Login  
 
 
Go Back   Chamber of Secrets > Harry Potter > The Stone > Legilimency Studies

Grindelwald: Character Analysis



Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #41  
Old December 24th, 2010, 3:51 am
Durmstrang_Swag  Undisclosed.gif Durmstrang_Swag is offline
First Year
 
Joined: 3253 days
Posts: 35
Re: Grindelwald: Character Analysis

Grindelwald is my favourite character in the HP series, because to me I know the perfect amount of information about him. I can picture him and I know of his darkness and his redemption, you know he was great and corrupted by dark arts, the rest is left to my imagination, making me want to know more. I've wanted to know more since he was first mentioned in "Dumbledore's legendary defeat of Grindelwald".

In defence of Gellert Grindelwald:

Grindelwald is referred as the second greatest dark wizard of all time, to me this depends on what is meant by greatest dark wizard. Is how dark the wizard is important or once you are classed as a dark wizard does only the threat you pose matter. Because Grindelwald does not seem all that dark to me, yet he posed the single greatest threat to the wizarding world's stability ever (breaking the International Statute of Secrecy has far greater consequences than a kind of wizarding apartheid based on blood purity, heck Durmstrang already forbade Muggle-borns from attending the school.) To look at what Grindelwald did must lead you to believe he wasn't bad to the core. He actually seems like a far more skillfull Fred or George who happens to have an ideaology which clashed with the wizarding authority's view of secrecy.

To measure how dark he is I'll contrast him with the ultimate evil (and even a lesser evil). Voldemort is designed to be the one-dimensional face of evil, Grindelwald is much more complex and as such much less evil.

Horcruxes and Hallows:

Voldemort willingly created 6 horcruxes, including one while at Hogwarts in his fifth year with his diary. He then created another 5 to bind himself to life and enhance his power further (7 parts of the soul would be greater to him), not to further any end other than his own continued existence and power. Grindelwald sought the hallows for the 'greater good' (I'll mention the Greater Good later). So the purpose of the Hallows/Horcruxes indicates that Grindelwald is far above Voldemort in moral terms, but also the means is important, as Harry pointed out to Dumbledore hallows not horcruxes. There's another dark wizard I'd like to mention here. Herpo the Foul, the wizard who first created a horcruxe and who first hatched a basilisk, Herpo also created a horcruxe, for second only to Voldemort, Grindelwald wasn't as concerned with his immortality as a dark wizard should be. This indicates that Grindelwald wasn't conqeuring the wizarding world for personal and eternal power, but for a more important purpose, which leads me to...

The Greater Good:

Voldemort sought nothing more than to further his own existence and inflict terror, sure he was alligned with the pure-blood movement, but I think that is as much as anything that this alligns with his undiluted hatred of his muggle father, for instance he himself is a half-blood, he fears fellow half-blood Harry Potter over anyone else other than Dumbledore, he presumably associated muggle-borns with muggles and therefore this policy is more an abuse of his power than him seeking power to repress muggle-borns. Unfortunately I know nothing of Herpo's intentions. But Grindelwald's quest for power was as the leader of a glorious wizarding revolution, for the muggle's own good and the benefits to wizards would be immeasureable. He sought to overthrow the statute of secrecy and have a wizard-ruled world, more importantly he recognised that he would face opponents to this and deemed that his acts against them would be 'for the greater good'. What was Voldemorts greater good? He didn't have one, he just caused terror and relished in his fear-invoking nature. He seems proud of the fact (as the diary Riddle) that the wizarding world was afraid to speak his name, there's no grand justification for it. With Grindelwald there is, to me this indicates that he recognises his acts as wrong and even regrets them, but to him the ends of his grand cause justify any means, yet he shows regret that his terrible acts are necessary for the greater good. Those aren't the actions of some dark and evil. Also remember that Grindelwald didn't care about immortality, his cause was greater than himself, probably why he was so excited that a fellow great wizard in Dumbledore had agreed to aid him in his plans, Voldemort never sought and would never accept such companionship, only unquestioning and unfailing servitude.

Gregorovitch and Nurmengard:

In his quest for the Elder Wand Grindelwald stole it from Gregorovitch, despite the reputation of having to kill to gain mastery of it Grindelwald only stuns Gregorovitch after stealing the wand, Voldemort never missed the opportunity to kill, in fact he showed mercy only once, to Lily Evans (a mudblood oddly, perhaps blood purity means less to Lord Voldemort after all) on request to Severus Snape. More important than this sole act of mercy is that Grindelwald constructed Nurmengard, a prison to hold his enemies, he didn't mean to kill anyone. In fact when still in friendship with Albus Dumbledore they sought only to use their incredible force when it was absolutely necessary for the 'greater good'. Grindelwald was no senseless killer, while he may have killed many (Krum says his grandfather wasn't the only one) it seems they were the ones who were foolish enough to try and stop Grindelwald at full power. To me Nurmengard's existence proves that Grindelwald was merely dedicated to the cause of the 'greater good', he tried to avoid killing in favour of imprisonment (otherwise Nurmengard is pointless), Grindelwald's quest has nothing to do with personal power but was all for a cause, a cause which may be wrong but when idealised to wizard working for the benefit of muggle it reads not so far from Plato's perfect city-state. In short Gellert Grindelwald was a young idealist who thought that his ends justified any means while Voldemort cared nothing for morality, and cared only for himself.

Young Riddle vs Young Grindel:

Young Gellert obviously had a bad reputation at Durmstrang where his 'experiments' endangered the lives of students and led to him being expelled by a school notoriously tolerant of the Dark Arts, while we know nothing about the nature of these experiments it was likely it was just dabbling in very powerful dark magic as I don't think anyone actually died as a result of his 'experiments'. However young Tom Riddle was punishing and tormenting his fellow orphans before he even discovered he was a wizard, and once Tom got to school he was far worse than Gellert. For a start he opened the Chamber of Secrets and was responsible for the death of Moaning Myrtle and the framing of Hagrid. And just to add to how evil Tom was at school it is assumed he had already created a horcruxe by the time he asked Slughorn about the possibility of 7 horcruxes, this is something Gellert never did at the pinnacle of his powers, and something I doubt Gellert ever considered due to him being motivated by a greater cause instead of selfish concerns of life. The point is that by the time Riddle was at school he had already delved deeper into dark magic than Gellert Grindelwald had at the height of his powers.

Redemption:

In the end it seems that like his old friend Albus Dumbledore, Grindelwald saw the error of his ways and showed genuine remorse for his actions while trapped in Nurmengard, by defying Voldemort at the end he showed that he wished to make amends for his actions. My guess is that when the 'greater good' has failed and he presumably abandoned his ideaology his cover and defence for his actions had dissapeared.

To conclude Grindelwald's defence it seems to me that he was an idealist who believed that his utopia justified his actions, while this does not remove his acts he recognises wrong, something Voldemort does not do. But what this means for his claim to greatest dark wizard is that he is the Greatest of the Dark Wizards but by no means the Darkest of Wizards.


Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #42  
Old December 24th, 2010, 4:42 am
canismajoris  Male.gif canismajoris is offline
The Forums Red Hypergiant Star
 
Joined: 5023 days
Location: əɹəɥ
Age: 36
Posts: 2,766
Re: Grindelwald: Character Analysis

Quote:
Originally Posted by Durmstrang_Swag View Post
He actually seems like a far more skillfull Fred or George who happens to have an ideaology which clashed with the wizarding authority's view of secrecy.
I think you wrote an excellent post which raised several good questions, but on this point I have to wonder. Did Fred and George ever actually subvert this statute? Grindelwald may have considered it irrelevant, but the twins were clearly raised within a law-abiding ethical framework and rejected certain aspects of it in favor of profit. Can you substantiate that they rejected secrecy as well?


Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old December 24th, 2010, 4:47 am
Durmstrang_Swag  Undisclosed.gif Durmstrang_Swag is offline
First Year
 
Joined: 3253 days
Posts: 35
Re: Grindelwald: Character Analysis

Quote:
Originally Posted by canismajoris View Post
I think you wrote an excellent post which raised several good questions, but on this point I have to wonder. Did Fred and George ever actually subvert this statute? Grindelwald may have considered it irrelevant, but the twins were clearly raised within a law-abiding ethical framework and rejected certain aspects of it in favor of profit. Can you substantiate that they rejected secrecy as well?
I've made a bit of a mistake here, I was more meaning that the Young Grindelwald seems like a charming trouble-maker, he seems to give off that impression to me, I meant in his personality not views that he was like the Twins. Nowhere in the books do Fred or George reject the statute of secrecy. Sorry I should have clarified that better.


Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old December 24th, 2010, 4:12 pm
Hut_On_The_Rock  Male.gif Hut_On_The_Rock is offline
First Year
 
Joined: 3272 days
Location: The North Sea
Age: 27
Posts: 26
Re: Grindelwald: Character Analysis

Quote:
Originally Posted by Durmstrang_Swag
Voldemort willingly created 6 horcruxes, including one while at Hogwarts in his fifth year with his diary.
Voldemort did not a create any Horcruxes during his fifth year. He didn't even commit his first murder (crucial, if one wants to split the soul) until the summer of his sixteenth year. Plus, he didn't know how to make a Horcrux at the time of his conversation with Slughorn, which took place during his sixth year at Hogwarts. We have actually no reason to assume that he began creating Horcruxes while still at school.

Quote:
Grindelwald sought the hallows for the 'greater good' (I'll mention the Greater Good later).
Grindelwald sought the Hallows in order to conquer death, that is clearly indicated in the text. At the very heart of his cruel and sadistic ideology was his yearning to become immortal, his dream of becoming the Master of Death.

Quote:
So the purpose of the Hallows/Horcruxes indicates that Grindelwald is far above Voldemort in moral terms, but also the means is important, as Harry pointed out to Dumbledore hallows not horcruxes.
Voldemort had no knowledge of the existence of the Hallows. Had he known about them he might not have bothered with all the soul-splitting.

Quote:
Grindelwald wasn't as concerned with his immortality as a dark wizard should be.
He was very much so.

Quote:
This indicates that Grindelwald wasn't conqeuring the wizarding world for personal and eternal power
On the contrary, that is exactly what he was doing. He might have been willing to share his power with Dumbledore, but their ultimate goal was, as the latter puts it in DH, to become "Invincible Masters of Death". Grindelwald dreamed of eternal power.

Quote:
But Grindelwald's quest for power was as the leader of a glorious wizarding revolution, for the muggle's own good and the benefits to wizards would be immeasureable.
Do you really think he believed any of that? He emroidered his disgusting ideology with a lot of impressive talk about the greated good in order to make it sound nice, but at the end of the day, he was just as bigoted, power-hungry and obsessed with immortality, as Voldemort.

Quote:
What was Voldemorts greater good?
He fought to keep the wizarding blood pure and free from pollution. That was his idea of the greater good. He wasn't merely aligned with this line of thinking, as you suggest. He was the main driving force behind it.

Quote:
He seems proud of the fact (as the diary Riddle) that the wizarding world was afraid to speak his name,
I'm sure Grindelwald would have been quite flattered by this as well.

Quote:
Also remember that Grindelwald didn't care about immortality,
Yes, he did. His dreams of immortality were at the very foundation of his schemes.

Quote:
his cause was greater than himself,
He made it out to be, but I doubt that he ever really believed any of his own mumbo-jumbo. He clad his plans in nice words in order to delude and intrigue the gullible.

Quote:
In fact when still in friendship with Albus Dumbledore they sought only to use their incredible force when it was absolutely necessary for the 'greater good'.
This is what Dumbledore was trying to make Grindelwald understand. Grindelwald was not above using unnecessary force and violence it seems.

Quote:
Grindelwald was no senseless killer [...] To me Nurmengard's existence proves that Grindelwald was merely dedicated to the cause of the 'greater good', he tried to avoid killing in favour of imprisonment
This we don't know. Nurmengard might have been a place for those Grindelwald thought could become useful later or any number of other things. We simply don't know.

Quote:
I don't think anyone actually died as a result of his 'experiments'.
There's no basis for such an assumption. I think that someone must have died or at least gotten seriously injured in order for Grindelwald to be expelled.

Quote:
once Tom got to school he was far worse than Gellert.
You don't know this. We don't know what Grindelwald was like as a student and therefore can't make a legitimate comparison.

Quote:
And just to add to how evil Tom was at school it is assumed he had already created a horcruxe by the time he asked Slughorn about the possibility of 7 horcruxes,
This is false.

Quote:
this is something Gellert never did at the pinnacle of his powers, and something I doubt Gellert ever considered due to him being motivated by a greater cause instead of selfish concerns of life.
He was motivated by nothing but his cruelty, his sense of personal superiority and his obsession with power.

Quote:
The point is that by the time Riddle was at school he had already delved deeper into dark magic than Gellert Grindelwald had at the height of his powers.
This is potentially false, because we don't know anything about Grindelwald's accomplishments as a student


Quote:
To conclude Grindelwald's defence it seems to me that he was an idealist who believed that his utopia justified his actions
It seems to me that all of his "greater good" nonsense was simply a way to disguise his obvious instincts for cruelty and domination.


Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old December 24th, 2010, 5:10 pm
Durmstrang_Swag  Undisclosed.gif Durmstrang_Swag is offline
First Year
 
Joined: 3253 days
Posts: 35
Re: Grindelwald: Character Analysis

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hut_On_The_Rock View Post
Voldemort did not a create any Horcruxes during his fifth year. He didn't even commit his first murder (crucial, if one wants to split the soul) until the summer of his sixteenth year. Plus, he didn't know how to make a Horcrux at the time of his conversation with Slughorn, which took place during his sixth year at Hogwarts. We have actually no reason to assume that he began creating Horcruxes while still at school.
Actually it is hinted that Riddle's main aim in his conversation with Slughorn was to discover what would happen should he create 6 Horcruxes, and also there were horcruxe books at Hogwarts, as Hermione uses a summoning charm and they fly out of Dumbledore's office, the book "secrets of the darkest art" which contains the instructions on how to create a Horcruxe was available to Riddle, Dumbledore removed the Horcruxe books after Riddle had left school so he knew how to make a horcruxe and had already killed his muggle relatives. Riddle aspired to make a horcruxe, knew how to and had killed. I'd say it's safe to assume he was making horcruxes while at Hogwarts.



