Harry Potter: Character Analysis

I should have put selflessness too. Although loyalty goes along the same lines. He'll put others first in every situation.

While Dudley, Harry, and Petunia would never be close, I agree that with those two at least, Harry would've been able to move past his hard feelings for them and to develop a better relationship with them. I don't think that would ever be possible with Vernon, at least not to the same extent. Harry understands that Petunia did love Lily, and that Dudley was mean because of his parents example, but where is Vernon's excuse. He was always the worst to Harry, and while Harry could certainly forgive Vernon, I don't see Vernon as the type to be able to move past his hatred and cowardice of the wizarding world.
I do wish we'd had a glimpse of how the Dursleys got on in their safe house! I can see him having some contact with Petunia and Dudley later on - not a lot, but perhaps a conversation or two and the odd Christmas card. I hope Dudley turned out OK in the end.

I do wish we'd had a glimpse of how the Dursleys got on in their safe house! I can see him having some contact with Petunia and Dudley later on - not a lot, but perhaps a conversation or two and the odd Christmas card. I hope Dudley turned out OK in the end.

I really wish we could've seen Vernon, Dedalus and Hestia. That must have been a riot! :lol: I think Dudley might have asked them for information at times. The "safe house" Dedalus spoke of was probably a wizarding house, right? If so, there was no television and Dudley might actually have learned human discourse!

While Dudley, Harry, and Petunia would never be close, I agree that with those two at least, Harry would've been able to move past his hard feelings for them and to develop a better relationship with them. I don't think that would ever be possible with Vernon, at least not to the same extent. Harry understands that Petunia did love Lily, and that Dudley was mean because of his parents example, but where is Vernon's excuse. He was always the worst to Harry, and while Harry could certainly forgive Vernon, I don't see Vernon as the type to be able to move past his hatred and cowardice of the wizarding world.

I agree. I have a feeling that Harry did get in touch with Aunt Petunia and Dudley, and assuming that he did, I wonder how Uncle Vernon would react to that. It would take a near miracle for him to set aside his differences with Harry, but I can see his wife and son being civilized to each other and even getting introduced to Harry's family. Harry may have attempted to patch things up with Uncle Vernon, after all, he is very compassionate and forgiving, but the latter may shove him aside and let their differences come in the way.

After Dudley's miraculous turnaound, maybe there was some hope for Harry to at least exchange gifts with the Dursleys. And maybe they could give him something more than a tissue or paperclip. :rotfl:

I would have loved to have seen some scenes of the Dursleys at the safe house.

Planning? Harry ever planned something beforehand and thought of all possibilities? Where was that in the book, must have missed that. :p

Planning? Harry ever planned something beforehand and thought of all possibilities? Where was that in the book, must have missed that. :p

I think he planned Gringotts and the Ministry - and also I think he planned the DOM trip in OOTP - or was that Luna?

I also thought Harry's planning was not just there. He was great in everything but I felt Ron and Hermione were better than him in planning. That was one thing I did not vote for.

I quite agree with everyone who thinks that planning is not one of Harry's strengths. He couldn't schedule his homework and learning for his exams and he was totally headless and disorganised during the Triwizard Tournament. He usually turns to Hermione when it comes to organisation. Harry's strength would be intuition and making decisions on the spur of the moment.

I think Harry is loyal, but somehow I don't count it to his greatest strengths. Maybe because Dumbledore took care so much of him doing what he did for own motivations too. Or maybe because he's just so awesome that this still great characteristic of him look slightly pallid against others I'd rate higher like his determination, quick thinking, compassion and bravery. :lol:

I think Harry is loyal, but somehow I don't count it to his greatest strengths. Maybe because Dumbledore took care so much of him doing what he did for own motivations too. Or maybe because he's just so awesome that this still great characteristic of him look slightly pallid against others I'd rate higher like his determination, quick thinking, compassion and bravery. :lol:


I wouldn't vote loyalty, because for me more of the story is about people being loyal to Harry, rather than the other way around. Ron and Hermione sticking with him, Neville telling him they will keep fighting no matter what, Sirius running off to the MoM, Dobby dying to rescue Harry, etc. It's not that Harry isn't loyal, it is that this is the conspicuously amazing trait of other characters.

I voted for determination, compassion, and bravery as his biggest strengths.

I quite agree with everyone who thinks that planning is not one of Harry's strengths. He couldn't schedule his homework and learning for his exams and he was totally headless and disorganised during the Triwizard Tournament. He usually turns to Hermione when it comes to organisation. Harry's strength would be intuition and making decisions on the spur of the moment.

Didn't Harry plan out their adventures at the Ministry and Gringotts? I'm sure Ron and Hermione had their share of input but I was under the impression that Harry might be the brains behind the operation.

Didn't Harry plan out their adventures at the Ministry and Gringotts? I'm sure Ron and Hermione had their share of input but I was under the impression that Harry might be the brains behind the operation.

See, I got the impression that Harry came up with the idea or rather said that it had to be done and that Hermione contributed the working parts to the plan (observation, Fred and George's products, Polyjuice Potion etc.) All in all, they had an immense amount of luck, since the plan itself was everything but well thought-out. He asked Griphook to get them into Gringotts and so most of the planning was out of the trio's hands.

I think Harry is very impulsive and has more brawn then brains (I don't mean that in a bad way). He acts on what he is feeling, on the spur of the moment. He is quite often led by his emotions and his heart. You could say that usually he doesn't have time to think about the consequences of his actions. He is usually right in what he is thinking, but not always takes the right (or easiest) way to do something. Hermione and occasionally Ron are more practical IMO. Especially Hermione uses her brains, this often leads to her over thinking things, but she hardly ever forgets to consider the dangers attached to a plan.

I'm sure he'll improve on his planning abilities...he does become Head of the Auror Dept, and to control such an organization definitely requires a lot of forethought and planning.

I would have loved to have seen some scenes of the Dursleys at the safe house.
Has no one ever written fanfic about this? Jo could provide a few short stories as special treats for us too! Perhaps she could auction off more mini-books for charity?I think Harry is very impulsive and has more brawn then brains (I don't mean that in a bad way). He acts on what he is feeling, on the spur of the moment. He is quite often led by his emotions and his heart. You could say that usually he doesn't have time to think about the consequences of his actions. He is usually right in what he is thinking, but not always takes the right (or easiest) way to do something. Hermione and occasionally Ron are more practical IMO. Especially Hermione uses her brains, this often leads to her over thinking things, but she hardly ever forgets to consider the dangers attached to a plan.
Yes, but I do think Harry grew and changed towards the end of the series. In DH he took the time required to plan the raid on Gringotts, for example, and made a well-thought out decision not to pursue the Elder Wand. And in HBP, Harry was able to put aside his anger about Snape betraying his parents, and concentrate on the job in hand - the Horcrux hunt with Dumbledore.

originally posted by anabel
Yes, but I do think Harry grew and changed towards the end of the series. In DH he took the time required to plan the raid on Gringotts, for example, and made a well-thought out decision not to pursue the Elder Wand. And in HBP, Harry was able to put aside his anger about Snape betraying his parents, and concentrate on the job in hand - the Horcrux hunt with Dumbledore.

I agree. Before DH, I would never have said planning. I still wouldn't, I think it's more Hermione and Ron's strengths, but Harry has improved in that area. He was acting less implusively (for the most part) and he sat down and thought many things out.

originally posted by ComicBookWorm
After Dudley's miraculous turnaound, maybe there was some hope for Harry to at least exchange gifts with the Dursleys. And maybe they could give him something more than a tissue or paperclip

Sure! Petunia sent Lily a vase, why not send Harry something better then a tissue?

See, I got the impression that Harry came up with the idea or rather said that it had to be done and that Hermione contributed the working parts to the plan (observation, Fred and George's products, Polyjuice Potion etc.) All in all, they had an immense amount of luck, since the plan itself was everything but well thought-out. He asked Griphook to get them into Gringotts and so most of the planning was out of the trio's hands.

Ah yes, I tend to forget that Griphook was the actual mastermind behind the Gringotts affair plus the fact that luck really played on their side. However, Harry's planning abilities come a lot from his impulsive nature - he doesn't plan out things but follows his instincts, which, I think, falls under his planning abilities.

Yes, but I do think Harry grew and changed towards the end of the series. In DH he took the time required to plan the raid on Gringotts, for example, and made a well-thought out decision not to pursue the Elder Wand. And in HBP, Harry was able to put aside his anger about Snape betraying his parents, and concentrate on the job in hand - the Horcrux hunt with Dumbledore.

I agree. Harry had definitely made mistakes in the past due to his impulsive nature, but HBP and DH truly showed that his instincts are not always too far off the mark - his idea about Malfoy planning something sinister in HBP, his decision to let Voldemort take possession of the Elder Wand etc are credits to his thinking ability.

I agree. Before DH, I would never have said planning. I still wouldn't, I think it's more Hermione and Ron's strengths, but Harry has improved in that area. He was acting less implusively (for the most part) and he sat down and thought many things out.


Well I agree that he improved a lot, even on the planning. Harry had to become less impulsive because he had three lives to protect doing the horcrux hunt. I just don't think planning is of his main strengths. Their plans to retrieve the horcruxes were mainly a group effort and Harry contributed of course.

I wouldn't vote loyalty, because for me more of the story is about people being loyal to Harry, rather than the other way around. Ron and Hermione sticking with him, Neville telling him they will keep fighting no matter what, Sirius running off to the MoM, Dobby dying to rescue Harry, etc. It's not that Harry isn't loyal, it is that this is the conspicuously amazing trait of other characters.

I voted for determination, compassion, and bravery as his biggest strengths.

I agree, the series did focus mostly on *** loyalty of others to Harry. However, I would say that Harry exhibited quite a bit of loyaty. His words after the 7 Potters raid when he refused to believe anyone had been disloyal showed his profound trust and loyalty to those working with him. Harry remained loyal to his friends although it took quite a bit to do so at times when others were remarking on their flaws. While the series was written so as to make it 'Harry's cause', in truth, it was 'the good cause' that Harry together with others were working toward. Harry did remain true to that purpose - even when it meant his own death. He also remained loyal to the memory of his parents, his godfather, Remus, Fred, Dobby, Moody, Cedric and all of the others who died during the trials of war and/or Voldemort's attempts. He did it both on a personal and general basis, personally unwilling to hear anything bad about any of them without anger (except from himself) and on a general basis in not forgetting any of them over the years - or shorter time span depending when they died - in using their memory to fuel and lend courage to his dangerous activities. He also did that with the living who were close to him - in more personal terms.

So I would say that canon allowed us to find loyalty in Harry. :)

So I would say that canon allowed us to find loyalty in Harry. I definitely agree on this. But as I said earlier, while I believe he has a good measure of loyalty I wouldn't vote for it here - it's just not one of his greatest strength in my opinion. Different said some others seem to be just stronger.
But then he's a hero, and I think he really is among all his normal 'boy from next door' behaviour, fears and fun moments. He should have some really powerful characteristics and some following close and still being strong, but maybe not as powerful as others. Given from the examples in the poll I would count loyalty to the latter.

I voted for loyalty because Harry was extremely loyal to Dumbledore and to his friends. I did not vote for planning because we don't see a lot of evidence of Harry planning in the first six books. He rushed off to the Ministry to rescue Sirius with absolutely no idea how to actually do it, for example. His planning in the last book was something new for him, in my opinion.

I love Harry to death, but since I don't "gush", I didn't vote for that one :lol:.

I voted for loyalty because Harry was extremely loyal to Dumbledore and to his friends. I did not vote for planning because we don't see a lot of evidence of Harry planning in the first six books. He rushed off to the Ministry to rescue Sirius with absolutely no idea how to actually do it, for example. His planning in the last book was something new for him, in my opinion.

I love Harry to death, but since I don't "gush", I didn't vote for that one :lol:.

I agree, Harry was extremely loyal to Dumbledore, even after declaring that he felt Dumbledore had betrayed him (following the memories) he remained true to the purpose. But I do not think it was a blind faith type of loyalty that kept Harry loyal in the end (although there were strains of that at various points of the series).

More important than Dumbledore betraying the faith and trust Harry had placed in him, Harry had developed that same faith and trust - that same sense of loyalty - to many others. This included, Molly, Arthur, Kingsley, Ron, Neville, Hermione and many more. It was not Dumbledore himself that was at the forefornt of Harry's mind, but rather the more recent deaths of others with whom he felt that same sense of loyalty, Remus, Fred and Tonks. They represented a line of others who had fallen, also recipients of Harry's loyalty (Sirius, Dumbledore himself, Colin, Cedric, etc). Harry's loyalty to all of those people, imo, drove him to the decision that those who reciprocated his feelings (in any degree) would continue to lay down their lives for the cause and in reality, for him, because only Harry had the power to stop it.

So to me, loyalty was actually one of the most profound attributes associated with Harry. Note that loyalty has elements of good faith, love, hope, trust compassion, and selflessness - all underlying the heavy sense of duty that loyalty demands. The beauty of Harry's loyalty, imo, was that the underlying elements were very positive and very strong in his case, which cannot be said for all of those who showed loyalty, imo. (i.e. what appears to be loyalty but is in reality 'self dealing, mainly for one's own interests' can be built on bad faith, hate, selfishness, lack of trust and hopelessness or a mixture of some of these and some of the foregoing attributes.)

