Vicarious Retribution (long)

[dumbledore11214]

No: HPFGUIDX 128803

Quigonginger wrote:
<SNIP>

I propose that JKR is using a literary sense of "cosmic justice" for 
lack of a better word (or phrase).  "Vengance is mine", saith JKR, so 
to speak.  Harry can not avenge himself for the sufferings he has 
received at that hands of Dudley, Draco and Snape, so JKR does it for 
him.  Perhaps she doesn't want him to sink to their level, but still 
wants these three to pay for what they have done to Harry.  
 
By avenging Harry through others, she allows the reader a sense of 
justice.  Each character gets his comeuppance (or in Snape's case, 
dropdownance) for the way they have treated Harry.  Kind of a "what 
comes around, goes around" philosophy.
   
Notice Harry's reaction to Dudley's tail and Ferret!Draco.  He 
doesn't feel bad for them but he doesn't outright cheer either.  In 
Dudley's case, he goes on to ask Hagrid about magic.  In Draco's 
case, his reaction isn't shown, rather his reaction to Ron's reaction 
is shown.  He laughs at Ron's reaction rather than at Draco.
 
This is in contrast to his reaction to Snape.  In this case, he is 
horrified.  In the grand scheme of things, readers want to see Snape 
shown up by someone, but in the pensieve, it rings hollow.  It is out 
of chronology.  Snape has, in his life, yet to do the things for 
which we wish to see him have to answer.  
<SNIP>
So there you have it.  Vicarious retribution.  Harry won't get back 
at people, but JKR will.  Harry does not need to seek revenge, nor do 
the Snape, Draco and Dudley have to seek atonement.  It has been 
taken care of.



Alla:

I absolutely agree with the idea of "vicarious retribution", only I 
like calling it "carmic payback". I may borrow yours though for my 
future musings.

I will not touch on the connections with the religion, because I 
think we differ a bit on it, but will just comment on this idea 
independently.

I am 100% in a agreement with you that JKR is VERY good on "carmic 
payback punishments", only I used to think that the reason for them 
is simply because direct punishment may not fit with the plot well.

I like your idea that JKR as Creator of the Potterverse may simply 
not want Harry to " make his hands dirty", so she will do it for him.

What I disagree with is that Pensieve scene is there to 
provide  "vicarious retribution" for Snape/Harry interactions.  As 
you mentioned it indeed rings hollow for that because Harry was not 
born yet. :-)

I said it before , but let me say it again - I think that 
Snape/boggart scene is MUCH more fitting candidate for vicarious 
retribution for at least Snape/Neville interactions.

Granted, it does not exactly fits your described pattern ( good 
character does something bad to bad character, etc., unless Pippin 
will be commenting on it, of course :-)), BUT we see Snape humiliated 
and we see Neville laughing at him for the first time in the books, 
even if it is only Boggart.

Personally I think that Snape is still about to receive "vicarious 
retribution" for what he does to Harry. I don't think we read that 
scene yet.

I have to agree with you, unfortunately, I don't believe that Harry 
will punish Snape personally. Too bad, I at least hope we will see 
Harry laughing at him or even better publicly expressing REAL pity 
for him, which Snape will of course take for mockery. :-)

I think pensieve scene is there for different reasons, not very clear 
to us yet.

But this is of course just my opinion and my opinion only,

Alla