Harry Potter and the Death Cult

[sweettalkeress.livejournal.com]

So recently I was reading this (actually really excellent) Pokemon fanfic, which appears to have been an attempt to iron out a rather confusing Pokedex entry. Basically, the fanfic revolves around the idea that a certain species of Pokemon has a custom that all young male members of the community must kill their own mothers as a rite of passage. Anyone who can’t do it is disgraced and treated as vermin for the rest of his life- failure to kill your own mother is considered a sign of despicable cowardice. The more I thought about this fic, the more I realized that there’s a similar parallel in Harry Potter- except that instead of the message being, “If you’re truly a real man and worthy of belonging, you’ll kill your own family on instruction,” it’s “If you’re truly brave, a true Gryffindor, you’ll kill yourself on instruction.”
 
In Harry Potter we see characters committing ritual suicide on just about any pretext. We see people kill themselves to protect their family (Lily and James), to escape a bad boss (Regulus), as a strategic ploy (Dumbledore), and even to vanquish their enemies (Harry). Granted, it’s quite possible that these people were better off dead than otherwise, given the circumstances; but still, it does seem to be a pattern.
 
Consider the fate of Lily Potter nee Evans. She dies to protect her son, and in doing so, grants him special love protection. Now, it’s stressed again and again that Lily’s sacrifice was so noble and granted Harry the protection specifically because Voldemort offered her a choice about whether or not to live. And it was noble of her to die for her child- but it also established a pattern that the books’ attitudes towards death reinforce: if you’re in big enough trouble, trouble you can’t escape from any other way, die. Preferably as prettily and dramatically as you can manage.
 
Then there’s Regulus. There was another essay on here in which someone, I think it was Terri Testing, puts it out there that Regulus’s search for Slytherin’s locket was not to have the locket destroyed, but to, effectively, commit ritual suicide rather than serve Voldemort any longer. And for this the heroes emphatically reward him.
 
Now consider Peter Pettigrew. Peter Pettigrew is easily one of the most confusing characters Harry Potter ever gave us. He’s pretty much the only Gryffindor who’s never presented in a remotely positive light (at least not once his identity becomes known). The main reason given for this (both by the author and her fans) is that he’s a coward who betrayed Lily and James rather than be killed by Voldemort (granted, we don’t actually know how much of this is true, since the evidence of his cowardice is rather conflicting and since we never get his side of the story- just the main characters’ assumptions). Tellingly, when Sirius confronts him, he specifically goes out of his ways to say that, had Sirius been in his situation, he would have willingly died rather than betray his friends (the fact that Peter easily would have been better off dead than with Voldemort is largely beside the point here, since it’s only DE’s, and never anyone who could be counted among the “good guys” who serve Voldemort out of fear).
 
And then there’s Phineas Nigellus, who makes the statement about Slytherins choosing to save their own necks. This in and of itself is taken as reason to regard Slytherins as contemptible cravens- they won’t kill themselves for any greater good they can come up with (and you could argue that one of the downsides of “ambition” is that you’re motivated to stay around and wait for things to turn in your favor, rather than the Gryffindorish “bravery” of permanently ending your problems through death).
 
To return to the fanfic I read earlier, like most pieces of media dealing with death cults from the inside, the fanfic mostly just illustrates how things are done- it doesn’t take a stance on the morality of the characters’ actions, and the narrator is genuinely conflicted about killing someone he loves so much- but not enough to stop himself from doing it. What makes Harry Potter’s death cult so freaky is that it really does seem as though suicide is treated, not merely as a cornerstone of wizarding culture but *objectively good and righteous.* Throughout the series we meet literally no suicide bombers among the villains (despite the fact that the DE’s are terrorists, and terrorists in the modern world are notorious for suicide bombing). No, the only suicide bomber we meet (so to speak) is Harry Potter- who’s supposed to be the hero we’re meant to admire!
 
So, yeah.

Comments

[majorjune.livejournal.com]

Every time I read all the things D2CLers post regarding the warped psychology of most of the characters and/or of various plot lines and backstories, I keep thinking to myself, "What does that say about the author?"

We've been fed this myth of Jo Rowling's life...a supposedly idyllic childhood until her sainted mother became ill and eventually died.

Except her mother didn't become ill until Joanne was in her teens and didn't die until Joanne was an adult...and within a few months of her mother's death her father married his secretary, at which time he and his daughter became estranged.

