Like Flesh in Flame: Tom's Avoidance of Harry's Mind

[terri_testing]

The Twinkly One very kindly explained to Severus (and Jo to the inquiring reader) why Tom, after the debacle at the Ministry at the end of OotP, would never again voluntarily open his mental connection to Harry.

“…. Do not think I underestimate the constant danger in which you place yourself, Severus. To give Voldemort what appears to be

Comments

[mary_j_59]

Yes, brilliant! I'd noted, some time ago, that Harry's willingness to die was being conflated with his ability to love, and the two are not necessarily the same. I don't think I was the only one to make that observation. But your analysis of Albus's manipulations is convincing and chillling - as is your conclusion. Wow!

BTW, I don't think I commented on the McLaggen story, did I? That is all too believable. It's really a wonder to me that Harry (who WAS a bully and a cheat in canon, though not, at that stage, a torturer) didn't do a lot more damage than he did.

[terri_testing]

Thanks! Yes, of course, Albus was deliberately conflating the two to manipulate Harry, and conflating BOTH with incorruptibility

[oneandthetruth]

No, her fundamental problem isn't confusion. It's spiritual immaturity. Her attitude is literally childish: I didn't mean for it to happen, so it doesn't matter that it did happen.

For example, a child might say, "Sure, I broke your favorite lamp playing ball in the house, Mommy. But I didn't mean to break it, so you can't be mad at me." Addicts do the same thing, often in reverse: "Sure, I got drunk instead of painting the living room like I promised. But I intended to paint the living room, so that's what really matters." That's because an addict's spiritual/psychological/emotional development stops at the age they were when they first became addicted, which is often in their teens. Abusers of all kinds are often the same way, particularly parents: "Sure, I was emotionally unavailable/hypercritical/drunk all the time. But I really wanted to be a good parent, so you can't be mad at me because I wasn't." In all those cases, the miscreant's feelings/intentions are what matter (to them), not their actions. To put it another way, they'

[terri_testing]

You're right. And so of course, she created a universe which reflects reality as it ought to be.

You know, that also makes sense of what someone said a bit back about some of the Pottermore retcons about minor characters' relatives' deaths--that all of the good guys ended up offed by Death Eaters. Of COURSE they were--whaddya think, someone good could ever die without a bad guy killing them? Bad things only ever really happen because someone evil meant them to.

I'll have to go back and reread that spork--you said some good things there!

[oneandthetruth]

she created a universe which reflects reality as it ought to be.

Oh, no! JKR + Rush Limbaugh = OTP! :O (He put his name on a book called, The Way Things Ought to Be. It was ghostwritten, of course.)

I'll have to go back and reread that spork--you said some good things there!

I'm glad somebody appreciates it. I've been feeling like Beethoven, i.e., writing for posterity because my contemporaries don't understand my ideas.

[terri_testing]

Erg. Yes, I do like the stages of spriritual maturity as applied to HP

[oneandthetruth]

That's why the surviving Marauders, and Jo, and those who follow them, can still diss Snape for holding "a schoolboy grudge" about almost being violently killed and never subsequently shown proper remorse. Sirius didn't mean to kill Snape, just scare him. Thanks to JKR-ex-machina James, Snape was only scared, not killed or infected. So what's the big deal about what predictably would have happened as a consequence of Siri's actions had God/JKR/James not successfully intervened? Which is why Snape is more spiritually mature than MWPP, his creator, Harry, or that idiot woman you argued with who insisted Sirius shouldn't be held responsible for attempted murder. Snape's still too immature for a man his age--not surprisingly, since Scummywhore actively interfered with his maturation--but he's more mature than his contemporaries, the Trio, or many fans. That's a major reason he has to be beaten down and ridiculed. That kind of mature, rational thinking can't be allowed to flourish. No telling where it could lead! Why, people might start

[jana_ch]

Which is why Snape is more spiritually mature than MWPP, his creator, Harry, or that idiot woman you argued with who insisted Sirius shouldn't be held responsible for attempted murder.There’s a story currently unfolding on The Petulant Poetess in which Severus, during a near-death experience after the Shrieking Shack, is depicted as the spiritual equivalent of a six-year-old who had trouble in this life because he incarnated before he was ready for it. Every dead person in the cast is shown as being more spiritually advanced than him as they discuss his case, and decide to send him back to life with the ghost of Fred Weasley as his spirit guide. The entire Weasley clan (including in-laws and honorary members) unite in providing him with therapy by forcing him to allow their rugrats to crawl all over him, and reminding him to play nicely if he ever dares to be less than delighted with the situation

[nx74defiant]

The twins more emotionally mature than Snape - shudders.

[jana_ch]

Not just more emotionally mature, but more “spiritually evolved”-whatever that means. As are Lupin and Tonks, Eileen and Tobias, Molly and Arthur, Kingsley, Hermione, a squib therapist, and a cat named Miss Knowi Tall. Severus, of course, is a good boy who backs down humbly every time one of them (including the cat) calls him out for being less than perfectly agreeable to all the surrounding dunderheads. How dare he let himself have independent thoughts? Doesn’t he realize he’s a moral and emotional toddler who needs to be guided by all those spiritual giants with their many healthy relationships?

The only thing I can say for the story is that all those supposed spiritual giants do recognize Albus’s less-than-stellar record with Severus, and manage to keep him thoroughly squashed. On the other hand Fred explicitly lets Lily off the hook for having done anything wrong, but he would

[nx74defiant]

Right. Lupin who won't stand up to his friends for what he believes. Tonks who bullies him into marrage. Eileen the neglectful mother. Tobias the abusive father. Arthur who's job involves muggle items and can't even pronounce electricity. And a cat!

I do like the idea of a squib therapist. Someone who knows about the wizarding world, but has lived outside it.

[oryx_leucoryx]

And Harry didn't mean to kill Draco. Anyway, it was just the Prince's fault for putting that spell in the book in the first place, and marking it so mysteriously 'for enemies'.

This is a world in which drunk drivers never kill anyone. Because the only way a car can ever kill or seriously hurt someone is if the driver really tries to. Being careless, driving drunk, playing chicken.... can't possibly have unintended results.

Only if a driver is a good person. If the driver is a bad person then braking in attempt to avoid hitting a child causes the child to panic and fall and get run over anyway.

[hwyla]

Yes - intent only matters if the person is one of the chosen 'good'. Sirius' 'prank' with a werewolf and the SK switch are great examples.

But notice that Snape's giving the prophecy to Voldy not only ends in the deaths of the Potters without him intending it, but also without it needing to be even a reasonable outcome for them specifically. Snape not only didn't intend for Lily (and Harry and James) to die, he didn't even know it was a possibility since he apparently didn't know she was pregnant.

So, his telling Voldy the prophecy is rather aligned with the Marauders freeing a werewolf once a month. Unknown persons are at risk. One could even put it as less 'irresponsible' than the werewolf romps since the prophecy does at least suggest that the people affected have repeatedly stood against Voldy on the other side, whereas those at risk of werewolf are totally innocent of any 'harm' specific to the Marauders.