Bellatrix Lestrange

Potteraholic Tue Jul 26, 2011 9:41 pm

This topic serves as an archive of a thread from the Harry Potter Lexicon Forum as hosted on World Crossing, which ceased operation on April 15, 2011. It was copied/saved by Lady Arabella and reformatted/reposted by Potteraholic. ~Potteraholic

Phelim Mcintyre- Mar 8, 2005 9:13 am
Edited by Kip Carter Nov 17, 2005 3:45 am

I don't know if she has had a thread before, but I have a big feeling that Bellatrix Le Strange is going to be important in Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince.

On the website [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] I found the following information:

BELLATRIX "warrioress" (west shoulder) Other Names the Amazon Star. Gamma Orionis HR 1790 HD 35468

Data RA 05 25 07.9 Dec +06 20 59 V 1.64 B-V -0.22 Spectral Type B2III Bellatrix is the 22nd brightest star in the sky.

The idea of a female warrior or Amazon fits her description.

Also, as the killer of Sirius and Voldemort's favourite (or so she claims) I believe we will see more of Bellatrix. What do others think about her?

i n d e x

• [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
• [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
• [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
• [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
• [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
• [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
• [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
• [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
• [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Potteraholic Tue Jul 26, 2011 9:53 pm

Choices - Mar 8, 2005 9:18 am (#1 of 444)

I always have wondered what the significance is of her having very heavy lidded/hooded eyes. Since the eyes are the windows to the soul, maybe she is keeping her eyes somewhat "veiled" so no one can see the blackness of her soul.....but it's pretty obvious without even looking.

Madame Librarian - Mar 8, 2005 12:01 pm (#2 of 444)

I know we've gotten the actual meaning of Bellatrix above, but I think there might be a double meaning or pun on her name. Not sure.

In Italian "bella" means beautiful and the suffix "trix" usually means woman or female. If you want to refer to the female executor of a family's will, you would have used the term executrix (it's a bit archaic now). But--phonetically "trix" sounds just like "tricks." So is there a pun going on involving beautiful tricks? I can't imagine where this would take us character-wise or plot-wise (Bella pulls some amazing stunts to get away from Voldemort, or turns states evidence sort of??), but you know how JKR loves that kind of twisty writing.

Also, is her surname Le Strange just to be taken as a direct translation of "the strange" or "strange one?" Remember, JKR was fluent in French, I think. Can our French-speaking members educate us on this?

Ciao. Barb

Nathan Zimmermann - Mar 8, 2005 12:04 pm (#3 of 444)

Every time I imagine Bellatrix Black Lestrange I keep harkening back to a passage in The Bhagavad-Gita about the radiance of a thousand suns because, of the potential she possessed as a student and the power she displayed in the MoM.

Steve Newton - Mar 8, 2005 12:34 pm (#4 of 444)

I'm weak on Latin. I thought that Bella was a war reference. Such as 'ante-bellum, before the war, and belligerent as in a participant in a war. Different word root?

Elanor - Mar 8, 2005 12:50 pm (#5 of 444)

Also, is her surname Le Strange just to be taken as a direct translation of "the strange" or "strange one?" Remember, JKR was fluent in French, I think. Can our French-speaking members educate us on this?

Let's see if I can help on that one! In French, the adjective "Ètrange", that can be translated by strange, odd, peculiar, according to my dictionary, comes from the old French "estrange" (meaning foreign or strange) and the "es" became "È" in the word as centuries went by. So "l'estrange" (that you pronounce "lÈtrange", without saying the "s" even in old French) can mean the strange one, or, in a way, the foreign one.

But, it also exists as a noun: "l'Ètrange" and then it means "the bizarre", with a rather disturbing connotation that fits very well with Bellatrix.

I have searched my history books and found a famous and interesting real Lestrange. His name was Dom Augustin de Lestrange (1754-1827). He was a Trappist monk and he was a very severe person whose ambition was to restore the Cistercian rules and ideals. I don't know if you're familiar with the Cistercian rules but they were very strict. He was in trouble during the French revolution during which he travelled a lot in Europe and North America but afterwards he came back in France where he restored the Trappist order, the most severe and austere branch of the Cistercians. In a word, not a funny guy... It is unlikely there is connection but his "to the bitter end" behaviour somehow reminded me of Bellatrix.

So, does it help?

EDIT: about bella, that is interesting because it can comes from "bellare", which means "to wage war" and gave words as "belliqueux"/"aggressive, warlike" in French and certainly "bellicosity" and "belligerent" in English, but it could also come from the adjective "bellus, bella, bellum" meaning pretty, graceful. This is perfect for dangerous, warlike but still handsome Bellatrix, isn't it?

Madame Librarian - Mar 8, 2005 2:25 pm (#6 of 444)

Elanor, thank you! Exactly the kind of elaboration I was hoping for. All the more detail to keep us pondering away at the choice of names for this character.

I do think it's always worthwhile to understand the meanings of things and how they sound when spoken aloud. I still can't believe I didn't "get" 12 Grimmauld Place (grim old place) till some kid pointed it out to me. Gaaa! How dense. So, anyway, that's all I was talking about here. Wouldn't it be amazing if the woman we love to hate turns out to be a lot more complex than we assume?

Ciao. Barb

Eric Bailey - Mar 8, 2005 2:53 pm (#7 of 444)

Hmm... Given that she's Tonk's mirror, I wonder if the reason Nymphadora refuses to go by her Latin first name and always changes her look is that she naturally resembles her aunt, a great deal?

T Brightwater - Mar 8, 2005 3:57 pm (#8 of 444)

Er, Nymphadora is Greek, it means something like "gift of the nymph" and if someone had named me that, I think I'd go by my surname too!

I still think Snape had a crush on Bellatrix.

Solitaire - Mar 8, 2005 7:05 pm (#9 of 444)

Bella is Tonks' mirror? Did I miss something farther back in the thread? Help!

Eric Bailey - Mar 8, 2005 10:35 pm (#10 of 444)

Bellatrix is Voldemort's Black family warrior woman, while Nymphadora is her counterpart on Dumbledore's side. I wouldn't be surprised if Bella was an Auror that went bad. She does seem much more of a fighter type than, say, Narcissa.

karebear811 - Mar 8, 2005 11:03 pm (#11 of 444)

I don’t think Bella would have been an Auror, because doesn’t Sirius say that his whole family was very supportive of Voldy's cause. I don’t have that book handy right now, but if I am remembering correctly, he is telling Harry that his family is all Dark Wizards, or at least very much concerned with Pure Bloodness. If this is the case, I highly doubt Bella would want to become an Auror, whose job is to hunt down Dark Wizards and such.

Archangel - Mar 9, 2005 4:44 am (#12 of 444)
Edited by Mar 9, 2005 4:45 am

Oooh a new Bella thread... Too bad the old thread was deleted there were some fabulous insights there.

Though I don't expect JKR to answer them, here are some questions that I would like to be answered about her:

1. How and when did she hook up with Voldemort and his DEs? After Hogwarts? Through her marriage?

2. Did her family, being sympathetic to Voldemort's cause, introduce their daughter to him and his, uh, ideas? Or was it the other way around? Did Bella's family become sympathetic to Voldemort's cause as a result of their daughter's influence? Was she the catalyst in the Black family's support and Regulus' recruitment in the DE? After all, she can be very persuasive.

3. Does Bella really subscribe to this pureblood mania or just finds this whole organization a convenient excuse to use unforgivable curses like an ordinary wizard uses Lumos?

4. Does Voldemort really need her now that she been "unmasked"? Her money, name, and property certainly came in handy before but she's a raving lunatic now.

5. Will Neville get his revenge in HBP or will he team up with Harry and they give her what she rightfully deserves?

I like this character, even if she's eviiiiiillll. She reminds me a lot of the younger-sister-turned-psycho-bomber in 24's second season. Smile

Czarina II - Mar 9, 2005 7:55 am (#13 of 444)

Does Voldemort really need her now that she been unmasked"? Her money, name, and property certainly came in handy before but she's a raving lunatic now. "

Well, raving lunatics can be very handy to an evil warlord. Yes, Bellatrix can get carried away, but she is useful as a scare tactic or as a torturess. She is also completely devoted to Voldemort, at least judging from her behaviour in GoF and OoP. With that sort of devotion, she can be sucked into doing anything for her master. (Which begs the question -- what does Rudolphus think?) However, she needs someone to control her. Right now in the story, Voldemort seems to be serving that purpose himself. Personally, I see him recruiting Narcissa Malfoy to watch her sister, if the others don't get out of Azkaban. Or perhaps another, more coolheaded Death Eater. Voldemort would be foolish to send Bellatrix out on her own, though.

karebear811 - Mar 9, 2005 10:49 am (#14 of 444)

Maybe, Since Bella escaped once from Azkaban, he will have her and the other DE that escaped that were not at the DoM help Lucius and the gang get out now. Voldy obviously wouldn’t want to leave 6 (or how ever many were taken away) DEs locked up at such a crucial time.

Also, I think Bella really did believe in the whole pure blood thing, being that her family was pretty much obsessed with it. Her Aunt would burn names of family trees if they didn’t marry pure bloods, so I have a feeling she pretty much believed in it. Although, I think having an excuse to use an unforgivable was a bonus for her.

Solitaire - Mar 9, 2005 5:41 pm (#15 of 444)

One thing about Bella ... she would probably be willing to go boldly on what others might consider a suicide mission, because she is not thinking properly (my opinion). I doubt she would be frightened, because if she thinks about it long enough, I believe she would prefer to go out in a blaze of green AK haze as opposed to rotting in Azkaban again. People who are maniacs do, as Czarina said, have their uses. Bella might come in handy for just such a mission. JM2K ...

Solitaire

Madame Librarian - Mar 9, 2005 7:06 pm (#16 of 444)

What do you folks think? I know Bella is a married woman, but I bet she's had a monstrous, huge crush on Voldemort just about forever. Perhaps her marriage was even semi-arranged to find her a pureblood hubby. They are devoted together to the cause, but there's really no love lost. Her heart belongs to Voldie, as the song goes. Soooo...now that she's one of the inner circle of DEs that's not at Azkaban, she gets to work even more closely with dear Voldemort, and her heart, hard and evil though it may be, beats with a quickened pulse. Voldemort, true to form, see many uses for Bella, but that's it. As adoring, loving, obedient and ga-ga she is toward him, he wastes not a whit of emotion on her at all. In fact, what if she performs her useful task(s) for a bit, but also manages to get on his nerves with her slavish love. So, he dumps her. Hurt, crushed, and really, really ticked off, she is a woman scorned. Not powerful enough to really do any serious harm to Voldemort on her own, she turns in revenge to...um...the OoP? DD? Harry? Arthur Weasley? Tonks, her kooky cousin? I haven't a clue, but wouldn't this be a neat turn of events?

OK, I'll go watch "West Wing" now, and avoid your dungbomb attack.

Ciao. Barb

Solitaire - Mar 10, 2005 2:55 am (#17 of 444)

She might be nuts enough to contemplate revenge against her Master if sufficiently provoked or humiliated. However, I seriously doubt she would seek out help from the Order or anyone who has fought against Voldemort. I can't see her admitting she needs help of any kind. She might try and enlist Narcissa or Lucius in her favor--albeit unsuccessfully, thereby officially cutting herself off from everyone--but I believe she is such a loose cannon that she would be more likely to attempt it on her own ... and in the process engineer her own demise. JM2K, of course ...

Weeny Owl - Mar 10, 2005 3:43 am (#18 of 444)

I don't see Bella's devotion to Voldemort as being anything at all romantic. I see it as a nearly religious fervor, and I can easily picture her being just as insane as Mrs. Black is in the portrait at Grimmauld Place.

Even during the confrontation at the Department of Mysteries, Harry ticked her off big time when he actually said "Voldemort." She started spouting the same things Mrs. Black does.

I cannot see Voldemort "dumping" such a fervent follower. She begged him not to punish her in the Ministry atrium, and that makes it sound as if he's punished her before when she didn't live up to his expectations. Him being displeased with a follower seems to be standard operating procedure, and if he isn't "dumping" Avery after the bad information on procuring the Prophecy, then I just can't see Bella being gotten rid of ever. He might Crucio her for a bit or perhaps allow a Dementor to come close to giving her a kiss, but he won't let a devoted follower leave.

Mellilot Flower. - Mar 10, 2005 4:09 am (#19 of 444)

Especially not a devoted follower who knows so much and for whom he went to some lengths at least to get out of Azkaban. I can see the possibility of a romantic involvement, or romantic feelings between the Dark Lord and Bella but I doubt that Voldemort would let anything like that get in the way. No matter how annoying a person might be, they can still be useful- after all he keeps Wormtail around (or we assume he does)

Archangel - Mar 10, 2005 6:12 am (#20 of 444)

Madame Librarian, I can see that sort of thing happening. Bella is close to losing it and you'll never know what sort of thing could finally cause her to snap.

Madame Librarian - Mar 10, 2005 7:52 am (#21 of 444)

I didn't mean dumping as in "sorry, Bella, we are no longer an item, and I'm taking someone else to the prom." No, it's more like he just didn't want her around him anymore. He assigns tasks of the sort meant to keep her at a distance. She's the one who perceives it as being dumped.

Ciao. Barb

Choices - Mar 10, 2005 10:46 am (#22 of 444)

We know the Longbottoms were Crucio’d into insanity. Could the reason for Bellatrix's crazed devotion to Voldemort spring from the fact that she has been punished/Crucio’d for past failures and it has left her a brick or two short of a full load?

TomoÈ - Mar 10, 2005 10:59 am (#23 of 444)

I don't see Voldemort as torturing his followers into insanity, there is no use for dysfunctional followers. I believe Bella's state of mind is due to Azkaban.

(By the way, can anyone correct Bellatrix's misspelled last name in the thread title, I may be the only one, but it bugs me)

Choices - Mar 10, 2005 11:34 am (#24 of 444)

The misspelling of the name bugs me too Tomoe'. LOL

I didn't mean he tortured her into insanity - just enough to make her a little unbalanced.....thus her "crazed" devotion to him. And yes, being in Azkaban probably contributed to her mental state.

Steve Newton - Mar 10, 2005 12:34 pm (#25 of 444)

But, she went to Azkaban because she was a faithful follower. I think that she has been this way since before her visit to Azkaban. She was already a fanatic.

Elanor - Mar 10, 2005 12:46 pm (#26 of 444)

Devotion is indeed the right word for Bella's attitude towards Voldemort, fanaticism, worship are other good ones for describing it in my opinion. I agree with you Madam Librarian that this devotion includes some kind of crush from her part, mixed with her thirst of power and a kind of fear of Voldemort's anger.

Well, she's definitely got a screw loose during all those years in Azkaban (though I agree, it probably started well before) and I'm not sure she is able to work out her feelings, if she ever tries to. But Voldemort is certainly aware of that and is certainly playing with her emotions to make her do what he needs. He may play with her husband feelings too... Manipulation is certainly a hobby Voldemort likes and I think it is likely he makes sure that he keeps a tight rein on her. But if he is wrong, you're right, that becomes very interesting...

And what if the weak link in the chain was Bella's husband? He may not try to attack Voldemort but what if, when he will have had enough of that, he set about her eventually?

Madame Librarian - Mar 10, 2005 1:10 pm (#27 of 444)

Bella's hubby could turn into the jealous husband, too. Especially now since she's out and about and he's in. A crack in the DE armor, perhaps? It would be a suitable message/theme for JKR to show how those who rule by fear and intimidation, and by creating petty jealousies within an organization never have as strong a team as those who rule by trust and fair standards.

Ciao. Barb

T Brightwater - Mar 10, 2005 2:33 pm (#28 of 444)

We saw Bellatrix in DD's Pensieve memory of her trial, and she was proud of being Voldemort's devoted follower then, before she went to Azkaban. From what she said to Neville at the DOM, I gather she was the main culprit in their torture, so she was already a psychopath before she was imprisoned.

Sirius said Azkaban didn't affect him as badly as most people because he knew he was innocent. Might Bella have also been less badly affected, because she was convinced of the rightness of her cause?

Weeny Owl - Mar 10, 2005 2:38 pm (#29 of 444)

(By the way, can anyone correct Bellatrix's misspelled last name in the thread title, I may be the only one, but it bugs me)

Ditto, Tomoe!

I don't get the feeling that crushes or anything like that are involved at all with Bella.

I mentioned on the Lucius Malfoy thread that he probably wouldn't care about Voldemort being a half-blood, but if there is a chink in Bella's armor, I think it would be that rather than any personal feelings.

I don't think she believed Harry when he said Voldemort was a half-blood, but if she finds out that all this time her fanaticism has been directed toward someone she would consider scum, she might not be quite so devoted.

Fanatics don't want their leaders to show any weaknesses, to show any feelings that are human, to be anything other than on that pedestal constantly, and for Voldemort to be only a half-blood, I would think would bother her.

I just cannot see any jealousies from a romantic point of view for her and Voldemort, and I cannot see any for her and her husband. I don't think any of his followers see him that way. Petty jealousies from the point of view as to who is his most faithful follower were there during his rebirthing, but other than that type of example, I just don't see it.

I really don't get where this is coming from, though. What parts of the books make it seem that she's more than just a fanatic, that she's got a crush?

T Brightwater - Mar 10, 2005 2:46 pm (#30 of 444)

Isn't there a French phrase that means something like "more royalist than the King"? Bella seems to be like that; there's no telling what she might do if she realizes that the leader she went to prison for is half Muggle.

Prefect Marcus - Mar 10, 2005 5:01 pm (#31 of 444)

TomoÈ - By the way, can anyone correct Bellatrix's misspelled last name in the thread title?

Done

TwinklingBlueEyes - Mar 10, 2005 7:24 pm (#32 of 444)

Could the reason for Bellatrix's crazed devotion to Voldemort spring from the fact that she has been punished/Crucio’d for past failures and it has left her a brick or two short of a full load?(Choices) "Bella's state of mind is due to Azkaban."(Tomoe)

Maybe also due to the genetic results of inbreeding? Pureblood thing don't you know? :-)

Weeny Owl - Mar 10, 2005 8:15 pm (#33 of 444)

Thank you, Marcus. You are a true gem.

It could be inbreeding, insanity from being Crucio’d, Azkaban, the way she was brought up, or any combination really.

She is definitely a few fries short of a Happy Meal, and just as she almost did in the Department of Mysteries, I have a feeling that her tenuous grip on sanity will be her downfall. Harry made her react quite easily, after all.

Solitaire - Mar 10, 2005 8:41 pm (#34 of 444)

I truly believe Azkaban has left her permanently unhinged. When Harry sees her picture in The Daily Prophet, he thinks to himself that, "Like Sirius, she retained vestiges of great good looks, but something--perhaps Azkaban--had taken most of her beauty."

Bella was evil when she entered Azkaban, and she remains evil. I would imagine that she is rather like Voldemort in some ways. Any vestiges of humanity that remained within her after the tortures of the Longbottoms surely must have withered, died, and rotted after all those years in Azkaban.

I'm curious about the Lestranges. Did they have children? If so, they'd have had to be very young, wouldn't they? If they were in their mid-twenties to early thirties in the first VWar, perhaps they were too busy killing and torturing people to have kids. Then they were in Azkaban for what--14 years?

Bella's husband was mentioned earlier. It's funny ... I do not see her as capable of loving anyone enough to get married, let alone have children. Still, as fanatical as she is about the whole pureblood issue, one would think she would consider it her duty to perpetuate the "pure" line. Perhaps her marriage was more one of convenience or convention, whose purpose was to link two pureblood wizard families.

Like Weeny and others, I think Bella is devoted to Voldemort ... not a "crush" kind of devotion, but a fanatic commitment to him that may outweigh any other relationships in her life. I'd love to know more about Bella and all of her relationships-with her sisters, with her husband, and with Voldemort.

Solitaire

karebear811 - Mar 10, 2005 10:11 pm (#35 of 444)

Maybe Bella and her husband’s child is one of the Slytherins we don't know much about. Maybe, when Bella and her husband were sent to Azkaban, their child was sent to live with someone else, or an orphanage. That child's last name was changed, possibly to Nott or Zabini.

Now, if this theory is correct, and Nott or Zabini is truly the son of Bell and her husband then...

That child would have been placed into Slytherin due to his personality, but resents the parents, and therefore, will eventually join with Harry and the rest of DA as a result of hearing about what his parents did in the DOM, and because of built up anger about them being in there in the first place for being evil.

Just a thought, I’m probably way off, and could use a butterbeer

Phelim Mcintyre - Mar 11, 2005 1:14 am (#36 of 444)

As the person who originally posted this thread I would just like to let people know that my hands have been well and truly ironed because of my misspelling of Bellatrix's last name.

TomoÈ - Mar 11, 2005 9:34 am (#37 of 444)

Thank you very much Marcus! and thanks Choices and Weeny Owl for support! There was no need for hand ironing, Phelim. Please, don't resort to such an extreme behavior for such a petty mistake.

As for Bellatrix's insanity, I don't think Crucio would bring that kind of personality disorder. My psychology lessons are years away, but she should be trying to avoid the pain, trying to avoid mistake, being less impulsive (remember Bart Simpsons and Lisa's cakes). The Longbottoms' brains have cut the incoming data from the outside, because the pain was unbearable and the brains are still afraid to let too much in.

Crucio in itself is not brain altering, but too much of it can create a "draw back" reaction, not a fanatic one.

(unless she turned masochist, in which case she would try to get in trouble as much as possible to get Crucio’d even more)

Choices - Mar 11, 2005 9:51 am (#38 of 444)

Maybe she is trying "fanatically hard" to please Voldemort to avoid the possibility of future punishment?

Solitaire - Mar 12, 2005 12:49 am (#39 of 444)

Bella reminds me of some of the evil doctors and commandants in the concentration camps. I think inflicting pain to the extent that Bella inflicted pain on the Longbottoms--and probably others about whom we may not even know anything--does something to the torturer as well as the victim. The very act of torturing someone has to kill something--possibly the essence of a person's humanity--within the torturer.

By the time someone reaches a psychological place where he enjoys causing or giving pain, I think he has pretty much left behind all vestiges of humanity and has become something else entirely. I believe this is so for Bella. She has lost the ability to feel remorse at the idea of inflicting pain; rather, she tells Harry that to be able to perform the pain-inflicting Crucio, one must enjoy inflicting pain.

I think this may well be one of the irrevocable steps one takes in the transformation process of permanently leaving behind one's humanity.

Solitaire

Choices - Mar 12, 2005 9:30 am (#40 of 444)

Makes me wonder if Bellatrix was an abused child - they usually grow up to be abusers, and we know that she enjoys inflicting pain. She and Snape seem to have a bit in common, although Snape limits his abuse to the verbal rather than the physical like Bellatrix.

Weeny Owl - Mar 12, 2005 11:08 am (#41 of 444)

I see her more as learning by example, Choices.

Sirius and Andromeda may be the only two members of the Black family who were disgusted by their parents' prejudices.

Bella, Narcissa, and Regulus had to get their beliefs from home when they were small children. Regulus learned too late what it meant to be a Death Eater, but Bella embraced it. Narcissa we don't know about. Andromeda and Sirius rejected those beliefs.

Granted, we don't know anything about Bella, Narcissa, and Andromeda's parents, and we know little about Sirius and Regulus' father, but if Sirius and Regulus' mother is any indication, those prejudices were learned from the cradle.

It reminds me of the song from "South Pacific" about prejudice... You've Got To Be Carefully Taught.

You've got to be taught before it's too late

Before you are six or seven or eight

To hate all the people your relatives hate

zelmia - Mar 12, 2005 11:23 am (#42 of 444)

We need not always look for a ready explanation for why people (even fictional ones) do evil things. Sometimes people simply are born wicked, without ever having been beaten, neglected or indoctrinated to do so.

Madame Librarian - Mar 12, 2005 5:02 pm (#43 of 444)

Zelmia, we have to keep in mind the following quote from JKR herself from the 2004 World Book Chat--

mnich: Was Voldemort born evil? JK Rowling replies -> I don't believe that anybody was born evil. You will find out more about the circumstances of his birth in the next book.

Though characters like Bella and Riddle for sure (who never loved anyone per JKR) make you wonder what she'd say if we asked her to explain further.

Ciao. Barb

Nathan Zimmermann - Mar 12, 2005 7:09 pm (#44 of 444)

Solitaire, I like the analogy you made about it is apt indeed. She certainly possesses sufficient malice and hatred.

The inculcation of such beliefs in most cases occurs in childhood or early adolescence the only notable exception I am aware of are cults whose founding members are usually adults.

The question I have is did Bella's stay in Azkaban render her legally insane.

Solitaire - Mar 12, 2005 7:27 pm (#45 of 444)

Thanks, Nathan. When I read anything about Bella--what she says and does--those are the people who spring to mind.

While I suppose abuse is always possible, I tend to think it is not likely. I like Weeny's snippet from the South Pacific song. I think Bella was groomed from birth to consider herself superior to and think meanly of others. If you consider Harry's first look at her--on trial in the Pensieve in GoF--she is described as "sitting in the chained chair as through it were a throne." When he sees her photo in OotP, he remembers the difference between the sleek beauty of the woman in the Pensieve and the way she looks now.

The description of Narcissa at the QWC sounds as though she is beautiful, well groomed, and haughty, as well. My bet is these two learned very early that the way to get the approval of the family was to behave exactly as Bella has behaved--full of disdain for everyone she did not consider "an equal." You see that Bella and Narcissa remain on the tapestry. They made choices that pleased the family.

I guess the Wizarding World is not so different from the Muggle world. I often marvel at how kids from the same family can turn out so differently--forsaking both good backgrounds and backgrounds full of pain and ugliness. I suppose the WW has kids who can turn their backs on the family values, too. Thank goodness ... that's where we get people like Sirius and Andromeda.

Solitaire

zelmia - Mar 12, 2005 10:33 pm (#46 of 444)

Madame Librarian, thank you for that reminder. However, I personally think that (even in a fictitious world) that there are simply some characters who are born evil. There has to be Evil in a world - otherwise Good has no meaning.

Nathan, I concur. One should avoid at all costs having Bella as an enemy.

In spite of these things, I find this character easily the most intriguing of all the minor characters. She has such a strong connection with Sirius, via their shared family background; but a similar connection with Lucius - not because he is her brother-in-law, but because both seem to be the closest to Voldemort. She is married, but we hear almost nothing of Rudolphus' actual participation in the various exploits - only that he was present. She is Narcissa’s sister, but where Bella is entirely "out" with regard to her support of Voldemort, Narcissa has yet to utter a single syllable.

Most interesting indeed.

Nathan Zimmermann - Mar 12, 2005 10:44 pm (#47 of 444)

Bella would not be an enemy I would desire to have, she inspires more fear in me than Voldemort himself because, she devoid of any moderation or emotional responses. She Macnair and Doholov strike me being Death Eaters who are most analogous in regards to Solitaire's earlier analogy, as the wizarding world is likely to get.

The fear, anger and contempt she displayed in the Department of Mysteries strike me as being trained responses such as those that acquired and reinforced during behavior modification, as opposed to true emotional responses that are inherent in humankind.

Note I originally posted prior to Zelmia's last post but, I felt it necessary to delete original post because, I was worried that the tenor of the post my have been too dark.

Eric Bailey - Mar 13, 2005 2:50 am (#48 of 444)

Oh, I suspect the sisters were abused, judging from how they reacted to their upbringing. Bella became an abuser, herself, Andi rebelled and left, and Cissy won't even discipline Draco even slightly, when he needs it. The boy's main problem is he was never disciplined at home in his life, always being spoiled and coddled. Given that that's not likely how she, herself, was raised, judging from her hardened sisters, she may have reacted to an abusive childhood by going the other extreme with her child.

Weeny Owl - Mar 13, 2005 5:03 am (#49 of 444)

I doubt if they were abused.

