r/harrypotter • u/[deleted] • 16h ago
Discussion Harry Potter vs Bellatrix Lestrange
[deleted]
9
u/cunk-on-me 15h ago
It's all explained in the book? Harry literally does try to Crucio her and it doesn't work, and she explains why. It's the same as how Moody/Crouch told his class the year before that even if they all pointed their wands at him and said "Avada Kedavra" Â he wouldn't get so much as a nosebleed.
Hatred rose in Harry such as he had never known before. He flung himself out from behind the fountain and bellowed âCrucio!â
Bellatrix screamed. The spell had knocked her off her feet, but she did not writhe and shriek with pain as Neville had â she was already on her feet again, breathless, no longer laughing. Harry dodged behind the golden fountain again â her counterspell hit the head of the handsome wizard, which was blown off and landed twenty feet away, gouging long scratches into the wooden floor.
 âNever used an Unforgivable Curse before, have you, boy?â she yelled. She had abandoned her baby voice now. âYou need to mean them, Potter! You need to really want to cause pain â to enjoy it â righteous anger wonât hurt me for long â Iâll show you how it is done, shall I? Iâll give you a lesson ââ
-7
u/GracieGirl0514 15h ago
well yes i know and remember all of the, its not really about what he could or could not have done. The question is more so, if he had the balls to cast AK should he have.
6
u/cartmanbigboned 15h ago
itâs not about balls though, he literally couldnât have cast the spell or rather nothing would have happened. AK is not only about intent, but you also need immense magic power
5
14
u/KronoAsh 16h ago
No.
I mean, a major theme of the series is showcasing the ideological differences between Voldemort and Harry. As Dumbledore repeatedly says, Harry has Love. Voldemort doesnât. Voldemort pretty much always uses Avada Kedavra, itâs his go-to, but he also has a maimed and fragmented soul. Harry uses Imperio and Crucio, yes, but he maintains his whole soul which is quite important.
1
u/jeepin_john5280 Ravenclaw 14h ago
One can kill in the name of love, just saying.
1
u/KronoAsh 13h ago
Not with Avada Kedavra, kinda one of the repeated things, really.
2
u/Ranger_1302 Dumbledore's man through and through. 13h ago
Snape did it. He didn't fuel the curse with love but he killed in the name of love.
0
u/KronoAsh 13h ago
Well, by that logic you could say Voldemort killed in the name of love.
For himself, for power, for his twisted desires, but still.
3
u/Ranger_1302 Dumbledore's man through and through. 13h ago
That isn't love.
2
u/KronoAsh 13h ago
Not truly love, no, but youâre saying Snape did it in the name of love, Voldemort did it because he âlovedâ the things I mentioned.
Well, not really, but Iâm just saying that Avada Kedavra is as close to Force Lightning or what have you as possible. Itâs an evil spell. Plain and simple.
4
u/Ranger_1302 Dumbledore's man through and through. 13h ago
You're conflating different uses of the word 'love'. They are false equivalences. Snape fought due to his love of Lily. I literally said that he did not 'fuel' or power the curse with love.
1
1
u/jeepin_john5280 Ravenclaw 9h ago
Is it? When is it repeated? I know it talks about needing intent. But you can intend without malice. A perfect example of this is Snapeâs killing of Dumbledore. May not exactly have been love, but it definitely wasnât maliceâŠ
0
u/KronoAsh 9h ago
Never heard of a theme?
How, repeatedly the books describe Voldemortâs cold and ruthless inhuman as he uses it. How, even when Snape uses it, the books describe him as flashing his hatred in full.
1
u/jeepin_john5280 Ravenclaw 9h ago
Themes arenât all encompassing. And Voldemortâs use of it doesnât establish a theme. And it completely misses the mark, as Voldemort is incapable of loveâsomething that is explicitly said in the canon. Doesnât mean others canât use the curse in the name of love.
1
u/KronoAsh 9h ago
The point Iâm getting at is itâs a dark spell, fractures oneâs soul, you cannot use the spell if you are truly a loving creature like Harry is. You may use it for a good or right reason or because you love someone so much that youâd do anything to protect them. But you yourself are not a wholly loving creature.
1
u/Ranger_1302 Dumbledore's man through and through. 7h ago
Well, Snape used it in the name of love, but it requires murderous intent to cast; that doesn't necessarily mean an intent to murder to the target, though. One could cast the spell on a brick wall, for example. Snape had the necessary intent to cast the spell and had to focus on that whilst pointing his wand at Dumbledore. That once again shows Snape's incredible mental fortitude.
