DH reread CH 12 -- Cracking a Few Eggs.

[jkoney65]

No: HPFGUIDX 186466

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sistermagpie" <sistermagpie at ...> wrote:
>
> > Magpie continues:
> > 
> > >I agree every thing happens in context. I don't think every
> > > act done in HP is justified by the context. The fact that a
> > > circumstance is unusual or the person uses restraint when 
> > > they hit the torture button doesn't necessarily make it 
> > > admirable or not troubling. Maybe it's forgivable, but that
> > > doesn't really mean somebody's necessarily going to approve 
> > > of what was done in the fictional story as a good thing. 
> > 
> > bboyminn:
> > 
> > Oddly, on this we agree, I didn't mean to imply that it was
> > OK for Harry to do what he did. It was wrong, especially when
> > he had other choice available to him, but it was also 
> > understandable, and it occurred under mitigating circumstances.
> > And I think the Wizard World understands those mitigating
> > circumstances and forgives the act. But while they forgive it,
> > they also disapprove of it and condemn it as wrong. They
> > socially and perhaps morally condemn it as wrong, but in a
> > practical sense, and in a legal sense, they understand it
> > and the circumstances, and are willing to let it go.
> 
> > If, Harry or McGonagall had sustained their action, or been
> > brutal or cruel, then it would have been a different story.
> > They both showed restraint relative to what those curses 
> > could have done. In neither case was any real harm done. In
> > neither case, was the 'victim' make to suffer beyond what was
> > clearly necessary. Again, I ask as I've asked before, if it
> > only last 3 seconds and does no harm, can we really call it
> > torture? 
> 
> Magpie:
> True--though I don't think in the Crucio scene that anybody in the scene thinks it's wrong at all. Harry stands by his action and McGonagall's protests have nothing to do with its being wrong. She describes the action as gallant but foolish (iow, foolish because Harry might have gotten caught).
> 
> Personally, I take the scene as just an action movie moment not unlike the "Not my daughter, you bitch!" moment. I think it's a moment we're supposed to cheer. (And if it's kept in the movie I suspect the screenwriters will set it up to make sure we do.) But I can understand why a lot of people are pulled up by it regardless of no harm done or relative restraint. I do think you can call zapping somebody with a torture curse for 3 seconds torture, just as electrocuting somebody's testicles for 3 seconds would be called torture. Just as everytime Harry's zapped with one for no matter how short a time it seems to be shown as torture. All torture is done under the claim that the victim is not suffering beyond what's "clearly necessary". In the case of Harry's Crucio it's not necessary at all. The guy just deserves some serious pain in Harry's opinion. A stunning spell would have taken care of necessary.

jkoney:
It seems like you are taking it out of context and expanding on it.

Harry's day started with the break in at Gringotts and ended with him finding his friends in the ROR where they are still showing signs of having been tortured. He's also under a time constraint because he needs to find the horcrux as soon as possible because Voldemort has just been told that Harry is at the castle. Standing in front of him is the person who tortured his friends and who is now spitting in the face of McGonagall.  Harry then takes of the cloak and tells Carrow that he shouldn't have done that. Carrow turns and Harry curses him.

Harry hit him with the curse and stopped. There was no excess time, no targeting his testicles, eyes, etc. It was if Harry had TASERed him. People don't consider a TASER a form of torture, unless someone does it repeatedly for a long time. That didn't happen here.

Could Harry have used some other spell, yes. He could have aimed a reductor curse at his head or a cutting curse at his neck. The restraint he showed was admirable.

Now looking at it after the fact as an univolved spectator people can say that if he was really good he would have stunned him and forgiven him for his actions.

That would have been a plastic hero. Someone everyone would have complained about for being too perfect.

Maybe what JKR was showing is that no one is perfect, especially in war. No one is unaffected (unchanged?) by being involved in war. 

> Magpie:
> The scene didn't particularly bother me. Like I said I just thought it was an action movie moment. But I think, also, that people have meta-objections to the idea of the author setting up this curse the way she did and then wanting her hero to be able to throw it to show how cool he was. I think that's probably where a lot of readers come from when they don't like the scene. They know Harry's supposed to be cool in that scene and that didn't work for them. 

jkoney:
I don't think she was trying to show that Harry was cool in that scene. I also don't think it was an action movie moment, but a very realistic response in the context of the situation.