My shocking idea

[sofdog_2000]

No: HPFGUIDX 72908

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Wanda Sherratt" 
<wsherratt3338 at r...> wrote:
> This brings me to my most controversial guess: that the deepening 
of character is going to extend all the way to Voldemort himself.  
When Dumbledore called him "Tom", I don't think he was doing it in a 
> sneering way; I think he was addressing himself to the human being 
> he once knew.  If all these other characters went bad because they 
> were mistreated, in the end we will learn that Tom Riddle was the 
> same.  That he was not always pure evil, that he had a chance for 
> good, but that he chose evil partly because of the way he was 
> treated.  I have my own ideas about what pushed him to the dark 
> side, which I won't go into.  But I think Harry is going to learn 
> that compassion, which he was already starting to feel for Snape, 
> (and that is one of Harry's most admirable moments, when he 
realizes that he feels bad for his most hated teacher) must extend 
all the way to the Dark Lord himself.  I think Harry's sacrifice will 
be even bigger than Lily's was; he won't be dying just to save his 
> friends, but to save his worst enemy.  I think Harry's death is 
> going to be *truly* Christ-like, and he'll be able to look at 
> Voldemort and see not the all-powerful dark wizard, but the ruined, 
> destroyed human being he once was, and respond with love and 
> compassion.  Any ideas about this, or am I just raving?

Fascinating comments, I think you're onto something with this part. I 
glimpsed the kinship between Harry and Snape early on. It's too bad 
Snape isn't mature enough to see it himself, and to release his 
childhood grudges.

Your insight into Dumbledore's use of "Tom" is keen. Mostly that line 
has been viewed as a move to put Voldemort in his place. Please do 
post your ideas about what drove Tom Riddle to evil and his pursuit 
of power (or email me). I've been musing on this a lot lately. It 
seems critical to the story (or even to a separate Tom-centric novel) 
to know what drove Voldemort over the edge - and at such a young age. 
If Voldemort is Harry's dark opposite, coming from similar 
circumstances as they do, then we need a fuller understanding of his 
descent than simply "he cannot understand love." Corruption doesn't 
happen with the flip of a switch. As we see with Harry who moves from 
the brink of committing murder in PoA to actually uttering an 
Unforgivable Curse in OotP, corruption happens in stages through a 
series of events and choices. I just wonder how much farther into the 
Dark Side young Skywalker is going to go.

Also, I'm not familiar  with your thoughts on Harry sacrificng 
himself. That certainly seems like an option. Personally, years of 
myths and Buffy have taught me to look twice at any Prophecy. I don't 
think that either Harry or Voldemort has to die at all. The trick is 
the word "survive," which means not only to exist, but also "to 
prosper or function in spite of" (Merriam-Webster). Also, Dumbledore 
insists that there are worse things than death to Voldemort, who has 
taken great pains to make himself if not immortal, than extremely 
hard to kill. So, I think there's a different option out there that 
won't involve Harry having to murder anyone, but will neutralize 
Voldemort permanently. 

 - Sof