[HPforGrownups] Re: What did Voldemort do that was so great?

[yr awen]

No: HPFGUIDX 41731

Yay! First good news of the day: off new member moderated status. Woo hoo!

Prefacing this, because connotation in this thread is getting confusing: I am taking 'great' to mean 'awe/fear inspiring, of impressive magnitude,' rather than 'Yay! Go Voldy! Woo hoo!' So you know :-)

Then Gretchen wrote:
>>>>>>>>If you use the simplistic definition of a great leader as one that 
>gets people to follow him/her and do what he/she wants, then 
>Voldermort was a great leader (as was Hitler).<<<<<<<<<<

To which Cathubovda replied:
>>>>>>>>>>If you want to use that definition, then it would have to apply to 
most of our politicians - that's charisma, not Greatness.  (Sub-
question - is Voldemort charismatic?)<<<<<<<<<<

In discussing 'great' as applied to leadership, you would have to further dissect what it means to be a leader. Voldemort has dedicated henchmen, lackeys, and sinister pets, but his managerial style tends to the impatient, bloodthirsty, and dictatorial, hardly positive qualities, although they do get people to do what he wants. Given that, I think Cathubovda's parenthetical aside is the more pertinent question -- is Voldemort charismatic? Sure.

Here I should say that I'm not talking charismatic in the sense of James Bond, shaken-not-stirred deadsexiness. I'm talking in the sense that Voldemort offers power, and power attracts the corruptible, and absolute power attracts the absolutely corruptible. He offers elitism on every level -- riches, the possibility of gain (cf. Wormtail in PoA -- 'What was there to gain by refusing him?'), the security of racial superiority, the power that comes with group conformity. He disguises himself behind the diary, turning himself into exactly what Ginny wants -- a friend -- in order to attract her into his sphere of influence. He does the same later with Harry (CoS.) 

The Hat offers Harry a shot at that, in terms designed to be attractive: "Not Slytherin, eh? Are you sure? You could be great, you know, it's all here in your head, and Slytherin will help you on the way to greatness, no doubt about that -- no?" As we learn later in CoS, Dumbledore tells Harry that Voldemort had left some trace of himself in Harry, that had been picked up by the Hat and translated into a possible candidacy for Slytherin -- but Harry rejects power, rejects the promise the Hat holds out to him, and in doing so, manages to resist the hunger that controls Voldemort.

Cathubovda:
>>>>>>>>>>I completely agree that Voldemort is not a guy to be adored and 
admired.  But my problem with him - particularly in light of 
Ollivander's comment - is that he isn't Great enough.<<<<<<<<<<<

[will return to examples in a minute]

I think your analysis, while very good (and delightfully cutting in places), has to be placed in the context of the fact that this man managed to terrify people for the better part of his life. Hardly Great, and as you point out he does fail spectacularly in some of his endeavors, but he *has* done it -- the fact of it remains. I don't think the WW would be as worried if they had the luxury of looking at from such a wonderfully detached point of view (that of a reader), but being that they don't have that chance, Voldemort's psychological impact on the WW should not be underestimated.

Cathubovda:
>>>>>>>1. >come up with ways to defy death
Well, kind of.  Maybe.  True, he's not dead.  But he spent many years 
in a state far short of living, so I wouldn't say he's "Achieved 
Immortality".  I'm going to give him a D- in Immortality Studies.<<<<<<<<

Well, Rome wasn't built in a day, you know <g> As Woody Allen said, "I don't want to achieve immortality through my work ... I want to achieve it through not dying." Immortality is ever a work in progress.

Cathubovda:
>>>>>>>2. >he influenced people to share his beliefs
The only people who seem to share his beliefs are the DEs, and by all 
accounts they're only a very small percentage of the wizarding 
population. (Even then, their loyalty is a bit suspect)  The majority 
of the WW seems to emphatically reject him and his beliefs, and as 
just about everyone wants him dead, I'm giving him an F in Charisma.<<<<<<<<<<

I sort of respectfully disagree with you there. See arguments above for part of it.

I'm not certain where your "all accounts" are coming from. Is it specifically stated anywhere that the Death Eaters were a small, select group of people? Or even that Death Eaters were the only followers of Voldemort? I have the impression somehow that one need not be a card-carrying DE and participate in club activites to be Bad, or to share a set of beliefs (this is based on the notion that one needs not be a Klu Klux Klan member to be intolerant, although group affiliation makes acting on intolerance easier.)

However, I do agree with you that Voldy's followers are of suspect loyalty, but this is partly how his charisma acts upon people: it attracts those of insatiable appetite for power and gain (see above again), but they abandon him when it serves their interests -- in other words, like rats from a sinking ship. Then again, the same thing happens routinely when people are called to account for their actions: they insist they were forced (it was the Imperius Curse! The Imperius Curse!) by their higher-ups and try to evade responsibility.

You probably have the edge in the argument because I can't get my words together tonight, but there's something about Voldemort, a certain je ne sais quois, that makes him a bizarrely compelling figure, and part of me -- the more basal part, admittedly -- can understand how he managed to garner a following in the first place. To return to the remark above about avoiding culpability, maybe *that's* what Voldemort offers -- the chance to finally ignore the obnoxious voice of conscience and behave according to appetite and whim without having to worry about justification, because Voldemort is all the justification the good DE needs to go out and torture Muggles. It's so much easier acting with divine sanction.

Cathubovda:
>>>>>>4a. The Reign of Terror
He does earn some points there, but if it was a battle, he was 
certainly the loser.  I can't give it anything over a D+.<<<<<<<

I don't know. Eleven years of a Reign of Terror in real life, with another eleven years of psychological impact, plus a promised renaissance for an indeterminate time (well, for three years at least) isn't too bad.

Cathubovda:
>>>>>There are only two positive indicators of Voldemort's greatness.  
Firstly, that Ollivander point-blank says so, and secondly the 
Wizarding World's fear of him.<<<<<

Yes, and when you consider that the WW consists of powerful individuals such as Dumbledore, plus people who were/are by all accounts very brave and highly respected individuals -- Sirius, the Bones, McKinnons, the Longbottoms, the Weasleys -- I think their words have to be taken into account.

>>>>>>Did anyone who said the word "Voldemort" immediately 
drop dead?  Or disappear? Or...or...or...  That would make me happy 
(er - not *happy*, but it would satisfy my doubts), I'd bestow the 
Greatness award upon him and leave it at that.<<<<<

Well, and therein lies the problem -- we only have corollary incidents and secondhand words to go on, rather than someone actually *saying*, "Yeah, and there was that huge massacre in Salisbury" or whatever. However, Voldemort's power, magical, psychological or otherwise, is continually reinforced: Dumbledore is the only wizard who rivals his power; there is a considerable breaking between Dumbledore and the Ministry over what to do about the Voldemort Question -- Dumbledore strikes me as the kind of person who does what he absolutely has to when it must be done, and his refusal to follow Fudge into self-imposed ignorance is very telling. And there is the whole issue of the Potters being killed, who were, by all accounts, pretty good with wands themselves.

Partly, Voldemort's reputation comes by proxy, through the people he sends out to do his dirty work. Reputation transfers itself up the scale; the actions of the subordinates inevitably will color that of the one(s) at the top. The Death Eaters were nasty, indiscriminate people -- so was Voldemort. What they did lent Voldemort more psychological ammo, and really

But you're right... he's not 'great.'

HF.




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]