Harry Potter and The Boys From Brazil (long)

[Neri]

No: HPFGUIDX 170387

If JKR is doing her job right, then the deepest mystery of the HP
series, what JKR once referred to as "the heart of it all", should
reflect directly the central theme of the series. If you know the
theme you have better chances at solving the mystery. And unlike plot
clues, the central theme isn't something that JKR can practically hide. 

So what *is* meant to be the central theme of HP series? Ever since
reading CoS I've been certain that it is the theme of Free Will. In
the resolution of CoS Dumbledore says to Harry "it is our choices that
show what we truly are, far more than our abilities". Just in case
anyone has failed to notice the significance of these words in first
reading, JKR recently flagged them for our attention herself: 

****************************************************************
http://www.quick-quote-quill.org/articles/2005/0705-tlc_mugglenet-anelli-3.htm

JKR: Yes, definitely, because I think there's a line there between the
moment in "Chamber of Secrets" when Dumbledore says so famously, `It's
our choices that define us, not our abilities,' straight through to
Dumbledore sitting in his office, saying to Harry, "the prophecy is
significant only because you and Voldemort choose to make it so."
*****************************************************************

(Interestingly she slightly misquotes her own canon here. She says
"our choices *define* us" instead of "show what we truly are". But
this is perhaps for another post).

A central idea, perhaps *the* Central Idea of all current monotheistic
religions as well as western humanism, is that human beings have the
ability to know good from evil, and especially that they have the
responsibility to choose good, and face the consequences of their
choice even if they aren't easy. Already in Genesis 3 the ancient
serpent tells Adam and Eve that once they eat from the fruit of the
Tree of Knowledge they "will be like God, knowing good and evil".
Interestingly snakes are a recurring motif in the Harry Potter series.
In Genesis 4 Cain, who is contemplating the first murder, is told:
"sin is crouching at the door; its desire is for you, but you must
master it". Again interestingly, the hero of the HP series is known by
a conspicuous mark on his forehead.

The opposite of the concept of Free Will is Determinism: the idea that
our fate or our biology or our upbringing can deny us our freedom to
choose good from evil. Throughout the series Determinism of all these
kinds is repeatedly brought up and condemned. The ideology of the bad
guys in the story – the "pureblood" dogma – is a typical philosophy of
biological determinism, claiming that someone's birth gives him the
right to abuse those of "lower" birth. In contrast Dumbledore, the
Author's prophet within the story, believes in "second chances" and,
despite his great power, knowledge and authority, typically exercises
a laissez-faire policy to the point of "detachment". 

Most of the main non-human and "half-human" characters in the series
dramatically refute the determinism of their biology: Dobby and
Kreacher both hack the magical geis enforcing house elves to obey
their masters, and choose to do either good or evil. Firenze denies
centaur fatalism in order to fight evil and save a human foal. Hagrid,
despite the obvious heritage of his giant blood, is the kindest
character in the series. Lupin, forced to turn into a mindless monster
every month since he was five, is the opposite in character of
anything you'd expect from a werewolf.

JKR's human characters refute not only the determinism of Nature, but
also the determinism of Nurture: Sirius had hated the pureblood
ideology despite growing up in a family of Dark wizards. James, an
arrogant berk at fifteen, saved the life of the person he hated at
sixteen. Peter became a traitor and a DE despite being a Gryffindor.
Draco, despite being a DE's son, decides in his moment of truth that
he is not a killer. Yes, yes, we will discuss Snape presently.

Most of the deepest magic in the Potterverse takes its power from
moral Choice. Lily's sacrifice, for example, had the power to protect
Harry "because she could have lived and chose to die"
(http://www.quick-quote-quill.org/articles/2005/0705-tlc_mugglenet-anelli-1.htm).
James's sacrifice did not have that same protection power because he
didn't have the opportunity to choose. Likewise the protection of 4
Privet Drive had to be sealed by Petunia's decision to take Harry in.
The Fidelius (as the name itself suggests) depends on the choice of
the Secret Keeper to remain loyal to his friends. The Life Debt takes
its power from the choice to save another wizard's life. The
Unbreakable Vow depends on a wizard's choice to back his word with his
life. The Patronus depends on the choice to keep on fighting, rather
than surrender to despair and take the easy way out. In all these
examples the most difficult part isn't technically mastering the spell
(indeed, in the cases of Lily's sacrifice and the Life Debt a
technical part doesn't seem to exist at all) but in the moral choosing
of what is right over what is easy. The more difficult the choice, the
more powerful the magic.  