Just because families have certain beliefs that seem contrary to what most of us feel is moral doesn't mean that said families are abusive.

I don't see Bella as an abuser. I see her as a psychotic who chose to follow a madman because of a belief system.

I don't see Andromeda leaving because of abuse. I see her leaving because she didn't buy into her parents' ideology.

We don't know that Narcissa never disciplines Draco. We do know he's sent sweets. He said she didn't want him being too far away. Other than those examples, it's pure conjecture as to what their private dealings are within their family.

Why can't they all just be what they are without it having to be because of abuse or something else?

Not all psychopaths were abused as children. Not all Nazis abused their children. Not every child who has a different belief system than his or her parents has said belief system because of abuse.

Nathan Zimmermann - Mar 13, 2005 9:48 am (#50 of 444)

Bellatrix, will prove to be the Death that will be the most difficult to capture. I think that before Kingsley or Tonks attempts to capture her they will have raise the intensity of their training or practice regimen. Both Tonks and Kingsley were outmatched by Bellatrix in their first duels with her. Even Moody needs to get in more practice before, the Order can even consider trying to capture her.

As it stands right now I think only Dumbledore or Andromeda are the ones with a chance of subduing her. If Harry could learn to control his emotions to the extent that he is able to focus his heart and mind together and bring them into balance then he may be able confront and defeat Bellatrix in a single combat situation. Harry would have the advantage because, Bella's state of mind has been adversely affected by her long incarceration in Azkaban to the extent that she has lost whatever little self-control she possessed. This loss of self control in effect has the possibility to translate into a situation which she confronts Harry, he taunts and goads Bellatrix enraging as her he did in the DoM, a fierce battle ensues Bella in her rage does not perceive that Harry is luring her into a trap which will result either in her capture or death.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Potteraholic Tue Jul 26, 2011 9:59 pm

zelmia - Mar 13, 2005 10:02 am (#51 of 444)

Not all psychopaths were abused as children - Weeny Owl.

Exactly, Weeny. In spite of what Rowling herself tells us about a person being "born evil" we have to acknowledge that there are evil people out there, even in a work of fiction. But what I think sets Rowling slightly apart is that her evil characters do evil things.

Nathan, I agree. Bellatrix must have been something of a standout academically. She's got a trophy on the JKR Web site.

Weeny Owl - Mar 13, 2005 11:09 am (#52 of 444)

I'd forgotten about that trophy, Zelmia.

JKR may not believe people were born evil, but she definitely believes in choices. The Death Eaters have chosen to do the things they do. Bella chose to follow a nutcase and torture the Longbottoms.

From what Sirius told Harry, many purebloods thought Voldemort was on the right track until they saw just how far he was willing to go. They made their choices not to follow him.

Solitaire - Mar 13, 2005 12:20 pm (#53 of 444)

Not all psychopaths were abused as children ... Not every child who has a different belief system than his or her parents has said belief system because of abuse.

I wholeheartedly concur, Weeny. I have another thought on this issue, as well. I realize this has not been said, but suppose Andromeda and Bella were twins who, like the Patil twins, were separated into different houses by the Sorting Hat--Bella into Slytherin and Andromeda into one of the other houses.

Bella would have continued to hang out with her Slytherin pals, who would have reinforced her own early-inculcated beliefs. Andromeda, however, would have been exposed to new people and different ideas and attitudes where the whole "pure-blood" thing was concerned. What's more, she would have had seven years to learn to see things differently. A lot can be accomplished in seven years, especially at this critical time of life, when kids are beginning to separate from their parents and forge their own individual identities. Perhaps this is also when she met the man who would become her husband--Ted Tonks.

I realize there is no canon suggesting this, but it could account for why Andromeda followed such a different path than her sisters. Making the huge assumption that she is a twin, I suppose she and Narcissa could also have been twins. This would probably have meant she married and became pregnant right out of Hogwarts, given Tonks’ age. Okay, no dungbombs ... it was just a wild idea.

Solitaire

Weeny Owl - Mar 13, 2005 1:09 pm (#54 of 444)

They wouldn't even have to be twins, Solitaire. Sirius was sorted into Gryffindor, after all, and we don't know where Regulus was.

I do like the idea of Andromeda being in a different house than her sisters. Draco said all of his family were in Slytherin, so I would think that would include Narcissa. If Bella and Narcissa were Slytherins and Andromeda was in another house, that could explain quite a bit.

Nathan Zimmermann - Mar 13, 2005 1:53 pm (#55 of 444)

Solitaire, those ideas are very intriguing. The fact that Sirius was sorted into Gryffindor probably contributed to the isolation that he felt at home. If Andromeda was sorted into a house other than Slytherin it is possible that Bella and Narcissa attitude shifted to anger, disgust, contempt and betrayal.

I also liked your thoughts on Andromeda's early marriage and pregnancy. I always imagined that Andromeda developed a relationship with Ted while in school and that her family attempted to dissuade her and put the kibosh on the relationship but, Andromeda being strong willed like Sirius refused to sacrifice the relationship and that her family disinherited her. The relationship with Ted Tonks could possibly have enraged Bella to the point where a confrontation between Andromeda and Bella took place.

Narcissa, on the other hand in all likelihood internalized her feelings. She did not strike me as a person who openly displays emotion.

Solitaire - Mar 13, 2005 2:25 pm (#56 of 444)

It's true, they would not have to be twins; but I think it is an interesting idea. If she had once been close to either or both sisters--especially so, if she were a twin--it would make her "defection" from the family values all the more traumatic on both sides of the issue.

I agree, Nathan, that--from the brief picture we have seen of her--Narcissa does not seem the type to expend much emotion. She seems to be a rather cool customer, if you ask me. Then again, we have not seen her provoked, and we have no idea if she was one of those torturing the Muggles. It will be interesting to see her character unfold.

Solitaire

Muggle Doctor - Mar 13, 2005 5:26 pm (#57 of 444)

I strongly suspect that Bellatrix Lestrange will be number one on the Ministry's "to kill" list - the Wanted poster will not specify her capture. I think even Moody, who prefers a live captive, might mark her down as "don't bother trying".

(In his time, the Australian bushranger and criminal Ned Kelly was supposedly the subject of a similar order that basically permitted anyone in the British Empire to kill him on sight.)

I concur that not all abusers were necessarily abused themselves - I'm sure, in contradistinction to Rowling, that some of them were born with structural defects in their brains that render them unperturbed by the suffering of others. While all of us would probably jump at the offer of a position of power with few or no controls, the bulk of us would reject it if hurting others was an integral part of the position. Such 'suffering-immune' people, however, would not see it that way. Once they were in such a position, their efforts to stay in it (or to avoid being prosecuted for being in it) generally extend to the creation of further mayhem.

I'm sure some of them would come to love it for its own sake.

This is even before we get onto the topic of people who are able to be indoctrinated to hurt or kill because their target is perceived as either 'less than human' or 'human but worthy of suffering'. Add that into the mix (which I'm sure that Bellatrix got, coming from a family like the Blacks), and you're almost guaranteed to come up with a nutcase like Bellatrix.

I seriously doubt that she will survive. I hope Neville is the one responsible for her undoing (e.g. hits her with a stunner and causes her to take a fatal fall, or hits something nearby with the Reductor curse a la Luna and causes her to die via falling/flying debris).

Archangel - Mar 13, 2005 9:08 pm (#58 of 444)

Shouldn't Voldemort be MoM's number one target? Smile

However, I do agree Muggle Doctor, the Aurors might be given new orders on how to deal with Bella or any other DE given their nature and their crimes.

The different house idea is very interesting. I wonder whether Andromeda asked the Sorting Hat to place her in any house except Slytherin like Harry.

I know that Bella deserves death for all the foul things she's done and she'll probably have a violent death, as people with violent lives tend to have one. However, I'd rather see her live and be handed a punishment similar to the one that befell Louis in the Man in the Iron Mask. Severely injured after the final battle, perhaps it'll be nice if she loses her sense of sight -- her blindness now physically manifested as well -- , she'll be forced to live out her remaining days in isolation. I think she, like Voldemort, deserves something worse than death.

Dumbledore - Mar 14, 2005 5:59 pm (#59 of 444)

The one word I think of when I think of Bella is "sociopath". She has no regard for human suffering, and can actually empathetically relate with very few (if not zero people) in life.

Madame Librarian - Mar 14, 2005 9:21 pm (#60 of 444)

That word sociopath applies to Tom Riddle, too. More so because he doesn't have an emotional connection to any other human being. At least Bella might have some attachment to her husband or some of the DEs.

Ciao. Barb

Solitaire - Mar 15, 2005 2:21 am (#61 of 444)

I don't know ... I tend to think Bella and Riddle are two peas in a pod. I believe she has lost all vestiges of her humanity, and I suspect any emotional regard she may have had for her husband died a long time ago. I'll agree we do not know much of her, but I suspect they came together through commitment to a mutual cause rather than through love. Neither seemed particularly interested in the other in the Battle.

I see Bella as having a one-track mind, and that is her single-minded "cause." She strikes me as an amoral, "natural born killer," and I fear she is beyond redemption. Sociopath suits her well, IMO.

Solitaire

Mellilot Flower. - Mar 16, 2005 12:11 am (#62 of 444)

I always saw Bella as overly emotional- that's why she's so dangerous to the Death Eaters, she's almost uncontrollable. Malfoy was trying very hard to keep a tight reign on her in the DoM - just how many times did he have to remind her not to hurt the prophecy?

Bella reacts emotionally when Harry reveals that the Dark Lord is a half blood, when she realises that the son of the two Aurors that in a sense were her biggest success is in front of her. She reacts emotionally when Harry tries to use an Unforgiveable. She reacts very emotionally when the Dark Lord himself turns up at the ministry.

To claim that she is a sociopath is to claim that she has no reason to kill, that she is emotionally separated by those that she hurts. This I don't think is the case at all.

Steve Newton - Mar 16, 2005 5:44 am (#63 of 444)

To claim that she is a sociopath is to claim that she has no reason to kill

Mellilot Flower, I don't see why this would be true. Having a reason has nothing to do with being a sociopath (psychopath, antisocial personality). She just doesn't care what happens to others. What you call "emotionally separated" is the sociopathic thinking.

Dumbledore - Mar 16, 2005 6:49 am (#64 of 444)

I should clarify my post.

What I mean by sociopath is that she doesn't have much empathy for those around her, namely her victims. Sure you can argue that she does care for certain things (like Voldemort), but overall I see her as having no remorse for the crimes she commits, and having no empathy for the victims of those crimes - the sure signs of a sociopath.

GryffEndora - Mar 16, 2005 10:25 am (#65 of 444)

Antisocial Personality Disorder is also known as psychopathy or sociopathy. Individuals with this disorder have little regard for the feeling and welfare of others.

Antisocial Personality Disorder is chronic, beginning in adolescence and continuing throughout adulthood. There are ten general symptoms: not learning from experience, no sense of responsibility, inability to form meaningful relationships, inability to control impulses, lack of moral sense, chronically antisocial behavior, no change in behavior after punishment, emotional immaturity, lack of guilt, self-centeredness

People with this disorder may exhibit criminal behavior. They may not work. If they do work, they are frequently absent or may quit suddenly. They do not consider other people's wishes, welfare or rights. They can be manipulative and may lie to gain personal pleasure or profit. They may default on loans, fail to provide child support, or fail to care for their dependents adequately. High risk (edited) behavior and substance abuse are common. Impulsiveness, failure to plan ahead, aggressiveness, irritability, irresponsibility, and a reckless disregard for their own safety and the safety of others are traits of the antisocial personality. (Bold Mine) from [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] (just wanted to site my source)

Here is the definition of Psychopathy and Sociopathy. There are definitely connections between Bella's behavior and the behaviors listed. I'll let you decide for yourself how you want to classify Bella. I choose EVIL.

Nathan Zimmermann - Mar 16, 2005 11:14 am (#66 of 444)

I agree Bella exhibited these tendencies prior to her incarceration in Azkaban. The stay in Azkaban exacerbated the preexisting behaviors because, of the adverse effect that long-term exposure to the Dementors can possibly have on a person. I also wonder whether there exists some unknown organic contributing factor, that contributes to her rages. She reminds me of Phinneas P. Gage who in 1848 suffered severe head trauma and for the remainder of his life was subject to violent mood swings and fits of uncontrollable rage.

Muggle Doctor - Mar 17, 2005 5:45 pm (#67 of 444)

Yep, Bellatrix fits the sociopath (formerly "psychopath") description to a T. I'm not sure Azkaban really affected her that much. Recall from the description Sirius gave of his own incarceration that even those who are not kissed by the Dementors generally end up as screaming wrecks, gradually changing into mindless vegetables as the depression works its way. Recall also that Sirius had 'powerful emotions' that were not positive or happy (and which accordingly did not attract the Dementors' attention) which enabled him to retain his sanity. No doubt Bellatrix and co. also had similar strong emotions, and they may have had the advantage since Voldemort's return of a quiet whisper in the Dementors' "ears" to leave them alone.

To torture two people to the point where they lose their minds takes a great deal of callous indifference, if not actual enjoyment of suffering; I'd say she was as bad as you can get beforehand, so afterwards is not a topic that requires discussion.

I certainly agree that she is not "unemotional".

It is an interesting contrast with Dolores Umbridge. The nature of this board does not permit me to name the sort of excitement I thought Umbridge was feeling as she prepared to "Crucio" Harry. Umbridge/Torture OTP.

Bellatrix KNOWS that what she does is illegal, and generally regarded as "wrong", and chooses to do it anyway; whereas Umbridge is not only incapable of appreciating the legal, moral and ethical gravity of her actions, but seeks to build a legal framework of justification around them. In my opinion, Bellatrix has the greater moral courage (to willingly step outside society's strictures), and thus Umbridge is worse - even if she is less competent.

Nathan Zimmermann - Mar 17, 2005 8:34 pm (#68 of 444)

Muggle Doctor I find your analysis and comparison of Bellatrix and Umbridge most fascinating. As dangerous as Bellatrix is Voldemort will keep her in check so long as he deems it necessary to restrain her. Conversely, there is no one to keep Umbridge in check because, Fudge is not strong enough to keep her in check this makes Umbridge highly dangerous to the extent that I would equate her with an unrestrained Bellatrix.

Solitaire - Mar 17, 2005 9:12 pm (#69 of 444)

Umbridge is not only incapable of appreciating the legal, moral and ethical gravity of her actions, but seeks to build a legal framework of justification around them

I agree that she does try to justify her actions, but I also believe she is fully aware that some actions are morally and legally wrong. She certainly knew sending the Dementors after Harry would not have been allowed even by Fudge. That is why she did not tell him.

Solitaire

zelmia - Mar 17, 2005 9:43 pm (#70 of 444)

I think what also makes Umbridge more dangerous than Bellatrix is that she is entirely ensconced in the Ministry and therefore in a perfect position to shift any unwanted responsibility to anyone she chooses. In other words, (for example) she sent the Dementors to Harry because she could - without even the slightest hint of suspicion cast upon her: a Ministry official, etc. Whereas Bellatrix - in spite of her sociopathic personality - would never allow anyone else to take credit for what she feels is a 'noble' act.

Remember in the Pensieve how she not only did not deny her actions against the Longbottoms, but she very proudly stood up and announced, without any fear of the consequences whatsoever, that she had indeed done the deed. Obviously Bellatrix is not someone anyone would want to come into contact with in Real Life. However, in this scene, we see that she clearly possesses a certain amount of integrity. I don't see this in Umbridge.

zelmia - Mar 31, 2005 7:21 am (#71 of 444)

I am sorry to see this discussion go by the wayside so quickly. I think this character deserves much more attention than this, as she will surely be a major factor in our next installment of the Saga.

Ponine - Mar 31, 2005 5:22 pm (#72 of 444)

Zelmia - I agree with you; she does seem to have integrity in that scene, although it could also be a case of her fanaticism shining through. What I like about Bellatrix is that she is all the way. She will not hide, she does not deny anything, she is proud and hardcore. Too bad she is so evil and keeps killing good people....

Say, has anyone else wondered why it is that Kreacher sought out Narcissa rather than Bella?

Choices - Mar 31, 2005 5:55 pm (#73 of 444)

Ponine - "Say, has anyone else wondered why it is that Kreacher sought out Narcissa rather than Bella?"

Location, location, location. He knows where to find Narcissa. Heaven only knows where Bellatrix is hiding out.

zelmia - Mar 31, 2005 7:39 pm (#74 of 444)

I'm not sure that's as much of an issue with House Elves, Choices. Dobby had no trouble finding Harry - although I'm sure we could come up with some "Six Degrees of Separation" way of Dobby obtaining the information on where Harry could be found living.

As for integrity, when I think of this attribute, I tend to think of those who firmly stand behind - and up for - their convictions. I emphasize again - I feel I can safely say this - that none of us agrees with Bella's convictions. But stand behind them she does. This is a great deal more than can be said for someone like Lucius who, like Umbridge, hides behind the face of normalcy and close Ministry connections. While I don't believe Umbridge is a Death Eater, her behaviour is equally reprehensible, if not more so.

I find myself comparing Umbridge and Bellatrix frequently, as both claim to be their Mentor's right hand/most devoted servant. But where Bellatrix openly fights her Lord's battles, Umbridge seems to create them - all in the name of the good of the Ministry.

But we should not confuse Integrity with Honor. Bellatrix, while proud of her deeds, certainly does not perform them honorably. Example: the torture of the Longbottoms. There is no honor in what she has done there. She knew they did not have what she wanted; yet she continued torturing them long after this had been determined. They were weakened physically, emotionally and certainly mentally. Yet she continued.

Nathan Zimmermann - Mar 31, 2005 8:28 pm (#75 of 444)

In the DoM when Bella finds out that one of the kids is a Longbottom Bella taunts him by saying that she wonders whether he will break like his parents. The question I have is was Bella lying about his parents breaking.

'It's Longbottom, isn't it?' sneered Lucius Malfoy. 'Well, your grandmother is used to losing family members to our cause... your death will not come as a great shock.' 'Longbottom?' repeated Bellatrix, and a truly evil smile lit her gaunt face. 'Why, I have had the pleasure of meeting your parents, boy.' 'I DOE YOU HAB!' roared Neville, and he fought so hard against his captor's encircling group that the Death Eater shouted, 'Someone Stun him!' 'No, no, no,' said Bellatrix. She looked transported, alive with excitement as she glanced at Harry, then back at Neville. 'No, let's see how long Longbottom lasts before he cracks like his parents... unless Potter wants to give us the prophecy.' 'DON'D GIB ID DO DEM!' roared Neville, who seemed beside himself, kicking and writhing as Bellatrix drew nearer to him and his captor, her wand raised. 'DON'D GIB ID DO DEM, HARRY

Cornelia - Apr 1, 2005 1:14 am (#76 of 444)

I think they didn’t break in the meaning of telling anything, and Bella was lying. The text says ...before he cracks...I’m not a native speaker, for me it sounds like that there is a difference between break and crack (break down and tell something or the mind cracks and you get mentally ill)?

Does anybody understand what I want to say?

Weeny Owl - Apr 1, 2005 2:11 am (#77 of 444)

Yes, Cornelia.

They cracked as in cracking up, and landed in the psych ward of a hospital.

Even if they had broken, as in telling all they knew, at that point, they didn't know anything since the information Bella was after was where Voldemort had disappeared to.

TomoÈ - Apr 1, 2005 2:10 pm (#78 of 444)

Ponine -> Say, has anyone else wondered why it is that Kreacher sought out Narcissa rather than Bella?

Kreacher left on Christmas and Bella broke out on mid-January, I guess Bella wasn't an option then.

Solitaire - Apr 2, 2005 12:18 am (#79 of 444)

Regarding the Longbottoms and the use of the term "cracking" ... When the body is subjected to sufficient pain, I believe the mind cracks and the victim loses his sanity. "Experiments" like this were performed on Jews and other prisoners during the Holocaust--by people like Mengele and other psychotic criminals who styled themselves "men of science"--just to see how much pain the body could endure and the mind could process before it broke.

Every time I read references to the Longbottoms' torture, I think of these mad, inhuman "experiments." Given some of Jo's comments about the Nazis, I wonder if she thought of them, as well.

You know, maybe the fate of the Longbottoms was one of the things Dumbledore was referring to when he told Voldemort there were worse things than death. The Longbottoms are just as lost to Neville as Harry's parents are to him ... their bodies may be alive and walking around, but their minds do not seem to be present at all.

Solitaire

Addriene Scire - Apr 11, 2005 10:59 pm (#80 of 444)

This is a little off subject at this point in the post, but I had a theory about how Bella got to where she is...

I don't think she was abused, not directly, but judging by all the artifacts in Sirius' house, she was probably subjected to a lot of nasty things as a kid. After a while it started to become commonplace for her - bad things existed and they hurt people and it was an everyday experience. I think that, coupled with her parents' pureblood fanaticism, is what started it. I mean, there's only so many times your pet dog can get killed by doxies before you stop caring. Eventually the emotion just shuts itself off to protect you. I see this in Sirius, sometimes, too. Since he was sorted into Gryffindor, he developed a certain level of conscience, but there are still some things he does that hint toward an amorality similar to Bellatrix. Snape, for example. I understand that Sirius hated Snape - but so did James and Remus. Yet Sirius saw no problem with letting Snape get mauled to death by a hungry Werewolf (even though he knew Remus would never be able to live with the guilt) while James ran off to save him.

Back to Bella - I do believe she became a Sociopath, but I don't think she fits the description perfectly. With most disorders, you don't have to have every symptom to be diagnosed, and I don't think she has complete apathy toward her victims. She's more sadistic than apathetic, she enjoys it. Over time it has become amusing to her - it's something she would be familiar with, perhaps even comforted by.

And as for her relationship with Voldemort and her Husband - I don't think she loves either of them. I think she shut off that capability a long time ago, when she started to become accustomed to how easily people die. Still, she does seem to have a strong emotional attachment to Voldemort, and she's the only one he's ever called by a nickname. He refers to all the rest of his followers by their surnames, but he refers to Bellatrix as "Bella." He also got her out of MoM, when he could've just left her, which he probably would've done to any other servant who had failed as miserably. Bellatrix is definitely valuable to him. As for Rudolphus, I think he and Bellatrix are closer to friends than lovers. They may be married to make their families happy, but I think the most interaction they have together is torturing Muggles for sport.

Anyway, I think I've gone on long enough...I'll just go back to my coffee ice cream now.

Aqualu Nifey - Apr 13, 2005 2:47 pm (#81 of 444)

I think Bellatrix and Rudolphus got married for the good of the "pure - blood cause" so to speak. I think she cares more about Voldemort than her husband. I think she reveres him. She idolizes him as the perfect embodiment of what she wants to be, if you know what I mean.

Choices - Apr 13, 2005 4:59 pm (#82 of 444)
Edited Apr 13, 2005 6:05 pm

What is the "good of the pure-blood cause"? If they got married to further the pure bloods, then we would see lots of little Lestranges running around. It doesn't do any good to just marry another pure blood unless you plan to help bring more pure bloods into the wizarding world. Wizards in general, and pure bloods in particular (except the Weasleys), don't seem much into producing new generations of wizards. Have you ever noticed that St. Mungo's has no obstetrical ward? Obviously when wizards do have children, they have them at home. Bellatrix obviously has more important matters on her mind than adding to the pure blood ranks. Bellatrix isn't getting any younger and by the time she did decide to have kids, she'd have to borrow Hermione's time-turner.

zelmia - Apr 14, 2005 6:57 am (#83 of 444)

I always find it so interesting the different back-stories people give for certain characters. Like Narcissa Malfoy (who even has/had her own Thread), Rudolphus Lestrange has yet to utter a single syllable, has not even been given any physical description by the Author - yet people are convinced that Bella does not love him and that theirs is a marriage of alliance.

Please understand, this is not a criticism. I just find it very interesting, is all. Personally, I have nothing to say on the subject of their marriage until I see it in action. Again, Rudolphus has yet to speak; but unlike Narcissa Malfoy, of whose personality we can filter a slight glimpse through Draco's boasting, we have nothing to go on with regard to Rudolphus other than Harry's eyewitness account at the DoM.

Which brings up a point: Rudolphus and Bellatrix were both tried and convicted for a crime they committed together. They went to Azkaban together. They were at the DoM together. Unlike the Malfoys, both Bellatrix and Rudolphus are very much a part of Voldemort's Inner Circle. While we really can't say what their relationship is like per se, we can make the observation that the two must at least share the same passion for "their work". That is something.

GryffEndora - Apr 15, 2005 12:58 pm (#84 of 444)

Zelmia - Which brings up a point: Rudolphus and Bellatrix were both tried and convicted for a crime they committed together. They went to Azkaban together. They were at the DoM together. Unlike the Malfoys, both Bellatrix and Rudolphus are very much a part of Voldemort's Inner Circle. While we really can't say what their relationship is like per se, we can make the observation that the two must at least share the same passion for "their work". That is something.

Good point Zelmia! I think their zealousness for LV may be the reason they have never reproduced. (Thank goodness!) First they were heavily involved with their master and his war, then they were doing anything they could to find him, including torturing the Longbottoms, then they were in Azkaban. When was there time? This could also show another difference between the Lestranges and the Malfoys. The Lestranges were involved in the war and would not take time for a family where Lucius and Narcissa decided to be a little more selfish and create Draco. (Isn't that a shame!) After the introduction of Vapormort the Lestranges continued his cause while the Malfoys continued their own, even denying their allegiance with LV.

Choices - Apr 15, 2005 5:43 pm (#85 of 444)
Edited Apr 15, 2005 6:44 pm

Good point GryffEndora - Lucius Malfoy wants to follow Voldemort, but he really doesn't want to get his hands dirty like the Lestranges. I was surprised to find him among the DEs at the MOM battle. Of course, maybe he never thought it would come to actual combat - just an easy little foray to get the prophesy orb and back home in time for bed.

Nathan Zimmermann - Apr 15, 2005 7:45 pm (#86 of 444)

I always thought he had no choice to go. He is one the few powerful enough to check Bellatrix look at how he deflected one Bella's spells.

Catherine - Apr 16, 2005 5:37 am (#87 of 444)

I think their zealousness for LV may be the reason they have never reproduced. GryffEndora

Well, we don't know that they didn't. This is something I've actually wondered about ever since GoF and OoP; it would be a significant discovery for a student to realize that they are related to two of the most notorious Death Eaters.

It was a shock to realize that Sirius was related to Bellatrix and Narcissa. What if Harry isn't the only young wizard in Britain to have been placed with relatives because his/her parents were unavailable? This happened to Neville. Anyone else?

Cornelia - Apr 16, 2005 5:42 am (#88 of 444)

But wouldn’t we have seen the Lestrange children on the Black-tapestry? Draco is mentioned.

Catherine - Apr 16, 2005 5:53 am (#89 of 444)

I know. The tapestry is a sticking point.

The only thing I can imagine is that no one knows of this hypothetical child's existence. Assuming that Bellatrix was "expecting" during her incarceration, a child could have been quietly smuggled from Azkaban.

I know--it's extremely far-fetched and unlikely. But, a recurrent theme throughout the books is that it matters not what someone is born (i.e. to a Giantess mum, to Muggles, to parents with a pure-blood mania) but what one grows to be. The children of the story, as part of their growth toward adulthood, make self-discoveries. Harry finds out he's a wizard, a Parselmouth, the Boy Who Lived, and the One to whom the Prophecy refers. Ron and Neville discover newfound confidence and abilities to succeed where they feared they would fail. Hermione discovers that there are mysteries for which pure logic and intellect are insufficient to understand.

I can see that discovering that one's parents are not who one expects (Dean Thomas fits this mold, certainly, even if it never makes it into the main storyline), especially if one's parents are notorious, escaped criminals, would fall in line with the themes JKR has incorporated thus far.

