Imperio.

[eggplant107]

No: HPFGUIDX 177691

 Lee Kaiwen <leekaiwen at ...> wrote:

> I've been combing through the P for
> Grownups archives, been to numerous
> websites discussing the UCs, and as
> far as I can see, prior to DH the 
> vast majority of HP fandom simply
> accepted the label at face value
> (not even you, AFAICT, suggested otherwise). 

Actually I did suggest otherwise. I sent the following to this group
more than 2 years ago on August 7 2005: 

"I think Harry will use Avada Kedavra on Snape and Voldemort, and I
hope he will too. Harry is in a war and you can't get squeamish in a
war, if you do the enemy will win and you will end up dead. In the
real world millions of young men just as nice as Harry have been
forced to face this harsh truth and for JKR to shy away from it would
be cowardly. If JKR makes Harry get all warm and fuzzy when he
confronts his enemies in the final big confrontation we all know is
coming in book 7 it will be a dreadful book."

I was wrong about who Harry would use the curses on but I still
believe my general point was absolutely correct. If I looked I'm
certain I could find much earlier examples, although it might not have
been posted to this Potter group. I specifically remember vigorously
defending Harry's use of the curse right after book 5 came out. But
yes, you're right about it being an unpopular view, I was about the
only one who defended Harry, most were appalled.
 
I'm a little less certain but I think right after book 4 I wrote a
post saying Harry should study the Unforgivables and use them when
needed; if I didn't write it I certainly thought it. 
    
> Since the use of Unforgivables by 
> Good Guys in book 7 is precisely 
> the point of dispute, it cannot be 
> used as a premise for your argument. 

You were complaining about inconsistency, you said that suddenly out
of the blue the good guys started using "Unforgivables" in book 7. I
see no inconsistency because I think of Harry as a good guy (you may
disagree) and he's been using them for three books.

> I hope you're not suggesting revenge
> exonerates illegal acts. 

I would say that the question of legality is moot because in book 7
all laws were made by Voldemort. If you're asking if I think revenge
is ALWAYS immoral I'd have to say no.

> Silly me for assuming the name 
> of the things was relevant.

It is a bit silly because in 7 books you can't point to one example of
somebody refusing to forgive someone for using an "Unforgivable". Not
one example! "Draco" means dragon but I don't think Draco is a dragon.

 Eggplant