In Harry Potter Voldemort seems some how beyond human. After all, it isn't even up till the 4th book we see Vodemort in a human form. He is introduced with out a body of his own in the 1st book. It isn't even till the 6th book we see his distant past. You know, like when he had a nose. Is this because he isn't supposed to be human? He is just a general symbol of all evil, racist and corrupt in the world or a talented boy who was misguided? I thought it was that he was the later but I think he is more of a symbol. Very few people on earth are just that overall bad. Voldemort symbolizes and magnifies all this evil.
Voldemort is purely evil because he can't love. Dumbledore often criticized Voldemort for not being able to love. He was never loved, so he could never comprehend any power beyond actual power over others. Then again, you could say that this lack of love in such a twisted, yet gifted child was why he couldn't comprehend love and became a monster. Evil is the lack of any love or sympathy to make someone do truly incomprehensible acts of unkindness. Most people have love, either have been loved or loved someone or loved even something, so we wouldn't do the things Voldemort does.
He is also evil because of his fear of death. This fear is caused by his lack of love. In "Deathly Hallows" chapter 32 Voldemort says "Potter will come to me. I
know his weakness, you see, his one great flaw. He will hate watching
the others struck down around him, knowing that it is for him that it
happens. He will stop it at any cost." He doesn't understand why there are people Harry would die for. He fears death more than anything. With out love he never had anyone he would die for, making his own death the worst thing imaginable rather than fearing living with out someone.
J.K Rowling shows he is evil through the Horcruxs. He has split his soul so many times he has gone insane. Every person has the ability to love but he has split up his soul and whatever love was in him got torn apart while spliting his soul. Much like how a broken heart can leave some one love sick, a broken soul leaves Voldemort's ability to love completely dead.
In a way Voldemort is similar to Snape. Snape sort of helped Voldemort
in his way, they both were in Slytherin and they both were odd children
who hated their muggle-side of their family. Snape however loved Lily
and that kept him for becoming power-hungry and emotionless like Voldemort. Voldemort never was so close to anyone because he viewed it as weak. Snape knew Lily was so important to him that saving Lily's son was more important than surviving. Why live forever with no point? Voldemort didn't see this. His only goal was to live, who cares if there is a point?
In the end, whether Voldemort is total evil, or talent gone wrong, he is a warning. Give people a chance, learn to love them. If no one does they can become dangerous. We need to love others or else the only life we will cherish is our own, causing us to protect it to the point of our own destruction. In a way Voldemort is similar to Snape. Snape sort of helped Voldemort in his way, they both were in Slytherin and they both were odd children who hated their muggle-side of their family. Snape however loved Lily and that
Showing posts with label death. Show all posts
Showing posts with label death. Show all posts
Thursday, March 8, 2012
Tuesday, February 7, 2012
Death
Death is an immensely important topic that comes up many different times throughout this book. A very big part of it is "living after death" or the contributions if you will of a person after they have already died as well as keeping faith in them. There is also the whole idea of mastering death. Mastering death comes up with both Voldemort as well as the nicer characters in the book.
The biggest example of a character contributing to the story, even after death was Dumbledore. He gave Harry the quest to find and destroy all of the horcruxes that were created by Voldemort. Harry had to keep faith in Dumbledore that he was correct and that Dumbledore knew what he was doing. Dumbledore's impact was felt way after his death in the form of Harry's quest and he was vital, maybe even more so than Harry in the downfall of Voldemort. He may have made some mistakes in his life, but he was devoted to stopping the dark arts and was a vital character, even in death. He even gives Harry some vital advice after he is dead and he got respect from most of the other characters.
Dumbledore isn't the only character that played a big role after death though. Surprisingly, Lily Potter, Harry's mom, played a huge role in this book. Lily is the reason that Snape was such a good character in this book. Without her influence and his continued love of her, Snape would never have been the hero that he was. If there weren't this tie between Lily and Snape, none of the plans that Dumbledore created would have worked and Voldemort would have stomped all over the wizardry world. Another key character after death was Dobby the house elf. Digging Dobby's grave is a key time for Harry. It helps him realize how foolish he was being by doubting Dumbledore and helped him get his head straight. The emotional shock of Dobby dying helped push Harry back into the right frame of mind which was key to the story.
The biggest example of a character contributing to the story, even after death was Dumbledore. He gave Harry the quest to find and destroy all of the horcruxes that were created by Voldemort. Harry had to keep faith in Dumbledore that he was correct and that Dumbledore knew what he was doing. Dumbledore's impact was felt way after his death in the form of Harry's quest and he was vital, maybe even more so than Harry in the downfall of Voldemort. He may have made some mistakes in his life, but he was devoted to stopping the dark arts and was a vital character, even in death. He even gives Harry some vital advice after he is dead and he got respect from most of the other characters.