What little non-slavish-fan literature there is on Rowling's adult life shows that she was quite promiscuous, and that her behavior when she lived in Portugal was considered quite extreme by friends/coworkers.

IOW, Rowling seems to have quite a few psychological issues which she seems to refuse to acknowledge, let alone work on.

Her mother was supposed to be this long-suffering saint, yet Rowling treats mothers poorly in her books, indeed she treats all female characters rather poorly.

Fathers get short shrift, too, but that is rather more understandable, she hasn't made any claims that her own father is a saint.

But yes, she does seem to glamorize death, especially the death of parents. Freud would have a holiday psychoanalyzing THAT! lol

Not only are a goodly number of the parents of Harry and his classmates dead, but there are seemingly no, or at least very few, grandparents and greatgrandparents alive...strange for a society where living to be at least 100 is considered the norm. What happened to all the elders of wizarding society?

[https://me.yahoo.com/a/gNLVidA.xeLuPiOU_2B_USM.HYNFjA--#b0b6b (from livejournal.com)]

I completely agree with you about the creepiness and distastefulness of how early, violent death is glamorised in the series.
You could say it even goes to the point where the great evilness of Voldemort's character is hinged on the fact that he does not want to die.
In and of itself that surely isn't a controversial thing to wish for. Most mentally healthy people are at least a little afraid of dying and seek to put it off for as long as possible. But JK constructed her universe so that hanging on to life with Horcruxes went hand in hand with the evil act of murder.

There are other ways the evil of Horcruxes could have been portrayed. They could have been used to show that unnaturally extending your own life causes damage to and destruction of other lives, and ruins your own life and humanity as well.
But I get the impression that these things weren't as important in the end as the fact that Voldemort was just a mad old coward simply for wanting to avoid death. (Recall Harry's and Dumbledore's revulsion at the injured, whimpering fragment of Voldie's soul at Kings Cross.)

What little non-slavish-fan literature there is on Rowling's adult life shows that she was quite promiscuous, and that her behavior when she lived in Portugal was considered quite extreme by friends/coworkers.

I've been meaning to read a biography of Rowling, and I have to admit these hints of mental disturbance have piqued my interest. Can you recommend any non-slavish-fan articles/titles?

[oryx_leucoryx]

It is misleading to say Lily died to protect her son. Her dying ended up protecting her son, but since she realistically couldn't have foreseen this possibility (at least according to Rolwing) then saving her son wasn't the purpose of her dying, at least not in any rational sense.

Regarding Regulus, Terri proposed later that he may have committed suicide in order to destroy his Dark Mark because its existence was potentially endangering his parents who were hiding from Voldie in their protected house.

[oryx_leucoryx]

Throughout the series we meet literally no suicide bombers among the villains (despite the fact that the DE’s are terrorists, and terrorists in the modern world are notorious for suicide bombing).

However suicide bombing was less common among terrorists in the west before the mid-1990s or so. Suicide fighters in organized military forces were known, but the terrorists were more of the 'hit and run' type.

[karentheunicorn.livejournal.com]

It's a romantic notion, the idea of dieing for someone else. For a mother/parent I'd think it would be more of an instinct.

Technically yea, it's noble but really I think a majority of parents would protect they're children first in a life or death situation.

And Harry's death is proclaimed to be the greatest ever because he died for everyone. (Oy, it's mini-Jesus).

But didn't everyone on the good side who fought in the Battle of Hogwarts potentially put themselves up to die for everyone? Why is Harry's any more noble just because he walked into it like a lamb for slaughter? Remus and Tonks death just sort of hide there under this rock of discarded secondary characters.

Is Harry's death any more noble because he took it like a man and walked right into it with no fight?

Well hell, what about Snape - he's been walking into Voldemort's lair since book 4 - in fact he walked into it at the end of book 4 and could have potentially been killed right then and there. He went on a limb since he turned from Voldemorts side. But fans and even JKR seem to dismiss his actions as being totally selfish because he was doing it just because he loved Lily.

So how is Snape different from Lily? She died for her child, a person she loved more than life. Snape seemly died for a love he felt that was never returned.

To me Snape's death seems to be out of everyone even more noble than saint Lily - due to him 1-not being related and 2-fighting his own nature to change and become more than he was.

