define love

[cubfanbudwoman]

No: HPFGUIDX 110633

Ginger wrote:
> I have to wonder, though, are we defining love the same?  Are we 
> defining it correctly?  I went back and reread the original 
> question which was "Has Voldemort or Tom Riddle ever cared for or 
> loved anyone?"
> 
> Would anyone care to join me in an exercise?  Think of 5 people 
> that you love that you met when neither you nor they were an 
> infant.  Got them?
> 
> Now ask yourself at what point you started loving them.  I bet it 
> wasn't instant.  I would bet that there was cordiality, 
> acquaintanceship, friendship, and then love.  Your experiences may 
> vary, of course, but if it was a relationship with someone you had 
> not met as a baby, how could you love them right off the bat?
> 
> The way I understood the question and answer was that Tom had never 
> gotten to the point of love.  He may have been cordial, and 
> possibly even friends, but not to a great degree.  Similar to a 
> relationship one may have with someone at work, but with whom one 
> doesn't socialize outside of the workplace.  Comfortable, but not 
> loving. 
> 
> Where I see Tom's choice in the matter is to not allow it to 
> continue to a deeper level.  
> 
> Remember the days of Storge'?  We went on about the different types 
> of love for days!  It would be my guess that "cared for or loved" 
> would mean a deep love, like with a spouse/SO, OR a very deep 
> friendship, or possibly both.  I don't think it means that he never 
> had positive feelings towards anyone on a basic level.  
> 
> My reasoning is that those base feelings are far more easily turned 
> off, especially as he reached the tumult of teenhood, than a deeper 
> love.  He may have told himself he was illogical or, as others have 
> suggested, weak.   A deeper love would have been much harder to 
> nullify.  It fits in with JKR's "choices".  Had he never been 
> capable of feeling even basic positive feelings towards anyone, he 
> would have had no choice.  Del has pointed this out admirably.
> 
> Any thoughts on this?  
> Ginger, who usually doesn't announce to over 11000 people that she 
> loves them (blush)


SSSusan:
I couldn't let Ginger sit out there, blushing, and wondering if 
anyone agrees with her.  

My response, Ginger?  This is *brilliant.*  Your points about depth 
of positive relationships and time in development of them are 
extremely important!  I know I had not considered that at all, yet it 
can make a huge difference in how "distressing" JKR's comments are.  
*This* idea softens the seeming finality of her comments about "never 
loved" and "psychopath" and allow room for the choice element that so 
many of us want in order to truly find Voldy evil & diabolical and 
not just pitiable.  

Noting that Tom likely did have positive relationships with others 
also allows room for something I just posted about--the potential 
influence of his peers in the orphanage, all of whom I do NOT believe 
had led totally loveless lives.  

With your thoughts in mind, I can much more easily see Tom being 
friendly enough to become HB and respected by peers & teachers--we 
just have to include this component of simply CUTTING SHORT the 
relationship before it deepens to love.  (And, I might add, the older 
he got and farther along his path toward full power & immortality, he 
likely would cut those positive relationships to almost nothing.)

Siriusly Snapey Susan