Voldemort's name (taking his power away)

[slgazit]

No: HPFGUIDX 82108

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Lisa Cocchiarale" 
<lisaeckleycocchiarale at y...> wrote:
> Martha quotes:
> One last point, then. From UK edition, page718:
> 
> " 'You do not seek to kill me, Dumbledore?' called Voldemort, his 
> scarlet eyes narrowed over the top of the shield. 'Above such 
> brutality, are you?'
> 
> 'We both know there are other ways of destroying a man, Tom,' 
> Dumbledore said calmly [...] 'Merely taking your life would not 
> satisfy me, I admit -' "
> 
> Martha says: "It's all about power, I tell you."
> 
> Lisa (me)here: I couldn't agree more with Martha's take on DD's 
> actions and LV's reactions in this scene, and had to giggle. DD's 
> words reduce LV to a tantrum-throwing 4 yr old (albeit a rather 
more 
> deadly one). The despised childhood name incenses him,and he loses 
> control.

I left out the exchange above. My take on it was different. LV and DD 
are locked in a life-or-death struggle. DD's pronouncement above 
implied implacable hatred and determination to destroy LV at all 
costs - which seemed almost out of character for the normally kind 
DD. It was a declaration of war, not a tactic in psychological 
warfare.

And I have not seen anywhere any sign that Voldemort gets angry over 
the use of his childhood name in that scene. He is afraid of DD and 
angry that he disrupted his plan to kill Harry. He tried to kill DD 
and almost succeeds - if it were not for the statues and Fawkes he 
would have done it - so let's not underestimate him. But nowhere is 
he losing his cool or pretending that the name does not apply to him.

> But I have to ask: is DD imprudent (irresponsible, even?) in 
choosing 
> NOT to kill LV on the spot while (presumably) he could? LV's death 
in 
> the battle at DOM would no doubt be a HUGE blow to the DEs, no?

Not at all. There are two issues here. I doubt that DD will perform 
an unforgivable curse under any circumstance. It is possible that to 
succeed you must be an evil person in the first place (as Bellatrix 
implies) - in which case he would not have succeeded anyway.

The second point is that we know that Voldemort is immune to death in 
the normal way. If he gets put on suspended animation again, how long 
will it be before he finds another way of capturing Harry or perhaps 
will even figure the hole in his original scheme (what caused DD's 
gleam in GoF) and revive himself in a way that makes him more 
powerfull than Harry and without that fatal flaw (whatever it is). DD 
knows he cannot vanquish Voldemort - that's according to the 
prophecy - and that it is Harry's future task. He also knows that 
Voldemort in his current form is vulnerable to Harry's (unknown to 
us) powers. In addition, he finally has the chance to demonstrate 
that Voldemort is indeed back (remember that at the beginning of 
their battle, two statues go to raise the alarm, and so he knows 
aurors are on their way). Had he killed him at that point, the world 
will continue to think that the whole thing was a haux.

Salit