Wrong-headed Compassion/Murder in self-defense

[dumbledore11214]

No: HPFGUIDX 162752

> > Alla:
> > 
> > The difference of course would be that Draco may think that Harry 
> > has a reason to kill him ( no matter how irrational this thought 
> > seems to me), but Draco shows Harry that he attacks him with 
> > Unforgiveable and Harry does not attack him first.
> > I mean, is the desire to absolve Draco so great that you honestly 
> > and truly equal these two?
> 
> Magpie:
> I was being sarcastic--I don't really want to absolve Draco. But if 
> I was dead set on doing it I would probably just find excuses for 
> why Harry did give Draco reason to think he was going to kill him 
> despite not throwing an Unforgivable (which are not all deadly any 
> way). Harry actually did throw a deadly spell, and I'd probably use 
> that as retroactive evidence that Draco should have feared death. 
> I'd find a way to make everything he did self-defense even if he 
> struck first or wasn't in physical danger.

Alla:

Oh, good, good :) And yes, we can find excuses for every character 
easily if we wish so. :)

But speaking seriously, I told you earlier that I agree with you that 
I think that JKR means for us to take the murder or murder attempts 
very seriously in the book ( all of them) and she means for Harry to 
think about it, but I am not sure if she does not mean the self-
defense situation to be a bit different from all other murder 
attempts.

And I am not even only talking about bathroom scene, where while to 
me it is absolutely clear that Harry was defending himself, JKR 
throws in a twist of Harry using a deadly spell.

I am talking about Harry killing Voldemort at the end. Now, because 
of general depiction of the murders in the book I share the view that 
Harry will not have Voldemort's blood on his hands, I believe that 
Voldemort will die, but because of some unconventional twist.

BUT I am not completely sure of that. At the reading in NY JKR said 
something to the effect that while most of her characters are 
redeemable, Voldemort is not one of them, that he is psychopath, etc.

So, I am not sure that JKR will not make Harry kill Voldemort after 
all and not hold it against him in the slightest, strictly because 
she will make it clear that it was self-defense, unique situation.

And I am pretty convinced that if Harry kills Voldemort ( which as I 
said I am more inclined to believe that he will not), it will be 
called self-defense even if Harry kills him in his sleep.

Does it make sense? I think it is pretty easy to see what JKR views 
about murders are, but I honestly believe that there is a possibility 
that she may view self-defense as different.


> Magpie:
> I was almost completely joking.:-) Don't worry, I don't actually 
> agree with that defense of Draco. I don't agree with the attitude 
> about Harry either. I'm not the biggest fan of Dumbledore, but I'd 
> much rather have him as a general than someone with this view of 
war 
> or fighting.
> 
<SNIP>

Alla:

Glad to know it is you after all :)

So, to make myself completely clear  I do not agree with Eggplant 
that this scene must be glorified, or anything like that. As I said 
many times I believe it is justified, except for Sectusemptra coming 
into Harry head originally, but I sure would not want Harry going 
around using it.

Now, Eggplant seems to want bloodbath at the end, I respect the wish, 
but I do not believe such wish would be granted. IMO of course and I 
can be wrong.

I mean, I can sympathise, since I also really want to see something 
at the end, which I strongly doubt I will get - nice long scene of 
Snape utterly humiliated by Harry and begging him of something - his 
life would be nice, but anything will do. I mean, I would be lucky if 
I will get couple of sentences of similar something, or maybe nothing 
at all.

JMO,

Alla.