Debatable ethical issues in OotP and HBP

[cubfanbudwoman]

No: HPFGUIDX 142414

Carol stated:
> Black has made the bed that he's lying in.

SSSusan:
Wow.  Um.  This really struck me last night, but I decided it was too 
late to try to craft a response.  Fortunately, this morning, I see 
that many people have responded already, making points I would have 
wanted to make myself.  So I can maybe be brief. :-)


Carol:
> He talked James Potter into making Wormtail the Secret Keeper.

SSSusan:
Nora pointed out [in 142396] that James *and* Lily agreed to Sirius' 
SK switch idea; this was not something Sirius DID himself nor FORCED 
upon others.  If Sirius can be blamed for trusting Peter, so can 
James & Lily be.  And as Christina [in 142404] pointed out, 
suggesting the switch did nothing to reduce the risk into which 
Sirius placed himself.


Carol:
> He took matters into his own hands and went after Wormtail rather 
> than going to Dumbledore

SSSusan:
Going after Peter himself was a very "Sirius-like" action, I agree.  
It was *not* particularly wise.


Carol:
> He laughed like a madman when Wormtail killed all the Muggles

SSSusan:
I fail to see how Sirius' laughter speaks to his having "made the bed 
upon which he lies."  Is the suggestion here that he CHOSE to laugh?  
That he KNOWINGLY thought to himself, "Gee. I think *this* would be a 
good time to laugh"?  No, JKR addressed this in the Melissa/Emerson 
interview:  

"The laughter – he was absolutely unhinged by James's death. ...He 
knew what he'd lost. It was a humorless laugh."   It was certainly an 
involuntary reaction, no?


Carol:
> After twelve years in Azkaban, he escaped with the noble intention 
> of murdering his former friend and behaved in ways that reinforced 
> the perception that he was a homicidal maniac

SSSusan:
Post-escape, Sirius' behavior does nothing to dissuade those who 
believe he's a murderer, true.  He's angry and desperate to stop 
Pettigrew from reaching Harry.  He's a fugitive and no one knows the 
truth about himself and Pettigrew, so to whom could he have turned?


Carol:
> He forgoes safety and flies to England to live on rats and hide in 
> caves when he hears that Harry's scar hurts.

SSSusan:
Well, yes, indeed he did this – after Harry's letter which spoke 
about the scar hurting.  Sirius CARES about Harry, who is a *child* 
still.  A parentless child to whom he is godfather.  A child who's 
obviously in danger and whom this godfather has been able to DO 
nothing about for 12 years.  Now he has the chance to DO something.  
He has an obligation, and Harry wants him in his life.  True, Sirius 
could have elected to stay put, to stay safe, so that he'd have a 
better chance of being there later on... but how many of us would 
have done that?  And, as Nora pointed out, how many of us would've 
called that cowardly?  Catch-22.  

I would also point to Eileen's excellent comments [in 142412] as a 
distinct possibility:
> And though we may not know whether Sirius' decision to come back to 
> the UK was entirely his own, we know that Dumbledore told him about 
> the cave, and we know that Dumbledore was using Sirius to keep him 
> informed of what Harry was thinking about and doing right through 
> GoF and OotP, when Dumbledore wasn't willing, due to the link 
> between Harry and Voldemort, to do this himself


Carol:
> He's at least living in his own house with Kreacher and dear old 
> mum for company

SSSusan:
He's "at least" living in his old home.  Um, yes, it was a choice, 
but it's not exactly something which provides comfort to Sirius.  
Short of continuing to stay in Padfoot mode and out in caves, where 
else could Sirius have gone *once* he'd chosen to be near Harry?  I 
would argue that the house triggered in Sirius the same kinds of 
things the Dementors triggered at Azkaban:  desperation, despair, 
depression, frustration.  


Carol:
> He brings Snape's taunts on himself with his incivility.

SSSusan:
Well, Nora's addressed this.  The two of `em were acting like 
juveniles.  But Snape had the upper hand and KNEW it – why couldn't 
he, for once, have let it go, basking in the knowledge that he was 
doing useful work for the Order (presumably) and that this man he 
hated was trapped into inaction?  I guess it just wasn't in Snape's 
nature to have done so (see comments below).


Carol:
> He chooses to remain, drowning his sorrows in self-pity and 
> firewhisky (or whatever he's drinking) and living in the past.

SSSusan:
Wow.  That seems a rather heartless assessment to me.  Sirius is a 
DOer.  Sirius is frustrated, forced into inactivity.  His only other 
choice, as you pointed out, is to go back to his tropical hideaway.  
How does this represent much of a choice for a man who's both a doer 
by nature and who loves and wants to protect his godson?  No, I'm 
convinced of the depression at work here.  I'm convinced JKR wants us 
to think about what 12 YEARS of being surrounded & haunted by 
Dementors, followed by a "freedom" marred by inability to prove one's 
innocence, does to a person:  it causes depression.  And depression, 
as others have noted, ain't just "snap-out-able."  


Carol:
> The responsibility for that wasted life, like the decision to go
> to the MoM, is primarily or entirely his own.

SSSusan:
Again, this strikes me as harsh.  And leads to what I intended to be 
the gist of my post:  making excuses or rationalizations or 
explanations or allowances [choose your term] for characters.  

