JKR's Messages (was Re: Hermione In Trouble?)

[cubfanbudwoman]

No: HPFGUIDX 120726


Pippin:
> I think what she means by innate goodness is that the Trio's 
> sense of right and wrong is maturing on schedule and hasn't 
> been damaged. They are revolted by cruelty, as  Draco and 
> Snape are not, and their ability to form attachments to others and 
> their desire to see fair play are intact and broadening.That 
> makes them very different from Tom Riddle. I think what JKR is 
> saying is that the battle against the Riddles and their followers 
> can never be won completely, because the only way to keep 
> them from exploiting the rights and freedoms the rest of us enjoy 
> is to deny them to everybody, and if we do that, they've won. 

SSSusan:
I certainly wouldn't disagree at all with what you're saying about 
the trio's emotional and moral development.  The question remaining 
is whether that is or isn't what JKR is referring to when she talks 
about the trio's "innate goodness."  My thought was along the lines 
of the first part of what you described:  that their sense of right 
& wrong is maturing on schedule and -- I would add -- appropriately, 
per JKR's definition of appropriately.

 
SSSusan earlier:
> > But anyway, I guess my specific question in response to your 
> > post  here is:  Would JKR really be telling us via the 
> > Hermione-turns-into- a-cat episode that she's being *punished* 
> > or getting her comeuppance  for stealing?  I mean, she may be 
> > the one who stole the ingredients,  but the other two were 
> > equally involved in the process --  accessories, as it were -- 
> > and so if what she/they were doing was  morally wrong & worthy 
> > of punishment/comeuppance, wouldn't JKR have  had all *three* 
> > experience such consequence? 
 
Pippin:
> Harry *did* get  a punishment. He's quite sure Snape 
> embarrassed him in front of the duelling club for throwing the 
> firework. Ron didn't take part in the theft, IIRC, so it makes 
> sense  that nothing much happened to him. 


SSSusan:
Yes, Harry's convinced he got *Snape's* punishment.  But is that the 
same thing as JKR's punishment?  That's what I'm trying to gather: 
whether the "consequences" -- punishments, comeuppances, whatever 
one calls them -- are being shown as JUST, as RIGHT by the author; 
that is, that she *agrees* with them.  *Is* that what we get with 
Harry being humiliated by Snape -- a clear message to the readership 
that Harry's getting what he truly deserves?  Or is it just "one 
more instance" of Snape being unfair in Harry's eyes?

Siriusly Snapey Susan