Debatable ethical issues in OotP and HBP

[lealess]

No: HPFGUIDX 142360

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lucianam73" <lucianam73 at y...> 
wrote:
>
> <SNIP> 
> Book 5 first. IMO there are two objectionable situations in OotP, 
> both of them concerning Sirius. One, JKR chose to show the Single 
> Parent (as opposite to the Standard Family) in a bad light; two, 
> the other adults' responsibility concerning Sirius was overlooked.
> <SNIP>
> Now, HBP. It got a little worse.
> 
> `But while I was at the Dursleys',' interrupted Harry, his voice 
> growing stronger, `I realised I can't shut myself away or _ or 
> crack up. Sirius wouldn't have wanted that, would he? And anyway, 
> life's too short 
 look at Madam Bones, look at Emmeline Vance 
 it 
> could be me next, couldn't it? But if it is,' he said fiercely, now 
> looking straight into Dumbledore's blue eyes, gleaming in the wand-
> light, `I'll make sure I take as many Death Eaters with me as I 
> can, and Voldemort too if I can manage it.'
> 
> `Spoken both like your mother and father's son and Sirius's true 
> godson!' said Dumbledore,  with an approving pat on Harry's back. 
> `I take my hat off to you _ or I would, if I were not afraid of 
> showering you in spiders.
> (from Chapter 2, `Horace Slughorn')
> 
> That sent shivers down my spine. In two very small paragraphs, in 
> short sentences coming out of the mouths of the biggest heros in 
> the series, JKR demolishes centuries of religious, ethical and 
> moral debate. Yes, children, it's allright to kill Death Eaters. As 
> many as you can!  
> 
> The problem word in that sentence being, of course, kill.
> 

Wading in here with trepidation.

I agree with you more than not.  I find much of the moral 
underpinnings of the books disturbing, to put it mildly.  The 
whole "girls follow the boys" message of HBP really depressed me.

I think the book 5 Sirius situation serves a literary purpose.  
Sirius' relationship vis-à-vis Harry serves to put him and his 
special "love" magic at peril, serves to isolate him and make him 
vulnerable to dark magic.  It is the same with Dumbledore, to a 
degree.  Dumbledore was reprehensible in HBP, stringing Harry along, 
as usual, on miniscule information, then leaving him to face a 
situation in which Harry not only is out for revenge, but may feel 
lingering guilt over his inability to prevent the death of someone he 
loves.  I think Harry's temptation by darkness may be a more 
pronounced theme in the next book, and the sacrifices of both Sirius 
and Dumbledore will play into that, as well as the counterbalancing 
loyalty and comradeship of Ron and Hermione, and Harry's one-
dimensional perception of "evil" villians.  Whether Harry will yield 
to bloodthirsty revenge and a full-on battle warp has yet to be seen, 
though significantly, he is now willing.

I don't underestimate the significance of that, either.  I think it 
is a dangerous message to send to youth, that violence is the answer 
to conflict.  The first time I finished HBP, I had a very strong 
reaction to Harry and his friends dropping out of school to, 
essentially, go off to war.  There are too many children fighting 
wars in this world.  I was disturbed by Harry's professed willingness 
to kill, as well.  I don't think that's a good message for anyone, 
but
 it may not be the message, ultimately.  Draco is an example of 
someone whose whole world was turned upside down when he tried to be 
a good soldier (perhaps not altogether willingly).

I agree that Sirius is depressed, and the adults just expect him to 
get over it.  It is the wizarding world, however, where they drop 
children out of windowd to see if they are magic and pit kids against 
dragons and hire purported psycho ex-Aurors to teach classes, and on 
and on.  I guess Rowling is trying to make the wizarding world 
unattractive.  You read the first book and think, oh, cool, I want to 
live in that world.  As you go along and the dirty underwear of the 
wizarding world is revealed, it is less attractive and more like our 
world, only a bit more rough.

As for Sirius being a single parent: he really doesn't have much of 
an opportunity to parent, though he tries, his support for Harry 
mainly echoing Harry's frustrations and suspicions.  I can't remember 
any other overt examples of single parents (except maybe Blaise 
Zambini's mom?) in the books.  For being full of a bunch of 
supposedly zany eccentrics, wizarding society seems extremely 
socially conservative in all ways, and disapproving of any variance.

> I had to read HBP a second time to convince myself Dumbledore was 
> not an impostor, just because of those two paragraphs.
> 

I've read theories that it wasn't Dumbledore who chided Harry into 
getting Slughorn's memory "by any means necessary" but rather someone 
polyjuiced to look like him.  Who knows?  Dumbledore was behaving 
peculiarly throughout the book, as if he was running out of time and 
patience.  It started at the Dursleys, where he knocks them on the 
head with drinks (which some found amusing, but I found rude), then 
scolds them for abusing their son, without going into detail.  So why 
was he behaving so strangely?  He may have been dying.

lealess