Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows (SPOILERS!)

[Nick]

To the person who said that Snape only asked Harry (commanded/ORDERED Harry) to look at him was to convey his memories, he had already had the memories. We don’t get that Harry picked up any more by looking at him. No, I am telling you, it makes sense that he was lusting for Lily, long after she was dead. We can now go back and re-read all the books and infer this whenever Snape always looked at Harry a little longer, always in the eye.

Do we all agree Lily never loved him as he would have liked? She once concidered him a best friend, but, never loved him as such. I will accept Dumbledore as the only person who loved him because it surely was never Lily.

I certainly do not think that we are supposed to believe that Snape was lusting for Lily when he looked into Harry’s eyes. I think that his love is portrayed as pure, undying, and yet un-returned. It seems that we are to see Snape as resigned to the fact that Lily was lost to him forever when she married James, but his love for her would never die, and he would do anything to protect her.

Some of the moral problems of the last book that I am not sure what to conclude on are: Is it immoral for a man to be in love with a married woman? It seems like it might be potentially morally problematic for a person to be in love with somebody who is married, what do you all think?

Also, the whole Snape and Dumbledore death pact thing is disturbing. Would the Church see this action as euthanasia? Does anyone else think that if anything this part of the book sends a somewhat unclear and potentially very dangerous message about euthanasia?

 

[JudieK]

I just finished this book, and all I could say was “WOW!” I loved it. I don’t care that it was 750+ pages long… the object for me is to enjoy the time in this fantasy world… linger in it… savor it… not rush through to the end to see how it all wraps up. Yes… I couldn’t put it down, but I wished it would go on even further. I resented the fact that I had to rush to finish it because I was sure that any moment now I would hear the details on TV, radio, internet, or in casual conversation. I wanted that “Magic Moment” that JK spoke of, and I did have it! Now the hard part is keeping my mouth shut while everyone else is reading it! And while I appreciate the analysis everyone on this board is doing, I think we have to realize that this doesn’t pretend to be Catholic literature, and while it may have started out as a children’s book, it became so much more. I was a little shocked at the word “effing,” which of course refers to the “F” word. But I think if your child is old enough to read a book of this weight, they are old enough to hear this reference and not be scarred for life (a little parental guideance is suggested, no?) I think the euthanasia reference may glide right over most kid’s heads, but I also agree that DD’s main motive was to save Draco. He is not perfect, and he admits it. This could be a teachable moment for parents and their kids. I think the best stories bring up questions and moral conundrums, so that parents can discuss them and guide their children. Humans are flawed… why do we expect otherwise? I loved this book and wouldn’t change a thing. I do wish we knew what happened in the immediate aftermath of the epic battle, and the ensuing years of “reconstruction” of the Wizarding world. that would be an intesting epilogue! I also wanted to say that I wish more was made of the fact that Harry risked his life (and that of his closest friends) to save Draco and Goyle. This seems unrealistic, but very saintly of Harry. I wish we could have seen a touching moment where Harry and Draco reconcile. That’s my 2 cents!

 

[SeekerJen]

Some of the moral problems of the last book that I am not sure what to conclude on are: Is it immoral for a man to be in love with a married woman? It seems like it might be potentially morally problematic for a person to be in love with somebody who is married, what do you all think?

I think it would be morally neutral for a man to love a married woman; it would be immoral for him to act improperly on that love (such as declaring it to her, asking her to leave her husband, etc.). In Snape’s case, it seems as though his love made him a better person. Without that, he might have been the worst of the Death Eaters. I didn’t see any impropriety depicted in his actions toward Lily; rather, he was depicted as staying out of her adult life but wishing to protect her as best he could. I certainly don’t think it’s fair to say that he was lusting after her. If anything, when looking at Harry’s eyes, he may have been trying to see Lily in her son, because otherwise Harry reminded Snape too strongly of his greatest school enemy. The eyes were the best reminder that Harry wasn’t just James Potter’s son.

As for the Dumbledore issue, that’s been addressed earlier in the thread.

