LOVE saves the day in the end + other love threads

[saraquel_omphale]

No: HPFGUIDX 137232

In answer to SSSusan, Merrylinks and Geoff - my last post today!

SSSusan Wrote:
> If we end this series without an explanation of how events 
unfolded 
> that night at GH, preferably with an actual "visual," it will 
> probably be my biggest disappointment of the series (unless Harry 
> bites it in the end, as that would be even bigger.
> 
Saraquel:
I think that would be impossible, GH is so central to the plot that 
JKR has even given us the nod that we'll find out about it somewhere 
near the start of book7, and I suspect it will further the plot with 
regards to Snape.

SSSusan wrote:
>  It's the 
> combination of these things -- love/compassion/concern for others 
>+ the willingness to sacrifice which will be the (somehow!) fatal 
> combination for Voldy.
> 
> Here's how I have always seen it playing out.  In the end, Harry 
>will come, probably solo, to the understanding that he must 
>sacrifice himself.  He will be willing to do so because of his love 
>for (many)others -- **not** because of romantic love for Ginny, but 
>because of deep, compassionate, altruistic agape love & concern for 
>others.
> 
> But here's the TWIST I'm hoping for.  Harry will come to believe 
> this, and he will come to DECIDE that he will sacrifice himself, 
>thus ensuring (somehow! -- leaving this up to JKR's magical 
>creativity) Voldemort's demise.  However, in the process of 
>offering himself up, Harry will (somehow!) discover, quite 
>surprisingly, that he does not NEED to die.  The belief & the 
>willingness to have died will turn out to have been enough.
> 
> Yeah, yeah, I know.  Some of you are gagging at your computer 
>screens right now.  But Saraquel asked... and this is my response. 
> 

Saraquel:
I did ask, Sssusan and I'm not gagging.  I like this scenario.  I 
said in another recent post, that I hoped that the love capable of 
killing Voldemort did not automatically demand a death to fulfil it. 
(Badly put, but I hope you get my drift.) To me, this powerful form 
of love, whatever it is,  should be something that is able to be 
experienced here on earth, not just something that is `heavenly' – 
sorry but it is difficult to find expressions that don't have 
religious connotations, when talking about this.  If not, then the 
message is, that death is the only way you can really experience 
love, and I'm not sure that I agree with that.  But with your 
scenario, it becomes more, love is *worth* dying for if necessary, 
but love itself does not demand the sacrifice of life.  I'm tying 
myself in knots a bit here, and am quite probably contradicting 
stuff I've said before :-)

Merrylinks wrote:
>Saraquel, your questions reminded me of Dumbledore's comments about
>the Mirror of Erised:
>"It shows us nothing more or less than the deepest, most desperate
>desire of our hearts. ...Men have wasted away before it, entranced
>by what they have seen, or been driven mad, not knowing if what it
>shows is real or even possible."
>Perhaps the reason the Room of Love is dangerous is that, once 
you've
>entered it, you never want to leave it.

Saraquel:
Hmmmm, a sort of Venus Fly Trap!!

Merrylinks wrote:
>If Harry somehow manages to open the door and get LV
>to enter the room, LV would suddenly be confronted with a huge 
amount
>of the power he knows not. Just something to think about.

Exactly Merrylinks, and thereby finds his downfall maybe.  My 
problem with my own theory is that I don't know how I can fit it 
round the prophecy – well there you go, my words give me away, if it 
was going to work, I shouldn't need to fit it round, it should just 
drop in like a round peg into a round hole!

Geoff wrote:
>This is why I objected a few days ago when someone wrote something
>like "That's why I don't want Harry to win by using (ugh!) love." I
>pointed out that real love is the sort of love demonstrated by 
Christ
>on the Cross - not love being crooned about but real, strong, deep
>love unyielding in its aims to care for others and to put their 
needs
>in front. "Greater love has no man...." etc."

Saraquel:
I find it very interesting that (generalising now, and aware of it) 
our society finds it difficult to credit love as being a strong, 
powerful and effective force.  I do think that the media being awash 
with romantic trivia has a lot to answer for.  The fact that there 
is only one word in English to cover so many bases, whereas in 
Greek, as you pointed out they distinguish different types, also has 
a part to play. The word love is used in all contexts from the 
sublime to the ridiculous, and I think it has suffered from that, 
and been tainted with ridicule. If I'm picking up the signals 
correctly about where JKR is going with this book, then I admire her 
for choosing this theme, and creating a powerful story around it.

Saraquel