Is Harry a Murderer / Killer!! ?? !! Yeah or Nah??<snipped>

[sistermagpie]

No: HPFGUIDX 151379

> ET:
> 
> He used poor judgement in using that spell, but remember the other 
> spell in the book & what it did?  It hoisted people into the air 
by 
> their ankles- it was more of a prank than dangerous & may have 
> predisposed Harry to believe the Sectumsempra would be an 
innocuous 
> spell as well.  (Come to think of it, it's a shame he didn't try 
that 
> one out on Draco in the bathroom...flip him upside down and then 
> disarm him! :D )

Magpie:
He did try that, but Draco blocked it, iirc.

I think a lot of this thread is, while not a bad thing, not really 
about what the scene is doing in the story when it goes into  
justifying or getting Harry off.  Harry himself has a healthy 
instinct to justify himself as well, yet he still feels badly, so 
there's a reason.  (Also Draco's being able to walk really seems 
beside the point; who wants to play down that awesome twitching 
Slytherin bleeding out in a puddle in the bathroom just because 
there's no stretcher? Harry's looking death in the face there?)

The reason has a lot, imo, to do with what Harry knows he did.  Yes, 
he didn't know what the spell did on one level, but on another level 
it did what he asked it to do.  The Prince has not done him "only 
good" up to this point at all.  How "good" the Prince is has always 
been a question.  What it has been is powerful and efficient, which 
is exactly what it is here.  The instruction "for enemies" is just 
the right sinister warning.  Harry feels guilty because it wasn't 
just a case of pushing the wrong button--he directed emotion at 
Draco and saw it writ large on him.  It's like asking a genii for 
something--he got what he wanted.

In terms of whether one can escalate after an Unforgivable, I think 
of course you can.  That's why Neville and Harry are walking around 
fine after Crucios and a person dead from any non-unforgivable spell 
isn't.  Crucio itself is different depending on the person and 
context, imo.  Adults who use it that we see are sadists genuinely 
torturing.  Teenaged boys in the heat of anger are throwing their 
own pain and someone else.  At least that's certainly what I see 
from the teenaged boys who have tried to throw it.  This is not to 
dismiss Draco's throwing it--had he been able to sustain or actually 
cast one in his emotional state he may well have continued casting 
it until Harry was seriously hurt.  But I still don't think that 
makes the scene about justifying Harry's mistake. They're both 
fighting, emotions are high, someone gets hurt, Harry happens to be 
the one left standing in the pool of blood.

One of the unique things about that scene, too, is that it's the one 
time Harry's fought with Draco when Harry *isn't* angry at him.  He 
knows he's come upon somebody in a state somewhat like a cornered, 
wounded animal.  Draco hasn't insulted him in the scene for once; 
Harry's blood isn't up, and he yet he does all this damage.  Harry 
gets a mild punishment (and a reward of a girlfriend and the 
Quidditch cup and within minutes it's all about Snape anyway), Draco 
gets time in the infirmary.  They both get a scare.  Nobody's coming 
to arrest Harry, so we don't have to prove whether "no court in the 
world" would convict him (even if fandom doesn't seem to come to a 
consensus!).  It's Harry's own conscience that's keeping the case 
from being completely closed at this point. I guess we'll just wait 
to see whether that actually leads to something in Book VI (which I 
would hope it would--I wouldn't expect Harry to visit Draco in the 
infimary, nor would I expect Dumbledore to insist on them working it 
out as he might in the real world, but I do think it's a bit odd to 
have the two of them just go off and never speak of this incident 
again...it seems a rather intimate experience) or if it's just there 
to imply Harry is a sensitive guy.  That seems a little off to me.  
I'm pulling for more to come.

-m