Love vs. Will (I wanted to call it Love Under Will, but that's taken!)

[sistermagpie]

Well, this is the thing about lists, you never know when I'm going to prattle on so much in a reply that it creates a post in itself. First Slughorn, now...this. But I thought it was interesting because recently I know I was talking to somebody about why Occlumency and throwing off Imperius were so different and why Harry sucks at one and is good at the other. I was reading a discussion about Harry's greatest strengths and weaknesses (does he need to learn to keeps his mind shut like Snape says?) and it got me around to seeing what may be the difference.



Occlumency is not, I don't think, the key to anything for Harry as he can't do it and that seems to be fine. But Snape's parting shots do still sound like something Harry will have to learn in his own way--he's got to have something left to learn about his personality in the last book, after all.

Harry's love will indeed be the thing that saves him etc., and since this is JKR's book she's going to control what defeats evil, but there's only so much moral weight you can give to something that's strictly tempermental before you lose credibility. Harry is openly emotional because that is his natural temperment. He can't hide his emotions for the same reason.

Harry is our hero and so it's his personal strengths that will see him through, and the author has probably chosen a personality to which she herself most relates. The villains, by contrast, do happen to be more able to compartmentalize their emotions, but it can't come completely down to temperment. That would be like a person who is very athletic, for instance, saying, "Well, I'm athletic because I'm healthy and love life and therefore good. Bookish people are therefore afraid of life and unhealthy and therefore bad." Any temperment can be good or evil, the trick is to make the best of your strengths, and seek a balance. It's just that our hero is going to be dealing with his own strengths and weakness, so that's what we're going to see.

The moral of OotP is not that Harry must learn Occlumancy, but Voldemort still uses Harry's nature against him--and he's able to do this because Harry is still not mature, imo. Harry could not and should not ever become Snape, but he's not yet perfect himself. Given that the four houses represent the four elements, a balance between the basic natures of each seems implied in the story.

In fact, Slytherin is the house of water, and water is emotion, not fire (Gryffindor's element). Fire is Will. I do think a strong Will is Harry's nature--thus the ability to throw off Imperius. A mature Harry would have not been as vulnerable to Voldemort in OotP not because he'd lost his emotions but because of his strong Will to resist being dominated. Harry's inability to compartmentalize fits nicely with that--he is not a fragmented person. He is always whole and so directs his will. Therefore when Voldemort manipulates Harry's emotions Harry confuses the two and his will is manipulated to do what Voldemort wants--that's exactly what happens.

The Slytherin books (CoS and HBP) deal with love most openly. If we were talking about cold intellect, that would be air and Ravenclaw. (The author has openly said the houses correspond to the elements and I'm only saying things I see supported in the books themselves.) Slytherins may therefore be able to manipulate their emotions, but this does not have to imply giving them up. Their emotions do not contain the exact type of danger because they are compartmentalized, they don't have the Will that Harry does. Draco is the character JKR describes as a natural Occlumens (Harry is natural thrower-off of Imperius), yet he's not without emotion at all. In fact, his story in HBP seems to be partially about his freeing emotions he has unhealthily repressed with is own Will.

I'm not making Draco and Harry equals here in the text here, but HBP did give them both tasks during the year. Harry did need to learn to consciously use emotions to support his will (like when he uses his dead mother to manipulate Slughorn) more in this book, and not allow his emotions to dominate his Will. (Harry's emotions want to jump Ginny early on, but he controls them. It is only when his entire self gives the okay that he acts on those emotions, setting his Will to getting the girl and of course succeeding.) The other kid, Draco, is encouraged to free the emotions he had repressed by Will. In both cases the dominant strength of the house (Will and Emotion) is the dominant strength of the boy, but only when used with the support of the other elemental strengths. It's not that Harry has to change his nature. On the contrary, to truly be himself is to claim his true strength, his Will, and connect to all the other elements of his personality through that. His emotions will always give strength to his Will; he just can't let them *replace* his Will. Draco and Snape have so far been weakened the opposite way, I think.

So Harry does have to learn a bit from Snape there, but Snape has to learn from Harry as well. Harry, I'm confident, will learn what he has to learn. Snape maybe won't. So far he hasn't, so he has not grown. He's still as Slytherin and so emotional as ever, but perhaps still trying to repress it.

Comments

[ptyx.livejournal.com]

Beautiful, as always. I hope JKR is reading your essays ;-). As for Snape, I do think he's trying to repress his emotions: "Fools who wear their heart on their sleeves, who cannot control their emotions, who wallow in sad memories and allow themselves to be provoked so easily - weak people, in other words - they stand no chance agaist his powers."

