Harry's moral core vs. Voldie's

[Kelsey Dangelo]

No: HPFGUIDX 117194


Neri:
> > At 15, Tom Riddle was a talented student, a good-looking boy, a prefect, highly appreciated by both his teachers and his classmates. 
<snip>It was his choice.

Alla:
> > No, he did not have to do all that and I have no sympathy whatsoever towards the choices he made. Moreover, I have less trouble understanding why Tom Riddle made them than why Harry did. Tom hated his father with all his heart and perhaps his sociopathy went from there. But what made Harry's free will to work that way? He clearly made his choices earlier than he was eleven. Why? 

bboyminn:
> But I don't think the key is that he hated is father, as much as it is WHY he hated his father. Tom Riddle - abandoned and denied by his father before and after his birth. Harry Potter - whose mother and father sacrificed themselves out of love for their child. While we can easily find similarities between the two, I think the above defines the critical difference between the two. One was left with the bitter impression that he was worthless, the other was valued more highly than life itself. In addition, Harry did at least get 18 month of nurturing love before he lost his parents.>> 

Kelsey:
I agree with everything the above people have said about the motives and differences between Harry and Voldie, determining their differences in how they use their free will towards different ends. As well as how their situations were the same, yet different. [my personal tendency is that their situations were the same, its their moral cores and choices that are different]

But remember, Harry didnt know that his parents sacrificed their lives for him until he was 11 years old. And he didnt really know the full extent of that until his third year. And we dont know the circumstances of the death of Toms Slytherin-heir mother (who fell in love with a Muggle). [insert outrageous theory about her sacrificial death here]. I think that, deep in the psyche of these two children, the abandonment issues are _about_ equal. Both needed care, attention, and love at a young age, and it shows later in their lives when they desire attention at Hogwarts, and then the differences exist in how they seek to gain that attention. Granted Harry hates the attention from his ill-won-fame (defeating the Dark Lord the first time), but he desperately seeks to prove himself (another form of fame).

So, heres my question. JKR has said that Voldie has never loved nor ever will love anyone. That he cant. [hence why he cant tolerate Harrys love for Sirius or Lilys love for Harry] Im all for him being a flat, two-dimensional evil villain figure (hatred, darkness, anger, the anti-thesis of Harry, the hero).
But this, I cant quite grasp. Why would he care if his father abandoned him if he never loved him at all? Why would he care about gaining attention or power or followers? If Voldie lacks that ability to love, I guess he cant really be molded by his nurturing, but that its part of his nature (i.e. he never had the ability, so it could never be developed).

Oh, wow. Epiphany coming through (possibly)! Maybe its love (capacity for and ability to) that is that infamous "moral core/moral choices" difference between Harry and Voldie. And if thats true, then Harry cant go against that moral core and do something morally wrong (i.e. murder, blood-baths, etc.) to become "Dirty Harry" [the grandfather of this thread] and defeat Voldie. Hes going to have to do something morally sound through love to defeat Voldie.

Kelsey, who apologizes if it sounds like shes talking to herself.