Seeking: Is it meant to be a good thing?

[Melody <Malady579@hotmail.com>]

No: HPFGUIDX 48256

Well, my melancholy fit has not lifted, and coffee does little for it
Sherry...though I heard that glutting your sorrows on a morning rose
or on the wealth of globed peonies can help [1].  <grin>

Let's just jump in with both feet now because I am a fool to myself:

Oh and the passage I am referring to constantly is this one:
"There is no good and evil, there is only power and those to weak to
seek it." (PS/SS Ch 17)


Bill Corey Jr. wrote:
>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.

Hmmm...seems we agree that the definition of "seek" in the creed is a
single-minded pursuit, and that definition is implied by Voldemort.
Why is that?  Why do we assume that definition?  Because if someone is
weak, then they would falter in their pursuit and would fail if they
do not pursue power in a single-minded way?  That is not implied here
in *this* passage.  The "seeking" of power is the bad part.  Just pure
seeking power is bad.  There is not degrees of any key word of that
statement.  There is "power", "weak", and "seek".  So really, we have
to decide on what degrees JKR means.  She cannot mean that all seeking
of power is bad.  And all those that do not seek it are weak.  There
must be a degree implied here by her.

It is only implied in the views of seeking JKR presents in the whole
of the text that she meant "seeking" as a single-minded pursuit.  And
those that are unable to go on such a quest are weak.  If we say that
the seeking of power is bad, then politicians are up a creek without a
paddle.

I make this distinction because I do agree with all of you, and it
would be foolish not too frankly, choices is a *big* theme in the
books.  What we choose to seek matters.  I just think it is also
implied that how we choose to seek also matters a great deal.  And JKR
seems to imply that the wrong way to seek is in single-minded
pursuits, which if that is true, then Harry is wrong in his seeking.
But y'all poke holes all over the place there, so let's move on.


Sherry your turn:
>Motivation. Voldemort sought power to destroy, and used Dark means to
>get it.  Crouch sought power to destroy as well - he was *far* more
>interested in destroying the Death Eaters than he was in Justice,
>IMHO. He authorized his Aurors to use the Unforgiveable curses
>against the Death Eaters...**skip ahead**  I see this and many other
>instances where Harry is still being formed, whereas Voldemort and
>Crouch Sr (among others) are "done deals".

Let me first tackle you bit on "done deals."  While I want to believe
Voldemort is rotten to the core, I can't help but remember he *is*
human.  Well, a part of him I'm sure is somewhere in there.  While I
may kid around with Voldie becoming redeemed at the end, I do believe
it is a viable option because he is still human.  Maybe it is just my
faith talking and maybe I believe too much in the heart of man (yes
even when I am melancholy), but there is good in him I can feel it.
<g>  He is not a "done deal."  Yes, he and Crouch have consequences to
their actions, but they have not crossed the point of no return in the
realm of learning and redemption.

Ok, back to seeking.  You say the key to the "seeking" problem is
motivation.  Voldemort's problem was *why* he wanted the power.  Also
this is what is wrong with Crouch.  I disagree.  Is their motivations
ever confirmed in the text?  Can we say that is the problem when it is
really kind of vague?

Seems to me, Voldemort is not out to destroy mankind.  He is out to
bring himself glory at all costs.  So when Voldie says he is seeking
power, he *is* wanting it for the wrong reasons of self glory, but
that is not evil incarnate.  Self glory is not a bad thing really.  It
is the actions you take to get that glory that are bad.  The
motivation is just more dangerous than most to achieve in good light.

And as for Crouch, I see his motivations of his office to be what is
best for the WW and himself.  I truly believe he did think the WW
would benefit from his "aggressive" tactics in fighting Voldemort.  If
they would not, then what good would it of done for him?  Can't win
over the populace if their needs are not met.  He took that step
because he wanted the good of the people and himself, and he thought
that was the way.  He was wrong but not entirely because of his
motivation.  He was wrong because he stepped too far.  Whether his
desire for the MoM position or his desire for all to be safe was his
motivation is still up for debate.  Once again, his motivations were
not bad, but his choices from the motivation are.


Oh, and Sherry said in the realm of Harry:
>You can't blind yourself to what's going on in the rest of the game
>(read: life) or bad things can happen. Harry broke his arm because he
>forgot about Dobby's Bludger - even though he knew full well it was
>after him, once he caught sight of the Snitch, the rogue Bludger flew
>out of his mind and got him.  This is a lesson for Harry.