His death just seems to get second fiddle because he was supposedly selfish about it. Hell, in a certain way most of the men's death seem second fiddle. Remus, Lupin and even James. The only reason given is well...Lily had a choice. But didn't they all have a choice to walk away at any damn time? I don't see how Lily's was any more special than James - he could have easily walked out and ran away when Lily got pregnant, but he stayed.

It just seems nice that JKR can pick her deaths in the series and suggest certain ones mean more than others....but it just seems sad that certain deaths are given more importance (Lily's/Harry's).

[granatapfelrot.livejournal.com]

Her dying ended up protecting her son, but since she realistically couldn't have foreseen this possibility

And I never understood how that ended up making her Saint Lily.
It was total happenstance.
I personally don't think it all that unlikely, that the conceited, self-righteous little braggart, we got to know in DH actually believed she and her baby might get away, just by her begging nicely enough.
Lily came off to me like a girl, who got her own way through her pretty looks and her charming vivaciousness all her life. She might have started to depend on it and the first time it didn't work out, she died.

But of course you're right: That whole thing did start a creepy trend (Or James did, since he died first) And Harry seems to be downright disturbed with his glorification of everybody dead.
Naming ALL his children after dead people, as one example of many.
Even Severus, who he hated and thought responsible for every bad thing that ever happened gets the dead = awesome treatment.
How sick is that?

[sharaz-jek.livejournal.com]

shows that she was quite promiscuous,

Is this really symptomatic of anything?

[sharaz-jek.livejournal.com]

It just seems nice that JKR can pick her deaths in the series and suggest certain ones mean more than others....but it just seems sad that certain deaths are given more importance (Lily's/Harry's).

And don't forget that German woman who pushed her kids behind her just as Voldemort sent an AK at them. Apparently German mothers love their children less than British mothers. Maybe adrenalin affects the brain sufficiently to impair judgement just enough to negate any sort of implicit "my life for theirs contract", which would explain James' protective love and the love of all who died in battle doing bugger-all, but then we're back to the problem of Snape.

[sharaz-jek.livejournal.com]

Oh, and I forgot Merope. A nasty little rapist who nonetheless loved her child enough to drag her dying body through an unfamiliar city in the dead of winter to an orphanage, and held on just long enough to give birth, name the kid and explain where the names came from - but in this case dying is a sign of weakness, just like Lord Voldemort always said it was. What the hell?

[majorjune.livejournal.com]

I'll leave the possibility of it being symptomatic of anything of a psychological nature to the experts...

But I WILL say that it is symptomatic of someone who is at least a hypocrite, whose books present a rather puritanical world when it comes to sexuality, and who has espoused in interviews that it is the philosophy she believes in, but whose actual ACTIONS in her own life shows a completely different picture.

[condwiramurs.livejournal.com]

I agree with your overall sentiment, but in fairness to Merope we have only Dumbledore's assumption that she raped Riddle. Because she wasn't pretty enough, 'obviously,' to have actually held his interest. Nevermind the time-honored tradition of the lords of the manor expecting to have their way with anyone on their domain without consequence. That she's not attractive might have made her seem the perfect target - he could rape her, or even pretend to her that he really loves her, and then split when she got pregnant/he got bored and nobody would be inclined to believe her tale. Because 'obviously' who would want to sleep with her?

We don't know what actually happened between them, is my point. Anything could have gone down. And assuming that because she was ugly she necessarily raped Riddle is a variant of a very old, very misogynistic trope. It makes me ragey when Dumbledore plays it, and I really hate to see it being taken up without question, especially given the suspicion of Dumbledore generally expressed here. I'm not trying to attack you, sorry if it comes across that way. I'm just trying to point out the problem of assuming Dumbledore's correct in his assumptions.

But word on the flip-flop regarding death as weakness.

[sharaz-jek.livejournal.com]

We don't know what actually happened between them, is my point.

You're right, I'd forgotten that. Dumbledore really is good at this half-truth/lies business, isn't he?

[sunnyskywalker]

He sure is. Riddle could have gone to London just to party for a few months, as young heirs have been known to do, and at the last minute thought it would be a lark to take Merope along with him (or let her tag along, anyway). And then she got pregnant, and maybe one of his friends teased him about it or Cicily found out and was upset, and he said, "Damn, you're right, she must have bewitched me!" The end. Or maybe Merope was as awful as Dumbledore guessed, but even if he was right, he still might have stumbled on the right answer via the wrong reasons (ugly => must've been a love potion).

