Moral Ambiguity in Main Characters

[annemehr]

No: HPFGUIDX 126957



> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "abadgerfan2" <ABadgerFan2 at m...>
> wrote:
> > 
> > I recently read a crtique of the "Potter" books that caused me to 
> > briefly question whether, as a parent, I should be endorsing the 
> > series as whole-heartedly as I have.
<snip>
> > The first criticism was that the books "clearly teach that obedience
> to rules or morality is required only when such obedience serves you
> best." 

Annemehr:
If you think about it even a little bit, you'll realise that's
actually a wildly inaccurate assessment of the way rulebreaking is
presented in the books.

Further, after looking at your Yahoo profile, the feeling that I'm
being baited has increased (and it is April 1st, after all).  Still,
the question does come up; I've seen it often enough, so I may as well
answer it.

> Valky:

<snip>
> My veiw on the rule breaking in HP is that it's not so much a
> rebellion on Morals as it is a questioning of morality. It's fairly
> obvious that when HRH, DD, The OOtP choose to break some rule there is
> no ambiguity as to what moral basis that they propound their rebellion
> on.
<snip>
> 
> I have no qualms wholeheartedly endorsing this subject to my children,
> and I do wonder does the writer of this critique you're speaking of
> put the kind of stock in tradition that leads to injustices like
> Sirius 12 year sentence in Azkaban and Pettigrews exploits? Because
> precisely this loquacious obsession with debased traditions is, for
> me, a far more pressing moral question.
> 
> Valky

Annemehr:
I think Valky has hit the nail on the head.  People in authority often
think they cannot afford to sanction any thought of rulebreaking
whatever, in case their authority is undermined.  But to refuse to
admit any moral basis for rulebreaking is to set imperfect codes of
conduct above justice, conscience, and even common sense.

Even the most well-intentioned of authority figures have no hope of
writing a set of rules to cover every circumstance, so there will
inevitably be cases where following the rules is wrong.  Worse yet, of
course, is that the rules are not always made by the well-intentioned,
but by the arbitrary or the power-hungry -- and "I was just following
orders" is not going to be any excuse for those who do wrong in
keeping them. We see examples of all of this in the Harry Potter books.

On the other side, the main characters are not perfect.  Sometimes
they do break rules that they should keep.  I don't see the fact that
they don't always get caught as an endorsement for this type of
behaviour, especially since there are very often consequences given,
whether natural or in the form of punishment.

Of course, children must usually follow the rules of their parents and
teachers, and later the laws of their communities. But it is dangerous
to make that an absolute value for them, for the sake of keeping your
control.  The difficult, but morally right, path is to balance
teaching proper respect for authority with fostering the ability to
consider the greater moral good.

In the Harry Potter books, the main characters are presented with
situations where the rules won't work rather more often than we who
are in Western society usually are. However, I agree with J K
Rowling's assessment that "these are very moral books," and I have no
hesitation in sharing them with my children.

Better?

Annemehr
Truth *is* generally preferable to lies.