Cornelia - Apr 16, 2005 6:18 am (#90 of 444)

Much depends on the people the child grows up with. Raised by Death Eaters and sent to Durmstrang, another Death Eater might grow up. I guess that kind of people would tell the child his/her parents are heroes. No sudden discovery by the child who the parents are, no guilty feelings, more likely the child would be proud of his parents, just like the people in the environment.

Raised by a normal petit bourgeois (from the dictionary, don’t know if the word fits here) wizarding family, not knowing who the real parents are, and then suddenly discovering your parents are really terrible criminals who tortured the parents of the boy who sits near you in Herbology. I don’t know what would happen then...

zelmia - Apr 16, 2005 8:26 am (#91 of 444)
Edited Apr 16, 2005 9:31 am

Personally, I think this discussion is getting a bit off-topic. We have nothing in the text to indicate that the Lestranges ever had any children, and - some excellent points notwithstanding - I don't see any reason to continue to speculate on the whys and wherefores of how this could have happened "off-camera" somewhere.

Bellatrix was the only one to have escaped the DM with Voldemort. Does this mean that we can expect another mass exodus from Azkaban? I tend to think not, now that the Ministry are fully awake on that particular matter. But it does mean that, as far as the Inner Circle, she would appear to be the only one who is still of any use.

The Aurors will certainly be looking for her, so that may put a bit of a kink in any plans the Dark Lord may have had in place. But I think the question is: will Voldemort stick to his only remaining disciple? Or will he chuck her into the arms of the awaiting Aurors?

If the latter, could she be "turned" in some way to become something of an ally for the Order, et al? I would imagine the devastation at her Dark Lord's betrayal might prove to be a bit mind-blowing for her. This could be of use to the Ministry. However, she may also see it as yet another opportunity to get up on her soap box about him so.

Catherine - Apr 16, 2005 8:50 am (#92 of 444)
Edited Apr 16, 2005 10:00 am

I respectfully disagree that the subject was off-topic. GryffEndora's idea that Bellatrix's devotion to Voldemort influenced her apparent lack of children seems to hit at the heart of Bellatrix's character.

Not that I really see her as Mum material. She'd make Mrs. Black look like an old softie, I'm sure.

But, given her obvious pure-blood mania, her childlessness is interesting. One might think that she would believe that it is her duty as a pure-blood wizard to carry on the family line by having children.

Would Bellatrix sacrifice herself for anyone other than Voldemort? Is she capable of sacrificing herself for her child, as Lily did?

In the end, I can imagine that Bellatrix was too obsessed with serving Voldemort to have children, but I do think it is an interesting possibility.

Cornelia - Apr 16, 2005 9:59 am (#93 of 444)

Didn’t Draco say that the Dementors had left Azkaban and that his Dad would be back really soon? Maybe they walk just through the open door.

I don’t know, I can’t imagine Bella working together with the MoM. I think her pure blood mania is so big and LV was only the leader who used it. Even if he would let the Aurors get her, I think she would not work with the MoM, because I think she believed in those ideals before LV and his betrayal might destroy her obsession to him but not to the ideals of purebloodness. She thinks she is so superior to those Muggle-lovers, that it would be beneath her dignity to work with them. But, I don’t know...

Ponine - Apr 16, 2005 10:08 am (#94 of 444)

Catherine - I think you bring up some excellent points! As far as the tapestry is concerned, it would largely depend on if it updates itself, or if Mama Black was the one to arrange and rearrange it as she saw fit (I am most inclined to believe the latter). Reasons such as she was never aware of it, it was to be kept a secret, she was ashamed of her kin stooping so low (I know, probably not), and, she may have become so disgruntled with the way her brood turned out, she sort of gave up on the whole idea. Too many burn marks on your wall can be quite disheartening, after all.

Your thoughts around Bella having children are so interesting, I must admit I never paid much attention to her as a flesh and bones character. Now, though, it strikes me that it would be blasphemy to squander Bella's blood and brains. If she has not yet had children, I wander if she would be found worthy of carrying Lordlets...

I think that Bella definitely has it in her to sacrifice herself for her young child, or an older child who shares her convictions. I do however also see her as capable of killing her own if she considers them treacherous.

Solitaire - Apr 16, 2005 11:07 am (#95 of 444)

Perhaps the tapestry updated itself, but Mrs. Black didn't like the updates, so she burned them off. Surely, she would not have put Tonks on the tapestry herself, then burned her off. Given Tonks' parentage, she would never have put her on at all!

As to Bella switching sides, I can't even conceive of this. I think Bella is probably brilliant, but I see her as an insane, cold-blooded psychopath. While I will agree that we do not know that she had no children, I tend to think she probably did not. During the last war, the Lestranges may have assumed they would wait until the war was over and Voldemort was in power. I'm sure they did not bargain on being captured and imprisoned for fifteen (?) years. It seems unlikely that she'd have delivered a child in Azkaban with no one finding out--although I suppose it is possible if she were expecting when she entered. In fact, I guess that could have contributed to the insanity she now exhibits. Hard to say ...

Solitaire

Catherine - Apr 16, 2005 11:28 am (#96 of 444)

Given Tonks’ parentage, she would never have put her on at all! --Solitaire

No, as Andromeda was burned off for marrying Ted Tonks.

I do agree with your assessment of Bellatrix as probably "brilliant," Solitaire. She seems to be utterly lacking in heart, which I hope is her downfall.

Nathan Zimmermann - Apr 23, 2005 4:12 pm (#97 of 444)

Bellatrix reminds me a great deal of Sirius in terms of intelligence and ability. The only difference is that Sirius has a moral center which Bellatrix lacks.

TwinklingBlueEyes - Apr 23, 2005 6:13 pm (#98 of 444)

Very good analogy Nathan!

zelmia - Apr 23, 2005 9:10 pm (#99 of 444)
Edited Apr 23, 2005 10:11 pm

I would say that her morality is different than Sirius's - or ours come to that. But she does operate using her own kind of morality. She is outraged when Harry for speaking Voldemort's name, for example. To her, it is an unconscionable act that one such as Harry, who is so wholly unworthy to wipe the Dark Lord's boots, should dare to utter his very name.

Miriam Huber - Apr 25, 2005 3:49 am (#100 of 444)

Please don’t misunderstand me, I really liked Sirius, but come to think of it: isn’t Sirius¥ "moral center" mainly that he is absolutely loyal to his friends? While concerning his enemies... well, look at sending Snape to the Shrieking Shack when they were young. So, in a way, he and Bellatrix are really similar: powerful wizards, intelligent and arrogant and very loyal. But of course, I am NOT assuming that on any account Sirius would have gone to the Dark Side -- not even for his friends.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Potteraholic Tue Jul 26, 2011 10:02 pm

Solitaire - Apr 25, 2005 6:14 am (#101 of 444)

I personally see Bella as being amoral.

Catherine - Apr 25, 2005 9:42 am (#102 of 444)

I see your point, Miriam, but I believe that Sirius's moral center goes deeper than what you have expressed, goes deeper than even extreme loyalty.

Sirius loved Lily and James. He was willing to die rather than betray them. I don't see Bella acting from love, but more from power-thirstiness and obsession.

zelmia - Apr 25, 2005 7:10 pm (#103 of 444)
Edited Apr 25, 2005 8:14 pm

But it was Bella who stood proudly at the Wizengamot and gleefully announced that she had indeed tortured the Longbottoms. That the Dark Lord would one day come again, etc. She was facing Azkaban - Death, if you will. How is that any different than Sirius willing to die for Lily and James?

Please don't misunderstand me: I don't see Bellatrix as the least bit heroic or praiseworthy. But that said, just because an individual acts from a moral standpoint that we may not agree with doesn't necessarily mean that that individual has no morality from which to act.

See, this is what makes her such an interesting character. She is complex and intelligent. She has specific dogma to which she strictly adheres. If I had to choose a counterpart, an opposite, I would actually choose someone like Hermione.

Astragynia Winifred Posy Miranda Yseult Cawdor - Apr 26, 2005 1:13 pm (#104 of 444)

It seems to me that the key to Bellatrix’s character is POWER. She likes the Crucio curse, which is a very direct way of having absolute power over a person (true, Imperius is like that too, but Imperius is most useful from a distance as a method of spying and sabotaging, therefore requiring distance and subtlety - which don’t strike me as things Bella cares about). It’s about power, but power in the very immediate sense. This is why she will stop in the middle of a fight to jeer at an opponent when she has the upper hand. After all, the Dark Arts are, at their core, an abuse of power, which seems to be their attraction, and anti-Muggle sentiment is based on some sort of idea that those with clearly superior power (magic) therefore have the right to rule over and abuse for entertainment those ‘lesser beings’ with inferior power. For Quirrell, the idea that the world was all about power was a revelation; for Bellatrix, it would have been an assumption she grew up with.

As to the scene in the Wizengamot, I don’t think that negates my theory - rather, she saw herself, strangely enough, as having the upper hand in that situation. Her defiant attitude came from her absolute faith in her ideology, that she was right and the ‘Dark Lord’ would return to power (and therefore return HER to power). Lucius Malfoy weasled (no offense to Ron and family) his way out by denying, apologising, and admitting what he believes was wrong - to Bellatrix, that must seem like unforgivable weakness.

I, too, am very curious about the exact relationship between Voldemort and Bellatrix. I really don’t think either one is ‘in love’ with the other - after all, one of the most important things about Voldemort is that he is incapable of love. She definitely worships him; I agree with the way Elanor put it in post #26: ‘Devotion is indeed the right word for Bella's attitude towards Voldemort, fanaticism, worship are other good ones for describing it in my opinion.’

It struck me as I was reading OotP that she very likely has fantasies of reigning as Voldemort’s queen. Having a husband wouldn’t be much of an obstacle to a Death-Eater; he can always be killed, ignored entirely, or best yet - send him on a suicide mission so he can die as a martyr to the cause. I'm not saying, however, that I think she loves him, and certainly not that she has a "crush" on him; it goes back to the power thing again. Voldemort probably sees her a bit below Nagini the snake; kinda fond of her, maybe a bit amused by her company, but of course wouldn't hesitate to kill her if the need arose.

On the Voldemort-is-half-blood issue... many racist people in the history (and present) of our Muggle world often allow for ‘one or two good (insert derogatory name for hated group here)’, usually people they know. This is how they keep their prejudiced philosophy intact even in the face of evidence to the contrary - they just allow for an exception. I would imagine that many Death Eaters might react in the same way. Bella, however... I’m not sure. Her reaction to Harry’s statement was anger and flat-out denial; I have a feeling that even if Voldemort told her himself, she still wouldn’t really believe it, and most likely would turn the anger that she felt about it against the same people she has always hated, and somehow blame them for the ‘lies.’ Though committing ‘blasphemy’ in her presence is certainly a sure-fire way to get her extremely angry and thus perhaps put her off-guard in a fight that requires cold concentration (say, on the edge of a cliff?), I don’t think it would ever cause her to turn against Voldemort or the cause.

(Hmmm, maybe my first post should have been an essay instead.)

zelmia - Apr 26, 2005 8:24 pm (#105 of 444)
Edited Apr 26, 2005 9:25 pm

For Quirrell, the idea that the world was all about power was a revelation; for Bellatrix, it would have been an assumption she grew up with. - Astragynia

A very astute point and well-made point. I agree with you.

Her defiant attitude came from her absolute faith in her ideology...

Yes! Ideology. Ideology, Belief, Dogma, Credo, etc. These can only serve to shape our morality. Find a belief system you agree with and you will act from it - well, most of the time. Her morality exists, whether we agree with it or not.

Ponine - May 14, 2005 12:30 pm (#106 of 444)

Has anyone else come to the conclusion that Bella cannot Apparate or Disapparate? I may - once again (I have this silly dream of actually be the first to discover something... Wink

- be reinventing the wheel, but based on the fact that she was trapped under the statue and unable to move (in MOM scene) and also that LV grabbed her and Disapparate d with her, leads me to believe that she cannot on her own... Thoughts?

Nathan Zimmermann - May 14, 2005 12:47 pm (#107 of 444)
Edited May 14, 2005 1:47 pm

Ponine that is an excellent observation. The questions that it raises are the following:

First, to what extent if any did Bellatrix's stay in Azkaban affect her ability to Apparate , Disapparate , perform complex spells, and complex charms?

Second, what level of concentration, focus, and control is necessary to successfully Apparate and Disapparate ?

Solitaire - May 14, 2005 2:40 pm (#108 of 444)
Edited May 14, 2005 3:41 pm

Remember that Dumbledore had already bound several DEs by an anti-Disapparation jinx in the Death Chamber. I see no reason why, in using the statue to "pin" Bella, he might not have included a Disapparation jinx on her, as well. I'm sure her wand would have been taken from her by this point, so she might not have been able to Disapparate or remove the statue.

Voldemort certainly had a wand, but perhaps he alone had the power to break any jinx Dumbledore had cast. I have difficulty believing that Bella would be unable to do anything the twins could do. JM2K, of course ...

Solitaire

Ponine - May 14, 2005 3:15 pm (#109 of 444)

Thank you Nathan Smile

Solitaire, I was thinking along those lines as well, and I will look again, but I could not find any reference to Bella losing her wand/having it taken while with Harry and LV and DD. Furthermore, I think the whole concept of her being physically pinned down by a statue would be somewhat redundant, as the anti-Disapparition jinx administered downstairs seemingly prevented the DEs from doing anything at all. I just have a feeling that it might be a clue. I agree that it would seem strange that she would not be able to, but there might be more to that story than we are aware of...? If she had been jinxed by an anti-Disapparating spell, would you think it likely that LV could Disapparate her? I don't know myself, just thinking out loud.. Smile

zelmia - May 14, 2005 6:45 pm (#110 of 444)

Perhaps it's a simple as this: In order to Apparate /Disapparate , one must be physically free to do so. In other words, if one is trapped under a statue, it is not possible to Disapparate .

One thing that strikes me, though. We see that Voldemort grabbed Bella and Disapparate d. Therefore it is clearly possible to perform this feat. For me this action rekindles the age old question of why Lily did not do the same with Harry back on that fateful night in Godric's Hollow.

In the past, there was speculation that perhaps one could not Disapparate holding a baby. But surely if one can Disapparate holding an adult in one's arms, an infant should pose no problem to the maneuver.

But as to the question of why Bella did not Disapparate on her own, I personally think it was that she had been instructed to obtain the Prophecy - and she wasn't going anywhere until she either had it or had been instructed to leave. She fancies herself the Dark Lord's Most Faithful Servant, after all. She would not abandon the quest unless she had been told to do so by Voldemort himself.

Solitaire - May 14, 2005 7:15 pm (#111 of 444)

Could she have Disapparate d with Voldemort, under her own power, once she was released from under the statue?

Solitaire

Choices - May 15, 2005 8:32 am (#112 of 444)

I do think that one must have the ability to Apparate before they can Apparate or Disapparate with someone else. Lily couldn't because Harry couldn't, and Arthur and Molly Weasley couldn't Apparate to Diagon Alley because the kids couldn't - so they all went by Floo Powder. Fred and George can Apparate together, but if one could and the other couldn't, then the one that could, would not be able to take the other with him. Does that make sense?? LOL

Ydnam96 - May 15, 2005 9:08 am (#113 of 444)

Yes, it makes perfect sense. Although I'm not sure it's so much as Apparating together as much as it is Apparating simultaneously.

Choices - May 15, 2005 4:31 pm (#114 of 444)

Thanks Ydnam - I didn't clarify that part - I did mean Apparating at the same time, not as a unit. :-)

Robert Dierken - May 15, 2005 5:37 pm (#115 of 444)

I suspect that prisoners at Azkaban have the anti-Disapparation spell cast on them.

Netherlandic - May 16, 2005 5:14 am (#116 of 444)

Or perhaps prisoners have too little strength to Disapparate. Remember that wizards are weakened by those creatures and the intense feeling of fear and cold.

T Brightwater - May 16, 2005 2:22 pm (#117 of 444)

Perhaps Apparition requires a wand. Sirius had his wand taken away; I expect the others did too.

Aqualu Nifey - May 16, 2005 5:15 pm (#118 of 444)

She had a wand to stun Sirius, though, right? Not entirely sure how she got it though....

Mrs Brisbee - May 16, 2005 7:11 pm (#119 of 444)

Bellatrix must have had her wand when she dueled with Harry in the Atrium, and she cast spells at the statue before it pinned her. Since she was trying to flee when she ran up to the Atrium, and didn't Apparate out once there but ran for the exit, my guess is she either cannot Apparate --which does seem unlikely-- or Dumbledore hit her with the anti-Disapparation jinx in the DoM before she fled, and it is a jinx which isn't easily removed.

Solitaire - May 16, 2005 9:01 pm (#120 of 444)

I think your last idea may be correct: Dumbledore hit her with the anti-Disapparation jinx in the DoM before she fled, and it is a jinx which isn't easily removed. Of course, Voldemort would probably be able to take her.

About those pesky wands ... I've wondered for ages where all the escaped DEs got their wands. I suppose they could have been purchased somewhere in Knockturn Alley ... but I've often wondered if they came from a stash of wands that DEs had taken from their victims in the last war. (Might the murderer take his victim's wand as a sort of "trophy"?) If so, perhaps Lucius was keeping them. After all, anyone who tried to buy half a dozen or more wands at once would surely raise some eyebrows--and might even start tongues wagging--even from a place like Borgin & Burkes.

Solitaire

Finn BV - May 17, 2005 4:09 am (#121 of 444)

# They could be stolen

# They could have been bought over a period of time

# Ollivander could be "darker" than we think

# If Lucius bought them, he could have said he was "trying some out" for Draco, etc.

We'll have to work that one out...

Solitaire - May 17, 2005 6:07 am (#122 of 444)

I think it is unlikely that the wands came from Ollivander. I do not believe he would sell a wand to Lucius for Draco to "try out." Ollivander is much too fussy about his wands. He'd want to see for himself that "the wand chose the wizard," so to speak. I also believe, based on what we know of Ollivander thus far, that he'd have notified Dumbledore of a major wand purchase like that.

The wands could have been purchased over a period of time, but that would probably have required several people to have been in on the secret. It would look "fishy" for one person to need to buy wands so often, don't you think? Stealing the wands seems a definite possibility. However, stealing them from Ollivander seems risky. He probably knows to the wand how many he has and which ones would have gone missing. I suppose they could have been "lifted" from other Wizards ... or even donated by other DE families. I still wonder if they were taken from victims. For instance, what became of Cedric's wand?

Solitaire

Cornelia - May 17, 2005 6:23 am (#123 of 444)

They could be bought in a foreign wand-shop. Fleur and Victor had Wands which weren’t made from Ollivander. The Durmstrang wandmaker could be willing to sell as many wands as needed to "the dark side".

Catherine - May 17, 2005 6:52 am (#124 of 444)

That's an interesting point, Cornelia.

We know that Ollivander makes wands with cores like dragon heartstring, phoenix feather, and unicorn hair. Could there be a "dark wand maker" who uses cores from dark creatures?

We already know from Fleur's "Veela hair" wand that other substances could be used.

So this makes me wonder if any of the dark wizards like Bellatrix have non-traditional or "dark" cores.

Solitaire - May 17, 2005 7:17 am (#125 of 444)

Cornelia, I agree it might be easier to buy from a foreign wandmaker. But I wonder ... just because Durmstrang teaches the Dark Arts can we assume the wandmaker used by most of their students is necessarily a Dark Wizard? After all, Ollivander sold Voldemort his wand. It's likely that he also sold wands to Bella, Lucius, and Peter.

Catherine, the idea of Dark Wizards having different cores in their wands is intriguing. Still, we know Voldemort has a Phoenix feather--from Fawkes, no less--and I'd say that is a core almost of purity for about as Dark a Wizard as one can find these days.

I suppose Ollivander could make custom wands with a core of choice. I do not remember if it is described in the books, but movie-Lucius' wand is rather unique-looking. Isn't it imbedded in some sort of walking stick that he uses rather imperiously?

This seems to be getting rather off-topic from Bella ... perhaps we should take the wand discussion elsewhere. Unfortunately, I think our wand thread was munched ages ago.

Solitaire

T Brightwater - May 17, 2005 11:06 am (#126 of 444)

Wands could have been taken from victims, or could be family heirlooms. If they aren't destroyed when their owners are sent to Azkaban, it's possible that some "mole" in the MoM has found a way to retrieve them. I doubt anyone is delegated to check the confiscated wand box every day. :-)

Solitaire - May 17, 2005 4:42 pm (#127 of 444)

Oh, good idea about the "mole" in the MoM. Actually, I suppose it would be quite possible for Lucius to have gotten them ... given his slippery ways!

Solitaire

Aqualu Nifey - May 17, 2005 5:12 pm (#128 of 444)

Yeah, I was just thinking that the Ministry would keep the wand, in case the person got let off for good behavior or something of the sort. I couldn't see them destroying, for instance, Voldemort's wand, if they're not worried about some curse that would have the wand AK its attacker (or something else lethal), then something that important could go in a Wizard's museum.

But then I remembered the part in OotP where they were going to snap Harry's wand just for the 'Dementor incident.' Then I suppose that at that point, the MoM would do anything to get Harry out of the picture.

TomoÈ - May 18, 2005 6:46 am (#129 of 444)

No, I think you’re in the right about the snapped wand, Hagrid get his wand snapped when he was expulsed from Hogwarts. Likely they do the same with the multi-murderers' wand.

Solitaire - May 18, 2005 6:45 pm (#130 of 444)

I believe Voldemort's wand would be snapped into a thousand toothpicks. I think most of the WW would want that wand DESTROYED! The wand they might want on display (even then I'm not even too sure) is the one that (we hope!) is ultimately used to destroy him.

Solitaire

Phelim Mcintyre - May 23, 2005 4:23 am (#131 of 444)

It is the MoM that confiscates wands, where do they store them? Could the Death Eaters simply have broken into the room where they are kept, or someone inside the ministry got them out for the other Death Eaters (e.g. McNair)?

Ydnam96 - May 23, 2005 7:40 am (#132 of 444)

Phelim, you could be correct. However when they expelled Hagrid they simply broke his wand and left him with the pieces. They threatened to do the same with Harry's wand in book 5.

There is a possibility that Bella had more than one wand as well, so that even if her main wand was confiscated or broken, when she escaped she could have simply gone home and gotten one of her alternate (or older) wands. Or...they went and bought a Gregory (is that the name) wand...where ever it was where Krum got his. It is possible that guy wouldn't care that they were escaped convicts.

Solitaire - May 24, 2005 2:08 pm (#133 of 444)

I'm betting one of the DEs who remained on the outside (Lucius, anyone?) during the time the other DEs were in Azkaban had a stash of wands that had been taken from their victims in the previous Voldy war.

Solitaire

Aqualu Nifey - Jun 5, 2005 3:24 pm (#134 of 444)

Ooh! Like General Grevous in Episode III, he kept the light sabers of all the Jedi he killed. Sorry, too much Star Wars for me....

I don't think it's possible to go out and buy extra wands, though. For one thing, it would raise a lot of questions not only among Ollivander, but word would get around. The Ministry might intervene. But also, the wand chooses the wizard. Any other wand wouldn't be as accurate, or efficient.

Ponine - Jun 5, 2005 5:21 pm (#135 of 444)

I must disagree, Aqualu - I don't think wizards have one 'wand mate', but several. It would be a shame if say our accident-prone Harry snapped his wand in two at the age of seventeen, and never got a good wand again. I am confident that yes, not all wands work well for every wizard, but several wands may work very well. Besides, Ollivander’s is not the only wandmaker - they could simply Apparate to Egypt or Norway or Tibet to get wands. We know that Durmstrang gets their wands from elsewhere, and also that this school is more into the DA. Considering that Karkaroff was a DE, I would not be surprised if he was a supplier of wands at one point...

Miriam Huber - Jun 5, 2005 11:51 pm (#136 of 444)

And Mr. Ollivander talked about Lily buying her first wand. It only seems that they haven’t more than one wand at a time.

Phelim Mcintyre - Jun 6, 2005 3:45 am (#137 of 444)

Miriam - good call. Could Harry buy another wand to take on Mouldy Voldy with?

Netherlandic - Jun 6, 2005 5:30 am (#138 of 444)

Well, as you grow alder, you change...so perhaps you need a new wand to mach your character, new skills etc.

applepie - Jun 6, 2005 6:16 am (#139 of 444)

Good catch, Miriam. I agree that you could "outgrow" a wand at some point in life, though I wonder how they know?

I'm laughing to myself right now thinking of the batteries with the little button you press to check the battery life. I'm imagining a wand with a button which would allow you to check the life of you wand. "Oh, I'm running low on magic...better head over to Ollivander’s"

Choices - Jun 6, 2005 8:48 am (#140 of 444)
Edited Jun 6, 2005 9:49 am

I agree that a successful person - Lucius Malfoy for example - would not want to continue to use their beat-up old school wand. They would buy a new one more fitting their station in life. And Dumbledore....I bet in 150 years, he probably has had more than one wand.

GryffEndora - Jun 6, 2005 10:38 am (#141 of 444)

Yes, why would the tournament people have bothered with the wand weighing if the wands never wear out? It seems to me the tournament organizers recognized that a wand could be poorly matched, abused or worn out and a champion better have a wand that is in perfect working order.

Choices - Jun 6, 2005 5:30 pm (#142 of 444)

Remember Ron's wand that had the unicorn tail-hair hanging out? It had definitely seen better days.

Solitaire - Jun 6, 2005 5:56 pm (#143 of 444)

Poor Ron! Then again ... if his wand had been in good working order, he and Harry might not be with us today!

Solitaire

zelmia - Jun 6, 2005 6:54 pm (#144 of 444)

I'm sorry. I thought this was the Bellatrix Lestrange Thread. I seem to have wandered into the Wands Thread.

Astragynia Winifred Posy Miranda Yseult Cawdor - Jun 6, 2005 9:22 pm (#145 of 444)

Good point, Zelmia. Smile

Anything DE-related seems to keep coming back to wands, for some reason.

Maybe I'll perform a public service and change the subject...

So, who's on the Bella/Voldie 'ship?

Miriam Huber - Jun 7, 2005 4:12 am (#146 of 444)

Which direction?

Now, earnestly, you could argue that Bella has sort of a different feeling towards Voldemort than the rest of the DEs. They all want power, but Bella, for example, was one of the few (if not the only one) proudly going to Azkaban, and there are other little bits of her behaviour that make me think if she is not - not loving him, but - more attached to the person Voldemort (whatever that might be, perhaps a figment of Bella’s imagination) than only to the biggest bully in the playground like the others. (Sorry for the long sentence)

But if she thinks V is more than just using her as a tool like all the others, I am sure she is mistaken and might experience a severe disappointment.

(By the way, she is one out of at least three who proclaim themselves "(most) faithful servant", the others being Wormtail and Crouch Jr. Voldemort is so clever manipulating people!)

zelmia - Jun 7, 2005 7:12 pm (#147 of 444)
Edited Jun 7, 2005 8:13 pm

I'm not sure that Wormtail ever proclaimed himself "most faithful servant". Faithful and Servant, yes. But as I recall he actually tried to deny his loyalty, claiming that it was only out of fear of what would happen if Voldemort found out the truth.

I would say that only Bella truly is the "most faithful servant." Even Barty Jr. did not stand up in front of the Wizengamot and declare his loyalty. Only Bellatrix never recanted her loyalty, pride, or devotion in her Dark Lord, even when staring into the gaping jaws of Azkaban.