Personally, IMO, Harry has great loyalty. He has always stuck by his friends no matter what happens, sure he's yelled at them a few times, but that's normal, it makes their friendship more real. Also through his great loyalty, no matter the situation, he, himself has a great broad of friends that are willing to fight for and with him to the very end, even after they thought Harry was dead. So in that case, yes, to me, loyalty is one of his greatest characteristic. :D

Is this poll new? How come I hadn't noticed before? :hmm: Anyway, I voted for determination, quick thinking (especially from OotP onwards) and, of course, bravery, because I have gathered the impression that these things have been of greatest help to him throughout the years.

You know what I just realised, there is no "Heart" or "Love" option in there? I know compassion can be put down to Love, but you don't have to have love for a person in order to have compassion. :shrug:

.... And yes, I ticked all of them :D I'm a mother what can I say. :D

The more I think about it, the more I recognize Harry's character to be a combination of those of his parents.

Harry bravely, albeit recklessly entered the room with the 3 headed creature; the chamber, the DOM, Gringotts, threw snowballs at Draco while under the invisibility cloak, rounded off with his friends against Draco and his mates (bascially making enemies), used the Sectumsempra with no knowledge of what it was, did the same in potions class, talked back to his professor, broke many rules (i.e., sneaking off to Hogsmeade), used the Marauder's map, hexed his professor giving more credence to another professor who he still was unsure about in terms of colluding with a possible murderer, played rough in Quidditch, snuck into his professor's pensieve, pranked his friends, marched up and kissed Ginny in a room full of shocked bystanders, impertinently and inappropriately told off, nay, bullied an adult, pretty much because he believed her to be a Death Eater and deserving of it (Narcissa), a flair for impetuousness, and became a bit arrogant at times with his friends and others, ignoring their words of wisdom and banking on his instinct instead. Would Lily do any of that or exhibit those characteristics strongly? Based on her character, not likely. Would James? Assuredly. Which also makes sense of Harry's patronus being a Stag.

Harry also had a shy element to his character, at times was cautious - in an out of character sense, at times idealistic, and had moments of being a bit overly introspective - things I would associate with his mum and not his father. More in line with his disposition rather than behavior and attitudes.

Then he had characteristics which, based on what we know reflected both of them, loving, a kindness and compassion for people - beyond those that one normally might, going the extra mile for people, risking their lives for others, a sense of humor, a sense of the ridiculous, a strong sense of goodness (as opposed to an interest in the dark arts), a desire to fight for what was right, a deep love for close friends, excelling in certain academia, a wont to have infrequent bouts of righteous anger, bravery, a trusting nature and likely more I cannot recall at the moment.

In short, :lol:, Harry's character reflected a strong similarity to what we know of his parent's characters. That said, I do believe that Harry put his own twist on some of those characteristics which made him unique...if still wholly recognizable as their son.

I was mad at Jo for needing to "dirty" up all the characters in the last book--I guess, to make them seem more rounded. So,I didn't like either Dumbledore's failings or Remus's. They felt contrived and forced.

I liked Dumbledore's failings mainly because before book7 I thought him extremely manipulative but after knowing he was involved in a disastrous love affair and spent the rest of his life making up for those mistakes raised him a bit in my estimation and made me understand him a bit better.

What I could not understand was Harry's sudden shouting match with Remus. Since when was Harry so open about giving his opinions to Remus and yelling at him anyway?

And I also felt that Remus should have dropped in on Harry, learning where he lived from Dumbledore, if he did not know it already in the light of James supporting Remus, before he died.

It would have made Harry so happy and made his wish of someone coming for him true.

Perhaps Harry would have even got out of the cupboard under the stairs sooner.

I liked Dumbledore's failings mainly because before book7 I thought him extremely manipulative but after knowing he was involved in a disastrous love affair and spent the rest of his life making up for those mistakes raised him a bit in my estimation and made me understand him a bit better.

What I could not understand was Harry's sudden shouting match with Remus. Since when was Harry so open about giving his opinions to Remus and yelling at him anyway?

And I also felt that Remus should have dropped in on Harry, learning where he lived from Dumbledore, if he did not know it already in the light of James supporting Remus, before he died.

It would have made Harry so happy and made his wish of someone coming for him true.

Perhaps Harry would have even got out of the cupboard under the stairs sooner.

I don't think Remus knew where Harry was. I don't think anyone knew except McGonagall and Dumbledore and I think they kept it that way precisely so that Harry would not learn of his birthright before 11 years old. I am sure Remus asked about him immediately after the Potter's were killed. Dumbledore likely assured him Harry was safe and that he was ensuring he stayed that way. Remus always trusted Dumbledore so he would not have defied him by searching for Harry on his own I don't think.

One of the reasons JKR made Harry and Remus have the shouting match was to help readers see that their relationship had grown closer - close enough for Harry to call him 'Remus' instead of Professor Lupin and also to feel comfortable enough to tell him off - much as he did Ron a little later at the camping scene. The two scenes were very similar in nature. She was also introducing Remus' furry little problem to be solved - helped along by Harry. Their relationship had not been well defined prior to that for most readers and thus it helped make it understandable for Remus to chose Harry as godfather (over say, Molly who he and Tonks were also close to) and for Harry to call him back in the reunion scene. The fight was to show Harry loved Remus and visa versa in their own way - odd way of showing it, but there you have it, killing 2 birds with one stone.

I was mad at Jo for needing to "dirty" up all the characters in the last book--I guess, to make them seem more rounded. So,I didn't like either Dumbledore's failings or Remus's. They felt contrived and forced.

Perhaps you are right. But I feel that Dumbledore and Remus both needed to be knocked off their pedestals, particularly Dumbledore, so that Harry could take over the leadership role that he was destined for. It's dreadfully hard to take over from someone who was perfect!

In DH we saw Remus come to ask if he could follow Harry as his leader, and Harry took over an adult role and gave Remus the hard truth that he needed to hear.

Perhaps you are right. But I feel that Dumbledore and Remus both needed to be knocked off their pedestals, particularly Dumbledore, so that Harry could take over the leadership role that he was destined for. It's dreadfully hard to take over from someone who was perfect!

In DH we saw Remus come to ask if he could follow Harry as his leader, and Harry took over an adult role and gave Remus the hard truth that he needed to hear.

Remus didn't ask to follow Harry and have him act as leader. On the contrary, he offered only his protection; he agreed that he would not attempt to find out what they were up to or interfere/help in any way.

And Harry's attitude sucked imo, even if his message was good. Harry admitted as much himself afterward. I respect your view, but that was no hard truth that Harry was profoundly bless with knowledge about, imo. Harry gave a simple truth that Remus, as an adult adopted and caused him to leave and continue to consider his situation (what else could he do?). But what Harry said was merely a drop of water in the sea of the situation. It was in no way as simple as abandoning one's child to the Death Eater regime that Harry spoke of - and Harry realized that, albeit after speaking. Hermione realized it while Harry was speaking. In the end Remus left his child to fight again and died; Remus giving his life for the cause, even if it meant leaving Teddy fatherless, was never the issue - just as it wasn't for Arthur. Rather it was get yourself together and lie in the bed you've made before you go on, but Harry didn't say that; it is what he wanted to say and even meant, but it is not what came out which is why Remus got upset - and Harry too - because he was putting it in terms of himself.

I hated the scene with Remus in the kitchen at Grimmaud Place. And, like CBW, I wasn't overly fond of the undoing of Dumbledore's role as impeccable aging wizard. I like my good wizards to end up like Gandalf. Once Dumbledore had died, there was really no problem in Harry assuming the leadership role in the quest to stop Voldemort. Really, it seems like overkill to trash the old man as a plot device.

I hated the scene with Remus in the kitchen at Grimmaud Place. And, like CBW, I wasn't overly fond of the undoing of Dumbledore's role as impeccable aging wizard. I like my good wizards to end up like Gandalf. Once Dumbledore had died, there was really no problem in Harry assuming the leadership role in the quest to stop Voldemort. Really, it seems like overkill to trash the old man as a plot device.

I agree with that, I too felt it was overkill to tear apart Dumbledore's character. I understand the 'everyone has flaws' theory, but couldn't they have just had him steal pumkin juice from the kitchens as a youngster?

In retrospect I really like the scene with Harry and Remus in the kitchen. Of course, since I dug both characters I was unwilling to consign either of them to perdition over the ordeal. Harry's attitude was too much and Remus was not handling his life well - but in the end, Harry and Hermione brought it up and Remus let it all out. But if you can't share the catastophe's of your life with those close to you, who can you share them with? Harry helped in his misguided way, but as his heart was in the right place, I don't infer he was in the wrong - we all help our friends best we can. Remus needed help at that point and didn't exactly walk away looking good either. :lol:

It was that scene that tipped me off that Remus was not going to make it to the last page of the book.

Harry, of course, was moved by his own father's example and we all knew from that moment on that Harry was going to be a great father to his own kids. "Parents... shouldn't leave their kids... unless they have to." I guess that said it all for me.

It was that scene that tipped me off that Remus was not going to make it to the last page of the book.

Harry, of course, was moved by his own father's example and we all knew from that moment on that Harry was going to be a great father to his own kids. "Parents... shouldn't leave their kids... unless they have to." I guess that said it all for me.

Yeah, but by the same token, James and Harry weren't werewolves...and harming their children against their will or inadvertently causing them devastating repercussions merely for loving them and 'being there' was something neither had to, or would have to, face.

Yeah, but by the same token, James and Harry weren't werewolves...and harming their children against their will or inadvertently causing them devastating repercussions merely for loving them and 'being there' was something neither had to, or would have to, face.

I know. That conversation is when I knew Remus wouldn't make it. His story is just so sad, so compelling. Harry was deeply affected by his death. Who wouldn't be?

I know. That conversation is when I knew Remus wouldn't make it. His story is just so sad, so compelling. Harry was deeply affected by his death. Who wouldn't be?

It is funny because, as you likely know, since OOTP I wanted that and I was convinced JKR wouldn't do it. I'm a huge werewolf fan and always hope they make it, but she gave Remus such a hard life. The thought crossed my mind that JKR might let him die and join his mates after the kitchen scene, and the godfather scene, but I refused to believe it. Then she did it and I threw my the book in the air, I couldn't believe it. I know it is sad for most readers, as it was for Harry, but I was celebrating. It was the only way for him to be truly happy. The resurrection scene was cool because in every post I wrote before hand I reiterated that I wanted Remus to die so he could be young, happy and healthy again...and she'd even included that in the story.

Harry, I don't think, ever felt that way, but seeing Remus in a happier state, surrounded by his loving friends would be the last vision he'd have of him - and Sirius and his parents (that we know of). I think eventually it would hit him that they were all in a very happy place together - finally.

It is funny because, as you likely know, since OOTP I wanted that and I was convinced JKR wouldn't do it. I'm a huge werewolf fan and always hope they make it, but she gave Remus such a hard life. The thought crossed my mind that JKR might let him die and join his mates after the kitchen scene, and the godfather scene, but I refused to believe it. Then she did it and I threw my the book in the air, I couldn't believe it. I know it is sad for most readers, as it was for Harry, but I was celebrating. It was the only way for him to be truly happy. The resurrection scene was cool because in every post I wrote before hand I reiterated that I wanted Remus to die so he could be young, happy and healthy again...and she'd even included that in the story.

Harry, I don't think, ever felt that way, but seeing Remus in a happier state, surrounded by his loving friends would be the last vision he'd have of him - and Sirius and his parents (that we know of). I think eventually it would hit him that they were all in a very happy place together - finally.

I hear you... His life was so darned hard, it was a blessing to see him finally happy and content. I think Harry sensed that in the forest, especially with Remus' death so fresh in his mind, and that made it easier for him to let Remus and Tonks go.

1. How do Harry's formative years with the Dursley's influence the person he is now? Would he be the same person if his parents had lived? If he had been sent to live with another wizarding family? If he had been sent to an orphanage like Tom Ridde?
I think his time with the Dursley's made him a stronger person, someone who was used to sadness and hardship. If his parents had lived, I imagine he would have been a lot less angry, although he probably wouldn't have had Voldemort chasing him down if his parents were alive. He would have felt a lot less lonely, too. He would have been happier and felt more supported. Had he been sent to an orphanage, I don't think he would have turned out like Voldemort, as something was seriously wrong with him, which dated back to Voldy's birth. Harry's mother died for him, and I think that would have helped him in his life regardless.

2. When do we first see evidence of Harry's "saving people" thing? Is this a strength or a flaw? What do you think of his final sacrifice?
I think it was in full swing by the time Harry was in his 2nd year when he went to save Ginny in the CoS. His saving complex turned out well in all times he used it, however it could have gone horribly wrong and multiple people could have died. His final sacrifice was necessary; had he not been ready to give his life, Voldemort could have taken control of the entire wizarding world.

3. Harry's natural curiosity was stifled by the Dursleys. "Don't ask questions!" but it comes out it full force once he gets to Hogwarts. How does this curiosity serve him through the books? Has he truly lost it after Dumbledore's death or will it return as he hunts for the horcruxes?
It definitely returned, as we saw from DH. I don't think I need to say much else.

4. What do you think are Harry's greatest strengths? What weaknesses did he overcome as the series progressed?
He is ambitious and brave; he is also compassionate. Sometimes all these can almost be faults. He doesn't always think things through and seldom plans; that's usually left up to Hermione. He tried to curb his tendency to jump into things after he felt guilty because of Sirius' death, and that control definitely served him well in later books.

5. How have each of the losses Harry has suffered helped to define who he is?
Each loss made him reconsider himself and his motivations. He tried to remember every moment with that person whom he lost and gain any knowledge he could from them.

