Cornelius Fudge: Aut idiotus aut homo malus?

Some Harry Potter web-pages go on about how Minister of Magic, Cornelius Fudge, is "evil", "he's a Death-eater", &c., mostly because of his opposition to Harry and Dumbledore in "Order of the Phoenix". But I think that's to miss the point of his character and his position as the minister. When you have all that power and responsibility, you don't have to be downright evil to cause all kinds of damage, make all kinds of mistakes, stepping on people and ruining reputations as you seek ludicrous goals. In this case, Fudge wishes to quell rumors of the Dark Lord's return and forbid dissenting opinions regarding this. So instead of seeking after the truth, Fudge seeks to make his own truth - always an impossible task - by disregarding overwhelming evidence to the contrary. In this way he hopes to keep order in the Magical World. Harry and Dumbledore's reputation are collateral casualties to him and even his overzealous assistant, Umbridge. Both are incessant bureaucrats, misguided, irresponsible and ultimately their attempt fails, Fudge going through a sort of reluctant repentance. But they are not evil in the way Voldemort or his death-eaters are though their means to achieve ends sometimes overlap. Voldemort's ends, his intentions, are absolutely evil because the goal is his own complete domination of the world and the domination of his ideology.

Dumbledore: Taking himself lightly

G. K. Chesterton said that angels can fly because they take themselves lightly. This seems to be the source and character of Albus Dumbledore's power as well, how lightly he takes himself. He's the most powerful wizard in the Harry Potter series. Yet Hagrid's constant compliment isn't "great wizard" but "great man". Dumbledore also shows a great fondness for ordinary things like lemon drops. His humility can be seen is his fondness and appreciation for muggles and squibs which most wizards have at least some disdain. He's not ashamed that his brother, Aberforth, cannot read. He seems to downplay his knowledge of Hogwart's in Book 4 to the other Headmasters at the ball. He also seems to be a great delegator of duties, trusting Hagrid when most people wouldn't - even in his Book 5 fight with Voldemort he uses the ministry fountain statues and his trusted Phoenix, Fawkes, rather than engage the evil wizard directly. He's a friend to the outcast and downtrodden giving many of them positions (Trelawney, Firenze, Filch, Hagrid, Lupin) at his own professional risk. One of the marks of the dark wizards is they love displays of magic, cunning and power. Dumbledore seems to be cunning enough, but he keeps it all on the inside, opting instead for deeper and more subtle forms of magic, reserving force for times of greatest need. I've read on different fan-sites speculations on why Dumbledore doesn't say words when he casts spells in the books, but I prefer to think that he is whispering the spells, almost in a humble awe at the magical art like the alchemist in the famous painting "The discovery of Phosporous". (http://www2.truman.edu/~ramberg/wright.jpg) My thoughts for now....

Moral culpability in Harry Potter series

It seems that moral culpability in the world of Harry Potter mirrors the teachings of the Catholic Church about certain intentions being necessary for an individual to be personally guilty of an evil action. At the end of "Order of the Phoenix", Harry attempts to use the Cruciatus, an "unforgiveable curse", against Bellatrix Lestrange to avenge the death of Sirius Black. Bellatrix explains why it doesn't work "righteous anger won't do" and "you have to really want to cause pain." So in Catholic moral theology one who doesn't realize what he is doing can perform an evil action but not know or understand that it is objectively wrong and therefore cannot be held personally culpable. Harry was unable to make the curse work; likewise the ignorant person would be unable to commit a sin. Bellatrix could be seen as the responsible party, however unlikely, for the formation of Harry Potter's conscience in this matter. It could be argued that had he attempted the Cruciatus against her again and succeeded that he would be culpable and worthy of Azkaban. However this does not happen.

Need to see the latest Harry Potter movie. Then have to check out Merlin's movie page, see what the man thinks about it. I've listened to all the Harry Potter books on tape, several times over. I'm astounded at the depth and richness of moral teaching contained in the books, all of it based on a Judeo-Christian perspective.