Phelim Mcintyre - Jun 8, 2005 4:15 am (#148 of 444)

Bella's devotion has a house-elf ring to it. May be she is not so pure-blood after all Wink

Astragynia Winifred Posy Miranda Yseult Cawdor - Jun 8, 2005 3:06 pm (#149 of 444)

Oh, I didn't make that connection - you're right. Her devotion does have a "house-elf ring to it," particularly her attitude about deserving punishment for failing to get the prophecy. Not that I think Bellatrix is part house-elf - but think about it, the character has probably had house-elf servants her entire life (we've heard no mention so far of wizards being domestic servants, have we?) and so it would make sense that her ideal of how a true servant thinks would be based on house-elves, though probably unconsciously. I wonder if JKR made the DE/house-elf situations similar deliberately, or if the similarity is based more on her idea of what extreme devotion looks like?

Miriam Huber - Jun 8, 2005 10:42 pm (#150 of 444)
Edited Jun 8, 2005 11:45 pm

Good catch about the "house-elfishness", although I think it is not connected with house-elves, but with the way certain people see loyalty.

Compare the loyalty of the DEs to V and the loyalty the Order shows Dumbledore. Can you imagine Dumbledore wanting anyone to kiss the hem of his robes? Or call him "master"? It is difficult for me to express in English... there is more hierarchy, more servitude, more person-worshipping and more question of "rewards" and "punishment" etc. on the Dark Side and that makes it house-elfish.

The loyalty of the Order is a free loyalty of people who serve a common goal and respect their leader, and that leader doesn’t humiliate them but understands his leadership as a ministry, too.

(That is what I LOVE about Dumbledore: that he is a bit crazy, funny, joking also about himself, not the typical "wise, good old man", the incarnation of good, who is always serious and only talks earnestly - if you know what I mean.)

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Potteraholic Tue Jul 26, 2011 10:05 pm

T Brightwater - Jun 9, 2005 6:11 am (#151 of 444)

I know exactly what you mean, Miriam, and I feel the same way. Voldemort and the DEs take themselves extremely seriously - as do Fudge, Percy, and Dolores.

Eric Bailey - Jun 9, 2005 4:37 pm (#152 of 444)

Yeah, I think Bella's got more than a working relationship with Tom. He was very disappointed he wasn't able to get a full set of Black sisters, since Andi left. After all, who wouldn't want a full set of Black sisters? Collect 'em all.

Finn BV - Jun 9, 2005 4:54 pm (#153 of 444)
Edited Jun 9, 2005 5:54 pm

Eric, I agree with you. Bella and Tom may be more than just partners in crime.

PS It seems like you were trying to make your word "wouldn't" italicized. We have to use HTML on these forums, and that is done using < and >. So to make something italicized, write word. That will appear: word. Check out the "How do you ...... ?" thread.

Solitaire - Jun 12, 2005 10:21 am (#154 of 444)

since Andi left

Andromeda (Andi) left? I don't see Andromeda as having "left"; I do not believe she was ever a part of his little entourage. I suspect that, like her cousin Sirius, she saw and understood her family's "racism" for what it was when she was very young. In fact, as she was Sirius's favorite cousin, she may even have had some part in educating him about it all.

Given the age of Tonks (about 7 years older than Draco), it is possible that Andromeda is the eldest of the three Black sisters. I believe that Bella's time at Hogwarts overlapped at least a couple of years with the Marauders. This would put her somewhere near Lucius in age, correct?

Is it possible that Andromeda's marriage to Muggle-born Ted Tonks could have ignited a family brouhaha? If the Blacks already hated Muggles and Muggle-born Witches and Wizards--and we know Sirius's mother did--imagine how they would have reacted to their pure-blood daughter marrying a Muggle-born. Could it be that Bella saw her chance to improve her position in the family "pecking order" by joining Voldemort's forces?

Concerning Bella's "servitude" ... I've often wondered if there were more to Bella's fanatical "devotion" to Voldemort than just being his faithful servant. Might she have eventually begun to envision herself "reigning" beside Voldemort as his "Queen," once he realized his "conquest" the Wizarding World? Such a fantasy would certainly account for the savage attack on the Longbottoms--the attempt to find and restore Voldemort to power--after even many DEs had given him up as being vanquished for good. As for her marriage, well, surely a DE husband would not be considered much of an obstacle to such a goal! And think of her position among the likes of her family then! The "stain" of having a sister married to a Muggle-born would be forgotten in her own glory!

Yes, it is just a fantasy ... but I can imagine Bella's mind working this way.

Solitaire

Miriam Huber - Jun 12, 2005 10:51 am (#155 of 444)
Edited Jun 12, 2005 11:52 am

There are more kinds of love than just "admired master" and "wife-husband-relationship". I think we all know that there are many, many different forms and that therefore there may well be a wife-to-man-attachment from Bella to Voldemort (not the other way around, though) without her ever thinking of divorce or even an erotic relationship with Voldemort.

I find the idea of Bella fancying herself "queen" very good, Solitaire. As we have seen with the many comments about "faithful servants" there is a hard (how do you call it? strong? severe?) competition between the DEs about who is nearest to Voldemort.

Eric Bailey - Jun 12, 2005 2:08 pm (#156 of 444)
Edited Jun 12, 2005 3:11 pm

By "left", I mean Andi leaving the family and their values. I figure the Tapestry had the birth order correct, reading Bellatrix, Andromeda, Narcissa. Since Voldemort got two of them, it's likely he'd wanted all three. We also don't know that Cissy had Draco immediately out of Hogwarts.

Of course, we still wouldn't know the age difference. Bella and Andi could well be twins who chose different paths, Andi choosing what was right and Bella choosing what was easy.

Still though, being in her early 40s wouldn't make Bella unfit for duty, or seduction. I think of her as a dark haired, British, Elle Driver from Kill Bill (with both eyes intact, of course). Daryl's in her early 40s and could still pull it off.

Catherine - Jun 12, 2005 2:24 pm (#157 of 444)
Edited Jun 12, 2005 3:25 pm

By "left", I mean Andi leaving the family and their values.--Eric Bailey

I think we should, unless her character attains more prominence, stick to the name "Andromeda." We have an international membership here, and the nickname "Andi" isn't something JKR has done, nor does it appear as a Forum nickname right now; it might prove confusing.

Still though, being in her early 40s wouldn't make Bella unfit for duty, or seduction. I think of her as a dark haired, British, Elle Driver from Kill Bill (with both eyes intact, of course). Daryl's in her early 40s and could still pull it off. --Eric Bailey

We also have movie threads, and a thread to discuss cast members.

timrew - Jun 12, 2005 3:29 pm (#158 of 444)

Aah! Ma petite choux........je t'aime beaucoup.

Gross! Bella to me is a cow of the utmost predeterminations............she's horrible!

I hate her; and I worship the ground that's coming to her, nuff said......she's terrifying!

Nathan Zimmermann - Jun 12, 2005 6:13 pm (#159 of 444)

According to the Black family tree that is included on the Lexicon Bella is the eldest of the three Black sisters.

Solitaire - Jun 12, 2005 9:18 pm (#160 of 444)
Edited Jun 12, 2005 10:20 pm

We know that Bella's time at Hogwarts overlapped with the Marauders, although we do not know by how many years--do we? The Lexicon has her in Slytherin in the early 70s. It also lists Tonks’ birth year as 1973, which means Andromeda probably left Hogwarts at least in 1972.

I suppose it is possible that the girls were only a year apart. Is it also possible that Bella and Andromeda could be twins? There are many pairs in the series. What are the odds that the three girls are triplets--and could that be important?

Who is Cissy--Narcissa? Hm ...

Solitaire

Edit: Suppose the tapestry started with the eldest dead center and worked outward ... the way a real tapestry--which could not be redone each time someone was added--would have been done.

Nathan Zimmermann - Jun 13, 2005 10:05 am (#161 of 444)
Edited Jun 13, 2005 11:15 am

Solitaire, those are excellent points. First, I had forgotten about Bella being in school with the Marauders. Second, I learned something new, I did not realize that tapestries were made in that way.

The idea of them being triplets is intriguing although if they are I would imagine them being fraternal triplets and not identical because, Narcissa and Bella look dissimilar to the best of my recollection.

Ydnam96 - Jun 13, 2005 2:55 pm (#162 of 444)

Well, it is a "magic" tapestry.

Solitaire - Jun 13, 2005 3:23 pm (#163 of 444)

I admit it is magic, Mandy ... but then why burn off Tonks, Sirius, etc.? Why not just zap them off with her wand, as if they'd never been there?

Nathan, actually, I am guessing about the tapestry, based on a few family trees I've seen embroidered over years. The ladies who did them did not want to rip out and re-do names that had already been done; so when families "expanded," they worked from the center out.

Solitaire

Ponine - Jun 13, 2005 4:01 pm (#164 of 444)

I just wanted to point out that while Bella and Barty Jr proclaimed themselves to be his most faithful servant, Wormtail was actually referred to as such by the prophecy. I find it interesting how well the source of the prophecy seems to be in tune with LV and his desires for servitility (word?). Also, I wonder, does this means that Bella and (see how I tie her nicely in here, as this is her thread after all?? Wink

Barty are not as faithful as Wormtail, or may the prophecy not be so accurate after all? He has demonstrated cowardice, weakness and fear, but these are not at all traits I associate with fierce Bella and fanatic Barty....

Ydnam96 - Jun 13, 2005 4:10 pm (#165 of 444)

Solitaire you bring up an excellent point. I hadn't thought about that. It does seem that they could just have them magically removed. Maybe though in those circumstances they were mad enough to just point their wand and blast and felt it was just that everyone else could see that is what happens to family traitors??

Steve Newton - Jun 13, 2005 4:27 pm (#166 of 444)

Magical removal just wouldn't seem, to me, to give the full message.

Mrs Brisbee - Jun 13, 2005 5:15 pm (#167 of 444)

I just wanted to point out that while Bella and Barty Jr proclaimed themselves to be his most faithful servant, Wormtail was actually referred to as such by the prophecy. I find it interesting how well the source of the prophecy seems to be in tune with LV and his desires for servitility (word?). Also, I wonder, does this means that Bella and (see how I tie her nicely in here, as this is her thread after all?? Wink

Barty are not as faithful as Wormtail, or may the prophecy not be so accurate after all? He has demonstrated cowardice, weakness and fear, but these are not at all traits I associate with fierce Bella and fanatic Barty.... --Ponine

Bella's a bit of a loose cannon, she tried to attack Harry before the DEs got the prophecy from him in the DoM -- she might have smashed it. Her sort of gung-ho servility (the word you wanted, I think) could cost her master his desire. Wormtail did seek out Voldemort of his own accord and was instrumental in restoring him to his body. Barty might qualify as "The Most Faithful", but as far as we know both he and Bellatrix were not in any position to act when the first prophecy was made.

Astragynia Winifred Posy Miranda Yseult Cawdor - Jun 13, 2005 7:04 pm (#168 of 444)

Ponine: IS Wormtail actually referred to as the most faithful servant in the prophecy? According to the Lexicon, the prophecy (the one that begins "It will happen tonight...") just calls him "the servant."

On another aspect of the "Voldie, Voldie, on the wall/ Who is the most faithful DE of all" dilemma, Bella's claim that it's her seems to be based on the way she didn't disown Voldemort at her trial - but isn't there some mention (in the trial scene, I think) that this wasn't the only time she and her husband were suspected of being DEs, and they had wormed their way out of it before? How could she do that without disowning Voldemort?

Or, perhaps her husband - Rudolphus or Rabastan or whatever his name is - was the one who got them out before, and this is why he seems so weak and dejected at the trial (and such a general non-entity since)?

Eric Bailey - Jun 13, 2005 11:39 pm (#169 of 444)
Edited Jun 14, 2005 12:43 am

We also have movie threads, and a thread to discuss cast members.

Sorry, but I fail to see how using another character as an example of how Bella could be fit for action and look good doing it in her early 40s is, in any way, discussing casting or the HP movies.

Netherlandic - Jun 14, 2005 4:34 am (#170 of 444)

I am wondering over Bella's husband. Is he still a free man or was he also in the DoM? If we assume that Bella has some love form going on with Voldemort, than how is her relationship with her husband. Any ideas?

Weeny Owl - Jun 14, 2005 7:41 am (#171 of 444)

Yes, Bella's husband was in the Department of Mysteries which means he's now in Azkaban.

I've never felt that Bella's relationship with Voldemort was the same type as she would have with her husband. I feel that she wants to please Voldemort only so that she can rise higher in the ranks than the other Death Eaters and not because there's a romantic type of feeling there. I feel that way because the Death Eaters we've come across seem to be arrogant, and they want their superiority acknowledged, so by being Voldemort's most faithful, Bella would be above the others.

I feel her devotion is more of a religious type of frenzy than anything else, and that it also fits into her pureblood mania.

TomoÈ - Jun 14, 2005 8:00 pm (#172 of 444)
Edited Jun 14, 2005 9:02 pm

The Dark Lord lies alone and friendless, abandoned by his followers. His servant has been chained these twelve years.

Tonight, before midnight, the servant will break free and set out to rejoin his master.

The Dark Lord will rise again with his servant’s aid, greater and more terrible than ever before.

Tonight ... before midnight ... the servant ... will set out ... to rejoin ... his master ...

No mention of "the most faithful" servant in the Bloomsbury version.

Weeny Owl - Jun 15, 2005 9:25 am (#173 of 444)
Edited Jun 15, 2005 10:25 am

Tomoe, I think they're referring to the prophecy in PoA.

It will happen tonight. The Dark Lord lies alone and friendless, abandoned by his followers. His servant has been chained these twelve years. Tonight, before midnight... the servant will break free and set out to rejoin his master. The Dark Lord will rise again with his servant's aid, greater and more terrible than ever he was. Tonight... before midnight...the servant...will set out...to rejoin...his master....

The parts in bold are mine.

T Brightwater - Jun 21, 2005 12:04 pm (#174 of 444)

Sybill's prophecy just says "servant," not "most faithful servant." Wormtail also says, at the Riddle House, "I am a faithful servant" - but again, no claim to being the _most_ faithful.

Aqualu Nifey - Jun 21, 2005 4:41 pm (#175 of 444)

Does anyone think that the reason Voldy calls her Bella is the same reason that Snape calls him Draco? Hmm... now we just have to figure out what those reasons are. And I thought Tomoe WAS quoting the Prophecy in PoA.

TomoÈ - Jun 22, 2005 7:20 pm (#176 of 444)
Edited Jun 22, 2005 8:31 pm

I was, but it seems I forgot to type the first sentence, which could have mislead Weeny Owl.

As for why Voldemort call her Bella (and his DE too), maybe it's plainly because there are too many Lestranges around to call them by their surname.

Edit: Why Bella and not Bellatrix, well, it's shorter. You don't expect a powerful Lord like Voldemort to waste is time saying the full name of his follower, do you? ^_~

Weeny Owl - Jun 22, 2005 9:14 pm (#177 of 444)

It isn't nice to mislead a Weeny Owl, Tomoe.

It could be a way of keeping his minions in their place. He calls Peter Pettigrew Wormtail, and by using a familiar name with Bella, perhaps he's indicating in a subtle manner that she needs to remember her place.

Astragynia Winifred Posy Miranda Yseult Cawdor - Jun 26, 2005 11:03 pm (#178 of 444)
Edited Jun 27, 2005 12:06 am

I just finished re-reading OoTP, and I happened to notice that Lucius calls her "Bellatrix" - but not Bella.

By the way, did anybody else find it odd that Harry felt Voldemort's anger over losing the prophecy at the very same moment that he told Bella it had smashed? Was Voldemort somehow seeing/hearing the battle through her eyes?

Phelim Mcintyre - Jun 26, 2005 11:40 pm (#179 of 444)

AWPMYC - Voldemort probably felt the reality of what Harry was saying through Harry.

Doris Crockford - Jun 27, 2005 11:31 am (#180 of 444)
Edited Jun 27, 2005 1:57 pm

But Phelim, why wouldn't Voldy have realized it before- when it was smashed, and Harry was horrified?

So Lucius calls her Bellatrix, not Bella? Hmm, that's interesting- he doesn't use her nickname even though she's his sister-in-law. Well, maybe Bella is one of those nicknames she doesn't like to use. I know a friend whose name is Kathrine, and she loathes being called Katie or Kathy. I mean, even if Bellatrix hates being called Bella, she can't really say much about it to Voldy, can she?

Edit: Rudolphus was in Azkaban, but was then one of the ones that escaped. He was later at the Ministry, Applepie. I assume he went to Azkaban, since Bella was the only one at the Ministry that didn't (I think).

applepie - Jun 27, 2005 11:45 am (#181 of 444)

I think Bella is Voldemort’s nickname for Bellatrix. My opinion is that he is as emotionally attached to Bellatrix as any person in Voldemort's position is capable of feeling.

This may have been stated earlier in the thread, but Bella means beautiful, and I think that says a lot about Voldemort calling her by that name.

I'm not saying that Voldemort loves Bellatrix. I'm saying that his nickname would lead me to believe that he is at his highest possible positive emotional level with Bella. Which, incidentally, is probably out of her loyalty and devotion, rather than love.

Just a bit off topic, but is Rudolphus still in Azkaban? My memory is failing me, and I don't remember him being at the Ministry of Magic.

Mrs Brisbee - Jun 27, 2005 1:02 pm (#182 of 444)

why wouldn't Voldy have realized it before- when it was smashed, and Harry was horrified? --Doris Crockford

I think it was Neville who was horrified when the prophecy smashed, not Harry. Harry was more worried about himself and his friends getting killed over the thing at that point I think.

Doris Crockford - Jun 27, 2005 1:09 pm (#183 of 444)
Edited Jun 27, 2005 2:10 pm

As both of them [Neville and Harry] stared at the place where it [the prophecy] had broken, appalled at what had happened... (p. 709 Canadian Edition). So they were both horrified, but maybe Harry was feeling too much at once for Voldemort to sort out the feelings and realize exactly what had happened. Or maybe he wasn't paying attention to Harry's feelings at that moment and his horror wasn't strong enough to draw Voldy's attention to it.

Mrs Brisbee - Jun 27, 2005 3:01 pm (#184 of 444)

Oops, you're right. I guess I got confused because when Neville tries to apologize Harry says, "It doesn't matter!"

TomoÈ - Jun 28, 2005 9:39 am (#185 of 444)
Edited Jun 28, 2005 10:39 am

applepie -> Just a bit off topic, but is Rudolphus still in Azkaban? My memory is failing me, and I don't remember him being at the Ministry of Magic.

Lucius Malfoy roar, 'Leave Nott, leave him, I say - his injuries will be nothing to the Dark Lord compared to losing that prophecy. Jugson, come back here, we need to organise! We'll split into pairs and search, and don't forget, be gentle with Potter until we've got the prophecy, you can kill the others if necessary - Bellatrix, Rudolphus, you take the left; Crabbe, Rabastan, go right - Jugson, Dolohov, the door straight ahead - Macnair and Avery, through here - Rookwood, over there - Mulciber, come with me!'

Paulus Maximus - Aug 1, 2005 11:58 am (#186 of 444)

I think Bella is Voldemort’s nickname for Bellatrix. My opinion is that he is as emotionally attached to Bellatrix as any person in Voldemort's position is capable of feeling.

Possibly. He isn't the only one who calls her "Bella", however.

David Breeze - Aug 16, 2005 11:52 am (#187 of 444)

Do you think that Bellatrix and Rudolphus would have been allowed to share a cell in Azkaban?

CatherineHermiona - Aug 16, 2005 1:24 pm (#188 of 444)

I don't think so. That is Azkaban at all.

Kate

timrew - Aug 16, 2005 2:36 pm (#189 of 444)

Bellatrix:- I'm so happy that you're sharing a cell with me, Rudolphus!

Rudolphus:- So am I!

One Dementor to the Other:- Did you hear that? Someone's happy. Let's go eat!

TwinklingBlueEyes - Aug 16, 2005 4:43 pm (#190 of 444)

Well Tim, I guess choking on my pork chop is better than killing my monitor with SPEW! Thank you! :-)

Gina R Snape - Aug 23, 2005 11:40 am (#191 of 444)

# giggle* I doubt supporting healthy marriages for convicts in Azkaban is much of a priority.

So, Bellatrix seems a bit of a gossip among the DEs. Anyone else think so?

Weeny Owl - Aug 23, 2005 2:30 pm (#192 of 444)

Why, yes, Gina, I certainly do!

She seems to be the type who would indulge in malicious gossip out of jealousy. She just HAS to be seething about her lowered status after the Department of Mysteries fiasco, where Snape is now the favorite. I can see her spreading a lot of malicious gossip hoping to get people on her side and against Snape especially.

zelmia - Aug 26, 2005 6:28 pm (#193 of 444)

Sounds like where I work.

Netherlandic - Sep 10, 2005 3:28 pm (#194 of 444)

I doubt that she has a good marriage with Rudolphus. They seemed to be married to unite pure bloods/social standing. Perhaps that is why they don't have any children?

zelmia - Sep 10, 2005 11:27 pm (#195 of 444)
Edited Sep 11, 2005 12:28 am

Having children isn't a measure of the quality of a relationship. Some couples simply don't want children. And as Rudolphus has yet to speak, we have no idea what sort of partner he is - or isn't - for Bellatrix.

Netherlandic - Sep 11, 2005 9:32 am (#196 of 444)

Actually, it was a joke. That's why I put a smiley behind my post. Definitely not a serious last sentence.

Gina R Snape - Sep 13, 2005 6:28 am (#197 of 444)

I can't imagine Bellatrix having children. Nor can I imagine her having any kind of real marriage when she is so blindly devoted to the Dark Lord. I wonder if her husband was a DE first, or after marrying (or as a condition of marrying) Bellatrix.

Solitaire - Sep 18, 2005 9:32 am (#198 of 444)

I agree with Zelmia. Many couples choose not to have kids for a variety of valid reasons, and it does not mean their marriage is less loving or worthwhile. There are also some people who shouldn't have children, and Bella seems like such a person. On the other hand, given the declining number of pure-bloods in the Wizarding World, it seems odd that those pure-bloods who think they are superior to Muggle-borns and Half-bloods wouldn't believe it to be their moral obligation to have children. Does that make sense?

Solitaire

Weeny Owl - Sep 18, 2005 11:45 am (#199 of 444)

I thought it was interesting how Bella said that if she had sons she'd be proud to give them to the Dark Lord, but regardless of Narcissa's viewpoints on the current war, she doesn't want her son dying. Bella doesn't understand a mother's love, and neither does Voldemort, but Narcissa sure does.

Gina R Snape - Sep 18, 2005 5:59 pm (#200 of 444)

Solitaire, I hope you are sitting down...because I agree with you. Some couples choose not to have children (such as Severus and myself) and their marriages are happy and fulfilling. But I am amazed purebloods aren't having dozens of children to repopulate the wizarding world with purebloods, just on principle alone.

I wonder if Narcissa's love for her son will play a future role. It's hard to imagine she and Bella came from the same mother.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Potteraholic Tue Jul 26, 2011 10:08 pm

zelmia - Sep 18, 2005 6:10 pm (#201 of 444)

Considering who Sirius' mother was, if the Sister's mother is anything like her, perhaps it's not so strange that Bella and "Cissy" could have been raised in the same house.

RoseMorninStar - Sep 18, 2005 7:02 pm (#202 of 444)

Gina.... SNAPE? What redeeming qualities do you see in Snape?

Solitaire, you make perfect sense. If they were so convinced that pure-blood was the ONLY way to be... they would want to counter the influx of Muggle-born and half-bloods with lots of little bigots, um, I mean, little witches & wizards.

Weeny Owl, it is an interesting point you bring up. Bella does not understand a mother's love. Neither does Voldemort. It will ultimately be their undoing I think. JKR has pointed in that direction all along.

I must also comment about Bellatrix... and her statement that she would be 'proud' to give her son's to the dark lord. Number one, it is easy to offer what you do not have to give. Number two, it is easy to offer what is not yours to give in the first place. We must assume that by the time a son (or daughter) would be old enough to serve (the dark lord or anyone else) that it would be their choice. Their life.

Phelim Mcintyre - Sep 19, 2005 12:19 am (#203 of 444)
Edited Sep 19, 2005 1:19 am

Possibly his potion/chicken soup making ; )

Solitaire - Sep 19, 2005 10:01 am (#204 of 444)

Gina agrees with me! **lapsing into momentary faint**

Number one, it is easy to offer what you do not have to give. Number two, it is easy to offer what is not yours to give in the first place.

Perfect, Rose. You hit the nail on the head!

Solitaire

timrew - Sep 19, 2005 2:30 pm (#205 of 444)

I think somewhere in one of the books (gosh, I'm informative!), someone says, something along the lines of, "There are no pure-blood wizards or witches left, they just like to think that way".

They have to marry half-bloods or, let's face it, Muggles, in order to continue the line.

RoseMorninStar - Sep 19, 2005 2:44 pm (#206 of 444)
Edited Sep 19, 2005 3:53 pm

Yup Tim, Sirius says that in OotP when he is showing Harry the tapestry with his family tree. I think that is true of any family history. If one goes back far enough how in the heck do we know? I also think JKR was thinking of the Germans (Nazi's) with their 'pure blood Aryan race' garbage. I mean... all the migrating people did and the wars that were fought, the captives that were taken, the borders that changed, poor record keeping, marriages or children that were unacknowledged -- I would imagine it would be like that in the wizarding world too. What does 'pure' really mean anyway in that context? I guess it would be how strongly you were willing to knock anyone off the family tree that didn't suit you.

For example, I know (relatively speaking) with a fair amount of certainty what my family history is back to about the late 1600's - early 1700's.... except one relative in the mid-1800's married a woman who was part Potowatomi Indian. I have no idea what her background is or how much her family migrated and mixed with other tribes. I also have Irish, English, Scottish, Czech, and German blood. But the borders of those countries have changed many times in the last couple of hundred years.. they have been invaded. Captives might have been taken from other places.

I realize this is a bit different with the make believe wizarding world... but I think someone somewhere in the books also hypothesized that the influx of some Muggle blood also made for a bit stronger wizarding race. Voldemort...a very talented (if evil) wizard was of 'mixed' race. So are many other very talented witches & Wizards. And look at Hermione...and Lily. Top in their class and Muggle born, which I think JKR did on purpose to make a point.

Gina R Snape - Sep 20, 2005 7:43 pm (#207 of 444)

RoseMorninStar, I think I will leave my very loooooong list of admirable traits regarding Snape to the Snape thread... (Where I have fallen SO far behind, I discovered today it is a new thread altogether!)

Phelim, you are cheeky!

It's true, we don't know what Bella would do if she really had a son to give. But just the fact that she would say such a thing conveys something, perhaps, of her depth of feeling in general for others. Draco is her nephew, and it seems they have some kind of relationship if she is teaching him Occlumency. Yet, that bond is not firm enough. If something every happened to my brother, I would think of his children as my own. I'm not so sure Bella has that capacity within her to start with.

Solitaire - Sep 24, 2005 11:58 am (#208 of 444)

I agree, Gina, that Bella doesn't have a maternal bone in her body.

Weeny Owl - Sep 28, 2005 8:48 pm (#209 of 444)

When rereading "Spinner's End," I noticed something that has probably been mentioned before, but it made me wonder.

Snape tells Bella she was facing six teenagers, and she said that shortly half the Order joined in the fight.

In OotP Ron told Harry that they'd met about twenty Order members, but that he thought there were more. Hermione didn't correct him, so that's probably correct.

Snape knows the Order members, so he would know Bella was exaggerating or telling an outright fib. Until Dumbledore arrived there were five members of the Order, and that would be only a quarter of them if there are only twenty.

I'm beginning to wonder if almost everything everyone said in "Spinner's End" was a lie.

wynnleaf - Sep 28, 2005 8:53 pm (#210 of 444)

Snape lying (sort of) pretending that he thought there were only teenagers there -- which is of course putting Bella down.

Then Bella tries to make the fight sound even tougher by saying 1/2 the Order was there.

