[the_old_crowd] Re: Death, Killing and Harry's Angst (WAS: A Simpler Scenario

[elfundeb]

> 
> Kneasy:

The ghosts - is it death they can't face -or what happens after death?
A subtle but significant distinction, I think, but from hints dropped it's
the latter. An unwillingness to take the next step.
 Debbie:
I hear what you're saying, but I think it amounts to the same thing: People 
fear death because they cannot face what happens next.
 Kneasy:
AKs are evil. Except when the Ministry says it's OK.
Has Moody's soul split because he killed DEs that who would rather die than
surrender? Does Moody beat his breast, crying "Mea culpa!"? Nope. Mostly 
he acts as if it were a distasteful but necessary part of the job. If it was 
all
cooked up beforehand between DD and Snape, is there any real difference?
 Debbie:
The Ministry doesn't have the power to decide whether AK is evil, only when 
it will be punished. Could Moody have created a Horcrux after Rosier's 
death? It was in the line of duty and Moody implies that Rosier tried to 
take Moody along on the next great adventure. Was that a supreme act of 
evil? I think not. 
 I wanted to construct another example of a *good* person killing in 
self-defense, which arguably is not a supreme act of evil, either. But, I 
seem to recall that no one in the Order casts any lethal spells anywhere in 
the books. Am I correct in this? 

 Why should it need to be noble?
> Indeed, if the Puppetmaster!DD theories are accurate DD has done much
> which is not very noble - but absolutely essential. These are the hard
> choices that distinguish a realist from a poseur, and the desperate 
> defender
> of literally thousands of lives from someone who wants to be well thought 
> of. 
> 
> But if you insist on nobility - is it more noble to be zapped by a traitor 
> or to
> ensure removal of oneself from the game because from now on one might be
> a danger to one's own side? Cling to some form of existence by one's 
> finger- 
> nails come what may - or accept that it's time to go? Which is more noble?

 Debbie:
I'm not a fan of Puppetmaster!Dumbledore; I just can't see him as a 
micromanager. But DD removing himself from the scene because his presence 
will hinder Harry is neither micromanaging nor puppetmastering. And it is 
noble in my book. 

For all that DD irritates me when he slaps the on bullshit two feet thick, I 
> think
> that this little episode was foreseen as a possibility and that it had 
> been 
> pre-arranged in case DD came up against something ultra-nasty but not
> immediately terminal while chasing down Hossclicks. The withered hand
> would have been fair warning - he only survived that because of prompt
> action by Snapey. He'd have to be pretty dim not to envision a potentially
> worse encounter with Voldy Dark Magic and take appropriate precautions.

 Debbie:
Which little episode? The near-lethal potion in the cave? Or Snape stepping 
into Chicken!Draco's shoes? I think it was much more convenient that DD was 
on the edge anyway, but I think DD agreed to this in advance in part for 
Snape, in part for Draco, and in part to get out of Harry's way because DD 
felt he'd just about outlived his usefulness. 

So, get back to Hoggers and when someone is about to open the door -
> freeze Harry. He expected Snape and he expected Snape to do the business, 
> but he had to make sure Harry didn't interfere. But it wasn't Snape.
> Complications ensue, but the end result was what he wanted.

 Debbie:
Interesting. So you don't think he expected Draco? I assumed that once he 
saw the Dark Mark, he knew Draco would be waiting for his return.

Well, if we all read the text the same way, there'd be nothing to talk 
about. 
 Debbie


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]