Do you think there is more to Voldie's story?

[pippin_999]

No: HPFGUIDX 97714

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "delwynmarch" 
<delwynmarch at y...> wrote:
> Ms Mo Me wrote:
> > I have often wondered, WHY and HOW did Voldemort get
> > so bad?
> > 
> > We know he had rough beginning.  People have also
> > speculated about the lack of love in his life.  But,
> > do you think that it is that ALONE that made him get
> > so evil?
> 
> Del replies :
> Nope. I think the lack of love and the rough circumstances 
made him hard, resentful and ambitious. And I think it's his 
*power* that  corrupted him in the end. Because he was so 
powerful, he could do  almost anything he wanted to satisfy his 
resentment and ambition.  And the more he did bad things, the 
more he eroded his conscience,  his sense of right and wrong. <

Pippin:
I think that Voldemort's conscience didn't erode, it simply never 
grew. JKR constantly uses baby metaphors to describe her 
villains. Peter sobbing in the shrieking shack "like an oversized, 
balding baby," Voldemort's ugly baby form, Bella's baby talk, the 
baby-headed Death Eater in OOP, Umbridge's little girl voice, 
and young Barty's infantile behavior under veritaserum  are all 
examples.  It seems they have no more sense of right and wrong 
than a baby does. Seen in this light, though, it's hard to regard 
them as evil.

Others, such as Quirrell, Draco, Lucius, Vernon and  Petunia, 
don't get the baby metaphor. And though they  cause loads of 
suffering, they don't seem  to be evil in the same compulsive way 
that Bella is.

On an individual basis, then,  there don't seem to be any evil 
characters, even Voldemort. And yet, we are warned, evil exists. 
 How to resolve this?  I think evil in the Potterverse is a 
collaborative act, not an individual one. It takes at least two 
people, one who can rationalize a cruel or unjust act, and one 
who doesn't need to.

So, to take the Dursley household as an example, Petunia and 
Vernon rationalize their behavior: it's necessary to hide Harry 
from the neighbors and squash the magic out of him.  Dudley 
doesn't need to rationalize; he flat-out enjoys making Harry 
miserable, and when he hasn't got Harry to pick on, he bullies 
younger kids in the neighborhood and at school.

 As he's  a child,  it is his elders' business to make him feel 
responsible for his choices by arranging appropriate 
consequences. But this they have largely failed to do, and I think 
the same thing happened to Tom, though as a result of neglect 
rather than over-indulgence. Dudley grew up feeling he would be 
rewarded whatever he did. Tom grew up feeling he would be 
punished whatever he did. Neither learned to connect their 
choices with the consequences.

Pippin