Love in HP

[torchedsong.livejournal.com]

Since Valentine's Day is close by, I thought this topic would be fitting to bring up and ramble about until I get it off my chest.

Here comes a few (potentially) silly questions I have about love as a reoccurring and major theme in the HP books: is love a redemptive and saving force? Is it a reflection of our inner nature and morals? Does it make us better or worse than we are? Is it proof we’re capable of good? Or is it simply a nice message to have in a children’s series i.e. love is more powerful than anything?

Voldemort is said to be incapable of love. He’s the product of an unhappy and coercive union; therefore, he’s doomed from the moment he’s born. Little Tom Riddle never had a chance.

Harry is said to have an amazing ability to love. His parents died trying to protect him and Lily gave him her magical protection because of her sacrifice. It doesn’t matter if Harry grew up in a terrible and neglectful household and grows up to experience a great deal of horrible things; he’s saved from the moment he’s born. He has the love of his friends and mentor figures too.

Dumbledore fell in love with the wrong man and suffered for it. He tries to rectify his mistake and… I’m not sure. Dumbledore confuses the heck out of me. He’s made critical mistakes in the name of love for Grindelwald but is still venerated despite his morally dubious self. He leads a long and admirable life and is seen as the epitome of good. I suppose he’s “saved” in a way too?

And then there’s Snape. He fell in love with the right woman but chose to follow his harmful ambitions and suffered for it. He gets Lily killed, shows remorse and strives to atone for the rest of his life. He remains slavishly devoted to Lily in exchange for nothing. He leads a miserable, isolated, and brutal life and succumbs to a miserable, isolated, and brutal death. He’s doomed from the moment he called Lily a “mudblood” (maybe even before - when he’s sorted into Slytherin). Beyond being branded a pitiful and tragic figure, I don’t think he was saved or redeemed by love at all. Although some fans disagree. I go back and forth sometimes too.

Lastly, we have the Malfoys. They’re established as a selfish and craven prejudiced family. And yet - they love each other. It’s Narcissa’s love for Draco which pushes for his protection. They walk away relatively unscathed from the war, other than their hurt pride and reputation. Love saved them, although it didn’t fully redeem them as moral figures in the story.

(There’s also love between other characters, such as the Dursleys’ love for their son, Bellatrix’s love for Voldemort, Tonks/Lupin, other romances, and so on. But I’m focusing on the big examples with the most significance to the overall plot.)

Love is important in the HP series. It’s heralded as a great power to have against evil and corruption. But does it - in a strange way - reveal how frozen the characters are? Harry is empowered by love because he’s the hero and innately good. Voldemort has no use for love because he’s the villain and innately evil. Dumbledore screws up greatly for love, but it’s all cool because he’s innately wonderful. Snape is innately a horrible person who made bad choices, but he loved Lily - so let’s be magnanimous and grant him a modicum of praise (but no proper redemption). The Malfoys are innately selfish and shady people, but they have love as a family - so let’s be magnanimous and grant them some praise too (but no proper redemption either).

My thoughts are all over the place. I’m a rambling type of thinker. I think JKR was going for the idealistic message that love is powerful and the most valuable thing in the world capable of defeating evil and revealing the humanity in unscrupulous individuals. However, it’s also connected to who you are innately as a person. But why does it have to be?

Why does Voldemort have to be “incapable of love” to be evil rather than his actions and choices as a person? Why does Harry have his parents and his ability to love praised to prove he’s capable of being a hero rather than his own actions and choices as a person? Why does love make Snape and the Malfoys worthy of recognition instead of their own actions and choices regardless of love? If it were not for their love for someone, they would be considered despicable and unworthy of mercy? And Dumbledore - well, he gets to love a big bad boy, mess up, and move on to be ultra powerful and admired because he’s untouchable (despite JKR’s attempt to give him shades of grey in DH).

And why is Lily’s love for Harry so special that it creates a unique protection spell? Have no other mothers or fathers in the history of the Wizarding World died to protect their child? Because only Harry can be the ultimate hero empowered by love?

Ah, I’m done for now. A lot of rhetorical questions. Love is weird. Or maybe I need to not take it too seriously… but I’m going to anyways.

Comments

[torchedsong.livejournal.com]

The friendship among the trio is, admittedly for me, one of the positive parts of the books because I do find their dynamic endearing sometimes. Nonetheless, there are fair criticisms to make, such as Hermione being used as a convenient info-dump, and Ron being written as too ordinary in comparison to Harry and Hermione. I also think their friendship was purer and more believable in PS/SS. JKR did a good job, in my opinion, of creating a warm and innocent atmosphere within the trio while showing their strengths separate from one another in the first book.

But as the books went on, it does seem like Ron and Hermione exist to serve Harry with little reciprocation. Ron provides Harry with the family Harry always dreamed of, and Hermione provides Harry with necessary help and knowledge on their adventures. I do think the three of them care deeply for one another from beginning to end, but they all suffer from a lack of development as individuals. If anything, I think Ron potentially changes the most out of the three.

