Requiescat in Pace: Unforgivables.

[Katie]

No: HPFGUIDX 174830

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "eggplant107" 
<eggplant107 at ...> wrote:
>
>  Lee Kaiwen <leekaiwen@> wrote:
> 
> > this is a big part of our problem 
> > with the scene. There IS no regret
> > expressed, either here or later. 
> > Harry never does seem to "hate himself"
> > afterward for what he has done.
> 
>Eggplant wrote: 
I consider myself a nice guy, I'm certainly no monster, but I have to
tell you if I had used the Crucio as Harry did I would not feel the
smallest particle guilt, not for one second, not for one nanosecond.
Indeed if JKR had put Harry through an indulgent orgy of hand 
wringing  at that point it would be imposable for a reader (at least 
for this reader) to feel anything other than contempt for the 
weakness of our "Hero".

*****Katie responds:
THANK YOU, EGGPLANT. I agree entirely. It's completely unbelievable 
that Harry would, or even should, have guilt over this incident. 
Carrow was a vile person, who had been torturing children with 
pleasure for a year. Children, I may add, that are Harry's close 
friends! Harry has been put through more in his short life than is 
humanly possible to bear without a little bit of anger and 
resentment towards those that have put him through it. Carrow 
deserved what Harry gave him, and Harry did not prolong it. He used 
a UC out of anger, but he also did not stand there and hurt the man 
unneccisarily for hours! In fact, I thought his treatment of Carrow 
was more than fair, given what the man had done to Harry's friends. 

However, I do feel the need to say that "torture" is defined this 
way on http://mw1.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/torture

1 a: anguish of body or mind : agony b: something that causes agony 
or pain
2: the infliction of intense pain (as from burning, crushing, or 
wounding) to punish, coerce, or afford sadistic pleasure
3: distortion or overrefinement of a meaning or an argument : 
straining

Soooo, technically Harry DID "torture" Carrow. I will not argue 
that. What I will argue is that Harry had every reason to do so, and 
to do so without guilt. 

Eggplant:
> And the "Molly's revenge" thread seems even stranger to me, as if 
we need to think long and hard to figure out if it is moral for a 
mother to kill a notorious serial murder who is actively trying to 
kill one of her children. Some actually think this is debatable and 
needs thinking about! And after Molly whacked the creep is she 
supposed to go through the hand wringing routine too? Remember the 
title of the book was not "Harry Potter and the Quest for Pablum". 
> 

****Katie responds:
Again, I agree so much, I don't know where to begin. Molly had 
already lost a child that day. All of her children and her husband 
were in danger of being killed. She sees her daughter about to be 
killed by the nastiest nasty next to Voldemort himself...I'd get 
pretty maternal, too. I'm glad she killed Bellatrix. I'm glad she 
called her a bitch. I'm glad Molly got a chance to protect one of 
her children, even after losing Fred.  Molly needs to make no 
excuses to me. 

In addition, Molly had been fighting with the Order since the 
beginning. She has, I'm sure, more than her share of anger against 
these horrible people for more than what was happening that day, at 
that moment. And for those that would argue that she shouldn't 
have "taken out her anger" on Bellatrix...Come on, people. Bellatrix 
deserved exactly what she got. She was an evil, nasty human being. 
And I, for one, actively wanted her dead from the moment she killed 
the poor innocent fox at the beginning of HBP. I was quite happy to 
see her go. 

I continue to not understand why so many people expect that our 
heroes should have guilt about killing or hurting these awful 
people. It's not like they're hurting innocents. And I do not 
believe that it says something about their lack of moral fiber...as 
a RW example of what I mean: World War II

The United States SHOULD feel guilty about dropping bombs on Japan 
and killing hundreds of thousands of innocent people.

The United States/Allies should NOT feel guilty about executing the 
people found guilty of war crimes at Nuremburg. 

See the difference? For me, the dropping of the atom bombs said 
something pretty awful about what kind of a country we are...but 
executing Nazis didn't. That's my point. Katie