Truth or consequences

[Barry Arrowsmith]

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, GulPlum <hp at p...> wrote:
> snip>
> If I do have a "rule" (see above), it is that I always assume that 
> characters throughout the saga are telling the truth unless we have 
> *immediate* (or prior) evidence to the contrary. Hence my disagreement with 
> several theories which assume that one character or another is being 
> deliberately dishonest with their statements. JKR is far too careful with 
> the way her characters speak and what they say to have the over-all plot 
> hinge on a lie (or, in this case, someone we are led to believe is lying 
> whist - as the theorists would have it - he is telling the truth).
>

Kneasy:
The chances that there'll be a big lie somewhere are pretty good I think,
though it may take a form that many would see as acceptable. How about
the Prophecy being an invention (or manipulation) of DD's to tempt Voldy
into a mis-step/deliberate trap? Or what one sees in the Mirror? It's so
difficult in a story like this to draw hard and fast lines, what one sees as a lie
another will consider a justifiable ploy to confound the enemy or as a way 
of guiding Harry or keeping him under control.

How does one differentiate between outright mendacity and misdirection?
Particularly as it seems that a fair few of DD's efforts at stretching the truth
have had Harry as the unwitting recipient. It's playing fair IMO, the idea that
DD should tell a half-trained volatile teenager who doesn't know his ass
from his elbow everything strikes me as a bit naive. It'd also result in a
load of unemployed theorisers cluttering up the boards. Admittedly I'd
be really unhappy if Jo had blatantly lied to us outside canon about the
basic characterisations -  if Voldy was good, DD evil for example, then the 
tar and feather gang would be heading for Edinburgh damn quick.
  

> GulPlum:
> My own view (and I had meant to say this in my previous post, but forgot) 
> is that this is part of the "thematic" morality of the books: truthfulness 
> is not a virtue in itself (for a childish example, we have an 
> "anti-snitching" message in PS/SS). Whilst, as Dumbledore points out, 
> "honesty is generally preferable" (I think that's the quote; sorry if I got 
> it wrong), there are circumstances in which keeping silent, or even telling 
> a small lie, in furtherance of a greater good, is preferable to honesty in 
> furtherance of evil.
>

Kneasy:
I agree, I don't think honesty is held up as a major virtue, nor is adherance
to the rules. As I pointed out in one of the 'Best of Enemies' posts, Harry
and his pals often regard rules as an irrelevance, much more so  than
Malfoy and his Slytherins, which is not what one would expect given
Slytherin's reputation.

No, the major virtue so far as HP  is concerned is loyalty, the greatest sin
betrayal. And we could be looking at it from both sides of the coin - Snape
has betrayed Voldy, after all. It'll be interesting to find out if traitors of
all stripes suffer the same fate - IIRC Dante didn't distinguish between good
or bad causes; betrayal per se was enough to get you to  the innermost 
circle of Hell.

A quick note to  Olivier -

Happy not to theorise, eh?  Ah, the joys you're missing!
However, I was doodling around on the wonderful web and I  came across
a snippet that might explain your stance. One of your heroes, Cantor - 
his doctoral thesis was entitled "In mathematics the art of asking questions
is more valuable than solving problems."

Um. What can one say to that?