Pity for Voldemort

[arrowsmithbt]

No: HPFGUIDX 104785

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" <dumbledore11214 at y...> 
wrote:
> 
> I don't want her to go there, but unfortunately I am the last person 
> she would ask advice from. :o)
> But with her latest answers - "I don't believe that anybody is born 
> evil, we will find out more about Tom, etc." (paraphrase) 
> I am afraid that is exactly where she is going.
> 
> Now, if she will make me pity Tom, I would think that she is not just 
> a very good writer, I would think that she is a genius.
> 
> I am wondering what would make me pity Tom. Because right now I 
> cannot think of him as anybody else, but very pathetic maniacal 
> murderer.
> 
> I suppose I have to see him doing some good, noble deeds. Ha! No, 
> talking more about his bad childhood is not enough for me.


It's an obvious truth that no-one is born evil (or  at least outside the 
horror genre), but in RL and fiction there's a mulitude who become
evil. How many of those repent and  eschew their wicked ways?
Some, but not too many.

Why they become evil is open to debate; in RL many search for for 
influences during childhood and it's fair to say that there are examples
where these have had an effect or may even be the sole cause. But there
are others, just as badly  treated or worse, where there is not a progression
on to extreme anti-social behaviour.

Transferring this pattern onto fictional characters can be a problem and
can be the cause of all sorts of disagreements. Most  of us are aware
of RL examples that we can draw on, but is imprinting these onto HP
characters valid? Or is JKR allowing us dig a pit for our own feet by us
carrying our RL experiences into her constructed world where they
may not apply?

Harry, Neville, Tom, Sirius. 
All are presented as having unhappy childhoods. So far(!) one is evil, one 
suspected by some of being ESE and two seem to have overcome it.
What  does that tell us? Not much evidence of straight-line cause and
effect there. 

Tom's case is the most interesting of the three. He spent his formative
years in an orphanage. He was not happy there, which is understandable
but not an inevitability. What seems to drive him is hate -  hatred of a
father he never met.  This seems to have expanded into hatred for all
Muggles and Mudbloods. He wants 'revenge' for what he perceives as
the wrongs done to him and to exact that revenge he has to have power. 
Hey Presto! - Voldy!

IMO Voldy isn't the inevitable outcome of Tom's childhood but a choice,
a means to an end. It's one of the choices that DD keeps whittering on
about. Tom has chosen his path (with maybe a little help from a nasty
entity that lurked in the Chamber, if my 'Possession Theory' stands up).
If it is a choice, then pity from the reader would be inappropriate. We
can Boo! and Hiss! and dream dreams of his satisfyingly traumatic
come-uppance with a clear conscience.

JKR may thwart us of course. Tom may make a new choice. Hope  not.
I always feel a bit cheated when the baddy revises his options, joins
The Band of Hope and is forgiven for past atrocities. The atrocities
happened, didn't they? They were carried out by choice, weren't they?
Fine; then it's the chopping block for you, my lad. Just punishment and 
social retribution; nothing wrong with it so far as I'm concerned. Saying
"Sorry" doesn't hack it. Repentance is an optional extra, not an alternative.

Kneasy
who *hates* fluffy endings