[meganinhiding.livejournal.com]

Snape strikes me as someone with a tendency to be ruled by his emotions;he may have an impressive intellect but he is not a rational person which I think is why he isn't in Ravenclaw. For all his prowess at Occlumency he is unable to compartmentalize his emotions in such a way that they don't affect his teaching. Emotions include anger, hate and bitterness in addition to love and compassion.

[ishtar79.livejournal.com]

I actually think Snape is overall able to compartmentalise his emotions...as long as he's not around people who provoque great emotion in him, namely Harry and the surviving Marauders. Hm, I sense a flaw in his system. I don't seem much potential for growth for him either. Hell, Draco is already ahead of him on that area, having managed to ignore Harry for a whole year.

Harry on the other hand...while I agree with you wholeheartedly on his needing to achieve balance, I fear that JKR will keep him as impulsive and emotionnal as ever, and yet still succeed, because in her world, heart is more important than pretty much...everything. *eyeroll*

*sigh* i REALLY need my own lj.......

[(Anonymous)]

I always just let it lie at, not so much in what you said, but desire. Slytherins WANT to hide their emotions, they WANT to keep them suppressed. Gryffindors, well, don't. They take pride in their emotions. In GoF, after Rita's interview with Harry makes its debut, the students are all teasing Harry about Rita's "tears fill those startingly green eyes" line, and Harry says, "Yeah, that's right, I'm just on my way to cry my eyes out over dead mum." Of course, Harry borders on arrogant, but that's more or less how most Gryffindors seem to me. They feel, therefor they're good, and they want to be good, so they let people know they're feeling.

And wooooah was this the reason I just KNEW Dumbledore had chosen Snape to teach Harry Occlumency. I wondered, when Harry asked. Snape can't have been right, that Dumbledore was just too busy to do it himself. There had to be others, after all. But then I realised, well ... who is the one person in the whole world, asides from Voldemort himself, that would make Harry, for once, WANT to hide his emotions? Snape. Snape, the man he hates and the man who ridicules him CONSTANTLY. Had Dumbledore taught Harry, Harry would have had no incentive whatsoever to try and hide his emotions. He likes Dumbledore, and he wouldn't mind in the least if Dumbledore saw inside him - I imagine he'd even offer assistance. He might make an effort just because Dumbledore wants him to, but that's not enough, nowhere near. He needed to WANT to block his emotions. And Dumbledore was near to the last person who would trigger that defensive wall in Harry's mind. But even with Snape, Harry couldn't do it, which is the biggest reason why I think that Harry really will NEVER learn Occlumency (or be anything more than a Squib at it). If he can't do it with Snape, he can't do it with anybody else, and it didn't work in HBP, either, when he hated Snape a gazillion times more than he did in OotP and whom he believed was Voldemort's spy.

To me, it was always the DESIRE to block your emotions that made it work. Slytherins consider emotions weaknesses; they don't want to be weak, they don't want to have weaknesses, so they strive to block those emotions, to supress them.

And that's, I think, where Snape and Harry differ so much. To me, they're just the same. JKR said Harry's too damaged in some ways, and I think that Snape is, too. Harry wears his emotions so close to the surface, JKR said, and I think Snape does the exact same. The one time Harry blasted his way into Snape's head, he came across such intimate memories that at first, I was astounded. They weren't even RECENT ones. They went back over twenty years. Harry was weak, Snape was strong - how the devil did Harry managed to get that far deep? But then, I don't think he did. I think that Snape's memories, even the most intimate, are just as close to the surface as Harry's, only his are walled up; once you break that barrier you strike gold. The difference, then, was that Snape WANTED to hide his emotions - Harry didn't - doesn't.

(Draco, in my mind, is very different from both of them.
He has a goldmine of emotions unlike Harry and Snape put together, but his is walled up, fortified, and buried down deep to the very bottom. If you broke through his barriers you would have to dig yourself to China and be damn grateful if you get so much as a nugget.)

- gabby

randomly ...

[likethemodel.livejournal.com]

And since water equals emotion it makes that the second task in GoF was all to do with water.

[lanjelin.livejournal.com]

Very interesting, as always!

I hadn't heard of the fire/will, water/emotion connection before, but it really makes a lot of sense. Especially if you consider that Harry was eligible for Slytherin in the beginning - he really does have traits to fit in both houses.

His emotions will always give strength to his Will; he just can't let them *replace* his Will. Draco and Snape have so far been weakened the opposite way, I think.

Yes. I think you said just about as perfectly as it can be said right there.

I often like characters who live according to their emotions (and a large part of that is because I myself am so different, and I admire the honesty in those type of characters) but in Harry's case I think they're too unbalanced. Especially his anger. He doesn't really show much of his emotions though, except for the anger, and avoid talking about his feelings as much as possible... Sometimes I wonder how much his best friends even know about him.

