Hiding from Voldmort / Moral Relativism (was:Re: witches of the world...

[horridporrid03]

No: HPFGUIDX 160938

> >>Betsy Hp:
> > Well, (a) you're assuming someone *can* easily flee from 
> > Voldemort's wrath, which ignores all the canon speaking towards 
> > the severely shortened life-expectency of anyone on the  "Must   
> > kill now" list... 
> > <snip>

> >>Phoenixgod2000
> Of course most of the people on that list stayed in country       
> because they wanted to fight against him.
> <snip>

Betsy Hp:
Actually, I was thinking about Regulus and Karkaroff, neither of 
whom were worried about fighting Voldemort (as far as we know 
anyway) and neither of whom were bound to the UK for any reason.

IIRC Lupin says something about the impossibility of fleeing 
Voldemort once he's decided you're toast.  I suspect that the reason 
the murders we know of occur in the UK is author convenience more 
than anything else.

> >>Betsy Hp:
> > And (b) I think you're selling short the danger inherent in     
> > going to a *Death Eater* for help in undermining a plan         
> > Voldemort has cooked up.
> > <snip>

> >>Phoenixgod2000: 
> <snip>
> He is clearly the safest bet for her to go to. And I would 
> agree that there is probably some school history between them      
> which would further soften his edge against her.
> I see it as more cunning than brave.  She tackles the situation in 
> good slytherin fashion and with any level of Gryffindor bravery.

Betsy Hp:
Well, I'm not admiring Narcissa's move here because it was 
*stupidly* brave. <eg>  Yes, Narcissa had reason to suspect Snape 
might actually help her.  Yes, Narcissa cunningly went for help from 
someone in actual position to help her son.  But there is still some 
level of bravery required.  She did take a risk.  Her very 
nervousness in asking the question shows that, IMO.

> >>Betsy Hp:
> > Okay, yes Molly is on the correct political side of the fence.  
> > She's not evil by any stretch.  Of course, it's not a hard place 
> > for her to be.  
> > <snip>

> >>Phoenixgod2000:
> Of course it is a hard place for her to be! She is working against 
> a man so bad people stutter through his name.  The easy path would 
> be to sit through it and let it be someone elses problem.

Betsy Hp:
And um, what exactly is Molly doing?  You know, for the cause and 
all?  It's Arthur and Bill and Charlie who've chosen to join the 
Order and fight the fight.  Molly is there because her family is 
there.  She has not had to proactively *do* anything.

Yes it's hard to realize that her family is out there and in 
danger.  But it's something that's happened to Molly.  It's not a 
choice she's made.

> >>Phoenixgod2000
> And for the record she is going against the tide of one of her     
> most beloved son's and her goverment--the goverment that feeds and 
> clothes her family.

Betsy Hp:
No she isn't.  The MoM and Percy are neither of them Voldemort 
supporters.  (I also suspect that Molly's most beloved sons are the 
twins.  Which, doesn't mean anything and is just IMO. <g>)

> >>Betsy Hp:
> > And yes, she's lost family members.  So has Narcissa.  In fact, 
> > her husband is sitting in jail at the moment, and her son is in 
> > immediate danger.  So it's not like Molly has the corner on 
> > suffering for her cause.

> >>Phoenixgod2000: 
> You are essentially giving the same moral weight to Narcissa's 
> murdering terrorist family and Molly's soldier family. thats like 
> comparing the family of an american soldier and the family of a 
> suicide bomber.

Betsy Hp:
No it's not.  It's like comparing an American soldier and his family 
to a Nazi soldier and his family.  While I can agree that the Nazi 
soldier is fighting for the wrong cause, I can also recognize the 
humanity of the Nazi soldier and his family.

The suicide bomber family is represented in Potterverse by Auntie "I 
wish I had sons to sacrifice to the cause" Bella.  And I'm *not* 
comparing her "love" for Draco with Molly's actual love for her 
children.  But Narcissa, willing to defy her side to save her son, 
*does* show an equal amount of love here.

> >>Phoenixgod2000:
> they aren't the same.  Narcissa and her family is *evil*.  They   
> have lain in a nest of vipers and are now experiencing the venom. 
> <snip>

Betsy Hp:
They are not evil.  Some of their beliefs are.  And IMO, there's a 
huge difference.  After winning WWII, the Allies did not decide to 
execute every German soldier and the families that loved them.  
Because they recognized that the soldiers and their families were 
not evil in and of themselves.  

> >>Phoenixgod2000
> Yes, Narcissa is suffering.  My answer is so what? 

Betsy Hp:
So she's not just passively suffering.  She's out there trying to do 
something about it.  And I admire her for it.

> >>Phoenixgod2000:
> The difference is that they are on different sides of the war and 
> Molly is on the right one.  Bad people have people in their lives 
> who love them.  Bad people have mothers and fathers, and sons and 
> daughters who care about them and who they in turn care about.     
> that doesn't make them any less bad people. Narcissa, Lucius, and 
> Draco are bad people and therefor I have no sympathy for them.

> >>Alla:
> Golden words, Phoenixgod, golden words. I do not buy the moral
> relativism argument, which IMO Betsy makes.

Betsy Hp:
See, I wouldn't call it moral relativism.  Narcissa loves her son 
and doesn't want to him to worthlessly sacrifice his life.  I 
imagine Molly would feel the same way about any of her children if 
someone sent them on a suicide mission as a punishment for Arthur's 
mistakes.  *That's* the morals I'm talking about.  There's nothing 
relative about it.  Because politics doesn't enter into it.  It's 
not bad to love your child.  It's not bad to try and save him from 
certain death.

> >>Alla:
> It does matter to me what are the views of the characters to       
> consider them more sympathetic or not.
> And Molly is on the side of the white hats as far as I am         
> concerned...

Betsy Hp:
I've never argued that Molly is on the wrong side.  Nor have I 
argued that Narcissa is on the right side.  I *do* admire Narcissa's 
love for her son and her willingness to take risks in order to save 
his life.  Once again, there is nothing political about that aspect 
of Narcissa.  

> >>Alla:
> ...that absolutely makes her suferings much more sympathetic to me 
> and Narcissa being concerned for her son and husband does not make 
> any less the sympathiser of terrorists and murderers to me.

Betsy Hp:
The reason I'm not as sympathetic towards Molly has nothing to do 
with her politics.  She whines too much, IMO.  So that loses her 
points.  I still see Molly as being on the right side.  Narcissa, on 
the other hand, is taking action to protect her son. And I admire 
that *without* agreeing with her politics.  I'm also able to 
recognize that Narcissa does love her husband and child.  It does 
nothing to win me to her cause at all.  But I am able to see that 
human side of her.

I honestly don't think seeing the humanity in some members of the 
opposing side as moral relativism.  Not the way I understand that 
term, anyway.  I'd say saying that anything the bad side does is bad 
(taking action to save their child's life) and anything the good 
side does is good (putting innocents in jail without trial) is more 
moral relativism.

Betsy Hp