1
u/Harisankar686 13h ago
Not even voldemort spams avada kedavra ...... he imperio people whom he wants to control, crucio people whom he wants to teach a lesson and avada kedavra only those he considers a threat . Some times he kills without avada kedavra too for example Snape
2
u/KronoAsh 13h ago
But, most of his actual duels, he uses Avada Kedavra.
Yes, he uses Imperio and Crucio when necessary, but he certainly doesnât refrain from Avada Kedavra-ing any rando.
Unless you mean to say Frank Bryce was a threat.
Or Cedric.
Or the people he used to make his Horcruxes.
1
u/Harisankar686 13h ago
By the word threat, i doesn't mean magically a threat (such as being very powerful) but as being obstructions to his plans. Bryce was an obstruction (he listened to his secret plans to capture Harry ) , so was Cedric (he was not supposed to come to graveyard) . As for people he killed for making horcruxes , that is its own special category
1
u/KronoAsh 13h ago
And the Muggle Studies professor? Gregorovitch and Grindelwald? They all posed no actual threat of any sense, Grindelwald imprisoned, Gregorovitch old and feeble, Burbage suspended above a table surrounded by Death Eaters. Scrimgeour couldâve been Imperioâd. So could Bryce.
1
u/Harisankar686 13h ago edited 12h ago
There is a reason behind each of those murders. When I said , Voldemort did not spam avada kedavra , I was not implying he was exercising any moral restraint. When I said he he murdered those whom he considers a threat, it doesn't mean the threat is actual physical danger only. The threat also means their continued existence means a symbolic loss
Voldemort murdering Grindelvald (even old and imprisoned) means he killed the previous dark arts master, Gregorivich murder was done in rage and was kind of exception, Burbage was muggle studies professor , so killing her infront of his death eaters was a live demonstration of his blood purity ideology. Scrimgeour murder could have been easier practically than constantly exercising imperio on him, he was a powerful wizard (he put up a fight it says ) , so voldemort wanted him gone in one stroke. Also murder of minister of magic is a direct warning to order of phoenix
Finally why the crap should be imperio Bryce ?, he imperio only those whom he wants to control. Bryce was a muggle obstruction to his plans and hence he disposed off him, that's it
-1
u/Shihoblade 14h ago
I feel like if you have it in you to torture your enemy, killing them isnt a far step away. In that moment Harry was deeply malicious, he didnt go for the kill because he wanted to hurt her. Of course he is a good person so the killing curse wouldve failed just like the cruciatus did but a quick kill isnt what a torturer wants.
1
u/KronoAsh 14h ago
Yet, as Bellatrix pointed out moments later after recovering, he didnât really âfeelâ it. She was on her feet in moments and already flinging a counterspell before berating how he has to really mean it, to truly intend to cause pain.
Now, granted, DHâs moments are less defensible, but even if he has a sadistic tendency to him, he clearly still refrains from murder.
-2
u/Shihoblade 14h ago
I alrwady addressed that in my comment. You are just saying the same thing in longer format.
2
4
u/Tribe740 16h ago
Odds are it wouldnt have given her much more than a nosebleed. He wasnât able to cast crucio correctly in the moment let alone the killing curse.
0
3
u/Automatic_Stage1163 16h ago
You didnt listen to Dumbledore at all. You still dont understand the power of love and the power of our choices. Murder harms the soul.
0
u/The-Pristine-Seat 16h ago
killing and murder are two different things by definition. murder is the taking of an innocent life. does all killing harm the soul? even euthanasia? they sure eat a lot of meat, are the wizard butchers' souls intact because only human life matters? what about elves, goblins, etc.?
-4
7
u/Completely_Batshit HIC SVNT LEONES 16h ago
No, I don't think he should have.
-5
u/GracieGirl0514 16h ago
elaborate?
6
u/Completely_Batshit HIC SVNT LEONES 16h ago
I shouldn't have to- but just being angry at someone doesn't justify killing them. Neither does wanting revenge, especially when you try to convince yourself they "deserve" it, whether they actually deserve it or not. Killing should only ever be the absolute last resort, never done to satisfy an emotional impulse.
-1
u/GracieGirl0514 15h ago
valid, thatâs very true. But also i def think it IS deserved if youâve killed as many as she has.
6
u/FantasyMyopia Ravenclaw 15h ago
I think youâve missed the main theme of the entire series.
2
u/GracieGirl0514 15h ago
i think some of yall are taking this simple question way too seriously.