Quote:
Grindelwald sought the Hallows in order to conquer death, that is clearly indicated in the text. At the very heart of his cruel and sadistic ideology was his yearning to become immortal, his dream of becoming the Master of Death.
Grindelwald had obviously researched the Hallows very well, this is proved by how he knew (despite all the myths) that he didn't kill Gregorovitch, which also testifies that he wasn't that dark, Voldemort killed Gregorovitch without even getting the wand from him. In his research he must have found out what 'Master of Death' really meant, that he accepted death and that there were things much worse than death. Note some of his last words to Voldemort was that he "welcomed death" and implied he knew so much more than Voldemort. I think this indicates that Grindelwald knew what Invincible Master of Death trully meant.



Quote:
Voldemort had no knowledge of the existence of the Hallows. Had he known about them he might not have bothered with all the soul-splitting.
Dumbledore says that he thinks Voldemort wouldn't want the Hallows (besides the wand) just as he didn't want immortality through the Elixir of Life, which he knew about. Hrorcruxes were Voldemorts chosen method, the Hallows were Grindelwald's and Dumbledore's, as Harry said "Hallows not Horcruxes".

Quote:
Do you really think he believed any of that? He emroidered his disgusting ideology with a lot of impressive talk about the greated good in order to make it sound nice, but at the end of the day, he was just as bigoted, power-hungry and obsessed with immortality, as Voldemort.
I do, Grindelwald went to extreme lengths to spread the 'greater good', from debating it with Dumbledore to carving it above Nurmengard. He seemed to genuinely believe it. He also never expressed any bigoted pure-blood beliefs, but he was undoubtedly power hungry, I can concede that.


Quote:
He fought to keep the wizarding blood pure and free from pollution. That was his idea of the greater good. He wasn't merely aligned with this line of thinking, as you suggest. He was the main driving force behind it.
This is hard to believe giving his own blood-status. He wasn't the driving force either, he had an intense hatred for muggles but not for half-bloods which entails muggle-blood in there. He cared for nothing but his own power, Grindelwald had a cause, a cause which he thought justified any means. What you also see with Grindelwald is the necessity to justify his actions with 'the greater good', he shows emotions near to remorse even during his reign of terror.



Quote:
I'm sure Grindelwald would have been quite flattered by this as well.
While a lot of what I say on Grindelwald is speculation, it is based on the few facts we do know. This has no grounding other than Voldemort relishing in it, there aren't many similarities between Voldemort and Grindelwald besides their skill as wizards and their reputations.



Quote:
This is what Dumbledore was trying to make Grindelwald understand. Grindelwald was not above using unnecessary force and violence it seems.
He probably wasn't opposed to using powerful dark magic, as is shown by his experiments at Durmstrang. But to him his caused justified any force which furthered his goal, that of overthrowing the European ministries in order to overthrow the statute of secrecy and enter a new wizarding order. In his view and any who sympathised with his view the force was necessary, even Dumbledore recognised there would be opposition and they would have to be subdued.



Quote:
This we don't know. Nurmengard might have been a place for those Grindelwald thought could become useful later or any number of other things. We simply don't know.
Nurmengard is specifically called "the prison he built for his enemies". Why build a prison for your enemies if you were planning on mercilessly killing vast swathes of the wizarding and muggle world. It's possible that Nurmengard wasn't used much if he got carried away with his power, but Nurmengard's existence shows that genuinely didn't intend to kill when he didn't have to and that he probably believed in his cause.

Quote:
There's no basis for such an assumption. I think that someone must have died or at least gotten seriously injured in order for Grindelwald to be expelled.
I don't think anyone died, but it's said that his experiments became too dangerous even for Durmstrang. If he was a danger to his fellow students it's perfectly reasonable to expect he'd be expelled.



Quote:
You don't know this. We don't know what Grindelwald was like as a student and therefore can't make a legitimate comparison.
We can be almost certain he didn't unleash a Basilisk on his fellow students or create horcruxes. I'd say if we think Grindelwald didn't kill it wasn't worse than Voldemort.


Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old December 24th, 2010, 8:02 pm
Hut_On_The_Rock  Male.gif Hut_On_The_Rock is offline
First Year
 
Joined: 3272 days
Location: The North Sea
Age: 27
Posts: 26
Re: Grindelwald: Character Analysis

Quote:
Originally Posted by Durmstrang_Swag View Post
Actually it is hinted that Riddle's main aim in his conversation with Slughorn was to discover what would happen should he create 6 Horcruxes
His initial aim was to find out what Horcruxes were and he began by asking Slughorn about them and how they're made, which proves his lack of knowledge regarding the process and the subject itself, at the time of their conversation. What ended up intriguing him the most, was, however, the idea of a seven-part soul.

You said in an earlier post that he had already made a Horcrux during his fifth year at Hogwarts, which is not true and I doubt that he made any Horcruxes at all as a student. There's not a shred of evidence to support such a conclusion.

The subject of Horcruxes was actually banned at Hogwarts during Riddle's time there and Slughorn said that one would be hard-pushed to find a book giving detailed information about them, which renders the possibility of Riddle learning about Horcruxes from a book rather unlikely

Plus, it is suggested that mutilation of the soul affects one's appearance and yet during his time at Hogwarts and even "Borgin and Burkes", Riddle remained just as handsome as ever.

Quote:
Grindelwald had obviously researched the Hallows very well, this is proved by how he knew (despite all the myths) that he didn't kill Gregorovitch, which also testifies that he wasn't that dark, Voldemort killed Gregorovitch without even getting the wand from him. In his research he must have found out what 'Master of Death' really meant, that he accepted death and that there were things much worse than death. Note some of his last words to Voldemort was that he "welcomed death" and implied he knew so much more than Voldemort. I think this indicates that Grindelwald knew what Invincible Master of Death trully meant.
Dumbledore said that both he and Grindelwald thought that once they had the three Hallows in their possession, they would become literally invincible. So Grindelwald did not interpret the legend in any sort of metaphorical sense. Why else would he have bothered to look for the Hallows? If he had truly understood what conquering death was all about, why would he have been so obsessed with these objects?

As for him welcoming death... I think he really did welcome it, because it would finally put him out of his misery. I mean, he didn't seem too happy in his cell in Nurmengard so death couldn't come fast enough, I'm sure.

Quote:
Grindelwald went to extreme lengths to spread the 'greater good', from debating it with Dumbledore to carving it above Nurmengard. He seemed to genuinely believe it.
I don't buy any of that. He sought power and domination and cared only about satisfying his own sadistic urges. All the "greater good" ** was only ever meant to make him and his plans seem appealing to others.

Quote:
This is hard to believe giving his own blood-status. He wasn't the driving force either, he had an intense hatred for muggles but not for half-bloods which entails muggle-blood in there. He cared for nothing but his own power, Grindelwald had a cause, a cause which he thought justified any means. What you also see with Grindelwald is the necessity to justify his actions with 'the greater good', he shows emotions near to remorse even during his reign of terror.
Hitler was part-Jew (if I'm not mistaken) and yet it didn't stop him from promoting hardcore antisemitism. There are a couple of rather telling passages in DH, where it is made clear that Voldemort views both Half-Bloods and Muggleborns as a disgrace. "Genuine" blood purity is what the only thing he truly values.

Quote:
Grindelwald had a cause, a cause which he thought justified any means. What you also see with Grindelwald is the necessity to justify his actions with 'the greater good', he shows emotions near to remorse even during his reign of terror.
The "greater good" slogan served no other purpose than to make his plans seem justifiable in the eyes of others. He himself felt no need to justify his own perverted dreams but in order for his vision to catch he needed it to look desirable and fair.

