LV never loved anyone

[delwynmarch]

No: HPFGUIDX 110490

SSSusan wrote :
"it happened because Harry WANTED to make friends; he was OPEN to
exchanging affection.  He did not see affection as a weakness.  I
think you believe Tom was *incapable* of such openness, but I don't
agree. "

Del replies :
There's a rule in human nature : you lose what you don't use. Take
languages for example. When kids are born, they have an innate
capacity to learn several languages perfectly and easily. But as time
goes by, if the brain is not stimulated by several languages, it loses
this ability. I, for example, grew up speaking only one language. I
learned English only at the age of 18. As a result, I still have a
strong accent and it's very very hard for me to learn other languages.
My husband, on the other hand, grew up bilingual, and he's got an
amazing ability to learn additional languages. When he came to my
country, it took him very little time to learn my language. He also is
very good at catching original accents : when I met him, I would have
sworn he was American, when in fact he's from South Central Europe.
And now we've moved to his country with our 20-month-old son, and we
can see that babies really are different. It took our son less than a
month to start to understand his grandparents, while I still struggle
with the basics after 2 months.
I believe something similar might have happened to Tom. He received no
or very little love as a kid, and was not prompted to love back. As a
result, he might have lost both his ability to love and his
sensitivity to receive love sent his way. Asking him to choose to love
would be like asking me to choose to speak only my husband's tongue at
home with him : I couldn't, even if I wanted to.

SSSusan wrote :
"Ack!  I shouldn't have gotten myself into this thread, because I 
can't keep up with your postings, Del! :-|  I'm at work and I just 
can't justify any more "break time"!  "

Del replies :
You don't have to keep up ! You can answer only one post a day if you
want, it's fine with me.

SSSusan wrote :
"I don't think you're going to believe that a child who was SHOWN no
love will be able to in turn SHOW love."

Del replies :
There are studies that confirm my beliefs, unfortunately. Yes, some
children will be able to love even though they weren't loved, but some
others won't.

SSSusan wrote :
"I, on the other hand, believe that it is possible *and* that JKR
clearly expects him to have done so--or at LEAST to have chosen the
difficult, "good" choices over the ones he did choose.  "

Del replies :
She calls him a raging psychopath and says that he's insensitive to
other people, or something of that effect.

SSSusan wrote :
"In other words, was Tom "immoral" because he couldn't help himself, 
or was he "immoral" because he CHOSE not to buy into the prevailing 
system of morality.  *I* think JKR's leaning towards that 
interpretation, along w/ his CHOOSING not to give in to the "weakness"
that he considered love to be."

Del replies :
If he doesn't believe in the system, then he can't be wrong according
to it. Telling a non-Christian, for example, that it's wrong to use
the name of God while swearing and that God will punish them for it,
is not going to make them change their habit. You can explain to them
that it hurts you and ask them to please not do it in your presence,
but that's about it. Unless you live in a theocracy, and there's a
legal law against swearing : then you can sue that person. But
otherwise, if they don't buy into your system of beliefs, they won't
agree with you when you tell them they're wrong, and they'll keep on
their path.

2 questions for you :

1. What makes you say that JKR agrees with you ? I'm not saying you're
necessarily wrong, I'm just asking for proof.

2. Why would anyone choose to give into a weakness ??? Especially
someone who believe in power over anything else.

Del