[HPforGrownups] Bathroom Scene - A Different Perspective

[Magpie]

No: HPFGUIDX 165126

> 2. The Battle in the Bathroom < Carol, should we start a campaign to
> get it renamed the washroom, toilet, restroom, or lavatory ;-)>
>
> I'd like to point out some ground rules that JKR has saddled us with
> in the Potterverse. There are three unforgivable curses, any of which
> will land you a life term in Azkaban if you are caught using it on a
> human. Personally, I would have liked to see AKers receive a stiffer
> sentence than Crucio or Imperio practitioners, but I wasn't asked.
> Therefore we must assume that *any* of the three are considered the
> most vile things in the WW and their use marks one as irredeemable.
> Again, not my choice, it's canon.

Magpie:
I actually don't consider this as hard and fast as everyone seems to think. 
We certainly hear them introduced this way, and they are serious curses. But 
we've seen them thrown all over the place, including by Harry himself, so I 
just don't see how we can think of them as a quick trip to Azkaban. Of 
course, any trip to Azkaban depends on actually completing it, which Draco 
didn't do, and it's possible he wouldn't have been any more able to complete 
it than Harry.

However that is *not* a statement that's supposed to mean that Harry's own 
curse is less appropriate. Harry thought he was having one thrown at him, so 
his reaction counts as a reaction to true Crucio regardless.

Mike:
>
> There's an old joke whose punchline is "Stupid Redneck brings a knife
> to a gunfight". In this case, the stupid Redneck was Harry. Draco is
> the one who pulled out the gun, Draco is the one who escalated the
> fight into the unforgivable curse territory.

Magpie:
Wizards bring everything--guns, knives, canons, bombs--to every fight. It's 
more a question of how you get what curse you throw. Harry brings a crucio" 
to his chase after Snape at the end of the book, but it was just as much of 
a split second thing as his curse in the bathroom. Harry "brought a gun" to 
the bathroom as well--his curse is more destructive than the Crucios we've 
seen cast in canon. Only the Longbottoms sufferred longterm damage from 
Crucio, and that was an extended session, much as Obliviate charms are used 
frequently and are even considered harmless, but cause brain damage if used 
too much over a short time.

But again, it's still understood that Harry pulled out his own gun in 
response to Draco pulling his out and starting to fire first.

> Mike:
> Victim of his own action is exactly right. Draco is the instigator
> and the elevator of the fight. Any results are on his head,
> regardless of how bad those results turn out to be.
>
> I'll go even further than Alla and step into Eggplant's realm: I have
> no problem with what Harry did to Draco in this scene. I'm 100%
> behind her comment:

Magpie:
But this is still where the thread runs around in circles, because those of 
us who are interested in Harry's state of mind really don't care who anyone 
apportions blame to in the situation. If you see the scene as just Draco 
getting himself sliced up to the point where Harry might as well be a mirror 
that Draco stupidly fired Sectumsempra into himself so that it backfired on 
him, that's fine. We get it.

So Harry's intent was to pull out a gun in response to a gun-I agree. (Not 
pull out a bullet proof vest.) But some of us aren't focused on whose fault 
it is. We're interested in the idea of Harry pulling out that gun in 
self-defense. Or actually, when I think about it, I think that's already 
getting too far back into "don't look at what Harry did!" Because of course, 
Sectumsempra turns out to be a big, nasty surprise that is deadly, while 
Crucio is about causing great temporary pain. Harry has had Voldemort 
himself cast it on him and gotten up to fight. Sectumsempra almost ended in 
death.

Harry didn't know that when he cast it, of course. But some of us are still 
interested in how Harry deals with the intent he *did* have ("I need a 
serious curse to use against Draco") coupled with the results that spell 
turned out to have. And it's frustrating that when we try to talk about this 
area it's like the Blame Police show up and say, "Hold on, you're talking 
about the bathroom scene! That means saying it's Malfoy's fault and Harry 
acted in self-defense and the detentions are unfair and anything other than 
that is disagreeing with me."

> Mike:
> I guess I'm one of those "cool with it" guys. <g> I believe in
> measured response. If one has to do a "bad thing" to stop an even
> worse thing ... so be it. As Alla has said, Harry wasn't going to
> stop Draco by hugging him. Quite frankly, I'm indifferent about Draco
> getting cut up. I take the position of 'He got what he deserved',
> despite what people think is too much retribution.

