LV never loved anyone

[cubfanbudwoman]

No: HPFGUIDX 110495

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. 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. 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:
But much of what we all learn--including language acquisition--is 
done through *modeling*.  There *IS* an age at which learning in 
general, languages in particular, is quicker:  in childhood.  But one 
can learn at any age, and modeling is one of the chief ways of doing 
so.  Especially once he was at Hogwarts, affection, friendship, 
loving relationships were likely all around Tom, being modeled for 
him.  I don't think comparing learning to love to learning languages 
is necessarily a good correllary, but even if it is, I'd say the 
opportunity was still there for Tom, just as I can learn German at 
age 42 if I choose.


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:
Precisely.  And as yet, we do not know into which of these categories 
Tom falls.  Given what Pippin provided awhile ago from JKR--about how 
Tom chose his path--I'd wager a guess that she thinks he's in the 
*former* category.  All imho, of course.

 

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. 

SSSusan:
I've seen this argument here before, and I'm just not buying it.  
*Saying* no one has to behave according to "the system" doesn't mean 
it's so--or else society breaks down and there is anarchy.  There is 
room for discord or dissention, to quite varying degrees, in 
different systems, but when we're talking about a society as a whole--
not one particular religious take on things--there are typically 
rules which must be abided by/mores which must be accepted or there 
will be consequences.  TOM IS NOT STUPID [forgive the yelling :-)].  
I truly believe that by the time he was a teenager, if not before, he 
understood the mores, the values; saw the modeling of love, devotion 
& friendship; and chose his own path.  

These comments of JKR's that Pippin provided support that, *I* think: 
1)  "What's very important for me is when Dumbledore says that you 
have to choose between what is right and what is easy." 
2) "Voldemort took wrong choices from a very early age - he decided 
young what he wanted to be."


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

SSSusan:
I didn't say she agrees with me.  I've repeatedly said *if* my 
interpretation or take on her words is right.  But the comments I 
just provided, above, about choice make me feel I'm on the right 
track.  


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

SSSusan:
To me it's his faulty logic which sees love as a weakness.  Most 
people either don't see it as a weakness or see it as one they're 
willing to give into because of the joys it provides.  As you note, 
Tom/Voldy apparently saw [yes, understandably] power as the more 
important "virtue" and chose to ignore love.

It's all just my $.02, really, but I do think the two quotes from JKR 
are helpful in understanding her view of Tom as having or not having 
choice.

Siriusly Snapey Susan