Debatable ethical issues in OotP and HBP

[Steve]

No: HPFGUIDX 142359

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lucianam73" <lucianam73 at y...>
wrote:

Preliminary: I've found your recent posts to be very wise,
intelligent, and insightfull; mostly, I've agreed very much with your
positions and enjoyed reading your opinions. HOWEVER, in this case, I
think you are, ...please, no offense intended..., either overly
...gasp... Politically Correct, or your position is
hyper-rationalized. (Sorry)

> lucianam:
>
> Of course it'd be very naïve to expect a book to match one's own 
> moral standards, being part of the reading experience to disagree 
> with the author's views once in while. ButI... Children still 
> can't fully understand that a book is not an infallible source 
> of wisdom, but justsomething someone wrote. ...
> 

bboyminn:

Don't sell children short, they understand more than you think,
though, I must agree they do not have an adult's perspective on life.


> lucianam:
> ...edited...
> 
> Book 5 first. ... JKR chose to show the Single Parent ... in a 
> bad light; two, the other adults' responsibility concerning 
> Sirius was overlooked.
> 
> ... the fact that she chose to write Harry's legitimate guardian,
> a single man appointed by his own mother and father, as a slighty 
> deranged, reckless, moody, tragic man, smelling of booze and `a 
> case of arrested development' too. 
> 

bboyminn:

Yet, to some extent, Sirius was none of those things when he was
appointed guardian (not /Parent/, but guardian) to Harry. This
happened when the characters were in their 20's, and Sirius was James
most trusted and loyal friend, and it occurred in a time of war when
Harry's mortal protections was a higher priority than his personal
happiness. Also, keep in mind that guardians are appointed VERY MUCH
with the hope that they will never have to fulfill their role. 

At the time of guardian appointment, it boiled down to a simple matter
of trust. Who did James and Lily trust above all others, even in spite
of his faults? Sirius, of course.

> lucianam:
> Those characteristics make Sirius clearly unfit as a substitute 
> parent,... I find such a negative portrait of a potential 
> alternative family – Harry and Sirius – in opposition to the 
> perfect family, the Weasleys, to be very unrealistic. ...
> 

bboyminn:

Sirius is who he is, and he has experienced what he has experienced,
and must endure what he must endure, and NONE of that was forseeable
when he was made guardian. Neither Lily, James, or Sirius forsaw that
Sirius would be warped by 12 years in a horrible prison, or that
Sirius would be racked with guilt over the Potter dying based on his
own suggestion. How could anyone have forseen the psychological and
physical torments that Sirius would have to endure? I don't think they
could, and I don't blame Sirius for being troubled by the experience.

I think part of the appeal of the JKR books, especially to young
people, is that the world and the people in it are just as flawed and
imperfect as people are in real life. Not many kids have a 'Leave it
to Beaver' father. Not many kids live happy unconcerned untroubled
stress free lives. It's that clean but gritty realism, and lack of
moralizing and cermonizing that invokes a very 'close to home' sense
of reality in the story.

> lucianam:
>
> On to more OotP disagreement. 
> 
> Why was it okay to leave Sirius to his own devices, if it was 
> clear even to Harry ... that he was depressed? It struck me as an 
> ugly case of abandonment. ... I don't even know if JKR noticed she 
> wrote it! 
> 

bboyminn:

Sirius is living under extreme circumstances and very little can be
done about it. They are at war, the greatest threat to wizarding
society has returned, and the stupid self-serving government is
refusing to even acknowledge it. Further, not only are they not
acknowledging it, that are actively trying to supress, intimidate,
discredit, and even elimintate the people who are trying to spread the
truth.

So, Sirius is depressed. Here are his choices; he can live depressed
or he can die depressed. He is an escaped criminal, the most notorious
murderer and escapee in the wizard world. Ten thousand Galleon reward
on his head. He is being hunted across continents. He is believe to be
so dangerous that it seems obvious that any law enforcement that
encounters him, will shoot first and ask questions later. 

So, which is worse, being depressed or being shot dead in the streets?



> lucianam:
> All we have is Sirius having `fits of the sullens', avoiding contact 
> with the others, retiring to Buckbeak's room, etc. It gives the 
> reader the impression it was all his own choice, perhaps to excuse 
> the members of the Order (and Dumbledore) of their responsability 
> towards a friend in need.
> 

bboyminn:

Sirius's situation is temporary. He only has to stay in hiding until
Voldemort, or at least Peter, comes out of hiding, then it will be
obvious that Sirius is innocent, and Dumbledore and others can work on
getting his conviction overturned. It could be a month or it could be
a year before Voldemort is discovered, but none the less the situation
is temporary.