Likewise, the power of the Darkest magic in the Potterverse usually
comes from *immoral* choice to embrace evil. Horcruxes can only be
created by a choice to commit murder and renounce a part of one's
soul. The Unforgivables require a deep intent to hurt the victim, even
enjoy it (but interestingly, the Unforgivable that takes away the
victim's freedom of choice, Imperius, *can* be resisted, again by
using the power of will rather than by applying any sophisticated
magical technique). It seems that the Potterverse Dark Arts are not
necessarily difficult in the technical sense: some of the most
powerful DEs do not appear overly bright, and the admittedly bright
Crouch Jr. had very little time to become so proficient. Rather, it
looks like the Dark Arts are difficult mainly because they require a
conscious choice to embrace evil. This concept is common enough, both
in folklore and literature (the "contract with the devil" theme) and
in RL ("admission exams" for new members into some satanic cults and
terror groups often require performing a crime, the more heinous the
better).  

The most dramatic example yet of the importance of Free Will in the
series is of course the prophecy, outwardly the very embodiment of
Determinism and fate. As both JKR and Dumbledore explain in detail,
the prophecy actually depended on Free Will in *three* different ways:
first in Voldemort's choice to act upon the prophecy, second in his
choice to attack Harry rather than Neville, and third in Harry's
choice to fight Voldemort back. And should anybody doubt the obvious,
JKR herself (see quote in the beginning of this post) connected the
last one with Dumbledore's speech about choices in CoS. Once again she
has consciously brought up a deterministic plot device only to shoot
it down with her Free Will theme.

However, I think that even the prophecy isn't the most important way
in which the theme of Free Will plays in the series. There's a far
more important way. I'm talking about the many parallels and
similarities that JKR draws between Voldemort and Harry. Granted, JKR
is hardly the first fantasy writer to draw parallels between her hero
and her evil overlord. Tolkien, for example, did it when he had the
ring taken from Frodo by severing his finger, the same as had happened
before to Sauron. But I can't think of any author who indulges in this
parallelism as much as JKR does. She starts already in the first book,
in the scene at Olivander's, where we find that the wand that chose
Harry is "the brother" of the wand that chose Voldemort. Strange,
isn't it, how these things happen. This theme continues in another of
the most famous HP scenes – the Sorting – in which we find that Harry
would have done well in Slytherin. In the next books we begin to
discover what it was that the wand and the Sorting Hat saw in Harry's
head. Diary!Riddle notes: "There are strange likenesses between us,
after all. Even you must have noticed. Both half-bloods, orphans,
raised by Muggles. Probably the only two Parselmouths to come to
Hogwarts since the great Slytherin himself.  We even look something
alike
". We learn that Harry is considered by many to be himself a
powerful Dark wizard, a possible replacement for Voldemort. We learn
that Voldemort has "put a bit of himself" in Harry without intending
it, we learn that there is a unique connection between their minds. In
OotP we have several scenes in which the narrator practically
describes Harry *as* Voldemort, not just seeing what Voldemort is
seeing, but actually feeling his emotions and even actively saying
words that are Voldemort's words and taking actions that are in fact
Voldemort's actions. 

Why does JKR invest so much in drawing all these parallels and
connections between the hero and evil overlord? In the context of the
Free Will theme the answer is obvious: if Harry and Voldemort are so
similar, then it is indeed only their opposite choices that make one
of them good and the other evil. This reminds me of a thought
experiment that is sometime presented in philosophy and Science
Fiction. Lets look at one example: "The Boys from Brazil" (TBFB)
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0077269/ is a 1978 movie by F. J.
Schaffner, based on a book (which I haven't read) by Ira Levin. Below
are spoilers for both the movie and the book, but I wouldn't let this
stop me: the movie at least is a rather standard seventies thriller
and IMHO mediocre at best. It really isn't worth the effort to locate
(which might not be easy anyway) and watch it. I mention it here
purely for its main plot assumption.

SPOILERS FOR "THE BOYS FROM BRAZIL" AHEAD

So, in TBFB, a nazi hunter is attempting to track down Josef Mengele,
the infamous doctor who had performed experiments on many human
victims in Auschwitz and escaped to South America after the war (note:
Dr. Mengele was a real person and had indeed escaped from trial after
the war, but his role in TBFB is completely fictional). The mystery
plot in the beginning of the movie is that Mengele appears to be
connected, for unknown reasons, with the murders of several men with
no common denominator, except that all of them have sons, boys at the
age of 13. Rather predictably it turns out (I believe most people will
see the solution to the mystery from about mile away) that Mengele is
attempting to clone Adolph Hitler. He had brought with him from
Germany cell cultures taken from Hitler's body, and had managed to
implant them in the wombs of several women who came to hospital for
fertility treatments. Now that his Hitler clones have reached 13
Mengle is attempting to recreate not only Nature, but also Nurture:
since the original Adolph Hitler had lost his father at the age of 13,
Mengele murders the fathers of his little Hitlers to be.