Quote:
Nurmengard is specifically called "the prison he built for his enemies". Why build a prison for your enemies if you were planning on mercilessly killing vast swathes of the wizarding and muggle world. It's possible that Nurmengard wasn't used much if he got carried away with his power, but Nurmengard's existence shows that genuinely didn't intend to kill when he didn't have to and that he probably believed in his cause.
Nurmengard was built for his enemies sure, but why he built it we don't know. Was it out of mercy or was it because he thought there was something to gain by not killing his enemies right on the spot? We don't know and the existence of the prison proves nothing.


Quote:
I don't think anyone died, but it's said that his experiments became too dangerous even for Durmstrang. If he was a danger to his fellow students it's perfectly reasonable to expect he'd be expelled.
The experiments were never said to be dangerous but "twisted". What he was doing we'll never know, just as we can't know if there were any victims or not.

Quote:
We can be almost certain he didn't unleash a Basilisk on his fellow students or create horcruxes.
First of all, we don't know if Riddle ever created any Horcruxes as a student. There's absolutely no evidence to support this.

Second, Grindelwald could have done something that was just as horrible as releasing a Basilisk. We can't know.


Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old December 27th, 2010, 12:13 am
Durmstrang_Swag  Undisclosed.gif Durmstrang_Swag is offline
First Year
 
Joined: 3253 days
Posts: 35
Re: Grindelwald: Character Analysis

Right, I've been busy and I'll do my reply to the Grindelwald stuff later, but Tom Riddle KNEW how to make a horcrux before he asked Slughorn and he had already KILLED. He was interested in the possibility of making 6 horcruxes as he that was the one thing he COULD NOT read about, as we think no one had ever made more than a single horcrux.

Albus Dumbledore removed the books about horcruxes after Riddle and presumably when he became headmaster as they were in his office (that's where Hermione summoned them from), they didn't just mention horcruxes, they gave specific instruction on the creation, and destruction of a horcruxe. As we know Dumbledore was not headmaster when Riddle was at school. And you can't take what the young Riddle said about not understanding horcruxes as the truth. He was (according to Dumbeldore) probably the most brilliant student they'd ever had, and by then he had a fascination with the dark arts and he had killed his muggle relatives already. He knew what a horcruxe was and how to make one (and probably had made one). So he knew how and had already fulfilled the requirements to make one, and wanted to become immortal. It's a safe bet he had created a horcruxe.

How this relates to Grindelwald? You can speculate that Grindelwald killed, but have no evidence other than his 'twisted' experiments, could merely be torture by the Cruciatus curse or it could be inventing new dark spells, but as far as we know Grindelwald did not create a horcruxe at all and didn't release a basilisk on the muggle born students. The horcruxe is regarded as the darkest of magic, it is unlikely Grindelwald topped this at all, nevermind going on to split his soul a further 5 times after Riddle's first horcruxe. Riddle was undoubtedly darker despite probably not being much more skillfull.


Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old December 27th, 2010, 3:06 am
Hut_On_The_Rock  Male.gif Hut_On_The_Rock is offline
First Year
 
Joined: 3272 days
Location: The North Sea
Age: 27
Posts: 26
Re: Grindelwald: Character Analysis

The subject of Horcruxes was banned at Hogwarts during Riddle's time there and Slughorn said that one would be hard-pushed to find a book giving details about them. We can therefore conclude that it wasn't simply a matter of going to the library if one wanted to learn how to split the soul etc.

Dumbledore is said to have been particularly fierce about it, long before he even became Headmaster and it is reasonable to assume that he wasted no time in making sure that any book bearing information about Horcruxes was kept out of reach for students. He most likely stored these books in the office that he occupied at the time and naturally took them along upon relocating to the Head's Office. Once again, it's safe to assume (given the canonical evidence) that Riddle had no access to information about Horcruxes and was thus forced to ask Slughorn about them.

Quote:
"Sir, I wondered what you know about... about Horcruxes?" [...] He [Harry] could tell that Riddle wanted the information very, very much;
Quote:
"A horcrux is the word used for an object in which a person has concealed part of their soul."
"I don't quite understand how that works though, sir," said Riddle. His voice was carefully controlled, but Harry could sense his excitement.
Quote:
But Riddle's hunger was now apparent; his expression was greedy, he could no longer hide his longing. "How do you split your soul"
"Well," said Slughorn uncomfortably, "you must understand that the soul is supposed to remain intact and whole. Splitting it is an act of violation, it is against nature."
"But how do you do it?" [it's the second time he asks this, with notable urgency; he really wants to know]
"By an act of evil - the supreme act of evil. By committing murder. Killing rips the soul apart. The wizard intent upon creating a Horcrux would use the damage to his advantage: he would encase the torn portion - "
"Encase? But how - [this is the fourth time he shows clear signs of incomprehension] "
Riddle's reaction to this very basic information about Horcruxes strongly indicates genuine curiosity and prior lack of knowledge. Nowhere in the canon is it even vaguely implied that he was faking ignorance here (on the contrary, it's pretty clear that he wasn't) and the only reasonable conclusion would be that he knew nothing about Horcruxes at the time of his conversation with Slughorn and it's almost just as unreasonable to assume that he learned how to make one during his remaining time at Hogwarts.


Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old December 27th, 2010, 7:57 pm
wolfbrother  Male.gif wolfbrother is offline
Sixth Year
 
Joined: 4248 days
Age: 30
Posts: 1,245
Re: Grindelwald: Character Analysis

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hut_On_The_Rock View Post
His initial aim was to find out what Horcruxes were and he began by asking Slughorn about them and how they're made, which proves his lack of knowledge regarding the process and the subject itself, at the time of their conversation. What ended up intriguing him the most, was, however, the idea of a seven-part soul.

You said in an earlier post that he had already made a Horcrux during his fifth year at Hogwarts, which is not true and I doubt that he made any Horcruxes at all as a student. There's not a shred of evidence to support such a conclusion.

The subject of Horcruxes was actually banned at Hogwarts during Riddle's time there and Slughorn said that one would be hard-pushed to find a book giving detailed information about them, which renders the possibility of Riddle learning about Horcruxes from a book rather unlikely

Plus, it is suggested that mutilation of the soul affects one's appearance and yet during his time at Hogwarts and even "Borgin and Burkes", Riddle remained just as handsome as ever.
I think it was repeated mutilation of the soul that affected one's appearance. Else it would be a pretty dead giveaway that you had made a horcrux.

As to whether Riddle made a horcrux when in school, the Riddle from the diary was said to have looked sixteen years old. He made it when he was in school.

The fact that Horcruxes were a banned subject at Hogwarts is irrelevant because Riddle managed to find out about it. Hermione hadn't even heard of the word when Harry asked her. IMO the book on horcruxes was present in the restricted section of the library and Riddle managed to find a way around its protection for unauthorized access.

I agree that he didn't seem to know about the process when he was talking about Slughorn. I think he had the basic idea that it split your soul and he wanted Slughorn's opinion on how multiple horcruxes would work.

Quote:
I don't buy any of that. He sought power and domination and cared only about satisfying his own sadistic urges. All the "greater good" ** was only ever meant to make him and his plans seem appealing to others.
IMO he was misguided but he believed it to an extent. He had no reason to debate it with Dumbledore otherwise. Dumbledore here was not someone who could be fooled by propaganda talk. To me it sounds like an ambitious project that two extremely intelligent and talented boys decided to start.
I don't deny that he was power hungry and wanted domination but I think to some extent he believed he was helping people.
We can't really speculate on why he wanted to do this without knowing his background. Dumbledore's reasons are pretty obvious though.

