LV never loved anyone

[jimlaming]

No: HPFGUIDX 110478

SSSusan wrote:
"It is possible that these children can show no attachment, empathy 
or bond to another whatsoever.  BUT, I'd like to go back to what I 
said in my first response to your first post in this thread.  Here's 
what I said then:  "*I* took what JKR said as meaning that Tom, once 
capable/old enough/able to choose, never *chose* to love another.""

Del replies:
But if Tom never experienced love, then how could he ever become 
capable of choosing to love ??  Imagine an 11-year-old boy who's only 
been given fries all his life. Fries are the only food he knows to 
eat when he's hungry. So now you're walking through town with him and 
lunch hour comes. The kid is hungry. You tell him that he can choose 
between a serving of fries at the stand 3 feet away, or vegetables 
and cookies in the shop on the other side of the big busy street. 
What is the kid going to choose? Fries, right? Now, how fair would it 
be to scold him for not choosing to cross the street to go and get 
vegetables and cookies?? *Why*would he choose to do that??

If Tom truly never loved, then he was *never* able to choose to love. 
He would have needed *a lot* of care and attention and teaching, to 
learn that love is something worth looking for, and *how* to get to 
experience it. But knowing the WW as we do, I doubt anyone took the 
time and effort to do that. Tom was on his own, and he just didn't 
grasp the concept of love, nor could he see the point of it. Even 
decades later, he still thought that Lily was just being *silly* for 
risking her life in order to save her baby: that shows how much he's 
alien to the whole concept of love.

I wish JKR hadn't answered that question so thoroughly. A nice little 
no would have been enough, and nowhere so disturbing.

Jim adds:
I love this thread.  I am intrigued at the nuances of each posters 
belief systems or background, which cling to different elements of 
the discussion.  Academic, abused, loved, redeemed
  Thanks to all!

I am of the redeemable belief system, meaning, I believe that agency 
is at work in all but the most damaged of personalities.  And that 
there is always a path to love.  You may be in a dark place and only 
make a miniscule step, but it is a step towards love or away from it.

Tom MAY be damaged enough to be missing the fundamental agency to 
choose love.  I rather think DD may have tried to influence him and 
failed.  There is an interesting dynamic between them, which seems 
somewhat sad for DD and arrogant for LV.  This is what I hear a hint 
of when DD reminds LV there are things worse than death.

IMHO, Draco is not that damaged.  In SS/PS, he exhibits a somewhat 
normal desire to meet a fellow student in the robe shop.  His 
approach is somewhat crude but he does attempt to befriend an unknown 
student.  I think that encounter is genuine.  Later when he knows the 
identity of that student, his background plays into the interaction.  
He makes a choice, however slight, to follow a darker path.

The fries analogy is too simple.  Devoid of any other stimulus, the 
choice is 95 percent clear.  But Draco sees many other choices and 
the consequences of the choices around him at school.  He has seen a 
variety of options.  The relationship of H/H/R vs. his relationship 
with C/G for example.  The interaction of Snape and Harry vs. the 
interaction of Hagrid and Harry.  Other student with their parents.

I guess my point is:  I'd like to think there are always options.

Jim Laming