Sirius and Snape parallels again - Sirius' death (LONG)

[lizzyben04]

No: HPFGUIDX 185097

> > Pippin:

> > You see, Sirius doesn't think  it's asking too much to expect a 
> man to
> >  die for his friends. It's more like...a privilege. 
> 
> Leah: <snip>What Dumbledore is doing with Harry is morally repugant,
even 
> though it may be the only thing to do.  And Sirius is more attached 
> to Harry personally (or the James in Harry) than Snape is. I don't 
> actually see Sirius taking Harry off to Barbados, but I could see an 
> extremely difficult, noisy, unpleasant reaction for Dumbledore to 
> deal with, and I can see why that is not in his interests.
> 
> Leah

lizzyben:

I'm not sure if Sirius would take Harry to Barbados, but there would
be A Scene. In general, I agree that Sirius would think nothing of
risking *his own* life for a friend, but that is very different from
being willing to stand back in safety & watching someone he loves die.
That is passive, *cowardly* even. It goes against almost everything
Sirius is & believes. And that's not even taking into account the
manipulation & betrayal. Sirius is fine w/an adult making a *choice*
for ones friends, which is very very different from DD raising &
training Harry for death since infancy. That IS morally repugnant.
Even Snape thought so. And if Sirius found out, he would not be quiet
about it - possibly risking DD's standing in the Order & the entire
secrecy of The Plan. No, IMO Sirius was a very real danger & DD knew it.


Leah: 
I think DD didn't *set out* to imprison Sirius or anyone else. I think
we're back to
what is the immediate subconscious reponse to needing to keep
something secret. 
<snip>
It's interesting from this PoV to look at Dumbledore's words to
Draco on the Astronomy Tower: '"...no harm has been done, you have
hurt nobody, though you are very lucky [read 'I am fortunate to have
Severus']that your unintentional victims survived...I can help you,
Draco"'. Yes, Dumbledore's happy to overlook attempted murder,and
long-term grievous bodily harm inflicted on Katie Bell to get Draco
on side. I'm just wondering whether Dumbledore used similar words to
Sirius after the Prank, with an offer of Order membership.

And he's still doing it on the Tower. "Come over to the right
side, Draco, and we can hide you more completely than you can
possibly imagine". Be afraid, Draco, be very afraid. 

lizzyben:

LOL, "I have a lovely house in Godric's Hollow, you'll be quite
safe..." It seems like DD had some kind of blackmail against almost
every Order member, so maybe he did recruit Sirius that way. It
actually seems like Lily & James were the only ones who joined the
Order totally voluntarily. Although it is quite odd that DD appointed
James to be Head Boy! I agree that DD isn't plotting evil; it's mostly
that DD can't help but repeat the pattern wherever he goes. 

Pippin:
<SNIP>
I think JKR sees individuals as a lot less malleable than you do, and
therefore she sees Dumbledore's machinations, whatever they were, as
more foolish than dangerous. 


Lizzyben:
But the machinations actually *work*. We don't see Slughorn telling DD
to go to hell, we see him being manipulated into doing what DD wants.
If Harry actually knew DD's plan to use him as Slughorn-bait, he'd
probably say no thanks. But because DD doesn't tell him any reason for
the visit, Harry is malleable & able to be dragged along. Heck, DD's
whole purpose was to mold Harry into someone willing to die for
Hogwarts & DD, and in the end Harry did. We never see someone in canon
actually stand up to DD. So I don't see the lesson that people are not
malleable; instead more often we are shown how easy it is for DD to
manipulate & fool the people around him. I just can't agree. Authority
figures DO have an enormous amount of influence & power over people,
especially when they are able to conceal the truth from them. I just
can't see that as anything other than dangerous. But maybe JKR has a
different view. You do get the sense that she views DD's actions much
less harshly than many readers; the narrative often seems to side with
him; and in fact she has said that DD is a self-insert for herself,
which.. uh.. maybe she shouldn't say too much in public. That's where
there's the fundamental disconnect is for me; but maybe it is just a
value difference, as you say.

Alla:

Heh, I have a feeling that on this one I will be defending
Dumbledore, but again I am asking for clarification. Are you in
essence saying that Voldemort did not do anything that Dumbledore
would not want him to and all those killings and atrocities done by
DE and Voldemort is what Dumbledore wants to happen? I am not quite
sure if this is in jest or not (I know you said full foil tin on, but
I do not know what that word means), but if it is not in jest,
here I cannot agree. 

Lizzyben:

Sorry, "tin-foil hat" is a slang term for a really crazy conspiracy
theory. I was referring to the most paranoid, expansive possible view
of DD's machinations. But I don't really believe that DD was
controlling every move LV made. LV was indeed a terror in his first
incarnation. But IMO DD often did manipulate LV's side – through
leaks, baits & traps – in the same way he manipulated the Order. PS is
a perfect example of that. "Seven Potters" is another example of DD
manipulating both the Order & the Death Eaters into a confrontation.