I'm certain – absolutely certain – that some listees will read my 
above "defenses" of Sirius as rationalization or explaining away or 
whatnot.  And you know what?  They are!  I do look at Sirius' 
situation, at the circumstances in which he finds himself, at his 
personality traits, AS WELL AS his choices.  I attempt to do this for 
other characters, too, not just for Sirius.  But that's where I think 
the "problem" often comes in:  consistency in allowing or doing this 
with other characters, not just the one being defended or trashed.

I've been considering my moniker:  Siriusly Snapey Susan.  I am in 
the rather unusual, so it would seem, position of being both a Sirius 
fan and a believer in Snape's loyalty to DD.  Notice I did not say a 
Snape apologist or Snape defender.  People who know me know I've done 
my share of Snape bashing, and yet I remain convinced of his position 
as DDM!.  I also will acknowledge Sirius' flaws (see a couple of 
acknowledgments above).  But perhaps because I'm not the more 
typical "either-or" HPfGUer when it comes to choosing Sirius *OR* 
Snape to defend or like or believe in, I'm struck by how things which 
are excused in one are often held up as a failing in the other.

Let me try to explain.  

Sirius made CHOICES.  He chose to escape from Azkaban and go after 
Wormtail.  He chose to return to London when Harry began exhibiting 
disturbing signs of Voldy's influence/presence.  He chose to galavant 
about as Padfoot when it wasn't wise.  He chose to remain in his 
family home, which he despised, so that he could be near Harry and 
hopefully be useful to the Order somehow.  He chose to be uncivil to 
Snape & to threaten him when provoked.  He chose to go to the MoM 
when the rest of the available Order members took off to help the DA 
kids.  These *were* all choices... but why were they made?  They 
were, imo, choices influenced by situation, personality 
characteristics, hatred for the Dark Arts and concern for Harry.

Let's look at Snape.  He's made CHOICES, too.  He chose to learn & 
create several dark spells.  He chose to join the DEs.  He chose to 
be a follower of the Dark Lord.  He chose to "return" (DD's word) to 
DD's side.  He chose to teach at Hogwarts.  He chose to engage in 
Order activities of unknown specification.  He chose to be an a**hole 
in the classroom.  He chose to play favorites with several students.  
He chose to behave "like a madman" after Sirius' escape from the 
tower in PoA.  He chose to single out Harry & Neville for humiliation 
and snide, sarcastic remarks.  He chose to treat Harry as if he were 
James.  He chose to rise to Sirius' bait and goad Sirius at 12GP.  He 
chose to inform the Order that Harry, et al., had likely taken off 
for the MoM.  He chose to AK DD.  These *were* all choices... but why 
were they made?  They were, imo, choices influenced by situation, 
personality characteristics and... and what??  

With Sirius we *know* his motivations pretty much, don't we?  We know 
he was rash by nature and anxious to take action.  But we also know 
he wanted to "do right" by James & Lily, wanted to avenge their 
murders, wanted to fight Voldemort and the DEs, wanted to care for 
his godson.  

With Snape, WHAT DO WE KNOW about his motivations?  Very, very 
little, as anyone who visits these boards knows!  I'm a firm DDM!
Snaper myself, and I can argue that position (quite well, I think ;-
)) with evidence and reasonable supposition.  BUT so can the OFH!
Snaper and the ESE!Snaper.  His motivations are ambiguous.  We can't 
say "Snape did X because he cares about Harry" or "Snape risked his 
own life because he believed so fully in DD and the cause."  We can 
think this is possible (or not), but we can't speak with much 
certainty because JKR has left it so open.  He *might* just as easily 
have done X because he's watching out for his own ass.  He *might* 
just as easily have risked his own life because he's gathering 
information to report to Voldemort at the same time.

My point?  That if we're going to judge one character as having "made 
the bed in which he lies," then we ought to judge others the same 
way.  And while it's *easier* to judge Sirius because the picture is 
clearer and his life is over, hasn't Snape made the bed in which he 
lies just as much as – perhaps more than? – Sirius did?  

Eileen said this:
> Sirius was always reckless, but he was recklessly making some very 
> hard choices, with Dumbledore's encouragement, that put him at 
> great risk from Voldemort and the Death Eaters, interposing himself 
> as he did between VM!Harry and Dumbledore.

SSSusan again:
See, I think this is the way to look at things.  WHAT was behind the 
choices made?  With *Sirius* in this particular case, yes, but with 
*all characters* as well?  If we're NOT going to allow, for 
Sirius, "excuses" like rashness as a personality trait or possible 
depression or the impact of 12 years of Dementor presence & the 
frustration of being unable to prove one's innocence regarding 
despicable crimes, then what about Snape?  No "excuses" such as 
Insecure!Snape or Narcissistic!Snape, who can't HELP the way he 
treats the kids, or his inability "by nature" to let go of the James 
grudge and therefore to dissociate Harry from James.  No ignoring 
that Snape likely did some nasty sh*t as a DE, which he *elected* to 
become.  No ignoring that his earlier choices have led to his being 
in a very delicate position now – playing loyal party to both sides, 
teetering always on the brink of someone's discovering the truth.  

I just think the harsh judgment of one character, the writing off of 
him as having "made the bed in which he lies," seemingly ignoring the 
complexity of influences, decisions, happenstance and personality, 
invites the same kind of judgment of other characters.  Do we write 
them off as quickly and easily, or do we justify, explain, and 
rationalize the position they're in and the choices they've made?  
Fairness would require consistency.

Not that I'm perfect in this, but I work at it. ;-)

Siriusly Snapey Susan, hoping she sounds reasonable and not angry.