6 Dumbledore tells him that his pure heart is what seperates him from Voldemort and his Death Eaters. What examples have we seen of this pure heart?
His sacrificing himself is enough evidence, I think.

7. What do you think of Harry's use of Unforgivables in DH?
It was a desperate time. I can't say I was disappointed, but I wasn't happy with it, either. I suppose I understood his motivations for it.

8. Why do you think Harry forgave Snape?
He finally saw Snape as confused and conflicted and scared; he finally saw him as human and a product of a life gone wrong. Because Harry's early life had also been tumultuous, I think he could finally identify with Snape. Also, Harry learned that Snape had loved Lily, who had in turn loved Harry, giving Harry a greater connection to Snape.

9. JKR tells us that he and Ron became Aurors and revolutionized the department? Do you think this was a good choice for him? What changes do you think he might have made?
I would have liked to have seen Harry as a teacher, but Auror is good too I guess :p He and Ron probably made it more proactive and difficult to join, because more ambition and desire would be recquired.

posted by WWB
I agree with that, I too felt it was overkill to tear apart Dumbledore's character. I understand the 'everyone has flaws' theory, but couldn't they have just had him steal pumkin juice from the kitchens as a youngster?

That would have been hilarious to read:lol:

Strangely I liked Dumbledore's flaws. Thay made him human imo and he was the man he became because of those flaws. I really, really loved that.

But Harry is different. He has no major flaws and imo he is a wonderful human being, and he has all the important virtues and values that are so admirable in a person.

Even before the backstory, Dumbledore came across as a little manipulative imo.

But Harry is kind, he is truly a leader because he is generous to his enemies -- he is able to nod stiffly at Draco and names his son after Snape.

Ron or even Hermione would have never been able to do that imo.

I honestly think him even better than his parents on almost every level...

Rereading DH, it struck me just how well Harry "knew" Voldemort. He knew him better than Dumbledore...or his Death Eaters...indeed, he knew Voldemort almost as well as Voldemort himself did. In part it was the soul-connection; but it was also his observation and the like, too. His ability to break into Voldemort's head and find out what he needed in DH was critical to the success of the horcrux mission.

Also, in the reread it struck me just how often Harry was thinking about Ginny. It was one of the few things that seemed to lift him up from the grim state he was in much of the book.

1. How do Harry's formative years with the Dursley's influence the person he is now? Would he be the same person if his parents had lived? If he had been sent to live with another wizarding family? If he had been sent to an orphanage like Tom Ridde?

Well, I don’t read HP for its psychological realism. ;) In real life, a child who experienced the amount of abuse that Harry does at the hands of the Dursleys would be deeply damaged emotionally. :( However, Rowling is writing a fairytale, so that accounts for what has been called Harry’s ‘non-Teflon’ soul – things don’t stick to him, they drop off! According to Rowling, Harry is just a very good person. Well, OK. But people aren't really born automatically good or bad, are they? What they do in life, the choices they make, determine what sort of a person they become. But Rowling is writing a fairytale, and in this fairytale scenario, she creates a hero who is naturally good, although with fairly believable flaws.

2. When do we first see evidence of Harry's "saving people" thing? Is this a strength or a flaw? What do you think of his final sacrifice?

First evidence is when he tries to save Neville from Draco’s bullying in Philosopher’s Stone. It’s definitely a strength, one of Harry’s more lovable qualities, and one which fits him to be a hero. :)

His willingness to sacrifice himself is deeply moving. However, I would have tremendous problems with it, morally, if I didn’t believe that Harry thought he was doing this so that Voldemort could be defeated. Otherwise his suicide walk through the Forest makes no sense, and is morally disturbing.

3. Harry's natural curiosity was stifled by the Dursleys. "Don't ask questions!" but it comes out it full force once he gets to Hogwarts. How does this curiosity serve him through the books? Has he truly lost it after Dumbledore's death or will it return as he hunts for the horcruxes?

This trait of Harry’s can’t be stamped out and will serve him well as an Auror.

4. What do you think are Harry's greatest strengths? What weaknesses did he overcome as the series progressed?

Harry’s greatest strengths are his courage and sense of justice.

His weaknesses: he is often rash, occasionally arrogant and sometimes lacks empathy, especially in his dealings with women! He is self-absorbed and insensitive around Cho when she is mourning Cedric: he himself is traumatized by Cedric’s death but cannot handle Cho’s feelings at all. But Cedric was her boyfriend, after all! We see this insensitivity surface again when Hermione accidentally breaks his wand in their getaway from Bathilda’s house in DH. Hermione is terribly upset about the wand’s destruction (and in blowing up the house she had actually enabled them to get away and save both their lives) and we can understand Harry being upset about the wand’s destruction … but he’s not exactly selfless in his reaction to her.

Harry, frankly, needs humility. Without it, he cannot be a great and good hero. I like to think that realising just how wrong he had been about Snape was a refining factor for Harry. This essential humbling is one factor, surely, that led him to honouring Snape by calling his second son after him.

He seems to be a mature, well-balanced man in the Epilogue, happily married with a family of his own. This is the fairytale ending for the good hero that Rowling wanted, and I think she pulls it off. :cool:

5. How have each of the losses Harry has suffered helped to define who he is?

- Family is tremendously important to Harry, because he was cruelly deprived of one. His losses make him yearn deeply for a family of his own.

- Because Rowling is writing a fairytale, she deprives her boy hero of all his substitute father figures, one by one, so that he can emerge through the refining fire of his losses as a true hero and prove himself worthy of his quest by battling the monster/dragon/his own personal nemesis ... Voldemort. It's a classic heroic quest.

- I said I don't read HP for its psychological realism, and that is true :p, but actually a more realistic element of Harry’s character is that he can sometimes be lacking in empathy. I do attribute this to the emotional wounding of his awful childhood. He sometimes detaches from people when they need him: in particular, he often detaches from women – Cho, Hermione – when he thinks they are making emotional demands on him. Ginny is an easy girlfriend for him to have because she doesn't demand much of him, she lets him go.

6 Dumbledore tells him that his pure heart is what seperates him from Voldemort and his Death Eaters. What examples have we seen of this pure heart?

Harry is purest of heart in his courage. He’s a brave kid, and he has a fierce sense of justice. We also see great purity of heart in his decision to face Voldemort and be killed.

7. What do you think of Harry's use of Unforgivables in DH?

Actually, I have no problem with it. I’d have been tempted to Crucio Amycus Carrow myself. :evil:

I do have a problem with Rowling setting up this whole thing about the Unforgivable Curses -- only Really Nasty Wizards use them, children! -- and then conveniently tossing the whole moral compass aside because her Gryffindors need to use them. :rolleyes:

Harry’s willingness to use Unforgivables seriously tarnishes his supposed ‘purity of heart’. :grumble:

But Rowling is not very consistent in her universe about magic and its moral uses.

8. Why do you think Harry forgave Snape?

Oh, please. Why wouldn’t he? ;)

Seriously: I think he got a wakeup call about his own blind spots when he viewed the Prince’s Tale.

9. JKR tells us that he and Ron became Aurors and revolutionized the department? Do you think this was a good choice for him? What changes do you think he might have made?

I think it’s a great career choice for Harry, as long as the messianic thing doesn’t go to his head, and as long as he gets some serious post-traumatic counselling first. ;)

:)

Out of curiosity, why do you think Harry would have needed some counseling? He had just defeated Voldemort, he had successfully escaped from the crowds of admirers (he never was comfortable in those situations, despite being uber-famous), and he was about to go rekindle his relationship with Ginny, who understood his nature better than anyone else out there. She'd probably serve as his counselor, helping him deal with the feelings from losing a lot of friends in the battle.

I would agree, however, that Harry wasn't at his best when dealing with the opposite gender. The twins book may have helped some, but I think that finding someone that matched him as well as Ginny was more important :).

Out of curiosity, why do you think Harry would have needed some counseling? He had just defeated Voldemort, he had successfully escaped from the crowds of admirers (he never was comfortable in those situations, despite being uber-famous), and he was about to go rekindle his relationship with Ginny, who understood his nature better than anyone else out there. She'd probably serve as his counselor, helping him deal with the feelings from losing a lot of friends in the battle.

In RL, one would definitely recommend it for Harry. Lousy childhood, and all those traumas. He was tortured by Voldemort and saw a classmate die in GoF. HIs godfather died in front of him in OotP, his mentor in HBP. DH was a toug year full of hardships and potentially traumatic incidents (like his best friend being tortured by a psychopath while he listened, locked in a dungeon), not to mention several deaths of people close to him....

Since it seems clear the Wizard World has not discovered this particular Muggle invention, I would guess Ginny sufficed...but the series is, after all, a fantasy. ;)

In RL, one would definitely recommend it for Harry. Lousy childhood, and all those traumas. He was tortured by Voldemort and saw a classmate die in GoF. HIs godfather died in front of him in OotP, his mentor in HBP. DH was a toug year full of hardships and potentially traumatic incidents (like his best friend being tortured by a psychopath while he listened, locked in a dungeon), not to mention several deaths of people close to him....

Since it seems clear the Wizard World has not discovered this particular Muggle invention, I would guess Ginny sufficed...but the series is, after all, a fantasy. ;)

Fair points all, and Ginny seemed like she'd be a good counselor in the muggle world :lol:

Actually that is a funny notion. I have never considered that all of the heroes over time might require therapy from Luke to Frodo to Susan...Peter and Siblings...all the way to Link :lol:. I figure if Batman can make it through all of these years without therapy, so can Harry. Heroes are tough like that.

Harry was an odd hero because in a way, he grew up in fairly normal (as opposed to fantastic) surroundings. The Potterverse wasn't all that strange because the wizard world had annexed all of the magical creatures. Apart from Hagrid, Remus, Fleur and Dobby, we really only got a pretty scant look at the magical creatures at all. Gwarp, Kreacher and Winky got a moment, but Harry didn't mix much in the underbelly where they lurked. Thus, the oddness in Harry's life seemed pretty much contained in the oddness of wizards which he quickly adjusted to. It may be because he did spend a year with magical parents and although he never really knew them, they would have impacted his life to some degree; not to mention being responsible for his genetic make up bestowing traits and attitudes upon him he did not know they possessed. Dumbledore led Harry about a lot as well and that too made his story distinct. In the end, based on the Epilogue, Harry seemed to have fit right into the world of magic, as odd as all of the other wizards (from a Muggle standpoint).

Harry in RL would have need huge amounts of therapy. Happily for me he is an imaginary character who came through with flying colours.:love:

He went through so much from being stuffed into a cupboard to seeing so many killed in front of his eyes, plus the burden of war and Voldemort living inside him because of which, he saw for a whole year, Voldemort's activities which could have hardly been pleasant.

For all that he comes through beautifully! Harry was a true Hero!!!

Since it seems clear the Wizard World has not discovered this particular Muggle invention, I would guess Ginny sufficed...but the series is, after all, a fantasy. ;)

You know what? I bet Hermione would be clued up about therapy. :) She'd research it thoroughly and then make suggestions to Harry about emotional closure. :lol: :)

Actually, that is a funny notion. I have never considered that all of the heroes over time might require therapy from Luke to Frodo to Susan...Peter and Siblings...all the way to Link :lol:. I figure if Batman can make it through all of these years without therapy, so can Harry. Heroes are tough like that.

Heh, I can't really see the traditional warrior-type hero, like Aragorn or Boromir, having therapy. :lol:

I like the warrior-type but my heart tends to belong to heroes like Frodo or Harry: the ordinary guy (or girl) who becomes extraordinary because of external circumstances and also, crucially, his (or her) gifts and willingness to enter the quest/act out of self-sacrifice. This type of hero never comes through the quest unscathed, which of course makes them endearing and human. If they survive, they are refined in some way.

In Rowling's fantasy set-up, however, Harry is pretty much unscathed. Of course this is not realistic, but she's not writing gritty kitchen-sink drama, is she? ;) She's writing a modern fairytale, and in the magical context she has created, Harry's particular strengths and flaws are believable. :)

Imo, Harry did turn out to be a bit fantastic in the end, imo. Harry's decision to name his son Albus-Severus still has me mystified - not entirely, but when you look at the basics: Albus deceived him - yet did apologize and did show Harry much love; Snape deceived him, but also treated him in disrepectful and cruel manner, imo, and did not apologize, but rather loathed him until his death. In the case of Snape, the naming was completely unrealistic and even disrespectful to Harry and his parents, imo, and the Albus naming, while somewhat more understandable, was still unrealistic, imo. Further explanation was necessary with respect to Harry's thought processes during the 19 year gap between the main story and the epilogue for me to personally understand. So imo, as it stands, Harry did enter into the realm of the 'fantastic hero' in the end - doing something that an average person of sound and ordinary reason, self-respect and reasonable sensibility would not do. In consequence, I find it difficult to respect Harry as an adult (unless I consider him a super fantastic-like character), although I thought the youthful Harry was a brilliantly depicted hero, just how he was.

Imo, Harry did turn out to be a bit fantastic in the end, imo. Harry's decision to name his son Albus-Severus still has me mystified - not entirely, but when you look at the basics: Albus deceived him - yet did apologize and did show Harry much love; Snape deceived him, but also treated him in disrepectful and cruel manner, imo, and did not apologize, but rather loathed him until his death. In the case of Snape, the naming was completely unrealistic and even disrespectful to Harry and his parents, imo, and the Albus naming, while somewhat more understandable, was still unrealistic, imo.

