Why were the sacrifices different? (was: A moral theory of Magic )

[arrowsmithbt]

No: HPFGUIDX 95320

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" <susiequsie23 at s...> 
wrote:

> Thanks, Kneasy, Ffi & Max, for answering the questions I raised.  
> Your comments all help it to make more sense.  STILL, I'm just a wee 
> little annoyed that James' death gets such short shrift!  So Lily 
> *thought* [or was instructed, per Kneasy's comments] to apply the 
> ancient magic that would save Harry.  That's true sacrifice!  STILL, 
> James chose to die saving Lily & Harry, as well.  Just because he 
> didn't apply the ancient magic which ended up saving Harry, he still 
> sacrificed himself for the hope of saving their lives.  Seems he--and 
> all those other wizards who did likewise for their families--should 
> get a little more "credit".  
> 
> Oh, how I hate to dredge up the idea of sexism here, but it reads to 
> me kind of like the stereotypes "Men are used to sacrificing 
> themselves in war" and "A mother's love is supreme" are being 
> evaluated to say that one is greater than the other.  

Take heart!
The Kneasy interpretation of the Prophecy *requires* the deaths of both.
It's an equal opportunity portender of  Doom.

I know a lot of posters don't like it, but what the hell, it's a theory that
hatched in the dark recesses of my perverted mind - and I'll stick with
it until somebody else comes up with a more attractive interpretation.
The only other reading that makes sense to me is a very convoluted
one involving my postulated Salazar/Tom possession -  and since we
don't know for certain that  the possession theory is valid, and we do
know that James and Lily died, it makes it simpler to go with the idea
that has the fewest unknowns, for the moment at least. But if I get 
bored I may well annoy the readers with my 'possession' possibility. 

To  re-iterate - the parents of the child foretold are referred to obliquely
at the beginning of the piece "...born to those who thrice defied him..."
So why shouldn't they get another credit later on, and in doing so clarify
the most puzzling part of the Prophecy - "..for neither can live while the
other survives..." can be read as "..for neither James nor Lily can live
while the other, (Harry) survives." It still wouldn't make the Prophecy
crystal clear, but it would tidy up the one phrase that refuses to make
sense if you insist that the Prophecy is about Harry and Voldy *only*.

James's death would have been as necessary as Lily's for the terms
of the Prophecy to be fulfilled.

And I agree with you - plot lines in fiction may require the male 
to make the ultimate (and quite often pointless) sacrifice. It's very
nearly a cliche; in fact if they *don't* they're considered to have
failed and possibly to have acted in a cowardly manner. Hardly fair;
they've got pensions to look forward to and then some author shoves 
them out the door to pitch face-forward in the dust at the feet of some
arch-villain. To add insult to injury, it's the wife and kids that get all 
the sympathy when it wasn't them that did the dying.
There ain't no justice.

Kneasy