Magpie:
Hey, I'm "okay with it" too. I'm not horrified by Harry in the scene. I 
liked Draco being sliced up (we Draco fans often love our hurt/comfort). 
And I don't have to pretend Harry was afraid of being insane to be okay with 
it either, which I don't think he was at all.

But I still think there's more to this for Harry's character than that he 
was justified. In fact, I think the justification he felt and still feels is 
partly what makes the result of the spell so icky for him. If it was all he 
needed to feel was justified, Harry would be a lot more like Tom Riddle. 
Maybe I want to analyze that a bit beyond "Harry's a great kid so of course 
he feels badly at hurting someone...even if he was totally justified and it 
was all Malfoy's fault and the detentions are totally unfair!"

Mike:
> And Harry is horrified at what he has done. Good, I would have
> expected nothing less from our teenage hero. If I shot and killed
> someone in self defense I'd imagine that I too would be distraught.
> But I would much rather be distraught than dead. Does that mean using
> Sectumsempra wasn't justified? I don't think one follows the other. I
> much prefer that Harry thwarted Draco's Crucio. Some folks <not me
> and Eggplant> think it was the wrong curse to use. That is a matter
> for opinion, but does not negate Harry's right to use it. Once Draco
> brought out his gun, it is not unreasonable for Harry to reach for
> his knife.

Magpie:
No, I don't think it is unreasonable. It's almost like I'm *not* arguing 
that Harry was acting like a psycho monster in this scene. It's almost like 
I've said he instinctively reached for "the right spell" for what he wanted 
more than once.

Mike:
It was at this point of the book that I felt, as Magpie puts
it, "hard done by" for Harry. The entire staff seems to accept Snapes
charges without bothering to find out the "why". Did Harry have some
history of greviously injuring other students, even Malfoy? Did that
bathroom look like Sectumsempra was the only spell fired off? Who
started the festivities?


Magpie:
Okay, I'm sorry that JKR did not write the book with the aftermath to 
Sectumsempra being about Harry's being vindicated and apologized to for 
having to miss a Quidditch game because he was in detention for almost 
killing that guy when that guy started it and was going to throw a Crucio. 
And that the response to the scene from the teachers (since the "justice 
system" never gets involved) is not to launch an investigation into why he 
did it. I'm sure Ginny's testimony would have sealed the deal about Harry's 
being lucky to have something up his sleeve, since she, Hermione and Ron 
(and possibly others) know about the almost-Crucio from Harry, who isn't 
keeping that part a secret.

But that's not a subject I'm particularly passionate about. When I think 
about "what the detentions are about" I go by what the detentions were 
actually about that we saw, and that was Snape rubbing Harry's face in it 
and Harry hating Snape. Not Harry being made to think about throwing 
Sectumsempra as if he just threw it at Draco unsuspecting and not to defend 
himself from Crucio.

That could be why for me, the bathroom scene does not automatically lead to 
the injustice of Harry having to miss a Quidditch game for slicing Draco up. 
And perhaps also because from what I've read of McGonagall I think she could 
very well know that Harry thought he was going to be Crucio'd and still feel 
she ought to back up Saturday detentions just to make it clear 
exsanguinations are not approved of by the faculty.

The WW's justice system is appalling and Harry reacts to it as such. But I 
don't think this is an example of the Wizarding Justice System gone wrong. 
Harry's not on trial, nobody's going to jail, teachers don't always have to 
judge things based on what Harry or we might think is the important issue. 
It's not anywhere near the worst detention Harry's ever had.

The "official" rule for Harry's use of Dark Magic could quite possibly have 
been expulsion. I assume that's why McGonagall refers to it. Yet Harry's 
never in danger of being expelled. McG makes a point of saying that he's not 
going to be. Might that not be because she actually does know Draco after 
all these years and knows his relationship with Harry and *does* have an 
idea about self-defense? Or at least feels that there had to be some 
provocation involved? McG makes a point of how easily Harry's getting off. 
It's fandom who thinks he's being punished as if he's a murderer.

-m