*nods at fox's answer*

Good point, I hadn't thought about that!

But remember we always have choices. I think that once he discovered he was Slytherine's heir, found the chamber adn realized the power he could command, he became intoxiated with power-lust and a driving desire to use this to take revenge on the muggles that hurt him so young. As he sought out Dark Art knowledge after Hogwarts, he "realized" that (in his mind) there was "no good or evil, only power and those to weak to take it." This became a powerful motivating force that drew his followers like a moth to flame. They saw his intentions aligning with their "pure blood" vs "mud blood" war being waged by Tom (I think he actually used this as a lure rather than an actual goal of his) and drove those under him to greater deeds of violence that could propel him to power in the wizarding world. He also sought to perfexct the Dark Arts until he defeated death itself.

-K-

Actually, I believe the reason Tom Riddle turned to the Dark Arts was because he wanted to attain immortality. Conventional and less...contriversal magic does not teach one how to become an immortal, save the Philosopher's Stone, and to gain immortality is quite widely frowned upon. There is a branch of the Dark Arts which focuses on immortality, I believe...called Necromancy, and it is quite powerful, and probably much easier to master than tracking down the Philosopher's Stone--at least at the time Tom Riddle was studying magic.

The Dark Arts has always been seducive to those who wanted to attain their goals of greed or power. Tom Riddle was one of them.

I think one of the scariest things about human beings is how quickly we turn to evil. I'm sure any of us could become murderers, and power hungry, if we were put in the right situations. Probably you-know-who studied the dark arts a bit too deeply, had his first taste of power, and decided he could get more of it by killing than by performing services for hogwarts.

"I agree with Backslash. And I think that he could've been Dark the whole time, and doing "good deads" so he wouldn't attract attention to himself. That way he could make people believe he was just another student, and not someone Dumbledore and the other Professors had to keep an eye on. What better cover for being Dark than playing up to people you want to hurt?"

I don't know about his being "dark" for his entire life. When would he have started? At birth? When he was 5 or so? Surely there was good in him when he was in school, and even now, though he is corrupted and power-hungry.

No homework?

* looks up at kool-mo-dee*

If there is homework it will be given at the end of the lesson. This lesson has just started, so just sit down and start taking some notes instead. It is really interesting!

Well I thing that he was interested in the Dark Arts because of what happened to his mother, and all.

I guess it's the Chicken vs Egg conundrum. I just don't see a school age Tom saying to himself "I want to be immortal and the Dark Arts might get me there." However I do see the same Tom finding the chamber and getting an introduction to true Dark Arts through exploring it and the Basilisk, realizing the power that comes with the Dark Arts and finally realizing that he can not only have power - but have power forever if he realized immortality.

So what came first the hunger for Power or the lust for Immortality?

-K-

i think that voldemort turned evil because of his father. his dad let because his wife was a witch. therefor i think that voldemort learned to hate muggles because of that.

No it is because his father is a muggle. So he killed his mom and his dad. Because his mom married a muggle and she was a witch. So he killed his mom and he killed his dad because he was a muggle.

What Treamayne says makes a lot of sense to me. We do have choices in life. I believe that Tom Riddle was just angry (and depressed?) enough that when opportunities like the Chamber of Secrets presented themselves he was tempted to take advantage of them for evil purposes. I also agree that people are not "born evil." Tom Riddle nay have had a predisposition for darker thoughts and feelings, but he was also definitely a product of his circumstances.

And kool-mo-dee, I don't think that's correct...didn't Tom Riddle's mother die while giving birth to him? The people he killed were his father and his father's parents (I'm pretty sure).

"Wow... I'm so impressed by some of your arguments. I'm happy to see so many of you really thinking in this class. It sounds like we fundamentally agree that there were a variety of contributing factors to Riddle's descent into the Dark Arts. Riddle was acting out of revenge against the people he blamed for his sad and lonely childhood... Muggles. He was acting out of power-hunger and a desire to have control over the Wizarding World. He was also acting out of a desire to attain immortality, an unnatural act that is almost unattainable except through the use of the Dark Arts."

