Chapter 27 Discussion / Why LV is bad / How TMR found the CoS / Cup Soul Bit

[pippin_999]

No: HPFGUIDX 184172

> Carol replied in 
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/184126>:
> 
> << dittany, a substance whose powers have been considerably enhanced
> since HBP >>

Catlady: 
rushed> Did I ever mention how much it annoyed me that dittany, which is a
> real herb and in HBP served only to prevent scars once a wound had
> been closed up by other means, in DH suddenly turned into a miracle
> cure-all for any wound?

Pippin:
How could it prevent scarring except by causing skin to regrow, which
is what it does here? 

This gives me the opportunity to remark that although the narrator
made it sound as if our heroes were about to be crushed, smothered and
burned to death by the replicating treasure, their actual wounds were
superficial. "Angry red burns" are first degree burns, not that
serious. No charred flesh, nor so much as singed eyebrows, IIRC,
though their clothing suffers. 

Even Griphook, buried up to his fingertips, was only blistered. I
think the enchantments were designed to panic and immobilize the
victims, not kill them. Like Voldemort, the goblins would want to
question any intruder who got so far inside their defenses. 

I think Griphook knew about the enchantments, and  expected that if he
kept his head, he'd get a chance to seize the sword from the Trio and
flee the vault before they could stop him. He could then claim that
his burns had shocked him out of the Imperius curse that the Trio had
put on him. 

I think he took it for granted that the notorious Harry Potter, AKA
Undesirable Number One, would be proficient at the Imperius curse. He
wouldn't mention that to Harry, since he wouldn't want Harry to get
any  ideas about actually using Imperius on *him.*  

If so, this was was nearly the undoing of his plan. IMO, he expected
to get as far  as the vault before setting off any alarms or
encountering the Thieves Downfall, which he says is activated only
when intruders are suspected. Of course the bank would not routinely
dump water on its oldest and most respected customers!

Catlady:

> Jen wrote in Chapter 27 summary in 
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/184119>:
> 
> << and for hearing about the golden cup. >>
> 
> If the killings had been a secrecy measure rather than a temper
> tantrum, he would have killed the escapees even after he calmed down.

Pippin:
It isn't his secrets he's protecting, IMO, but his pride. He wants to
erase the shame of being robbed. Once he calmed down, he would
remember that only Bella knew the cup was his. But the anger, IMO, is
part of his new personality, the one imposed on him by the blood
magic. He did not used to kill in anger, because he did not used to
feel shame. He killed when it was strategically necessary, or, as in
Lily's case, to simplify. 


Catlady:
> The authorial voice agrees with you, but it seems to me that
Voldemort greatest desire is not to live forever, but to hurt and kill
people,

Pippin:
Voldemort leaves the large-scale killing and hurting to others when he
goes in search of the Elder Wand, which, according to Ollivander, he
wants not only because he thinks it will kill Harry but because it
will make him invincible. 

Here's what Jo had to say about the taboo on Voldemort's name:

http://www.accio-quote.org/articles/2005/0705-tlc_muggleneet-anelli-2.htm


What prompted people to start referring to Voldemort as You-Know-Who
and He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named?

JKR: It happens many times in history — well, you'll know this because
you're that kind of people, but for those who don't, having a taboo on
a name is quite common in certain civilizations. In Africa there are
tribes where the name is never used. Your name is a sacred part of
yourself and you are referred to as the son of so-and-so, the brother
of so-and-so, and you're given these pseudonyms, because your name is
something that can be used magically against you if it's known. It's
like a part of your soul. That's a powerful taboo in many cultures and
across many folklores. On a more prosaic note, in the 1950s in London
there were a pair of gangsters called the Kray Twins. The story goes
that people didn't speak the name Kray. You just didn't mention it.
You didn't talk about them, because retribution was so brutal and
bloody. I think this is an impressive demonstration of strength, that
you can convince someone not to use your name. Impressive in the sense
that demonstrates how deep the level of fear is that you can inspire.
It's not something to be admired.

ES: I meant, was there a specific event?

JKR: With Voldemort? It was gradual. He was killing and doing some
pretty evil things. In the chapter "Lord Voldemort's Request," when he
comes back to request that teaching post in book six, you get a real
sense that he's already gone quite a long way into the dark arts. By
that time a lot of people would be choosing not to use his name.
During that time his name was never used except by Dumbledore and
people who were above the superstition.

Pippin;
I think that Jo is saying it was a superstition during the first
Voldemort war. That fits with Lupin not being able to figure out what
Harry might have done to bring the Death Eaters on them in DH. 

It took me a while to see what Jo was getting at. It's not about being
superstitious or not superstitious. It's about keeping an open mind.
Just because something was believed as a superstition in the past
doesn't mean it couldn't ever be true. 

Catlady:
> I believe that Tom M. Riddle / Lord Voldemort was bad because he was
> born bad. I believe he was born with a specific defect in his brain
> that made him a psychopath, unable to feel any concern (never mind
> love!) for other people and thus coming to believe that all
> expressions of concern he saw other people doing were a big fake,
> which he also learned to fake.

Pippin:
I believe we don't know what causes people to become psychopaths, or
what causes some psychopaths to become murderers. Riddle's own name
suggests that Rowling intended to leave this a mystery, as it is in
real life. Even if psychopaths are born with a defect, we don't know
whether it is genetic or caused by the prenatal environment, which
surely wasn't ideal either in Tom or his uncle Morfin.

My understanding is that psychopaths do understand that most people
feel concern for others. Psychopaths know that other people feel,
their mirror neurons work.  But they don't *care*. Voldemort certainly
understands that Harry's concern for Sirius and Ginny is real and he
understands how Ginny and Hepzibah suffer from their loneliness. But
he doesn't want to *be* the friend they need, he just wants to profit
from their trust. 

Children are an underclass in every society, and orphans are an
underclass of children -- there was plenty for
Voldemort to feel  resentful about before he came to
Hogwarts. Then he discovered that far from being accepted as the
superior being he believes he is, he's in an underclass *again*.
Naturally the world must pay for its disrespect.

Catlady: 
> Either way, it kind of conflicts with the Potter ouevre's alleged
> moral that people have a choice of doing good or evil. 

Pippin:
How do you see  being unable to feel remorse or connection to others
as forcing Voldemort to become a murderer? Voldemort gained nothing by
killing that he could not have achieved by other means, except the
pleasure of killing itself, and he could have got that by killing
animals, as his uncle Morfin did. 

Catlady: 
> Asking Voldemort to repent or feel remorse was asking him to do
> something he was physically unable to do. Rowling's excuse is that
the drop of Harry's blood inside Voldemort mystically gave Voldemort
the ability to repent.

Pippin:
How do we know it wouldn't? The real moral of the Potterverse, IMO, is
that in the absence of facts, it's difficult to keep an open mind, but
 one should strive to do it. Voldemort is defeated because he won't
open his mind to the possibility that Snape betrayed him, that he is
not the master of the wand, that death is not the end of pain, that he
might, if he looked for it, discover that he has gained the capacity
to feel remorse as he gained the capacity to feel shame.

In any case, how would Harry know that remorse was not possible? Think
of all the impossible things that Harry had done in the previous 24
hours. He escaped from Gringotts, rode a dragon, broke into Hogwarts,
recovered the lost diadem of Ravenclaw, became master of all three
hallows, spoke with the dead,  survived the Avada Kedavra curse for
the second time, visited the next world...am I forgetting anything? 

Who is Harry to say what can or cannot be done? Who are any of us?

Pippin