Quote:
Hitler was part-Jew (if I'm not mistaken) and yet it didn't stop him from promoting hardcore antisemitism. There are a couple of rather telling passages in DH, where it is made clear that Voldemort views both Half-Bloods and Muggleborns as a disgrace. "Genuine" blood purity is what the only thing he truly values.
Frankly, I don't think Voldemort cared one whit about blood purity. That was just his propaganda. The only thing Voldemort cared about was himself.

Quote:
The "greater good" slogan served no other purpose than to make his plans seem justifiable in the eyes of others. He himself felt no need to justify his own perverted dreams but in order for his vision to catch he needed it to look desirable and fair.
I don't think we can comment on this without knowing his motives. As I mentioned above, I think he believed it to an extent. Power hungry individuals with selfish motives do not like to share power but it seems Grindelwald had no problems with Dumbledore sharing the spotlight with him.


Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old December 28th, 2010, 1:17 am
Hut_On_The_Rock  Male.gif Hut_On_The_Rock is offline
First Year
 
Joined: 3272 days
Location: The North Sea
Age: 27
Posts: 26
Re: Grindelwald: Character Analysis

Quote:
Originally Posted by wolfbrother View Post
I think it was repeated mutilation of the soul that affected one's appearance.
Given the evidence in the canon, I would assume that even the smallest degree of mutilation would somehow affect one's appearance.

Quote:
As to whether Riddle made a horcrux when in school, the Riddle from the diary was said to have looked sixteen years old. He made it when he was in school.
There's more to it it than that and the canonical evidence if far from clear.

Diary-Riddle said that he had decided to leave behind his diary in hope that someone would find it and continue the work of Salazar Slytherin. Yet Riddle never left it behind, but took it with him after leaving Hogwarts and waited nearly three decades before giving it to Lucius Malfoy. This suggests that he never succeeded in making a Horcrux out of it while in school but rather at some point during his adult life. The fact that diary-Riddle is sixteen does not mean that Riddle turned the diary into a Horcrux at that age.

Quote:
The fact that Horcruxes were a banned subject at Hogwarts is irrelevant because Riddle managed to find out about it. Hermione hadn't even heard of the word when Harry asked her. IMO the book on horcruxes was present in the restricted section of the library and Riddle managed to find a way around its protection for unauthorized access.
Hermione had never heard of the word prior to Harry's mention of it, that is true, but she did actually come across it in a book once she began researching the subject (the book did not give any details, however). It is, what I would call a proven fact, that Riddle did not know anything about Horcruxes at the time of his conversation with Slughorn. I presented the evidence for this in my previous post , yet you have provided me with nothing but groundless assumptions and several contradictions of the canon.

Quote:
I agree that he didn't seem to know about the process when he was talking about Slughorn. I think he had the basic idea that it split your soul and he wanted Slughorn's opinion on how multiple horcruxes would work.
Could you please provide the evidence for this?

Quote:
IMO he was misguided but he believed it to an extent. He had no reason to debate it with Dumbledore otherwise. Dumbledore here was not someone who could be fooled by propaganda talk. To me it sounds like an ambitious project that two extremely intelligent and talented boys decided to start.
I think Dumbledore was infatuated with Grindelwald and was simply deluding himself into thinking that Grindelwald was one of the good guys. Grindelwald on the other hand was trying to delude others with a lot of impressive talk about the greater good, imo (Dumbledore certainly fell for it). Dumbledore actually believed in Grindelwald's ideas and their friendship was very fortunate for Grindelwald (who had cleverly constructed a fake ideology in order to conceal his true intentions) because he finally had someone who could help him gain what he desired most - power. JMHO, of course.

Quote:
I don't deny that he was power hungry and wanted domination but I think to some extent he believed he was helping people.
I think he was consciously trying to fool people into believing that he was helping them, when in fact he never cared for anyone but himself.

Quote:
The only thing Voldemort cared about was himself.
The same goes for Grindelwald, imo. The only difference is that Grindelwald is said to have felt some remorse for his deeds.

Quote:
it seems Grindelwald had no problems with Dumbledore sharing the spotlight with him.
I think he was using Dumbledore. Dumbledore was brilliant and truly dedicated to Grindelwald's fake cause and that was of course advantageous for Grindelwald. In the end though, I don't think Grindelwald would ever let anyone else share the spotlight. I think he would have gotten rid of Dumbledore once he was done with him.


Reply With Quote
  #51  
Old December 28th, 2010, 11:18 pm
wolfbrother  Male.gif wolfbrother is offline
Sixth Year
 
Joined: 4248 days
Age: 30
Posts: 1,245
Re: Grindelwald: Character Analysis

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hut_On_The_Rock View Post
Given the evidence in the canon, I would assume that even the smallest degree of mutilation would somehow affect one's appearance.
Please show me the evidence from canon for this.

Quote:
There's more to it it than that and the canonical evidence if far from clear.

Diary-Riddle said that he had decided to leave behind his diary in hope that someone would find it and continue the work of Salazar Slytherin. Yet Riddle never left it behind, but took it with him after leaving Hogwarts and waited nearly three decades before giving it to Lucius Malfoy. This suggests that he never succeeded in making a Horcrux out of it while in school but rather at some point during his adult life. The fact that diary-Riddle is sixteen does not mean that Riddle turned the diary into a Horcrux at that age.
The Diary-Riddle told Harry what Riddle's plans had been at the time of the making of the horcrux. Evidently, Riddle changed his mind about leaving it behind. He probably decided it was better to strategically plant it at a later time. Not to mention that the horcrux was probably his only one at the time, so he wouldn't want to risk it being destroyed so soon. If Riddle had made the horcrux after leaving school, then Diary-Riddle would have known that it wasn't intended to be left behind in school.
The Diary-Riddle also says that it was present in the diary for 50 years. I don't see a reason for Diary-Riddle to appear as a sixteen year old person as well. IMO it makes sense for the soul to take the form of the body it was inhabiting at the time of creation.

Quote:
Hermione had never heard of the word prior to Harry's mention of it, that is true, but she did actually come across it in a book once she began researching the subject (the book did not give any details, however). It is, what I would call a proven fact, that Riddle did not know anything about Horcruxes at the time of his conversation with Slughorn. I presented the evidence for this in my previous post , yet you have provided me with nothing but groundless assumptions and several contradictions of the canon.
Yet Riddle seemed to know that Horcruxes were a dangerous subject so much so that he carefully planned a meeting with Slughorn. Harry mentions that it seemed like the Riddle had been working for that moment for weeks. He also knew that it had something to do with immortality.

Also note that Slughorn said he would be "hard pushed" to find a book about Horcruxes at Hogwarts. Hard-pushed not impossible.

I also find it a stretch to believe that Riddle went from first hearing about horcruxes to asking Slughorn's opinion on making seven of them in a matter of minutes if not seconds.

The way I see the scene, Riddle knew that Horcruxes had something to do with immortality and splitting your soul prior to meeting with Slughorn. He knew what it was but not the process of how it was made. His purpose of the meeting was to get as much details on the process as possible and Slughorn's opinion on making multiple ones (specifically seven).


