Unforgivables - from a different angle

[sudeeel]

No: HPFGUIDX 174511

>>
>> Leah wrote: <snip> What the book appears to give us is the wholly
unsatisfactory justification that it's ok for the good guys to use the
Unforgiveables by the simple fact that they are the good guys.

> Carol wrote: <snip> I agree that JKR's explanation is extremely
unsatisfactory. We already know that Harry isn't perfect. <snip> We
don't need Harry to use a Crucio to show us that he's human.

sudeeel responds: I've been thinking about this since Harry cast his
first Imperius Curse. I consider it possible that JKR was using
Harry's Unforgivables as a plot device – to make us think Harry might
be capable of using an AK on Voldemort when the time came. She starts
him off with the "least offensive" of the three in a very crucial
situation, something we might be able to justify. When he Crucios
Amycus, it seems to us unnecessary. But if Harry is building up to
being able to use an AK, Amycus is an excellent practice target for
the Crucio.

Harry has been agonizing over the fact that he will need to be either
a killer or a victim since the end of OoP when Dumbledore first tells
him about the Prophecy and what it means. If he can use the AK
successfully on Voldemort, he won't need to be a helpless victim. Of
course with DD & Snape's help, he finds a way to be a victim who isn't
helpless – a willing sacrifice. And that makes all the difference.

sudeeel, who would like to put the "practice" theory out there for comment