The power in the plot of TBFB is the thought experiment: if you
created a genetic clone of Hitler and further attempted to also
recreate his upbringing, would that clone have the Choice to become a
good person rather than an evil one? The weakness in TBFB is that it
does not attempt to address this question in any real way. We meet
only briefly with one of these boys and he indeed shows tendencies for
sadism, but we do not come to know him, and his fate (as that of the
other boys) is left open in the end. I think TBFB could have been much
more powerful if it was told from this boy's point of view, but that
would have taken some courage and ability, which the writers of TBFB
obviously didn't have. However, JKR might.

Of course, JKR is writing a fantasy series, not a Sci-Fi thriller, so
she wouldn't use genetic cloning, she'd use a magic plot mechanism
instead. Like having the boy share a part of the soul of the evil
overlord. The principle is the same:  it is a thought experiment in
which the boy shares the essence of the evil overlord. Now, can Free
Will trump Determinism? Is this boy compelled to become the next evil
overlord, or can he choose good? I don't see the point of JKR
investing so much in drawing all these parallels unless Harry has a
bit of Voldemort's soul in him, either as a Horcrux or as mere
possession (and I'm not sure JKR even sees a principle difference
between these two possibilities).  

Yes, yes, but what about Snape, some of you must be asking by now <g>.
If Free Will is the main theme of the series, then what is the role of
Snape's character in this theme? Well, in this obvious duality of the
two mirror images, Harry and Voldemort, the one who chose good and the
one who chose evil, Snape stands in the middle like a wild card,
always ambiguous, always refusing to take a side. For these structural
reasons I think Snape's character was created in order to represent
the attempt to refuse choice altogether, to enjoy the best of both
worlds, to play on both sides at once. In this way Snape being the
"double/triple/quadruple agent" isn't merely an act and a mystery to
be solved, but is in fact deeply thematic. It neatly symbolizes
Snape's refusal to choose once and for all between good and evil and
be accountable for this choice. 

Lets consider what Dumbledore reveals in HBP about Snape's history.
Snape was a DE who was assigned to spy on Dumbledore. I used to think
that realistically he must have committed some horrible crimes during
his career as a DE, but now I think that it may actually be more
thematic if, unlike Regulus, Snape had actually managed to get away
without the really nasty DE stuff. It appears that Voldemort always
had enough Crabs, Goyles and Bellas to do the torturing and killing,
but someone smart like Snape was too valuable to be wasted as a common
thug. So while Regulus was forced to choose, murder some innocent
victim or die himself, Snape had it easy for a while. His role
required him to maintain a convincing good guy cover, so whenever some
killing or torturing was on the menu he always had a handy excuse for
"slithering away from action on the Dark Lord's orders", as Bella
characterizes him in Spinner's End. He only dealt with information, he
passed it to his evil master and didn't have to think about what this
master was doing with it. He thought he could avoid facing the really
unpleasant consequences of his choices.

Well, he should have known that he wouldn't be able to get away with
it in a series that has Choice as its central theme. *Of course* one
of those impersonal pieces of information he was passing to his master
turned out, by a nice twist of fate, to have critical implications for
Snape personally. Dumbledore explains in HBP that Snape only went to
him when he found that Voldemort was specifically after the Potters.
He didn't care before that, when he thought it was about some people
he didn't know. This is a *huge* red flag with a central theme like
that. As I see it, Snape's character must be punished on page, *not*
for choosing evil (we have quite enough bad guys in the series for
that), but for thinking that he can avoid being accountable for the
consequences of this choice. This isn't something that I or JKR have
against Snape. I simply think this is his role in the theme, the
reason his character exists in the first place. Same as Harry was
created to be the boy who chose good and Tom was created to be the boy
who chose evil, Snape was created to be the one who refused to choose.

But throughout the first six books Snape isn't punished. On the
contrary, he reestablishes his old "double/triple/quadruple agent"
role that would enable him to come out on top whichever side wins,
hinting that he's still haven't learned his lesson and is still
applying his considerable intellect to avoid difficult choices with
consequences that must be faced. Only in the end of HBP, on the tower,
JKR nails Snape and finally forces him to go through "the Regulus
Dilemma" – kill an innocent victim with your own hands or die yourself
– which Snape has managed to avoid all these years, and with Draco's
choice to provide the dramatic contrast for Snape's opposite choice.
Snape was finally forced to pick a side, and in DH he will be forced
to face the full consequences of this choice. The way I see it, the
central theme of the series practically demands it. Therefore
LID!Snape theorizes that Snape went to Dumbledore before GH to avoid
the consequences of his Life Debt to James, that throughout the series
his game was attempting to end up on the winning side (whichever it
turns out to be) while ridding himself of his Debt, and that in DH he
will finally pay this Debt and face the full consequences.

There's of course also the strong canon support for both LID!Snape and
Horcrux!Harry. But mainly both these theories (in this or that
variation) are, IMO, so deeply thematic that I suspect they are
unavoidable.      


Neri