Also, keep in mind that Sirius isn't a prisoner, he can leave and go
to China or Australia any time he wants. All he has to do is walk out
the door. But /he binds himself/ to Grimmauld place out of a sense of
duty and loyalty. Miserable as it is, war brings out the heroes even
in the worst of us.

> lucianam:
> Dumbledore has his line of excuse .... But isn't Sirius, as quoted 
> above, a case of arrested development? Twelve years in Azkaban 
> count for nothing? 
> 

bboyminn: 

Indeed Sirius endured 12 years at Azkaban and endured it far better
the most others who died very quickly under the influence of the
Dementors. What is a few month is a luxury London townhome compared to
 12 years being tortured and tormented by the Dementors? 

Sirius is strong, far stronger than most, certainly he can endure
being shut in a comfortable home with occassional company, when the
alternative is an adventerous but very quick death?

> ...edited...
> 
> 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.
> 
> ...
> 
> What I'm saying is: I very much object to how little_ or even none _ 
> room to debate JKR left in those two paragraphs. ...edited...
> 

bboyminn:

Funny, you see a moral dilemma, and I see a heroic speech. Remember,
Harry is not talking about seeking out DE's and killing them. He is
talking about fighting to the bitter end and never giving up. He is
talking about himself being killed, but that he will never surrender
to that fate. He will fight against all odds against those who are
bent on killing him, and when they finally do kill him, he will simply
not lay down and die, but he will take as many of his enemy down with
him as he can.

You find that immoral, but I find it very inspiring, and I suspect
many kids are also inspired by Harry's fearless never-give-up
never-give-in attitude. In fact, I think Harry sounds very much like
the much admired Windson Churchill.

Winston Churchill -Speech before Commons June 4, 1940

" We shall not flag nor fail. We shall go on to the end. We shall
fight in France and on the seas and oceans; we shall fight with
growing confidence and growing strength in the air. We shall defend
our island whatever the cost may be; we shall fight on beaches,
landing grounds, in fields, in streets and on the hills. We shall
never surrender and even if, which I do not for the moment believe,
this island or a large part of it were subjugated and starving, then
our empire beyond the seas, armed and guarded by the British Fleet,
will carry on the struggle until in God's good time the New World with
all its power and might, sets forth to the liberation and rescue of
the Old."

> Lucianam:
>
> `I see,' said Dumbledore eventually, peering at Harry over the 
> top of his half-moon spectacles .... `And you feel that you have
> exerted your very best efforts in this matter, do you? That you 
> have exercised all of your considerable ingenuity? That you have 
> left no depth of cunning umplumbed in your quest to retrieve the 
> memory?'
> 
> When was the last time I read about, or watched a movie about a wise 
> and righteous mentor telling his young apprentice to leave `no depth 
> of cunning umplumbed' to get something?  I can't remember! Yoda and 
> Obi Wan-Kenobi never told Luke anything even remotely similar.
> 

bboyminn:

Maybe we have different definitions of cunning, but I'm pretty sure
they all, indirectly, said exactly that. 


> Lucianam:
> ...edited...
> 
> ... Harry Potter can be very deceptive sometimes, with all its 
> plot twists, funny bits and (now) Horcruxes – there's also a lot
> of ideas underneath, and I  confess not all of them are fine with 
> me. Constant vigilance!
> 
> Lucianam

bboyminn:

Dumbledore is simply asking Harry if he has done everything he could
to achieve an important and vital task, or whether he has blown it off
and spent his time screwing around. Harry admits to screwing around. 

I think you are making much more of this than is really there. You
seem to be taking acception to one small group of words while ignoring
the context and the importance of the situation. This memory is
critial, and it is already established that Slughorn will not give
Dumbledore the full version. That leaves Harry and Slughorn's fondness
for Lily as tools to complete the vital task. Harry admits he has only
been half-heartedly trying and has been distracted by other things. He
see that Dumbledore takes this as a critical task, he admits his
mistake, and promises to do better, and indeed does.

Dumbledore is simply repeating various forms of 'Did you /really/
try?'. Nothing more, nothing less.

I guess we can't agree all the time.

Steve/bboyminn