On Children and the "Other" (was:Re: On the perfection of moral virtues)

[Mike]

No: HPFGUIDX 169593

> lizzyben04:
> <snip>
> However, we never see any criticism in the text of some of
> Hermione's other actions - like jinxing Marietta, or luring
> Umbridge, which were actually much more sinister.  <snip>

Mike:
It seems on this thread I keep responding to defend Hermione, and I 
don't really like Hermione all that well. <shrug>

I've said my piece on both Marietta and Umbridge. But since you 
brought it up again <eg>. Umbridge had just admitted to ordering the 
Dementor attack on Harry. She was fixin to 'Crucio' Harry when 
Hermione spoke up. So I hardly think it's fair to classify the 
Umbridge affair with the Marietta affair. This was *so* self-defence.

But what did Hermione actually do? She tricked Umbridge into 
following her. That's it! That's all! And we should classify this as 
sinister? Everything that happened between Umbridge and the Centaurs 
was completely and solely Umbridge's doing. Hermione even tried to 
warn Umbridge to tone it down, for crying out loud. And those were 
the only words spoken from Hermione or Harry until Umbridge was 
dragged off.

So what are we saying here, that a 16-year-old girl is responsible 
for the behavior of this adult, Under-secretary of the Ministry of 
Magic? Umbridge is hoisted by her own petard, but it was all her 
doing, her own prejudice got her in trouble. That and her inability 
to curb her vitriolic speech.

I'm sure Hermione felt that the Centaurs would allow her and Harry to 
escape from Umbridge. But I do not think she had any plan other than 
to get the Centaurs involved. To claim that she should have known 
that Umbridge was going to get into the kind of trouble that happened 
is giving Hermione too much credit and too much blame, imo.



> > Betsy Hp:
> > It disturbs me as well.  But I wonder if it's maybe *supposed* to
> > be disturbing on some level?
> >  <snip>
> 
> lizzyben04:
> I hope so, but I'm not sure. Perhaps she is sending a message about
> the treatment of the "other" w/these juxtapositions & hypocritical
> behavior. But if that message is in the text, it's so subtle that
> I'm not sure most children will see it. I care about human rights,
> but I enjoyed Draco's "ferret-bouncing" until I caught myself &
> thought about the fact that I was laughing at the torture of a
> student! Ack! The text NEVER invites us to consider the immorality
> of this act - indeed, Moody is praised for it, and Ron makes a joke
> about how he always wants to remember that moment. 

Mike:
I'm afraid you are reading the wrong series if looking for some 
ultimate moral guidelines from JKR. She has said that she is a 
Christian, and that colors her approach to writing this series. But 
she has also said that she is not going for the kind of moralistic 
work we got from C.S. Lewis. JKR has *good guys* and *bad guys* and a 
few tweeners. Her good guys have suffered, they haven't got off scott 
free. They might not have suffered for all of their misdeeds, 
especially if one wants to expand the list of misdeeds as much as 
some choose. 

IOW, my guess is that you'll have to satisfy yourself that the Trio 
have been knocked out, petrified, bitten by a Basilisk, fallen from a 
broom, had a leg broken, attacked by Dementors, tortured and almost 
killed by Voldemort, attacked by Dementors again, permenently scarred 
by a teacher, suffered internal injuries that will take some time to 
heal, attacked by brains and left with scars, poisoned, and Crucio'ed 
again. That of course doesn't include having to watch a friend, your 
godfather, and your beloved mentor be killed in front of you.

Oh yeah, JKR promised it's going to get worse before it gets better 
for the Trio in DH.

JKR does have the gift to recall things from the previous books and 
make them relevant in the current book. But she has a lot of ground 
to cover in the last book. I hope you can enjoy the book and 
therefore the series even if JKR doesn't answer all your questions, 
and even if she doesn't right every wrong. I don't think it is 
possible to resolve the story to everyones satisfaction. My advice: 
don't expect too much and you won't be so disappointed. :) FWIW


> lizzyben04:
> If it turns out that Harry was wrong about Snape, that could be that
> moment of "revelation" that would illustrate the dangers of mindless
> hatred, prejudice & fear of "the other". From the beginning, the
> trio has sorted Snape into "the other" - as an enemy, dark, less
> than human, etc. Harry has felt justified using unforgiveable curses
> & immoral means against Snape & co. because "they deserve it." (just
> like Sirius said). 

Mike:
This is what I mean. Snape most definitely started the ill feelings 
between himself and the Trio. And Snape has never let up. The Trio 
didn't make Snape "dark", JKR wrote him that way. And as to Harry 
using an unforgiveable on Snape (actually only attempting one, Snape 
was too quick), Harry just witnessed Snape AK Dumbledore. 
Irrespective of Harry's ability to effectively use Crucio, is his 
response to Snape really out of place here? 

If one holds the hero to an unreasonably high standard, one is sure 
to be disappointed when the hero doesn't scale that mountain. Harry 
doesn't have to climb Everest for me, the Matterhorn will do just 
fine.

Mike