Philosophy of Dumbledore (was:Moody's death...)

[Carol]

No: HPFGUIDX 179559

Sharon wrote:
> To my mind, it makes the books that much more interesting to have to
work through all the confusion and mistakes that the characters
undergo, to try to figure out the difference between good and evil.
Why should the author just hand it to us on a platter?  Surely the
mark of a good novel is the depiction and development of characters
who can seem real to us -- ie. flawed, confused, irrational, sometimes
immoral, making mistakes--even BIG ones--then suffering because of it.
 Where would the plot be if she gave us the good and evil stuff up
front.  We need to work for it and that is half the fun of the books.
Harry is so dense at times it makes me want to scream! But would I
want him all-knowing and wise from the start--no way! The fun part is
how he gets through everything in spite of his denseness, how he
manages to fulfil his destiny in spite of his impulsiveness and his
inability to listen to the advice of others.  Hermione is a royal
pain, overly cautious, and drives me nuts as well.  But how could she
be otherwise?  I don't want a MarySue. Hermione makes lots of mistakes
in spite of being so smart and her antics help the plot along nicely.
 So I wouldn't change anything about the books in terms of how good
and evil are depicted.  Even the Gryffindors doing Unforgivables near
the end. Harry perfoming Crucio just shows how human he is. He has
suffered so much in his short life-- my god if you think about it the
boy has been abused left, right and centre.  Finally he snaps.  It
seems reasonable given the circumstances.  McGonagal too.  Sometimes
you ahve to fight evil with evil.  Mind you Harry never once even
considers using the Avada Kedavra, even when faced with Voldemort.
That speaks volumes about his morality if you ask me.
>
Carol responds:

While I agree that the main characters are not black and white in the
sense of being all bad or all good (even Bellatrix and Tom Riddle are
shown to have human traits on rare occasions), and I think that Harry
grows more perceptive, perhaps wiser, throughout the books (though
it's a very slow process until Snape's revelations and Harry's choice
to sacrifice himself complete the process), I don't agree that the
Crucio is justifiable (no matter how much you've suffered and how evil
your opponent, you don't Crucio that opponent for spitting, IMO). 

I also disagree that Harry never considered using an AK (he's
certainly considered using Crucio as far back as GoF, when he wants to
Crucio Snape for giving him and Ron what he perceives to be an unfair
detention). I think that the one Unforgiveable that he never considers
using (until Griphook suggests it and he follows through) is the
Imperius Curse. As of OoP, when he first hears the Prophecy, he thinks
that he's going to have to murder or be murdered, and the only Killing
Curse he knows is Avada Kedavra. (Even after he learns Sectumsempra, I
don't think he considers using it on Voldie, if only because Snape
knows the countercurse and he thinks that Snape is a loyal DE.) It's
only when he sees Snape's memories and realizes that he has to
sacrifice himself, letting Voldemort kill him (or attempt to) without
fighting back, that he stops thinking in terms of killing Voldemort. 

The fact that Avada Kedavra is an Unforgiveable Curse has ceased to be
important to Harry (or even, I suppose, to Hermione, who's the only
one of the Trio who ever worried much about rules and laws). If it's
the only weapon he has, he'll use it, just as he uses Crucio and
Imperius when (in his opinion, not mine) the need arises. He attempts
to use Crucio at least twice before the corrupt MoM (presumably)
legalizes it (or illegality ceases to matter).

I agree that his decision not to kill Voldemort after all the
Horcruxes are destroyed, instead relying on Expelliarmus, the Elder
Wand's loyalty, and perhaps the failure of Voldie's spells resulting
from Harry's earlier self-sacrifice, is a good one. IMO, it's the
right decision, reflecting the loss of desire to avenge or punish and
the renunciation of power. But were it not for Snape's message and
memories, I think that Harry would have tried to kill Voldie the first
time around, resulting in his own death and the revaporization of
Voldemort, who would have died when Neville or someone else killed Nagini.

Carol, who thinks that Harry's choice of Gryffindor does not in itself
mark him as good and that only in DH is he cured of his worst trait,
the desire for revenge