Funny.  I thought the lesson Harry learned there was not 'catch the
snitch at all cost unless you get hurt' but that 'if you get hurt,
don't let someone de-bone your arm'.  <g>  Really that is what Harry
complains about later.  He is praised for his catch and even for the
fact he broke his arm because of it.  His captain was quite pleased.
Percy even praised Harry's efforts in catching the snitch.  (CoS Ch11)
 Harry was not scolded by his professors for going too far in his
pursuits.  He was rewarded with points for Gryffindor.  Funny thing is
the rest of the team did chastised Harry and Oliver during the match
about being single-minded but relented after they won.

This mentality is carried by Harry into PoA with his determination to
defeat dementors.  He is so driven to conquer this problem that he
works voluntarily to bring this distraction away from this game.  It
was not the sounds of his parents nor the fact he fainted all the time
that caused Harry to do this.  It was the fact the dementors ruined
his "seeking".  Harry was not going to have that.  He would not let
his team down nor himself just because he has a problem.

So, Harry's "seeking" of the snitch *is* an awful lot like Voldemort's
and Crouch's own "seeking".  It is single-minded.  It is cut-throat.
And it is unwavering.


So then Eloise brings up these other examples of "seeking":
>As far as Quidditch is concerned, I think of Krum. What do we make of
>his action at the QWC? He wasn't seeking personal power or glory as
>such, but to uphold the honour of his team in the face of inevitable
>defeat.
>
>In the Second Task, the competitors had to seek their lost friends.
>All sought, but the winner was the one sought with the interests of
>the "lost" uppermost in his considerations, rather than thought of
>personal gain.

Krum:  True true.  His "seeking" was in honor.  It was calculated,
manipulative, and crafty...but in a good way.  Seems he has managed to
truly "seek" an object and still maintain a higher cleft of
sportsmanship.  I think this does show single-minded "seeking" in a
good light.  Well found, Eloise.

Task Two:  Can you honestly say that the tournament was not about
winning?  Winning for your school, house, country?  When they were in
that lake they were wanting to get their hostage first because they
wanted to get back to the finish line first.  No because they thought
the person was in danger.  Only Harry was thick enough to believe
that.  The object they were seeking was deeply felt, but the main goal
they were after was glory.  I think this example divided between the
two objects being sought (hostage and finish line) very closely.
Close enough I don't think they could be separated.


Pippin wrote:
>I think the difference is not in seeking power, but in seeking power
>because one sees submission as the inescapable consequence of
>weakness.  Crouch let himself believe that the WW had no options
>besides fighting violence with violence or letting Voldemort win.

See, you do this on purpose.  You always make so much sense, and it is
so hard to argue against you.  <g>  I do think that Voldemort is
afraid of weakness and that motivates him to seek power.  He does not
want to be seen as weak *at all*.  So if we are to say that it is this
fear of weakness that is the problem with the creed, then we could
also draw a parallel to Harry's fear of loosing being his motivation
for seeking.  Both are signs of weakness in the eyes of others.  Both
Voldemort and Harry do not want that stigmatism added to their image.
You imply that Crouch looses faith in the ways of good and let his
pursuit of destroying the evils taint his decisions.  Harry on the
other hand does not do this.  He has more faith in the system.  Well,
he is young and impressionable.  And in times of despair, good has
never let him down.  Though it has let his parents down it seems.
Hmmm, that is a sad thought.  Anyway, you quote the biblical passage
of Lot and his daughters.  They also lost faith and sought their own
path.  Funny Sarah does that too with Abraham.  Seems a lot can be
messed up when you loose faith.

So is the problem with seeking occur when the seeker looses faith?
Crouch lost faith in good defeating evil nobly.  Voldemort lost faith
that the WW would find him to be the pinnacle of existence.  Sirius
lost faith in the WW justice system.  Hmmm, I like the trend Pippin.
Harry in the other hand, has not lost faith yet.  So his "seeking" is
about more than lost dreams. Well actually it is motivated by Oliver
Wood having lost dreams if Harry failed.

So return to the above quote, "There is no good and evil, there is
only power, and those to weak to seek it."  Hehehe, I have that
memorized now verbatim.  Sorry, easily amused at this hour.  In light
of all that has been typed, how are we to interpret this statement?
If you loose faith in good and evil, there is only failure, and those
too blind to see it?


Melody
who really, really needs to go to bed and greatly hopes this post is
coherent, but she really, really liked all the replies and wanted to
respond.

[1] Lifted from Keats "Ode to Melancholy"