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

[dumbledore11214]

No: HPFGUIDX 160957

> Jen: I'm not certain if you are talking evil or irredeemably evil, 
> Charles? Cause JKR is saying there is hope for the Malfoys, all of 
> them, when Dumbledore offers to hide Draco and his family. And 
> despite his second chances, even Dumbledore recognizes people who 
> are irredeemably evil--Voldemort & Crouch Jr. to name two because 
I 
> can't think of others at the moment <g>.

Alla:

Hmmm, we shall see of course if Dumbledore indeed recognises all 
irredemably evil people at the end of book 7. :)

Ssssssssss.

But yes, I was so happy at the reading in NY when JKR IMO clearly 
implied that even though most of her characters are redeemable, 
Voldemort is not one of them.

 
> Writing the Malfoys off misses the point of the series in my 
> opinion. Dumbledore is saying there is a right side, and that the 
> Malfoys still have the capacity to choose that side, their actions 
> have not risen to the level that they are incapable of seeing 
right 
> from wrong. The person who no longer has the capacity to choose is 
a 
> person whose soul has died. 

Alla:

Oh, absolutely. Hate them as I am, I totally understand the 
possibility of Malfoys choosing  the right side later on. The 
question is for me is where anything to admire about them **right 
now**


Jen:
> Lucius appears to be the least likely to have any redemptive 
> qualities given his history of Muggle torture, the COS, etc., but 
> there's so little information about Narcissa it's difficult for me 
> to brand her as evil and write her off. So she's OK with 
Dumbledore 
> dying instead of her son (if she even thinks of it in those 
terms), 
> well if it were my son the thought of sacrificing him for a cause, 
> any cause, is unbearable. Some things are universal and love for a 
> child goes beyond political affiliation. 

Alla:

But of course it is understandable to want your child to live, the 
problem for me is that as Phoenixgod said Narcissa could have asked 
Snape for **anything** in the third part of the Vow, she could have 
asked Snape to **save** Draco by any means, but she **still** asked 
for Snape to kill Dumbledore.

Sorry, Jen, I think Narcissa does show her evil nature here - not in 
trying to save her son ( as I said upthread, I find it something 
very basic, but completely understandable), but in wishing for 
Dumbledore's death which IMO she could have done without.


Jen: 
> Up to the point of the Vow, and even during the Vow, our 
information 
> about Narcissa is that she's guilty by affiliation--does that rise 
> to the level of evil? Compared to Voldemort, the DE's who tortured 
> the Longbottoms, the DE's hurting and attempting to kill children 
in 
> the MOM....no, not in my book. 

Alla:

Yeah, sorry, IMO it does :)

She wishes and she actively provides means for another person to die 
IMO ( by going to Snape)

 
> Jen, who does view Bella in the same vein as Voldemort and Crouch, 
> Jr.
>

Alla:

Me too :)