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

[Magpie]

No: HPFGUIDX 164983

> 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?

Magpie:
But of course there's choices of things that could be done, particularly in 
this case. It's not like Sectumsempra is the only thing that would have 
worked--it's not even one Harry's used before at this point. I can't imagine 
McGonagall wouldn't see exactly that distinction. Just as I would expect her 
to make that distinction if, for instance, the Slytherins were getting hexed 
on the train and from the floor managed fire off AKs at everyone.

Alla:>
> 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.

Magpie:
Draco's bleeding because Harry pointed his wand, waved it wildly, and threw 
a cutting curse. If it's there was nothing else to be done, it would 
probably be more okay.

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

Magpie:
I don't think there's any question of authority dealing with Harry's 
conscience. As I said, nobody is sitting Harry down and talking to him about 
this aspect at all. Not even Snape, who might rant about Sirius almost 
killing him but doesn't seem too horrified about Draco's near-death.

>> 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:
Sure--but Snape's not spending a moment's time on Harry's hurting anybody.


>> 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?

Magpie:
Not at all. Harry's acting in self-defense is canon. It's never called into 
question either way; Harry's never accused of cursing Malfoy offensively. 
The issue isn't that Harry wasn't on the floor with Draco above him possibly 
about to Crucio him. We know that's what happened.


>> 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?

Magpie:
They are both lucky and they do both have responsibility for their own 
actions. It's not like a scale where if Harry has responsibility for 
something it takes away from Draco having responsibility for what he did. 
They're both living their completely separate stories.

Alla:>
> 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.

Magpie:
Well, he's not lucky in general in the scene, since he's the one who gets 
badly hurt, which why I think he is punished for using his curse. In terms 
of who's luckier to not get questioned about the Unforgivable, I don't see 
how that really matters. Draco was in the midst of trying to throw one that 
might or might not have worked. Thinking about what actually happens in 
canon, I'm not seeing what big difference this would have made to the way 
things went. Who is definitely ignorant of this fact and what would happen 
if they knew it? Nobody in canon, including Harry, seems to focus on that 
idea, and I can't imagine it wouldn't if it was the case.


>> 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:
Right, you created a scenario where Harry was careful and responsible and 
didn't cross the line into something more severe, a curse where he didn't 
know what exactly it did but knew it was "for enemies," indicating it's 
aggressive and punishing (which is why he was hoping to try it out on the 
irritating McLaggen as he's tried out other aggressive hexes). Nothing "went 
wrong" in the spell--it went all too right.

>> 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.

Magpie:
Harry uses a curse marked "for enemies" not "self-defense." He's been 
thinking about it for weeks, hoping to try it out on McLaggen who also 
annoys him and who he wants to *punish.* It never crosses Harry's mind that 
this is a self-defense spell. He always relates to it as a curse.

Beyond that, there is also the intention required to cast any spell. I think 
the reason he feels twinges of conscience is that he *can't* be so sure that 
he was only thinking self-defense, particularly given the history involved. 
It's not like he accidentally fired this off on Hermione. This was someone 
he hates and infuriates him. You hate somebody for that long and you wind up 
gutting him in the middle of a violent fight, you might not be so sure you 
couldn't possibly have wanted to hurt him.

-m