Anger, Sectumsempra and cheating (was Apologies and responsibility)

[delwynmarch]

No: HPFGUIDX 139324

Lupinlore wrote:
"True, Harry does take out his anger on the relatively innocent,
sometimes (and I'm not at all sure Ron and/or Hermione are blameless 
in the situations where Harry yells at them),"

Del replies:
Are you saying that they should be blamed for not breaking a *promise*
they had been forced to make to DD of not giving Harry any detail in
their letters? Then by the same token, I guess you are also blaming
Harry for not breaking the promise he made to DD of obeying his every
command in the Cave, and for deliberately poisoning DD?

Let's be serious: Harry had *no right* to yell at Ron and Hermione for
not doing what he wanted them to do. He has no right to demand
anything from them to start with, and he has no right to expect them
to break their promise just so he can have his way. I don't care how
much stress he was under, they had made a promise, and they had every
right in the world to keep it.

Are you also saying that Ron and Hermione should be blamed for
interacting in a way that Harry doesn't like? So they bicker. So what?
It's their right. If Harry doesn't like it, let him walk away. He has
no right to shout at them for doing it, he is not their parent or
anything.

I'm a bit surprised that so many people still consider that Harry's
anger in OoP was normal and OK. OoP is the book where Harry was in
permanent contact with LV's mind and emotions. So how can it be a
coincidence that throughout that book, and in that book *only*, Harry
displays a much nastier temper than usual? It is no coincidence to me,
it's pretty obvious to me that Harry was very heavily influenced by
LV's personality. All those fits of unrighteous anger, this desire to
dominate others, to make them act as he wants, to have his way, they
come straight from LV! The real Harry is not like that at all. Even
when devoured with jealousy in HBP, he never gives in to his impulses
to beat the life out of Dean, he doesn't do or say *anything* that
shows to Dean that he's displeased with him in any way. Hey, he even
offers the guy a place on the Quidditch team! Now, *that* is the Harry
I know and like.

Lupinlore wrote:
"we have lost touch with some important aspects of social morality --
righteous anger being one of them.  There is even plentiful
theological, and if you will specifically Christian, justification for
it.  One only has to think of Christ addressing the Pharisees with
stinging taunts, or the driving the moneychangers out of the temple in
a fit of rage.  Jesus was not always kind or patient, and sometimes
displayed a towering temper when confronted by evil and hypocrisy."

Del replies:
Not a good idea to bring Jesus in the mix :-)

First, Jesus showed anger in only two occasions, if my memory serves
me well. Both times, he chased the money-changers out of *his
Father's* House. His anger was never about himself: it was about the
respect due to God. Jesus never got angry about anything people did to
*him*. It's only when he came accross people who showed blatant
disrespect for God and committed a hideous sacrilege by carrying on a
very secular (and some say evil - some theories have it that the
money-changers were robbing the faithful with their artificially
inflated exchange rates) task right inside the walls of the sacred
Temple, all the while pretending to be working for Him, that he
reacted strongly.

Compare that with the many times in OoP when Harry got angry in his
own interest only. "Nobody tells me anything", "you annoy me", "you
don't believe me", and so forth and so on. Those are episodes of
selfish anger, not at all comparable with Jesus' righteous anger.

Second, Jesus also said things like (King James Version):

Matthew 5:

21 Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not
kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment:
22 But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother
without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever
shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but
whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.

38 Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a
tooth for a tooth:
39 But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall
smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.

43 Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy
neighbour, and hate thine enemy.
44 But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you,
do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully
use you, and persecute you;
45 That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for
he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth
rain on the just and on the unjust.
46 For if ye love them which love you, what reward have ye? do not
even the publicans the same?
47 And if ye salute your brethren only, what do ye more than others?
do not even the publicans so?

So, well, let's not drag Jesus into this, OK :-) ?

