5

Why don't members of the Order of the Phoenix use any of the Unforgivable Curses in life-threatening situations?

I remember Harry (in the last part when he encounters Death eaters) and Dumbledore not using those curses when faced with mortal peril. None of the Order members tried to use these Curses in The battle fought at the end of the Order of the Phoenix.

Do people (Excluding Aurors) not use the Curses as they believe it would ensure a cell in Azkaban; even if they use them in life-threatening situations?

Möoz
  • 45,398
  • 37
  • 256
  • 451
Tom Lynd
  • 3,708
  • 4
  • 35
  • 52
  • Can you site an example incident in the question? That would make the question better. – Stark07 Apr 28 '14 at 08:03
  • On the other hand ,I didn't site a single incident in which one of the Order did cast an Unforgivable Curse. Or did I miss something? – Tom Lynd Apr 28 '14 at 08:09
  • Not sure how to flesh this out into a full answer, but remember these are kids books, with a pretty black and white morality. These spells are evil, and the good guys are too good to ever use them. In chapter 1 of the very first book, Dumbledore tells McGonagall Voldemort has powers he will never have, to which she replies something like "Only because you're too, well, noble, to use them!" (don't have the book at work for the exact quote). And when Harry does try to use the Cruciatus curse on Bellatrix Lestrange, he doesn't have enough hate and anger in him to make it work. – BoBTFish Apr 28 '14 at 08:09
  • But it seems almost foolish not to use them in such situations...And I don't think the story is for only kids(apart from the fact that it was meant to be) – Tom Lynd Apr 28 '14 at 08:12
  • 1
    Sirius on Moody in GoF: “I’ll say this for Moody, though, he never killed if he could help it. Always brought people in alive where possible. He was tough, but he never descended to the level of the Death Eaters.” I imagine the Order were similar. Then read Donald McLean’s answer to Why were the Death Eaters so lenient during the fight at the Department of Mysteries? – alexwlchan Apr 28 '14 at 08:16
  • Oh I don't at all mean to imply the books aren't great for adults to enjoy too, but compared to, say, A Song Of Ice And Fire, the characters are much more Good xor Evil (Snape notwithstanding). Dumbledore regularly calls himself a fool, or similar things. – BoBTFish Apr 28 '14 at 08:18
  • @alexwlchan, No offence but I don't agree with that – Tom Lynd Apr 28 '14 at 08:20
  • 1
    @BoBTFish All the same, the books are great – Tom Lynd Apr 28 '14 at 08:22
  • 2
    @BoBTFish: Interesting; I would say moral ambiguities around things like Harry’s use of Cruciatus, or Dumbledore’s selfish desire for the Hallows, elevates the books beyond simple Good/Evil. (However, I haven’t read ASOIAF, so I can’t compare.) – alexwlchan Apr 28 '14 at 08:26
  • 1
    @BoBTFish: It sure was childish at first. Then it it was all about death death death suck your soul death death Neville's parents death death Lupin death death Tonks death Dobby death. Did I miss someone? Of course I did. – Saturn Apr 28 '14 at 10:44
  • @BoBTFish I agree with Voldy for one. Although it started off (till book 3) as a children's book series, the themes in and after the fourth book got real dark, along with messages I doubt children would have the capacity to fully grasp. They were intended to be children's books, but in the end they came out far from that. I always argue vehemently whenever an adult waves away the HP series as "silly kids' books". :) – The Dragon Rider who Lived Apr 28 '14 at 16:39
  • There were a couple instances where Order members (including Harry) cast Unforgivable Curses... – Möoz May 13 '14 at 02:29
  • Related: http://scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/9269/what-makes-those-three-curses-unforgivable?rq=1 – Möoz May 13 '14 at 02:32

2 Answers2

15

There are five reasons:

  1. Ethical.

    Both Harry and Dumbledore feel that using Unforgivable curses isn't exactly a Good Thing to do (Harry ends up using them when absolutely required in DH, however).

    • Harry is well known for relying on Expelliarmus (See the Seven Potters battle in DH as well as him using the same on Voldemort in the end)

    • Dumbledore is discussed as possessing knowledge (presumably of powerful dark spells) as deep as Voldemort's but choosing to not use it.

    • Dumbledore specifically is aware that power is his weak point. He understands that he's more in danger of corrupting his soul than Harry from using powerful Dark spells

  2. Practical

    Leaving aside ethics, Harry's not able to use Unforgivables well:

    • Fake Moody (Barty Crouch Jr) explicitly says when teaching them in Year 4 that you can't cast Avada Kedavra unless you're powerful; and if any of them cast it; they would at most give him a nosebleed

    • Harry tries to use Cruciatus on Bellatrix and she sneers at him explaining that you must put the full power of your hatred behind it to make it work

  3. Legal.

    Technically speaking, Unforgivables are illegal. The Ministry would be all too happy to stick the entire Order into Azkaban as you yourself stated, especially before Year 5 was done and Fudge was kicked out. Hell, they wanted to convict Harry for casting a bloody Patronus.

  4. Propaganda.

    It's easier to gold the moral high ground propaganda wise when you don't resort to using Unforgivable curses.

    As an example, witness issues that USA has with holding moral high ground against, say, Iran or North Korea, when detractors can easily bring up "well, let's see, who's the only country to actually drop a nuke on someone?". The nuances and context of decision to use or not use the weapon are irrelevant in that sort of propaganda war.

    Given that the other side here has Rita Skeeter and the Ministry flacks, letting them have the propaganda wins isn't a good approach.

