Voldemort can't love because his conception wasn't out of true love?

I just read somewhere that the reason Lord Voldemort out of the Harry Potter books is unable to love is because his conception was under the influence of a love potion rather than authentic true love. So I looked it up under Voldemort's Wikipedia article (not the most reliable source, I know) and found under the "Personality" section for him the confirmation of this "fun fact." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lord_Voldemort#Personality

And so I guess I'm just wondering if anyone else is a little let down or disappointed that JK Rowling would do something like that to one of her characters. To me it just kinda feels like she's saying any child who is the result of a rape or a one night stand shouldn't be able to love. As though just because you're not the product of love, you shouldn't be capable of that universal human feeling.

What do you think of this, Books & Authors?

2012-08-03T19:35:56Z

Just to clarify, I don't have any beef with him not being able to love because he grew up without parents and a loving environment-- that part makes sense to me (even if the circumstance is a little extreme). I'm only referring to the part about his conception not being a moment of authentic love. JK Rowling said that it was "a symbolic way of showing that he came from a loveless union . . . . The enchantment under which Tom Riddle fathered Voldemort is important because it shows coercion, and there can’t be many more prejudicial ways to enter the world than as the result of such a union." She's basically saying that any time sex if forced onto a person ("coercion"), the offspring of that sex would live a loveless life. She also of course said "everything would have changed if Merope had survived and raised him herself and loved him." But still. It bothers me that JK would have thought to make the conditions of just the conception a factor of h

2012-08-03T19:37:13Z

t bothers me that JK would have thought to make the conditions of just the conception a factor of his inability to love at all. The fact that someone as influential and inspiring as Jo thinks such a thing... it's kinda unsettling to me.

http://the-leaky-cauldron.org/2007/7/30/j-k-rowling-web-chat-transcript

Lyra [and the Future]2012-08-04T10:46:45Z

Favorite Answer

I'm not sure that that *is* what Rowling is trying to say... that a child of a coerced love, so to speak, will live a loveless life, himself, I mean. At least, I don't think that she's making any sort of blanket statement.

What I think she's trying to do is to carry on this theme that runs through the series about how doing things to a person against their will is among the worst things you could do. You do see it with the unforgivables-- the Imperius curse is unforgivable because you're forcing your own will onto another person without their permission. And, of course, choice plays a HUGE role in this series. We all know the line, "It is our choices, Harry, far more than our abilities, that makes us who we truly are." And we could sit here and have a whole separate discussion about choice as a factor in this series (ex. Voldy chooses Harry instead of Neville as his enemy).

So with Merope and Tom Riddle Sr., I think Rowling is taking this theme of coercion as one of the worst crimes against a fellow human being and running with it. I don't believe that she means that any child of a loveless union will grow up loveless, themselves. I think she's taking Voldy and using him as an extreme symbol of the danger of a loveless life--because, remember, love plays a huge role in the series, too. What you mention about him not being able to love because he grew up without parents and a loving environment is part of the symbolic package. She makes the conditions of the conception a factor because Voldy is an extreme case, and that matters because his feelings about his father, who abandoned Merope as soon as he found out she was a witch (if I remember correctly) also have a huge impact on how his own feelings towards muggles and muggleborns, and wizard superiority, develop. He takes Harry to his father's grave for his "resurrection" to show his superiority over his muggle father.

I definitely understand what you're saying, and maybe my answer is partially an excuse as well as an explanation because I seriously doubt that JK Rowling would do what you fear she's doing. But hopefully my answer provides another perspective. To me, the Potter series is something to be looked at as a whole, because several themes run through all of the books.

*Rachel*2012-08-07T13:19:34Z

While I don't know if that is the sole reason as to why he can't love - I'm not JK Rowling, so I can't say if it is or not - but if it is, I have to say I agree and that that is a terrible message. My grandmother was a rape-baby and she could love - as well as the millions of children who were conceived through loveless relationships are loveless.

Even if the reason has to do with that and the fact that he never received love growing up - that's still a terrible message. Too many kids grow up being abused, neglected, or bounced around from foster home to foster home, but can still love. Sure, maybe it could be harder for them to trust, but they still have that emotion.

Also, if the potion was the case, people shouldn't say that "it's okay, because Voldemort never knew his family's love" because neither did Harry. His parents loved each other when they conceived him, but he grew up with his aunt, uncle, and cousin who hated him. I know he met friends and people who loved him when he was 11 - but that's still long enough to cause any psychological affects. If growing up in a loveless house is what made Voldemort unable to love, then Harry should be unable to, too. While I don't know if the whole "love potion" thing is real, if it is, then yes - it simply had to do with the love potion.

?2012-08-04T08:18:38Z

Hmm yeah I can see your point there. But Voldemort's environment also would have influenced how he was towards others. Harry points out that he has never known love. He has no clue of what love is and he views it as a pathetic weakness. Voldemort grew up in a children's home and wasn't taught how to use his magic properly because he was among muggles who were frightened of him. When he was taken to Hogwarts it was too late and he'd already discovered dark magic. He liked torturing people because it gave him a good feeling and he held a position of power. I think this comes down to the fact that he had no control over his own life and now being the 'Dark Lord' he has ultimate control. This is why Harry is such a threat to him.

Maybe I'm thinking too deeply but there you are haha.
Hope to have helped

Ginger2012-08-06T02:31:10Z

I think it's simply a way of mirroring the loveless relationship between Merope and Tom Sr. and the loveless nature of Voldemort himself. I don't think she was saying/suggesting anything about children of rape being different than, or inferior to, other children. His parents' past was a way to explain his hate of muggles, and his pureblood obsession. Remember that Voldemort is an extreme character who is completely irredeemable and remorseless. I'm pretty sure that having normal parents who loved each other wouldn't have made much of a difference with him. He was literally pure evil, and his past didn't make him that way, he simply was that way. He was evil and without remorse before he even know about his parents' loveless relationship.

Jordy26022012-08-07T08:59:06Z

She did also say that if he grew up loved that would've changed things, but he didn't he grew up in an orphanage, whereas kids that came from rape or something would probably still grow up loved either my their mothers or be adopted.
Harry grew up without love from the Dursleys, but was still fine because his parents loved each other, it wouldn't have made sense if JKR said it was just because Voldemort grew up in an orphanage.
Apart from that, I'm not really sure what you're going on about. JK Rowling made an evil character who isn't real, and said it's because he grew up without love and his parents weren't really in love. What else is there?

Show more answers (9)