It's completely weird. :lol:

Of course I love the fact that Harry names his son after Severus ... which I suppose is Rowling's own grudging nod to Snape. ;)

But she needed to write more of Harry's internal processes, IMO. The emotional exhaustion he felt after the final battle - and what must have been hugely conflicted emotions in him regarding the final revelations from Dumbledore and Snape.

Further explanation was necessary with respect to Harry's thought processes during the 19 year gap between the main story and the epilogue for me to personally understand.

Completely agree. Rowling should have done a Tolkien and written much more after the final showdown. I'm not saying she should have carried on for another 100 pages, as Tolkien does, but the ending of DH really does feel very truncated to me. And it's all Messianic!SuperHero!Harry. Gah. I really don't see Harry that way. :)

posted by Pearl_Took
Completely agree. Rowling should have done a Tolkien and written much more after the final showdown. I'm not saying she should have carried on for another 100 pages, as Tolkien does, but the ending of DH really does feel very truncated to me. And it's all Messianic!SuperHero!Harry. Gah. I really don't see Harry that way.

But I think Jo meant it that way. Otherwise a boy who did not even know his parents middle names and was told they died in a car crash, and who was the personal house elf of the Dursleys for 10 years, suddenly is pitched into a world that is as different from the world he knows, and still remains normal is something hard to believe IMO.

There is magic, there is fame, and there is someone after his blood and from when he is 11 years old, Harry has been seeing death.

year 1 - Quirrell, year 2 - the basilsik and Ginny almost dead and Lockhart's memory gone, year 3 - having a murderer after him and fighting dementors who would suck off what little happiness he had, year 4 - Cedric's death and Volemort's ressurrection, year 5 - Sirius and the link to Voldemort where he sees a lot of Voldemort's actions that could hardly be pleasant, year 6 - Dumbledore's death and year 7 - knowing he is a horcrux and his own death and Voldemort's, not to mention the dead at the battles, Moody, Hedwig and so on.

Harry seems incredible when we see all this and find he is still normal. That would mean only one thing for me. His creator i.e., Jo wanted him that way.

Otherwise even therapy would not have helped IMO!:p

Completely agree. Rowling should have done a Tolkien and written much more after the final showdown. I'm not saying she should have carried on for another 100 pages, as Tolkien does, but the ending of DH really does feel very truncated to me. And it's all Messianic!SuperHero!Harry. Gah. I really don't see Harry that way. :)
Perhaps she will write it some day! I assume a lot happened to Harry in the 7 years between his ridding us of Voldemort and James Potter being born. Ginny would have a lot to do with that. And in that time he has to have mulled over all that has happened to him, and tried to make sense of it. In his years at Hogarts he didn't have a lot of opportunity to be introspective - there was such a lot happening.

Shakespeare said, "Some are born great, soma achieve greatness and some have greatness thrust upon them." I think Harry was in that 3rd category and from the moment Voldemort marked him as his equal, he was the Messianic figure destined to rescue the wizarding world from its worst evil. Not of his own choice, although he was determined to do what he could to bring Voldemort down because of what Voldy had done to his parents. But the Messianic burden was what Dumbledore was trying to keep from him IMO.

Superhero? I don't know - he has to be rescued periodically - by Ron when he tries to get Gryffindor's sword from the pool, by Hermione when he is threatened by Nagini in Godric's Hollow and on many other occasions. The superhero would have done all the rescuing! He does seem to change after his near-death experience though, but chiefly in understanding - it's amazing (and IMO a bit unconvincing) how he comprehends all about the Elder Wand - I don't really understand it now! And most of what he achieves couldn't have been done without his 2 side-kicks.

Harry is a hero - he rescues the wizarding world from Voldemort - but not without his flaws. That's what makes him a human being I think. And a convincing character.

I am sure this has been discussed before, but it just occurred to me last night while watching OoTP that when Harry pushes people away which he does many times throughout the series, I often attribute that to "His Saving People Thing", but what if there is more to it than that?

I think that the fact that he was an orphan has something to do with it as well. I think by nature orphans, specically ones that are ones by birth or made one early in life, have a sort of solitary survival mode. Yes, Harry was raised by the Dursley's, but I think the neglect fed that survival mode for Harry. I think at times when he is pushing Ron and Hermione away, it could also be because being alone or fighting alone is all he knows. He had no one to come to his rescue for 11 years and had to figure out how to survive on his own and I think we see that play out time and time again throughout his years at Hogwarts. He was used to going at things on his own and even after years (6) of having his two best friends help him and fight with him he still snapped into that mode when trying to set out on the horcrux journey by himself, as if it was inate within him to respond that way.

Does Harry eally push people away in the books? I'm not so sure. When I watched OotP the film, it annoyed the hell out of me, because of the Hollywood-ish motif of the lonesome hero who woudn't want to be attached, so that he wouldn't have anything to lose [aaaarghhh]. I noticed nothing of the sort in OotP the book. He vents on Hermione and Ron and treats them horribly, but he doesn't really push them away. Actually this is precisely what I loved in the series in the first place, which I found fresh, which I could relate to and which I feel is the most wonderful message of them - that friendhsip always comes first with those three, and they leaned on each other and stayed together and sacrificed a lot for each other (most notably own principles, pride and stuff like that).

So I don't really see a lot of pushing and distancing in the books. Well, granted, in DH Harry acted completely inadequately with Hermione, in my opinion, and I was SO MAD at Jo for doing this. It was so, so unnecessary. They had always been equals, always been together, this was what made them such a special, adorable unit - and then, all of a sudden, Harry is alone and somehow better tha the other two. I hated it. End of rant and apologies.

Anyway, my point was that, save for some DH instances, Harry doesn't really push the other two away from himself.

Anyway, my point was that, save for some DH instances, Harry doesn't really push the other two away from himself.
Maybe "pushing peole away" was the wrong way to phrase it on my part. What I meant is that we often see him strike up the journey on his own. Telling people they can go back if they want, handling things on his own without always voicing the truth or his thoughts to Ron and Hermione. We see this at its strongest before DH, at the end of HBP Harry walks along to face his fate after breaking up with Ginny.

I think there are subtle and not so subtle moments that Harry does withdraw within himself to solve his problems many times throughout the series and those are the moments that I also was referring to in my post.

I will gladly post parts that are of intrest when I can find some examples (I would like to search now, but the morning sickness isn't allowing me to do much today :lol:)

I am confident that in at least each book there is a part where Harry doesn't quite trust himself to realy on others to help him at first. That is why Ron, Hermione, and Ginny (later) were so good for him in those moments, because they wouldn't allow him to do so.

I see what you mean loveweasley, I think Harry doesn't want to feel responsible for causing someone else to die or suffer. You know in The Forest Again, how Harry apologizes to Lupin because Lupin died, leaving his son behind? I mean, it's hardly Harry's fault that Lupin died - it was Lupin's own choice to be part of this war, but Harry still felt responsible somehow for his death.

Some of this attitude I don't think comes so much from Harry's personality as it does from just how young Harry is. He's still a teenager, and this grief and guilt sort of intertwine together until he can't totally tell the difference.

I agree with Yoana about Harry in OotP. Harry was very confused at that time and needed his friends more than ever. His anger never really had to do with them, but that they were such good friends that they were always around when he needed to vent.

I'm with you LW04 about the whole independent thing. Harry's often convinced he's the best man (person) for the job when it comes to fighting. He's loathe to let others take risks. I think it's part of his saving-people thing. We see this with his attitude about Ginny; his refusal to accept help on many occasions, and even in instances like in the Seven Potters, when he didn't want the other six to take the polyjuice potion (putting them at risk). I think it shows his deep caring about others, and his utter selflessness - qualities that set him apart from almost all his mentors.

I'm with you LW04 about the whole independent thing. Harry's often convinced he's the best man (person) for the job when it comes to fighting. He's loathe to let others take risks. I think it's part of his saving-people thing. We see this with his attitude about Ginny; his refusal to accept help on many occasions, and even in instances like in the Seven Potters, when he didn't want the other six to take the polyjuice potion (putting them at risk). I think it shows his deep caring about others, and his utter selflessness - qualities that set him apart from almost all his mentors.
I don't think Harry considers that he is the best man for the job, so much as he'd rather take the risks himself than risk his friends' safety. But that's perhaps what you meant to say as I agree in general with the rest of what you say.

I don't think Harry considers that he is the best man for the job, so much as he'd rather take the risks himself than risk his friends' safety. But that's perhaps what you meant to say as I agree in general with the rest of what you say.

Perhaps :relax:

That's a fine paraphrase, actually :). I like that way of looking at it better.

I don't think Harry considers that he is the best man for the job, so much as he'd rather take the risks himself than risk his friends' safety. But that's perhaps what you meant to say as I agree in general with the rest of what you say. I think it's more that Harry knew he was the destined man for the job. He knew he wasn't the most talented wizard out there, but he knew that he had to be the one to get things done. (even before he heard the prophecy, I think Harry knew this instinctively somehow)

I think it's more that Harry knew he was the destined man for the job. He knew he wasn't the most talented wizard out there, but he knew that he had to be the one to get things done. (even before he heard the prophecy, I think Harry knew this instinctively somehow)

That "somehow" is the whole "Voldemort's after me for some reason" thing :p.

Fast-forwarding a bit, what do folks think the auror office under Harry would be like?

Fast-forwarding a bit, what do folks think the auror office under Harry would be like?Probably very organized with only the best people working there. I'll bet Harry could have set up some new training programs, perhaps coming in to teach some of the classes. I could see him teaching defensive spells, or at least being a guest lecturer/teacher.

Probably very organized with only the best people working there. I'll bet Harry could have set up some new training programs, perhaps coming in to teach some of the classes. I could see him teaching defensive spells, or at least being a guest lecturer/teacher.

Well I don't think it would be very organized. Harry is not a very organized person, I feel. His trunk whenever we see is always packed anyhow. His invisibility cloak always stuffed into his robes and usually never folded or any such thing.

But I do thing he would make a terrific auror and a even better Head of Auror office, simply because he had great insticts that never fail him and superb gut feeling that would always assist him in his decision making and his handling of cases, people and other things. He is a natural leader I feel.

The one thing Harry would have to develop would be IMO people skills (talking to people). He is not a very confident person and he I feel is kind of riddled with insecurities. Perhaps Hermione would help him there.

Well I don't think it would be very organized. Harry is not a very organized person, I feel. His trunk whenever we see is always packed anyhow. His invisibility cloak always stuffed into his robes and usually never folded or any such thing.

:rotfl: True...but maybe he's gotten a bit more organized over time.


But I do thing he would make a terrific auror and a even better Head of Auror office, simply because he had great insticts that never fail him and superb gut feeling that would always assist him in his decision making and his handling of cases, people and other things. He is a natural leader I feel.

The one thing Harry would have to develop would be IMO people skills (talking to people). He is not a very confident person and he I feel is kind of riddled with insecurities. Perhaps Hermione would help him there.

:lol: - your posts have me cracking up tonight for some reason Green. I love um. Anyway - I think that Harry likely matured much more since we last saw him in DH. He had just become a man (17 years old in the Wizard World) and while we saw him take control and become more assertive, he was still somewhat immature in ways. I thought an example was his talk with Lupin at #12. What Harry said was 100% correct - but the way he put it was way out of line. However, even then, Harry also recognized he'd gone overboard and let his emotions get away from him immediately afterward, so he was showing some maturity and growth. Notice he did the exact same thing with Ron in the camping scene. Again feeling remorse the moment Ron left, just as he had with Lupin. Of course, some quarter should be given to Harry (and Lupin and Ron) because it was war time and emotions were running high. But I believe we did see Harry mature during the course of the book to some degree.

I feel with maturity would come the ability to speak in a more mature manner with others and handle himself well as a leader. He showed a lot of potential in that regard once he began heading up the DADA, and so I feel he would end up relating to others very well. It was in his blood; Harry was a bit arrogant like his dad and both his mother and father were outgoing people who seemed to relate well with others. Thus, I think Harry would rapidly grow into the ability.

:rotfl: True...but maybe he's gotten a bit more organized over time.

Hopefully, though I am not very sure. lol

:lol: - your posts have me cracking up tonight for some reason Green. I love um.

Thank you! :)

Anyway - I think that Harry likely matured much more since we last saw him in DH. He had just become a man (17 years old in the Wizard World) and while we saw him take control and become more assertive, he was still somewhat immature in ways. I thought an example was his talk with Lupin at #12. What Harry said was 100% correct - but the way he put it was way out of line. However, even then, Harry also recognized he'd gone overboard and let his emotions get away from him immediately afterward, so he was showing some maturity and growth. Notice he did the exact same thing with Ron in the camping scene. Again feeling remorse the moment Ron left, just as he had with Lupin. Of course, some quarter should be given to Harry (and Lupin and Ron) because it was war time and emotions were running high. But I believe we did see Harry mature during the course of the book to some degree.

I feel with maturity would come the ability to speak in a more mature manner with others and handle himself well as a leader. He showed a lot of potential in that regard once he began heading up the DADA, and so I feel he would end up relating to others very well. It was in his blood; Harry was a bit arrogant like his dad and both his mother and father were outgoing people who seemed to relate well with others. Thus, I think Harry would rapidly grow into the ability

The last we saw Harry he was all about 'er', yeah' and things like that, unless he was shouting, but that could be because of the tension I suppose of having a Dark Lord inside him and having 4 horcruxes to find and destroy and the fact Ron and Hermione were looking for insipiration in a boy who was feeling desperate about his job rather than being a leader, leading them into great adventures of finding horcruxes.(Really Dumbledore needs to be yelled at a few more times IMO for leaving such a huge job to 3 teenagers and not even telling them how to destroy the bloody things) :grumble:

So I suppose what you said about age giving him that maturity may be true, though I would not place any bets on it lol. But even then he was a great leader. A leader who led from the front as it were. He never left that to anybody else. That is one thing I really like about him. He was a natural, more so than Dumbledore because Harry never did anything for the greater good. He did only what he had to and he tried to do everything on his own, preferring to sacrifice himself for the common good rather than others for the greater good. IMO.

