Suspension of disbelief - Being dependent

[pippin_999]

No: HPFGUIDX 182498

> > >>Pippin:
> > I agree, Voldemort should have been stopped when he was a real baby,
> > not a stunted imitation of one. But that would have taken a world   
> > that pays far more attention to the fate of its children than the   
> > WW -- or ours.
> > <snip>
> 
> Betsy Hp:
> Actually, the Muggle world *did* recognize something wasn't right 
> about young Tom Riddle.  

Pippin:
*Tom* knew there was something not right about him. But he's not the
Muggle world. Mrs. Cole suspected there was something wrong but knew
of nothing that would cause the Muggle world to take action. If there
had been an asylum that would take Tom, she'd have sent him there --
she was not sorry to be rid of him.

But I was thinking of the handsome infant who could be ignored because
he scarcely cried and (one presumes) did not respond to cuddles. That
should have been a warning sign, if anyone was paying attention.

Betsy HP:
 Voldemort certainly puts  little effort into it.  I think one guy
gets Imperioused and another  gets killed, and Bob's your Uncle, he's
running the show?  Really?   Just like that?

Pippin:
The mass breakout from Azkaban and subsequent coverup mentioned in DH
could not have happened unless  Pius Thicknesse was just the tip of
the iceberg. There had to have been massive subversion in the Ministry
spreading in secret all the time since Voldemort returned. 

It's like  docking the Queen Mary -- by the time it's obvious that
you're going to hit the pier, it's too late to change course. The laws
of rule and order *were* working, but Voldemort made them work for him. 

Just as Dumbledore was recruiting people to help the Order, Voldemort
was working to get them on his side -- and like Dumbledore, doing a
good job of covering his tracks despite other obsessions. But Voldie
had a weapon that Dumbledore refused to use. 

It is demonstrated in canon that most people, even skilled Aurors, can
fall prey to Imperius. Gryffindors are  as susceptible as anyone else.
Just as you don't need applied physiology to torture if you can use
the Cruciatus curse, you don't need applied psychology to persuade if
you can use Imperius. It's only "handwaving" if you don't believe that
mob psychology can do what the Imperius does: make people do terrible
things without being able to stop themselves.

> 
> > >>Betsy Hp: 
> > > Yes, I was talking about Harry having that horrible moment when   
> > > you realize your preconceived notions are wrong.  
> 
> > >>Pippin:
> > Why should that be horrible?
> 
> Betsy Hp:
> Generally people don't like realizing they've been an ass. 

Pippin:
Generally people like to realize they've become wiser. It's all in how
you look at it. <g>

> Betsy Hp:
> Yes, and (as I see it anyway) you may childishly refuse to take any 
> responsibility for your own actions. 

Pippin:
Yep, that's what Snape is afraid of. He doesn't think anyone's really
been made responsible until they've been humiliated. Not, of course,
that he wants anyone to know what *he's* done. <g> But it never works
on Harry  -- he felt much more responsible for what he'd done to
Draco *before* Snape tried to make him feel bad about it.  

I think JKR's position is that basic morality is innate. Unless a
person is very damaged he will want to do things correctly (as he's
been taught to perceive correctness), he will feel responsible for the
pain he perceives he has caused and he will want things to be fair. If
that basic moral circuitry is not in place, you're not going to fix it
by making people feel bad about themselves. 

If it is in place, and not lost to enchantments or psychological
manipulation, then people will know what they should do, though they 
may feel too angry or helpless or frightened to do it. 

But wait, there's more <g>

*Enlightenment* -- understanding that in hurting anyone you hurt
yourself, in robbing anyone you rob yourself--  that's something more
than the basic moral understanding that most of us are born with (as
canon sees it)

-- that's a choice. And therefore it can't be forced on anyone. 

Enlightenment, as we see, carries with it the danger of
enlightenment bias, and like any other bias, it can be manipulated to
make people do terrible things. Canon suggests one should be alert to
this, but that  it is still better to be enlightened and biased
against the unenlightened than the other way around. YMMV.

Pippin