Bathroom scene again WAS: Re:Weasley Family Dynamics/To the Extreme

[dumbledore11214]

No: HPFGUIDX 164978

> > Alla:
> > 
> > Well, I would hope that Minerva is the kind of character who 
does 
> > think that **that sort of thing** as you call it or **self-
defense 
> > from unforgivable curse** as I call it, is Okay indeed. 
Otherwise 
> I 
> > would be very dissapointed, personally :)
> > 
> Magpie:
> I'm saying that I think Minerva, as a teacher, would make a 
> distinction between the general question of Unforgivables being 
> something to defend yourself from and students opening each other 
up 
> in bathroom brawls. I can imagine her acknowledging that Harry was 
> acting in self defense but have a harder time imagining her going 
> from that to, "Nothing else you could have done, Harry. It's great 
> you did that." I think she'd want to deal with things beyond 
making 
> sure there was self-defense involved.

Alla:

Oh, but why such leap between first and second sentence of that 
imaginary quote?

Because I do not get why if Minerva would acknowledge that self 
defense is involved, she would leap from nothing else you could have 
done to it is great you did that, you know?

To me the self defense implies that nothing else can be done, 
period. Which does not make Draco bleeding Okay, but neither would 
it be Harry's responsibility IMO. Except thinking about the wrong 
curse, IMO.

I just do not see why Minerva would want to deal with it, you know?

If Harry's conscience feels it needs to be dealt with, fine, but it 
is not something authority should be involved with IMO.



 
>> > Alla:
> > 
> > Not sure I understand, you are saying that Snape does not punish 
> him 
> > for that? How so? Without Harry doing sectusemptra Snape would 
> have 
> > no reason to give him detentions at all, book or no book IMO of 
> > course.
> 
> Magpie:
> And you think Snape shares your view of when he's got reason to 
give 
> Harry detention? I don't. But regardless, even if Sectumsempra was 
> the event that led to the detentions it is not what the detentions 
> are *about,* which is important. Neither Harry nor Snape 
associates 
> the detentions with Draco's injury, not even at the moment the 
> detentions are given. The detention as a punishment for hurting 
> Draco is intentionally not given by Snape, Harry or the narrator, 
> any more than is the idea that Harry's in detention for messing up 
> the bathroom.

Alla:

Awww, I think I get it or maybe not. It is just to me that even 
though Snape does not say precisely that he punished Harry for 
Sectusemptra by implying that he punishes Harry for using the book 
he does precisely that. He IMO lets Harry knows that he knows what 
is in the book, if that makes any sense.


 
> Magpie:
> I mean the OP was about how it wasn't fair that Harry hurt Malfoy 
in 
> self-defense and no one ever found out the facts, as if Harry was 
> suffering from being falsely accused of hurting Malfoy 
offensively. 
> But Harry's acting in self-defense ins't a secret and his 
suffering 
> has nothing to do with the false idea that he wasn't acting in 
self-
> defense.

Alla:

Forgive me, but I may bug you offlist about this paragraph, because 
I am still confused. I mean what are you saying? I think it is 
pretty much a given , yes, that Harry is acting in self defense, but 
the reason why I bring it up is because it seems to be questioned, 
no?

 
> > Alla:
> > <SNIP>
>> > As I said, I think Harry was stupid for thinking about 
> Sectusemptra, 
> > Draco was something else IMO and I absolutely resist the 
argument 
> > that their responsibilities in this scene are even **close** to 
> one 
> > another.
> 
> Magpie:
> They don't have to be close to one another. Harry certainly isn't 
> comparing them. He doesn't *have to* feel anything--nobody does. 
> Like I said, he's free to take Ginny's attitude that it was good 
he 
> had something up his sleeve. Harry isn't able to make that leap, 
> completely. He feels twinges of conscience. Some people think it's 
> right for him to feel that, some people think it's wussy, some 
thing 
> it's a sign that Harry's an extraordinary person.

Alla:

Exactly. They do not have to be close to one another, the reason why 
I am saying that they are not in my opinion is because the general 
impression I get from your argument is that Draco and Harry **are** 
equally responsible for what happened. Forgive if I am wrong, but 
that is how I always feel when we start debating this scene and 
didn't you just say upthread that both boys did not get the talk 
about Dark magic and they are **both** lucky? Or did I misunderstand 
you?

And that I very strongly disagree with. I believe that Draco is so 
much **luckier** to not get questioned about Unforgivable than Harry 
who used the unknown curse in IMO what is 100% self defense. 


 
> Alla: 
> > Imagine if Harry used I don't know, stupefy and Draco hit his 
head 
> on 
> > the bathroom floor and died. Would you begrudge Harry for using 
> that 
> > curse as well?
> 
> Magpie:
> I wonder why you would make that comparison, actually. In this 
> scenario Harry is using a non-hurtful spell that due to bizarre 
> circumstances led to a death, as opposed to an offensive spell he 
> only knew was to be used again enemies that was, unsurprisingly, 
> potentially deadly in itself. I would certainly feel differently 
> about Harry's using stupefy and I would guess Harry would also 
(even 
> if he regretted being involved in anyone else's death, even 
> tangentially). Obviously there's never any question that it was 
> wrong of Harry to do *something* in the scene. That's part of what 
I 
> think is carefully put into the scene. It would be such a 
different 
> scene if Harry had done what he does in this scenario. But he 
> didn't. 

Alla:

I made that comparison to show my view that the **only** reason 
Harry should feel twinges of conscience is because he was thinking 
about unknown curse before hand. I was trying to say that in any 
self defense scenario, anything can go wrong and self defense 
scenario does not become less self defense IMO.


 
?
> 
> Magpie:
> I think there is an element of intent to Harry's use of 
Sectumsempra 
> that is part of that niggling conscience. <SNIP>

Alla:

Oh, I think we finally got to the heart of our disagreement. You 
think that Harry used Sectusemptra intentionally, so IMO it means 
that you do not buy that it was clear self defense?

I guess that is agree to disagree time then. I think that it is very 
clear that Harry used Sectusemptra completely as self-defense 
reflex, because he does **not** use it right away in response to 
Malfoy's crucio, he uses it only when he is IMO not in control and 
rather desperate. Sure, it is his stupidity that got this curse in 
his head in the first place, but I do not buy that he did it on 
purpose at all.

Pippin:
<SNIP of the whole post>
I am not questioning Harry's right to defend himself,
> but he still chose to supply himself with an illegal weapon.

Alla:

I disagree. I think he chose to supply himself with unknown weapon, 
which is also bad, but not illegal, or at least he did not know that 
it was.

JMO,

Alla.