Seeking: Is it meant to be a good thing?

[Bill Corey Jr.]

No: HPFGUIDX 48206

On Thu, 12 Dec 2002 03:17:49,  Melody <Malady579 at hotmail.com>" said:

> We all know the creed of Voldemort proclaimed by Quirrell in the
> mirror room.  "There is no good and evil, there is only power and
> those to weak to seek it." (PS/SS Ch 17)

> The key to this statement is the word "seek".  Why is it that word
> changes everything?  A basic non-Potter view of seeking is...wait let
> me find the dictionary..."to try and obtain."  Nothing wrong with
> that, is there?  We all seek our breakfast every morning.  And yet,
> the HP series bad guy creed seems to imply that seeking is wrong.

<snips examples of seeking: Crouch Sr., Sirius>

> Our little hero is a *Seeker*.  He plays a game where his whole
> purpose is to have complete tunnel vision for one individual object
> that is hard to catch.  Hmmm, see any parallels?

<snips analysis of Seeker/seeking>

Now me:

Although this is a very interesting double-usage of the word "seek" (and a
good catch, I might add... well done!), I don't think the emphasis in LV's
creed should be placed on "seek", but rather on "weak".  LV assumes that if
a wizard that does not possess power, then he is weak because he did not
choose to single-mindedly seek it.  While this makes sense from a purely
magical PoV (and, therefore, from LV's PoV), it does not account for the
other aspects of a person's worth: honor, honesty, friendship, love, etc.
All of this makes perfect sense for LV, because he places no value in these
abstracts... and therefore anyone who allows them to interfere with their
pursuit of power is "weak".

A perfect example of what single-mindedness can do is presented in PoA, when
Hagrid is attempting to cobble together a defense for Buckbeak.  Harry is so
wrapped up in his coming Quidditch match that he completely forgets about
Buckbeak's case and fails to provide what very well could have been the
crucial bit of evidence to save Buckbeak's life.  Because Harry was so
intently focused on Quidditch and the coming match with Slytherin, he forgot
his promise to Hagrid and failed him.  Now, let's face it, this is a
perfectly natural thing to happen to a 13 year old boy (heck, it's natural
for any of us!).  Is Harry taking a step towards becoming eeeeevil because
he lost his sense of priority?  Certainly not... but perhaps he did learn an
important lesson about what's truly important.  In summary, it's not the
seeking that's wrong... it's the seeking *to the exclusion of all else* that
is wrong.

One other quick note about LV's creed: It seems to me that, if I were trying
to entice someone to help me (as LV plainly was trying to convince H in
PS/SS), I would do my best to convince him that I'm "not such a bad guy
after all", for instance, by explaining my non-eeeevil nature.  In this
case, LV does this by postulating (in a very philosophical way, which is
perhaps not the best tack to take with an 11-year-old) that there is no evil
or good, but only power.  I am forcibly reminded of a lyric from a song by
Don Henley called "The Garden of Allah":

Because there is no wrong,
There is no right,
And I sleep very well at night.



With regards and salutations,

Bill Corey Jr.  ((otherwise known as The Artist Formerly Known As
nightfall_42), who still thinks that Quidditch is far cooler than curling
and should be made into the next Olympic sport, as soon as we figure out how
to make a flying broom or two)