Marietta/On Children and the Other/Malfoy

[dumbledore11214]

No: HPFGUIDX 169523

>   Dantzel:
<SNIP>
>   Now, if Hermione had devised a spell that would chop the sneak's 
hand or tongue off, that would be more serious.
> 

Alla:

I think you said another thing which just makes me support Hermione 
action even more. Hermione designed the spell that will punish 
**sneak**, she did not design the spell ( or found the spell) that 
would specifically target Marietta or anybody else for that matter.

She came up with punishment for the **action**, NOT targeting 
specific person. I think under circumstances it was understandable 
and to me acceptable.  IMO of course.


It is like when McGonagall humiliated Neville for losing passwords in 
front of everybody. I think it was **Horrible**, but I hesitate to 
call it abuse of Neville, because I am pretty sure that no matter who 
would have answered hers " what incredibly foolish person", would 
have gotten the same tongue lashing. IMO of course.


I do not think Hermione's action was horrible (not perfect, 
excessive - maybe), but I think loose analogy holds, for me anyways.




> Magpie:
> I didn't think that was even an issue. Harry liking Bellatrix or 
> even Lucius Malfoy doesn't seem like anything he's being asked to 
do 
> by anybody. II don't think Harry particularly needs to understand 
> their reasons for killing and torturing--though I think he would do 
> well to think about how his society may have wound up with so many 
> of these people and their supporters. There wouldn't be anything 
> wrong with his wanting to know.

Alla:

I thought that Harry was asked to understand Malfoy and I was saying 
that if he *Malfoy** ends up like Bella or his dad, Harry does not 
have to do that IMO.

Sure, there is nothing wrong with his wanting to know, IF he wants 
to. I was saying it will not decrease his worth as "person" to me if 
he would not.


Magpie: 
> If Malfoy decides he's rather kill and torture for a living 
(despite 
> the story about how he decided he would not like that) I don't 
think 
> Harry would be called upon to have much understanding.

Alla:

I have not read that story yet, personally. I read the story of him 
planning the assassination and then lowering his wand when standing 
in front of Dumbledore that was it so far. But that's good that we 
agree on this point.




 > Magpie:
> Probably I'll always think Ginny is the awful person I think she is-
-
> but I would still think she deserves a certain level of respect as 
a 
> human being (more, it seems, than many people think some other 
> characters deserve that they don't like). But I don't give her that 
> respect or compassion because she helped against Voldemort. 

Alla:

Well, I guess we differ then, if I understand you correctly. Sorry if 
I do not.  I mean, my **default mode** of existence is obviously to 
give respect and compassion to human beings, or at least try to. But 
if I learn that person did awful things, the fact that person is a 
human being does nothing really to increase my respect. I need to see 
that person to try and mitigate the awful things he/she did and then 
such person will get my respect. 

I respect Ginny as character sort of by default because I think she 
has plenty good qualities and did good things, although she did some 
bad things too. I do *not* respect Malfoy as a character yet at all, 
because I think he did plenty awful things and nothing to mitigate 
them. I **may** respect some of his actions in book 7 or not, we 
shall see.

> Lupinlore:
> If the trio were to decide "well, we don't like you <whoever> but 
you
> are okay if you are against Voldy," that is as "relative" a morality
> as one that says Gryffindors good, Slytherins bad. It is in effect
> saying, "I don't care if you do whatever," yes, including abuse of
> children, "as long as you are on the right side." Not a very
> laudable moral message, that. In fact, I'd say it's downright
> contemptible.
> 
> Magpie:
> Actually, I kind of agree. I think the problem is that it's just 
not 
> that simple. There are no clear groups of good or bad. Every single 
> character is just different. If Snape is DDM and has and did great 
> things in the war against LV, that doesn't make his petty bullying 
> of Harry in class part of that fight. Likewise, Snape's petty 
> bullying of Harry in class doesn't cancel out any heroics on the 
> good side. Even Quirrel doesn't deny Snape hates Harry, he just 
says 
> that he also doesn't wish him dead...while Quirrel, who does not 
> hate Harry, does want him dead. Barty Crouch was nice to Harry and 
> is still a popular teacher, regardless of his being a very loyal DE 
> who wanted Harry dead. 
<SNIP>


Alla:

LOL. I was waiting someone to ask in response to my remark about 
Malfoy whether Harry should respect Snape if he helps him against 
Voldemort?
I may as well address it here, sort of related argument.

I would say that then Harry should respect Snape's action, sure. But 
there is no way Harry should in my opinion respect Snape other 
actions towards him, since indeed one has nothing to do with one 
another IMO.


Hmmm, if I am saying that, does it mean that Harry should not give 
Malfoy complete respect even if he is on the right side?

No, probably not, I think that what Snape did against Harry is truly 
evil and nothing will cross it out completely.

I think Malfoy did evil towards other people ( I do think for example 
that Hagrid will be fully justified in not respecting Malfoy ever), 
but what he did towards Harry is at least not as horrible as what 
Snape did to him.

Hmmm, have to think about it.


JMO,

Alla.