CCBC-Net Archives
Potter (spoilers)
- Contemporary messages sorted: [ by date ] [ by subject ] [ by author ]
From: Greg H. Leitich <ghl>
Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2000 09:32:02 -0500
I just finished Goblet of Fire and therefore now feel qualified to make comments on this discussion. :-).
I was intrigued by certain threads I had hoped would be more fully developed and may yet be. Specifically, I found the character of Moody-Crouch (hereinafter "MC") to be very interesting and somewhat troubling in an "extremism in defense of liberty is no vice" kind of way.
For example, early on, MC transforms the odious Malfoy - without his consent - into a ferret, which is treated with amusement by students and faculty alike, though some faculty are (admittedly) scandalized. Now, in addition to a violation of school policy, I would think that such an act would be criminal, probably a felony, yet MC doesn't appear to be reprimanded by Dumbledore in any meaningful way, let alone reported to the local constabulary.
The next thing MC did in an official capacity was the lecture on curses, in which he announces that the curses are themselves illegal, yet pressures the students into accepting, "experimentally", that they try them out! And let's be very clear on what happened: The teacher literally and most completely enslaved certain students, while torturing others.
That MC turned out (gratifyingly) to be an agent of Voldemort is not enough. Surely Dumbledore should have gotten wind of such goings-on, put a stop to them and hauled MC off to the clink, especially after the heads-up warning of the ferret incident.
That he did not leads one to conlcude either that Dumbledore is inept and should be removed from office (which we know is not the case) or that the experiemnts were condoned by Dumbledore, perhaps for the very reasons given by MC: military necessity.
The argument that it is necessary so that the students are prepared to fight evil (or whatever) is a bit tepid for me, and is a bit, well, totalitarian. If you're willing to break (or countenance the breaking of) one law, then where do you stop? Suspend habeas corpus? Intern suspected dark wizards without trial? Let dementors run amok? (And, yes, they're another issue, but at least DUmbledore is on record against them).
I was also somewhat surprised that Hermione, at least, didn't show more reaction. Yes, I know she succumbed to peer pressure, but that didn't stop her with regard to the house gnomes, which clearly are enslaved. Which raises another issue: Is the fawning desire of the house gnomes to serve completely voluntary? And, if not, surely Hogwarts and others should fear an uprising?
I do like the fact that the society of "good" wizards is not perfect, but I would like to see developed in a more meaningful thematic way, just how far Good can go in pursuit of Evil without going too far.
Greg Leitich
Received on Fri 15 Sep 2000 09:32:02 AM CDT
Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2000 09:32:02 -0500
I just finished Goblet of Fire and therefore now feel qualified to make comments on this discussion. :-).
I was intrigued by certain threads I had hoped would be more fully developed and may yet be. Specifically, I found the character of Moody-Crouch (hereinafter "MC") to be very interesting and somewhat troubling in an "extremism in defense of liberty is no vice" kind of way.
For example, early on, MC transforms the odious Malfoy - without his consent - into a ferret, which is treated with amusement by students and faculty alike, though some faculty are (admittedly) scandalized. Now, in addition to a violation of school policy, I would think that such an act would be criminal, probably a felony, yet MC doesn't appear to be reprimanded by Dumbledore in any meaningful way, let alone reported to the local constabulary.
The next thing MC did in an official capacity was the lecture on curses, in which he announces that the curses are themselves illegal, yet pressures the students into accepting, "experimentally", that they try them out! And let's be very clear on what happened: The teacher literally and most completely enslaved certain students, while torturing others.
That MC turned out (gratifyingly) to be an agent of Voldemort is not enough. Surely Dumbledore should have gotten wind of such goings-on, put a stop to them and hauled MC off to the clink, especially after the heads-up warning of the ferret incident.
That he did not leads one to conlcude either that Dumbledore is inept and should be removed from office (which we know is not the case) or that the experiemnts were condoned by Dumbledore, perhaps for the very reasons given by MC: military necessity.
The argument that it is necessary so that the students are prepared to fight evil (or whatever) is a bit tepid for me, and is a bit, well, totalitarian. If you're willing to break (or countenance the breaking of) one law, then where do you stop? Suspend habeas corpus? Intern suspected dark wizards without trial? Let dementors run amok? (And, yes, they're another issue, but at least DUmbledore is on record against them).
I was also somewhat surprised that Hermione, at least, didn't show more reaction. Yes, I know she succumbed to peer pressure, but that didn't stop her with regard to the house gnomes, which clearly are enslaved. Which raises another issue: Is the fawning desire of the house gnomes to serve completely voluntary? And, if not, surely Hogwarts and others should fear an uprising?
I do like the fact that the society of "good" wizards is not perfect, but I would like to see developed in a more meaningful thematic way, just how far Good can go in pursuit of Evil without going too far.
Greg Leitich
Received on Fri 15 Sep 2000 09:32:02 AM CDT
