Malum blah blah blah was Re: Harry using Crucio.

[sistermagpie]

No: HPFGUIDX 174441

> va32h:
> 
> I definitely agree that it isn't Voldemort's soul bit making Harry 
> use the UCs. And I agree that he needed to use Imperio in 
Gringott's 
> and I also feel that there is nothing "wrong" with Harry giving in 
to 
> the very human temptation to cause someone pain when you feel 
deeply, 
> deeply wronged. 
> 
> My only objection - EVER - has been Harry enjoying the Crucio, and 
> not feeling the least bit uncomfortable about it. He was reluctant 
> when he cast the Imperio - knew it was necessary but was reluctant 
to 
> do it. That's very in-character for Harry. 
> 
> I expected him to show equal reluctance to use Crucio. This is the 
> young man who saved Draco (twice - once at great personal risk) 
> during the Battle of Hogwarts. The young man who tried to stop 
> Wormtail's silver hand from strangling him. The boy who agonized 
over 
> accidentally using Sectumsempra. 
> 
> Personally, I thought Harry was nuts for trying to save Wormtail 
from 
> the silver hand. I wouldn't have done it. But that's not how Harry 
> is - he's incredibly compassionate, even to people who totally 
don't 
> deserve it, and that is why it felt very out of character to see 
> Harry happily and satisfactorily using the Cruciatus Curse. 
> 

Magpie:
I probably shouldn't even jump in on this, but it makes my skin crawl 
to hear Harry Potter described as a character that's incredibly 
compassionate. He has a saving people thing. He's just. He is not all 
that compassionate. What's that expression? That in a kingdom of the 
blind the one-eyed man is king or something like that? (I hope that 
expression isn't considered offensive by the blind people on the 
list.) This is the low level of compassion these books operate on 
where somebody trying to stop someone being strangled by their own 
hand is considered incredibly compassionate. I know that it's more of 
a big deal because of what Wormtail has done to Harry, but I still 
don't think his reactions in extreme situations like that come from a 
nature that's overly compassionate in general. Almost every character 
in canon would have done the same in these instances (and yes, I 
include Ron--I can't imagine he'd have let anybody burn to death if 
he'd been by himself).

I'm not saying Harry doesn't absolutely do the right thing in trying 
to save Womrtail and saving Draco, and that he doesn't prove himself 
a Good Guy doing it--but I don't think it's all about compassion. 
Actually, if it did then Snape is also an incredibly compassionate 
character since he, too, only watches people die whom he can not 
save. As I said in my other post about the subject, if a character is 
really supposed to impress me with a virtue he has, I can't always be 
having more of it than he does on every page of the story (and I'm no 
role model either, I'm just saying this is my pov when I read the 
books). There are other qualities Harry has that do impress me. I 
need more than the flashy moments like this to give him this one. I 
just can't imagine anyone learning compassion from these books.

What Harry doesn't do is agonize over Sectumsempra. I think I've felt 
more guilty about not returning a phone call than Harry feels guilty 
about almost gutting Draco. I was foolishly waiting for some sort of 
resolution on that score in DH--oops!

> va32h
> One sentence - Harry felt a momentary thrill at Carrow's pain, 
> followed by a twinge of guilt - would have saved the whole scenario 
> for me. 

Magpie:
Ironically, I think that also proves my point. He tortures someone, 
so should feel a "twinge of guilt." It's torture. I think an 
incredibly compassionate character would feel more than that.
(Not that Harry has to do that, I'm just saying I don't think he's 
ever been presented as a model of compassion in the way he's been 
presented as a model of other things.)

-m