And in Merope's defense, even if she used a love potion, where in the wizarding world would she have gotten the idea that that was wrong? We know that in the 19990s Fred and George are selling them openly and legally, Lockhart can talk about them as romantic Valentine's Day fun in public and no one will contradict him even later in private, Molly Weasley made one and it's still something to giggle about, and Hermione thinks they aren't dark or dangerous - which probably means that none of the books she's read say they're dark or dangerous, and none of the Hogwarts professors have ever said anything against them either until Slughorn comes along in sixth year and says they're dangerous. And even he isn't too emphatic about it, given that none of his generations of previous students - basically all of the adults - seem at all worried about them. So, while we might wish that Merope could reason out what seems to us like a basic ethical principle for herself even if the world around her was saying differently, it doesn't actually show that she's much worse than, say, Romilda Vane. (And what do you suppose Romilda would have done to Harry if she succeeded in dosing him? And would she have gotten in any trouble at all for it?)

[sweettalkeress.livejournal.com]

Especially since it's a real-life current event that people say that the only way a woman who isn't physically perfect could be in a sexual relationship is if rape is involved (from either end).

Since we never get her side of the story it's possible that Tom Rid Sr did agree to it of his own free will- but with no intention of it being a permanent thing. Hell, he might have thought she was a prostitute for all we know!

[sunnyskywalker]

Really, I think the strongest argument in favor of his scenario might be that love potions seem to be a common and accepted part of wizarding culture. Maybe using a moderately weak potion (ie not what Ron got) is subtle enough in its effects that after a few months, the average person would believe those were his or her natural feelings so strongly that they would stick with the person after the dosing stopped, assuming that any slight change in feeling is just due to the honeymoon period wearing off.

If that's the case, then maybe it makes sense for Dumbledore to assume that Merope just did what many young witches would, like Romilda and Molly. Molly might even have succeeded, for all we know. Except Merope was ugly and inbred and her family was mean, so it isn't something for schoolgirls to giggle over when she does it, or a sign that she could be a great entrepreneur if she sold it in pretty bottles for others to do the same thing. That doesn't reflect well on wizarding culture.

And it still doesn't mean he's right. No way to know.

[oryx_leucoryx]

Your scenario needs some modification because both Marvolo and Morphin were arrested the day Ogden visited the Gaunts and were both in Azkaban when Merope left for London. Marvolo (but not Morphin) may have been around when Tom Sr returned, after Jr's conception sometime in late March. Marvolo was sentenced for 6 months, but we don't know exactly when Ogden's inspection of the Gaunt home took place nor do we know hos long Marvolo lasted from his release to his death. BTW Albus says Marvolo may have died because he no longer knew how to feed himself - implying he always depended on his daughter for daily care - but how much of his inability was the result of 6 months of exposure to dementors?

[danajsparks.livejournal.com]

----Tom might've willingly rolled in the hay with Merope, but he certainly didn't want to marry her!

I think the problem here may be that you can't have sex in the Potterverse without being married first.

[danajsparks.livejournal.com]

What you are calling suicide, others would call martyrdom. Sacrificing oneself for a cause is currently rather out of fashion in the West, but that is a pretty recent development, I think. Historically, martyring oneself was often considered an acceptable, honorable, way to die, and many people still believe this today.

I think that the attitudes about martyrdom in the HP books are probably mostly a reflection of Rowling's religious beliefs and the influence of older literary traditions. I find them much less disturbing than some other aspects of the books.

[danajsparks.livejournal.com]

Sorry, what I meant is that Rowling wasn't willing (or perhaps allowed) to write a scenario where Tom Jr. was conceived out of wedlock.

We can think of several scenarios where Tom Sr. might have had sex with Merope without the use of a love potion, but, as you say, it's very unlikely that he would have willingly married her.

However, unlike in the real world, it isn't an option for characters in the Potterverse to have sex outside of marriage. Thus, Rowling started with the premise that Merope and Tom Sr. were married before they had sex as she developed the story, hence Merope's need for a love potion.

[sunnyskywalker]

Dying for a cause when there's no other option and you really think it will help further a goal that's really that important, like saving lots of lives, is one thing (which we still have in a lot of stories - think of all the gruff military leaders in the movies who tell the men to go on, he'll cover for them...). But I think you're right, the HP books do seem to have a slightly different, older style of martyrdom where it's noble to die even if it won't particularly do any good as far as you know (Regulus being the prime example here).

