I think calling F&G "more evil" than Voldemort is misleading and kind of dumb. The two things aren't comparable and I'm not comfortable with the word in the first place. I think this might arise from feeling more visceral about F&G. These are people you might have known. Voldemort can be compared to Stalin and Hitler, but this is kind of abstract and besides that, we aren't really sure what he's up to and we rarely see him.
But I think both Voldemort and F&G have a total disregard for other people--maybe even the same kind of disregard. Voldemort things others can be squashed to suit his purposes, F&G think other people's suffering doesn't really matter. You mentioned that if you're suffereing and someone tells you it's a joke, then it's like you've been erased (not what you said but it's in there somewhere). But the same kind of thing is there in the grand schemes of dictators--the people just don't matter.
It's true, though, that the Wizarding World is a dangerous place and the damage F&G do isn't really remarkable considering what can happen to a student just in class. Also, not just F&G but everybody has no concept of psychological damage. So you can sort of see why they never learned better. But then why isn't everyone like them? The fact remains that they enjoy humiliating people (even if the physical damage is usually reparable) and everyone does comprehend humiliation.
I very much dislike the idea that everyone they hit deserved it, even if just by divine authoral intervention. I don't think they have an unconscious evil meter and just hit the bad guys. I do think, though, that they have a sense of sides and attack harsher on people their friends don't like. I think that mostly they just like being irrepressable. They like feeling free like they can do anything, they like seeing their fingerprints on the world. In their minds they are rebels, scorning rules and courtesy.
A while back I had a conversation with a friend about humor that degenerated into a bad fight. he mentioned the idea that humor basically means a lack of empathy, and that perhaps this is it's purpose, so we don't feel too badly all the time. I hate that. Not all laughter is like that, not all humor is like that. no_remorse obliquely referred to an incident about teenagers doing something horrible to someone, filming it, and showing it to their friends who also found it hilarious. It's things like that which had started my train of thought in the first place which is why I kind of exploded on my friend during our discussion. Because I think things like that piss me off more than Stalin. Even if that shouldn't be, even if Stalin does more damage. Stalin is coldly doing his job. he's terrifying, and he's evil, but someone the disregarding laughter of these teenagers seems worse. Stalin at least sort of knows what he's doing. He probably had all kinds of justifying arguments to himself and perhaps he slept well at night. But these teenagers... they probably don't think about it at all. It's the dumbfounded surprise when you attempt to tell them they're cruel. And they laugh. Somehow that makes it worse. Stalin looks at you and sees a grain of sand to be ground under his wheel. That feels pretty bad... but the teenagers look at you and actually see you on an immediate scale, actually look at you personally, and yet you're still nothing but a fly they pull the wings off of. Somehow that's far worse. Stalin, in a way, is blind. You're a disregarded nothing in the river of history, and that sucks a lot, but it's different from someone walking right up to you and telling you that you're nothing at all.
no subject
I think calling F&G "more evil" than Voldemort is misleading and kind of dumb. The two things aren't comparable and I'm not comfortable with the word in the first place. I think this might arise from feeling more visceral about F&G. These are people you might have known. Voldemort can be compared to Stalin and Hitler, but this is kind of abstract and besides that, we aren't really sure what he's up to and we rarely see him.
But I think both Voldemort and F&G have a total disregard for other people--maybe even the same kind of disregard. Voldemort things others can be squashed to suit his purposes, F&G think other people's suffering doesn't really matter. You mentioned that if you're suffereing and someone tells you it's a joke, then it's like you've been erased (not what you said but it's in there somewhere). But the same kind of thing is there in the grand schemes of dictators--the people just don't matter.
It's true, though, that the Wizarding World is a dangerous place and the damage F&G do isn't really remarkable considering what can happen to a student just in class. Also, not just F&G but everybody has no concept of psychological damage. So you can sort of see why they never learned better. But then why isn't everyone like them? The fact remains that they enjoy humiliating people (even if the physical damage is usually reparable) and everyone does comprehend humiliation.
I very much dislike the idea that everyone they hit deserved it, even if just by divine authoral intervention. I don't think they have an unconscious evil meter and just hit the bad guys. I do think, though, that they have a sense of sides and attack harsher on people their friends don't like. I think that mostly they just like being irrepressable. They like feeling free like they can do anything, they like seeing their fingerprints on the world. In their minds they are rebels, scorning rules and courtesy.
A while back I had a conversation with a friend about humor that degenerated into a bad fight. he mentioned the idea that humor basically means a lack of empathy, and that perhaps this is it's purpose, so we don't feel too badly all the time. I hate that. Not all laughter is like that, not all humor is like that.
Blah need another comment.