Disarming spell WAS: Re: Wandlore and more

[dumbledore11214]

No: HPFGUIDX 185408


 Magpie:
> Yes, but that's exactly the point--Aang is presented as a pacifist. 
> His beliefs about murder are a major belief of his people. So he 
had 
> a reason to want to avoid that one act and his feeling like it was 
> wrong for him, and it was genuinely hard for him to overcome them.
> 
> But with Harry I'm saying regarding the Crucio spell that obviously 
> he doesn't shrink from doing something less passive than 
> Expelliarimus. As you say, he's susceptible to anger, but whatever 
> the reason Harry just doesn't have any sort of block about it if he 
> chooses a torture spell in a moment where his alleged "signature" 
> spell would have been an obvious choice. Or even something less 
> violent but more effective like a stunning spell. So did Harry come 
> to agree with Lupin? If it's just that he got angry then his 
instinct 
> was easily overcome with anger.


Alla:

I am not saying that Harry has an instinct to use Expeliarmus either. 
Of course not, because as you say when he is angry his so called 
instinct is overcome with anger or whatever. But I think Pippin is 
spot on here with what she wrote :

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/185405

"The point is not that Harry is a natural pacifist, the point is that
he *chooses* not to be a killer. As part of that, he chooses not to
practice spells that would make killing easier."




Alla:

Harry IMO chooses not to become a killer. Does he want to torture the 
bastard who did all that to his friends? I think he did. I think he 
was extremely angry and let his anger overcome him and **made a 
choice influenced by it** Did he want to kill DE when Lupin chastised 
him? Well, it seemed to me that he made conscious choice not to.

So again, it seems to me that the point is the choices that Harry 
makes here, be it a wrong choice or right one.


Magpie: 
> So it just seems like the whole concept of Harry as not being 
> naturally violent is overdone there. Sure he's not an overly 
violent 
> person, but Lupin's speech about how he's suddenly got to work on 
not 
> shying away from something other than Expelliarimus just seems a 
new 
> idea that doesn't really go anywhere. Like a way to set up Harry as 
> being innocent in war without any real consequences.

Alla:

Did not feel that way to me at all. I mean as I said before, it was a 
little wierd that Lupin was the one who said it, but when I think 
about it, maybe it makes sense, because as Pippin again points out 
Lupin did want to kill Peter had Harry not stopped him. So, I don't 
know, it feels more like a rather consistent way to me to set up 
Harry as not a killer rather than an innocent in a war. 

Person who makes choices, who tries to make right choices, does not 
always gets to be consistent, especially young person, no?

But to me it presented consistently enough that Harry tries. No, he 
is not a pacifist, no he does not have a block against feeling anger 
and revenge if his friends, teachers are being hurt. But again, I see 
that he tries not to be a killer.

Magpie: 
> Where as with Aang there are consequences. He doesn't just have an 
> instinct for non-violence, he's a committed pacifist. When people 
> tell him he's got to get over it it really is a problem. Here it's 
> more like if they were in a fight and Sokka knocked a sword out of 
> someone's hand with his boomerang and Iroh suddenly said, "Sokka, 
> what was up with that? Most people would have thrown the boomerang 
at 
> his head and killed him. You need to work on that sweet nature of 
> yours--this is war!" It would be silly because yeah, Sokka isn't an 
> angry, violent guy either, but he's never been presented as having 
a 
> block about using force any more than Harry has.

Alla:

I would sort of agree, but not quite, Sokka is not shown to stop 
anybody from killing anybody, no? I may not remember well, watched 
Avatar within a week every day few months ago, may have forgotten. 

And, well, I don't know about Aaang, but as I said before, love show 
as I am, and liking Aaang well enough, I fully admit to never be able 
to relate to character as much as I can relate to Harry, so I am 
probably biased. I love Zuko, but find Aaang to be rather blah.

So I honestly feel that Aaang chose easier way than Harry did at the 
end, IMO of course. It is a speculation, but I feel that Harry would 
have liked very much to use Avada on Voldemort to make him pay for 
all that he did to his friends and whole WW. So in my speculative 
opinion Harry chose against what he wanted to do and Aaang found a 
way, creative way of course, but still he found a way to satisfy his 
pacifist nature and not go against it. 

JMO,

Alla