Harry is not a very organized person, I feel. His trunk whenever we see is always packed anyhow. His invisibility cloak always stuffed into his robes and usually never folded or any such thing.True, but I thought he did a good job of organizing the lessons he gave the DA in that he started with the basics and sequentially moved on to harder things. I do think he's organized when he's in a leadership role, which is what he would be in when he's Department Head of the Auror Office. He may not be organized with his personal possessions, but when he's acting as a leader I see him being pretty organized.I feel with maturity would come the ability to speak in a more mature manner with others and handle himself well as a leader.That makes sense, I agree. In taking on a management position you have to liaise with many people during the day. I'm sure Harry's people skills would have gotten better as he spent more time within his new role.

True, but I thought he did a good job of organizing the lessons he gave the DA in that he started with the basics and sequentially moved on to harder things. I do think he's organized when he's in a leadership role, which is what he would be in when he's Department Head of the Auror Office. He may not be organized with his personal possessions, but when he's acting as a leader I see him being pretty organized.That makes sense, I agree. In taking on a management position you have to liaise with many people during the day. I'm sure Harry's people skills would have gotten better as he spent more time within his new role.

Yes, I think, you do have a point. As a teacher, Harry was fantastic. He did have everything planned out in his head and also knew how to bring out the best in others.

I do know of people who are terribly disorganized at home and are very efficient in their work, so you are right there as well.

But his role in Auror office would also involve interactions with others. How would he tackle that? Harry looked to me, a very private person, an introvert who would not let anyone inside easily, and also not a very good conversationalist also,though that may have improved later on as he grew and matured.

Harry looked to me, a very private person, an introvert who would not let anyone inside easily, and also not a very good conversationalist also,though that may have improved later on as he grew and matured. Frankly, this sounds like a description of Snape, not Harry. I never saw anything like that in him. He was warm and open and accepting of others. He immediately formed many deep and caring friendships. Someone who would not let anyone inside would not function that way. He opened to Neville and Luna and few people did.

When he started school he was hesitant because he was new to the magical world, but that isn't the same as not opening up to people. I don't see how he wasn't a good conversationalist, either. He never seemed to have any trouble talking with others. He wasn't a great orator, but most people aren't. He was very direct and wouldn't mince words, but as we saw in the Hog's Head he could keep the crowd's attention when he spoke. He was also a natural leader without being pushy or demanding, and we saw that with the DA.

Sometimes he would assume the weight of the world on his own shoulders, but he often had no choice but to do so. He didn't want to drag others in to the dangers he faced, so he didn't always confide his worst problems. But usually at some point he would open up. His strength was the wide circle of friends he developed. Someone who kept to himself would not do that. He got his warmth and caring from Lily, and his leadership and confidence from James. He got bravery from both of them.

But his role in Auror office would also involve interactions with others. How would he tackle that? Harry looked to me, a very private person, an introvert who would not let anyone inside easily, and also not a very good conversationalist also,though that may have improved later on as he grew and matured.

Hm...I believe that while Harry is an introvert and somewhat private, he is still able to interact with other people. They just need to start the conversation. ;)
In a professional environment, there wouldn't be too much smalltalk anyway. And since Harry was able to address the DA at large and immerse himself in those lessons, I don't see it being too difficult for him to talk on a professional basis.
And after a while, I think he could easily connect with a few people from work if they were friendly enough.

posted by CBW
Frankly, this sounds like a description of Snape, not Harry.

Well, I don't know about that. I always thought Snape could speak very well; though he did become an introvert to the extreme after Lily broke off with him, I think ( he was one before too, I think). But no canon for that, so am not sure. But even then I think he spoke extrmely well and his speech was always well-coordinated to me.

Harry while he was very friendly, to me he came across as a private person. That is not to mean he would never talk; only he would not talk openly like say Ron for an example. Of course that is only my opinion of how I see Harry. And I see him very very nicely, because he is one of my faves. :)

And his abilities as far as conversation were concerned, I felt going by the books, were nothing to write home about. He was very friendly, more so than Ron, who always made fun of Luna.

But Harry, even though he may have agreed with ROn on Luna's apparent silliness, would never have mocked her or rolled his eyes at her or be impatient with her. I think he was far too sensitive of others to make fun of them or mock or ridicule them or call them teasing names because he had already been there with Dudley.

In HBP, for example, Harry makes a comment about Fleur's intelligence I think, and when Hermione and Ginny round up on him, he does not defend himself or laugh it off or look embarrassed like Ron or someone else would, but Harry thinks to himself that he should have stayed quiet.

Somehow, little things like that made me feel the way I do, that Harry is an intensly private person and that may be because his feelings as a child and while growing up, were not respected by the Dursleys.

Edit ::
posted by ignisia
They just need to start the conversation.

Oh! I agree. That was how it I felt it was always with Harry.

Well I don't think it would be very organized. Harry is not a very organized person, I feel. His trunk whenever we see is always packed anyhow. His invisibility cloak always stuffed into his robes and usually never folded or any such thing.

But I do thing he would make a terrific auror and a even better Head of Auror office, simply because he had great insticts that never fail him and superb gut feeling that would always assist him in his decision making and his handling of cases, people and other things. He is a natural leader I feel.

The one thing Harry would have to develop would be IMO people skills (talking to people). He is not a very confident person and he I feel is kind of riddled with insecurities. Perhaps Hermione would help him there.

It depends really on the person,and his character and time management

you see sometimes,messy people ,are organized in certain aspects of thier life,things that really interest them,like the auror thing would be to Harry.
Besides I dont think he was messy all the time but only whenhe was at the drusleys,cause he entered a thing like depression state,it wasnt his favorite time of year.Im not saying he was neat ,but maybe he was organized to certain degree.

Frankly, this sounds like a description of Snape, not Harry.

They're different?

Jk! :lol: Or am I? :evil:

TGW- I like your insights on Harry. He's really a patient person (so, different from Snape), IMO, because he can sympathize easily with people and understand where they're coming from. Neville, for instance: Neville's teachers are very tough on him because of his clumsiness and incompetence. But Harry, I believe, can understand where Neville is coming from and therefore is far more patient with him, even trying to help him in the places where he needs the most help ("you're worth twelve of Malfoy" --for Neville's low self-esteem).

They're different?

Jk! :lol: Or am I? :evil:

TGW- I like your insights on Harry. He's really a patient person (so, different from Snape), IMO, because he can sympathize easily with people and understand where they're coming from. Neville, for instance: Neville's teachers are very tough on him because of his clumsiness and incompetence. But Harry, I believe, can understand where Neville is coming from and therefore is far more patient with him, even trying to help him in the places where he needs the most help ("you're worth twelve of Malfoy" --for Neville's low self-esteem).

Imo, Lupin proved it was not Neville, but rather the professors who had the wrong attitude in helping him succeed. I agree with you though that Harry similarly worked well with Neville in a teaching capacity, based on the DADA classes. I think too, it helped that they were friends. But if Harry had been very derogatory and put Neville down for his attempts instead of being encouraging, he would have had the same poor results Neville showed in some of his classes. Harry actually worked well with all of the different personality types in the DADA meetings (except Cho :lol:). Like his parents, he was a natural born leader. But all good leaders fall into the role and learn to become more effective and efficient with experience and I don't think Harry would have a problem becoming a very proficient leader in the long run (i.e., as Head Auror).

I believe I did imply that the teachers were going about it wrong. But I think that a great deal of what was holding Neville back were his own feelings of inferiority.
For Neville, Harry was able to tap into the innermost part of Neville and help heal what was really bothering him and keeping him from succeeding.

Harry fell very easily into the role of leader, which I think is partly something he got from his father. James and Sirius were both the "ringleaders in their own little gang", and so perhaps Harry managed to dredge up a little of James' charisma to help him keep the attention of the DA.

I'm actually not sure how much of a leader Lily was. From what we see of her, she seems to be very trusting, naive, willing to learn, and strongly attached to learned principles, which all together IMO don't really denote a leader.

Harry fell very easily into the role of leader, which I think is partly something he got from his father. James and Sirius were both the "ringleaders in their own little gang", and so perhaps Harry managed to dredge up a little of James' charisma to help him keep the attention of the DA.

I'm actually not sure how much of a leader Lily was. From what we see of her, she seems to be very trusting, naive, willing to learn, and strongly attached to learned principles, which all together IMO don't really denote a leader.

I respect your view, I believe you may be correct in that Lily was not a leader per se, but she did seem to make up her mind about things and carry through based on her ideals - which is characteristic of leaders. I saw that in Harry as well. I didn't find Lily naive or trusting in the least (she was not credulous or simple-minded or unsophisticated in her thinking, imo). In fact, she seemed rather mistrustful and very perceptive and quite a complex and experienced girl in her interaction with Snape and later with James in SWM (the only views we have of her interacting in canon as an older girl. :lol:). I felt Harry was equally mistrustful when warranted and at times also very perceptive, sophisticated and hardly credulous in his thinking. Naturally all people are a bit naive when they are very young, but as time went on, I found Harry to show a lot of maturity in that regard - at even at 11, he was not terribly naive. I think he would have gotten those things from his mum - and dad too. :)

I think ten years spent with the Dursleys would also have taught him a fair bit about not trusting people or expecting goodness out of them straightaway...and despite all that, Harry has IMO a remarkably open mind about new people, for the most part- even if they do discomfit him at times (e.g. Luna).

I think ten years spent with the Dursleys would also have taught him a fair bit about not trusting people or expecting goodness out of them straightaway...and despite all that, Harry has IMO a remarkably open mind about new people, for the most part- even if they do discomfit him at times (e.g. Luna).

Yes, Harry is a complex character. But the whole 'has an open mind about people' is not true. For example, Draco. Harry judged Draco the moment he extended he saw him. Sure, the air Draco gives off is not very friendly, underneath. Another example, Snape. The moment that Harry's broom was being jinxed, he thought it was Snape and then we thought it was Snape. Just because he was muttering, it did not mean that he was the one jinxing Harry. There are many others, though he DOES invite some people with an open mind, like the fake Moody and Tonks. But you must remember that Harry saw Moody as a teacher and someone that fought the dark arts, and he saw Tonks as an Order member. Harry thinks all Slythrins are bad, just because Draco, and Lucius and Snape and Voldemort where. That is not an open mind. Especially if HE was almost a Slytherin.

~WendyPotter

Yes, Harry is a complex character. But the whole 'has an open mind about people' is not true. For example, Draco. Harry judged Draco the moment he extended he saw him. Sure, the air Draco gives off is not very friendly, underneath. Another example, Snape. The moment that Harry's broom was being jinxed, he thought it was Snape and then we thought it was Snape. Just because he was muttering, it did not mean that he was the one jinxing Harry. There are many others, though he DOES invite some people with an open mind, like the fake Moody and Tonks. But you must remember that Harry saw Moody as a teacher and someone that fought the dark arts, and he saw Tonks as an Order member. Harry thinks all Slythrins are bad, just because Draco, and Lucius and Snape and Voldemort where. That is not an open mind. Especially if HE was almost a Slytherin.

~WendyPotter

I would agree that Harry was closed minded to those who he felt were on the dark side with Voldemort (Draco and Snape plus all death eaters), but I don't recall him being closed minded with anyone else. To my recollection, he accepted everyone else with open arms upon first meeting them. Naturally, like all other humans, when his good and trusted friends told him to be wary of someone, he took that into account (i.e., Mundungus), but he was not unfriendly with those people until they crossed him or someone else to his knowledge.

I would agree that Harry was closed minded to those who he felt were on the dark side with Voldemort (Draco and Snape plus all death eaters), but I don't recall him being closed minded with anyone else. To my recollection, he accepted everyone else with open arms upon first meeting them. Naturally, like all other humans, when his good and trusted friends told him to be wary of someone, he took that into account (i.e., Mundungus), but he was not unfriendly with those people until they crossed him or someone else to his knowledge.

I did say that. I said that he invites SOME people with an open mind. Harry is one of my favorite characters, and I love the line in DH after they escapade with Voldemort in the begining of the book, when he said: "We've got to trust each other. I trust all of you, I don't think anyone in this room would sell me to Voldemort." ....Lupin was wearing an odd expression as he looked at Harry. It was close to pitying. "You think I'm a fool?" Harry demanded. "No, I think you are like James," said Lupin,"who would have regarded it as the height of dishonor to mistrust his friends."

And I agree with Lupin. But that is just his friends.

~WendyPotter

I think Harry had this abitlity not to judge people from first impressions,but to wait and know them better,I mean ,Hermione wasnt one of his favorite people,and he just gave her a chance,the same happened with fleur...Draco,he didnt like him,but it wasnt until draco showed his true self by delitling Ron ,that Harry decided to mark him as a not nice person.
Take slughorn for instance,instead of answering to DD question straight off,he takes his time and Dd understands he is wainting to know him furter to be able to exted and opinion on the person.

1:i dont think he would have been affected; his parents were not the ones who'd spoil him like the dursleys did with their son. and as for being raised with a wizardind family ; harry is just modest.