 

[babydoc]

I enjoyed the book very much. Within the confines of language geared for children, Rowling’s final chapters convey the best of heroic epic tradition. Themes such as redemptive suffering (Harry’s voluntary acceptance of martyrdom caused a grace that protected the innocent from the Dark Lord’s curses) the complexity of the human personality (No one is a perfect human being --Dumbledore had his own temptations to conquer – Harry made dumb errors and was tempted to arrogance,Ron did a judas walk but repented), the eternal power of love recur through the pages.
In story and subcreation these themes are explored through the lens of imagination. Readers learn that there are things worth dying for (the Good); and that submitting to Darkness leads to an existence of shadow and distortion.

I read these books to vet them for my children’s consumption but ended up loving them for their own sake.

 

[Ahimsa]

Here’s what one blogger predicted:

I think Snape is loyal to Dumbledore in the end.

I believe that Dumbledore pleaded with Snape to kill him because if Dumbledore did not die, Draco Malfoy and his family would be killed by Voldemort. Snape, who had sworn an unbreakable vow to aid Draco, in acting in accordance with Dumbledore’s wishes both achieves the end result of his vow and keeps faith with Dumbledore.

The look of revulsion on Snape’s face was because he hated having to kill Dumbledore, the only person who ever finally believed totally in him.

Note that Snape very carefully avoids harming Harry Potter in the next scene and instead acts to protect Harry from the worst of his desire to act in revenge.
The loathing look on Snape’s face was probably a profound jealousy that he would never share the mentor-student relationship with Dumbledore that Harry had.

So in the end, Dumbledore sacrifices himself to save a traitor’s life. A profoundly Christian thing to do.

So, was Dumbledore’s confession to Harry, that Harry was the better man, simply what anyone of Dumbledore’s moral stature, would tell someone? Did Dumbledore think (to paraphrase St. Paul) that agape-love was not something to be grasped as one’s own?

 

[Nick]

Here’s what one blogger predicted:

I think Snape is loyal to Dumbledore in the end.

Correct me if I am wrong but this seems to be the same logic used in the “abortion is justified to save the life of the mother” argument. Would not the Church say that it is a grave evil to perform an evil act so that a good end may result? It seems that deliberately killing someone, even if that someone wanted to be killed, in order to justify some good end, perceived or real, is gravely immoral. Even if that end entails saving another’s life, whether it be Draco’s or the pregnant mother, it is not morally permissible to perform evil in order to achieve that end.

 

[child_of_God85]

I certainly do not think that we are supposed to believe that Snape was lusting for Lily when he looked into Harry’s eyes. I think that his love is portrayed as pure, undying, and yet un-returned. It seems that we are to see Snape as resigned to the fact that Lily was lost to him forever when she married James, but his love for her would never die, and he would do anything to protect her.

Some of the moral problems of the last book that I am not sure what to conclude on are: Is it immoral for a man to be in love with a married woman? It seems like it might be potentially morally problematic for a person to be in love with somebody who is married, what do you all think?

Also, the whole Snape and Dumbledore death pact thing is disturbing. Would the Church see this action as euthanasia? Does anyone else think that if anything this part of the book sends a somewhat unclear and potentially very dangerous message about euthanasia?

I agree. Why would anyone think that Snape was ‘lusting’ for Lily. He was in love with her! He had a very pure and tender love for her. The lasy thing he wanted to see before he died was Lily, and Harry’s eyes were as close as he was going to get.
Please, why do people have to bring impurity into everything. Snapes love was very beautiful.

 

[child_of_God85]

Correct me if I am wrong but this seems to be the same logic used in the “abortion is justified to save the life of the mother” argument. Would not the Church say that it is a grave evil to perform an evil act so that a good end may result? It seems that deliberately killing someone, even if that someone wanted to be killed, in order to justify some good end, perceived or real, is gravely immoral. Even if that end entails saving another’s life, whether it be Draco’s or the pregnant mother, it is not morally permissible to perform evil in order to achieve that end.

So Dumbledore was supposed to let Draco die? Thats real moral of him. He died saving Draco’s life, whats so wrong about him. The person wasn’t tring to make some stupid justification, they were making a good point. They read a lot more into Dumbledores action that the jumped up people trying to say it was euthenasia.

 

[didymus]

1. Concerning the “euthanasia” question: at first, I did see Snape killing Dumbledore as euthanasia and morally wrong, but then I remembered about the spell Vol. cast on Malfoy. Unless Dumbledore was killed, Malfoy would die. I think the moment Dumbledore found out about that, he was willing to allow himself to be killed so that Draco could live, but he didn’t want to have Draco do it and tear his soul, so he appealed to Snape. Maybe the speech to Snape was Dumbledore’s way of getting Snape to do what he asked.

