Molly's "revenge" Re: Requiescat in Pace: Unforgivables

[Lisa]

No: HPFGUIDX 174857

guzu: 
> 
> Yes, I realize this this is Rowling's point-- mother love conquers all
> (except when it doesn't-- See Tonks and the Albanian woman who
> Voldemort killed while she was shielding her children). It still
> doesn't excuse the scene for me-- there were ways Molly could have
> taken out Bellatrix that would have been more realistic and in
> character, and less (as someone else mentioned upthread) like an
> action movie scene. For me it's not the concept that's wrong, it's the
> execution (no pun intended!) of the scene.
>
Lisa:

Oh, I disagree with this entirely.  

First of all, the Tonks analogy is sort of out of place here -- Tonks 
died joining her husband in battle, to assist him in ridding the world 
of evil, and she left her child in good hands.  Would "I" have done 
it?  Well, I guess if I was an auror and I thought I could be of help, 
perhaps; but personally, I'd've not gone.

But the "mother's love conquers all" thing?  I don't think Rowling 
believes this nor do I think she implies such a thing when she has 
Molly charge Bellatrix.  Molly's actions were fueled by loss and fury 
and desperation, as well as love for her children.  I think it's 
totally in character for Molly -- or any mother -- to protect her 
child.  Much like adrenaline kicks in for us Muggles, allowing us to do 
things we'd never have thought possible, I would assume super-magic 
kicks in for witches and wizards, in such situations.  Entirely 
believeable, for that particular character and for the situation in 
general, to me.

Lisa