Canon!Harry’s “saving people thing” is just that - it is not real sacrifice because it doesn’t spring from real love. Yes, it may come from a desire to get people out of danger, but the emotionally stunted Harry we see throughout the series is incapable of selfless love for all humanity and all sentient creatures.

Yes, I wouldn't describe Harry as defined by his all-embracing love for humanity. He cares for his friends, chosen family figures, and the people he likes. He is perfectly normal in that sense. But I never saw him as a Christ figure who extends his compassion towards his fellow man out of selflessness - no matter their background. I think JKR wished for her readers to see him that way and wrote his sacrifice in DH to hammer it home. But even then, it's another example of Harry blindly following Dumbledore's orders to get rid of the horcrux within him. It's not a sacrifice based on love for humanity alone. But I'm probably being too hard on Harry here because I thought his sacrifice and return to life was foreseeable. And the specters of his parents urging him to his death was creepy rather than moving for me....

Overall, I agree Harry primarily runs on luck, impulse, plot armor, and the dependence/convenience on other people in his life to guide him. Even the DA wasn't entirely made of Harry's own choice - Hermione was the one who initiated it, if I remember correctly. And it was disbanded in HBP because...it wouldn't benefit the plot anymore, I guess.

[with-rainfall.livejournal.com]

To be fair, although I’m no longer rabidly into the books (I’ve more or less outgrown them, even the earlier ones), there are some lovely moments in PS in particular. I think Snape’s introductory speech is one of the best pieces of writing in the whole series, and the puzzle sequence at the end is clever. It’s much more whimsical than the rest of the series.

Part of the reason I don’t buy their friendship is that I probably need to reread the books. :P Harry and Ron’s first Christmas morning at Hogwarts, for instance, is also lovely. But there are less of these quiet moments throughout the books, and I’m willing to bet that we see Harry comforting and standing by Ron less than the opposite (Ron standing by him).

But even then, it's another example of Harry blindly following Dumbledore's orders to get rid of the horcrux within him. It's not a sacrifice based on love for humanity alone. [...] And the specters of his parents urging him to his death was creepy rather than moving for me....

I entirely agree. I didn’t predict Harry’s death and resurrection, though. Speaking of, Christ went through an enormous amount of pain on the cross. His agony was palpable and he reacted to it in an entirely appropriate way. What does Harry go through? Yes, he goes through abuse, but his actual death is just a standard battle. Resurrecting him certainly won’t suddenly make him the Christ figure of the series.

Even the DA wasn't entirely made of Harry's own choice - Hermione was the one who initiated it, if I remember correctly. And it was disbanded in HBP because...it wouldn't benefit the plot anymore, I guess.

That’s an excellent point about the DA. It could’ve been used to unite the school and fight LV, especially given all the Sorting Hat’s warnings about uniting or “crumbling from within”, but instead it is just more clumsy anti-Slytherin fodder. Harry does little if anything to entice Slytherin members into the DA.

The Marietta thing could also have been handled much better - in fact, it needn’t have happened at all.

As others have pointed out, Hermione never actually stops and reflects on her behaviour towards Marietta. Having your protagonist commit an immoral act and never be changed by it is... sort of pointless and makes the character come off as sociopathic. I know people disapprove of her Memory Charms in DH, but at least she was affected by those.

[torchedsong.livejournal.com]

To be fair, although I’m no longer rabidly into the books (I’ve more or less outgrown them, even the earlier ones), there are some lovely moments in PS in particular. I think Snape’s introductory speech is one of the best pieces of writing in the whole series, and the puzzle sequence at the end is clever. It’s much more whimsical than the rest of the series.

I think JKR had a better handle on her writing in the earlier books from PS/SS to POA. It wasn't extraordinary literature, but it was a fun and moving story with colorful characters and a cozy yet eccentric magical world. The dialogue was decent and funny too. The moment in COS when Ron and Harry are bantering back-and-forth about Snape's absence before he appears to scold them for their arrival via flying car was genuinely amusing. Everything was more, as you've said, whimsical. JKR does a good job creating that sort of atmosphere; it's when she attempts to make things "deeper" and "darker" in the later books that her writing starts to fall apart for me.

But there are less of these quiet moments throughout the books, and I’m willing to bet that we see Harry comforting and standing by Ron less than the opposite (Ron standing by him).

Ron does abandon Harry in GOF and DH, but he returns and continues to support Harry despite his own insecurities and jealousy issues. Ron and Hermione's loyalty to Harry can almost be unbelievable at times. Maybe I excuse it too much. :p

And I agree about Marietta. When I was younger, it completely flew over my head how ruthless Hermione could be. JKR did explain how she loathes traitors and, well... that's probably why Hermione never reflects on scarring a student. JKR approves of Hermione's actions, so there's no need to call Hermione out on it in the text.

The DA was another missed opportunity for Harry to grow and come into his own as a leader, as well as missing the chance of uniting students across all houses. The call for house cooperation never amounted to anything either. Gryffindors are the main stars. Ravenclaws and Hufflepuffs are afterthoughts. Slytherins are morally dubious at best and evil at worst.

It would've been interesting if Harry had at least one Slytherin friend or mentor figure he respected, but that would've required giving Slytherin house redeeming qualities of its own and I don't think JKR ever wanted that.