Did Snape kill DD - ethical debate

[Miles]

No: HPFGUIDX 143642

> h2so3f wrote:
> <SNIP>
>> It doesn't seem right to judge the 'morality' of a novel (which is
>> not trying to do anything more than simply telling a story) by a
>> reader's own moral standard.

>lupinlore wrote:

> Except that such judging is inevitable and unavoidable.  Whether
> that's good or bad of indifferent or all three, stories do
> have "morals."  Some of them are very conscious morals.  Some are
> very unconscious morals.  Some are sophisticated, some are basic.
> But the morals are always there.

Miles:
I totally agree that the morals of a novel *do* matter. But not in the way
you display it.

Maybe my summary of your remarks will be inaccurately, so correct it if
necessary:
You state that a good novel should have heroes that act in a morally way,
maybe not in every single action, but in general. And your idea is, that
characters which act in an unmoral way are to be "punished" in the course of
the story. Right?

In my opinion the moral factor in valuing a story or novel or film is
different. We will have moral, or better: ethical questions in most stories
told. The question is: are they treated in an adequate way? The characters
should think about right or wrong, they should consider consequences for
themselves or others. And if they do not, we shall see that they can get in
trouble with that. Because this is real life, isn't it? For me, good stories
deal with interesting people. And interesting people think about right or
wrong. And when they do, I can judge about their questions for myself. If
Dumbledore makes a decision I do not appreciate, and I can understand why he
did it, then the Harry Potter series can still be valuable from a moral
point of view.

The other point I disagree with is, that the outcome has to be "just". Why
should it be? Life is not just as well, I'm not trying to find the ideal
world in the books I read. We all know, that bad guys quite often are
successful, and the good guys are the losers. Why not in stories, why not in
Harry Potter? Umbridge is not punished for her actions. I really dislike
this - but it's ok. We know that the ministrial system is corrupt, so why
should it be just in this case?

Heroes who make wrong ethical decisions (read: decisions I do not approve),
and unfair results of actions are ok in stories in general, and they are in
stories for children/teenagers as well. There is no problem if adolescents
*disagree* with their heroes - and I'm quite sure they will do. We should
not overestimate the influence of books on children. They do have their own
opinion.

I do not speak of indoctrinating books, books that hide their ethical values
and try to transport them through the backdoor. Harry Potter is surely not
indoctrinating - the people in the book speak about good and bad, they have
different opinions, and Harry considers his actions.

Miles