Suspension of disbelief - Being dependent

[sistermagpie]

No: HPFGUIDX 182488

> bboyminn:

> Take Hitler for example, Hitler was a dork, why should we be
> scared of him, or consider him evil, he probably personally
> kill or tortured very few people. Yet, countless people were
> killed and tortured by his order, and that is what makes him
> scary and evil. Hitler was a great orator, charismatic and
> clever. He excelled at getting people to willingly do his
> bidding, even when his bidding was the most evil and illogical
> of things. 

Magpie:
Voldemort was none of these things. Hitler was loved by a nation and 
books have been understandably written about his "willing 
executioners." In canon we get some examples of Pureblood Supremacy 
outside of Voldemort. But Voldemort is supposed to be feared and 
hated by everybody while having a group of thug followers who are 
already up for doing evil and illogical things. He doesn't have the 
WW on his side and helping him do stuff, most of them hate him 
without getting it together and using their super powers to stop him.

Steve: 
> Hitler, like all dictators, displayed a personal ruthlessness 
> that intimidated people. You felt that if you did not do his 
> bidding, the cost would be extremely high, higher than any 
> living person would dare to pay. So, Hitler only had to 
> personally kill, maim, or torture a very few people, just enough
> to convince anyone who considered opposing him, that the penalty
> would be sure, swift, and cruel.

Magpie:
Voldemort's followers are desperate to not make him angry, but 
Arthur Weasley isn't supposed to be doing his bidding because he 
thinks the cost of rebellion is extremely high, so high that any 
living person would never pay it. (Why did Sirius claim 
Peter "Should have died!" if this is the case? Why is this exact 
kind of behavior so looked down on by most of our characters?) As a 
reader I don't believe it at all. Why should I? I've seen that 
Voldemort is vulnerable.

People DID, by contrast, refuse to do Hitler's bidding. Many more 
people were very eager to do his bidding than were eager to do 
Voldemort's

Steve:
> The same is true of Voldemort, he is a great orator; powerfully
> charismatic, and intimidatingly ruthless. He can tell people 
> what they want to hear, twist that message to his own agenda, 
> and convince people to do evil and despicable things in his name
> and in the name of their seemly common agenda.

Magpie:
No he isn't. He makes dramatic (and overdramatic) speeches for his 
DEs in between crucioing them, but he does not whip crowds into the 
kind of frenzy Hitler did. He's not known for being a great orator 
or even charismatic to most people. He was charismatic as a student 
but not as Voldemort. The DEs don't represent the WW at large. I 
forget how Dumbledore describes them, but he accurately points out 
the kind of people who were attracted to Death Eating. 


Steve:

> That is analogous to the DE's and Voldemort, it is not that
> they can curse you, it is that they will. 

Magpie:
So will a lot of people in the WW, including those on the good side. 

Steve:
When they are 
> around, you must walk on eggshells. You must tread every so
> lightly and delicately because at the most minor and 
> insignificant provocation, they won't hesitate to curse and 
> possible kill you and everyone associated with you. That
> creates a paralyzing atmosphere of fear and inaction, just
> as it does in the real world. 

Magpie:
This does describe how Death Eaters act around Voldemort. But should 
the entire country keep walking on eggshells because this one guy--
or even a group of them--have such terrible tempers? That doesn't at 
all line up with the personalities the good guys claim to have. 
Gryffindor, the house of the brave, isn't it? The more snarly 
Voldemort got the more eager to whup his ass I'd imagine a lot of 
them would get. 

Steve: 
> We do see Voldemort kill a sufficient number of people to 
> indicate that he is both dangerous and evil. But more evil
> is, either through persuasion or intimidation or magical
> coercion, his ability to get evil things done in his name.

Magpie:
People don't by in large do evil in Voldemort's name. He attracts 
people who also like to do evil--the DEs, Dolores Umbridge takes 
well to the task of ridding the world of Muggleborns, for instance--
she's an example of somebody who obviously liked this sort of thing 
anyway. But the WW at large is not doing evil in his name. He hasn't 
inspired the WW in general and it doesn't believe he's right. He 
only inspires his thugs and scares everyone else.

In the case of real dictators people can study what made them work, 
though, and I think it's usually complicated. It's not just the 
personality of the person but the society itself, the time period, 
etc. With Voldemort we don't have to ask how he got people to do 
evil things, because mostly he didn't. It's only his DEs that are 
acting out his agenda, and sympathizers like Mrs. Black and 
Umbridge, but they weren't warped by Voldemort. He didn't corrupt 
rational men, he attracted the irrational and the rational didn't 
mount much of a defense, even while being presented as if they 
should. Because of they were all really just folding out of fear, 
they'd all be Peter Pettigrew. Intead they're more like maybe the 
English bravely surviving through the blitz, only without doing much 
else.

-m