Of course, Bellatrix may not actually know how many, or which, wizards are part of the Order. If that's the case, it's obvious she hasn't been enlightened by Severus.

Weeny Owl - Sep 29, 2005 1:53 am (#211 of 444)

She may not know how many are in the Order, but she has to know there are more than ten or so. She wanted it to sound as if she had been in a huge battle and barely made it out, but there were twelve Death Eaters and only six teenagers, so that has to irk her somewhat.

Derek Robertson - Sep 30, 2005 12:43 am (#212 of 444)

Bellatrix should know of those who are still in the order from the 1970's because Wormtail will have exposed those, she will now be aware since the department of mysteries battle who the new faces were.

Weeny Owl I agree with you about Snape talking a load of fibs to Bella. More reason to believe he's a goody!

Gina R Snape - Oct 4, 2005 5:47 pm (#213 of 444)

I think when Bella said "half the order" she was not being specific to numbers. Rather, she was making a generalisation. I do not think, also, that it's beyond the scope of common language to say "half the..." whatever the case may be to mean "a lot."

But it does raise the question of whether or how much the DEs and Voldemort know of Order members. Do they know who all has joined? Or do they have only a rough idea.

We know that numbers are not JKR's strong suit; and we don't know how many DEs *or* Order members there are in full. I doubt we'll ever fully know.

Even with Snape's dig, though, he was right. A handful of experienced, evil DEs should have been able to take down those kids swiftly. But Bella would probably have been a lot more reckless and maybe even AK'd them all on the spot of they weren't trying to be so careful about the prophecy.

Weeny Owl - Oct 4, 2005 9:29 pm (#214 of 444)
Edited Oct 4, 2005 10:30 pm

I understand that Bella wasn't giving a specific number, but I thought it was interesting that that whole chapter was filled with lies, and even if she didn't know exactly how many are in the Order, she was still exaggerating, making herself seem to be braver. Facing half the Order sounds much more dangerous than facing six teens.

PS: Love the new avatar, Gina... all the Slytherin boys lined up looks pretty good.

RoseMorninStar - Oct 4, 2005 10:49 pm (#215 of 444)

I think Bella makes the same mistake that Voldemort will also eventually make. She underestimated her opponent. She was too confident. Voldemort will eventually do the same.

Gina R Snape - Oct 5, 2005 4:41 pm (#216 of 444)

I think you are right, Rose. I also think Snape contributes to this by continuously asserting that Harry is nothing but an ordinary boy, when in fact he is quite talented in DADA. He just needs to pick up those certain skills of Occlumency and silent spell-casting!

But Bella et al. will hear this mantra over and over again and believe it, and just be all the more frustrated when things aren't as easy as they ought to be. Bella is also training Draco in dark arts and other skills. I wonder if he will make the same mistake in downplaying his opponents--especially when he's grown up with some of them.

And, thanks Weeny!

Saracene - Oct 10, 2005 4:28 am (#217 of 444)

I just wanted to mention that, after Voldemort, Bellatrix is the character that freaks me out the most. The woman is just plain psychotic.

Solitaire - Oct 17, 2005 10:01 am (#218 of 444)

Is it possible that Bella does know exactly how many are in the Order--or how many Kreacher may think are in the Order? Remember that Kreacher passed some important information to the Malfoys the previous Christmas when he was missing from 12GP. I realize he was forbidden to give some specific pieces of info to anyone, but he might have been able to give numbers, if not actual names, of Order members. He certainly regarded Bella with twisted affection and might have been prevailed upon to provide her with some juicy bits of info.

Solitaire

I agree, Saracene ... Bella is creepy and psychotic.

haymoni - Oct 17, 2005 11:59 am (#219 of 444)

Bella is psychotic but Fenrir creeps me out more.

Solitaire - Oct 17, 2005 2:07 pm (#220 of 444)

Let us just hope the two of them don't get together! What a gruesome 'ship that would be!

Gina R Snape - Oct 17, 2005 4:13 pm (#221 of 444)
Edited Oct 17, 2005 5:14 pm

# dies laughing*

It is comforting to know that, despite Kreacher's fondness for Bellatrix, his compulsion to follow Sirius' orders kept him from doing or saying certain things. I was both amused and surprised at how he reacted to Harry in book 6. We'll note that Harry was very careful about how he instructed Kreacher, and Kreacher took note of this.

I could easily see Sirius being less than precise toward Kreacher, which could have then left open loopholes for Bellatrix to exploit.

Nathan Zimmermann - Nov 21, 2005 1:47 pm (#222 of 444)

I think Bellatrix and Narcissa may be surprised about how carefully Harry instructs Kreacher.

Solitaire - Nov 22, 2005 7:00 am (#223 of 444)

If I were Harry, I would put Dobby in charge of keeping an eye on Kreacher. He is sneaky ... and I don't trust him. Hm ... I wonder if Harry could do some "memory modification" on Kreacher? Do you suppose spells work the same way on House-elves as they do on humans?

Solitaire

Snuffles - Nov 22, 2005 8:44 am (#224 of 444)

Judging by Kreacher's behaviour and muttering to himself, I'm wondering whether he may have had memory modification already and it didn't work too well!!

Gina R Snape - Nov 22, 2005 9:21 am (#225 of 444)

Au contraire. I think Kreacher has the memory of a steel trap. It's his personality that needs fixing!

Solitaire - Nov 22, 2005 10:10 am (#226 of 444)

I agree, Gina. Do you suppose there is a potion or a spell for "attitude adjustments"? hehe

Solitaire

Gina R Snape - Nov 22, 2005 12:29 pm (#227 of 444)

Well we know St. Mungo's has a ward for the incurably insane. But Kreacher is a house elf, so likely it's the wall for him.

Speaking of the insane, I wonder if Bellatrix has ever gotten held as criminally insane at St. Mungo’s!

Phelim Mcintyre - Dec 3, 2005 1:46 am (#228 of 444)

I don't know why but yesterday (my birthday) I was watching season one of the Muppets on DVD. As I watched Miss Piggy I kept thinking about Bellatrix. Is there a connection or am I just going mad?

Steve Newton - Dec 3, 2005 5:43 am (#229 of 444)

Tough call, Phelim.

azi - Dec 3, 2005 10:26 am (#230 of 444)

I think you're going mad Phelim! Happy birthday for yesterday though!

Muppet Harry Potter would be an ace idea! Kermit the frog as Harry Potter...hehe!

Back to topic, I don't think Bellatrix will ever have been incarcerated in St Mungo's, and Kreacher will probably just be beheaded if she gets a choice in his future.

Gina R Snape - Dec 3, 2005 6:52 pm (#231 of 444)

Happy birthday, Phelim!!!!!

As for Miss Piggy and Bellatrix, I think there is some room for comparison. Both are strong outspoken females with an unhealthy fixation for a male leader. I do, however, think Kermit makes a much better catch than Voldemort.

Aqualu Nifey - Dec 8, 2005 10:29 am (#232 of 444)

Oh no! Gina, it's all your fault. I just pictured Kermit-mort!

ex-FAHgeek - Dec 8, 2005 1:42 pm (#233 of 444)

I can see it. After all, Voldemort doesn't really have a nose and is bald...

frogface - Dec 9, 2005 1:26 am (#234 of 444)

Be careful where you go with this! LOL

Phelim Mcintyre - Dec 9, 2005 6:36 am (#235 of 444)

Yes, the Dark Frog surrounded by his faithful Fly Eaters (who were summoned by him pressing the frog mark - a frog's head with a snake coming out of it) telling them that it is not easy being green.

But please someone, get us back on track before we get modded.

Gina R Snape - Dec 9, 2005 11:15 am (#236 of 444)

No wonder the Dark Frog was eager to get to Harry. He was drawn to his house---the Lily Pad.

ba dum bum

Ok. Sooooo, about Bellatrix. Bella Bella Bella. What can we say?

Oh! Do you suppose she's living with Narcissa now? We see Bella follow Narcissa to Spinner's End. And we know she's around Draco a lot. Malfoy Mansion seems pretty big and Narcissa might get awfully lonely with Lucius in Azkaban. Bella and her husband did just get out of Azkaban and may not have had a home to go to.

Solitaire - Dec 9, 2005 12:00 pm (#237 of 444)

Where is Bella's husband? Did he evade capture at the DoM, or is he in Azkaban also? Or do we know?

Solitaire

Eric Bailey - Dec 9, 2005 2:09 pm (#238 of 444)

Well, Voldemort only took Bella with him after the MoM battle, so presumably Rudolphus is in prison.

timrew - Dec 9, 2005 5:52 pm (#239 of 444)

I can just see Voldemort now, singing, "Halfway down the stair is the stair where I sit............."

Sorry! I'll stop now!

Phelim Mcintyre - Mar 14, 2005 8:25 pm (#240 of 444)

timrew - is that a reference to a certain squeaky stair in Privet Drive? Or am I just trying to find the rainbow connection?

On the issue of Bella's husband, do we know that the Death Eaters have not escaped from Azkaban? There is no mention in HbP but Stan Shunpike is not that able a wizard so he may not be able to Apparate . Anyway, with the Dementors having joined the dark frog (sorry but I think that is going to stick) who is guarding the prison?

Gina R Snape - Dec 10, 2005 10:16 am (#241 of 444)

Phelim, one would hope there are anti-apparition charms in the prison. I suppose they have hired other wizards or maybe trolls with a degree of intelligence to guard. But yeah, it's doesn't look good does it?

azi - Dec 10, 2005 1:44 pm (#242 of 444)

At first I was surprised that the Death Eaters in Azkaban hadn't been mentioned as escaping by the end of HBP, but then I thought how annoyed Voldemort must have been after the loss of the prophecy and decided he just wanted to leave them there.

I wondered where Bellatrix was living also. You'd think the ministry would catch up with her if she was at Malfoy Manor or at least watch Narcissa, knowing that they are sisters and all, to see if they have contact. Obviously they do, as does Draco. Maybe she lives in a hide out somewhere under the Fidelius Charm and they visit her?

Gina R Snape - Dec 10, 2005 3:17 pm (#243 of 444)

The Malfoys are incredibly rich. I wouldn't be surprised if they've harboured the Lestranges and have means of hiding their travels. Perhaps Bella was lent an invisibility cloak. Maybe someone was paid off not to watch their Floo. I've no doubt there are secret rooms and chambers at the mansion that could avoid detection during a raid.

Eric Bailey - Dec 10, 2005 3:53 pm (#244 of 444)

Well, we know Lucius wasn't out of prison, so we can assume Rudolphus isn't, either.

Astragynia Winifred Posy Miranda Yseult Cawdor - Dec 15, 2005 12:56 am (#245 of 444)

This just occurred to me while posting on another thread - did Bellatrix perhaps recruit or teach Barty Crouch Jr.? They were arrested for the same crime, so they clearly worked together, and though their approaches at the trial were very different their views of service to Voldemort are strikingly similar (the whole "most faithful servant" thing, and despising DEs who didn't give up everything looking for LV when he was Vapormort).

Solitaire - Dec 15, 2005 7:13 am (#246 of 444)

Winifred, that seems like a perfectly plausible idea to me. I wouldn't doubt it.

Solitaire

Aqualu Nifey - Dec 18, 2005 3:34 pm (#247 of 444)

I don't know if Bella would waste her time trying to convert underlings. She seems to be constantly in the middle of everything, not sitting on the sidelines trying to recruit DEs.

zelmia - Dec 18, 2005 5:26 pm (#248 of 444)

Aqualu, I don't think Bella "converted" Junior. We know from the trial (mentioned by Astra) that the two, along with hubby Rudolphus, merciless tortured the Longbottoms to the point of permanent insanity. All apparently had an equal role in this atrocity. Certainly the Ministry thought so.

As for Junior being an "underling" again I would say that, given what little evidence we have for such a hierarchy, Bella and Junior seem to be running pretty neck and neck.

Certainly we DO know that each thinks of him-/herself as "The Dark Lord's most faithful servant". Of course, with Junior out of the picture, Bella does seem to hold that title more officially, especially as Voldie himself grabbed her and Disapparate d with her from the Ministry. We don't see him offering such consideration to any of his other followers.

Solitaire - Dec 18, 2005 11:22 pm (#249 of 444)

Even if Junior and Bella were "neck and neck" by the time they were torturing the Longbottoms, she still could have been instrumental in tempting him into the DE fold sometime earlier. I only remember him being described as a "pale youth with straw-colored hair." That makes him sound kind of young. Do we know how old he was at the time of the tortures? Whatever his age, I should think recruiting the son of the Minister of Magic would have been a nice feather in her cap.

Solitaire

zelmia - Dec 19, 2005 12:12 am (#250 of 444)

It's just that it didn't sound as if he needed recruiting. His confession in GF makes it sound to me like he was pretty gung-ho without being induced to 'join up'. Very much like Draco today.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Potteraholic Tue Jul 26, 2011 10:10 pm

Gina R Snape - Dec 19, 2005 7:39 am (#251 of 444)

He doesn't sound like he needed recruiting, no. But he does sound so strikingly like Bella that the idea of her influencing him is a strong one. It could be that he started asking questions and she made sure he got into the inner circle, treating him much as she does now with her darling nephew Draco.

zelmia - Dec 19, 2005 10:35 am (#252 of 444)

Good point. Or perhaps to that sort of young person, one whose aim is to become "the Dark Lord's most faithful servant", Bella has a certain charisma. At least, she seems to have something that would lend itself to someone wanting to emulate her in that regard.

Here's a bit of an odd take: Perhaps Bella wasn't actively training Junior back then and has a level of regret about it. Though we don't really know the age difference, if any, between Bella and Junior, one certainly gets the impression that she's older than he is. Was. And we know that if she had had a son she would have been proud to offer him up to Voldie's service (HBP -2). So perhaps by trying to take Draco under her wing, she is really attempting to fulfill her own (albeit skewed) maternal instincts.

me and my shadow 813 - Dec 20, 2005 6:28 pm (#253 of 444)

I think the only reason Bellatrix has taken Draco under her wing is to shove Snape out of the picture. The only thing we know she taught Draco was Occlumency. She must know by now that Snape is gifted in Legilimency, so it makes sense to me she'd just use Draco as a pawn to sabotage Snape's "spying". As we know, she is incredibly jealous and outraged of Snape being *the Dark Lord's favorite*.

Phelim Mcintyre - Dec 21, 2005 1:23 am (#254 of 444)

Love the avatar Gina - so what other Christmas songs can you 'Potterfy'?

frogface - Dec 21, 2005 3:27 am (#255 of 444)

I've always found this "I am the Dark Lord's favourite" business kind of amusing. It reminds me of "student of the week" at school. It is probably just a careful manipulation of Voldemort's to make those in his inner circle perform to the best of their ability and keep them constantly competing to out do each other.

azi - Dec 21, 2005 7:56 am (#256 of 444)

I like your idea, me and my shadow! I never thought of it that way as I just assumed Bellatrix was teaching Draco because he was her nephew, not because of Snape. But your idea does make sense!

And yes, the constant competing to be the favourite is very amusing!

haymoni - Dec 21, 2005 10:08 am (#257 of 444)

But I cut off my right hand for him!! (or was it my left?)

But I spent years in Azkaban for him!!

But I was married to Bella while spending years in Azkaban for him!!

But I had to spend years teaching that Potter brat for him!!

But I had to spend years in my manor house, surrounded by luxury and wealth, with my beautiful wife and pure-blood son...Um, wait...hang on...I mean, the roof leaks...and she really isn't all that beautiful when you get up close...and, well, the kid is really a brat...I WAS LOOKING FOR SIGNS!!! I WAS!!! I REALLY WAS!!!

CRUCIO!!!

Is that what my hair looks like from the back???

Mrs Brisbee - Dec 21, 2005 11:11 am (#258 of 444)

LOL!

I have nothing more to add, just

LOL!

Elanor - Dec 21, 2005 11:33 am (#259 of 444)

LOL Haymoni! That's exactly that!

Gina R Snape - Dec 22, 2005 8:51 am (#260 of 444)

Ha! Yes, haymoni, that just about sums it up.

Thanks, Phelim. You can Potterfy anything if you try hard enough, you know.

Aqualu Nifey - Dec 23, 2005 7:42 pm (#261 of 444)

Mugglenet has oodles of Potterfied songs. Gina, you should really go on potterpuppetpals, they've got this new thing with Snape, it's awesome! =D

But, yes, Bella...

Solitaire - Jul 5, 2006 1:26 pm (#262 of 444)

To continue a point I raised over on Ginny's thread ... does Bella know that Voldemort is not a pureblood?

Solitaire

TwinklingBlueEyes - Jul 5, 2006 1:46 pm (#263 of 444)

Well, she's been told, but if she believed it or not is another matter.

Shut your mouth! Bellatrix shrieked. "You dare speak his name with your unworthy lips, you dare besmirch it with your half-blood's tongue, you dare -"

Did you know he's a half-blood too? said Harry recklessly. Hermione gave a little moan in his ear. "Voldemort? Yeah, his mother was a witch but his dad was a Muggle - or has he been telling you lot he's pure-blood?" pp 784 OoP Beyond the Veil

darien - Jul 5, 2006 2:44 pm (#264 of 444)

From her point of view it could seem just an attempt by Harry to discredit Voldemort, to confuse Bella and to gain some time as they were battling at the time

TheSaint - Jul 5, 2006 3:17 pm (#265 of 444)

Agreed darien... and she is so obsessed with him, she may have turned a deaf ear on the information. I don't think she would even bother to follow up on it. She has been told however.

Solitaire - Jul 5, 2006 3:28 pm (#266 of 444)

This is what intrigues me. What would (will?) she do if (when?) finds out Voldy is not the pureblood wonder she has been serving all these years? I cannot believe she followed up Harry's remarks, but at some point, she must find out.

Then again, didn't Voldemort make some reference to his Muggle father in the graveyard, when he was speaking to the DEs? I know she was not there, but surely she would have heard by now, right?

Solitaire

Finn BV - Jul 5, 2006 3:58 pm (#267 of 444)

Perhaps she would kill herself? Okay, no, that's a little hopeful drastic. But I have a feeling she'd be pretty stunned. Let's hope she finds out!!

Solitaire - Jul 5, 2006 4:05 pm (#268 of 444)

Surely it would be enough to send her off the deep end, so to speak. She is already a loose cannon, if you ask me, kind of hanging onto the edge of sanity in most cases.

Solitaire

Choices - Jul 5, 2006 4:39 pm (#269 of 444)
Edited Jul 5, 2006 5:41 pm

Voldemort tells Harry in the graveyard that his father was a Muggle and a fool, and he did not like magic. When he said this the DEs had not yet arrived, although Wormtail was there. Unless he was under some sort of spell, he heard what Voldemort said. I have wondered if Wormtail wasn't under the Imperius Curse, although that would not affect his hearing, but he so blindly obeys Voldemort that it makes me curious. It's probably just from fear. Anyway, Wormtail could certainly have told Bellatrix.....if he dared.

Ludicrous Patents Office - Jul 5, 2006 5:51 pm (#270 of 444)

Choices interesting catch. Wormtail may be one of the few Death Eaters aware that Voldemort is half-blood. I would think his original group from Hogwarts would know. I doubt Bella believed Harry. Her devotion to Voldemort is more than the pureblood stuff. I think part of it he gives her the opportunity to indulge in her cruel nature. That may be too powerful to let the half-blood stuff bother her. LPO

TwinklingBlueEyes - Jul 5, 2006 6:11 pm (#271 of 444)

Wonder if Bella knows Snape is half-blood? If so, and I think she does, then the pure blood mania has kinda fell by the wayside, or so it seems. The DEs and LV have a much bigger agenda.

Solitaire - Jul 5, 2006 6:14 pm (#272 of 444)
Edited Jul 5, 2006 7:15 pm

I suspect Wormtail is afraid of Bella. I know I am! I can't imagine him seeking her out to tell her anything ... especially something that would enrage her so. I agree, LPO, that she has an incredibly cruel nature.

Edit: Twinkles, she probably knows about Snape, and that could be an additional reason she distrusts him.

Solitaire

Ludicrous Patents Office - Jul 5, 2006 7:11 pm (#273 of 444)

Perhaps being Slytherin's last remaining descendant erases Voldemort's Muggle half. Bella may consider that of more importance. LPO

Finn BV - Jul 5, 2006 7:13 pm (#274 of 444)

Perhaps she'll think of herself as superior to LV? Maybe she'll go into a power-hungry mode and want to do what he did, except she'll be "able" to do it "better" because she's of a better blood lineage.

But then Voldemort kills her.

Come on, I just want to see her die.

Weeny Owl - Jul 5, 2006 7:54 pm (#275 of 444)

That's what I was thinking, LPO, that being Slytherin's heir is more important than anything.

My, Finn, you're as bloodthirsty with Bella as I am with Draco.

Solitaire - Jul 5, 2006 8:37 pm (#276 of 444)

You could be right, LPO. It might cancel out the Muggle taint. Finn, I wouldn't mind seeing her shuffle off this mortal coil myself.

Solitaire

TwinklingBlueEyes - Jul 5, 2006 9:04 pm (#277 of 444)

I wouldn't mind helping her along.

...toddles off muttering, I shouldn't have said that, I shouldn't have said that...

Laura W - Jul 6, 2006 1:33 am (#278 of 444)

Just hit yourself over the head with a lamp a few times to make up for saying it, TBE.

Laura

Steve Newton - Jul 6, 2006 5:25 am (#279 of 444)

At this point in time I don't think that it matters whether or not Trixie knows that Voldemort is half Muggle. She is part of Voldemort's army and if she doesn't obey she will be tortured and killed. I'm thinking that she will do whatever she is told to do by Voldemort.

Ludicrous Patents Office - Jul 6, 2006 7:40 am (#280 of 444)

She is so unstable. At this point Voldemort is the only one with any kind of control over her. Now that Snape is such a "hero" hopefully she will try and kill him and they will knock each other off! I would love to see the Death Eaters fall on each other like a pack of mad dogs. LPO

Finn BV - Jul 6, 2006 6:25 pm (#281 of 444)

Trixie?? LOL, Steve!

I can imagine Bella Trixie stopping mid-instruction from Voldemort when it slips from his own mouth that he is half-blood, Oh, this is so good. Can't wait.

Mediwitch - Jul 6, 2006 7:21 pm (#282 of 444)

Trixie *snort* Rolly 3

Solitaire - Jul 6, 2006 7:40 pm (#283 of 444)
Edited Jul 6, 2006 8:41 pm

I would love to see the Death Eaters fall on each other like a pack of mad dogs.

LPO, I don't think that is such a far-fetched idea. It appeared to me, when they were in the graveyard, that some DEs were afraid of Voldy. I mean, he wasn't exactly nice to them, was he? The Dementors have been gone from Azkaban for over a year, yet none of the DEs who were arrested in the DoM have escaped. (Have they even tried?) This makes me wonder just how eager they are to see their Dark Lord again.

If the incarcerated DEs are at all conflicted about rejoining Voldemort, lots of bickering and infighting could occur. We already know Bella is fanatically devoted to Voldemort, but what about Rabastan and Rudolphus? Are they as loyal as she is? What about the DEs who were not part of the little raiding party at the DoM? Are they already being cut loose? Or did they opt out of the operation? Just a few idle thoughts ...

Solitaire

Soul Search - Jul 7, 2006 6:44 am (#284 of 444)

It has been suggested that Snape's real job for Dumbledore was to sow dissention among the Death Eaters. Such would be easy for some, like Avery who gets Crucio’d. But Bellatrix seems solidly devoted to Voldemort.

Yet, her finding out that Voldemort is really a half-blood. And seems to favor Snape over her devoted self. All little chinks in her devotion.

Bellatrix may be difficult to sway, but if it happens ... she would explode!

Nathan Zimmermann - Jul 7, 2006 8:35 am (#285 of 444)
Edited Jul 7, 2006 9:39 am

I am not certain whether Bella can be swayed but, if such an attempt is made, the only chance of success rests with Narcissa. I doubt Bellatrix would listen to Andromeda in light of her marriage to Ted Tonks. Also, given her dim view of Severus I do not think she would trust him enough to allow him to sway her views.

Solitaire - Jul 7, 2006 8:53 am (#286 of 444)

I would be surprised to see Andromeda brought into the story as anything but an off-screen character at this point in the story. There is so much else to wind up that I can't see Jo taking the time to make her much of a character. Also, I honestly do not think Bella would turn against Voldemort unless he tried to get rid of her. I can see her coming completely unhinged in that event ... but it would be more of an on-the-spot thing, right when it happens. JM2K ...

Solitaire

Ludicrous Patents Office - Jul 7, 2006 10:26 am (#287 of 444)

I agree Solitaire I don't see Bella turning against Voldemort. She is defiantly competing with other Death Eaters (Especially Snape) to be Voldemort's most loyal supporter. His supporters have an almost religious fanaticism in their devotion to him. Bella would have made a wonderful Nazi. LPO

Nathan Zimmermann - Jul 7, 2006 3:10 pm (#288 of 444)

I agree I do not see Andromeda playing a major role in book seven. I meant only to use her and Severus as examples of people that cannot influence her actions in a positive manner. I tend to think Narcissa while not capable of controlling Bellatrix's full wrath is able to restrain her more so than Lucius did at the MoM.

Solitaire - Jul 7, 2006 10:39 pm (#289 of 444)

Bella does seem to care about Narcissa ... in her own selfish, twisted sort of way. And I agree, LPO, Bella would have made a great Nazi--a female Heinrich Himmler or Hermann Goering. Lucius strikes me more as the counterpart of Albert Speer, although he also reminds me of Reinhard Heydrich.

Solitaire

Nathan Zimmermann - Jul 8, 2006 9:05 am (#290 of 444)

Solitaire, that is the best description of both Bella and Lucius I have heard.

Solitaire - Jul 8, 2006 10:54 am (#291 of 444)

Thanks, Nathan. From the time I first "met" Lucius and Bella, they have reminded me of those particular players among Hitler's "DEs." Lucius, in particular, evokes the cold, calculating racism of Heydrich. He also reflects Speer's apparent desire to be able to influence the rich and mighty, to be perceived as magnanimous and philanthropic. Lucius, like Speer, was even able to present himself before the court and claim how deluded he had been and confess his penitence for the terrible, misguided things he had done. The parallel is quite fascinating. JM2K, of course ...

Solitaire

Ludicrous Patents Office - Jul 8, 2006 11:02 am (#292 of 444)

Great comparison Solitaire. I think Bella may care some for her sister. But she was more interested in serving the Dark Lord than protecting Narcissa. And she defiantly is willing to sacrifice Draco. Narcissa cares more for Draco than the Dark Lord. Maybe that is her redeeming quality. LPO

Solitaire - Jul 8, 2006 11:06 am (#293 of 444)

Thus far, Narcissa's concern for her son and husband (rats though they may be) is her only endearing quality, IMO.

Solitaire

Soul Search - Jul 10, 2006 6:20 am (#294 of 444)
Edited Jul 10, 2006 7:27 am

Back on post #284 of this topic I mentioned Snape's real job for Dumbledore being the undermining of Voldemort's Death Eaters, but that Bellatrix would be difficult to dissuade. Its been nagging me, so I reread "Spinner's End" with that in mind.

Bellatrix very much needs to be Voldemort's favorite, but clearly is worried that her position has been jeopardized with the failure at the Ministry of Magic. She resents Snape's apparent move into the most favored position with Voldemort. She tries to undermine Snape's importance to Voldemort, perhaps only to satisfy herself.

Snape's responses are subtle, but very effective.

He demeans Bellatrix's sacrifice of spending thirteen years in Azkaban "for Voldemort."

He points out that she was up against teens in the Ministry of Magic. Voldemort had to come and rescue her.

He infers that Voldemort has trusted him with secrets that he, obviously, has not trusted to Bellatrix. This hurts.

