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

[Jen Reese]

No: HPFGUIDX 169595

> Betsy Hp:
> Harry going to the DoM unintentionally supported Voldemort.  Does 
> that make him a member of the "wrong" side now?  Does that mean 
> that Harry is no longer quite as human as those who've been 
> completely obedient to Dumbledore?  May we hit Harry with sticks 
> now? <eg>
<snip>
> I know the answer is "no" of course.  But it seems to me that Harry 
> and his friends are allowed to make some mistakes, and yet still 
> remain on the "right" side.  Others (or should I say "others" <g>) 
> are not given as much leniency.  Probably, IMO, *because* Harry and 
> co. doesn't recognize them as human or real and therefore 
> susceptible to various pressures and misunderstandings as well. \

Jen:  LOL.  Okay, let me clarify what I meant by unintentionally or 
indirectly supporting Voldemort.  I was thinking of someone like a 
Ludo Bagman as an unintentional supporter or a Percy as an indirect 
supporter, people who have access to enough information to have a 
clear understanding of the political stakes when making the choices 
they do.  

Harry in OOTP or Draco in HBP are boys playing a man's game in my 
opinion.  Neither understands exactly what they are getting into and 
neither one has all the information to make a fully informed choice 
at the time their respective plans are initiated.  Both think they 
are more powerful than they are and thus set in motion something they 
can't control or contain without adult intervention.

> Betsy Hp:
> I think that's where the lack of realism comes in a little.  Fellow 
> students don't strike back in the way they would in real life, 
> IMO.  Ginny isn't jumped by Hufflepuffs; Hermione isn't jumped by
> Ravenclaws.  Seamus and Dean are weirdly passive when it comes to 
> Ron and Harry. I think it's because (I *hope* it's because) JKR has 
> a sense of where and when the Trio will learn their final lesson on 
> how to treat others.

Jen:  'Lord of the Flies' it's not.  JKR apparently didn't want to 
explore how far kids could go who have unusual powers and police 
themselve because the action at Hogwarts seems tame in comparison to 
what they could be doing in such a situation.  I still remember short 
stories by Ray Bradbury from my reading of them 25+ years ago because 
he depicted simply *chilling* psychological games kids are capable of 
playing on each other.  Gritty realism in fantasy and futuristic 
settings.

Back to the point, I'm trying to envision what people want out of a 
final lesson for the Trio.  If it's something that comes up in the 
story naturally like Harry seeing a different side of Draco on the 
tower and shifting his thinking a little bit because of it, well that 
fit the story as it evolved imo.  I personally enjoyed Hermione 
sweating it out when she failed miserably with the Centaurs and 
wouldn't mind seeing her sweat a little more.  

When it comes to pure personal preference and what would be 
enjoyable, I'm not interested in scales dropping from eyes and 
dramatic sweeping change myself.  For example, coming full circle to 
a simple handshake between Harry and Draco when they *both* realize 
the other is human as they set out on a section of the Horcrux search 
together would be a simple action that moves both characters forward, 
imo.  

> Betsy Hp:
> Just Ravenclaws and Hufflepuffs?  And non-prefect Gryffindors? <eg> 
> Oh, and adults who aren't in good with Dumbledore.  Other than 
> that, yes they're just three lonely, powerless, unpopular students.
> <g>\

Jen:  I didn't realize all these groups were oppressed!  Maybe they 
can join Dumbledore's sanctuary in the Forbidden Forest or the 
largest population of house elves in all of Britain in order to get 
away from the Trio? ;)

lizzyben04
> See, this is where I disagree, & this is my fundamental problem with
> the series. Under a real system of laws, EVERYONE is entitled to
> fairness, respect, rights and tolerance. Everyone is protected by
> those laws, and they should be applied equally and without
> prejudice. That's the fundamental basis of our democracy, and our
> Constitution. "All men are created equal, all endowed with the right
>to life, liberty & happiness..."

> The problem is, these fundamental rights don't appear to exist in 
> the Wizarding World. 

Jen:  You're referring to a political system based in federalism 
which the WW is not.  'Our' form of democracy was born out of certain 
circumstances just as all political systems are, and the WW has its 
own unique set to deal with.  Had colonial America had to deal with 
pressing concerns like hiding their magical powers from the King, 
there might be a different political system in the U.S. as well <g>.  

Jen R.