Wands and Wizards...Again

[jkoney65]

No: HPFGUIDX 183610

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, juli17 at ... wrote:
>
>  
> Carol wrote:
> 
> IMO,  it would have been much less cruel to young readers (who *do*
> notice such  things and, in my experience, are shocked by them) to 
have
> Harry regret his  actions than to force them to either reject their
> hero as flawed or  rationalize his behavior by finding excuses for  
it.
> 
> 
> 
> Julie:
> I would add that even by having Harry regret his actions, this 
still leaves  
> him 
> a flawed hero, i.e. human. But proving himself more self-aware by  
regretting
> his wrong actions (not just the Crucio but the Sectumsempra  and 
the few 
> other moments you mentioned) would *show* his growth as a human  
being,
> his maturation into a "better man" by the end of the series. And I 
believe  
> that
> *showing* makes a much greater impact on the reader, and makes for 
a  better
> story, than expecting the reader just to *assume* Harry at some 
point off  the
> page experienced regret over his wrong actions. For me and many 
other  
> readers,
> the Crucio scene would have been much improved (i.e., better 
written and  more
> in character) if Harry had experienced at least momentary shock or 
regret  at
> the ease with which he cast an Unforgivable that had no other 
purpose than  to
> cause excruciating pain, and if McGonagall had shown even the 
slightest  hint
> of dismay or disapproval at Harry's action. (And if the 
Unforgivables had  
> been 
> presented and explained in a more consistent manner.)
>  
> Julie, who still enjoys JKR's Harry Potter saga, but doesn't see 
the  problem 
> with
> pointing out the weaker areas of her writing, as no writer no 
matter how  
> popular
> or critically acclaimed is without weak areas (it's that being 
human thing  
> again).
>  

Jack-A-Roe:
I guess this would be more of a general opinion on this thread of the 
crucio.

I don't have any problem with Harry using the crucio on him for a 
couple of seconds. This is the guy who has been torturing his friends 
all year. Is is some sort of revenge for them, possibly. But Harry 
stops the curse quickly. To me it seems more like being hit with a 
TASER than a torture device. 

Just like a TASER, you get hit with the curse, lose control and are 
in pain. After that the subject is apprehended with no threat of 
violence to the person taking them down.

Isn't Carrow the one who hit Harry with the same curse as they fought 
their way out of Hogwarts in book 6? If so, maybe it's a bit of an 
eye for an eye type of justice.

As for Harry owning a slave:
It appears that we are trying to judge it using our moral standards. 
This appears to be different in the magical world. House elves are 
just that. They are elves who work around the house. To them, this is 
their life and they enjoy it. I don't consider it wrong to have a 
guard dog protecting my property, because that is what they do. House 
elves may be more advanced than a dog, but they still seem to have 
their own purpose. 

I don't remember an evolutionary chart of house elves or anything 
about them being forcibly enslaved. If so, could someone point it out 
to me.