Harsh Morality - Combined answers

[horridporrid03]

No: HPFGUIDX 121262



>> Betsy wrote earlier:
>Some of the *characters* may have their own harsh morality, but that 
point of view is treated rather dimly by the author.  (See the 
tragedy that is the House of Crouch.)<
 
>>Del replied:
>I disagree. Even the Crouch example shows that there is Good and 
there is Evil, and if you partake of Evil even for apparently good 
reasons, then you're evil. The reason Crouch fell is because he used 
the tools of Evil : he allowed the Aurors to use the Unforgivables 
during VWI, he didn't let his son, a DE, pay for his crime, and he 
used an Unforgivable on him. Crouch partook of Evil, and by doing so 
he became evil too.<

Betsy:
I disagree that Crouch is depicted as "evil."  He does start to use 
the tools of evil (or tyranny anyway), and I think most readers can 
see that the Crouch government is heading in a wrong direction, but 
evil seems a bit harsh.  Crouch is respected by other wizards, 
including those whose judgement we tend to trust, like Arthur 
Weasley, and there isn't anything in the narrative that clues us into 
the idea that this man is evil.  His story is one of tragedy - not 
moral justice.

>>Del:
>Inversely, when talking of DD, in PS/SS, McGonagall basically says 
that one reason DD is Good is because he refuses to use Dark Magic.<

Betsy:
McGonagall doesn't say Dumbledore is good *because* he doesn't use 
Dark Magic, she says, "[he's] too -- well -- noble to use them." (SS 
paperback, pg. 11).  It might seem like I'm nitpicking, but I think 
it's an important difference.  Out of his goodness, Dumbledore 
doesn't use magic in a wrong way - the way he uses magic doesn't 
*cause* his goodness.

>>Del:
>Redeemed!Draco is a theory about the future, he's a possibility, so 
he's irrelevant to the point I was making. What is relevant is the 
way Draco is being described as being *now* (bad bad bad), and what 
kind of judgment the author seems to pass on him (bad to the core - 
she called him a bad boy or something like that, after all).<

Betsy:
I *was* talking about Draco now.  The very fact that there are 
theories that Draco could be redeemed and that those theories use 
cannon as support means that there are sympathetic messages towards 
Draco in the text currently.  Which means that no matter what JKR 
says in an interview, as an author she is *not* writing Draco as 
repulsively evil.  And JKR can write repulsively evil characters - 
Umbridge or Lord Voldermort for example.  Harry thinks Draco is bad, 
bad, bad.  The author, however, seems to have a slightly different 
take.

>> Del:
>Snape is the only truly grey character IMO. But you'll notice that 
when commentating on him, JKR systematically condemns his behaviour, 
and she doesn't seem to understand that some readers should like him.
<snip of a scurrilous attack on our sweet Ron ;P>
>You'll also notice that the *only* thing that redeems Snape is that 
he works for DD. He's written as a completely black character with a 
white lining, not as a truly grey character.<

Betsy:
Again, I don't care what JKR says in interviews.  If it's in the 
books, it's in the books.  And there is too much reader sympathy for 
Snape for me to accept that Snape's only good side is his support of 
Dumbledore.  Like my previous nitpick I don't see a goodness in Snape 
because he's thrown in with Dumbledore.  I believe it's Snape's 
goodness that has caused him to team up with Dumbledore to overthrow 
Voldemort. 

>>Del:
>Fudge is more what I consider a grey character : not working for 
either DD or LV. And he's very clearly condemned for this greyness, 
right from the end of GoF.<

Betsy:
And see, I'd condemn Fudge for his weakness, not his greyness.  Fudge 
is actually a fairly clear cut character.  I don't think there are 
any hidden depths to him.  He's no supporter of Voldemort, but he's a 
coward with delusions of granduer and he does point out the danger of 
power in the hands of a weak man.
 
>> Betsy wrote: 
>If the characters were as black and white, if the Potterverse was as 
unforgiving, as you're saying it is, I don't think the books would be 
nearly as interesting...<

>>Del replied:
>First, there are many people who like black-and-white moralities, 
especially among the children. Second, there are *many* interesting 
things in HP apart from its morality.<

Betsy:
I should have been clearer, sorry!  *I* would not find the books 
nearly as interesting if they were a simple morality tale.  Of course 
I do enjoy a ripping tale of good vs. evil.

Betsy, who's up way past her bedtime and cannot think of a good 
closing so is just going to end.