What I want to know is, if this is the case, then why isn't Merope dying so Tom could grow up with people who are not Gaunts also a noble sacrifice? Clearly Dumbledore doesn't think Merope would be a fit parent, so shouldn't choosing to give Tom up to hopefully-better people and taking herself out of the equation be a sign that she's placing her baby's welfare above her own? If he's assuming she meant to die, why doesn't he assume that was the motive? Because motherhood instantly transforms you and he thought she would have suddenly become the best caretaker for little Tom? It just seems like Merope can't win alive or dead. If she had lived to raise Tom and he still turned out bad, as seems likely since he was apparently "funny" since birth, would Dumbledore not have blamed Merope?

[karentheunicorn.livejournal.com]

Mawwwage, Mawwage is what brwings us togefer today.

Apparently in the potter universe for a woman the highest goal is to get married and spew out some rugrats.

Hell, look at McGonagall, I never thought she was ever married and low and behold JKR gives info on the Pottermore site about her being married.

Every character gotta get JKR's matchmaker makeovers. No way Tonks you can't be alone, here HAVE a werewolf to make your life miserable.

You can't be happy without a lovekins to wed and heaven forbid you fall in love and the person doesn't love you back; that calls for a blood letting on a dirty shack floor or death after popping out an evil overloard baby.

[sweettalkeress.livejournal.com]

I don't doubt that there are ways in which accepting death can be noble, either to save someone else or to hold onto a core belief that you'd otherwise have to give up. But Harry Potter takes it way too far- everyone who commits suicide for any reason is presented as heroic (if they're good) or irredeemable (if they're evil) and almost nobody tries to find a way to solve problems that doesn't involve someone's death.

[sunnyskywalker]

Which is especially absurd when you consider how many options they often seem to have, yet don't take. I know a lot of people wondered if Harry could stick his forehead through the Veil or involve a Dementor to get rid of his Voldybit, and supposedly the Dementors were all over the place (not that we ever ran into any in DH, for some reason... why wasn't one gliding along by the diner they escaped to after the wedding, or wandering around Grimmauld Place?). And we have no reason to think that Lily couldn't have grabbed Harry and jumped out the window while Apparating away and floating down like when she was a kid other than "they were in so much danger that they needed a complex and rare (since Flitwick has to explain it to a crowd of mostly-competent adults in PoA) spell to hide them, but never bothered to make detailed escape plans and she panicked." No, they have to die dramatically. That isn't noble, it's careless! No escape plans? All those months of camping and they never wondered whether a Dementor or the Veil could destroy a Horcrux? Even when they spent weeks planning to break into the Ministry to get a Horcrux, and their most memorable experience of the Ministry involves the Veil? Now, Dumbledore deciding that he's dying anyway and might as well make it count, that I can understand. Snape giving up the memories to facilitate Voldemort's downfall rather than working harder to stop his bleeding, likewise. But most of the voluntary deaths in HP aren't like that. It's backwards - rather than the goal being so important you're willing to die for it if that's the only option, it's that dying for a goal is heroic, so go do it.

[sunnyskywalker]

There are so few characters in fiction who are not married, not in a relationship, and perfectly fine that way. HP is just following the crows here, unfortunately. Though some of its examples are particularly nasty.

[dungeonwriter.livejournal.com]

I think that was when HP lost me. I hate the trope of a woman being too selfish to live for her children. All I could imagine was being cold, and hungry and tired and pregnant and abandoned and in a time where an abandoned woman with child was a slut and should be shamed. Let's not forget that just across the sea in Ireland, women could be put in a workhouse prison for the crime of fornication. She has no life skills, no family and no medical care.

Yet she dragged her dying self to a place where her baby could be safe. May I be granted that courage in the face of adversity in life.

"Merope chose death in spite of a son who needed her, but do not judge her too harshly, Harry. She was greatly weakened by long suffering and she never had your mother's courage"

Up yours, you evil mansplainer. Merope had more courage and strength than you could possibly imagine. I'd love to see Lily deal with being poor, abandoned, shamed and desperately ill, and see how much courage she'd have.

That is just vicious. An actress I very much admired, Michal Friedman died from complications from childbirth. She was a strong amazing woman and I imagine she fought like hell to live. Unfortunately, we are mortal.

I understand losing a mother is traumatic, but people suffering from illnesses often want to live very badly, and blaming them for dying is blaming the victim in the most pure sense possible.