It’s unfortunate that the “euthanasia” aspect was mentioned at all. To me Snape killing Dumbledore was required by his role as double agent. If he were to continue to be accepted as a Death Eater and continue to fight Voldemort from within, killing DD was his duty.
Of course it had the side benefit of preserving Draco (the despicable little git) from becoming a murderer.

1. Snape is now one of my favorite characters. How sad! The whole character of Snape really speaks to JKR’s theme of the power of love. Lily and Dumbledore were probably the only two people who ever showed Snape love and that was what won his allegiance over Voldemort.

(grunt!)
Well, as one who has despised Snape throughout the series I rather resent having to now admire him.

 

[bquinnan]

So Dumbledore was supposed to let Draco die? Thats real moral of him. He died saving Draco’s life, whats so wrong about him. The person wasn’t tring to make some stupid justification, they were making a good point. They read a lot more into Dumbledores action that the jumped up people trying to say it was euthenasia.

Hey, Dumbledore was the one who told Snape, “Only you will know what damage helping an old man avoid pain and humiliation will do to your soul…” Let’s see – a man who is terminally ill anyway is killed by his friend to avoid pain and humiliation, and we’re not supposed to see a link between that and euthanasia?

 

[the_nuge]

Hey, Dumbledore was the one who told Snape, “Only you will know what damage helping an old man avoid pain and humiliation will do to your soul…” Let’s see – a man who is terminally ill anyway is killed by his friend to avoid pain and humiliation, and we’re not supposed to see a link between that and euthanasia?

Exactly! Dumbledore had made the “arrangements” before the news that his death would be saving Malfoy, to help “an old man avoid pain and humiliation”. This is euthanasia in a nutshell.

 

[mommyof4]

There was though one thing that troubled me about this book… Could Dumbledore’s death be considered euthansia?

I wondered the same thing.

 

[the_nuge]

Well along with Dumbledore’s revelation about his death there is the “Don’t pity the dead” statement. To me it brings up the question: Is the Potter series “Culture of Death”?

Don’t pity the dead, Harry. Pity the living and above all, pity those who live without love.

Is this a “Culture of Death” statement? The immediate way I read it is that death ends our suffering so the dead are at peace and don’t need pity (which smacks of universal salvation), while life on earth *is *suffering, especially if you are not loved/live without practicing love.

Now I can see pitying plenty of the living, but don’t pity the dead? Rubbish!

Any thoughts?

 

[Melissa]

Well, you could look at it as the dead have their fate fixed, so there’s really no point in having pity (how can you have compassion on someone whose fate can’t be changed?) on the dead.

Dumbledore’s death–it certainly does look like euthanasia, but I’m not sure that he wasn’t a ‘dead man walking’ from the time he put on the ring. Certainly, the way he died was different than others who’d been ‘Avada’d’ and we learn in HBP that skilled wizards can cast spells without speaking them aloud. So–suppose that what Snape actually did was remove the ‘tourniquet’ on the curse in Dumbledore’s hand (which would’ve killed him earlier if the ‘tourniquet’ hadn’t been there), and “Avada’d” the corpse to make it ‘look good’ to the Death Eaters. (Tourniquet isn’t used in the book, but that’s what I thought of when told that Snape had ‘contained’ the curse in Dumbledore’s hand.)

 

[Nick]

Perfect are heroes are boring.

Is Jesus “boring”?

I don’t think so. Not by a long shot.

 

[Ahimsa]

Is Jesus “boring”?

I don’t think so. Not by a long shot.

Ergo, Jesus isn’t “perfect”.

A “perfect” cup of coffee makes you “feel” better.

A “perfect” job makes you “happy”.

A “perfect” gentleman epitomizes social respectability.

Jesus isn’t “perfect”.

