Sorry- that phrase came out wrong. What I meant was that the laws of magic seem to have some sort of moral force behind them. Not always a positive one- the Unforgivable Curses are apparently addictive, or at least encourage a mindset in which it becomes easier and easier to cast them effectively. On the other hand, Lily's sacrifice reinforces the idea of maternal sacrifice by the ensuing magical protection that Harry gains. Even seen in purely evolutionary terms, these are very powerful reinforcements of behaviour. However, the fact that they don't benefit the "good" characters so much as the grey areas suggests that they're ways of nudging people in the right direction. JK is a Christian; that sort of worldview certainly supports this idea, of fallen people being pushed in the right direction, whilst the truly virtuous people just get to be virtuous, and that's their own reward.
Also, I'll admit that I think Sirius attempting to kill Snape wasn't premeditated murder. It was a bloody stupid thing to do, but this is a bloke who is portrayed as rash throughout the books, and has been happily running about with the werewolf without any problems. Now, that suggests to me something along the lines of Sirius getting drunk, Snape sneaking around and getting caught, and Sirius thinking, "Well, if he wants to know that much, then why doesn't he go look?" It's the same situation as Dudley and the ten-tonne toffee- the Weasleys are from a culture where it can be rectified in seconds, and they know Dudley's immensely greedy.
Now technically, Dudley owes Mr Weasley a life debt...
Of course, at 15 it seems that Snape would be too young to know what he was getting himself in to. Certainly he's bloody stupid in trying to sneak past a violent tree on a full moon on the suggestion of his worst enemy... In fact, more stupid than I'd expect of a fifteen-year old. And bear in mind this is a culture where you can put a kid on a broomstick at 12 years old, and in a violent competition with a very real chance of death, not to mention allowing a boy of 11 to disappear down two seperate secret passageways to duel the Dark Lord. (You'll never convince me that Dumbledore wasn't aware all along, just to make sure that Harry was up for it). So the idea that Snape could've deserved, if not death, then a bloody big shock and lycanthropy doesn't surprise me much. It's a callous world, and if life debts help people to realise that they all need to depend on each other more, I'm not going to condemn them.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2004-11-17 01:50 pm (UTC)Also, I'll admit that I think Sirius attempting to kill Snape wasn't premeditated murder. It was a bloody stupid thing to do, but this is a bloke who is portrayed as rash throughout the books, and has been happily running about with the werewolf without any problems. Now, that suggests to me something along the lines of Sirius getting drunk, Snape sneaking around and getting caught, and Sirius thinking, "Well, if he wants to know that much, then why doesn't he go look?" It's the same situation as Dudley and the ten-tonne toffee- the Weasleys are from a culture where it can be rectified in seconds, and they know Dudley's immensely greedy.
Now technically, Dudley owes Mr Weasley a life debt...
Of course, at 15 it seems that Snape would be too young to know what he was getting himself in to. Certainly he's bloody stupid in trying to sneak past a violent tree on a full moon on the suggestion of his worst enemy... In fact, more stupid than I'd expect of a fifteen-year old. And bear in mind this is a culture where you can put a kid on a broomstick at 12 years old, and in a violent competition with a very real chance of death, not to mention allowing a boy of 11 to disappear down two seperate secret passageways to duel the Dark Lord. (You'll never convince me that Dumbledore wasn't aware all along, just to make sure that Harry was up for it). So the idea that Snape could've deserved, if not death, then a bloody big shock and lycanthropy doesn't surprise me much. It's a callous world, and if life debts help people to realise that they all need to depend on each other more, I'm not going to condemn them.