Blowing his cover

[Mike]

No: HPFGUIDX 181449

> > zgirnius:
> > Additional evidence of his emotional state, as I see it, is the
> > way the spell works when he casts it. More normally, a victim of
> > this curse falls screaming to the ground and continues to
> > experience excruciating pain until the caster deliberately stops
> > the curse by raising his wand. Harry's spell sends Amycus
> > crashing into a wall, where he promptly loses consciousness.

Mike:
I included zgirnius' entire paragraph just to say that I proposed 
this difference in the results of Harry's Crucio as compared to 
other's Crucios way back, and nobody bought it. Glad to see a fellow 
traveler, Zara.


> Mr. Lee responded:
> Even if Harry IS all wound up about his friends and fellow students
> (though, as we've seen, not more than a Stunning spell's worth),

Mike:
Well, Harry's Crucio acted like a stunning spell. How do you know 
that's not what Harry was thinking about when he wonders if he should 
stun Carrow at this point?


> Mr. Lee continued: 
> then it simply becomes a crime of passion. But a crime of passion 
> is still a crime.

Mike:
I thought we were discussing the moralistic importance, not criminal 
ramifications. Here, once again, I'd like to point out that using 
Sirius Black as your moral guide with regards to the MoM's actions is 
akin to asking O.J. what he thinks of the L.A.P.D. Black's opinion 
may be accurate, but how much of it was based on his own experience? 
Sirius is my favorite character in the series, but 12 years in 
Azkaban might have seriously affected his objectivity about the 
Ministry. 

Not that I have much regard for the MoM myself. But, I'm also sure 
that they labeled the Unforgivables as such. Which is why we got 
penalties for using a type of spell regardless of circumstances, 
instead of penalties for murder, torture, etc. According to wizarding 
law Harry deserves life in prison for using Crucio on Amycus, but 
whomever blasted the wall that killed Fred doesn't deserve to 
be "most heavily punished by wizarding law." How's that for moral 
ambiguity?


> Mr. Lee concluded: 
> Nevertheless, we still have Harry's own admission: "He spat at 
> you!" The passage just doesn't support any other interpretation.

Mike:
I'm not sure how well you are able to compartmentalize, but might I 
suggest that Harry isn't quite as good. He isn't able to see Neville, 
hear about the Carrow's brutality, listen to Amycus plan to torture 
the Ravenclaws and blame one or some of them, then finally watch him 
spit on Minerva, make an individual judgement on each piece of 
information and plan separate responses for each. That type of 
compartmentalizing is rare indeed.

As Alla and Beverly have stated before me, Harry was not simply 
responding to the expectoration. Harry was responding to the 
cumulative effect of what he's seen happen to his school by a couple 
of low-life animals. The spit was the last straw, but by no means the 
only one.

Mike, who's neither fussed by Harry's Crucio nor the Marauders' 
marauding.