And I don't think of DD cackling evilly at how he's fooled everyone; I
agree that he believes that he is doing what is best for the greater
good. But it's just that IMO he's so blinded by his own issues &
damage that he is NOT capable of deciding what that is. And I can't
help noticing how DD seems to, almost, feed off of & benefit from
these various Dark Wizards in an almost symbiotic fashion. How they
seem to satisfy many of DD's own needs – for power, for influence, for
adulation & glory & even for disposing of troublesome people.  I read
DD as basically a tyrant, w/ a need to control & exercise power.  He
won't let himself get power through the MOM, so it's almost like
subconsiously he finds covert ways of accumulating power. Without a
Dark Lord, he's just an old headmaster whose time has passed. W/a Dark
Lord, DD is adored & adulated as the "only one LV fears;" he gains
followers & minions to manipulate; & enormous power & influence. And
even more, he gets to create an idealized self-image as Leader of
Light, Epitome of Goodness, Protector of Children, almost a God, that
satisfies his ego & hides his own moral failures. I think DD kind of
likes having a LV around; and almost needs one. LV is DD's shadow;
which allows his light to shine all the brighter. 

Psychologically, I think DD is a malignant narcissist. Narcissists
have a need for "narcissistic supply" - which is attention, adulation,
worship, etc. They gain this adulation by creating a "false self" - an
idealized self-image as good, superior, grandiose, etc.; hiding away
the "true self" where even they are not aware of it. That's really
similar to DD's created image as the Epitome of Goodness; & the way he
seems to keep hiding away the shame of his true self (Muggle-hater,
damaged child, etc.) where no one can find it. It's all about DD in
the end; & the whole world is merely a stage for his psychodrama to
play out. In that sense, yes, I do think that DD has an interest in
sustaining & even creating a LV.

There's a definite Gothic twinge to DD's story. And Gothic literature
often employs this concept of a monstrous double – a double who acts
out  the suppressed wishes of the other person. Like Jekyll & Hyde,
Frankenstein & Frankenstein's. Monster, etc. So perhaps LV is
ultimately DD's "monstrous double" who allowed him to gather the power
& control he would not allow himself. And the two remain united even
after death; DD's idealized 'false self' clothed in stars like a God,
LV's 'true self' stunted & hidden under a chair. That visual image is
almost the perfect metaphor for what DD has been doing all along. It's
all so very very weird & I don't think I'm explaining it right. 

Sorry, but I think a clinical definition of narcissism would be
helpful here: 

1. An exaggerated sense of self-importance 
Translation: Grandiosity is the hallmark of narcissism.
- DD's grandiose plans; exaggerated self-importance, etc. are pretty
obvious throughout. Claiming that he had sole care of Ariana is
another example. 

2. Preoccupation with fantasies of unlimited success, power,
brilliance, beauty, or ideal love
Translation: Narcissists cultivate solipsistic or "autistic"
fantasies, which is to say that they live in their own little worlds
(and react with affront when reality dares to intrude).

- Aberforth says DD spent all his time in his room, communicating
w/"great wizards". DD himself confesses that he was obsessed
w/becoming great, powerful, famous, etc. 

3. Believes he is "special" and can only be understood by, or should
associate with, other special or high-status people (or institutions)
Translation: Narcissists think that everyone who is not special and
superior is worthless. By definition, normal, ordinary, and average
aren't special and superior, and so, to narcissists, they are worthless.
- That explains a lot of DD's attitude toward his followers & people
in general. First he thought he should rule over Muggles; later he
manipulates & controls his followers as his inferiors. Only
Grindelwald is a true equal. 

4. Requires excessive admiration
- OK, this is where this comes in. If DD is a narcissist, he actually
needs to be admired, adored, loved by people around him. That's his
narcisistic supply. And that's why he needs the image as a Good
leader, whom the entire wizarding world adores. LV allows DD to gain
the admiration, glory, & power he secretly craves.

5. Has a sense of entitlement
- Felt entitled to greatness; resented his family slowing him down.

6. Selfishly takes advantage of others to achieve his own ends
Translation: Narcissists use other people to get what they want
without caring about the cost to the other people.
- No explanation needed? 

7. Lacks empathy
This is the biggie. DD truly seems not only unwilling, but unable to
understand what other people are going through. That's why he was so
cold to Snape & Harry while they were grieving, so willing to raise
Harry for slaughter, so casually able to endanger & even kill other
Order members. He just doesn't care.

http://www.halcyon.com/jmashmun/npd/dsm-iv.html


 So DD manages the Order to get the admiration & adoration he craves.
As others have pointed out, the Order acts mostly like a personality
cult around DD & DD values personal loyalty to Him most highly. He
doesn't value human life because he sees them all as inferior to him.
In a wider sense, he lets crises develop because that increases
people's fear, malleability, & need for DD's authority (like the
Basilik, LV's rise, etc.) DD creates the problem for which he is the
only cure – reaping the power, adulation & control that comes to him
as a result. So in that way, yes, I do see DD moving both the black &
white pieces for his own self-aggrandizement.


lizzyben

> Alla:
> 
> Okay now I am confused. I told Pippin that I really like her point, I
> do not believe Dumbledore would have been allowed to kill and keep
> Elder wand, however are you saying that it only works literally? So
> if Dumbledore used wandless spell he would have still been allowed to
> keep it.


lizzyben: 

Oh, God, I can't keep the Elder Wand rules straight. But if the Elder
Wand could not be used to *kill*, this scenario would allow DD to
dispose of Sirius w/o using a lethal spell. Immobilization spells do
not kill or even harm on their own - if DD could cast them at the
Death Eaters w/o problems, IMO he could certainly cast one at Sirius
as well.