  5. Usefulness.

    • Leaving aside the other two, Crucio isn't really a very useful curse for the Order. They never had a chance or a reason to interrogate someone (never mind real world debate on whether torture is useful during interrogation).

    • When absolutely needed, they use it (they use Imperio during the Potter's Eleven… errr…. the Great Gringotts Robbery)

alexwlchan
  • 102,594
  • 16
  • 447
  • 468
DVK-on-Ahch-To
  • 342,451
  • 162
  • 1,520
  • 2,066
  • Besides, the DoS battle was quite fast-paced. It wouldn't have been easy to mark your target properly. One could have easily missed and hit an ally. If they'd used an Unforgivable Curse when that happened, they'd be pretty sorry. – The Dragon Rider who Lived Apr 28 '14 at 16:43
  • NOTE: I didn't bother with book quotes, but can add them if someone needs. – DVK-on-Ahch-To Apr 28 '14 at 16:45
  • 1
    It seems they wished to avoid the "We met the enemy, and it was us" scenario. – Major Stackings Apr 28 '14 at 16:47
  • @MajorStackings - that's what I covered in #1, roughly. – DVK-on-Ahch-To Apr 28 '14 at 16:50
  • Remember, Imperio wasn't exactly easy for Harry to maintain, either. – methuseus Apr 28 '14 at 22:33
  • @DVK Why doesn't the Order use Avada Kedavra even when absolutely needed? – Tom Lynd Apr 29 '14 at 12:41
  • @tom define "absolutely needed" – DVK-on-Ahch-To Apr 29 '14 at 12:43
  • @DVK for instance, when at war – Tom Lynd Apr 29 '14 at 12:45
  • @tom there is no evidence avada is "absolutely n eeded" at magical war. It may be more convenient or more useful. But not "NEEDED" – DVK-on-Ahch-To Apr 29 '14 at 12:46
  • Evidence.,,,,.? – Tom Lynd Apr 29 '14 at 12:48
  • 2
    @TomLynd Avada Kedavra is a downright cruel spell. I doubt people like those in the Order would even think of taking someone's life. Yes, in the end some people need to be finished off, but there are other ways to do it. Or perhaps they thought that simply imprisonment or Dementor's Kiss is what Death Eaters' fates should be. Plus, directly killing someone rips your soul apart. I don't think anyone would want that (except Voldy, ofc). – The Dragon Rider who Lived Apr 29 '14 at 12:58
  • I remember a quote by Slughorn: "Merlin's beard, Tom! Isn't it bad enough to consider killing one person? To rip the sould into seven pieces!" – The Dragon Rider who Lived Apr 29 '14 at 12:59
  • @TomLynd - Yes, evidence. Like, canon example of a war or a situation at war that was sure to be won WITH Avada and sure to be lost if NOT using Avada. That's the definition of "Absolutely needed" (as opposed to "more useful") – DVK-on-Ahch-To Apr 29 '14 at 13:43
  • So basically, Bellatrix was telling Harry that he needed to let the hate flow through him? – Adamant Apr 01 '16 at 08:03
  • @TheDragonRiderwhoLived Lupin actually contradicts your claim there. When Harry suggests Sirius (not knowing he was innocent at that point) deserved that fate Lupin strongly questions him. Harry grows from this definitely. And Sirius states that Mad-Eye always tried to bring people in alive rather than kill. Doesn't equate to the Kiss and I don't think that the Aurors even had that authority in the first place. – Pryftan Jan 07 '18 at 01:07
  • @DVK-on-Ahch-To You mean Harry wasn't good at them originally. In DH he not only casts Imperio (even if he had some difficulty although he did fine with all targets) on the goblin but also Yaxley (think it was Yaxley). Then later on he casts Crucio on the Carrow (after he spits on McGonagall - and then McGonagall uses Imperio to put them both out of action for the battle to come). He notes then what Bellatrix meant about needing to mean it and to want to cause pain, too. – Pryftan Jan 07 '18 at 01:10
1

But doesnt Harry say at start of 6 to Dumbeldore that he wants to kill as many Death Eaters as possible in the process of trying to take down Voldemort?

It seems to me that in a battle situation - eg, Battle of Dept of Myst in 5, or Battle of Hogwarts in 7 - they'd certainly duel to kill. M McGonagall says to Slughorn that if the Slytherins attempt to sabotage their fight against the Death Eaters, then we will 'duel to kill.'

Dolohov, Lucius Malfoy,B Lestrange and co in Book 5 are completely willing and prepared to kill anyone in their way, so for an Order memeber to use a similar spell in that situation, would be self defense. Also remember that Sirius and Bellatrix are dueling around the dais with the veil - if Sirius knows that if you knock someone out behind the veil, then they die, well, then mightn't he be trying to kill B Lestrange? It's a possibility.

It's possible that they would prefer to send captured Death Eaters to Azkaban, however. (Although Dumbledore thinks the dementors' very presence in Azkaban is cruel and unusual punishment - not sure where he says this but he does! I think there's a line in 3 - Mr Weasley says he, like Dumbeldore, doesnt like the dementors, but sometimes you have to 'join forces with those you'd rather avoid' in extreme situations, such as, at that time, capturing the supposed mass murderer S Black.

Oh, and at end of book 4, Dumbledore tells Fudge he thinks the dementors wil soon rejoin Voldemort. So he isnt keen on them for that reason as well.

Snape could not kill a Death Eater because then he would be revealed as a spy and have to either go into hiding or be killed by Voldemort. Probably he'd be killed even if he went into hiding. So he's a special case. Other than that, however, it seems that Order members will use Avada Kedavra in battle situations.

Carina
  • 139
  • 1
  • 2