Evil, and Stuff (was Re: Seeking: Is it meant to be a good thing?)

[clicketykeys <clicketykeys@yahoo.com>]

No: HPFGUIDX 48269

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Melody <Malady579 at h...>" <
Malady579 at h...> wrote:

> 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.

I'm not sure. First the wisp-o-mort, then the back of someone else's 
head and unicorn's blood, then the ugly baby, then Flatface... I think 
Rowling has done a pretty good job of dehumanizing Voldemort. I'm not 
saying that it's completely impossible to redeem him. In theory, it's 
still a possibility. I just wouldn't put too many eggs in that basket.

> 
> 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?

Well, a person's motivations for seeking will help to determine what 
they will do in their, um, search. What lines they will and will not 
cross, etc.

> 
> 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. 

Depends on who you ask. I'd say it is. The major Western religions 
teach "Love your neighbor as yourself," which goes against the idea of 
focusing on yourself. When you're willing to do ANYTHING for personal 
gain, and other people are of no concern to you (beyond usefulness)... 
YES. That is evil incarnate.

> 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.

Again - motivation helps determine what actions you will take.

> 
> 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

I think you have it backwards. He was out for himself first, THEN for 
the WW. Otherwise why would he have agreed to sneak his son out of 
jail? At no time do we see evidence that he believed his son was 
innocent. He did it to placate his wife and to assuage his own guilt.

> 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.

I think there are other motivations, perhaps - vengeance sticks out in 
my mind as a distinct possibility. "You filth, you corrupted my son!" 
sort of thing. This also does not lead to healthy choices.



> 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.

I wouldn't say it's cutthroat or entirely single-minded. He doesn't 
actively hurt others to achieve his goal; he plays by the rules, and 
he does his homework and basically does have a life outside Quidditch.


> So then Eloise brings up these other examples of "seeking":


> >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.
> 

> 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.

Well, the judges separated them! Bottom line: Harry got the most 
points because he showed concern for others in his seeking.


> 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.  

I'm not sure I believe that fear of losing is the primary motivation 
for Harry. I think a HUGE part of it is proving - to himself and to 
others - that he's important on his own merits, and not just because 
Voldemort didn't kill him back in the day.

And another part of it is that it's FUN. He enjoys the opportunity to 
push EVERYTHING else out of his mind for a little bit and focus on 
catching the Snitch. It's escapism.


> 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?

I would interpret it as the desperate statement of someone who has 
lost his humanity - an attempt to rationalize what he has done. 
Because... come ON. We know that Voldemort's statement presents a 
false dichotomy! Dumbledore clearly has the capacity to take more 
power than he currently has. He has a lot of powerful friends and is 
arguably the most powerful wizard in the world. But the power he has 
is what has been attained without seeking it. Some of it is natural 
talent, and some of the rest is a result of others respecting him for 
that talent, and for being a wise, caring, merciful and just man.

This is Voldemort saying, 'I'm not evil - there IS no evil! I'm 
powerful.' It's... oh dear... what's the phrase? Moral relativism! 
Yes! It is Voldemort's way of trying to convince others that he was 
right in what he did. Maybe he's trying to convince himself, too, but 
I think mostly he's trying to make Harry start having doubts about HIS 
choices by presenting this false dichotomy.

And it's still early, so I'm rambling. Later, yo.

CK