[HPforGrownups] Re: Moral Ambiguity in Main Characters

[Charme]

No: HPFGUIDX 126958


"abadgerfan2" <
> wrote:
>>
>> The first criticism was that the books "clearly teach that obedience
> to rules or morality is required only when such obedience serves you
> best."
>
> Valky:
<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.


Charme:

Danger, Will Robinson. Soapbox alert! :) Now that you've been warned, I can 
go on......

Iconoblog is not an article, I think. It is a pastor's blog. Just this 
girl's opinion - obviously the pastor who wrote the criticism didn't read 
the books in full context and think about them from a philosophical 
perspective. Instead, he used the basis of religion: other religious leaders 
have published books (not blog entries) which outline the exact opposite as 
this man does and supports the books' moral implications in line with Bible 
teachings.

Let's try reformulating that sentence to "the books clearly teach that 
obedience to rules or morality is required as a general rule of thumb, 
however rules can be excepted by extenuating circumstances such as threat of 
death or the greater good of all." The original sentence you quoted can 
imply that there are "rules" to morality - whose interpretation of morality 
is that exactly, a religious one? The word "morality" doesn't even belong in 
the same sentence, IMO, as some rules have little to do with morality and 
moral values are interpreted differently by each person for himself.

Mind you, these are characters who are kids, not adults who have the benefit 
of experience to guide their judgements, so they are going to make mistakes 
and get in trouble just like I recall I did as a kid.  This point resonates 
with me, as my mother repeatedly drilled into my head that sooner or later, 
you *have* to stand up and be counted for something, and the easy solution 
(following the rules, for example, when you know something attributed to the 
outcome of a rule is wrong, wrong, wrong) isn't always the *right* one. (God 
bless Mom, if any of you tell her I actually REMEMBER what she taught 
me...well...where is the nearest rock I can hide under?!?!?." :)) When we 
screwed up with the rules, my mother always asked us "why."  The "why" can 
be more important than the rule you broke.

I might suggest the reading of Harry Potter and Philosophy: If Aristotle Ran 
Hogwarts or John Granger's book - perhaps that might help you as you come 
across, IMO, such limited views on the subject.

Charme