Comments | hp_essays: The theme of accepting one's own death

maryh10000 in hp_essays

The theme of accepting one's own death

Oct 20, 2007 10:19

Death is not the ultimate evil. Murder is not the ultimate evil. Killing is not the ultimate evil.

Not accepting your own death is the ultimate evil.

Edited to add: by the way, these aren't my own views on morality. This is what I actually see in the books.

Saving someone's life is only heroic if you substitute your death for theirs. Lily is a hero ( Read more... )

other topics:heroes, characters:severus snape, other topics:morality, other topics:themes

Comments 151

dancesontrains October 20 2007, 16:12:15 UTC

Interesting. The worrying thing is that this theory does make sense in the context of canon.

Although nothing says that I have to agree. Personally, I'd either hide or fight to stay alive, and that makes me Evol.

I'm sure others will make more intelligent comments than me, but this particular notion of morality leaves an unpleasant taste bahind

maryh10000 October 20 2007, 16:16:33 UTC

Thanks for your comment.

I'm not saying I agree with this worldview. Just trying to figure out what Rowling's moral point is.

sleetersoulfire October 20 2007, 16:18:44 UTC

The morality given in HP canon leaves a nasty taste behind. That's all there really is to it.

zanesfriend October 24 2007, 18:36:33 UTC

"Greater love has no man than this--that a man should give up his life for his friends."

"He who would save his life will loose it, but he who would loose his life will save it."

Either of those quotes look familiar?

kadaj010 October 20 2007, 16:22:51 UTC

Yep, I totally see what you are saying above.

I think the author wrote each paragraph on its own, individually and isolated rather than looking at her story as a whole and how the smaller messages would fit in the overall story. This is why there is no consistency.

tudorpot October 20 2007, 17:41:19 UTC

"Snape shows that he is not as good as Sirius by not trying to save Charity, since at least part of the reason he doesn't save her was because he knew he couldn't do so without being killed."

So, he would have been good if he stupidly interfered with Voldemort and his fellow Deatheaters to save one witch? This action would not allow him to share what he knew with Harry by sharing his memories. He could never intervene in any other Deatheater action in an subtle and intelligent manner as he sacrificed himself in a moment of horrific idiotic action, which most probably would have failed -causing both his and Charity's death.

Based on this total lack of logic, ignorance of canon evidence and imbecility, this essay is not worth reading further.

maryh10000 October 20 2007, 17:59:29 UTC

Thank you for your comment.

I'm not saying I agree with this worldview. Just trying to figure out what Rowling's moral point is.

tudorpot October 20 2007, 18:03:52 UTC

My point is that she had no understanding of her characters nor can she fairly deal with their morals and ethics as she is deeply prejudiced and lost all connection with her canon in the last book.

kadaj010 October 20 2007, 19:13:48 UTC

What? I thought maryh1000 was bordering on tongue and cheek with her analysis of the author's logic. It doesn't necessarily mean she agrees with the author's perception death and evil and whatnot.

Thread 7

sander123 October 20 2007, 17:47:00 UTC

Thank you very much for wording this out. Perhaps you could even hyperbolising a bit and claim that evil is to not accept death.

Harry shows his ultimate goodness because at the end of PS, because he don't accept Voldemort's offering to have his parents back. His heroism is proofed as he is walking into death at the end of DH.

The bad thing is, that it is human to fear death. Most writers write actually to become immortal.

There's a strange suicide-pattern going through this morality, too (I can't sort that out, at the moment).

I'm sure it has something to do with her mother's death, but I'm not sure how.

As a side-note: I'm so happy that there are a lot of people who have other ways of trying to become heroic in real-life, because I'm fonder of sensible firemen and doctors than suicide bombers...

quivo October 21 2007, 01:07:43 UTC

I'm so happy that there are a lot of people who have other ways of trying to become heroic in real-life, because I'm fonder of sensible firemen and doctors than suicide bombers...
Amen to this. Allowing for extreme cases, you can usually do more in life than you can by dying.

I'm sure it has something to do with her mother's death, but I'm not sure how.
I think it's some kind of twisted way of reassuring herself that accepting her mother's death is The Thing To Do, and that by extension, accepting her eventual death must be done. I can see someone's reaction to the death of someone close to them being terrified of death thereafter, so it's not hard to imagine JKR trying to confront a very human reaction in this roundabout sort of way.

eroej_kab October 21 2007, 18:10:49 UTC

With the theme's of accepting death in the forms of DD's being euthanized by Snape and Harry's attempt at suicide, I'm afraid the tie in to her mother's death may, unfortunately, be something else.

j_daisy October 20 2007, 19:30:16 UTC

In his talk with Dumbledore, Snape points out that lately he has only watched those people die whom he could not save. That's actually why he's not a hero.

This comparison to Harry would work if Harry was not trying to hide anything. Everybody knew what side he was on. Snape had to maintain an alias, and it would have been shattered if he had tried to save anyone. I understand what point you're trying to make, but you're comparing apples and oranges. Their positions were totally different.

And furthermore, it could be argued that Snape did accept his own death - he knew he was walking an extremely fine line being a spy. He tried to stay alive while he could - but so did Harry.

maryh10000 October 20 2007, 20:35:10 UTC

Except that Harry *was* hiding during most of DH, and actually *did* break his cover anyway during the raid on the MoM.

I thought it was incredibly stupid at the time, exactly as stupid as it would have been for Snape to risk everything on the off chance he MIGHT be able to save Charity.

But of course, Harry succeeded.

j_daisy October 20 2007, 21:00:16 UTC

LOL - I should have been more clear, I meant that he was hiding his loyalties. And Harry was going to break out of the MoM anyway; Snape couldn't break out of the Death Eaters.

eroej_kab October 21 2007, 18:20:13 UTC

but so did Harry

I don't believe that is the case as presented in canon at the end. At the first suggestion that the way to eliminate the soul piece in Harry was Suicide by COP (LV), Harry was off to end his life. No concideration of options, no discussion with Hermione who has the Horcrux Books, nothing but a "Glorious" acceptance of death. No attempt to stay alive at all.