Dh reread CH 23

[Carol]

No: HPFGUIDX 186904

Alla quoted:
>
> "Stan Shunpike," said Ron.
> "Like "ell you are," said the man called Scabior. "We know Stan Shunpike, "e"s put a bit of work our way" - p.363
> 
> Alla:
> 
> What does put a bit of work our way means here? He worked for us? Or against us? Or something different? Because this could be an answer i Stan really was a DE, no?

Carol responds:
I think that "put a bit of work our way" means that he's an informant like Runcorn at the MoM except on a lower level (reporting to Snatchers rather than to MoM officials). He would probably provide information on runaway Muggle-borns or anyone else that the Snatchers could get a reward for turning in. (What Stan's reward would be is unclear; I suppose that's his job as a junior DE, perhaps without the Dark Mark.) I'm only guessing, but that's what it sounds like to me. However, we still don't know whether he joined willingly or was Imperiused, which could have happened during the second breakout from Azkaban. (We see Pius Thicknesse in league with the DEs throughout DH, but we know that he was under the Imperius Curse. Stan could have been manipulated in much the same way on a smaller scale. I only hope that Thicknesse doesn't receive the same sort of sentence as any DEs that survived the battle. Some sort of restitution would be more appropriate than a prison sentence, IMO. And ditto for Stan--if he was Imperiused.)
> 
Alla quoting: 
> "... window was the merest slit in the black rock, not big enough for a man to enter ... a skeletal figure was just visible through it, curled beneath a blanket... dead or sleeping...?" - p.368
> 
> "... the emaciated figure stirred beneath its thin blanket and rolled over towards him, eyes opening  in a skull of a face... the frail man sat up, great sunken eyes fixed upon him, upon Voldemort, and then he smiled. Most of his teeth were gone...
> 'So, you have come. I thought you would... one day. But your journey was pointless. I never had it." - p.369
> 
Alla:
> 
> You know what? When JKR wants, she can make me pity ANYBODY. I do feel sorry for Grindelwald here, no matter what crimes he committed. Spending a life time in such horrible conditions only to see the monster whom he basically become to come kill him?
> Yeah despite his crimes I do pity him and really hope for forgiveness for him in afterlife.

Carol responds:
I have mixed feelings about Grindelwald. Yes, he seems to have felt remorse for his crimes, and he has unquestionable courage. I admire the way he, a dying, toothless old man, fearlessly confronts Voldemort, taunting him with his lack of knowledge and lying to him. (He also seems to have anticipated that the johnny-come-lately Dark Lord would eventually want the Elder Wand; he knows exactly why Voldie has decided to visit him.) He was always brilliant and merry, with a mischievous streak, and we see that even here.

But, then there are all those crimes, murder, torture, imprisonment of innocent people, and whatever else he did, probably on a larger scale than Voldemort because he was actually in power and wasn't sidetracked by Horcrux-making and fear of death. I do think that, given the opportunity, he would have tried to atone for his crimes by some means other than his own suffering in prison, but how can you make restitution for so many horrendous acts? If it had been "only" the torture of Ariana and Aberforth and he had taken responsibility for Ariana's death, doing nothing more wrong and helping Dumbledore to prevent Voldemort's rise to power when he got out of prison, it would have been different. But to pile on all those crimes afterward with no restitution other than fifty years in prison? Does the prison sentence count as a kind of Purgatory to purge his sins and crimes? I can't help contrasting him with Snape, whose sins were so much smaller and who spent most of his adult life atoning for them by protecting Harry and risking his life to undermine Voldemort. Do they deserve the same fate in the afterlife? I don't think so.

I don't think, of course, that Grindelwald deserves a fate like Voldemort's (which he wouldn't have, anyway, because however battered his soul might be by all those murders, he never split it by making Horcruxes), but I can't imagine him just wandering around free, his wounds healed as Dumbledore's hand is healed, and being happy and loved in the afterlife. Or maybe his wounds could be healed, but he could spend a few hundred years reliving his crimes so that he would really feel the painful remorse that Voldemort would have to feel for his soul to come back together--assuming that the soul bits hadn't been destroyed?

I agree with you--Grindelwald is a sympathetic figure here, especially in contrast to Voldemort. But is fifty years in prison sufficient to atone for his crimes? Unlike Snape, whose crimes are so much smaller, he's made no active restitution, no contribution to the safety and welfare of Wizarding society. I don't know what to feel about him, and I feel strange and guilty for liking him, not only in this scene but in all the other scenes in which he appears. I see why he was so attractive to Dumbledore. There's something wild and fearless and rebellious about him, as well as brilliant and cheerful under the greatest adversity.

Alla: 
> That also makes me think that the lack of ANY sympathy for Voldemort at the end, baby looking or not, was very deliberate artistic choice, because I have no doubt that her skills are strong enough to manage it.

Carol:
I agree. It takes great skill to make a babylike creature terrifying and revolting, and she does it twice.

Alla: 
> Mind you, I am **not** saying that she should have made me feel compassion for Voldemort, I am just wondering over my reactions.

