Wands, Meanings and Where it All Could Lead...

[meglet2]

No: HPFGUIDX 35294

--- In HPforGrownups at y..., "abigailnus" <abigailnus at y...> wrote:
>>> 
> In other words, in Potterverse, evil isn't represented by death 
and good by life, but almost the other way around.  
> Nicolas Flamel, a friend of Dumbldore's and hence a good guy, 
destroys the Philosopher's Stone which Voldemort 
> covets.  It's no accident, in my opinion, that Rowling changed the 
Stone's function so that in destroying it Flamel 
> accepts death.  This allows Dumbledore to state, so early in the 
series and with such importance, that "death is but 
> the next great adventure."  Voldemort is evil not because he 
causes death but because he refuese to accept it - in 
> trying to become immortal he becomes inhuman.

I'm not sure that I would want to say that in the Potterverse evil 
is represented by life and good by death but I agree that one of the 
signs of Voldemort's evil is his unwillingness to accept 'the next 
great adventure' and his desire to hold on to immortality in this 
life. I think this implies a belief by JKR in some sort of afterlife 
(more than what might be implied by the ghosts' existance) and that 
clinging to this life is not good. I very much like your comment 
that 'in trying to become immortal (Voldemort) becomes inhuman.' 
Seems a very good way of putting it. 
> 
> The pheonix, then, represents not immortality but resurrection - 
life *through* death, not without it, just as Harry's life 
> is saved through the death of his mother.  To be a dark wizard, 
then, is to dispute the natural order of things - that 
> everything must change and die - and attempt to change it.  
Ignoring the relgious connotations of this claim (and 
> that's some mighty big ignoring that I'm only managing by dint of 
being Jewish) I think this is going to be a theme in 
> the series - death is only truly death when there's no one left 
who is willing to rise out of the ashes and try again.  I 
> think this ties in to Dumbledore's speech at the end of GoF, in 
which he says words to the effect of "in order for evil to 
> triumph it is only necessary for good men to do nothing."

This is fascinating isn't it. Though as a Christian I don't want to 
ignore the religious overtones of resurrection but on the contrary 
am waiting with considerable impatience to see what JKR is going to 
do with all this.
> 
> 
> I realise I've made very little sense - it's all very confused in 
my mind.  And I haven't really dealt with your theory.  
> Considering my thoughts on the life/death issue I feel very 
strongly that Dumbledore was stating some basic truth of 
> Potterverse when he said that no power can bring back the dead - 
accepting that death is coming is part of what 
> makes the good guys good guys.  It's perhaps not impossible, 
though, that Harry will one day be able to block the 
> unblockable AK curse (excepting the time he already did it as a 
fluke of wands.)

I would agree wholeheartedly that death and the nature of death is a 
major theme in the books and as I said I am deeply intrigued by what 
she intends to do with it. Thanks for sharing your thoughts. Great 
stuff isn't it? Wonderful too that a writer for children is tackling 
such huge issues of life and death, morality, good and evil when 
writers of adult fiction these days seem to shy away from big themes.

meglet2/Mercia