Comments | aurora_knight: JKR Talks About Grindelwald

aurora_knight

JKR Talks About Grindelwald

Feb 10, 2010 20:36

ghostangel has pointed out a new post to Melissa Anelli's blog on the Harry, A History website, where we finally have some details from J.K. Rowling about Grindelwald's feelings for Dumbledore.

http://harryahistory.com/2010/02/vault-xx-dumbledore-and-grinde.html

The response I posted to grindeldore is beneath the cut.
( Read more... )

ad/gg

Comments 5

miss_morland February 11 2010, 23:08:48 UTC

From an in-verse point of view, I can agree with this (although I prefer to think they both wanted the same things, and not only when it comes to sex -- I'm not at all fond of the idea that AD was somehow 'tricked' into the whole subjugating-Muggles-plot; I like it when his darker side is acknowledged).

However, I'm troubled by the idea expressed both in the books and by Rowling herself that being capable of love somehow is synonymous to being morally sound (for instance, Snape is supposed to be redeemed by his feelings for Lily). It seems to me that she has this idea that love (or the lack of same) is what distinguishes the good guys from the bad guys, which is just far too simplistic, even for a series of children's books, IMO.

aurora_knight February 12 2010, 00:03:19 UTC

I think much of the problem lies in the fact that, for all its expansive vocabulary, English is not very good when it comes to talking about love. No one ever quite seems to know what type of love is being referred to, and many of the types that exist can overlap ( ... )

(sorry for the comment fail) miss_morland February 12 2010, 08:54:20 UTC

There's an overarching type of love that has the potential to be born from love of these other categories, and I think that's the one that Rowling is getting at when she talks about the power of love to redeem.

Yes, I think it can be argued that this is what Harry's 'Power the Dark Lord knows not' is about. The thing is, I don't think the two kinds of love (eros and agape, if you will) are sufficiently distinguished in the text -- for instance, I think we're meant to read Dumbledore's line about how Snape's love is the best of him (I don't have my copy of DH with me, so I can't give the exact quote) quite literally, although it can be argued that Snape has, indeed, come to see other people as human beings, cf. the 'lately only those I couldn't save' line. (Then again, the way he treats his students is anything but ethical, so his morality is flawed at best.)

An evil person can fall in love, and they will see the one they love as an object, just as they view all other people as objects.But then why does she feel the need to create ( ... )

Re: (sorry for the comment fail) aurora_knight February 12 2010, 13:25:35 UTC

lol, it that kind of got away from me there. I'm glad it made some sense.

I almost used "agape," but I've come to dislike the term a bit because it's so often sterilized and many of the people who use it deny that overlap I was talking about. To utilize eros and agape, however, I would say that Dumbledore thinks Snape's love (eros) for Lily is the best of him (I don't have my copy of DH, either :( ) because what agape Snape is capable of has emerged out of his love for Lily. But you're right, I don't know that that's how Rowling actually thought about it, and we kind of have to make the distinction for ourselves.

But then why does she feel the need to create villains who are either incapable of love or at least don't reciprocate the feelings of their love interests?I see what you mean. It can't be because she sees sexual desire as equivalent to, or always resulting in, agape, because then we wouldn't have Bellatrix. So I'm not sure what her problem with Grindelwald wanting Dumbledore is. She seems to have this idea about her ( ... )

Thread 5