"Treamayne, you bring up an excellent point. Five points for Hufflepuff. Riddle may have been Slytherins heir, and he may have had some dark leanings due to that fact, but it was his own choice to follow that path. It was his own doing that caused him to become the "Dark Lord."

"Something that I'd like for you all to keep in mind is that the Dark Arts have an effect beyond that which is intended. They are "bad" not only because they are socially, morally, and legally reprehensible, but also because they leave a mark. Dark magic calls out to dark magic, causing what Muggles might term "addiction." The more one uses Dark magics, the more magic they user wants to use. And use of Dark magic changes a person. It stains the soul in a way."

"In other words, once you start to use it, you have to keep using it and use more and more and more?" Ashlie asked. "beisdes, I don't necessarily think Salazar Slytherin was Dark."

"Exactly, Ashlie. It is VERY easy to fall into a pattern of Dark magic once you started, which is one of the reasons Hogwarts teaches Defense, but very seldom will teach Dark spells. Other schools do... Durmstrang, for example."

"About Salazar Slytherin, you make another good point. Just because he had specific prejudices against Muggle-born wizards and was very powerful, does not mean that he was Dark. His association with the Chamber of Secrets also does not mean he was Dark."

Peony raised her hand. "In which case, the CoS does not make Salazar Slytherin bad, but what about basilisks? They seem to have no redeeming attributes at all, and most people connect them and those around them, as dark."

"But wouldn't that be because that mostly basilisks are bred and raised by dark wizards, and taught to be evil?"

Isn't there a difference between magical creatures and wizards? Creatures must obey the call of wielders of dark magic, but wizards must actually choose to use the dark arts.

yeah i agree with her the creatures don't deside for themselfs they have to obey their masters even if their masters are evil most creatures don't know the difference.

Maybe dark creatures are just dark because of their nature. Basilisks, for example, are considered dark because they kill people with one look in the eye. Maybe it's what they need to survive, so you can't say that they're evil. "Dark" is a word that I believe isn't defined very well at all. It can mean a variety of things.

Well, you must also remember that in the case of the Basilisk (and some other Dark Creatures) they were bred by Dark Wizards to be what they are. Their entire existance is due to the Dark Arts. Now, that said, there are two ways to look at this information:

1 They had no control of their own developement and therefore no choice in their own nature, meaning they are not truely Dark since they made no choice to be so. They merely act on those instincts they are born with and have no choice but to follow.

2. They were created by Dark Wizards to be Dark creatures adn although they had no choice in the matter they cannot be other than Dark since their entire existance depends on it. A Basilisk is not a Basilisk if it did not kill with a glance, have a potente venom and hunt prey. Sure, it's no tth ecreature's fualt, but that doesn't make it any less Dark and dangerous, or by make up alone they can never be nought but Dark Creatures.

As for S. Slytherine - this may make me unpopular, but IMO he may very well have descended into the Dark Arts himself. Looking strictly at circumstantial evidence (since it's all we have) his relations to peers fractured and broke, he became moody and mean, created teh chamber and bred a Basilisk ot dwell there. He never (that we know) sought the elimination of Mudbloods, but he definitely wanted their exclusion at Hogwarts and seemed willing to go to great lengths to achieve it. Though I doubt he was always a Dark Wizard, I do believe it is possible that he began that descent while leaving Hogwarts and either recovered or not after having left, since we have no further accounts of him after his life at Hogwarts.


-K-

We know, since Salazar was once best friends with Godric Gryffindor, that he was not always dark. Maybe he was embittered by the quarrel over ideology with the others, and explored the dark arts then. Unlike the Basilisk, he does seem to have had redeeming qualities. Before he was completley dark, he was probably very intelligent and fun to be around. Unfortunatley, we don't have any evidence on where his hatred of muggle-borns came from, and why it twisted his mind so much that he fell into the dark arts.

he never killed his mother

I'm guessing you are refering to Tom Riddle. You would eb correct, his mother died giving birth - after leaving Hogwarts he looked up the father that abandonded him and took revenge.

-K-