LV never loved anyone

[tylerswaxlion]

No: HPFGUIDX 110657

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pcaehill2" <pcaehill2 at s...> 
wrote:

> I have to agree here, I do think that at some point, our choices 
can 
> lead us to a "point of no return", that is, a place where we have 
to 
> live with what we've done and what we've done leaves an indelible 
> impression on us.
> 
> And I really don't believe in cheap redemption (hence my belief 
that 
> Darth Vader's deathbed conversion was faked!)

Lucas lost me at "I am your father." BAH!

...but I still take 
> issue with your (previously posted) argument that cognitively 
> acquired skills such as language are equivalent to emotional 
> development.  Windows of opportunity in infancy abound, and I've 
> heard the language argument before, and read the research re: 
feral 
> kids, etc. (which is not considered extremely convincing, however, 
> due to the small sample).  

It's not ethical to experiment on kids, so there are far more 
studies on animals, but I think I'm getting a little off-topic 
listing studies and such.  You buy it or you don't.

>But emotional development depends on much 
> more than cognition -- I've worked with mentally retarded kids and 
> adults who are extremely wise emotionally and socially!!!
>
OK, my younger brother has Down Syndrome, and it's really hard for 
me to tell people how "old" he is, b/c he doesn't talk.  He CAN, 
though not well, but he now REFUSES to do so.  When my son was born, 
I paid extremely close attention to his language acquisition, hoping 
to get clues to help my brother.  But...there aren't clues.  I 
believe much of our language acquisition *is* hard-wired, and while 
exposure is crucial, it's not all, b/c we've always TALKED to my 
brother.  

Emotionally, he *is* his real age.  It's from him that I've learned 
true *unconditional* love.  But again, he was always a loved child.  
I've seen people with Down Syndrome in some really awful 
institutionalized settings--and they are not emotionally mature.  
It's not that they aren't capable of feeling emotions; it's that 
neglect atrophies them.

Voldemort (back to topic!) was never loved, I believe.  It crippled 
him emotionally.  He has never loved anyone (per JKR) and his 
actions make more sense with that knowledge (he's not just randomly 
violating the Evil Overlord Rules).

I refuse to believe Baby!Tom was "born evil"--as I said, I'm a big 
believer in free will (and you CAN'T kill a BABY!)  Even though he 
was damaged and crippled (imho) he is still responsible for his 
*actions*.  I don't find impunity for him in "diagnosing" 
sociopathy.  I find understanding of how he could make the choice to 
be ESE.  Doesn't make it right, never will.  

It will probably make it possible for a non-genius teen to defeat a 
genius, super-powerful, nigh-invulnerable wizard.

Whether or not we agree on love's effect in real life children, I 
think love has had a powerful role in the books to date and will 
have an even more important role in the last 2.  YMMV.

> Pam, who once had a client who created the bumper sticker:  
> 
> F*** DOOM!!!
> 
> I heartily concur.
Tyler