Did Snape kill DD - ethical debate

[lupinlore]

No: HPFGUIDX 143660

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Miles" <miles at m...> wrote:
>
<SNIP>
> 
> 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?
> 


Sure.  But that isn't an objective standard.  There ARE no objective 
standards in literature.  Literature, like morality itself I'm 
afraid, is a fundamentally political process where you take your side 
and you fight it out.

So, yes, if JKR is a good writer then Snape and Umbridge will be 
specifically and severely punished.  That is a political position, 
which is to say it's a moral and literary one.  

<SNIP>

> 
> 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?

No, I don't think it's okay, because it would be extraordinarily poor 
writing -- and has been up to this point.  Of course, we aren't 
finished with Umbridge, yet, so we'll see.


Lupinlore