---

Concerning Sectumsempra, the thing that really bothers me is how could
Harry be stupid enough to try it on a human being?? Levicorpus wasn't
labeled "for enemies", and yet it's hardly something one would use on
their friends. Sectumsempra was clearly labeled "for enemies", so
Harry should have *known* to be cautious in trying it. *Especially*
since he didn't know the counter-curse!! This is EXACTLY the same kind
of mistake he made when he jumped into Snape's Pensieve: he gave in to
curiosity, without ever wondering how he would get out of it. The
Levicorpused!Ron incident should have made him wary of trying a curse
whose counter he didn't know. But no, he was itching to try it, so
ahead he went... Harry, Harry, Harry... If at least he had tried it on
an animal or even an object first, just to get an idea of what it did!

---

On to cheating now.

Lupinlore wrote:
"Harry was doing what he had been instructed to do -- i.e. prepare a
potion."

Del replies:
No, he wasn't. There was a textbook assigned for the class, and the
unspoken rule was that students would work out of that book. If a RL
chemistry student started using chemist!Daddy's notes to do their
class work instead of the teacher's instructions, I don't think the
teacher would be happy. Hermione doesn't bring other books to class,
and that's because the unspoken rule is that you follow the
instructions in the designated class book.

Lupinlore wrote:
"He never claims to have invented the directions himself,"

Del replies:
By not saying the truth when he realised that other people, including
the teacher, thought that the directions came from him, he committed a
lie by omission.

Lupinlore wrote:
"he did not gain these directions in a dishonest manner,"

Del replies:
Not at first. But when he deliberately gave the wrong book back to
Slughorn, he acted dishonestly. He pretended to give back the book he
had been lent, when in fact he gave another one. From then on, all the
directions he received from the book were indeed obtained in a
dishonest manner.

Lupinlore wrote:
"and offers to share them with his classmates."

Del replies:
Only when that suits him. He didn't give the Bezoar hint to Ron.

Lupinlore wrote:
"True, he receives praise from Slughorn, but it is obvious that
Slughorn is just seizing an excuse to butter him up.  Had Harry
protested that he was following different directions, Sluggy would
undoubtedly have said "Nothing of it, dear boy!  It just shows your
cleverness and initiative!""

Del replies:
That's not the point. What Slughorn would or wouldn't do doesn't
matter. What matters is what Harry did and didn't do. And the fact is
that he deliberately let Slughorn believe that he, Harry, was the
inventor of the enhancements, which was not true.

Lupinlore wrote:
"In any case, in no class that I have ever taught, and I have taught
many, would Harry's actions be considered cheating in any way -- nor
can I imagine any of my colleagues would have ever looked upon them in
that way."

Del replies:
You're lucky. In all classes I've ever been, what Harry did would have
been considered characterised cheating. Being caught using someone
else's notes was a very sure way to achieve a zero. In fact, just
*having* the notes with us garanteed a zero, whether or not we used
them! The whole point of doing our own experiments was to see how well
we could do when following a particular protocol. Having notes that
gave us shortcuts or that provided us with ways to go around the weak
points of the protocol defeated the whole point of us making those
experiments. It's like putting an engine on your bike before entering
a bike race. It's cheating.

Lupinlore wrote:
"In the environment in which I now work, a professional milieu outside
of an academic setting, Harry would be highly commended for initiative
and flexibility of thinking."

Del replies:
*Trying* the enhancements to see what they do is indeed a sign of
initiative and flexibility of thinking. But just applying them without
understanding in the least how they work is not a sign of anything,
except of choosing the easy way.

Lupinlore wrote:
"If Harry had published the HBP's directions under his own name, THAT
would be plagiarism and theft of intellectual property, but Harry does
no such."

Del replies:
Was it his name that appeared next to all those great grades, or was
it Snape's? Harry presented all the modifications as his own, he
*never* said they came from Snape. In my eyes, this is like a junior
research assistant presenting a team's findings without ever
mentioning his senior partner. 

Lupinlore wrote:
"Similarly, in my current professional environment, Hermione would
recieve high formal marks, but would swiftly gain the reputation of
being myopic and hopelessly hidebound with literal and restrictive
interpretations, and her chances for promotion would be dwindling
rapidly."

Del replies:
Yes, but Potions class is a formal environment. It is an academic
environment where the students are supposed to work by the book unless
specifically told otherwise. The fact is that Harry did not follow the
class instructions, so he couldn't be tested against his fellow
classmates. By pretending to be following the rules when he was using
someone else's notes, he cheated. It's that simple for me.

JMO, of course :-)

Del