 

[wisdom_3_5]

Dumbledore’s death–it certainly does look like euthanasia, but I’m not sure that he wasn’t a ‘dead man walking’ from the time he put on the ring. Certainly, the way he died was different than others who’d been ‘Avada’d’ and we learn in HBP that skilled wizards can cast spells without speaking them aloud. So–suppose that what Snape actually did was remove the ‘tourniquet’ on the curse in Dumbledore’s hand (which would’ve killed him earlier if the ‘tourniquet’ hadn’t been there), and “Avada’d” the corpse to make it ‘look good’ to the Death Eaters. (Tourniquet isn’t used in the book, but that’s what I thought of when told that Snape had ‘contained’ the curse in Dumbledore’s hand.)

Right. Why does no one see Snape’s actions “stoppering death” akin to keeping DD on a respirator etc?

I think that DD’s death can be seen in both ways. Its up to the reader to make the choice.

Is Jesus “boring”?

I don’t think so. Not by a long shot.Today 9:45 am

No, Jesus is not boring. But it is good to read about people with failings overcoming them. It gives us hope, that’s why we love the saints. Not that HP & co. are saints, but good characters who overcome evil.

 

[Nick]

Ergo, Jesus isn’t “perfect”.

A “perfect” cup of coffee makes you “feel” better.

A “perfect” job makes you “happy”.

A “perfect” gentleman epitomizes social respectability.

Jesus isn’t “perfect”.

What are you talking about?

God = perfect. Jesus = God. therefore Jesus = Perfect!

 

[Contarini]

Some of the moral problems of the last book that I am not sure what to conclude on are: Is it immoral for a man to be in love with a married woman? It seems like it might be potentially morally problematic for a person to be in love with somebody who is married, what do you all think?

First of all, I don’t think Snape is a morally exemplary person (even though he is heroic in many ways). In fact, nobody in Rowling’s books can be assumed to be morally exemplary. In the second place, I don’t think being “in love with” a married woman is sinful if it does not include the conscious desire to possess her sexually or alienate her affections from her husband. As I see it, Snape’s love for Lily becomes “purer” as time goes on, and one important part of this process is his decision to help and protect (at Dumbledore’s instigation) Lily’s child at a time when (Lily being dead) there is nothing more in it for him. I think one poster’s attempt to portray this as something “creepy” is misguided, to put it kindly. It betrays just how crass and corrupted our culture’s perceptions of love are.

One famous analogy: Dante continued to “be in love with” Beatrice long after her death and his own marriage to someone else. Yet while Dante, like Snape, was not a morally exemplary person in many ways (both of them held wicked grudges, for one thing), I don’t think Christian readers of Dante have generally been of the opinion that his love for Beatrice was sinful.

Also, the whole Snape and Dumbledore death pact thing is disturbing. Would the Church see this action as euthanasia? Does anyone else think that if anything this part of the book sends a somewhat unclear and potentially very dangerous message about euthanasia?

I think that Dumbledore’s plan is probably contrary to orthodox Christian ethics, since it involves asking Snape to do something objectively evil (kill an innocent person) that good may come. However, Rowling is not a Catholic–she appears as far as I can tell to be a fairly liberal Protestant–and I think it’s unfair to expect her to adhere to Catholic ethics. I think there is a lot to appreciate about her moral and spiritual views without endorsing all of them.

It may be that Rowling believes euthanasia is legitimate, and thus doesn’t see the moral dilemma in Dumbledore’s death that you and I do. However, Dumbledore’s main purpose is not to avoid pain and humiliation (that is a side benefit) but to save Draco (and incidentally to keep the Elder Wand in reliable hands, though that didn’t work as planned). I also think that the point raised by other posters here is valid: Dumbledore is presented throughout this last book as being a noble but flawed person who (as he confessed in Book 6) sometimes makes very big mistakes, and who tends to manipulate people for his own benevolent purposes.

To me, one beauty of the Harry Potter books, particularly this one, is that they make you think, and think, and think again about important moral issues. I don’t think Rowling offers easy answers, but at the same time she presents her story within a heavily moral framework. We don’t have to agree with her or even know exactly what her own views are to appreciate this rich and powerful story about imperfect people trying to do the right thing under extremely difficult circumstances.

In Christ,

Edwin

 

[Contarini]

Exactly! Dumbledore had made the “arrangements” before the news that his death would be saving Malfoy

I didn’t think of that. I will have to go back and check. If right you have a good point there, though as someone else said I think the other main purpose was maintaining Snape’s status as double agent. I continue to maintain that avoiding a painful death was a side benefit from Dumbledore’s perspective.

Edwin