|
#41
|
|||
|
|||
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. |
Sponsored Links |
#42
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Grindelwald: Character Analysis
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?
|
#43
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Grindelwald: Character Analysis
Quote:
|
#44
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||
Re: Grindelwald: Character Analysis
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
#45
|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
Re: Grindelwald: Character Analysis
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
#46
|
||||||||
|
||||||||
Re: Grindelwald: Character Analysis
Quote:
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:
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:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Second, Grindelwald could have done something that was just as horrible as releasing a Basilisk. We can't know. |
#47
|
|||
|
|||
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. |
#48
|
|||
|
|||
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:
Quote:
Quote:
|
#49
|
||||
|
||||
Re: Grindelwald: Character Analysis
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. 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 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:
Quote:
|
#50
|
||||||||
|
||||||||
Re: Grindelwald: Character Analysis
Quote:
Quote:
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:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
#51
|
||||||||
|
||||||||
Re: Grindelwald: Character Analysis
Quote:
Quote:
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:
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:
Quote:
Quotes from Bathilda and Dumbledore suggest that they became good friends and Grindelwald didn't see him as a rival. Quote:
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:
Quote:
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. |
#52
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
Re: Grindelwald: Character Analysis
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
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:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
#53
|
||||
|
||||
Re: Grindelwald: Character Analysis
Quote:
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.
__________________
![]() ![]() ![]() “Death is the only pure, beautiful conclusion of a great passion.”-D. H. Lawrence All was well. Last edited by arithmancer; January 3rd, 2011 at 10:23 pm. |
#54
|
|||
|
|||
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). |
#55
|
|||||
|
|||||
Re: Grindelwald: Character Analysis
Quote:
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). Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
#56
|
|||
|
|||
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. |
#57
|
|||||
|
|||||
Re: Grindelwald: Character Analysis
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
#58
|
||||
|
||||
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 |
#59
|
|||
|
|||
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. |
#60
|
|||
|
|||
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. |
![]() |
|
Bookmarks |
Tags |
character analysis, gellert grindelwald |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
Thread Tools | |
|
|
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. |