unforgivable, since they are
obviously forgivable under specific circumstances.

Carol:
That's exactly the problem, isn't it? *Apparently* it's okay to
torture animals with a Crucio or kill them with an AK (but Kneasy to
the contrary, there's no canon to show that Crouch!Moody was telling
the truth when he said that Dumbledore had authorized the
demonstration of those spells) and Crouch Sr. authorized their use by
Aurors, but we see what happened to him--hoist with his own petard
(Imperio'd and then murdered by his own son, whom he had previously
Imperio'd). We *don't* know that the real Moody ever used the
Unforgiveables to bring in DEs, only that he never killed unless he
had to--and there are, as Del implied in her post, other ways to kill
in the WW, but with spells that can be used for legitimate purposes.

So are we to think that the Unforgiveables, used against humans, at
least, are Unforgiveable only in JKR's mind (because they violate the
will of the victim, etc.) but forgiveable by the WW in general or by
Dumbledore?

Kneasy to the contrary, I am not confusing my own standards with JKR's
or the WW's. I am trying to figure out what is meant by Unforgiveable.
I understand why the term applies only to the three Curses, which are
designed *only* to harm and can be performed only by a person who
either enjoys torturing others (like Bellatrix) or is coldly
indifferent to their human rights (like the two Crouches)--and even
teaching the students to resist the Imperius Curse involves invading
their minds and controlling their wills. Would we have excused
Crouch!Moody for Crucioing to show them what it's like and teach them
to resist it? Or for demonstrating AK on a human being? I think not.
And note that he, too, got what he deserved for having used the
Imperius Curse (on his father, the real Moody, and Krum) and Crucio
(on the Longbottoms, and, through Krum, on Cedric)--a fate worse than
death. Maybe Crucioing a spider is somehow acceptable. (I certainly
agree with Kneasy that the WW has different ethical standards than the
RW, as I've indicated in numerous other posts.) *Maybe* Imperioing
students to make them skip around the classroom and releasing them
from the spell is a necessary evil and an exception to the rule.
Probably a *failed* Crucio performed without the necessary intent to
cause pain for pain's sake (Harry trying to Crucio Bellatrix) is
forgiveable. But Bellatrix, who excels at performing Crucios because
she enjoys inflicting pain, will also, I predict, come to a
well-deserved bad end, even if Dumbledore--or more important,
Neville--forgives her (which would, in a Christian view, be the right
thing to do). But such an action would not change the nature of the curse.

But the question remains, Unforgiveable *by whom*? I don't think that
by making them *legal* in certain circumstances, Crouch Sr. made them
forgiveable--as he found to his own cost. Dumbledore does not use them
and I don't think he'll want Harry to use them. The fate of the
Crouches, and the corruption of Tom Riddle, the obviously cruel nature
of Bellatrix are all, IMO, warnings that he should heed.

It just occurred to me that there is a difference between the act and
the actor, between the curse and the person who performs it. Maybe
it's the curse that Unforgiveable but the person who performs it can
be forgiven? That sounds like the Christian view JKR might be expected
to take, but it doesn't sound like what is happening in the books.
There is no hope of forgiveness or afterlife or anything else for
Barty Jr. Only total oblivion, forever, as far as I can see.

Carol