Dumbledore isn't the only character that played a big role after death though. Surprisingly, Lily Potter, Harry's mom, played a huge role in this book. Lily is the reason that Snape was such a good character in this book. Without her influence and his continued love of her, Snape would never have been the hero that he was. If there weren't this tie between Lily and Snape, none of the plans that Dumbledore created would have worked and Voldemort would have stomped all over the wizardry world. Another key character after death was Dobby the house elf. Digging Dobby's grave is a key time for Harry. It helps him realize how foolish he was being by doubting Dumbledore and helped him get his head straight. The emotional shock of Dobby dying helped push Harry back into the right frame of mind which was key to the story.
When Harry and Hermione went to Godric's Hollow, Harry saw what was written on his parents tombstones which disgusted him. The tombstones said "the last enemy that shall be destroyed is death,". This reminded Harry of Voldemort's obsession of Mastering Death. I think he is not correct here and that he unfairly made this connection.
In Harry's parents case, mastering death meant that death was just the next step. The only way to truly defeat death is to not dread it or try to resurrect those who have been stolen by it, but is to continue to love those that have passed away, even if they aren't alive.
In Voldemort's case however, mastering death meant becoming immortal. He tried to achieve this by creating horcruxes and obtaining the Elder Wand (Deathstick, Wand of Destiny, etc.), one of the hollows. Death and Dumbledore were the only two things that Voldemort was afraid of.
Death is a very important topic to follow in this book.
Fear of Death
This book very obviously demonstrates the two polar opposites of good and evil: Harry is good, and Voldemort is evil. But while the book demonstrates this theme very clearly, I don't entirely agree with it. Yes, I think Voldemort is evil, but I don't think the Death Eaters are. While the Death Eaters have done evil things, what I think is most important is what drives them to do what they do.
I find to be very easy to pinpoint the Death Eaters as evil people without giving much thought to it. They have committed many evil deeds, deeds that virtually cannot be forgiven. They are the followers of true evil. But how much of their lifestyle was their choice? When Voldemort first came to power, before Harry was even born, the people of the wizarding world only had two choices: you either had to be with him, or against him. I can see why the Death Eaters thought that to ally with Voldemort was safer way to go. It was the safer choice, but it was not the right choice. The Death Eaters are not evil for siding with Voldemort. The only thing that the Death Eaters really are are cowards.
In retrospect, though, being a Death Eater is not that safe either. If any Death Eater does not carry out what Voldemort has wished, they do face certain death. That is why I believe that it is fear that is the true root of the Death Eater's actions, not evil. They fear death. Fear of death is why they commit those evil deeds. Fear of death is why they joined Voldemort in the first place. They were afraid of Voldemort, and they still are afraid of Voldemort. But when you look back even further, it turns out that if Voldemort did not fear death, he never would have became who he was. So is it fear of death that drives people to do evil things? And does doing evil things automatically make someone evil?
I find to be very easy to pinpoint the Death Eaters as evil people without giving much thought to it. They have committed many evil deeds, deeds that virtually cannot be forgiven. They are the followers of true evil. But how much of their lifestyle was their choice? When Voldemort first came to power, before Harry was even born, the people of the wizarding world only had two choices: you either had to be with him, or against him. I can see why the Death Eaters thought that to ally with Voldemort was safer way to go. It was the safer choice, but it was not the right choice. The Death Eaters are not evil for siding with Voldemort. The only thing that the Death Eaters really are are cowards.
In retrospect, though, being a Death Eater is not that safe either. If any Death Eater does not carry out what Voldemort has wished, they do face certain death. That is why I believe that it is fear that is the true root of the Death Eater's actions, not evil. They fear death. Fear of death is why they commit those evil deeds. Fear of death is why they joined Voldemort in the first place. They were afraid of Voldemort, and they still are afraid of Voldemort. But when you look back even further, it turns out that if Voldemort did not fear death, he never would have became who he was. So is it fear of death that drives people to do evil things? And does doing evil things automatically make someone evil?
Tuesday, January 31, 2012
When is it time for Avada Kedavra?
On page 70-71 (chapter five) Haarry and Lupin have a argument on
whether or not Harry should have used the disarming spell against the
death eaters or a more violent spell.
"Lupin looked aghast. 'Harry, the time for disarming is past! These people are trying to capture and kill you! At least stun if you aren't prepared to kill!'
