CHAPDISC: DH26, Gringotts

[Jen Reese]

No: HPFGUIDX 184093

Beatrice:
> 10. There has been a lot of debate about Harry's use of unforgivable
> curses.  Here we have the first time he uses one as he performs the
> Imperius Curse on Bogrod and Travers.  Why doesn't he confound them
> as he does the security guard?  Is it really necessary to use this
> curse?  Is this more effective than a Confundus Charm?  Does Harry's
> feeling that he did not perform a very strong curse make it more
> acceptable that he uses this tactic?

Jen: The Imperius bothered me for story reasons more than the Crucio. 
It was included right after Harry made the choice to pursue Horcruxes 
rather than Hallows, to reject the path most wizards would deem the 
better choice - the pursuit of magical power - for the more difficult 
path of destroying Horcruxes.  Dumbledore suspected the temptation on 
Harry's part once Harry learned he was in possession of two Hallows, 
thus the reason for willing Harry the Stone in such a cryptic manner 
(and giving Hermione the fairy tale book in order to help stall him.)

So Harry puts everything together & rejects magical power as the 
answer, then casts his first Imperius.  Total control over another. 
What?!?

The only answer that makes sense to me is JKR classified the 
Unforgiveables exactly the way Pippin describes here:

"Harry's got a lot worse things to be concerned about than a life
sentence in Azkaban. And that's mostly the way Imperius and Crucio
have been presented to him: not as uniquely evil actions but simply
ones that will get you into a lot of trouble if you're caught. Only
the act of murder is consistently called evil in itself."

Jen again:  It's true that HBP presents the idea that there is 
something worse than Unforgiveables, and that something is murder.  
That murder is a moral evil while Unforgiveables are a legal evil.  
I'm suddenly realizing that distinction made for a good red herring 
in HBP when Snape kills DD by using Avada Kedavra.  Was it the AK 
that was the worst evil or the murder itself?  (If indeed it had been 
a real murder I mean.)  In my mind after HBP it was the AK that 
presented the dilemma as much as the murder itself.  Snape couldn't 
possibly be *good* if her performed an Unforgiveable even if he was 
loyally killing Dumbledore at Dumbledore's request.  

> Pippin:
> JKR characterized Griphook as a goblin fanatic. But I don't
> believe she showed that all goblins are fanatic, so I have no
> reason to think they all share Griphook's view. Bill himself says
> that this is a belief among goblins, and Gringotts goblins are
> especially prone to it, which shows that he doesn't believe all
> goblins think the same way.

Mike:
> I don't see how you get there from what Bill says. "Especially prone
> to it" (and it was with regards to gold and treasure) sounds to me
> like Gringott's goblins, which Griphook was until recently, are more
> fanatical in their application but not differing in their base
> beliefs.

> Though it may be possible that Griphook belongs to a more fanatical
> faction of goblins, we have no exception to prove that postulation.
> In what way they are fanatical, we can't know because JKR gives us
> no other examples. 


Jen: I read it the same as Pippin but not because of the section 
where Bill says 'especially prone to' the beliefs about treasure.  It 
was the sentence right above that says: "However there is a belief 
among some goblins..."  'Some' to me sounds like a part of, a 
faction, a few.  I didn't think all goblins believed as as Griphook 
does, that in fact those who did were the ones attracted to working 
at Gringotts in the first place.  Those are the goblins Bill would 
know, the ones who are part of his everyday life. 

Mike:
> But he was being our typical goblin, a standard by which we should 
> be allowed to judge all goblins. Just as we know all Centaurs are
> aloof and stay out of the wizards affairs. Whoops, hello Firenze,
> the exception. Then, look who joined the battle of Hogwarts.

> Just as all House Elves want is to serve humans, any humans, they
> don't care. Whoops, hello Dobby, the exception. Then they join the
> battle on the good guys side, showing it *does* matter to all of
> them who they serve.

> Giants are just gormless, barbaric creatures that can't be civilized
> and must be shunted off to a land far, far away. Whoops, hello 
> Grawp, and thanks for joining the battle on the good guys side.

> Werewolves; hello Lupin. Even a vampire is invited to Sluggy's 
> party.

> But goblins? Where was the exception? Which one broke ranks to show
> us that they don't all think the way Griphook thinks? <snip> 

Jen: This doesn't prove all goblins are like Griphook in their 
beliefs about treasure though, only that all goblins appear to 
believe as Griphook does when it comes to the 'wizarding war'.  They 
have more to lose if they join the Hogwarts group because they have 
more power within wizarding society.  At least Voldemort allows them 
to continue working at Gringotts when he's in power; should they 
choose Harry's side & lose, goblins will likely lose any connection 
to Gringotts because Voldemort wouldn't allow it.  Perhaps it's not a 
noble choice by human standards in the story, but it *is* a prudent 
choice by a group who's mounted rebellions in order to gain their 
power in the WW.