Quote:
Could you please provide the evidence for this?
Dumbledore mentions to Harry that Riddle wanted specifically to get Slughorn's opinion on making multiple horcruxes right after they see the memory. He said that no book would have given him that information and that as far as Riddle was aware, no one had split his soul more than once.

Quote:
I think Dumbledore was infatuated with Grindelwald and was simply deluding himself into thinking that Grindelwald was one of the good guys. Grindelwald on the other hand was trying to delude others with a lot of impressive talk about the greater good, imo (Dumbledore certainly fell for it). Dumbledore actually believed in Grindelwald's ideas and their friendship was very fortunate for Grindelwald (who had cleverly constructed a fake ideology in order to conceal his true intentions) because he finally had someone who could help him gain what he desired most - power. JMHO, of course.
I agree that Dumbledore was deluding himself to an extent. He seemed to know what Grindelwald was deep down. That said, it doesn't make sense for Grindelwald to spend so much time and effort with Dumbledore. Grindelwald would have realized pretty soon that Dumbledore was as talented and as intelligent as himself. He would have started seeing him as a rival soon.
Quotes from Bathilda and Dumbledore suggest that they became good friends and Grindelwald didn't see him as a rival.

Quote:
I think he was consciously trying to fool people into believing that he was helping them, when in fact he never cared for anyone but himself.
While I don't agree with this, you may be right about this. I don't think we have enough information to take a call on either side.
People can do horrible things believing that they are doing right. In such a situation, it may even be possible that Dumbledore going along with Grindelwald may have solidified his belief that he was doing the right thing.

Quote:
The same goes for Grindelwald, imo. The only difference is that Grindelwald is said to have felt some remorse for his deeds.
As I mentioned above, we don't have enough information in the case of Grindelwald. Everyone has some motivation or a reason for doing what they do however misguided it is.

Quote:
I think he was using Dumbledore. Dumbledore was brilliant and truly dedicated to Grindelwald's fake cause and that was of course advantageous for Grindelwald. In the end though, I don't think Grindelwald would ever let anyone else share the spotlight. I think he would have gotten rid of Dumbledore once he was done with him.
I don't know where you come to the conclusion that Grindelwald had his cause concocted just for public acceptance. He had to have believed in it to a certain extent to have been able to sell the idea to Dumbledore.

When Grindelwald grabbed power, he never tried to take over Britain because Dumbledore was there. He was fully aware of just how good Dumbledore was. This knowledge would have come from his interactions with Dumbledore as a youngster. He would have been well aware as a kid just how good Dumbledore
was. The prudent action would have been to take out Dumbledore then and continue with his plans. Grindelwald hadn't come to find a partner for his plans, he had come to find out more about the Hallows.

IMO Grindelwald and Dumbledore became great friends and had a shared vision of a revolution. Power blinds and corrupts. Grindelwald may have eventually become blinded by power and decided that he had enough of Dumbledore, but I don't think it was his intention initially.


Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old January 3rd, 2011, 9:30 pm
Hut_On_The_Rock  Male.gif Hut_On_The_Rock is offline
First Year
 
Joined: 3272 days
Location: The North Sea
Age: 27
Posts: 26
Re: Grindelwald: Character Analysis

Quote:
Originally Posted by wolfbrother View Post
The Diary-Riddle told Harry what Riddle's plans had been at the time of the making of the horcrux. Evidently, Riddle changed his mind about leaving it behind.
The diary was originally intended to be left behind, because Riddle was absoluetly sure that he would figure out how to seal a part of his soul in it before graduation. Yet, in the end, he took it with him, which suggests, imo, that he never succeeded in turning it into a Horcrux. Nothing else makes sense to me. (This is, of course, speculation, given the lack of solid canonical evidence on this particular matter)

Quote:
Not to mention that the horcrux was probably his only one at the time, so he wouldn't want to risk it being destroyed so soon.
Had he known how to make a Horcrux while still in school, he would have surely wasted no time in turning the ring into one as well. So, we can logically conclude that he most likely had two Horcruxes at the end of his seventh year and had therefore no reason to worry too much about the diary. This of course brings us right back to square one and that's one of the reasons why I don't accept your theory.

Quote:
IMO it makes sense for the soul to take the form of the body it was inhabiting at the time of creation.
The piece of soul in a Horcrux can no doubt take whatever form it prefers or whatever form the creator of the Horcrux wants it to take (just look at Horcrux-Harry and Horcrux-Hermione, in DH).

Quote:
Yet Riddle seemed to know that Horcruxes were a dangerous subject so much so that he carefully planned a meeting with Slughorn. Harry mentions that it seemed like the Riddle had been working for that moment for weeks. He also knew that it had something to do with immortality.
Harry wanted to know what Horcruxes were as well and he worked long and rather hard for that information, without knowing anything about them, except for the fact that they were the wickedest magical invention ever (according to a book Hermione found during her research). So there's no reason to assume that just because Riddle was thoroughly prepared (according to Harry, that is and just because the main hero of the books says or thinks something, doesn't mean that it should automatically be regarded as truth, btw) that he had any prior knowledge on the subject.

Quote:
Also note that Slughorn said he would be "hard pushed" to find a book about Horcruxes at Hogwarts. Hard-pushed not impossible.
Semantics. No matter how one looks at it though, it clearly wasn't a simple matter of going to the library if one wanted to learn how to split the soul. Had it been that easy, then Riddle would have never gone to Slughorn in the first place. The very fact that he asked him about Horcruxes, pretty much proves that he had not been able to find the information elsewhere.

Quote:
I also find it a stretch to believe that Riddle went from first hearing about horcruxes to asking Slughorn's opinion on making seven of them in a matter of minutes if not seconds.
I have no trouble believing this.

Quote:
The way I see the scene, Riddle knew that Horcruxes had something to do with immortality and splitting your soul prior to meeting with Slughorn. He knew what it was but not the process of how it was made. His purpose of the meeting was to get as much details on the process as possible and Slughorn's opinion on making multiple ones (specifically seven).
1. This conversation took place in September (at the very earliest) of Riddle's sixth year.
2. You say he created his first Horcrux (the diary) as a sixteen-year-old.
3. He turned seventeen on December 31, which would have left him no more than four months, to find out how to make a Horcrux. First of all, where would he have found the information (clearny not at Hogwarts)? The creation of a Horcrux is a "grotesque process" according to Rowling, involvning several curses (no doubt highly advanced Dark Magic), so even if we assume (against all reason) that Riddle had all the necessary information at hand, how likely is it that he would have mastered the magical theory in a matter of months (I know I said the conversation took place in September, but I'm being pretty generous with the timeline here. It could have been October or November for all we know). And if he (through some sort of miracle) succeeded in turning the diary into a Horcrux, then why didn't he leave it behind as planned?

Quote:
That said, it doesn't make sense for Grindelwald to spend so much time and effort with Dumbledore.
It makes a lot of sense, imo, becuase it would have been a huge advantage to have someonse as brilliant (and as devoted to the "cause") as Dumbledore.

Quote:
Grindelwald would have realized pretty soon that Dumbledore was as talented and as intelligent as himself. He would have started seeing him as a rival soon.
Exactly. Grindlewald doesn't share power.

Quote:
Quotes from Bathilda and Dumbledore suggest that they became good friends and Grindelwald didn't see him as a rival.
When Ariana died and Dumbledore was a wreck, Grindelwald left without ever looking back. What a friend.

