I didn't find this through Loose Canon, but through your link on your ff.net page. Just so you'll know.
I think DH blows a lot of theories about Dark Magic and makes Snape's question to Lily, about why the Dark Magic joke was somehow worse than all the stuff the Marauders did, one of the Big Unanswered Questions of the series.
Further, in DH we get to see the Trio using unforgivables with no comment. There's no sense that they're getting too focused on the goals of the here-and-now and standing too close to the slippery slope down to the Dark. And even later, when JKR was asked about Harry's use of unforgivables, she just said that well, he's flawed just like Snape was flawed. Well, that makes using the Dark Arts spells just some sort of not-so-good choice, but not actually indicative of any particular dreadful proclivities.
The other point in DH is where McGonagall responds to Harry's use of Crucio with the adjective "gallant". If use of such a spell was truly dangerous for the caster, or somehow gave us a clue or cue that the caster was toying with something seriously dangerous, wouldn't McGonagall have reacted differently? And of course, that's completely aside from the aspect of McGonagall calling the torture of another person gallant.
Before DH came out, JKR posted something, I think on her site, about curses being Dark, while hexes and jinxes were milder. But then we look back through the series and see the Trio and others using curses and even being taught curses in school. So how could they be Dark?
I participated in a very long thread on the Harry Potter Lexicon Forum regarding this whole topic of Dark Magic and what made it so bad. We never came to any conclusions.
As for your ideas, they are certainly very good ones, but you might find that you need to somehow explain some of the things in DH and the attitudes that the Trio and even McGonagall had to the use of unforgivables. Come to think of it, the aurors were given permission to use them during the first Voldemort war. If use of such spells was damaging in more ways than just the immediate effect of the spell, why would that have been allowed?
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
branchandroot
(no subject)
Date: 2008-06-11 06:16 pm (UTC)I think DH blows a lot of theories about Dark Magic and makes Snape's question to Lily, about why the Dark Magic joke was somehow worse than all the stuff the Marauders did, one of the Big Unanswered Questions of the series.
Further, in DH we get to see the Trio using unforgivables with no comment. There's no sense that they're getting too focused on the goals of the here-and-now and standing too close to the slippery slope down to the Dark. And even later, when JKR was asked about Harry's use of unforgivables, she just said that well, he's flawed just like Snape was flawed. Well, that makes using the Dark Arts spells just some sort of not-so-good choice, but not actually indicative of any particular dreadful proclivities.
The other point in DH is where McGonagall responds to Harry's use of Crucio with the adjective "gallant". If use of such a spell was truly dangerous for the caster, or somehow gave us a clue or cue that the caster was toying with something seriously dangerous, wouldn't McGonagall have reacted differently? And of course, that's completely aside from the aspect of McGonagall calling the torture of another person gallant.
Before DH came out, JKR posted something, I think on her site, about curses being Dark, while hexes and jinxes were milder. But then we look back through the series and see the Trio and others using curses and even being taught curses in school. So how could they be Dark?
I participated in a very long thread on the Harry Potter Lexicon Forum regarding this whole topic of Dark Magic and what made it so bad. We never came to any conclusions.
As for your ideas, they are certainly very good ones, but you might find that you need to somehow explain some of the things in DH and the attitudes that the Trio and even McGonagall had to the use of unforgivables. Come to think of it, the aurors were given permission to use them during the first Voldemort war. If use of such spells was damaging in more ways than just the immediate effect of the spell, why would that have been allowed?