Harsh Morality (was Re: Double standards and believing)

[lupinlore]

No: HPFGUIDX 121006


--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "delwynmarch" 
<delwynmarch at y...> wrote:
> 
> Lupinlore wrote:
> (snip highly interesting explanation)
> "In JKR's world, your actions are good or not according to an
> objective  standard of who you're helping, your own personal beliefs
> and intentions and morals seem to have very little, if anything, to 
do
> with it.
> 
> Now that might not seem very fair.  But if one believes in Good and 
> Evil as Platonic existants, as JKR seems to in the HP saga, it is 
> perfectly logical."
> 
> Del replies:
> Fascinating! I had never seen things like this. But it does explain
> the Potterverse quite nicely. And it ties in very well with Renee's
> explanation that in the Potterverse being loyal to DD seems to be 
the
> main moral compass.
> 
<SNIP>

As this discussion continues, I am growing more and more convinced 
that JKR is, at heart, espousing a rather old-fashioned form of 
Christian moralism in the Potter Saga.  That is, I truly think at 
heart she is a Christian Platonist, someone who believes that Good 
and Evil are very real metaphysical principals, and that the goodness 
or evil of actions, beliefs, and even human beings is not determined 
by their intentions or reasoning, but by the extent to which they 
obey the harsh demands of one principle or the other.  

Note in Dumbledore's speech about choosing between "What is right and 
what is easy," he leaves absolutely no room for middle ground.  You 
either choose what is right or you don't, PERIOD.  It is also 
instructive that Sirius says "The world isn't divided into good 
people and Death Eaters," but he DOES NOT say "The world isn't 
divided into good people and evil people."  I think all our recent 
conversations about grey areas are, in a way, missing the heart of 
JKR's morality, because I'm just not very sure she really believes in 
grey areas as such.  It is a very harsh morality, but let me give 
some examples.

Dumbledore's decision to leave Harry with the Dursleys.  I have been 
extremely critical of this decision, and I have been hoping we would 
see some exploration of its consequences.  I have been hoping that 
eventually we would see a greater confession on Dumbledore's part 
that this was an extremely grey area and that he proceeded with great 
misgivings and heartache, as well as a greater acknowledgement of 
pain Harry has suffered due to Dumbledore's decision.  But I regret 
to say I am becoming convinced we will see no such.  In the harsh 
morality of the Potterverse I don't think there is room for such 
heartache and acknowledgement of Harry's pain and the injustice of 
DD's decision on any plane.  DD did what was necessary to uphold THE 
GOOD in a Platonic sense.  His action was RIGHT, full stop, no 
apology or sense that perhaps the morals and priorities weren't clear 
or that Harry deserves a chance to challenge the assumptions that 
have caused him so much pain.  That is extremely distasteful to me to 
admit, but I am becoming convinced that such is JKR's stand.

In the case of Percy and Draco once again I don't think JKR sees a 
true grey area.  Percy and Draco have chosen to uphold the Evil 
principle.  Percy's reasoning in breaking with his family, his 
sincerity or lack of it, is entirely irrelevant.  He has not done 
what was RIGHT.  The fact that Draco has not ever had a 
counterexample in his family once again I don't think cuts any ice 
with JKR.  There is good and there is evil and Draco has chosen the 
wrong side, full stop.

The question of Snape is one of the opposite case.  Snape supports 
the side of THE GOOD.  His reasons for doing so, I think in JKR's 
eyes, are ultimately irrelevant.  The fact that he causes pain and 
heartache wherever he appears also seems to be irrelevant to JKR.  
There is good and there is evil and Snape has chosen THE GOOD, full 
stop.

Is JKR trying to say something about complex morality in the HP 
saga?  The more I think of it the more I think she is saying 
something in exactly the opposite direction.  She seems to be 
implying that morality is harsh, Good and Evil are real, and human 
ideas about justice or reason or individual worth or even the right 
to be loved and comforted are not very important in the great scheme 
of things.  You either support the good principle or the evil 
principle, there is no middle ground and there is no quibbling.  JKR 
has said she doesn't care if she has only six fans when she is 
finished.  I think a lot of people (including me) have assumed that 
means things will come to a very confused, complex, and possibly grey 
conclusion.  I am starting to believe that, on the contrary, we will 
see an end that is shocking in its harshness and clarity.

Lupinlore