Quote:
People can do horrible things believing that they are doing right.
And there are always those who commit horrible deeds just to satisfy their own sadistic urges.

Quote:
Everyone has some motivation or a reason for doing what they do however misguided it is.
Yes, I agree. Everyone does have some sort of motivation for their actions, whether it's genuine principles or just a power-hugry nature and perverted dreams or power.

Quote:
He had to have believed in it to a certain extent to have been able to sell the idea to Dumbledore.
No, he didn't. He was just a good liar, imo.

Quote:
The prudent action would have been to take out Dumbledore then and continue with his plans.
He needed Dumbledore.


Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old January 3rd, 2011, 10:04 pm
arithmancer's Avatar
arithmancer  Undisclosed.gif arithmancer is offline
Assistant to Professor Snape
 
Joined: 5224 days
Location: The Hogwarts Boathouse
Posts: 7,938
Re: Grindelwald: Character Analysis

Quote:
Originally Posted by wolfbrother View Post
IMO Grindelwald and Dumbledore became great friends and had a shared vision of a revolution. Power blinds and corrupts. Grindelwald may have eventually become blinded by power and decided that he had enough of Dumbledore, but I don't think it was his intention initially.
I don't see the evidence for supposing Grindelwald decided he had enough of Dumbledore. My impression was that he fled after the death of Ariana, fearing possible legal fallout and/or Albus's anger. The fight started when Aberforth objected to the time Albus was spending with Gellert, so at that point it would seem that Grindelwald still very much wanted to be spending time with Albus.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hut_On_The_Rock View Post
You say he created his first Horcrux (the diary) as a sixteen-year-old.
This discussion has nothing to do with Grindelwald. However, Riddle seems to confirm this himself. In CoS he tells Harry he placed his "16 year old self" into the diary. By "self" I would presume he means a piece of his soul, the piece that is draining Ginny and creating the Tom Harry is talking to.


__________________
The Sorting Hat says I belong in Slytherin.



“Death is the only pure, beautiful conclusion of a great passion.”-D. H. Lawrence

All was well.


Avatar by nerwende, signature art by sigune, used with permission.

Last edited by arithmancer; January 3rd, 2011 at 10:23 pm.
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old January 4th, 2011, 1:28 pm
Durmstrang_Swag  Undisclosed.gif Durmstrang_Swag is offline
First Year
 
Joined: 3253 days
Posts: 35
Re: Grindelwald: Character Analysis

Tom Riddle could have found out how to create a horcruxe. There was a book at Hogwarts about the 'ritual' needed to create one, it's the one where Hermione finds out how to destroy them. "Secrets of the Darkest Art", it's in the canon and it was at Hogwarts. I think it's perfectly reasonable to suppose that Tom Riddle had created AT LEAST one horcruxe while at school. I think the only reason he wouldn't is if he wanted to save it for a 'special killing' (Presumably Harry's death would have been the creation of his final horcruxe, although it sort of was anyway.)

My original point to all this was that Tom Riddle before becoming Voldemot was already more evil than Grindelwald ever had been. It seems almost certain Grindelwald never wanted or did make a horcruxe, and as only one book in Hogwarts seems to go into any detail about them, and the other that mentions them refers to them as the 'most evil' of magic. He'd already killed and planned his path to immortality and ultimate power, and created at least one horcruxe.

And I don't think Grindelwald would have cast Albus aside, Albus himself said of how they both dreamt of being 'Invincible Masters of Death' and 'Glorious young leaders of the Revolution'. The most important thing is that both of them saw themselves as joint participants. Grindelwald no doubt admired Albus. Gellert wasn't Voldemort, he knew how to love and had friendship, true friendship not Voldemort's servants seeking power. I think it would be wrong to assume Grindelwald like Riddle in his emotional side, I think he was willing to share power with those he considered worthy of his friendship (Dumbledore).


Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old January 4th, 2011, 2:23 pm
Hut_On_The_Rock  Male.gif Hut_On_The_Rock is offline
First Year
 
Joined: 3272 days
Location: The North Sea
Age: 27
Posts: 26
Re: Grindelwald: Character Analysis

Quote:
Originally Posted by arithmancer View Post
However, Riddle seems to confirm this himself. In CoS he tells Harry he placed his "16 year old self" into the diary.
This has already been mentioned several times and it doesn't prove or confirm anything. Riddle said that he had decided to leave his diary behind, but he ended up taking it with him, so something must have interfered with his plans. I've already given my thoughts on the matter, so I'm not gonna repeat myself.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Durmstrang_Swag
Tom Riddle could have found out how to create a horcruxe. There was a book at Hogwarts about the 'ritual' needed to create one, it's the one where Hermione finds out how to destroy them. "Secrets of the Darkest Art", it's in the canon and it was at Hogwarts.
First of all, we don't know if the book you mention was available in the library. In fact, given the canonical evidence, it's reasonable to assume that it wasn't. It was most likely locked away somewhere out of reach for any student. As for Hermione summoning the book out of Dumbledore's office with a simple spell... Dumbledore was dead and whatever protective and anti-theft enchantments he most likely had placed upon his office had died with him.

Secondly, the very fact that Riddle asked Slughorn about Horcruxes, proves that he wasn't able to find the information anywhere else. I know what you might say, that Riddle was particularly interested to know what would happen to a person who split their in seven. Particularly, yes, but not solely (and not initially).

Quote:
It seems almost certain Grindelwald never wanted or did make a horcruxe
How can anything be "almost certain" when there's no evidence to support it?

Quote:
He'd already killed and planned his path to immortality and ultimate power
This is exactly what Grindelwald was doing at roughly the same age. It's also possible that he had killed someone as well, although we can't know for sure, due to lack of evidence. I'm actually inclined to believe that someone did die as a result of his "experiments". That seems to be only kind of thing that'll get you expelled from a school like Durmstrang.

Quote:
Gellert wasn't Voldemort, he knew how to love and had friendship
This is speculation on your part. We don't know if Grindelwald ever loved anyone beside himself and it seems to me that a true friend wouldn't have left Dumbledore after Ariana's death. Grindelwald was selfish, imo and cared about nothing but personal gain. He became "friends" with Dumbledore only because the latter would no doubt prove to be useful and help him further his goals.


Reply With Quote
  #56  
Old January 4th, 2011, 3:28 pm
Sceolan  Undisclosed.gif Sceolan is offline
First Year
 
Joined: 3769 days
Posts: 1
Re: Grindelwald: Character Analysis

I think that if Grindelwald had been that coldhearted and selfish, he would have reacted differently right after Ariana´s death.
Remember Bathildas narrative: She said, that he came back to her house "all of a dither" (cit.) and that he was "terribly distressed" (cit.). Either he was distressed about the fact, that Albus`sister died due to the argument he, Aberforth and Albus had or he was distressed that Albus didn´t choose him or that partly his great plans had to be rearranged due to Albus`withdrawal, imo.
In my opinion he either way showed more "care" than Voldemort at the same age had ever been capable of.

And about Grindelwald`s time at Durmstrang:
Rita wrote that there had been only "near-fatal" attacks upon fellow students and no murder. If there had been any fatality during his schooldays, Rita would definitely have written so, imo.


