Harry Draco and bathroom.

[justcarol67]

No: HPFGUIDX 162619

Carol earlier: 
> 
> > Harry knows quite well that a Cruciatus curse doesn't kill 
> 
Eggplant:
> But the Cruciatus does make its victims wish they were dead. 
> 
Carol earlier:
> > He has felt it himself. He knows exactly what he's protecting
himself from. 
> 
Eggplant:
> Indeed Harry does know what he's protecting himself from. The
> Cruciatus caused a 14 year old boy to wish he were dead. Think about
> that for a second, it's not a cliché or a meaningless phrase, Harry
> was in such pain he really and truly WISHED HE WAS DEAD! You don't
> forget something like that.
> 
> > So Harry isn't protecting himself from death or insanity.
> 
Eggplant:
> So you think that if Harry had done nothing he still might have left
that bathroom with his life and sanity still intact.

Carol:
Now where did I say that Harry should do nothing? I don't expect him
to realize that budding DE!Draco may be no better at casting Crucios
than Harry himself is (being angry doesn't make an effective
Crucio--quite the contrary--you have to be in control, enjoying
causing someone else pain. As someone else pointed out, the DEs don't
cast Crucios in battle. But I do expect him to realize that casting an
unknown spell labeled "for enemies" is not the wisest or most
effective move at this moment. A known defensive spell--a spell
designed for Defense Against the Dark Arts, Harry's forte--would be a
wiser move. I have my doubts about Protego in this instance, but
Expelliarmus or Stupefy or Petrificus Totalus would work just fine.
Better, in fact, than the unknown spell, which horrified Harry and
could have resulted in his killing Draco. And Harry doesn't want to
kill anybody, not even Voldemort, though he knows he has to do so in
the end. (Unless JKR finds a way around it.) 

Like Snape with Harry, Harry hates Draco but doesn't want him dead,
especially by his own hand. I think that if Draco had died, Harry
would have felt terrible. If Ron or Katie had died, I'm not sure that
Draco would have felt the same way. Why? Because Harry's the good guy,
and Draco is a kid who at this point is just learning what death means
and has not yet decided to join the good guys. Maybe he never will.

Eggplant:
 Well maybe, but would it be unreasonable for Harry to think
otherwise, especially as he knows Draco has hated him with passion for
6 years? I think not. If I were Harry protecting myself would receive
a bit more consideration than seeing that no harm came to my torturer.

Carol:
that's not the point. He needs to use a good defensive spell that he
knows will work to protect himself and prevent Draco from attempting a
Crucio, not use some unknown spell designed to hurt an enemy. The good
guys use defensive magic, the bad guys use offensive Dark Arts spells
to attack and hurt. That's a lesson Harry has yet to learn even though
DD keeps telling him that Love is more powerful than hate-based forms
of torture and domination.
> 
Eggplant"
> And Carol, do you really want your literary heros to be that wimpy,
that politically correct?  

Carol:
Me? I don't want anybody to be politically correct. I can't stand
political correctness in any form, which is probably why I hate the
whole SPEW business so much. As for "wimpy," I guess we have to differ
on that. I don't think being in the right, on the side of good,
refusing to stoop to using the weapons of the enemy (or in this case,
to try out unknown spells labeled "For Enemies" which could very well
be Dark) is wimpy. Nor do I want Harry to turn the other cheek and
allow himself to be Crucio'd (assuming that Draco can actually do it).
I just want Harry to behave nobly. You know. Like a hero. There has to
be a difference between evil and good, and I think that both Harry and
Draco have yet to learn it.

Carol, pretty sure that vengeance, hatred, and an eye for an eye are
not the way to defeat Voldemort