I think that he's really starting to learn, though. OotP had some harsh lessons for him. And it felt like he was quite a bit different from how he was at the end of OotP when I finished HBP. Also, as you say, he's still growing into the person he's going to be; sometimes I think we forget how young they are.

Anyway, reading this makes me even more of a H/D shipper than I already was, heh. You managed to put words on something I'd just vaguely suspected, with the will/emotions reasoning. You say they're not equals, and they aren't yet, but now I can definitely see the possibility. I guess I just like that type of combination, haha.

[static-pixie.livejournal.com]

Harry is our hero and so it's his personal strengths that will see him through, and the author has probably chosen a personality to which she herself most relates.

I think this is my major sticking point with JKR, actually. I mean, I guess every writer creates protagonists s/he can most relate to, but sometimes I feel like JKR has done it to the extent that she doesn't really relate at all to some characters. It's like, I feel I read somewhere that JKR said she had absolutely nothing in common with Umbridge or something like that, but she'd have to in order to write her so well. It's like in the interview she did with Leaky where she said that Draco is someone to be pitied...and that's it. It's like, she understands them, but she can't relate to the way they go about things. Or doesn't want to think she can, or something like that. It's the way she says the books aren't pushing any specific type of morality, but then gets "worried" when people start likeing Draco too much because she doesn't actually get how they could or refuses to. Which bugs me. A lot, actually. Because sometimes I really feel like she is saying if athletes are good, bookish people must be bad. Or maybe I'm just too sensative when it comes to Draco, or something crazy like that, I dunno. :D I just know that I see a lot of Draco in both Ron and Ginny, but I feel like if I said that to her, she'd beat me over the head with something.

But anyway, great essay, as usual! Although I think that she's cheated a bit with Harry. He does let his emotions rule a lot of the time, but then a lot of the time, his will tends to agree with his emotions anyway (so it's not so much his emotions ruling his will as it is his emotions ruling his head), whereas Draco's emotions never agree with his will, which I think is just because love has to win out and you can't have love following will, but will following love is ok. So I think Draco actually inherently has the longer road to travel, just because of the way the books are (grumbles). Just to add to your point, though, both Draco and Harry had Major Moment of Conflict at the end, and in Harry's case it was one where his will had to dominate (poisoning Dumbledore) and in Draco's case, he had to let his heart take over (not killing Dumbledore because he didn't want to). Which is interesting, because I'd come away from the book thinking that Harry was most Slytherin when he was forcing Dumbledore to drink and the opposite for Draco, but now I'm reconsidering. And if you want to put Draco, Harry and Snape into a sort of Trio, I think your point actually makes an excellent case for Snape's having killed Dumbledore out of love rather than spite, although I can't quite articulate how right now.

Bravo!

[woman-ironing.livejournal.com]

Here via the Snitch. I've really enjoyed reading this essay and the comments following. Dumbledore trying to get Harry to do occlumency in OotP always seemed to be barking up the wrong tree (Though Harry did learn some useful things about Snape, the Marauders and Lily as a result.) because in fact it was Harry getting into Voldemort's mind and discovering helpful info not vice versa - until Voldemort finally twigged and used it against him, of course. It didn't seem that important for Harry to block out Voldemort because he'd already shown (in GoF) that he had the stronger will. I suppose Snape's right that now it would be a good idea for Harry to be develop some occlumency skills, if he's hoping to succeed in casting any spells on Voldemort, that is. If Harry can see occlumency and legilimency as expressions of will he might manage it. Perhaps Snape's technique - suppressing emotions - is only necessary if you are the weaker party.

Can Harry actually learn anything from Snape? This is perhaps another way of asking is Snape good or bad. Harry's instincts are usually right, but JKR has made it impossible to be sure. This week I'm in the Snape:bad camp, and believe that Snape is a reluctant ally of Dumbledore and is only working for him for his own protection. If we've seen Snape apparently protecting Harry on occasion it's because Snape's survival depends on Harry's survival. I've got a bitofatheory about this but don't know if half a million other people have already had the theory before.

Your discussion with Anonymous about Draco was fabulous! Draco didn't devote himself to Voldemort's task only because his parents lives were at stake. He was just as strongly, perhaps more, motivated by ambition. If he achieved his goal he would prove himself to be everything that so far he was not: strong, powerful, important, successful, Voldemort's right hand man. He really wanted this! In his conversation with Dumbledore in the tower you could clearly see the conflict between his concern for his parents, his ambition for himself and his horror at what he'd agreed to do to, but the conflict was not really resolved.