[HPforGrownups] Re: Voldermort's "death"

[Vivamus]

No: HPFGUIDX 119399

> whimsyflower (wildflower) wrote:
> <snip> I've spent some time musing on what it would take to 
> kill LV, but then I looked at the prophecy again.  It does 
> not actually say that Harry has the power to kill LV.  After 
> Harry heard the prophecy in OOP, Harry assumed it meant he 
> would have to kill LV, but the prophecy actually says Harry 
> has the power to "vanquish" LV.  What if vanquishing does not 
> mean killing, but somehow redeeming?  or emptying of evil?  I 
> wonder if somehow Harry forgives LV or sees some good in him, 
> and because Harry does so, LV is vanquished or looses his 
> power or becomes impotent or is rendered no longer evil?
> > 
> > Alas, many more questions than answers, but I would love to hear 
> > others' thoughts on these possibilities.
> 
> Hi!  Kim here:
> I (and other posters) had some thoughts on this topic 
> probably back in Sept. or Oct. this year (can't remember the 
> post nos. or titles, sorry), but I still think it's an 
> intriguing question.  By asking the question about 
> vanquishing possibly not meaning killing, do you lean in the 
> direction of a Lord Voldemort redemption?  If so, I'm with 
> you on that.
> 
> I somehow doubt that Harry or anyone else will actually be 
> able to "kill" Voldemort, because I don't think he's been 
> killable for some time, not even after taking Harry's blood 
> in GoF.  

Vivamus:
You may be right, of course, but I'll toss my hat on the side that DD's
"gleam of something like triumph" meant either that LV is now human enough
to be killed, or in some way is now vulnerable to being destroyed by Harry,
if by no one else.

> I also don't think Harry is actually killable 
> either, not by LV's hand at any rate.  I think it would be 
> quite a twist if LV survived the final battles, though it 
> would be much less severe and final a fate for the evil one 
> than some folks might wish for.  It even seems likely that 
> Harry's forgiving nature might make him forgive even LV.  But 
> I'd still like Harry to "vanquish" LV's evil nature.  That's 
> the main point, isn't it -- to stop the evil, not just to get 
> even with LV?  

Vivamus:
I fear I must disagree here most strongly.  The entire series has been about
making ethical choices and facing consequences.   Always it has been choices
that have been emphasized, not fate.  Harry & co. will win because they
choose to do so, albeit at great cost.  Just as LV has remained alive
because he has willed to do so, Harry will be able to vanquish him forever
despite all odds because Harry's will is equally strong, and his heart is as
good as LV's is bad.  

The other side of this coin is that choices always result in consequences.
LV has made choices all along the line which are purely evil.  Irrespective
of how he got to where he is -- and there are probably some significant
faults to be laid at others who had a hand in shaping him (Grindelwald,
perhaps?) -- he nevertheless has chosen, as an adult, to be who and what he
is.  If any choices in life have irredeemable consequences, and we are not
just chips in a mill race, then LV must die.

A good example for comparison is the Star Wars saga.  Darth Vader represents
a figure who seems purely evil, and acts that way, yet Luke is able to
redeem him.  This may be what some are bringing to mind, if they are
thinking about redeeming LV.   But standing behind Darth Vader is the
Emperor -- who not only merits death but receives it.   In story terms, Luke
was able to redeem his father only because there was a still darker figure
behind him to take the fall.  Even then, Anakin Skywalker could only be
redeemed in death.  LV does not have any such figure.  In allegorical terms,
he IS the Emperor; he IS the evil Galactic Overlord; he is the source of the
evil that must be vanquished, not a victim of it.

While there probably was some good in young Tom Riddle before he went the
way he did, and there almost certainly were others who contributed to Tom's
choices, it is Tom, ultimately, who must pay the price for his own choices.


> Whereas if Harry kills LV, what's to say he'll actually be 
> dead, like last time he was "killed" back in Godric's Hollow 
> and he didn't really die?  Redemption would be a much more 
> effective way of rendering LV powerless for good, and 
> besides, as repayment for his crimes, he might then be made 
> to do some really helpful community service, such as 
> volunteer work in a Muggle orphanage... ;-)
>
> As to how to render LV powerless and possibly even good, I'd 
> had the idea that LV could somehow be lured into that 
> mysterious locked room in the Dept. of Mysteries and 
> "neutralized" (that is, if being in there didn't just 
> vaporize him instead...)

I think a "redeemed" Tom Riddle walking around doing good would be a source
of suffering to Neville Longbottom (and hundreds of others who have suffered
similarly at the hands of LV or his followers) *almost* as terrible as the
loss of his parents in the first place.

Vivamus, who is old-fashioned enough to believe that freedom implies
responsibility, and some choices have eternal consequences.