Carol:
So am I. My own reactions, I mean. :-)

Alla quoting: 
> "Harry saw Draco's face up close, now, right besides his father's. They were extraordinary alike, exceptr that while his father looked beside himself with excitement, Draco's expression was  full of reluctance even fear" - p.372
> 
> Alla:
> 
> I am rereading this scene and oh wonders of wonders I am willing to go easier on Draco here. He so so does not want to IMO to do any identification and his lovely parents practically force him. Oh hero he is not, but I really do not think that since he has a strength to reject loving parents, I really do not think that more can be expected of him.

Carol:
I agree. The contrast between Draco's father's face and his own, both seen close up, so alike in their features and so different in their expressions, is a very deliberate and very effective strategy, both from Harry's standpoint (I'm sure that this memory goes into his unconscious mind along with Draco's slight lowering of his wand on the tower) and the reader's. Lucius, even wandless, is still the quintessential Death Eater (not psychotic like Bellatrix but very self-interested, wanting his old position of power back even after all that Voldemort has done to him). Draco, OTOH, is torn between terror for himself and his family and reluctance to turn Harry and his friends over to torture and death, just as he was reluctant to Crucio Thorfinn Rowle and unable to kill Dumbledore. Weak Draco certainly is, but he doesn't have the makings of a Death Eater, in marked contrast to his father. I agree that we can't expect any more of him. He's neither hero nor villain, only a teenager who's found out the hard way that being a DE is anything but glorious.

Alla: 
> But boy I hate both Malfoys here. Narcissa is soooo eager, sorry I am not buying anything less but self serving reasons for refusing to say that Harry is alive at the end.

Carol:
Funny; I don't have any strong feelings toward the Malfoys at all. (Bellatrix is another matter.) I see them (I think!) completely objectively, or at least feel nothing stronger than contempt. I agree that Lucius is acting from pure self-interest, and it's also clear that his views haven't changed at all. He's still perfectly willing to follow the DE agenda, to summon Voldemort so he can kill Harry, which will, he thinks, restore him to his old prestige. (Maybe he'll even get a new wand!) There's no change in his views of "Mudbloods" and "blood traitors," either. Voldemort's mistreatment and humiliation of the Malfoys hasn't yet reached the point where Lucius will cease to be loyal as long as there's still the chance that loyalty will be rewarded.

His eagerness is an interesting contrast to Narcissa's coldness. Her views on Pure-blood superiority clearly haven't changed, either, and she, too, is perfectly willing to hand Harry and his friends over to Voldemort as long as its in her family's interest to do so. But I don't think at this point she feels any personal loyalty to Voldemort, who has, to say the least, abused her family's hospitality (and is about to do worse). Her primary concern, in contrast to Lucius, is Draco. Voldemort's agenda comes second. For her, I think, obedience to Voldemort is a practical necessity, not a matter of personal loyalty, but she has no more sympathy or empathy for Harry and his friends than her husband does.

Both of them are different from Bellatrix, who is insanely devoted to Voldemort, but even she is concerned about self-preservation. She knows that his wrath will be boundless if it turns out that her vault has been broken into--even worse than it is when Harry Potter escapes yet again!

Alla: 
> And really, soooo many psychopaths in Voldie's employ - Greyback, Bella, one better than another.

Carol:
You meant "one no better than another," right? Bellatrix certainly holds Greyback in contempt, and she's more than a match for him and his Snatchers, but in terms of being a psychopath, you're right--it's hard to tell who's worse, him or her.

I can't think of any other DEs that I'd consider psychopaths, though. How would a psychiatrist classify someone like Lucius Malfoy, who seems to be perfectly sane, following his own self-interested Pure-Blood supremacy agenda, coldly Imperiusing people, manipulating and threatening and bribing to get his way? It's hard to say how many actual crimes he's committed, aside from the Imperius Curse and leading the DoM break-in, but he wouldn't have been above killing and torturing teenagers to get the Prophecy orb, and he abused his House-Elf severely. Is he a psychopath, a sociopath, or just a petty tyrant, ruthless and amoral and self-interested, who would have been quite at home as a baron in the court of William I?

Anyway, I think that Narcissa's main priority is already Draco at this point; Lucius's is still himself. Only after they're punished first for letting Harry get away and then nearly killed for hearing about the stolen cup does Lucius finally realize what Draco has already learned; this Dark Wizard is not worth their loyalty and family is more important. As for Narcissa, I think her "self-serving" reason for lying to Voldemort at the end is the same one that led her to go to Snape for help in HBP: her love for her only son and her fear for her safety, which overrides any loyalty to the Dark Lord even before he abuses them and especially afterward. She could have told the truth and perhaps been rewarded, but she had ceased to care one way or another about Harry Potter or Voldemort. All that mattered to her was getting to her son. Of course, she carefully avoids looking at LV to avoid being detected, but her courage is nonetheless greater than Xenophilius Lovegood's in a similar situation. (Which is not to say that I don't sympathize with Xeno; I do.)

Carol, who likes Alla's selection of quotations here, especially the last two, both of which are masterful character sketches in miniature (no doubt *intended* as such by the author but left for the reader to interpret)