2: it's good to save people and his sacrifice was great, no one can deny.
3:I dont think hte dursley succeeded in keeping facts from harry, but i think he's too much cusrious that made him in trouble. and it didnt stop after dd's death
4: His most greatest power in my opinion is Bravery .
5:i think his parents' and sirius' death affected him more than any but they made him tough.
6:his last sacrifice and what he saw in the mirror ,when he cried holding his mother's letter were the most powerful evidences
7: i dint like the imperius but the cruciatuos was great
8:because harry has pure heart and snape was great enough
9:its the best feild for harry and ron i think he killed umbrige (only joking)

I think Harry had this abitlity not to judge people from first impressions,but to wait and know them better,I mean ,Hermione wasnt one of his favorite people,and he just gave her a chance,the same happened with fleur...Draco,he didnt like him,but it wasnt until draco showed his true self by delitling Ron ,that Harry decided to mark him as a not nice person.
Take slughorn for instance,instead of answering to DD question straight off,he takes his time and Dd understands he is wainting to know him furter to be able to exted and opinion on the person.

I would actually say that Harry based quite a lot on first impressions. When he first met Hermione he saw her as just an annoying know-it-all and it wasn't until Halloween until he saw her as an actual person. I suspect it was where she overheard Ron insulting her and brushed past them crying that this happened, but until then he hadn't really considered getting to know her better at all.

He also took an immediate dislike to Malfoy in Madame Malkins, which I believe was further cemented by his belittling of Ron, as you mentioned.

He has also made immediate judgements on Hagrid and Snape as well as many other chracacters. An interesting one is Luna. He immediately sees her as 'weird' and this is shown further when he whishes Cho had seen him with "cooler people" again showing that his first impression of Luna is one that he then changes once he has got to know her better.

However, I feel that everyone judges immediately on first impressions, and this is not a critism of Harry but something that makes him more human.

1. How do Harry's formative years with the Dursley's influence the person he is now? Would he be the same person if his parents had lived? If he had been sent to live with another wizarding family? If he had been sent to an orphanage like Tom Ridde?

With his parents I believe he would have been a lot happier, and I think going into Hogwarts he would have had more confidence. The Dursleys stripped him of any confidence he may have had when he was younger and they mistreated him. I think any other wizarding family would have cherished him as much as his parents would have. And in an orpahange I believe he would have maybe been resentful, but I think we still would have had the same Harry.

2. When do we first see evidence of Harry's "saving people" thing? Is this a strength or a flaw? What do you think of his final sacrifice?

I think he first portayed his "saving people thing" in his first year. He wanted to do the right thing and wanted to make sure that everyone was safe. We are first shown this when he, Ron and Hermione go to stop the Stone being stolen.

3. Harry's natural curiosity was stifled by the Dursleys. "Don't ask questions!" but it comes out it full force once he gets to Hogwarts. How does this curiosity serve him through the books? Has he truly lost it after Dumbledore's death or will it return as he hunts for the horcruxes?

I think the fact that the Dursleys forced him to keep quiet about his curiosities only made him more inquisitive in the long run. It serves a big purpose throughout the books, because Harry wants to know what's happening. After all, if the main character isn't curious about things then why should the reader be?

4. What do you think are Harry's greatest strengths? What weaknesses did he overcome as the series progressed?

IMO his greatest strengths are his bravery, selflessness and leadership skills. I think his main weakeness was his lack of confidence in himself and his abilities, but by DH although he knew that he wasn't the best wizard, he still had confidence in himself and what he could achieve.

5. How have each of the losses Harry has suffered helped to define who he is?

I think Sirius affected him because he was so close to him. He was like a replacement father figure, yet felt like a brother to him. I think it was the hardest loss for Harry.

Dumbledore also affected him majorly. It was his point of realisation - he had no one else to rely on, no one else to help him out of seemigly impossible situations.

7. What do you think of Harry's use of Unforgivables in DH?

I didn't mind it. Harry isn't perfect, and he was trying to do the best he could in desperate situations. It wasn't the right thing to do, but no one can do the right thing all the time.

8. Why do you think Harry forgave Snape?

I think Harry understood the love that Snape felt for his mother and how it ruined his life. I think he pitied Snape and his life and appreciated everything that Snape did for him - even though they were all for the wrong reasons.

9. JKR tells us that he and Ron became Aurors and revolutionized the department? Do you think this was a good choice for him? What changes do you think he might have made?

It was definitely the right choice for him. It's the best job for his leadership skills and his need to help others and to do the right thing. I think he just did his best to get rid of any allies of Voldemort and to let them rot in Azkaban.

I would actually say that Harry based quite a lot on first impressions. When he first met Hermione he saw her as just an annoying know-it-all and it wasn't until Halloween until he saw her as an actual person. I suspect it was where she overheard Ron insulting her and brushed past them crying that this happened, but until then he hadn't really considered getting to know her better at all.

He also took an immediate dislike to Malfoy in Madame Malkins, which I believe was further cemented by his belittling of Ron, as you mentioned.

He has also made immediate judgements on Hagrid and Snape as well as many other chracacters. An interesting one is Luna. He immediately sees her as 'weird' and this is shown further when he whishes Cho had seen him with "cooler people" again showing that his first impression of Luna is one that he then changes once he has got to know her better.

However, I feel that everyone judges immediately on first impressions, and this is not a critism of Harry but something that makes him more human.

Well,if he does,the good thing is he gives people achance to prove themselves to see if his judgements are right then...he just doesnt label people and decide not to talk to them or to befriend them at first instance.

hey people, can someone please tell me in which book and in which scene/chapter it is stated that "harry's interior, his nature is the like of Lily's" ??!

thank you

hey people, can someone please tell me in which book and in which scene/chapter it is stated that "harry's interior, his nature is the like of Lily's" ??!

thank you

There is a thread called "Little Questions Answered" in the main room "the Stone". Your questions would likely be answered very quickly there.

I would actually say that Harry based quite a lot on first impressions. When he first met Hermione he saw her as just an annoying know-it-all and it wasn't until Halloween until he saw her as an actual person. I suspect it was where she overheard Ron insulting her and brushed past them crying that this happened, but until then he hadn't really considered getting to know her better at all.

He also took an immediate dislike to Malfoy in Madame Malkins, which I believe was further cemented by his belittling of Ron, as you mentioned.

He has also made immediate judgements on Hagrid and Snape as well as many other chracacters. An interesting one is Luna. He immediately sees her as 'weird' and this is shown further when he whishes Cho had seen him with "cooler people" again showing that his first impression of Luna is one that he then changes once he has got to know her better.

However, I feel that everyone judges immediately on first impressions, and this is not a critism of Harry but something that makes him more human.

I agree. Harry, in the years previous to his 6th the whole thing based on first impressions was high. I am proud to say that as he grew older and got to know the people around him, he changed. Take for example the whole 'cooler people thing'. After the death of Sirius, he shoos away a bunch of girls, including Romilda Vane, and stays with Neville and Luna, who he had previously called 'not cool enough' in some sort of way. After the battle in the ministry, he has a new idea of who to trust. Yet, he knows that he would rather trust one of his friends than himself. As I said in one of my previous quotes. He knows that there is someting strange going on with himself and Voldemort and blames himself for Sirius's death. After trusting himself that what he was seeing was true, he got Sirius killed, or so he thinks. I really don't think he would be so trusting in strangers&himself after that. He trusts his friends, who have all almost lost their lives to him. IMO.

~WendyPotter:rave:

Welcome to the post-DH discussion of Harry Potter.Previous discussion without spoilers can be found here: Harry Potter: Character Analysis (http://www.cosforums.com/showthread.php?t=96607)




1. How do Harry's formative years with the Dursley's influence the person he is now? Would he be the same person if his parents had lived? If he had been sent to live with another wizarding family? If he had been sent to an orphanage like Tom Ridde?

2. When do we first see evidence of Harry's "saving people" thing? Is this a strength or a flaw? What do you think of his final sacrifice?

3. Harry's natural curiosity was stifled by the Dursleys. "Don't ask questions!" but it comes out it full force once he gets to Hogwarts. How does this curiosity serve him through the books? Has he truly lost it after Dumbledore's death or will it return as he hunts for the horcruxes?

4. What do you think are Harry's greatest strengths? What weaknesses did he overcome as the series progressed?

5. How have each of the losses Harry has suffered helped to define who he is?

6 Dumbledore tells him that his pure heart is what seperates him from Voldemort and his Death Eaters. What examples have we seen of this pure heart?

7. What do you think of Harry's use of Unforgivables in DH?

8. Why do you think Harry forgave Snape?

9. JKR tells us that he and Ron became Aurors and revolutionized the department? Do you think this was a good choice for him? What changes do you think he might have made?

1. It's interesting how Harry, compared to LV and Snape - the two other "lost boys" of Hogwarts, came out of a bad childhood environment, compared to the other two, as a very good/healthy character. We can always speculate but I don't think he'd be different growing up anywhere else, if he could stay good with the Dursleys...except maybe if he had grown up in a DE family.

2. I'd say in CoS, when he is going to the Chamber to save Ginny, I think it is big because it's the first time he's saving someone (unlike PS, where he just told Hermione and Ron to stay back). Mostly it's a strength, except OOTP. I liked the last sacrifice, though I was sure he'd die for real.

3. Obviously it served him well, he found out many secrets, solved many mysteries etc...I knew the curiousity wouldn't stop even before I read DH.

4. Loyalty (to Dumbledore), bravery, leadership. As for weaknesses, sometimes he bursts into saving people (as in OOTP). He resisted LV entering his mind. Also compassion, even for Dursley, Draco, Pettigrew and young Riddle, and Snape in the end.

5. Obviously loss of his parents defined him the most; it made him the Boy that Lived and the ultimate weapon against LV. I guess loss of Cedric has shown him the randomness and cruelty of death. Sirius showed him he shouldn't act on his thoughts too much and he was the loss of anything resembling a family. Dumbledore showed him he has to finish his task alone. Hedwig is probably the last symbol of innocence in the books.

6. The fact that he rejected DH and faced death.

7. I was surprised he didn't AK Voldemort, and I didn't see Cruccio or Imperus coming.

8. Because he understood his feelings for Lilly were deep, and that he worked for DD all along, and he understood the sadness of Snape-Lilly. (James in the picture, Snape being pals with the wrong people...)

9. Yes, good choice, I would have guessed Auror or Quidditch player.

Just noticed something on a re-read.
Kind of ties in the how powerful or not Harry is.

Harry uses the Cruciatus twice through the books, against Bellatrix and Carrow. Bella gets knocked clean off her feet, and Carrow is thrown against the wall like he's been stunned.

Every other example of this curse being used, simply inflicts pain, yet it could be seen that Harry's is extremely powerful, especially as he never attempts to prolong it, and merely hits Carrow with it, but the force of it is massive. Not even Voldemort knocks someone like that with the curse. Could this mean Harry is, or could grow up to be a more powerful wizard, in terms of spell casting.

Or more importantly, how can we interpret the fact that Harry seems to have a more powerful Cruciatus Curse than Voldemort? As a good thing or a bad thing?

I took the knocking back to be an indication of the strength of his emotions. We don't see another case of it with Crucio, but we do see it with other spells. Snape's Expelliarmus on Lockhart in "The Duelling Club" (think he may have been annoyed by the implication he could not outduel Gilderoy? :lol: ), COS, (and, a guess, but reasonably likely IMO) on Harry in "The Flight of the Prince" in HBP, as well as his Killing Curse on Dumbledore in the same book (scenes in which he is described as in the grip of powerful emotions), also uncharacteristically knock their assorted targets back.

Just noticed something on a re-read.
Kind of ties in the how powerful or not Harry is.

Harry uses the Cruciatus twice through the books, against Bellatrix and Carrow. Bella gets knocked clean off her feet, and Carrow is thrown against the wall like he's been stunned.

Every other example of this curse being used, simply inflicts pain, yet it could be seen that Harry's is extremely powerful, especially as he never attempts to prolong it, and merely hits Carrow with it, but the force of it is massive. Not even Voldemort knocks someone like that with the curse. Could this mean Harry is, or could grow up to be a more powerful wizard, in terms of spell casting.

Or more importantly, how can we interpret the fact that Harry seems to have a more powerful Cruciatus Curse than Voldemort? As a good thing or a bad thing?

I think the whole point was that Harry had a lot of untapped power. When he needs to, he can perform awesome and incredible acts of magic. Through his connection with his father, he drove 100's of dementors away - but it was Harry who enacted all of the magic involved, even evoking the connection. As you pointed out, he tries a curse and it is "megastrong" immediately - Cruciatus Curse is one example and Sectumsempra is another. We only saw Harry at the brink of his power, but Lupin declared his "instincts were nearly always right" which is kind of a sense of the future that Harry has as well - also powerful. Dumbledore had massive problems that prohibited him from being the Master of the Hallows, Harry did not. Harry snatched Draco's "other" wand from him and yet, the Elder Wand, sensing this, chose him to be its new master. Harry ejected Voldemort from his body when he possessed him, it was called 'the power of love' by Dumbledore, but whatever you want to call it, it was still very powerful magic in the end. Harry was shown to falter against Snape in HBP while he tried to attack him when he was fleeing - but that is because Snape could anticipate all of his spells and curses - due to Harry failing to learn Occulmency under Snape. Yet, by DH, we see Harry had found his own method of Legilimens and Occulmency against Voldemort - once again overcoming his deficiencies of magic on his own.

