Voldemort's Rationality / The Taboo and the Trace

[Mike]

No: HPFGUIDX 184216

> And SSSusan replied in 
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/184124>:
> 
> He's [Voldy] IRRATIONAL. He's always been someone who frightens
> even his closest followers, but I wonder if even they had always
> believed that he really would do – or even if Voldy always *would*
> have done – something like he did when he got the news about the
> cup and started AKing everyone in sight. 

Mike:
Doesn't it make you wonder if we should call the Death Eaters 
"followers" any more? I mean since his return in GoF. The DEs 
themselves seem to sense that things are different this time. 
Though they all still want that title of "Most Trusted", there 
seems to be an air of 'don't screw up' rather than 'what can I 
do to impress the boss', about the DEs now. Not counting Bella,
she's definitely an aberration in every sense of the word.

Not that some of them aren't looking to do the right thing in 
Voldemort's eyes. But it seems to come more from a fear of being 
punished if they don't, than the expectation of reward if they do. 
IMO, Voldemort set the tone in GoF when he said he "I confess 
myself disappointed", and when he told Avery while Crucio-ing him 
that he wanted "thirteen years' repayment" before he forgives 
them. I don't think by DH he or his DEs think he's gotten that 
thirteen years worth back, yet.



> Catlady wrote:
> 
> I agree that killing one's followers because of a temper tantrum
> is not an effective technique for having a large number of
> followers or deeply loyal followers. - <snip>

Mike:
The only response that comes to mind is to say, 'Ya think?'


> Catlady continued:
> But I think it was part of Voldy's personality at least since
> he turned into a snake-man. Tom may have been equally eager to
> massacre, but he used self-control for the sake of
> self-preservation. 

Mike:
I think having Tom kill his father and grandparents in the summer 
after his fifth year was meant to show us that murder was always 
considered a viable option for this character. So yeah, Rita, 
Voldemort would not have advertised this option when he was still in 
his recruitment stage. 

Once in, I'm sure all the DEs were aware of this codicil in their DE 
contract. They knew that death was a possibility for treason, or just 
plain screwing up too badly. And they wouldn't be warning off any 
potential recruits, either. There's safety in numbers.



> Catlady wrote:
> BTW Diary!Tom's quote is 'a name I knew wizards everywhere would
> one day fear to speak'. And only Britain (and maybe Ireland) knew
> of him, but 'feared to speak' was literal. I don't know if that
> is because LV and all other wizards and possibly Rowling have a
> habit of not saying the name of what they fear. Maybe not - maybe
> it is because LV himself took steps during his first reign of
> terror to make people fear to say his name, by punishsing some of
> the ones who did. He could had had the same Taboo in the first
> Voldie War as he did in the second, and sent DEs to respond to
> the Taboo's signal by massacring the people who said it. If so,
> it was remarkably stupid of Dumbledore if he didn't know there
> was a Taboo. If he did know, it was remarkably stupid of him to
> encourage the Order members not to fear saying the name.

Mike:
I know that JKR said in an interview that she remembered the 
superstition about speaking the Kray Brothers names from back when 
they were the notorious serial murderers. Whether she wanted to 
convey that same kind of superstition in the WW about 'Voldemort', is 
anyones' guess. I think the idea about the "Taboo" came later, but it 
fit in nicely with what she had set up earlier with his name.

I also don't think that Voldemort could have set up the Taboo in the 
first war. I have no canon for backing me up, but I think things like 
the Hogwarts Quill, the Trace and the Taboo - magic that applies 
universally over all of Britain and has this 'all seeing' sort of 
quality - could only be established by a governing body like the 
Ministry of Magic. 

I liken it to a powerful radio transmitter with a two-way feature to 
it. There has to be some sort of base station from which to receive 
this kind of magic, and then made interactive to inform the listeners 
of the location and the offence. Since Voldemort had never taken 
control of the MoM in VW1, he couldn't have set up this kind of 
magical base station without it being detected by the Ministry, 
giving itself away. That's just the way I read it, YMMV.

Which brings me to the Trace. I don't understand why JKR couldn't 
have introduced this term earlier in the series. She showed the 
results of it as early as CoS with Dobby and the cream pudding. 
Dumbledore somewhat explained it in HBP. And yet Harry was still 
oblivious to the term until DH? I don't get it. Does anyone think the 
use of this term or explaining the magic earlier would have given 
away something too soon? Was there some advantage to the plot/story-
line that necessitated holding this term back?

Mike