He presents good argument that Voldemort has not only accepted Snape back into the Death Eater fold, but has put him in an elevated position. Bellatrix wants her position with Voldemort to be unique, so she attacks Snape's actions.

Snape emphasizes his past and continuing value to Voldemort, being at Hogwarts and trusted by Dumbledore, while pointing out Bellatrix's lack of value.

Snape says that he knows of Voldemort's plan for Draco (which he doesn't,) but Bellatrix is put off because Voldemort hasn't trusted her with the plan. (Narcissa does seem to know, but we can't be sure how much or from whom.)

While seeming to be trying to explain to Bellatrix why Voldemort trusts him, Snape has subtlety undermined Bellatrix's belief in her own position. She was already insecure, perhaps paranoid, and Snape pushed her just a little farther along that line.

I think something is being set up for book seven, where Bellatrix will play a key role in a disaffection from Voldemort. The Malfoys may also be involved.

With Snape ridding Voldemort of his strongest enemy, Dumbledore, he will have moved into a clearly favored position. Bellatrix may go over the edge.

wynnleaf - Jul 10, 2006 6:28 am (#295 of 444)
Edited Jul 10, 2006 7:29 am

I could see Bella turning on LV in a sort of crazed kind of way. A kind of "you didn't appreciate the suffering I went through for you." I wouldn't think anyone would want to count on Bella for a planned power play to rebel against LV. She's just to unstable.

Malfoy's a different thing. I find it hard to think JKR will keep him in Azkaban. He's too interesting a villain. But I think he'd be a lot better off personally if LV were dead. So I'd think he could be persuaded to turn on LV.

Neither Bella nor Lucius would ever turn "good," but they could both turn on LV for different reasons. Lucius would turn in a rational way; Bella would be more an emotional, vengeful turning.

Just my guess, of course.

Anna L. Black - Jul 10, 2006 6:52 am (#296 of 444)

That's really interesting - "Lord Voldemort's gift for spreading discord and enmity is very great. We can fight it only by showing an equally strong bond of friendship and trust." But the same thing could be applied to Voldemort's supporters themselves - in order to succeed, they have to be united - which they probably never will be, because of the immense distrust DEs must have for one another. Bella's attitude towards Snape just demonstrates it.

Snape says that he knows of Voldemort's plan for Draco (which he doesn't,) but Bellatrix is put off because Voldemort hasn't trusted her with the plan. (Narcissa does seem to know, but we can't be sure how much or from whom.) - Soul Search

We don't really know whether Snape knew of the plan or not (he might have used Legilimency on Narcissa, who was very weak at the time of the conversation, or he might have really known it - there doesn't seem to be a proof for either way, but I'm digressing...), but I'm convinced that both Narcissa and Bella knew of the plan - they say themselves that they were told not to tell anyone else about it. After all, who would know of the plan if not the both of them?

Mrs. D. - Jul 10, 2006 7:30 am (#297 of 444)

Wynnleaf, your post has me thinking Lucius married the wrong sister. He and Bella would have made quite a pair.

Magic Words - Jul 10, 2006 7:49 am (#298 of 444)

Nah, Bella's too unstable. She would have disgraced the Malfoy name some way or other.

Ludicrous Patents Office - Jul 10, 2006 11:20 am (#299 of 444)

I think Lucius will do what is best for himself and the Malfoy name. If something does happen to Draco or Narcissa I could see Lucius turning on Voldemort. Bella will do whatever Voldemort tells her. She is willing, in a very irrational way, to sacrifice anyone and anything for Voldemort. Being the most favored Death Eater is like a drug to her. LPO

Solitaire - Jul 10, 2006 11:26 am (#300 of 444)
Edited Jul 10, 2006 12:27 pm

If something does happen to Draco or Narcissa I could see Lucius turning on Voldemort.

Hm ... I'm not so sure. Somehow I think Lucius really is the quintessential Slytherin and will save his own neck before he saves Narcissa's and Draco's. I hope I am wrong. I would like to think there is one teensy redeeming quality within him--a love for his family that is greater than his love for himself--but at this point, I don't believe it. JM2K, of course ...

Solitaire

BTW, I guess if anyone wants to discuss this, we should take it to Lucius' thread.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Potteraholic Tue Jul 26, 2011 10:19 pm

TheSaint - Jul 10, 2006 2:18 pm (#301 of 444)

That's really interesting - "Lord Voldemort's gift for spreading discord and enmity is very great. We can fight it only by showing an equally strong bond of friendship and trust." But the same thing could be applied to Voldemort's supporters themselves - in order to succeed, they have to be united - which they probably never will be, because of the immense distrust DEs must have for one another. Bella's attitude towards Snape just demonstrates it.

That and they all seem to want to be the favored one. I guess Voldemort's table is not round.

Soul Search - Jul 10, 2006 6:59 pm (#302 of 444)

I agree, TheSaint, that there will not be a concerted effort among Death Eaters against Voldemort. I do think, that we have had hints that all is not well in the Voldemort camp and he may find himself without full support when he needs it most.

Of all the free Death Eaters only Wormtail went looking for Voldemort, and for his own selfish reasons, not for dedication to him. None of those really wanted him back. They were doing just fine without him.

Voldemort only relied on Barty Crouch, Jr. for getting his new body. Voldemort didn't trust any others to help him.

The Death Eater graveyard scene in GoF was not one of welcome, but of great fear. He even punished some for returning to him, and promised more punishment. Not a way to win converts.

He promises rewards for faithful service, but all we have ever seen is Wormtail's silver hand. Wormtail was pleased then, but isn't any more. He punishes for failure, but does he really reward for service and success?

His treatment of Lucius Malfoy serves as an example for others. And not a good one.

Of all the Death Eaters we have seen, only Bellatrix seems wholly devoted, and she is unstable, liable to explode at any minute.

He has made promises to Dementors, giants, and werewolves. If he treats them the same as his closest followers, his "family," then they, too, will become disaffected.

I can see all this playing out to help Harry defeat Voldemort.

Solitaire - Jul 10, 2006 7:28 pm (#303 of 444)

Nice assessment of the DE camp, Soul Search.

zelmia - Jul 11, 2006 2:05 pm (#304 of 444)

I have to say that I don't think that Bellatrix is as blindly devoted to her Dark Lord as she was earlier in the saga. In the Spinner's End chapter of HBP, she mentions outright that she feels "the Dark Lord is mistaken" with regard to Snape. Blind devotion would never allow for such an opinion.

It seems that there is a slight chink in the armour of her loyalty. She is still entirely loyal to Voldemort's cause; but I think it's clear that she no longer sees her Dark Lord as infallible. His pedestal is a fraction of an inch lower.

Perhaps by the time she does learn of Voldemort's "half blood" status, she won't really be that surprised.

Catherine - Jul 11, 2006 2:43 pm (#305 of 444)

Perhaps by the time she does learn of Voldemort's "half blood" status, she won't really be that surprised. --Zelmia

Learn, or accept? I would agree that there is a difference between the two.

She has already been told that Voldemort is half-blood by Harry in OoP. Perhaps she has to accept the idea?

Soul Search - Jul 11, 2006 2:50 pm (#306 of 444)

I don't think "half-blood" will be that important to Bellatrix. More important will be how Voldemort treats her. If he lets her sit at his right hand, so to speak, then she will be happy and remain his devoted servant. If she gets a lesser status, she will be unhappy. If Snape gets the exalted right-hand position, then Bellatrix will become unhinged.

After killing Dumbledore, Snape will surely become Voldemort's most favored.

zelmia - Jul 11, 2006 4:05 pm (#307 of 444)

Good point, Catherine. I guess wasn't thinking about Harry having already told Bella about Voldemort. Still, she may recall the moment at some point and a little light bulb will go on.

Ludicrous Patents Office - Jul 12, 2006 8:23 am (#308 of 444)

It is interesting the both Bella and Sirius held the same opinion of Snape. They both believed their leader was mistaken.

Zelmia hopefully Bella is starting to see Voldemort in a different light. I'm sure as soon as she is back in favor she will forget it. LPO

zelmia - Aug 3, 2006 10:22 am (#309 of 444)

One thing that interests me is the dynamic between Bellatrix and Narcissa, which we've only been allowed to see in Ch. 2 of HBP. In this, one of the very few completely objective chapters of the saga, we observe certain tenderness between the sisters.

Clearly Bella cares for her sister, or she would not have gone to such lengths to try to stop Narcissa from making, what Bellatrix believed, to be an enormous (possibly lethal) mistake. She could have gone straight to Voldemort and told him of Narcissa's betrayal, but obviously she didn't do that. Instead she chases her sister through an unfamiliar "Muggle dunghill" in the middle of the night. Bella is astonished that Narcissa would point her wand at Bellatrix ("Narcissa! Your own sister...") - though one could argue that Bella is being deliberately ironic.

Regardless, Bella doesn't allow this gesture to stop her from trying to make her sister see sense - remembering that this is Bella's own brand of sense, of course. She could have simply let Narcissa run off into the dark with a "Please yourself, then." But she doesn't. She follows Narcissa all the way into Snape's house and does her best to prove her point to Narcissa that Snape is not to be trusted - thought this must have been something of a bonus, in Bella's mind, seeing as how she detests Snape.

In the end, her arguments fail and she is forced to comply with Narcissa's request. But not before having done everything she could think of to dissuade Narcissa from taking, what Bella believes, is a most dangerous path.

Nathan Zimmermann - Aug 31, 2006 1:46 pm (#310 of 444)

A question occurred to me during Bellatrix and Narcissa's visit to Spinners End, Bellatrix attempts to rebuke Severus for not revealing the location of the Headquarters of the Order of the Phoenix to which Severus responds that he cannot.

I am not the Secret-Keeper; I cannot speak the name of the place. You understand how the enchantment works, I think? . . . (HBP Large Print Edition page 48)

This passage seems to imply that a Fidelius Charm was cast with Bellatrix as the Secret-Keeper. What sort of secret could Bella be duty bound to guard?

Choices - Aug 31, 2006 4:31 pm (#311 of 444)

I did not get the impression that she may have personal knowledge of how the charm works, just that as an accomplished, mature witch she would likely know how a Fidelius Charm is cast and what limitations it places on someone - general knowledge.

Solitaire - Sep 2, 2006 3:17 am (#312 of 444)
Edited Sep 2, 2006 4:18 am

I agree with Choices here. I can't even imagine Voldemort choosing her for a SK ... she's too much of a loose cannon. I can see her blurting it out in a manic moment.

Solitaire

haymoni - Sep 2, 2006 9:22 am (#313 of 444)

I thought it was Snape slamming Bella.

You do understand how the Fidelius Charm works, don't you, Bella?

Solitaire - Sep 2, 2006 7:38 pm (#314 of 444)

I agree, haymoni. Until it was just brought up, I'd never thought it meant that Bella was someone's SK.

haymoni - Sep 5, 2006 5:56 am (#315 of 444)

Can't wait to hear Alan Rickman deliver that line!

I think Bella's a goner.

I really don't care how she dies though.

wynnleaf - Sep 5, 2006 7:42 am (#316 of 444)

Bella, of practically all the characters except LV, deserves some truly horrible death.... sorry, that's just the way I feel about it. I feel fairly confident JKR will kill her off, but not very confident that it will be as terrible a death as I'd like.

haymoni - Sep 5, 2006 7:52 am (#317 of 444)

Bella & Fenrir both.

Meoshimo - Sep 6, 2006 1:34 pm (#318 of 444)

Yea, Fenrir needs to die.

Magic Words - Sep 8, 2006 9:04 am (#319 of 444)

Fenrir needs to be torn limb from limb. It's only fair.

Bella can be AK’d or whatever, I'm less picky about that. So long as she dies. I do think it would be fitting if she somehow brought about her own death. I once wrote a fan fiction I was rather fond of in which Bella tries to AK Harry and the curse rebounds and kills her.

haymoni - Sep 8, 2006 9:16 am (#320 of 444)

They never learn!

Phelim Mcintyre - Sep 8, 2006 9:40 am (#321 of 444)

Bella will die "sacrificing" herself for her Dark Lord, either in a vain attempt to save him or to join him in the next big adventure.

zelmia - Sep 11, 2006 9:01 pm (#322 of 444)

I'd like to bring the discussion back to the relationship between the two Black sisters, if possible. Seems Bella has chosen her "own sister" over Voldemort - at least for now. Could this (what amounts to) betrayal of the Death Eaters come back to haunt her - or worse - in the final installment?

Will Bella stick to her role as Bonder for Narcissa? Or will she ultimately hand Narcissa, Draco and Snape all three over to Voldemort?

Personally, I think JKR has done a good job of making Bella a complex enough character that I could accept either of those outcomes. However, I would be curious to know what others think.

haymoni - Sep 12, 2006 6:16 am (#323 of 444)

Snape said he knew of the plan, so I think that may have gotten Narcissa off the hook.

I think if Bella really wanted to stop Narcissa, she would have AK'd her like that fox.

Laura W - Sep 13, 2006 1:21 am (#324 of 444)
Edited Sep 13, 2006 2:25 am

Sorry, zelmia, but I don't see Bella choosing *anybody* over LV. Everything I have read about her in all the books in which she is mentioned or present points that way.

I also don't see how she "has chosen her own sister over Voldemort." Are you referring to the fact that she went with Narcissa to see Snape even though Cissy should not really have told Snape about Voldemort's task for her son? If so, I think she just went with her sister a) to try and talk her out of giving Snape the information, and b) to use the occasion to let Snape know she doesn't trust him and to intimidate him (as if anyone could ever do that!).

I agree with haymoni that the only thing that saved Narcissa (from Bella) was Severus saying he knew what the plan was anyway, and giving all those explanations of why Lord Voldemort now trusted him so completely. Being even more cynical (who me?), I think Bella agreed to be Bonder, not out of her love for her sister, but because it might result in the death of Severus Snape and restore her to being "the favourite" once more.

Like Barty Crouch Jr., who destroyed his own father for the cause, I don't think Bellatrix Lestrange would let anything or anybody get in the way of her absolute love for and devotion to her lord and master. Even more so. The 19-year-old Crouch denied torturing the Longbottoms in order to try and stay out of Azkaban (even though he was guilty); the Lestranges apparently never pretended to be other than what they were/are.

I could be wrong about this, but it is how I see it.

Laura

haymoni - Sep 13, 2006 5:19 am (#325 of 444)

I think Bella was a bit in shock over the Vow.

Snape called her bluff by asking her to be the Bonder - how can she back out? Doesn't she want Draco ( & therefore, Voldy) to be successful? She HAS to be the Bonder.

Even if she Apparate d right out of there and told Voldy what was going on, she couldn't risk his anger at her inhibiting his great plan. She is definitely on the outside and Snape is definitely on the inside. She had to go along.

painting sheila - Sep 13, 2006 5:51 am (#326 of 444)

Do we know what responsibilities Bella took on by being the "bonder"?

haymoni - Sep 13, 2006 6:41 am (#327 of 444)

I just thought it was taking the Notary thing to the extreme!

Magic Words - Sep 13, 2006 9:25 am (#328 of 444)

I think it's basically a witness.

legolas returns - Sep 13, 2006 1:42 pm (#329 of 444)

Didn’t the bonding stuff come out of her wand?

zelmia - Sep 13, 2006 8:48 pm (#330 of 444)
Edited Sep 13, 2006 9:50 pm

Ha! I like that, Haymoni. And I thought basically the same thing: that a Bonder is sort of a Wizarding Notary. Extreme indeed!

That's a good point about Bella not really having a choice. Had she gone off and tattled on Snape and/or Narcissa, Voldemort may well have simply punished her for interfering. On the other hand...

My point was that she actually did have the choice before setting foot in Snape's house. She could have gone straight to Voldemort when she realised where Narcissa was going - whether that was before Narcissa left her own house or once the two women had Apparate d into the Spinner's End. But Bella did not. She tried to stop Narcissa from doing it by bargaining. Had Bella truly wanted to stop Narcissa from going to Snape, she could have done so with either a wave of her wand or a wag of her tongue.

haymoni - Sep 14, 2006 4:18 am (#331 of 444)
Edited Sep 14, 2006 5:18 am

Yes - definitely. She had a choice when they first Apparate d there.

For once did she choose what was right?????

Honour - Sep 14, 2006 2:31 pm (#332 of 444)

I also thought that it was the bonder's job to make sure that the Vow had been carried out and if not met out the punishment?

Laura W - Sep 14, 2006 11:49 pm (#333 of 444)

I say again I cannot see Bella choosing anything or anybody over Voldemort, haymoni. Again I say I think she just went with her sister a) to try and talk her out of giving Snape the information, and b) to use the occasion to let Snape know she doesn't trust him and to intimidate him (as if anyone could ever do that!).

But possibly I'm the only one who feels this way.

Laura

haymoni - Sep 15, 2006 5:26 am (#334 of 444)

I'm certain that Bella is Voldy's man - er, woman - through & through for sure, but there is obviously some sort of bond between she and Narcissa.

Or perhaps Bella realizes her spot in the DE pecking order and she needs to follow along with Snape or she'll sink even lower in the ranks.

Laura W - Sep 15, 2006 11:08 pm (#335 of 444)

Ok, I can buy what you wrote in both your paragraphs.

Laura

Snortimer - Sep 25, 2006 7:56 am (#336 of 444)

Honour wrote "I also thought that it was the bonder's job to make sure that the Vow had been carried out and if not met out the punishment? "

I doubt that. That would make the "unbreakable vow" no stronger that one person's ability (or will) to punish.

Honour - Oct 3, 2006 4:11 pm (#337 of 444)

Hi there Snortimer, that certainly makes sense. Maybe it was my interpretation of Bella's reaction to the vow and that she was asked to be bonder. She seemed shocked, then astonished and a little taken back. Severus had to prompt her to use her wand, move closer. By the last vow it also seemed that Bella was mesmerized, could the vow induce the bonder to act in some way so that if the vow is not fulfilled the bonder kills the vow maker? Otherwise why have a bonder, magic doesn't need a witness surely?

Thom Matheson - Oct 3, 2006 6:56 pm (#338 of 444)

But if the two are holding hands, who would do the wand work. Not that either party couldn't, but I think a third party locks both parties into the vow. Bella being taken aback, I think is a reflection of Snape agreeing to take the vow. She probably thought that he would try to find a way to get out of it, and instead did the right thing for Narcissa. Then, Snape telling Bella to do the bonding was the other slap in the face that said See, "you can trust me as the Dark Lord does".

Laura W - Oct 3, 2006 11:48 pm (#339 of 444)

That's how I took it too, Thom.

Laura

Honour - Oct 3, 2006 11:52 pm (#340 of 444)

Maybe it's because the words "Unbreakable Vow", the way the "couple" clasp hands and make promises, the bonder presiding over them, almost like a priest at a wedding... I still think the bonder undertakes the task of punishing whoever does not fulfill their promise, unless the "snake-like" bonds somehow appear and strangle the wrong doer?

I don't think Severus needs to prove anything to Bella, his attitude towards her proves this. The only one he really wants to impress is Narcissa, well, and maybe an eavesdropping Peter?

TwinklingBlueEyes - Oct 4, 2006 1:17 am (#341 of 444)

That would make the unbreakable vow" no stronger that one person's ability (or will) to punish."

What if not only the taker of the vow, but also the bonder fell under the same penalty for not following through. That might make Bella have a hesitant thought or two.

Laura W - Oct 4, 2006 1:19 am (#342 of 444)
Edited Oct 4, 2006 2:20 am

"I don't think Severus needs to prove anything to Bella, his attitude towards her proves this. The only one he really wants to impress is Narcissa, well, and maybe an eavesdropping Peter?"

I'm sorry but I do not agree, Honour.

The fact that he took all that time in Spinners' End to answer Bella's questions (accusations?) about his loyalty to Voldemort shows me that he feels the need to prove something to her. He could have just said something like, "I resent your implications about my loyalty to the Dark Lord and will not dignify them with an answer. Now, Narcissa, what is it you are here for?" But he didn't. He spent a lot of time and effort in throwing cold water over everything Bellatrix said.

I don't think this is because he cares about her at all - although I do think he is fond of Cissy -, but because he is *very* aware of his position. He is constantly proving to both sides that he is *their* spy. He cannot afford to have Bella take anything back to Voldemort which will cast the slightest doubt on his being a tried-and-true Death Eater and spy for the Dark Lord.

I know that Bellatrix has lost some currency with her master, but the Lestranges are still pretty high up there in the DE pecking order I would imagine. They spent all that time in Azkaban for V and never denied him as some did (Lucius Malfoy, Karkaroff), and Bella did get rid of that pesky Order member, Sirius Black. And Snape is aware of this. Also aware that she will take anything she knows that will increase her value in Voldemort's eyes back to him.

I might be wrong but I never saw the Bonder as the one who would do the punishing if the Vow was not fulfilled. (We will see in Book Seven, no doubt.) I always just saw the Bonder as a witness to the "ceremony"; a necessity to make it legal and enforceable.

TwinklingBlueEyes - Oct 4, 2006 1:36 am (#343 of 444)

If Cissy originally intended to see Snape without Bella following her, what did she hope to accomplish? To ask him to take the vow without a witness? Wherein is the motive?

haymoni - Oct 4, 2006 5:38 am (#344 of 444)

I think Snape would have helped her without the Vow - without a witness.

Bella being there as the "doubting Thomas" threw a wrench in things, so he had to prove himself.

Laura W - Oct 4, 2006 11:10 am (#345 of 444)
Edited Oct 4, 2006 12:17 pm

TBE, I think Cissy went to Severus' house with the singular and express purpose of begging him to help her. She was desperate, after all. Maybe she knew that he liked her and was going to play that card; or play upon his long-time friendship with Lucius. Probably the last thing she wanted when she originally decided to go to Snape was for her sister to come along, but she couldn't exactly stop her. I don't think Narcissa had the Unbreakable Vow in mind in her original plan, but that it was something which occurred to her as the conversation progressed. And with a third party Bonder there, it was possible to do it.

That's my view anyway.

Laura

S.E. Jones - Oct 4, 2006 2:58 pm (#346 of 444)

I think you might be able to do the Unbreakable Vow without a witness. I figured Snape asked Belle to be the bonder as a slap to the face, sorta speak. A way of kinda making her eat her own words.

Laura W - Oct 4, 2006 5:28 pm (#347 of 444)
Edited Oct 4, 2006 6:30 pm

No Bonder needed? Don't you need a third party for their wand at least (i.e. - so the Bonder's wand touches the joined hands of the other two and the flames can come from it)? Isn't that what makes it an Unbreakable Vow - the flame connecting the hands in some magical way -, as opposed to two people just agreeing to something with no need of a witness with a wand to bind them together?

Does canon say otherwise (and I just missed it)?

Laura

S.E. Jones - Oct 4, 2006 6:45 pm (#348 of 444)

Laura, I meant that you might need a third person to be the bonder, it might be accomplished by one of the two people. For instance, Narcissa may have originally envisioned herself doing the bonding....

Laura W - Oct 4, 2006 8:47 pm (#349 of 444)

Oh ... like, one hand would be clasping Snape's and the other would be brandishing her wand creating the flame? Maybe.

Honour - Oct 4, 2006 11:21 pm (#350 of 444)
Edited Oct 5, 2006 12:23 am

Hi there, Laura W,

In reading the interaction between Severus and Bella, I got the impression that, 1. JKR used this chapter to fill in all the plot holes since OOTP (involving Severus and Voldemort, as well as maybe setting up a bit of doubt in the 'reader's' mind regarding Severus' loyalty to Dumbledore and therefore making the scene on the tower more believable?), as she did in Chapter One, "The Other Minister", and 2. All through this chapter it seems that it is Severus who is the one in charge. His attitude is arrogant, and somewhat condescending towards Bella, and yet by contrast he is almost compassionate, if a little embarrassed by Narcissa's tears.

You alluded that Severus may have felt threatened about anything Bella would report back to Voldemort. With one foul swoop Severus turned the tables upon Bella and demonstrated that he had usurped her.

Bella; "he calls me his most loyal, his most faithful -" "Does he still, after the fiasco at the Ministry?"

He was also able to parry her accusations, and in the end he shut her down by turning his attention to Narcissa. It was Narcissa he needed to get information from without seeming to. It was Narcissa's confidence he was courting.

I agree with S.E. Jones he asked Bella to act as bonder as a "slap to the face." As there is no canon to prove otherwise, I am going to assume that the Bonder does have a role to play if a party reneges in the vow. When Ron described taking part in an Unbreakable Vow with the twins it was between two and the third acted as Bonder. As I have said before, I don't think magic needs a witness.

What I find interesting about this whole chapter is, what was Peter doing there, and who was Severus looking out for when he glanced out the window? Smile

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Potteraholic Tue Jul 26, 2011 10:30 pm

Honour - Oct 4, 2006 11:21 pm (#350 of 444)
Edited Oct 5, 2006 12:23 am

Hi there, Laura W,

In reading the interaction between Severus and Bella, I got the impression that, 1. JKR used this chapter to fill in all the plot holes since OOTP (involving Severus and Voldemort, as well as maybe setting up a bit of doubt in the 'reader's' mind regarding Severus' loyalty to Dumbledore and therefore making the scene on the tower more believable?), as she did in Chapter One, "The Other Minister", and 2. All through this chapter it seems that it is Severus who is the one in charge. His attitude is arrogant, and somewhat condescending towards Bella, and yet by contrast he is almost compassionate, if a little embarrassed by Narcissa's tears.

You alluded that Severus may have felt threatened about anything Bella would report back to Voldemort. With one foul swoop Severus turned the tables upon Bella and demonstrated that he had usurped her.

Bella; "he calls me his most loyal, his most faithful -" "Does he still, after the fiasco at the Ministry?"

He was also able to parry her accusations, and in the end he shut her down by turning his attention to Narcissa. It was Narcissa he needed to get information from without seeming to. It was Narcissa's confidence he was courting.

I agree with S.E. Jones he asked Bella to act as bonder as a "slap to the face." As there is no canon to prove otherwise, I am going to assume that the Bonder does have a role to play if a party reneges in the vow. When Ron described taking part in an Unbreakable Vow with the twins it was between two and the third acted as Bonder. As I have said before, I don't think magic needs a witness.

What I find interesting about this whole chapter is, what was Peter doing there, and who was Severus looking out for when he glanced out the window? Smile

Laura W - Oct 5, 2006 12:36 am (#351 of 444)

Can you really see Snape giving Bellatrix that power over him (i.e. - the power to be the one to kill him if he reneges on the Vow)? With the way she feels about him, and their rivalry to be Voldemort's favourite? That is almost like Snape honouring Bella or giving her a somewhat-exalted position. As in, "You will be the one who gets to kill me if I fail the Dark Lord." Hardly a slap in the face.

I really do not see him putting himself at her mercy, as it were. Yet it was *he* who suggested she be the Bonder (p.40, Raincoast). That is why I have some doubts about the Bonder being the one to carry out the punishment.

Where I *do* see his suggesting Bella as Bonder being a slap in her face is, by taking the Vow, he is once-and-for-all putting to bed her theory about him being disloyal to Voldemort. How much more loyal can you be than willing to die if you do not carry out your master's plan; which, by taking the Unbreakable Vow, you are doing. And for Bellatrix to be party to this ultimate act of loyalty and bravery by a man she suspects of being a spy for the other side (DD) *would* indeed be very distasteful for her!

Laura

Honour - Oct 5, 2006 3:41 am (#352 of 444)

Hi there Laura W, I actually don't see Severus' use of Bella as Bonder as a means of allowing her to have power over him. I really think he is toying with her. She amuses him.

