Wands and Wizards...Again (Was: Epilogue ...)

[dumbledore11214]

No: HPFGUIDX 183588

Leah: 
I can understand why Harry acted as he did. That doesn't mean
that I have to think what he did was right. Understanding that
someone was driven to take an action is not the same as condoning
it. It is possible to understand why someone is driven to commit
murder, but it doesn't mean the murder has to be condoned.

Alla:

Yes, I also do not think that what he did was right. However, I do 
not believe that understanding what I perceive to be his reasons and 
sympathize with him and not Amicus translates in condoning it. I also 
do not believe that what he did amounts to something as serious as 
murder.
I think it was torture, very brief torture, to me completely 
understandable, and something that Amicus mightily deserved IMO. 
That's all what it was to me.

Leah:
I don't think anyone is criticizing anyone for
showing 'understanding' or accusing anyone of supporting torture in
the real world.

Alla:

I have a different opinion.


Leah:
The post I was replying to did not say that Harry
used Crucio because of his inner suffering. It set out a military
motive for his doing so, and stated the poster's opinion that
Harry's Crucio did not amount to torture. This is providing reasons
or 'excusing' Harry's action.


Alla:

So, that's not readership saying so, right? That's one reader with 
whom by the way I personally completely disagree.  I disagree with 
Harry having military motive for doing so, I disagree that it was not 
torture, I think however brief one, it was. However, again Steve 
provides reasons or excuses actions of fictional character. I also 
provide reasons based on which I understand the actions of fictional 
character. The leap that I would never make is to make a judgment 
about the reader based on his likes or dislikes in fiction.

Look, here is the example that I always use in the similar 
discussions. Say I come to you and tell you that my very favorite 
character in the HP series is Voldemort.
You are not going to tell me in response that it means that my 
inspiration in life is to be the leader of the terrorist organization 
which kills and tortures people, right? 


Leah:
<SNIP>
What strikes me
as odd is the number of people who are indeed prepared to excuse
rather than merely understand the action. I just wonder if
this would happen if the character concerned wasn't Harry himself.

Alla:

Why does it strike you as odd? No seriously, why? Should it strike me 
as odd that number of people who were preparing to excuse rather than 
understand Snape's actions towards Harry and Neville was in my 
opinion huge? And should I wonder whether that would happen if the 
character was not Snape?

I mean, of course I am deliberately making sweeping generalization 
here to make my point. I know a lot of Snape's fans who love Snape 
knowing all his faults and saying that yes he treated kids horribly 
but we still love him because he is a great character. I know a lot 
of Snape fans who gave a reason why he treated kids this way and that 
is why they understand and sympathize with him, etc, etc.

And same here, there are a lot of readers who do not condemn Harry 
for Crucio in that episode. That does not mean that all of the 
readers think it was Cool for Harry to do it.

It does strike me as odd that anyone would make any judgment about 
readers based on what they like or dislike in fiction. The very same 
issue that reader can be very much against in RL in one book reader 
may love and dislike in another.

Like I do not think that Harry asking Kreacher for a sandwich amounts 
to anything horrible. Does it really translate into me supporting 
slavery in RL?  I do not think so.  And while I have no problems 
whatsoever with Harry owning  Kreacher for example, there is a book I 
am preparing to discuss elsewhere, where **one** action of the main 
character where he basically entraps and enslaves another human being 
against his will caused this character to be on the list of the 
characters I cannot stand.  In that book I have no doubts that 
enslaved character a) would rather be elsewhere and b) that it is 
true slavery. 

At the same time when I read "Gone with the wind", I have no issues 
with slavery portrayed there. And again here is a different 
motivation for me. I do not believe that slavery as portrayed there 
is historically correct at all, but in that fictional universe, where 
slaves are treated as family members and do not want to go anywhere 
else, why would I be upset?

Again, I think it is a lie, complete lie, but in this imaginary 
universe I am fine with it, you know?

So we have three books and in each of them I have a different opinion 
about the issue of slavery "in those books" based on many reasons 
while **it does not change my stand on the issue of slavery in RL one 
bit**

What I am trying to say is that I think it is completely risky trying 
to make a judgment about real person based on only knowing this 
person's view about Harry Potter. That is why I usually prefer to 
stick to arguing about the books and not the readers.

Alla