Requiescat in Pace: Unforgivables.

[Katie]

No: HPFGUIDX 174839

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sistermagpie" 
<sistermagpie at ...> wrote:
>
> Katie:
> > 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...
> 
> Magpie:
> Actually, I don't believe people are saying that Harry should feel 
> *guilty* in the way you seem to mean it--thinking he was really 
> wrong to do it. They said that they wanted a more nuanced 
> exploration of this sort of thing. For instance, if Harry merely 
> wondered about his own dark impulses in wanting to cause that kind 
> of pain, or using that curse given the build-up he's had to it in 
> his own life. Canon takes your view, that the only question is 
> whether or not you're "hurting innocents" (innocents of course 
being proclaimed so by us/the heroes, and often being objectively 
*not* innocent because they're psychotic killers). If the person 
isn't innocent you don't need to feel anything. Maybe if the person 
isn't  quite completely guilty you might feel a twinge of conscience 
in answer to that, but nothing too bad. There's still no connection 
> between you and the other person, nothing to lead to any growth or 
> change on your part. Just breaking some eggs to make that omlette.
<<<BIG ENORMOUS SNIPPAGE>>>

***Katie:
I guess I *didn't* want a more nuanced explanation of that. I don't 
look to Harry Potter books to be some great work of philosophical 
literature. JKR puts some philosophy in there, she touches on 
classical and Biblical references...she's obviously a well-read and 
intelligent person. However, she's not a writer of great literature. 
She's a writer of really good stories. And that is a big difference 
that makes me have different expectations for HP books than say, for 
Pepys, or Chaucer, or Lord Tennyson. I do not expect JKR to be any 
of these people. I do not expect her to be able to explore every 
single philosophical issue she brings up, because, quite honestly, 
she's not always a great writer. A fantastic story teller, always. 
As a writer, she is sometimes not so fantastic. And these are not 
great works of high literature. 

I don't want these books to be that, anyway! I want them to be fun 
and tell me a good story and be books I can read over and over until 
the spines release all their pages into my lap. And they are. The 
books have fulfilled my expectations for them. 

I did have a "Ha, b#$%h moment when Harry Crucioed Carrow, and when 
Molly killed Bellatrix. I *did* cheer! Because I don't expect a 
nuanced exploration of philosophical issues...I expect Harry and co. 
to get the bad guys. And they did. And I liked it.

Katie, who is in no way claiming that great literature cannot be 
fun, just claiming that HP is *not* great literature on the level of 
the above-mentioned authors