Harry was the ultimate hero, and the greatest of heroes have the ultimate power when they come into their own and I would imagine that Harry will end up being the greatest wizard of all time.

I think the whole point was that Harry had a lot of untapped power. When he needs to, he can perform awesome and incredible acts of magic. Through his connection with his father, he drove 100's of dementors away - but it was Harry who enacted all of the magic involved, even evoking the connection. As you pointed out, he tries a curse and it is "megastrong" immediately - Cruciatus Curse is one example and Sectumsempra is another. We only saw Harry at the brink of his power, but Lupin declared his "instincts were nearly always right" which is kind of a sense of the future that Harry has as well - also powerful. Dumbledore had massive problems that prohibited him from being the Master of the Hallows, Harry did not. Harry snatched Draco's "other" wand from him and yet, the Elder Wand, sensing this, chose him to be its new master. Harry ejected Voldemort from his body when he possessed him, it was called 'the power of love' by Dumbledore, but whatever you want to call it, it was still very powerful magic in the end. Harry was shown to falter against Snape in HBP while he tried to attack him when he was fleeing - but that is because Snape could anticipate all of his spells and curses - due to Harry failing to learn Occulmency under Snape. Yet, by DH, we see Harry had found his own method of Legilimens and Occulmency against Voldemort - once again overcoming his deficiencies of magic on his own.

Harry was the ultimate hero, and the greatest of heroes have the ultimate power when they come into their own and I would imagine that Harry will end up being the greatest wizard of all time.
You really have a point there. However, some of Harry's powers must have come from the Voldemort connection - Parseltongue certainly did, and Dumbledore said something at "Kings Cross" about Harry's wand taking on some of the power of Voldemort. Whether that would remain after Voldy was gone it's hard to say - Parseltongue left him - but I don't see why the wand should change. And I don't doubt that Harry was in himself a very powerful wizard.

Harry's emotions did seem to have a powerful effect on his spells - I'd add in that he tried "crucio" under the emotion of grief and it (mostly) failed in OoTP. The only one that doesn't seem to fit well is the Imperio in DH - he felt the "raw power" emotion after he'd first used it. But, his second attempt was stronger, so he was a quick study.

I do like how Harry didn't rely on the unforgiveables in the Battle of Hogwarts, after McGonagall woke him up to his senses. He backed off using them when others may have started using them more, since he knew they were effective in his hands.

Yeah, I am used to seeing the full potential of a hero's magic ability by the end of a series, but we only really got a glance of it - Harry was just coming into his own. What some referred to as luck - like Harry's achievements during the 3 tasks, was really his power. He had assistance all through the series, but he was just learning how powerful he was. That is why a part two showing the older Harry would be cool, or even a series that talked about the 19 year period, showing him out on missions as an Auror. I think we would get a better handle on Harry's ultimate ability. He was just gaining maturity too, but he was already becoming a pretty cunning warrior. Alas, I don't think that period interests JKR at all. Maybe one day she will get the Lucas fever and take us through every possible journey pre and post series. :)

Harry's emotions did seem to have a powerful effect on his spells - I'd add in that he tried "crucio" under the emotion of grief and it (mostly) failed in OoTP. The only one that doesn't seem to fit well is the Imperio in DH - he felt the "raw power" emotion after he'd first used it. But, his second attempt was stronger, so he was a quick study.

I do like how Harry didn't rely on the unforgiveables in the Battle of Hogwarts, after McGonagall woke him up to his senses. He backed off using them when others may have started using them more, since he knew they were effective in his hands.

I wanted Harry to use the AK to off Voldemort. I wanted Jo to show through him, that using any spell harmed only if there was deliberate intention to harm. The AK would not harm Snape IMO because he used it on Dumbledore and I wanted the books to show the AK would not have harmed Harry had he used it.

But Harry used an expelliarmus to return Voldemort's curse on to himself. Jo obviously did not agree with me, drawing a line between light and dark curses, even though almost all light curses could also kill, if used wrongly IMO.

I wanted Harry to use the AK to off Voldemort. I wanted Jo to show through him, that using any spell harmed only if there was deliberate intention to harm. The AK would not harm Snape IMO because he used it on Dumbledore and I wanted the books to show the AK would not have harmed Harry had he used it.

But Harry used an expelliarmus to return Voldemort's curse on to himself. Jo obviously did not agree with me, drawing a line between light and dark curses, even though almost all light curses could also kill, if used wrongly IMO.

I respect your view, but my interpretation of canon indicates that Harry using the AK on Voldemort would have harmed him because he woud have had the intent to kill. It wasn't necessary to kill Voldemort, Harry could have subdued him and taken him to Azkaban, so killing Voldemort would have been overkill, imo. Instead, Harry acted in self-defense and thereby Voldemort was killed with his own curse. It was only fair because Harry was acting benevolently and for the good of the Wizard World. Although his soul would heal afterward by his subsequent good actions, why make Harry go through the added burden? Imo, Harry had carried a burden of existence since his birth, so it was kind of fate to allow him this reprieve.

Imo, there is a clear line between light and dark magic because dark magic is used to harm and light magic is not meant for that purpose (although it can be used to harm). It is like a car - normally it is used for transportation and it is great, but in the hands of one with mal intent or recklessness, it can cause death. That does not make a car bad - a car is like light magic. On the other hand, take something like poisonous gas made to kill people, it will kill anytime it escapes. So if it is used, it's purpose will always be harmful and deadly - that is like dark magic. :)

But Harry used an expelliarmus to return Voldemort's curse on to himself. Jo obviously did not agree with me, drawing a line between light and dark curses, even though almost all light curses could also kill, if used wrongly IMO.

I think it is a different line she is drawing. All Harry did was defend himself. If he had used a 'non-dark' spell to, say, flatten Voldemort with a broken piece of wall or something, he would still have killed him. As Rowling wrote it, Harry did not kill anyone. Voldemort cast the spell that killed him, and while Harry might have been able to guess which spell Voldemort would use, he did not know. They cast their spells simultaneously.

I think it is a different line she is drawing. All Harry did was defend himself. If he had used a 'non-dark' spell to, say, flatten Voldemort with a broken piece of wall or something, he would still have killed him. As Rowling wrote it, Harry did not kill anyone. Voldemort cast the spell that killed him, and while Harry might have been able to guess which spell Voldemort would use, he did not know. They cast their spells simultaneously.


Well yes, but that does not account for the prophecy - one must die at the hand of the other. Ultimately Harry had Voldemort's blood on his hands because it was due to the disarming spell, and Harry's ownership of the Elder Wand that caused Voldemort's curse to rebound and kill him. The self-defense aspect saved his soul from harm, imo.

It is notable that generally in fiction, being hit with furniture, metal ship parts or collapsing ceilings doesn't usually take out a Dark Lord. I don't know if JKR would have stuck with that formula, but usually you have to hit them with something tremendously powerful. I think JKR would have stuck with that idea for Harry because the legacy of him taking out Voldemort with a sofa couch or a bit of wall would have been pretty lame.

Well yes, but that does not account for the prophecy - one must die at the hand of the other. Ultimately Harry had Voldemort's blood on his hands because it was due to the disarming spell, and Harry's ownership of the Elder Wand that caused Voldemort's curse to rebound and kill him. The self-defense aspect saved his soul from harm, imo. I almost agree with this. I think Voldemort's death was a unique situation where Voldemort himself supplied the spell that eventually ended his life, but he had been intending to hit Harry with that spell. Harry's soul was safe because at that particular moment, Harry had not tried to kill Voldemort - he merely tried to defend himself, as you stated. The part I slightly disagree with was that Voldemort's death was on Harry's hands, because if Voldemort hadn't tried to AK Harry, his own death would not have occurred. And Harry couldn't really have predicted the way the Elder Wand would work - I don't think he had any idea that it would turn Voldemort's own spell against him.

I almost agree with this. I think Voldemort's death was a unique situation where Voldemort himself supplied the spell that eventually ended his life, but he had been intending to hit Harry with that spell. Harry's soul was safe because at that particular moment, Harry had not tried to kill Voldemort - he merely tried to defend himself, as you stated. The part I slightly disagree with was that Voldemort's death was on Harry's hands, because if Voldemort hadn't tried to AK Harry, his own death would not have occurred. And Harry couldn't really have predicted the way the Elder Wand would work - I don't think he had any idea that it would turn Voldemort's own spell against him.

I see what you mean. But the fact remains that if Harry had not used the disarming spell, calling on the power of his Elder Wand to do his bidding and coming to him, the curse may not have rebounded at all. It is unknown whether or not it would have killed Harry (probably not), but I don't believe it would have rebounded and killed Voldemort of its own accord. Harry's action played a role in that, his spell made it a duel and the Elder Wand reacted to its master, coming to him and when the spells were halted in the middle, they resolved against Voldemort, Harry's opponent.

The prophecy did not say that 'one would die at his own hand' which is what it would be if we were to see it as Voldemort's curse rebounded and killed him. The prophecy in and of it self holds Harry responsible for the death of Lord Voldemort...the blood of one had to be on the hands of the other. It just so happened that Voldemort issued the curse that did him in, but that does not contradict the prophecy because it speaks of 'how it started' rather than 'how it was ultimately achieved'.

But the fact remains that if Harry had not used the disarming spell, calling on the power of his Elder Wand to do his bidding and coming to him, the curse may not have rebounded at all. It is unknown whether or not it would have killed Harry (probably not), but I don't believe it would have rebounded and killed Voldemort of its own accord. Harry's action played a role in that, his spell made it a duel and the Elder Wand reacted to its master, coming to him and when the spells were halted in the middle, they resolved against Voldemort, Harry's opponent.Yes, you're right that Harry's conscious act of using the Expelliarmus spell did cause Voldemort's death. Technically I guess we could say that Harry brought about Voldemort's death, but did not outright kill him. I guess that's the distinction that's important as far as Harry's soul is concerned, because if Harry had consciously tried to kill Voldemort (which I don't think he was trying to do when he used Expelliarmus), then he would be much more responsible for his death. I actually really liked the way the final confrontation played out. I liked the fact that Harry didn't blatantly try to kill Voldemort, but rather that he ended up causing Voldemort's death in self defence. It is interesting to speculate whether or not Harry would have been killed if he'd been struck again with the AK - I'm not sure one way or another!

Yes, you're right that Harry's conscious act of using the Expelliarmus spell did cause Voldemort's death. Technically I guess we could say that Harry brought about Voldemort's death, but did not outright kill him. I guess that's the distinction that's important as far as Harry's soul is concerned, because if Harry had consciously tried to kill Voldemort (which I don't think he was trying to do when he used Expelliarmus), then he would be much more responsible for his death. I actually really liked the way the final confrontation played out. I liked the fact that Harry didn't blatantly try to kill Voldemort, but rather that he ended up causing Voldemort's death in self defence. It is interesting to speculate whether or not Harry would have been killed if he'd been struck again with the AK - I'm not sure one way or another!

That is a good distinction...I would agree with that. I was just trying to make it jive with the prophecy. But bringing about Voldemort's death is a good way to put it. I don't think Harry knew the spell would rebound either, so I would agree that his intent was to take the wand away - perhaps stopping Voldemort from being able to cast anything rather than intentionally trying to kill him (which I had thought before). That would be a total move in self-defense. I agree then that beyond the fact that Harry used self defense, he also had no intent to kill and that would have kept his soul right and tight. Potterverse is rather stringent when it comes to using unforgiveables - in other lore, killing the villainous Dark Lord does no harm whatsoever to a person and can even redeem them completely, so it gets trickier when discussing outcomes for Harry's world - but I agree with you here.

Harry's formative with the Dursley's influenced the person he is now because living with the Dursley's was pretty miserable so he appreciates his friends and Hogwarts a lot. He may not have been the same person if his parents had lived because his parents probably would have taken better care of him than the Dursley's and he wouldn't have been "the boy who lived". If he had been sent to live with another wizarding family it would definitely have to depend on who exactly that wizarding family was. If he had been sent to an orphanage like Tom Riddle, events would definitely be different, but how so I mustn't say.

We first see evidence of Harry's "saving people" thing... uhm... when he helped fight the troll in the bathroom. This was a strength. His final sacrifice was rather noble.

This curiosity serves him as a sort of advantage in his quests. He's totally lost it after Dumbledore's death.

Harry's greatest strength is his enormous amount of pure luck. The weaknesses he overcame as the series progressed were that of naiveness.

Each of the losses Harry has suffered helped define him by giving him a reason to keep fighting. Example we have seen of this pure heart is his deep love and care for his friends and other significant beings.

Harry's use of Unforgivables in DH was sort of necessary.

Harry forgave Snape probably for a lot of reasons. One being that he loved his Mom so very much and in the end, kind of lost. Another being that Snape made it his life's purpose to protect Harry for the sake of Lily.

JKR tells us that he and Ron became Aurors and revolutionized the department, yes. This was a good choice for him, sure. Changes he might have made would have included choosing a different career.

I see what you mean. But the fact remains that if Harry had not used the disarming spell, calling on the power of his Elder Wand to do his bidding and coming to him, the curse may not have rebounded at all. It is unknown whether or not it would have killed Harry (probably not), but I don't believe it would have rebounded and killed Voldemort of its own accord. Harry's action played a role in that, his spell made it a duel and the Elder Wand reacted to its master, coming to him and when the spells were halted in the middle, they resolved against Voldemort, Harry's opponent.