Severus is more powerful than many give him credit for. He is able to withstand whatever punishment Voldemort met out to him when he arrived 2 hours later than the other DEs. He was able to convince Voldemort that he is still loyal to the Dark Lord, and continue his comfortable life at Hogwarts playing each side off against the other. Depending on which camp you affiliate with, Severus was also powerful enough to fool Dumbledore the most wisest wizard, into thinking that he, Severus, is on the side of the Order. Fooling Bella would be a breeze. Smile

First and foremost Severus is a Slytherin, and as such he will look after number one, himself. He has maneuvered his way through this whole series just as skillfully as Voldemort has maneuvered himself in readiness to pounce, and as well as Dumbledore has trained and placed Harry into the game. Bella is no threat to Severus. He is cunning, he is sly, he is weary, but he is not afraid. Bella is a loose canon, she is emotional, arrogant and irrational, the very traits that Severus has warned Harry that he needs to learn to control in order to become a better wizard.

Like I said before it was Narcissa who had Severus' attention. The vow was a means to an end. I still think it more important to ask why Peter was at Severus' home? Was he spying on Severus for Voldemort? Was he of no use to Voldemort now the Dark Lord has a body and has been cast aside? And who was Severus looking out for?

Nathan Zimmermann - Oct 5, 2006 9:14 am (#353 of 444)

I see Severus toying with Bellatrix in a somewhat different light. In a way I reminded of the scene where Morfin Gaunt is torturing the live adder. In a way Snape is able to torment Bella by playing off those weakness Honour listed in her previous post. A confrontation between Bella and Severus would result in a serious injury to her person or death because, temperament would place her at distinct disadvantage and she might suffer the same fate as the adder that was affixed to the Gaunts door should attempt to lash out at Severus with an Unforgivable or any other dark magic.

Soul Search - Oct 5, 2006 11:03 am (#354 of 444)

Snape's role has been characterized as a "spy" for Dumbledore. No doubt, he does that, but that role has to be limited, or it becomes obvious to Voldemort that there is a spy in his house. I have suggested before that Snape's main role is more like fomenting dissention among Death Eaters.

We see exactly that in "Spinners End." It's subtle, but Snape makes Bellatrix doubt her role with Voldemort. She very much wants to be Voldemort's favorite, and Snape makes her doubt that. Snape makes Bellatrix think that Voldemort has trusted him a lot more than her.

Snape also further undermines Narcissa's loyalty to Voldemort. True, it’s already low, but Snape makes a vow to help her son, whereas Voldemort is a threat to her son, husband, and self.

No doubt, Snape has been subtly undermining Voldemort with other Death Eaters as well.

Snape has lit Bellatrix's fuse, and it is only a matter of time before she explodes.

Laura W - Oct 5, 2006 12:58 pm (#355 of 444)
Edited Oct 5, 2006 2:24 pm

I totally agree with your second paragraph in post 352, Honour.

And I never used the word "threat" when referring to how Snape sees Bella. The way I would put it is that Snape always has to be very, very conscious of how both sides see him, given his position. He has to apply Constant Vigilance in dispelling even the whisper of doubt that either side might have about him. It's not that I think Severus is actually afraid of Bella in Spinner's End (fear is not his thing, after all), but I still say that he is very aware of the importance of the fact that he has to squash her accusations against him - considering her somewhat diminished, but still considerable (based on her past deeds) place within the DEs and the fact that I think Voldemort would still at least listen to her. Which is why he took so much time and effort to answer her accusations in such detail.

I do not see that as the Potions Master playing with her - although I can see why you do -, but as his attempting to erase any doubts, once and for all (which plays to the self-interest thing you mentioned, Honour) . Snape, as we all agree I think, is very smart!

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Oh yeah, and when I first read HBP I just assumed Peter was staying with Severus because Voldemort had to put him somewhere and also as a kind of servant to Snape who, in Voldemort's eyes, had redeemed himself by turning up after V's rebirth - albeit two hours' after. Now, of course, I'm not so sure that my rather simplistic view of why the rat (with apologies to rats everywhere) is living at Spinner's End is correct. This is one of Jo's books, after all. (grin)

I believe a number of people on this Forum think Peter was sent to spy on Snape, but i just cannot see the logic of the brilliant Tom Riddle sending a dunderhead wizard to spy on such a clever subject such as Snape.

But aren't we getting just a wee bit off the Bellatrix Lestrange topic? Or perhaps someone can tie it all in.

Laura

haymoni - Oct 6, 2006 6:23 am (#356 of 444)
Edited Oct 6, 2006 7:24 am

What else could he do with Peter? People know that he is alive. He was also willing to betray his best friends, so he certainly can't be trusted. I'm guessing Snape had to babysit Wormtail.

I was a little disappointed to find out that Bellatrix was "Bella".

I really wanted to call her "Trixie".

Laura W - Oct 6, 2006 5:19 pm (#357 of 444)

Feel free to do so, haymoni. (very big grin)

Laura

Weeny Owl - Oct 6, 2006 11:34 pm (#358 of 444)

Voldemort called her Bella in the Ministry Atrium when he first appeared. He said something while she was trying to tell him about Dumbledore... something such as, "I'll deal with you later, Bella." I think that was the line, but it was definitely during the part in the Atrium before Dumbledore showed up.

haymoni - Oct 7, 2006 8:08 am (#359 of 444)

Yes - I remember reading that and being very disappointed.

Although, I can't really imagine Voldy calling Bella something as cutesy as "Trixie".

If we ever see her husband again, maybe he can call her that.

But Trixie, my little doxy...

Stop calling me Trixie" or I'll turn you into doxy DROPPINGS!!!"

It could be like Scarlett in "Gone with the Wind" - "Stop calling me "Sugar"!!"

Steve Newton - Oct 7, 2006 11:35 am (#360 of 444)

If Narcissa ends up being Cissy it seems clear to me that Bellatrix must be Trixie. I like it.

haymoni - Oct 7, 2006 6:11 pm (#361 of 444)

I thought "Cissy" was a play on "Sissy" - like what you'd call your little sister.

Narcie just doesn't cut it!

Weeny Owl - Oct 7, 2006 7:26 pm (#362 of 444)

Perhaps "Sissy" would be because she's a sissy? Not the sister type, either.

Trixie makes me think of "The Honeymooners," and I wonder if her hubby would be willing to send her to the moon. Good place for her, I say!

Laura W - Oct 8, 2006 1:46 am (#363 of 444)
Edited Oct 8, 2006 2:47 am

You know, Weeny, there is now a Space Travel in the Wizarding World thread. (chuckle, chuckle)

And speaking of names, re reading Spinner's End, I notice that Snape always refers to her as Bellatrix (not Bella, as her sister does), and she always refers to him as Snape (not Severus, as her sister does). ... Which may mean nothing at all.

Laura

legolas returns - Oct 8, 2006 1:50 am (#364 of 444)

I thought using Bella/Sissy was affectionate family naming. Names that they would have been called as children.

Bella does not know/trust Snape so she calls him Snape. Lucius and Snape were on good terms and Narcissa is begging him to help hence the Severus.

Laura W - Oct 8, 2006 2:23 am (#365 of 444)
Edited Oct 8, 2006 3:26 am

I don't disagree with your first paragraph but it begs the (trivial) question as to why Voldemort would have called Bellatrix "Bella" in OoP. Twice. He's not a member of the Black family, and affection of any kind is totally not his thing!

It is certainly true that Bella does *not* trust Snape - and for good reason, some would say -, but she definitely knows him. She has known him since school. After which they are/were members of the Death Eaters together. Her brother-in-law is his good friend and speaks well of him to Umbridge. No, she knows him; she just doesn't *like* him. (Especially since he has usurped her position as Voldemort's favourite).

Laura

legolas returns - Oct 8, 2006 2:29 am (#366 of 444)

I think that at that stage Bellatrix was high in Voldemorts favour because she had remained loyal.

juliebug - Oct 8, 2006 6:02 am (#367 of 444)

It seems like Voldemort likes using special names on some people once they are "his." He (and now the other DEs) only refer to Peter Pettigrew as Wormtail.

S.E. Jones - Oct 8, 2006 12:14 pm (#368 of 444)

I think Voldemort referred to Bellatrix as Bella for the same reason he referred to the DEs as his friends, to try to make them believe he actually cares what happens to them in an attempt to assert greater control over them.

I think he, and his DEs, referred to Peter as Wormtail as a reminder of what Peter did to get himself there, i.e. backstab his true friends.

juliebug - Oct 8, 2006 12:25 pm (#369 of 444)

I agree with the false sense of friendship thing you are saying SE. It seems to me that Voldemort collects people in the same sort of way that he collected his trophies. Some people are proud to be counted among Voldemort's numbers, like Bella. Others are terrified by it, like Pettigrew. The thing they all have in common is that they have been marked and claimed by Voldemort. That branding he does on the forearm kind of reminds me of a child writing his name on one of his toys. I think that's about all of the regard the DEs get as well.

haymoni - Oct 8, 2006 5:27 pm (#370 of 444)

I can't picture Snape calling anyone by a nickname.

I can, unfortunately, picture Bellatrix telling Voldy that he can call her, "Bella".

Yuck!!!!

Nathan Zimmermann - Oct 8, 2006 5:34 pm (#371 of 444)

Perhaps the nicknames are an attempt to make an individual seem infantile and child like.

Instead of treating others as equals perhaps both Bellatrix and Voldemort use nicknames to denigrate others?

Thom Matheson - Oct 8, 2006 5:37 pm (#372 of 444)

I've a problem with the general idea that any of the DE or Voldemort call and know Peter by Wormtail. Maybe not the name itself but the idea of it.

We have 4 teens running around Hogwarts(secretly), calling themselves Padfoot, Prongs, Moony, and Wormtail. There seems to be no written record of them as such except on the Marauders Map, which no one knew about until midway through PoA. If all along Voldemort knew about Peter and the nicknames would it not make sense that he also knew that the boys were Animagi? One would lead to another by association at the very least.

I would think that most DE would be called by last name, as in Pettigrew rather then Wormtail. So, when did the WW find out about the boys? Bella makes a big deal about telling Voldemort about Sirius at the end of OoP. Did they know at the time of James and Lily's death that James could change into a Stag?

Meoshimo - Oct 8, 2006 7:45 pm (#373 of 444)

I think that once Pettigrew found Voldemort again, he required an explanation as to where Peter was for all those years. And you can't lie to Lord Voldemort.

Nathan Zimmermann - Jul 10, 2007 9:34 pm (#374 of 444)
Edited Jul 10, 2007 10:44 pm

With Lucius and several of the more senior and effective Death Eaters imprisoned in Azkaban that there will be a power struggle within the ranks of the Death Eaters to win Voldemort's ear between Bellatrix, Severus Snape, Fenrir Greyback, and Peter Pettigrew?

The imprisonment of Lucius Malfoy and Nott Sr. deprived Voldemort of the two most influential and wealthy Death Eaters. Additionally I would argue that Malfoy's imprisonment deprived Voldemort of his second in command and fairly sharp intellect.

If such a power struggle ensued could Bellatrix count on the support of Narcissa?

TwinklingBlueEyes - Jul 11, 2007 6:19 am (#375 of 444)
Edited Jul 11, 2007 7:20 am

If such a power struggle ensued could Bellatrix count on the support of Narcissa?

Nathan, I would that would entail just what Bella required. We have already seen one instance that Cissy put her family before LV's cause. I don't think Cissy is interested in the hierarchy of LV's minions when it has cross-purposes to her cause, namely her family. Remember, there has never been a witch or wizard that's gone bad that wasn't in Slytherin...I think Cissy will look out for herself and her immediate family first, before LV's cause.

Solitaire - Jul 11, 2007 7:22 am (#376 of 444)

Snape is now the smartest DE remaining, IMO. Unfortunately, he is probably on the side of the good guys, so he is not going to be much help to LV. In fact, his status as Dumbledore's murder has probably put him into the perfect position to more or less destroy Voldemort's army from within.

Bella--unfortunately for Voldemort--probably is his most trusted DE at this point. She is also a loose cannon, and I think her hatred of Snape--once he is firmly ensconced as Voldy's number one man--is going to be her undoing. The weird thing is that she is probably correct in her distrust of him ... but we know how capable Snape is of manipulating things, and I believe he is going to manipulate her into doing something that will bring about her own downfall.

Can she count on Narcissa? I doubt it. In fact, I think Narcissa could be the one to help bring her down in an effort to save Draco. JM2K, and I'm wrong a lot! LOL

Solitaire

TwinklingBlueEyes - Jul 11, 2007 8:14 am (#377 of 444)

JM2K, and I'm wrong a lot! I don't think you are wrong about this one.

Solitaire - Jul 11, 2007 2:32 pm (#378 of 444)

Oh, good! I have an ally!

MickeyCee3948 - Jul 11, 2007 3:20 pm (#379 of 444)

Make that 2 allies, Soli.

Mickey

Good Evans - Aug 7, 2007 10:54 am (#380 of 444)

I was disappointed that JKR confirmed that Bellatrix was the one to finish off Tonks. She was after her niece from the start and it seemed so unfitting that Bella should get her way with that. Does this mean that the bad witch was a better witch than her Auror relative?

it is an interesting "good versus evil" issue. Bellatrix (evil) defeated the good relative, almost like two sides of the same coin, and in this case the evil side was stronger. The Black family really is torn apart, I wonder what Mother Black would have made of this, she would no doubt have thought Tonks a Mudblood and scourge, but would she have approved of her niece killing her great niece? hmmm.....

zelmia - Aug 7, 2007 11:06 am (#381 of 444)

Yes, I think she would have, Good Evans. She had no problem burning Andromeda off the Family Tree - she was dead to her already - so I think she would have considered Bella murdering her own niece as Voldemort does: Pruning the family tree.

But as for Bella killing Tonks, Bellatrix is really the most ruthless character, apart from Voldemort himself; so it's interesting that she went to such extremes to try to prevent Narcissa from going to Snape.

Solitaire - Aug 7, 2007 5:43 pm (#382 of 444)
Edited Aug 7, 2007 6:44 pm

I agree that this just shows how cold and heartless Bella really is. After seeing her in DH, I wonder if she was only concerned about Narcissa going to Snape because, perhaps, she'd been set down as Narcissa's "watchdog." She may have believed that if Narcissa got into trouble with Voldy, she herself would be punished for letting it happen. After seeing Bella's behavior in DH, I can't believe she has a shred of human compassion or caring.

Solitaire

zelmia - Aug 7, 2007 6:56 pm (#383 of 444)

Good point, Soli. Still, she calls Narcissa by her family nickname, which makes it seem that Bellatrix is trying to appeal to the sisterly intimacy between them that they must have once had, even though they may not any longer.

I notice that Rowling uses the phrase "like a lover" when she has Bella talking to Voldemort at one point. Just an interesting (i.e. "adult") choice of words there.

Solitaire - Aug 8, 2007 7:59 am (#384 of 444)
Edited Aug 8, 2007 9:01 am

Zelmia, I believe they once were close, perhaps before Bella went to Azkaban. Surely she would have been resentful that Lucius managed to stay out, given her comments to Snape at Spinner's End. Anyway, I guess I just think Bella is so unhinged and cold that she no longer has any warmth or compassion, sisterly or otherwise. Calling Narcissa by her nickname doesn't really mean much to me, as old habits die-hard and that is probably the name she has always used. I could be wrong ... but she is so cold about Draco's possible fate in that conversation that I just don't think I am.

Solitaire

PeskyPixie - Aug 1, 2008 9:58 am (#385 of 444)
Edited Aug 1, 2008 10:59 am

The following are from the Series Read-Along thread:

Anyway, as regards the bravery thing, I don't think bravery is necessarily a good or bad characteristic. On the extreme level of nastiness, Bella appears to be quite brave in a fanatical sort of way, and as loyal to the one she serves as a Hufflepuff. But of course she's completely evil. And we see little actual Slytherin characteristics in her character other than her interest in blood purity. -wynnleaf

I see your point there, wynnleaf, but one of my personal definitions of bravery is doing the right thing in spite of being afraid. I don't consider Bellatrix brave. She chose what is easy over what is right and I don't consider that brave. But I may be in the minority here. -PatPat

Oddly, I do not see Bella as brave. I'm not even sure if loyalty is actually a trait I would ascribe to her. I think she is a cruel and twisted psychopath, and by serving Voldemort she is given free reign to use her magic to torture and murder. Eventually, I think she becomes obsessed with Voldemort--perhaps because she sees similarities to herself--and by the time we see her in OotP and thereafter, she has reached a level of obsession where she must be first with Voldemort. She's even jealous of Snape! While obsession can look like love, it is not the same. I just do not see how love and such evil can coexist in the same person. -Solitaire

I'm still out on whether Bella is brave or not, but sure, love can exist with evil. Lucius and Cissy and a good example of how evil people are still able to love one another. Their love just happens to be very limited. I suppose the best way to describe it is that they understand love at a very basic level; they are not open to the true greatness of love. -PeskyPixie

Perhaps they are not as evil as the others ... not thoroughly evil. I don't like 'em much ... but even I do not think Lucius holds a candle to Bella on the evil scale."" -Solitaire

No, but he's still evil. A bit shrewder than Bella perhaps, but does that make him much less evil? -PeskyPixie

As far as evil and love existing in the same person, I think they can, but it depends on the level of evil. There's no doubt that there are different levels of evil. We know very few people are all good or all bad. Lucius and Narcissa are cruel certainly, and clearly have bigotry, but a lot of their actions come out of fear ... On the other hand, Voldemort and Bellatrix are pure evil. They revel in cruelty and power. I don't even think Bellatrix really loved Voldemort. It was more of an infatuation. I would label both of them as psychopaths. No conscience. This is the highest form of evil, IMO, and the one that really precludes love. -PatPat

In my eyes, as I've said, there are degrees of evil. The purest evil is a case where there are no redeeming qualities. This is how I see Bellatrix and Voldemort. There is not an ounce of goodness that can be found in either of them. Umbridge falls into this category also, IMO. I don't see Lucius this way. Don't get me wrong. He is certainly evil. But there are traces of goodness there. Those being his obvious love for his wife and child. This makes him not as evil as Voldemort [and Bella?]. In fact, his and Narcissa's love for Draco are such that they don't even participate in the final battle after Harry returns from the forest. Their only concern is finding their son. Had they been pure evil like Voldemort [and Bella?], their son would have meant nothing compared to the defeat of Harry and the other fighters and the chance to take over. -PatPat

In spite of our personal views on what should go along with bravery, bravery in and of itself is defined along the lines of willingness to confront fear, pain, risk/danger, etc., and there's nothing tied to that about the willingness to confront these things having to be for good" reasons. After all, in wars throughout the ages there is bravery on both sides. We don't have to figure out who's "right" to see that there is bravery. Bravery does not equate to nobility, which I think is a problem when interpreting Gryffindor's prime characteristic, because if bravery is necessarily a mark of courage for good choices, then all Gryffindors are necessarily "good" just by virtue of being brave.

As for gradations of evil or badness, I agree that there are levels. Bella and LV are purely evil and have no apparent ability to truly love anyone. Bella's devotion to LV is, however, fully committed and she doesn't exhibit the supposed Slytherin characteristic (as related by Phinneas) of looking out for self first." -wynnleaf

That would be my interpretation of bravery, too ... Bravery does not equate to nobility, which I think is a problem when interpreting Gryffindor's prime characteristic, because if bravery is necessarily a mark of courage for good choices, then all Gryffindors are necessarily good" just by virtue of being brave." -Mrs Brisbee

As I said, that was merely my personal feeling about bravery. I see bravery as being willing to conquer fears to do the right thing. You don't have to agree with me. That's just how I see it. Now I agree that the right thing" is not always black and white, and that falls to my personal views. However I think we can certainly agree that Bellatrix and Voldemort and even Umbridge are not doing the "right" thing. So I do not see Bellatrix as brave." -PatPat

Yes, I totally understand. We all bring different personal feelings about the characteristics that the Sorting Hat talks about -- you know, like whether the characteristics of this or that House are necessary good or bad, etc. It's one of the problems with some of the key and crucial words and concepts that JKR brings up - like with love" - is that while we each have our own feelings about what the words mean, to interpret the story, we have to figure out when possible what JKR's interpretation is for the word or concept, or if that's impossible, decide whether to assume she means a standardly held definition, or something else." -wynnleaf

So, is Bella brave or a coward?

Solitaire - Aug 1, 2008 10:28 am (#386 of 444)

Hm ... I just think Bella is insane. Insane people operate on a system of their own, don't you think? Their actions really can't be compared to those of a rational, sane human being. JM2K ...

Mrs Brisbee - Aug 1, 2008 12:05 pm (#387 of 444)

That would be my interpretation of bravery, too ... Bravery does not equate to nobility, which I think is a problem when interpreting Gryffindor's prime characteristic, because if bravery is necessarily a mark of courage for good choices, then all Gryffindors are necessarily good" just by virtue of being brave." -Mrs Brisbee

I just want to point out that wynnleaf actually was the one who said (most of) that. I was just agreeing with her.

Orion - Aug 1, 2008 12:45 pm (#388 of 444)
Edited Aug 1, 2008 1:47 pm

I agree with Soli. Bella is a psychopath whose brains don't work like a human being's. She's seriously sick, just like Voldemort, and shouldn't be allowed near other people. So the question whether she really loves Voldie or whether she's just obsessed with him is not very relevant. Obviously in her poor twisted brains there are a few synapses which regulate passionate feelings. (It doesn't mean much. There are documented cases of people who are passionately in love with machines or steel bolts.) It doesn't make her in the least bit "better".

And I agree with Wynnleaf and Mrs Brisbee (or whoever said it first - I hope you have sorted it out now ) that bravery is in itself a secondary virtue, like punctuality or diligence, and neutral in itself. It can be used for good and bad purposes and doesn't say anything about the integrity of a person. In the HP books bravery is overrated just because it's Rowling's pet virtue. She said so. She's obviously a Gryffindor. Neither Bella's romantic feelings for a monster with an artificial, second-hand body nor her willingness to fight like hell can save her.

tandaradei - Aug 1, 2008 7:11 pm (#389 of 444)
Edited Aug 1, 2008 8:16 pm

I do wish someone besides me had read Charles Williams.

In some of his extremely intriguing novels, Williams "argues" that even a mere act of devotion -- and even that towards evil -- can in itself be a kind of saving grace.

Devotion can be seen as something like an out-of-the-self obsession, something rarely seen in the animal world. I guess the opposite of the devoted fanatic is the Charismatic leader; and CW definitely considered these leaders, which point followers toward evil, as a kind of ultimate evil. But those fanatics who were so passionately devoted? CW held back a fair amount.

Granted, if I saw Bella around I wouldn't feel safe until I had obliterated her with a bazooka (then incinerated the remains, buried them 50 feed deep and spread Holy Water on top); but CW's arguments do seem to have a ring of truth to me, and I would feel actually reluctant to hand down a judgment on her that was absolute, because I do think there is something in devotion that, in and of itself, may mean something good somewhere.

TwinklingBlueEyes - Aug 1, 2008 8:23 pm (#390 of 444)

Dogs are usually devoted, to either a good or a bad person. Molly called it right, but that's just my opinion.

mona amon - Aug 1, 2008 10:06 pm (#391 of 444)

So, is Bella brave or a coward? (Pesky)

I say brave, definitely, insane or not.

As I said, that was merely my personal feeling about bravery. I see bravery as being willing to conquer fears to do the right thing. (PatPat)

There are people like religious fanatics and terrorists who wholeheartedly believe that they are doing the right thing. They are willing to sacrifice their lives for the cause, and they are certainly brave. Yet most of us would classify them as evil. Bella does not belong to this category. IMO she knows that what she's doing is evil and revels in it. But she's fearless in battle and no coward at any time. Brave in other words!

So on the whole I agree with Wynnleaf, except that I feel that bravery is a positive quality. At least we approve of it and admire it a lot more than cowardice, on whichever side the brave person happens to be. But it is not the prerogative of the good guys. A lot of the bad guys have it as well.

Loyalty is different. It needs some supporting qualities like discernment and discrimination for it to be a virtue. Blind loyalty is a vice. Young DE Severus Snape didn't become a good guy until he became a traitor.

wynnleaf - Aug 2, 2008 6:48 am (#392 of 444)

There are people like religious fanatics and terrorists who wholeheartedly believe that they are doing the right thing. They are willing to sacrifice their lives for the cause, and they are certainly brave. Yet most of us would classify them as evil. Bella does not belong to this category. IMO she knows that what she's doing is evil and revels in it. But she's fearless in battle and no coward at any time. Brave in other words! (mona amon)

I'm not sure to what extent Belle believes she is being evil and revels in it. She definitely revels in what she does, but I think that she feels it's all justified according to her.

Generally, bravery is a trait that we speak of in positive terms. I personally would not call a terrorist's actions brave, even if I understood their political agenda and had some sort of sympathy for it. Still, there are occasions when people do things that are both brave and despicable, because regardless how much we want to view bravery as a noble thing, the actual word does not require nobility of purpose.

So is Bella brave? I think she does exhibit the basic things that define bravery. But of course, her actions are evil.

PatPat - Aug 2, 2008 11:23 am (#393 of 444)
Edited Aug 2, 2008 12:27 pm

I am simply giving you my personal feelings about bravery. Of course I am a Gryffindor through and through so that may have something to do with it! (Sorry, Pesky!) I do not see someone who murders for sport, like Bellatrix, as brave any more than I see a terrorist suicide bomber as brave. Does it take courage to kill indiscriminately? Does it take courage for Bellatrix to follow the insane leadership of Lord Voldemort? Not in my eyes. It takes much more to go against him, especially when he begins to take over. This may be why I relate so much to JKR's books because she clearly sees bravery as a positive trait.

I do see wynnleaf's point that the dictionary definition of bravery does not give a good or bad connotation, but I also think most people view bravery as a good trait.

EDIT: And actually, mona, we do see some instances of cowardice from Bellatrix. She flees from Dumbledore in the Ministry. She begs Voldemort not to hurt her after the prophecy is broken and blames Lucius for it. She panics when she believes the trio have been in her vault and won't let the Malfoys call Voldemort for fear of his wrath.

Soul Search - Aug 3, 2008 6:27 am (#394 of 444)

I, too, associate some sort of self-sacrifice for some greater "good" with the word "brave." I would not call Bellatrix "brave." Maybe "fearless" is a better description of Bellatrix.

wynnleaf - Aug 3, 2008 6:35 am (#395 of 444)
Edited Aug 3, 2008 7:37 am

I originally brought up Bella in terms of bravery in order to point out that bravery is not necessarily something only shown by people making good choices.

I can understand people not wanting to call Bella brave. In general terms, I wouldn't do so either. My point -- which diverges from this thread -- is that doing something that is brave is not synonymous with doing something that is right. Otherwise, how could one possibly have bravery on two sides of a war? Everyone always wants to see their side as right, and therefore their side’s fearless actions as brave, while the other guys (the opposition) is wrong, and their fearless actions are evil. But since (I'm not speaking of Bella) the other side thinks they are right and therefore fearless and brave, what do we say to that?

The problem with bravery in Gryffindor (where this discussion started) is that it tends to get equated with the notion that 1. Bravery is necessitated by right choices and therefore is a virtue. 2. All Gryffindors are brave. 3. Therefore all Gryffindors make right choices. 4. Therefore all Gryffindors are virtuous and good at least to an extent (partly equated to how brave they are). And I really, really, really dislike that kind of notion. It's like some types of nationalism or whatever you call it on a smaller scale, where people end up thinking "we're right and good just because we're us."

Solitaire - Aug 3, 2008 8:47 am (#396 of 444)

I do not see someone who murders for sport, like Bellatrix, as brave any more than I see a terrorist suicide bomber as brave.

PatPat, I think this sums her up perfectly! Despite eloquent arguments to the contrary, I would have to change my entire value system regarding what I think courage and bravery are ... and I doubt I will. According to my understanding, Bella is not brave ... she is a murderous terrorist. JM2K, though ...

