Harry Agonistes (was Re: Ever so evil ? was Dumbledore's role in Sirius' death

[arrowsmithbt]

No: HPFGUIDX 99180

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "nkafkafi" <nkafkafi at y...> wrote:
> 
> Neri now:
> But it is practically a surety that SOME ships will happen. So the  
> question (which does interests me) is WHICH. OTOH I'll bet you 
> anything that none of the main good characters, such as Lupin or 
> Sirius (or Harry...), will turn out to be ESE. IMHO this should be 
> pretty obvious to anybody who read the books in more levels than 
> merely the plot level.
>

Kneasy:
Maybe one of the SHIPs will come home, but in my opinion it will be 
passed over in a paragraph or two. No big thing will be made of it
in the books.

ESE is something else. 
Most of us consider ESE to be shorthand for a range of behavioural 
or plot possibilities, particularly as evil is not an absolute - it depends
on when, where and in what circumstances the action takes place.

Two of the major themes in the story are betrayal and the motivations 
for choosing sides. 'Betrayal' is itself conditional. In some 
circumstances  it could be considered 'good'. The more interesting
characters have an air of ambiguity about them, as if their final
choice has not yet been finally made or is open to re-assessment. 
In this list you can put Pettigrew, Snape, Fudge, Malfoy. The last of
these could easily change sides; Voldy himself calls him "slippery."
These are the ones in plain view and *all* of them are on the
other side. I've posted before about Snape. By conviction and
temperament he is not a 'goody'; he is a 'baddy' estranged from
his natural allies. The 'why' of this  will be very important IMO and
may have important consequences. But it's reasonable to  expect
some balance; someone 'good' won't be. Betcha.

With a writer like JKR it's quite probable that there are surprises
to come; not everyone will turn out be what they seem. The WW isn't
involved in a war tribe against tribe, it's a society at war with itself,
a civil war where families are divided against each other. The stance
a  person takes is likely to be strongly influenced by personal 
interactions that are marginal to the philosophy of either side, that's
one of the reasons civil wars are so terrible.
   
> Neri:
> I think what you are suggesting is more GTE!Harry (Good Turns Evil) 
> than ESE!Harry. This is indeed much easier plotwise. I'll grant there 
> is a chance this might happen for a short time, just as another trial 
> in the hero's journey, but we have only two out of seven books to go 
> and much that still has to happen, so I don't think this specific 
> episode will last very long, if at all.
>

Kneasy:
No, I'm not. If enough of Voldy was in Harry then he would always have 
been ESE, but inactive, waiting for an opportune moment to show or
declare his true colours. Not likely, but with Voldy delving  into his
mind and Harry *still* not studying hard on his Occlumency, outside
influences could stimulate something that has lain dormant.

> Neri:
> Voldy proudly styles himself as the "Dark Lord", and his followers, 
> such as Bella and the Malfoys, regard this as an honorific (Snape, as 
> we all know, is a more complex case). Their mark is a skull with a 
> snake coming out of its mouth. Why do you think they chose these 
> specific symbols for themselves? 
> 

Kneasy:
Symbols can be odd; the Nazis stole the swastika symbol from the
old Indian Aryan cosmology where it was a traditional  sign for
good luck. The snake is probably Slytherin, but again, the snake
is an ancient symbol for wisdom -  there are two intertwined 
snakes on the caduceus of Mercury's staff, now often used as a 
medical sign. The skull? Conquering death? That's what Voldy wants.
We might find out before the end.

> Neri:
> The question of relative moral in RL aside, the Potterverse DOES have 
> a God, or rather a Goddess. Her name is Jo K Rowling and She seems to 
> have very established opinions on the universality of Good and Evil. 
> And as well she should, since she is obviously writing a novel in the 
> celebrated genre of good-against-evil. It is of course your basic 
> right to hijack the Potterverse and change it to your heart content. 
> Fanfiction writers do it all the time. I sometime read them and 
> sometimes it is even interesting, but I still find the original 
> Potterverse much more interesting.
>

Kneasy:
Not me doing the hi-jacking, not when JKR says the theme of the
books is death. I'm going along with it.
 
> Neri:
> Murdering your parents because they were protecting you IS evil. 
> Philosophical convictions are not needed to appreciate this. It is 
> obvious to any 11 yrs old child.
>

Kneasy:
Voldy's view is different. There's this kid who is prophesied to kill
him. What to do...? Let him? Er, no.
 
> Neri:
> I apologize for the boring literature lecture. I almost never analyze 
> it in such an intellectual way when I read the books. I just know it, 
> as I think 95% of the readers do.
> 

Kneasy:
Me, I'm just the opposite. If a book is not susceptical to analysis then
it lacks depth, is superficial pap and probably not worth reading.