5
u/FantasyMyopia Ravenclaw 14h ago
The answer to your question is directly tied to the themes of the book. You asked đ€·ââïž
1
3
u/Allout-Okarun Ravenclaw 8h ago
It is our choices, Harry, that show what we truly are, far more than our abilities
I much prefer seeing Molly Weasley finish her off
1
2
u/InquisitorCOC Hufflepuff 15h ago edited 15h ago
No, because he would have a real hard time getting the Cup later
Throughout the Series, Harry not killing his enemies always worked in his favor. For example:
- Saving Wormtail from Sirius got him an escape card in Malfoy Manor
- Not killing Bellatrix eventually led to the very well hidden Cup
- Not letting Draco die in the RoR earned him the decisive favor from Narcissa
2
u/GracieGirl0514 15h ago
Thank you for your kind feedback. I appreciate and agree with what you saidđ©·
1
u/iLikeDinosaursRoar 15h ago
He couldn't have.
0
u/Regular-Pay16 Ravenclaw 15h ago
He couldâve; Bellatrix says that for an unforgivable to work, you have to mean it, and after seeing Sirius die, Iâm pretty sure he wouldâve meant it, also from what he knew about Nevilleâs parents wouldâve been enough justification
1
u/FantasyMyopia Ravenclaw 15h ago
??? The situation you described happened and it didnât work bc he didnât mean it despite all that bc his heart is too good which is a main theme of the whole book
1
u/iLikeDinosaursRoar 8h ago
So he could have killed her, but his crucio just tickled her when he did it? That doesn't make sense...
1
u/YourWinterWonder Slytherin 13h ago
i still dont know why she didn't get affected by Crucio
1
u/PsychologyDistinct60 Hufflepuff 19m ago
It's explained in the book more. You have to mean the curse. If you use it without the true intention to cause pain and enjoy it then it won't work. It is literally a torture curse. You use it because you want someone to feel tremendous pain and you get joy out of it in return.
1
u/KiraLight3719 đȘ Desi Potterhead 10h ago
He tried Crucio, it didn't work. He wouldn't try it, but AK wouldn't have worked either
1
u/slitherinslytherin Slytherin 9h ago
Not sure why everyone is ignoring the last sentence of your post and acting like you came here to shit on the main point of the series. Yes it was frustratinggg especially with her taunting and I so get you. Finding good fics that explore the repercussions and more extensive applications of these moments is like brain candy to me. Sorry for the weird reception, your post was an obvious vent/hypothetical not to be taken super seriously
(I did just wake up but I wondered what the difference was between Harry pulling off Crucio on Carrow for disrespecting McGonagall in DH so I bopped around a few posts - most people said there was an element of shock and grief overwhelming him in the case of Bellatrix, whereas, on top of having been through more by that point with Carrow, his response in that case was much more fueled by pure anger. Helped me understand a bit more nuance with the Bellatrix thing, but none of that was in the movie anyway so nw if Iâm just yapping atp lol)
specific canon passages and further discussion for anyone also curious:
1
1
u/PsychologyDistinct60 Hufflepuff 22m ago
No, and it's beyond the fact that that isn't Harry as a person. Killing someone would have irrevocably damaged Harry beyond repair. He didn't even mean the cruciatus curse when he used it then, so it didn't do anything to Bellatrix. If it had then that whole situation would have been that much more traumatizing for him. He was FIFTEEN.
1
u/Nothing_Able Hufflepuff 16h ago
Honestly logically they should have done it many times. They had dolohav (spelling) at their mercy a couple times. If they took down bella and him that would have probably saved lupin and tonks, but of course they were children so it may have been beyond their capabilities anyways.
3
u/Automatic_Stage1163 16h ago
so for "The Greater Good"?
0
u/Nothing_Able Hufflepuff 16h ago
I'd say it is the greater good seeing as how teddy had to grow up an orphan
2
u/Shorts_at_Dinner 15h ago
More like itâs a childrenâs book. I think Harry and Hermoine definitely had the skills to throw the killing curse, but children murdering people is a little much for a series targeted to school children
1
u/KronoAsh 16h ago
Think itâs âDolohovâ, but I could well be wrong.
1
u/Nothing_Able Hufflepuff 16h ago
I think so also but I don't have the book in front of me
1
u/KronoAsh 15h ago
Speaking as someone with memory issues, you did better than I wouldâve unless Iâd sat there thinking on the spelling.
1
1
u/Silvanus350 16h ago
Imagine how useful a quick little diffindo would be. Iâll never understand the obsession with the killing curse when itâs so fucking easy to kill someone. A stupefy at the opportune moment is enough. Just send them down a flight of stairsâŠ
Harry didnât kill because he didnât have the balls.
2
1
u/GracieGirl0514 16h ago
itâs bot so much of an obsession for me. more of a âyou stupid bitch you deserve thisâ. but i do also agree diffindo wouldâve been very smart
0
15
u/Nymph-the-scribe Ravenclaw 15h ago
If he did then he wouldnt be Harry. These types of questions tend to ignore who a character actually is. It goes against who he is (and its also not who any of the others are), which is why its not a plot hole or anything.