'We were hundreds of feet up! Stan's not himself, and if I Stunned him and he'd fallen, he'd have died the same as if I used Avada Kedavra! Expelliarmus saved me from Voldemort a few years ago,' Added Harry defiantly" and on page 71
"'So you think I should have killed Stan Shunpike?' said Harry angrily.
'Of course not,' said Lupin, 'but the Death Eaters- frankly, most people- would have expected you to attack back!"
It seems clear that this is a debate deeper then spells. I think that J.K Rowling is showing both sides of the argument for and against using violence in self-defense, in short it seems she is referencing war. The argument ends with Harry saying "I won't blast people out of my way because they are they're there. That's Voldemort's job." To me this means that you shouldn't kill people (like in war) because they are fighting for the "bad guys" whether it be the death eaters or a army. If you kill people because they are killing people then that sort of defeats the purpose. But is it worth it to save more people?
I would say that because of how the conversation between Lupin and Harry ended that J.K Rowling agrees with Harry, that you can't fight fire with fire but in the end Harry kills Voldemort. Though sort of unintentionally but he still dies (I'll write about that later.) So she can't be totally anti-violence. It's like she is saying that you can't kill tons of people because like in a war many of these people are innocent but if you have to kill the source of the violence then it is okay. Like in World War 2, the Nazis were soldiers under the influence of Hitler. Hitler is like lord Voldemort and the Death Eaters are like Nazi. So was it right to go to war and kill these solders to stop Hitler from killing people?
I understand what she is saying and I think that the concept of war is wrong. I mean killing people for what? Money? Power? In those cases war is unnecessary. However in a situation like World War 2 or Voldemort, it is necessary. Until the day there is world peace and no one tries to kill anyone, it is better to kill death eaters/nazis who are going to kill huge populations of people then to let death eaters/nazis live and kill the entire muggle/Jewish population.
What I find really interesting is that when Voldemort dies the wizards celebrate. Much like how when Osama Bin Laden died many Americans and 9/11 victims celebrated. Is it just human nature that when someone who seemed so evil dies that we celebrate. Even Voldemort had some human in him. Was it wrong for them to celebrate? Should anyone be killed for killing?
"Lupin looked aghast. 'Harry, the time for disarming is past! These people are trying to capture and kill you! At least stun if you aren't prepared to kill!'
'We were hundreds of feet up! Stan's not himself, and if I Stunned him and he'd fallen, he'd have died the same as if I used Avada Kedavra! Expelliarmus saved me from Voldemort a few years ago,' Added Harry defiantly" and on page 71
"'So you think I should have killed Stan Shunpike?' said Harry angrily.
'Of course not,' said Lupin, 'but the Death Eaters- frankly, most people- would have expected you to attack back!"
It seems clear that this is a debate deeper then spells. I think that J.K Rowling is showing both sides of the argument for and against using violence in self-defense, in short it seems she is referencing war. The argument ends with Harry saying "I won't blast people out of my way because they are they're there. That's Voldemort's job." To me this means that you shouldn't kill people (like in war) because they are fighting for the "bad guys" whether it be the death eaters or a army. If you kill people because they are killing people then that sort of defeats the purpose. But is it worth it to save more people?
I would say that because of how the conversation between Lupin and Harry ended that J.K Rowling agrees with Harry, that you can't fight fire with fire but in the end Harry kills Voldemort. Though sort of unintentionally but he still dies (I'll write about that later.) So she can't be totally anti-violence. It's like she is saying that you can't kill tons of people because like in a war many of these people are innocent but if you have to kill the source of the violence then it is okay. Like in World War 2, the Nazis were soldiers under the influence of Hitler. Hitler is like lord Voldemort and the Death Eaters are like Nazi. So was it right to go to war and kill these solders to stop Hitler from killing people?
I understand what she is saying and I think that the concept of war is wrong. I mean killing people for what? Money? Power? In those cases war is unnecessary. However in a situation like World War 2 or Voldemort, it is necessary. Until the day there is world peace and no one tries to kill anyone, it is better to kill death eaters/nazis who are going to kill huge populations of people then to let death eaters/nazis live and kill the entire muggle/Jewish population.
What I find really interesting is that when Voldemort dies the wizards celebrate. Much like how when Osama Bin Laden died many Americans and 9/11 victims celebrated. Is it just human nature that when someone who seemed so evil dies that we celebrate. Even Voldemort had some human in him. Was it wrong for them to celebrate? Should anyone be killed for killing?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)