Reply With Quote
  #57  
Old January 4th, 2011, 3:32 pm
Durmstrang_Swag  Undisclosed.gif Durmstrang_Swag is offline
First Year
 
Joined: 3253 days
Posts: 35
Re: Grindelwald: Character Analysis

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hut_On_The_Rock View Post
First of all, we don't know if the book you mention was available in the library. In fact, given the canonical evidence, it's reasonable to assume that it wasn't. It was most likely locked away somewhere out of reach for any student. As for Hermione summoning the book out of Dumbledore's office with a simple spell... Dumbledore was dead and whatever protective and anti-theft enchantments he most likely had placed upon his office had died with him.
It says Dumbledore moved them, I think it's meant that Dumbledore had moved them after Riddle so no other student would find them. Considering there are many other books of dark magic available in the library I'd say something triggered him to remove the only book on Horcruxes, I think that something was him suspecting Riddle. And we don't know if Dumbledore placed any magical protection around the books, I think it's perfectly acceptable to assume Riddle knew about horcruxes, what they were and roughly what he needed to do to create one.

Quote:
Secondly, the very fact that Riddle asked Slughorn about Horcruxes, proves that he wasn't able to find the information anywhere else. I know what you might say, that Riddle was particularly interested to know what would happen to a person who split their in seven. Particularly, yes, but not solely (and not initially).
Dumbledore specifically points out that he wanted to know about the soul divided into 7 because he couldn't find out about that anywhere else, implying there was a way Riddle could have found the rest out. I'm almost certain Riddle knew what a horcruxe was. He wasn't likely to go up to Slughorn "Hi professor, I've been looking into making horcruxes and I've found out about how to make them and all that, but I just can't figure out if having 6 horcruxes would be worth it or not, any ideas?". Riddle was manipulative, he didn't want Slughorn to think he knew what he was talking about.



Quote:
How can anything be "almost certain" when there's no evidence to support it?
He was interested in the Hallows like Dumbledore, that's how he wanted to get power. And it's not mentioned that he did, the fact he chose what is viewed as an alternate means of immortality (even though it isn't, and it's possible he knew that given he'd researched the Hallows a lot) and it isn't said he created one. There's also no mention of Dumbledore having experience with Horcruxes before, he'd have probably been the one to destroy Gellert's. Grindelwald was obsessed with two things; his mission to overthrow the statute of secrecy and the Deathly Hallows, I don't think he ever cared about horcruxes.



Quote:
This is exactly what Grindelwald was doing at roughly the same age. It's also possible that he had killed someone as well, although we can't know for sure, due to lack of evidence. I'm actually inclined to believe that someone did die as a result of his "experiments". That seems to be only kind of thing that'll get you expelled from a school like Durmstrang.
I think seriously endangering the life of students would be enough to get someone expelled, even from Durmstrang. And I've read somewhere (can't remember where) that they endangered lives but was expelled before anyone died. Obviously as I can't remember the source it's not perfect, but it's never mentioned he killed anyone, it'd probably state that he was expelled for fatal experiments if a student had died in them.



Quote:
This is speculation on your part. We don't know if Grindelwald ever loved anyone beside himself and it seems to me that a true friend wouldn't have left Dumbledore after Ariana's death. Grindelwald was selfish, imo and cared about nothing but personal gain. He became "friends" with Dumbledore only because the latter would no doubt prove to be useful and help him further his goals.
I think it's quite clear Grindelwald and Dumbledore were genuine friends until Ariana's death, or maybe even when Grindelwald turned on Aberforth before Ariana died. You seem to view Grindelwald as the same as Voldemort in how he sees others, there's no evidence for this, there's more evidence that he genuinely cared for Dumbledore, not every dark wizard is like Lord Voldemort. Grindelwald fled as he feared the consequences of being associated with the death and probably feared Albus' wrath. I think it's fairly clear Grindelwald and Dumbledore were friends, even if the friendship was inspired by Grindelwald seeing him as a great help in finding the Hallows, it was a real friendship.


Reply With Quote
  #58  
Old January 4th, 2011, 3:37 pm
Hes's Avatar
Hes  Female.gif Hes is offline
Embroidered by imaginatio
 
Joined: 5416 days
Location: One second out of sync
Age: 38
Posts: 5,979
Re: Grindelwald: Character Analysis

Can we move all discussion regarding horcruxes from now on to the various Horcrux threads we have especially since Grindelwald has no canon relationship with horcruxes. Please keep this thread about Grindelwald's character.

We also have a lovely thread about Grindelwald and Dumbledore together called:

Grindelwald and Dumbledore: Joint Character Analysis

Please use it when discussing their interaction


__________________


"I'm a leaf on the wind...watch how I soar."

"Chickens come home to roost."

"It's okay...I-I'm a leaf on the wind."


Loveliest Care Bear. Expert Sig Changer
Reply With Quote
  #59  
Old May 7th, 2011, 3:21 pm
Rodrick  Male.gif Rodrick is offline
First Year
 
Joined: 3177 days
Location: Birmingham
Posts: 43
Re: Grindelwald: Character Analysis

What did you think of him?

Very interesting character. It's a shame Rowling did not relieve as much as I would like to fully analyze him. I hope the Encyclopedia that she is planning to write will discuss him in more detail. I would like to know more about his earlier life and childhood.

What did you make to his and Dumbledore's blossoming friendship?

I think they were both young and ambitious and wanted to achieve and create a whole new world together. Their friendship ended when Grindelwald killed Dumbledore's sister and of course Dumbledore felt regret for being blinded by him and not seeing his true nature.

For the greater good - did they have a point (albeit not going about the right way)?

Frankly I always saw that as an rationalized excuse to make it seem that what they were trying to achieve was not so bad.

Did the fact he was prepared to die rather than betray the wand's whereabouts redeem him?

In some ways yes. I think he finally understood the dangers of the wand and even Dumbledore believed that he felt remorse during his later years. But mostly no because we still have to remember that he murdered countless wizards and witches while using the "greater good" as an excuse. To me, that noble act in the end was too small in comparison to the crimes he committed to actually fully redeem him.


Reply With Quote
  #60  
Old May 22nd, 2011, 6:03 pm
salazarssister  Undisclosed.gif salazarssister is offline
First Year
 
Joined: 3112 days
Posts: 86
Re: Grindelwald: Character Analysis

What did you think of him?

We don't know a huge amount about him. We don't really know what he was like at his prime in comparison to Voldemort

What did you make to his and Dumbledore's blossoming friendship?

It makes sense. Dumbledore and Grindelwald were similar. They were both intelligent, young men who were lonely (well Dumbledore was anyway). They bonded because of that.

For the greater good - did they have a point (albeit not going about the right way)?

Maybe its just matter of opinion.

Did the fact he was prepared to die rather than betray the wand's whereabouts redeem him?

Redemption is an important theme in the books and i think it was noble of Grindelwald to not betray the wands whereabouts. Severus Snape redeemed himself and that was essential for the downfall of Voldemort. I think Grindelwald has redeemed him to a certain extent


__________________
Dumbledore watched her fly away, and as her silvery glow faded he turned back to Snape, and his eyes were full of tears.
"After all this time?"
"Always," said Snape.
Reply With Quote
Reply
Go Back  Chamber of Secrets > Harry Potter > The Stone > Legilimency Studies

Bookmarks

Tags
character analysis, gellert grindelwald


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 8:47 pm.


Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Original content is Copyright © MMII - MMVIII, CoSForums.com. All Rights Reserved.
Other content (posts, images, etc) is Copyright © its respective owners.