ClassicDrogn Wrote:At this cynical hour of the evening, I think the earlier post which suggested Voldishorts is a tragic hero because he wanted to reform the stagnant and degenerating wizarding society but was just too insane to succeed might have been right.I feel this is an incorrect statement. As far as I can tell, you are talking about me. My statement about Voldemort being the hero had nothing to do with him otherwise being able to cause societal change. It was purely about a Hero, in the classical sense, being destroyed by his tragic flaw.
A) A Classical Hero does not have to be good, moral, fit any criteria derived from Judeo-Christian morality, fit any literary theory, or carry out any societal changes. Hero was a word used for warrior-chiefs, and mighty or famous warriors, who were likely also aristocrats.
B) As I recall, a classical tragedy is generally about a successful person of rank, skill, and other positive traits failing as a result of some imperfection or excess of positive trait.
C) I'm afraid I haven't read enough classical tragedies lately to give a good reading list, or any solid examples of a tragic flaw. Basically, a tragic flaw is a trait that taken to a certain degree of excess, is capable of utterly destroying an otherwise successful person.
D) While it comes out in a nonlinear fashion, we get a lot of information about Riddle's life. We get more about Harry, but we've essentially have the biographies of both.
E) Therefore, if 'entirely too crazy' is acceptable as tragic flaw, and Riddle's known aptitude is enough to qualify as a Hero, the above explains the justification for 'Riddle as Hero', if you squint enough. Under this model, Riddle would still be a tragic hero, no matter what he would have done without the flaw, whether mass murder or nothing of consequence.
Regarding youthful talent and Harry's relative lack thereof. Albus got his position from talent. Riddle was dangerous and able to avoid being dealt with because of his talent. James and Severus also got their positions in the plot due to talent. (James for 'thrice defying' Riddle, and Severus for his ability to pull off high level minioning.) All over the place in terms of ancestry. If Harry turned out to have been as talented, aside from the marked by Riddle thing, it would have undermined the whole 'blood is a poor marker for ability' theme. Draco maybe does undermine that, but that can be understood as a) upbringing and b) having had an unfortunate effect on his personality. One can understand that maybe Harry is, talent-wise, just an average person stuck in an environment that concentrates the mind wonderfully.
As far as nothing really changed goes:
Does this mean I cannot have a Hero if, in the course of the story I do not 1) Kill off a good sized chunk of the Human population (to hope to eliminate objectionable institutions) or 2) Kill off all of humanity (to eliminate those objectionable factors stemming from human nature)? I mean, I really don't think I have very many other plausible methods for those goals, and thus have no chance with the convincing the reader to suspend disbelief on anything less.