Solitaire

mona amon - Aug 3, 2008 6:57 pm (#397 of 444)

There's nothing brave about killing helpless, innocent people. But from the suicide bomber's point of view, what he is doing is no different from what Harry did when he walked into the forest to allow Voldemort to kill him. He (the terrorist) is giving up his life for what he believes is some greater good. The tragedy is not that he is lacking in certain good qualities like the courage to give up everything for what he believes in, but the utterly misguided nature of his beliefs.

Similarly, with Bella, she is certainly not brave when she's killing or torturing helpless victims, but when she's fighting for Voldemort in the Battle of Hogwarts she's at least as brave as Lupin, Tonks, Minerva McGonagall or any of the other Harry supporters. How is her willingness to fight and die for her side any less brave than theirs, because she happens to be fighting for evil?

PeskyPixie - Aug 3, 2008 8:59 pm (#398 of 444)
Edited Aug 3, 2008 10:28 pm

I really was undecided on this one and you've all given me a lot to think about.

Now, of course we all have our own definitions for terms, so I thought I'd check a dictionary for the generally accepted meaning of the word. Here's what I found: "The quality of mind that enables one to face danger with self-possession or confidence."

With this definition, I'd have to say that yes, Bella is brave in battle, and loyal to Voldemort. 'Bravery' and 'loyalty' tend to be regarded as positive traits because we like to believe that those on 'our' side of the battle are the 'good guys'. However, the people on the other side feel the exact same way about themselves.

Bella is not a 'terrorist' in battle; she openly fights for the cause she believes in, as do McGonagall, Flitwick, and even Dolohov (my most hated Death Eater, for reasons I don't understand myself! ). Now, I may personally feel that Bella is completely coo-coo bananas, but she is willing to lay down her life in battle for what she believes in. That's brave. Just as love and evil can go together, so can bravery and evil. Bravery, by definition, is a neutral term. Achilles was brave, so was Hector.

The point is that when the battle begins, Bella won't be whimpering under Harry's Invisibility Cloak, hoping she isn't called to go into action.

In contrast, Draco is a coward. However, it is his cowardice which assists the 'Good' movement. Cowardice tends to be a negative trait, but in the hands of his rival it ends up assisting Harry.

Now, Snape gives us something to think about when he mocks Bella for speaking of running dangers (battle at the MoM) when all that was required of all those grown Death Eaters was to take on 'six teenagers'. That was a moment of cowardice for all of the adults involved. Snape's snitching to Order headquarters for back up to be immediately sent to protect these annoyingly headstrong children, is brave. However, during the battle between the Death Eaters and the Order members, yes, Bella is brave, as is every other adult in that room (when they're not taking on a kid).

wynnleaf - Aug 3, 2008 6:18 pm (#399 of 444)
Edited by megfox* Aug 4, 2008 5:34 am

To me this is kind of like the idea of "what I think it means to be an American" or insert your own nationality. Some people in a county define being American or British or whatever by various great things that most people in the country like to think of as being "really British" or "truly American", but in fact, all it really takes is citizenship.

Edit: I moved this here for you, wynnleaf.

wynnleaf - Aug 4, 2008 4:52 am (#400 of 444)
Edited Aug 4, 2008 5:56 am

I had thought the post previous was lost, but found later that I'd mistakenly put it on the Snape thread.

I was concerned that it was a bit offensive, and I don't mean it to be. In interpreting the HP series, bravery is a theme that is very important to the series. JKR considers bravery a really important characteristic and that's why she gave that characteristic to Gryffindors.

When interpreting this question of bravery and how it relates to Gryffindor and non-Gryffindor characters, good guys and bad guys, I think the important question isn't how each individual reader interprets the word "brave" but instead whether, in the context of the books, being "brave" necessarily means that the character is acting on good choices. As I've said several times, if in the HP series, bravery is only something that people who make good choices can do, then all Gryffindors are, by necessity, good.

I'm not talking here about individual interpretation, but about the series and how bravery works out in the books. When the Sorting Hat says, "Gryffindor!" has it discovered that integral to that person is the ability to be the type of person who takes risks in order to make good choices? Or does the Hat simply see that the person has a lot of courage of some kind, perhaps moral courage, but perhaps just physical courage?

If "brave" in HP must include moral bravery - willingness to risk much for good choices - I don't think we see evidence for that among many of the Gryffindors, sorted supposedly because they are brave.

I chose Bella as an extreme example of someone willing to risk her life repeatedly to follow through on whatever she's committed to. Of course, she's committed to following an evil Dark Lord, but she is willing to take a lot of risks to do so.

I totally agree that the higher order of bravery would be the courage to risk much in order to make good choices. But if this is only what bravery is in HP, then it automatically means that a large number of people must be "good" just because they got Sorted according to their bravery - even though we never see much evidence in the books that most of them are risking much of anything in order to make good choices -- at least no more risks than Hufflepuffs and Ravenclaws, who were not Sorted for reasons of bravery, take in situations like opposing Umbridge or fighting in the battle at the very end.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Potteraholic Tue Jul 26, 2011 10:33 pm

Julia H. - Aug 4, 2008 4:54 am (#401 of 444)
Edited Aug 4, 2008 6:10 am

Bravery and its associations: I like the definition Pesky found. Perhaps one of the reasons why bravery is considered a positive trait by a lot of people is that it is usually associated with either fighting for a purpose or keeping one's dignity when it is rather difficult. Why would someone want to face danger? Sometimes you cannot avoid it and in this case brave behaviour is more respectable - and often more practical - than cowardice, yet not everybody is able to show "self-possession and confidence" in a dangerous situation.

In other cases, people may have the chance to choose between facing a particular danger or not. There may be people who enjoy taking risk for the sake of the risk (the teenage James and Sirius were supposed to be of this type, yet as adults they both agreed to hide when that was the practical thing to do but fought bravely when they had to or when they had a specific purpose). Yet, most people will choose to face danger for a purpose only. (Sensible people will not jump into a dangerous river just for fun - extreme sports aside - but a brave person may do it to save someone's life.) Snape did not enjoy risking his life as a spy but he was both willing and able to do it for a purpose. This is bravery. Bellatrix could be brave in battle fighting for a purpose (whatever it was: promoting her beliefs or helping Voldemort's cause or gaining Voldemort's favour) but she could not bravely face Voldemort's wrath since she found no meaningful purpose in risking being Crucio'd by him, so she chose to flee or to beg him (apparently, she did not care for dignified behaviour). Unfortunately, the purpose for which someone is willing to face danger is not necessarily a good one, although perhaps that is the "default" option in our minds when we think of bravery without a specific context. Then again I would not like to confuse brave people with fanatics...

Cross-posted with Wynnleaf!

PatPat - Aug 4, 2008 3:55 pm (#402 of 444)
Edited Aug 4, 2008 4:56 pm

PatPat, I think this sums her up perfectly! Despite eloquent arguments to the contrary, I would have to change my entire value system regarding what I think courage and bravery are ... and I doubt I will. According to my understanding, Bella is not brave ... she is a murderous terrorist. Solitaire

Thanks, Solitaire. I agree with you completely. While we may say that we are discussing bravery as it relates to the books, it is impossible to separate our personal viewpoints from our interpretations of the series. That's part of reading. My feeling related to how Bellatrix was written totally depends on my personal views and experiences. In spite of some very good arguments here, I simply cannot see Bellatrix as brave. I have already said that I am going purely by my personal feelings about bravery and not by the dictionary definition.

mona, I disagree with you about the terrorist suicide bomber, but we are getting into a dangerous area there, so I am going to let it go. But, related to that, I do not see Bellatrix as simply a soldier fighting for a cause. We know that Bellatrix takes great pleasure in murder and torture. Voldemort gives her a path for her cruelty. That is not brave, IMO.

PeskyPixie - Aug 4, 2008 4:29 pm (#403 of 444)
Edited Aug 4, 2008 5:30 pm

As a complete person, no she is not always brave, she does some pretty nasty things. However, everyone fighting in the Battle of Hogwarts is brave. Part of valor is acknowledging that one's enemy is also fearless in battle.

As for the 'terrorist suicide bomber' thing, I think the main difference is that Harry sacrifices himself only while most Muggle terrorists suicide bombers tend to prefer to take as many unsuspecting innocents with them as possible. Also, Harry does not sacrifice himself for ideals (or similar things like that which I won't get into); he must physically die in order for the Dark Lord to be destroyed.

This discussion actually reminds me of the reason I lost marks in grade twelve English. During a presentation about King Lear I had made some sort of comment about how Regan is an asset to the evil side. My teacher believed that an 'asset' is a positive term a negative thing/person cannot be an asset. I tried to get her to understand how values are completely switched around for 'evil' people, how a kind heart is most definitely not an asset from a violent madman's point of view. Needless to say, that experience taught me to get Tom Riddleish about researching my teachers'/professors' preferences and writing them flowery essays to their respective tastes.

As I said, Hector and Achilles are both brave. We may agree with one and disagree with the other for a variety of reasons, but on the battlefield, both are brave and highly skilled.

I have a question though. Is Bella fearless (I won't use the term 'brave') because she is willing to go into battle and die for her beliefs, or is she this way because she believes that she is so skilled that her own death is impossible in battle?

tandaradei - Aug 4, 2008 4:48 pm (#404 of 444)
Edited Aug 4, 2008 5:50 pm

To me these questions are like asking if Sméagol was brave in Lord of Rings: Sméagol endured untold deprivations, went through unbelievable horrors, fought an invisible enemy in the end and fell into a fiery pit ... all for his "Precioussssss." We are given no indication he even cared that he was falling to his death.

Was this bravery or obsession to loss of self -interest?

PeskyPixie - Aug 4, 2008 4:52 pm (#405 of 444)

Is Bellatrix mentally the equivalent of Sméagol?

wynnleaf - Aug 4, 2008 5:43 pm (#406 of 444)

There's a difference in someone taking risks in order to achieve something where their obsession drives them to the point where they neither see nor care about the risk. These people -- and it doesn't matter whether they are motivated for good or bad -- aren't overcoming fear and a natural desire to preserve one's own safety in order to achieve something they consider important. They are simply so incredibly driven by their obsession that they never even think about their own personal safety, at least in situations where the obsession is taking over.

Gollum might fall under this sort of thing and indeed Bella might as well. But even people pursuing good objectives can become extraordinarily obsessive to the point where they are taking risks, not out of bravery, but because their obsession is driving them to the point where they aren't even aware (other than objectively) of personal risk. No, I don't think that's actually bravery, because there's no innate motivation to avoid the risk that has to be overcome.

But people can act out of obsession whether they are acting for good or for bad. Their goal isn't what determines that it's not brave, but the fact that they aren't actually having to overcome any kind of typical and natural harm-avoidance issues.

PeskyPixie - Aug 4, 2008 6:07 pm (#407 of 444)

I like that, wynnleaf.

mona amon - Aug 4, 2008 6:45 pm (#408 of 444)

To me these questions are like asking if Sméagol was brave in Lord of Rings: (Tandaradei)

I came across this quote a while back, and it might be relevant here-

Into the ultimate judgment upon Gollum I would not care to enquire. This would be to investigate 'Goddes privitee', as the Medievals said. Gollum was pitiable, but he ended in persistent wickedness, and the fact that this worked good was no credit to him. His marvelous courage and endurance, as great as Frodo and Sam's or greater, being devoted to evil was portentous, but not honourable.- (The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien, Letter 181)

Can we say that people like Bella have courage, but their courage is not honourable?

wynnleaf - Aug 4, 2008 6:53 pm (#409 of 444)

Can we say that people like Bella have courage, but their courage is not honourable? (mona amon)

Sounds good to me.

PeskyPixie - Aug 4, 2008 6:55 pm (#410 of 444)

Me too.

Orion - Aug 5, 2008 5:28 am (#411 of 444)

Is Bella the equivalent of Sméagol? Funny you ask that, Pesky. For me, Bella was always an Uruk-Hai captain and the Sméagol part of Gollum was always Snape. But it's impossible to pair all the objects and characters.

PeskyPixie - Aug 5, 2008 8:23 am (#412 of 444)

I can definitely see Bella as an Uruk-Hai!

PeskyPixie - Aug 5, 2008 2:04 pm (#413 of 444)

However, I really wonder whether Bellatrix thinks of herself as evil? Most people (even nasty ones) tend to feel that they are the 'good guys.'

I wouldn't be surprised if Bella actually believes she is entitled to torture and kill all those who (she believes) are lower than her on the food chain.

Solitaire - Aug 8, 2008 2:51 pm (#414 of 444)
Edited Aug 8, 2008 3:52 pm

from the suicide bomber's point of view, what he is doing is no different from what Harry did when he walked into the forest to allow Voldemort to kill him

Oh, yes, there is. When Harry walked into the forest, he did not take one, ten, or a thousand people with him. He walked alone. I see Pesky has said kind of the same thing: I think the main difference is that Harry sacrifices himself only while most Muggle terrorists suicide bombers tend to prefer to take as many unsuspecting innocents with them as possible.

Wynnleaf: Can we say that people like Bella have courage, but their courage is not honourable? Hm ... maybe. I'll have to think about it a while.

Bella is not a 'terrorist' in battle

I see Bella as a part of an elite "hit squad," a terrorist. She certainly terrorized the Longbottoms ... didn't she?

Bella needs Voldemort's recognition, his "strokes," IMO. It is important that she be first, and it is important that others in her circle know she is so. As to whether or not she is evil ... she is like Voldemort. Both of them are insane. Would we say that they are also immoral ... or amoral? Can one be both amoral and evil? Just asking questions ...

Pesky said, I wouldn't be surprised if Bella actually believes she is entitled to torture and kill all those who (she believes) are lower than her on the food chain. People like Bella and Voldemort feel they are on a different plane than others and do not operate according to the same laws and mores. In this case, they feel they have the right to live ... whereas others (determined by themselves) do not.

Solitaire

PeskyPixie - Aug 8, 2008 3:08 pm (#415 of 444)
Edited Aug 8, 2008 4:11 pm

Good to see you, Soli. ***waves***

I wasn't under the impression that she terrorized the Longbottoms during a battle. During those DE duties, absolutely, she can be considered as a terrorist.

However, in battle (e.g. the Battle of Hogwarts) she doesn't do anything other than fight for her beliefs (as warped as they are), and disagreeing with someone's beliefs makes them neither a coward nor a terrorist.

I think she has a lot of courage because she is willing to defend all she holds dear at the risk of her own life. However, her beliefs are not honourable, so I quite like Tolkien's quote about having courage, but that courage not being honourable.

I'm a bit stumped on amoral/evil, Soli. I need to think on it.

Solitaire - Aug 8, 2008 3:56 pm (#416 of 444)
Edited Aug 8, 2008 5:02 pm

she is willing to defend all she holds dear at the risk of her own life

Interestingly, I do not believe that Bellatrix ever thought, for one split second, that her own life was at risk. I do not believe she considered her own death or Voldemort's to be even a remote possibility. She never viewed Molly as an adversary who would kill her. I think she believed she would be the victor there. She was shocked that Molly AK'd her.

I also do not believe she held anything dear ... except Voldemort. I don't really believe she was fighting for any great cause. I think she was obsessed with Voldemort and would have gone anywhere he sent her and done anything he asked her to do. JM2K ...

Solitaire

PeskyPixie - Aug 8, 2008 4:02 pm (#417 of 444)
Edited Aug 8, 2008 5:04 pm

I had actually brought this very point up before, Soli, as I think it may affect one's views of whether Bella can be classified as courageous or not. Here it is, "I have a question though. Is Bella fearless (I won't use the term 'brave') because she is willing to go into battle and die for her beliefs, or is she this way because she believes that she is so skilled that her own death is impossible in battle?"

Solitaire - Aug 8, 2008 4:04 pm (#418 of 444)

Obviously, from my post, you can tell I believe the latter.

mona amon - Aug 8, 2008 6:57 pm (#419 of 444)

Oh, yes, there is. When Harry walked into the forest, he did not take one, ten, or a thousand people with him. (Solitaire)

But Soli, this is from our point of view, not the suicide bomber's, which is the point I'm trying to make. In the suicide bomber's twisted mind, killing those innocent people is something he is doing for the greater good. Anyway, he is voluntarily walking to his death, so in that way (and only in that way) he is similar to Harry.

Solitaire - Aug 8, 2008 8:05 pm (#420 of 444)

Sorry, mona ... we must agree to disagree here.

mona amon - Aug 8, 2008 9:26 pm (#421 of 444)

Agreed!

Orion - Aug 9, 2008 1:48 am (#422 of 444)

"I also do not believe she held anything dear ... except Voldemort. I don't really believe she was fighting for any great cause. I think she was obsessed with Voldemort and would have gone anywhere he sent her and done anything he asked her to do. JM2K ...2 (Soli)

Bella's motivation? I think that she'd never have fallen in love with Voldie if he hadn't touched upon her inner drive towards sadism. She comes from a crazy pureblood family, and it might have influenced her beliefs and her involvement with the DEs, but that is not all there is to it. Bella would have searched everywhere until she'd have found a similarly addicted sadist to join forces with. If she'd been a Muggle, she'd joined an internet forum to exchange snuff movies and she'd found a way to participate.

Julia H. - Aug 9, 2008 2:00 am (#423 of 444) Reply

Good point, Orion. Another reason for her attraction may have been learning from Voldie and so gaining greater power to torture and to kill. And his attitude justified"" her own (in her eyes)."

Solitaire - Aug 9, 2008 9:04 pm (#424 of 444)

Bella would have searched everywhere until she'd have found a similarly addicted sadist to join forces with

I agree that she liked to terrorize and hurt people. I think that was her "high," and he was her "connection" to that high.

Solitaire

PeskyPixie - Feb 8, 2009 11:23 am (#425 of 444)

A point which has arisen about the lovely Ms. Bella on the HBP movie thread is what type of accent she might have had.

Is Helena Bonham Carter's choice of accent accurate with regard to the character's background and story? Or would Bella have a more upper class accent as she a dedicated Black? Would she allow the Carrows, etc., to rub off on her or would she retain her nutty Dark regal air?

me and my shadow 813 - Feb 8, 2009 11:29 am (#426 of 444)

Pesky, look at you stirring up that can of worms you told me about?

Solitaire - Feb 8, 2009 11:32 am (#427 of 444)

It will be interesting to see. Bella and Narcissa are sisters, so, theoretically, their dialects should be the same. Are they? It will be interesting to hear them together (Spinner's End, if they leave in that scene). Do we know from what part of England they come? Lucius’ dialect seems very well bred, if I am remembering him properly.

azi - Feb 8, 2009 11:35 am (#428 of 444)

I don't think the Blacks would associate with Cockney accent types. Regarded as very common (that's not to say anyone with that accent is, but it's the stereotype). Actually, where I'm living now is close to where that accent is from and if you're from the posher areas you won't have that accent. I'm surprised how clear-cut it is, actually.

I would expect the Black's to have posh accents. Not the stereotypical British accents that films like to do (and which makes me cringe) but posh enough that you wouldn't be able to put their upbringing in any specific geographical location.

me and my shadow 813 - Feb 8, 2009 11:39 am (#429 of 444)

Solitaire, I went on imdb.com and there is a photo of the scene where Severus and Narcissa take the vow, with Bella standing between them. I shut my eyes to fast! I don't want to see anything, no trailers, nothing until I plop into that seat with my popcorn and root beer

I feel Narcissa will be of the utmost breeding and decorum, a study in what has been come to be known Upper Echelon so her voice to me will reflect that.

I think it is not inappropriate to have Bella be the opposite to Narcissa in voice, going along with the contrast we have of them so well described in Spinner's End. JKR did such a great job with their light/dark thing...

Solitaire - Feb 8, 2009 11:49 am (#430 of 444)

But one's accent and dialect are rather an intrinsic part of one, aren't they? I know it is possible to deliberately change how one speaks, but I can't see Bella wanting to do that. She seems to me someone who would want to emphasize her pureblood heritage, and to that end, I should think she would retain the "posh" accent Azi describes.

In school, one or two of my professors always referred to this accent as "Received Standard British," although I think it is also referred to as "Received Pronunciation." It is supposed to be free from any "inflections" that might give away the speaker's origins.

azi - Feb 8, 2009 12:04 pm (#431 of 444)

I agree with Soli. Purebloods who are proud of their heritage would not want to appear as if they have anything in common with people lower down, and accents are a massive part of how you are viewed by other people. You hear someone speak and you instantly make assumptions about what they are like based on their accent.

Also, the way Bella talks in the books is not a Cockney accent in any shape or form. JKR likes to write accents and she didn't for Bella. That suggests to me she speaks 'standard' British with no particular inflection. In DH I found it funny when Harry etc. were taken to Malfoy Manor and Narcissa, Lucius and Bella all said 'What is this?' when asking what's going on. To me this shows a similar level of upbringing (and accent) and it's definitely not a phrase that would be used by anyone with a more common accent. It has an old-fashioned twinge to it, if that makes sense?

I've vaguely heard of Received Standard British. I had a friend in school whose mother insisted on elocution (sp?) lessons, and you couldn't tell where she was from. I'd be surprised if the Black's didn't have elocution lessons themselves.

Solitaire - Feb 8, 2009 12:19 pm (#432 of 444)

Remember what Henry Higgins said in My Fair Lady:

An Englishman's way of speaking absolutely classifies him,

The moment he talks he makes some other Englishman despise him.

wynnleaf - Feb 8, 2009 1:40 pm (#433 of 444)

Remember what Henry Higgins said in My Fair Lady: (Solitaire)

An Englishman's way of speaking absolutely classifies him, The moment he talks he makes some other Englishman despise him.

As I understand it from my British friends, accent is still very indicative of background and class still matters a great deal in social acceptance.

What we don't know is the extent that Muggle social classes are similar to wizarding social classes. As one Brit friend commented to me, the Malfoys actually seem a lot more nouveau riche, because they make such a big deal out of being more wealthy. She told me that a phrase used in Britain about true aristocracy is "The people who matter don't mind, and the people who mind don't matter." The Malfoys mind too much.

Anyway, we don't know how much regional or class social cues and accents are the same, or evoke the same feelings, that they do in real life Britain.

For instance, I recall that some people from Britain said that they knew early on Snape must be working class, because of his spitting in public during the PS Quidditch game. Apparently, you wouldn't see an upper class person do that. But maybe such things don't matter in the WW.

So for accents, maybe an accent that would in real life Britain indicate a high social class or a working class, doesn't do the same thing in the WW.

me and my shadow 813 - Feb 8, 2009 1:52 pm (#434 of 444)

I definitely see the Blacks as the "old money lockjaw" cliché of, say, the polo crowd. Isn't it a running joke that "gentlemen" never have any money? I'm thinking of The Importance of Being Earnest, the film (I am such a cliché myself -- Generation X: why read the book when you can watch the movie?) These well-bred upper-crusty men of Leisure are broke! The #12 GP certainly seems more in line with this than Malfoy Manor and the white peacock

There is definitely something to be said about Bella holding on to her eloquent speech in order to set herself apart from the rest of DEs, as she is so obsessed with being Vold's most devoted, most loyal, most cherished, most everything.

Solitaire - Feb 8, 2009 2:01 pm (#435 of 444)

I agree that they seem to be ostentatious in a way that indicates "new money." But the Lexicon says the following: The Malfoy family is an old and aristocratic wizarding family. They live in Malfoy Manor, a large, ornate house which has been in the family for generations. The Malfoys are extremely wealthy.

That sounds like they have been around for a while.

wynnleaf - Feb 9, 2009 6:46 am (#436 of 444)

But the Lexicon says the following: The Malfoy family is an old and aristocratic wizarding family. They live in Malfoy Manor, a large, ornate house which has been in the family for generations. The Malfoys are extremely wealthy. (Solitaire and The Lexicon)

Yes, I know. What I don't know is the exact quotes where that info comes from, so I'm not sure if we're told it by a completely reliable source (like Dumbledore, for instance) or whether their wealth and position are only a few generations old and they only put up the front. You might recall some character (can't recall who), saying that the old pureblood families weren't really pureblood at all, but they just present that front and cover-up the fact that they, like everyone else, actually have Muggles in their background. That being the case, I'm not sure that we know for dead certain that the Malfoys are such an old and prestigious family.

Anybody know where that info comes from?

Solitaire - Feb 9, 2009 10:23 am (#437 of 444)

There was some old Malfoy (Brutus?) mentioned in Beedle, who seems to go farther back than Abraxas, which makes me believe that they had been around a while. You're certainly entitled to differ, however.

Ron was the one who said that most old pureblood families had to marry with Muggle-borns, or they'd have died out. Personally, I see the Black and Malfoy tribes as those who intermarried a bit ... which resulted in people like Walburga and Bella, both of whom sound a bit unbalanced, to me.

wynnleaf - Feb 9, 2009 1:03 pm (#438 of 444)

Argh! Intermarriage does help explain the Blacks having more than their fair share of people who are pretty wacko. I'm thinking of Mrs. Black as well. And all that stuff with the house elf heads on the wall. The Malfoys aren't perhaps so obviously crazy like that. We don't see it in Lucius or Draco anyway.

Was Bella insane before Azkaban, do you think? I feel she was, based on her going after the Longbottoms even after LV was gone and the extreme torture she used. Most of the DEs were running for cover by then, at least it sounds like it to me.

legolas returns - Feb 9, 2009 1:07 pm (#439 of 444)

Didn't Dumbledore say at one point that many of Voldemort's supporters were almost as bad as him. I think Bellatrix was one of those supporters a few knuts short of a Galleon .

me and my shadow 813 - Feb 9, 2009 1:35 pm (#440 of 444)

Argh! Intermarriage does help explain the Blacks having more than their fair share of people who are pretty wacko.

Yeah, I love that line DD had about the Gaunts' inbreeding and the *undesirable traits* of too similar DNA ... could apply to the Blacks.

PeskyPixie - Feb 10, 2009 8:45 am (#441 of 444)

Pesky, look at you stirring up that can of worms you told me about?

Yes, MEAMS, I have been known to do that.

JKR does write in accents, so I don't get the impression that Bella has a Cockney accent. From how she is described she seems to be a beautiful woman who knows her status in society, but also happens to be as 'mad as a hatter'. On the Cast thread someone brought up the argument that perhaps after mixing with lowlifes for so long she has taken on their characteristics. I don't believe this is the case, based on the scene in Malfoy Manor.

me and my shadow 813 - Feb 10, 2009 12:35 pm (#442 of 444)

I brought it up, mainly because I love Helena's *over the top* depiction of Bella. But as far as the books go it's basically film contamination, I'd agree, because Bella's "speech" is not written in the same way as, say, the Carrows or Hagrid.

Re: Malfoy Manor, I'd agree with Solitaire that although they are, um, a bit tacky... Lucius’ lineage, as well as Narcissa's, seems to be "old wizard" and not nouveau riche. Coulda fooled me!

legolas returns - Feb 10, 2009 12:45 pm (#443 of 444)

Bella is from old money and old family. She would be well spoken with received pronunciation (Queens English) and she would not pick up a Cockney accent because that would be way to common.

kingdolohov - Feb 14, 2009 3:45 pm (#444 of 444)

Yeah, I love that line DD had about the Gaunts' inbreeding and the *undesirable traits* of too similar DNA ... could apply to the Blacks.

Or the Carrows.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Sponsored content

Bellatrix Lestrange

Bellatrix Lestrange

Bellatrix Lestrange (posts #1 to #50)

Bellatrix Lestrange (posts #51 to #100)

Bellatrix Lestrange (posts #101 to #150)

Bellatrix Lestrange (posts #151 to #200)

Bellatrix Lestrange (posts #201 to #250)

Bellatrix Lestrange (posts #251 to #300)

Bellatrix Lestrange (posts #301 to #350)

Bellatrix Lestrange (posts #351 to #400)

Bellatrix Lestrange (posts #401 to #444)

Re: Bellatrix Lestrange