The prophecy did not say that 'one would die at his own hand' which is what it would be if we were to see it as Voldemort's curse rebounded and killed him. The prophecy in and of it self holds Harry responsible for the death of Lord Voldemort...the blood of one had to be on the hands of the other. It just so happened that Voldemort issued the curse that did him in, but that does not contradict the prophecy because it speaks of 'how it started' rather than 'how it was ultimately achieved'.

Perhaps the Elder wand belonged to Harry could not kill Harry with the AK. If that was the case, then technically Harry killed Voldemort, Voldemort died at the Hands of Harry's wand? Don't know. I am kind of confused on this.

Imo, there is a clear line between light and dark magic because dark magic is used to harm and light magic is not meant for that purpose (although it can be used to harm). It is like a car - normally it is used for transportation and it is great, but in the hands of one with mal intent or recklessness, it can cause death. That does not make a car bad - a car is like light magic. On the other hand, take something like poisonous gas made to kill people, it will kill anytime it escapes. So if it is used, it's purpose will always be harmful and deadly - that is like dark magic.

I respect your view, but my interpretation of canon indicates that Harry using the AK on Voldemort would have harmed him because he woud have had the intent to kill. It wasn't necessary to kill Voldemort, Harry could have subdued him and taken him to Azkaban, so killing Voldemort would have been overkill, imo. Instead, Harry acted in self-defense and thereby Voldemort was killed with his own curse.

Most of the poisionous stuff also have their uses, bombs (for defence as well as offence) do too and almost everything including the AK have two sides IMO.

The AK for example could also be used for a mercy killing or some suh thing. Ok pretty lame, but what I am trying to say here is it would have been great had Harry used a curse that would have killed with deliberate intention, like Molly did.

That would be retaliation IMO and not instigating a murder with deliberate intent.

Molly wanted to hurt Bella, because she was trying to kill Ginny. She retaliated with an offensive curse, with deliberate intent to kill. I think that's not wrong. Because Molly was not instigating it; she was retaliating and she was defending.

Harry was attacked time and again by Voldemort. He had lost so much to him. At the time of the last battle, it would have been wonderful had Harry attacked Voldemort so that Voldemort would never kill again ot never hurt again; IMO that's not wrong. And deliberate intention to cast any spell to that effect is also not wrong.

Harry was not instigating the fight. Voldemort did, when he killed Harry's parents. And he did not stop there. He went on and killed so many others, hunted Harry down and tried his best to destroy Harry's world.

I think had Harry retaliated for all this, it would have been wonderful. But he did not. He used the expelliarmus and allowed the Elder wand to do the rest.

1. How do Harry's formative years with the Dursley's influence the person he is now? I think they play a heavy influence in that Harry wants to prove they're wrong. However, I believe he subconsciously remembered Lily and her love for him. That and James' love along with Hagrid's, Dubmbledore's and his Friends' influence on his life proved that not all people are prejudiced and cruel. Would he be the same person if his parents had lived? If he had been sent to live with another wizarding family? I'm not too sure here. He'd definitely be loved and maybe somewhat pampered, however, I don't know how to really answer that question. If he had been sent to an orphanage like Tom Ridde? He might have wound up being like Voldemort himself. Scary, scary thought.

2. When do we first see evidence of Harry's "saving people" thing? When he saves Neville's remembrall. He didn't save anyone physically, but he did save Neville from facing his Grand Mother's wrath. Is this a strength or a flaw? In many ways it's a strength because not many people would willingly put their lives on the line.What do you think of his final sacrifice? Absolutely, postively, totally awesome! It showed how unselfish and loving he was. He risked his life for many people, risked being tortured, etc. Truly heroic.

3. Harry's natural curiosity was stifled by the Dursleys. "Don't ask questions!" but it comes out it full force once he gets to Hogwarts. How does this curiosity serve him through the books? In many ways it keeps the Child within him alive. Curiosity can be a good thing, but as he learned in "Snape's Worst Memory".it can also get you in a LOT of trouble. I think it also overruled his common sense in this and a couple of other situations. However, because of his unrelenting curiosity, Voldemort and The Death Eaters were rounded up, arrested or killed. Has he truly lost it after Dumbledore's death or will it return as he hunts for the horcruxes? Well we have the answer. Plus I see his losing his curiosity after Albus' Death as being a normal "I never want to hear, see or smell that thing again" as a normal reaction. Plus I see it being rekindled after Voldemort was killed and he moved on. This was especially true after seeing Snape's Memories of Lily. He'd naturally want to find out more about her and go about doing so.

4. What do you think are Harry's greatest strengths? His Loyalty, his intelligence, his determination to get things done, his resiliance in that he didn't let anything keep him down. What weaknesses did he overcome as the series progressed? His prejudiced against people like Severus Snape and the Slytherins.

5. How have each of the losses Harry has suffered helped to define who he is?

6 Dumbledore tells him that his pure heart is what seperates him from Voldemort and his Death Eaters. What examples have we seen of this pure heart? His acceptance of Hagrid for who he was. He never made any mean comments about his intelligence, his Handicaps, etc. His risking his life to save Ginny. Standing by Hermione, standing up to Ron when he came back from wanting to be alone in Deathly Hallows. Harry also accepted Luna for who she was and never said "Loony Luna".
7. What do you think of Harry's use of Unforgivables in DH? It was needed for self defense, to save the lives of others.

8. Why do you think Harry forgave Snape? Because Harry realized Snape was truly remorseful for what he had done to Lily. He kept his promise to her. Severus remained loyal to Dumbledore and the Order. He also gave Harry an incredible gift when he gave Harry his memories of Lily. Harry "met" Lily through those memories. It probably also sparked that need to know her. Harry had also done a lot of growing up and became a man during Snape's final moments and when he defended him when fighting Voldemort. He would have looked meak and small if he had remained hating Snape and labelling him an Evil git despite what he saw. Harry would also be sending the wrong message if he kept that "Yeah, he did this, but he's still evil".

9. JKR tells us that he and Ron became Aurors and revolutionized the department? Do you think this was a good choice for him? What changes do you think he might have made? It was an excellent career choice for Harry. He'd be using his Childhood experiences to change the Ministry.

Most of the poisionous stuff also have their uses, bombs (for defence as well as offence) do too and almost everything including the AK have two sides IMO.

Yes, that is what I was saying. A bomb tossed in the middle of a crowd of tourists or in the middle of a group of soldiers in self defense will still kill them all. It doesn't care who they are or if they are innocent or guilty. It will simply kill and that makes a bomb, used only for the purpose of killing people (for whatever reason) a bad instrument of destruction. Used in self-defense it may be justifiable, but it is, imo, still wrong because it can never be put to a use that won't cause harm. That is like dark magic. JKR apparently didn't want Harry to have to be victim to using dark magic (a bomb) to kill Voldemort. She wanted to keep his experience whole and that was her perogative (unless it already had to heal for using the other unforgiveables).

Molly on the other hand used an AK curse I believe. It was dark magic and there is no way around that. It was not self-defense, but rather in the defense of others which is equally noble. Thus, Molly's soul would be harmed, merely for using it, but her soul would be knit thereafter because that is how it works in the wizard world. Same with Snape and the AK against Dumbledore.

Harry just didn't have to go through the harmed soul, knit soul process - I don't see why it would be necessary for him to do so. Kingsley, and Molly did and likely Remus, Sirius, James, Lily and everyone else who fought in the first war had to go through it also. Harry just got off easy and imo, it was deserved - his life was more atrocious than any other character in the book up to that point. He deserved a break. You know in most fantasy tales, the heroes kill the Dark Lords flat out and this issue does not arise, but JKR decided that in her world, using the AK curse at least, affects the soul. I don't know why she did that, but it is a twist on the norm. :)

posted by wwb
Yes, that is what I was saying. A bomb tossed in the middle of a crowd of tourists or in the middle of a group of soldiers in self defense will still kill them all. It doesn't care who they are or if they are innocent or guilty. It will simply kill and that makes a bomb, used only for the purpose of killing people (for whatever reason) a bad instrument of destruction.

I think you are correct. I agree. But you still need those things too, don't you, in order to defend yourself and your nation from outside and sometimes inside threats. That was what I meant and that was why I said sometimes it is not wrong to fight fire with fire; even though destruction is the primary quality of it, even if it does give warmth, when used properly.

I think you are correct. I agree. But you still need those things too, don't you, in order to defend yourself and your nation from outside and sometimes inside threats. That was what I meant and that was why I said sometimes it is not wrong to fight fire with fire; even though destruction is the primary quality of it, even if it does give warmth, when used properly.

I would agree that self-defense is not wrong. I think that JKR showed that in the 7 Potters raid when Harry was tossing off curses and DEs fell from their brooms as a result (presumably dying). He wasn't using AK curses though, so his soul would not be affected. However, it was a showing of Harry acting in self-defense in a way that caused others to likely die. Lupin later addressed it indicating that it was okay to fight fire with fire in self-defense - just like Kingsley believed he killed a DE during the raid and no one said a thing about it.

You really have a point there. However, some of Harry's powers must have come from the Voldemort connection - Parseltongue certainly did, and Dumbledore said something at "Kings Cross" about Harry's wand taking on some of the power of Voldemort. Whether that would remain after Voldy was gone it's hard to say - Parseltongue left him - but I don't see why the wand should change. And I don't doubt that Harry was in himself a very powerful wizard.
I think it is truly remarkable, that with a piece of Voldemort's soul inside him, and certain magical skills that came from Voldemort alone, Harry's own soul remained so incredibly pure. It's almost as if Lily's love protection extended to protecting his very soul against the corrupting influence of Voldemort's evil soul.

I think it is truly remarkable, that with a piece of Voldemort's soul inside him, and certain magical skills that came from Voldemort alone, Harry's own soul remained so incredibly pure. It's almost as if Lily's love protection extended to protecting his very soul against the corrupting influence of Voldemort's evil soul.

But, this is a question that exercises me greatly: in what real sense does Harry's soul remain 'so incredibly pure'?

For example: do we often see him being especially selfless? OK, so he has a 'saving people' complex. That is no less than I would expect of someone in his position, quite frankly. I would be disappointed in him if he was not prepared to save people like Draco, who don't necessarily 'deserve' it. Whether Draco 'deserves' it or not is irrelevant: what Harry sees is a fellow pupil about to be consumed in a horrible fire and he does what I hope I would do in the same circumstances - he doesn't leave Draco to die but dives in to the rescue.

It's a great moment :tu: but one would expect no less of a hero as brave and pure of heart as Harry is meant to be. (As a Tolkien fan, I have very high standards of my heroes.) Rowling has built him up as the Saviour of Wizarding Britain: the bar is set pretty high, and Harry must reach it.

Oh, and he is prepared to make friends with non-cool people like Neville and Luna. Which is nice of him. :) But does that make him especially pure? :cool:

After all, he's not very selfless in his reaction to Hermione after she breaks his wand in DH. Which is very human of him :) but not particularly pure or saintly. Rowling does not portray Harry as an especially saintly person. Which is very much why I like him as a character, btw ... I like the fact that Harry is so ordinary in so many ways, and the fact that he's a bit rebellious, can have a temper, etc.

I always interpret the stuff about Harry being so very pure in heart as being a generic contrast between souls: the contrast between the soul of a cruel sociopath like Voldemort, who has deliberately bled out all shreds of his humanity, who is in total denial about what it means to be human ... and the soul of an innocent, relatively unspoiled boy who retains, despite his own unhappy experiences of tragedy and abuse, the glorious human capacity to love.

The moment when I find Harry purest is when he demonstrates incredible purity of purpose and enormous courage in going out to meet Voldemort and face certain death. He offers himself up as sacrifice, for the sake of others, and thus in that chapter he truly becomes the hero that Rowling intended him to be ... seeing it all through to the bitter end. Awesome. :tu:

That depth and quality of self-sacrifice in a hero will always impress me far more than any amount of magical powers that a wizard may possess. :cool:

But, this is a question that exercises me greatly: in what real sense does Harry's soul remain 'so incredibly pure'?

I don't think it was...he did use unforgiveables. However, his soul would be mended by his acts following those events, that is how it works in Potterverse. Although there is the self-defense and defense of others aspect to look at - if those come into play, his soul would not have been affected. But apparently just acting mean or out of anger does not affect one's soul in Potterverse - unless accompanied by an unforgiveable or some other dark harmful curse.

After all, he's not very selfless in his reaction to Hermione after she breaks his wand in DH. Which is very human of him but not particularly pure or saintly.
Isn't he? He does his best not to show how hurt he is. I don't remember him being mean to her about it, or even reminding her of it. In fact, he is aware that part of her disparagement of his troubles with the stolen wand is based on guilt over breaking his real wand, so he doesn't press the issue with her.

In my eyes, the true purity of Harry's soul is that he acts so completely unselfishly, even walking in to the forest with the full intention of deliberately allowing Voldemort to kill him. Can you imagine purer heroism than that? Could you do it? Could I? (Yeah - Aragorn probably would, but that's another book! ;))

Aberforth tells Harry to run away and save himself, but to Harry that isn't even an option. He is never once tempted over to "the Dark side", but is unwavering in his intention to destroy Voldemort even if it kills him, and even when he believes that it will. And none of it is for personal gain - not at all! To me, that shows an exceptionally pure, brave and totally unselfish soul, untainted by the evil of the parasitic soul fragment attached to it.

I don't think it was...he did use unforgiveables. However, his soul would be mended by his acts following those events, that is how it works in Potterverse. Although there is the self-defense and defense of others aspect to look at - if those come into play, his soul would not have been affected. But apparently just acting mean or out of anger does not affect one's soul in Potterverse - unless accompanied by an unforgiveable or some other dark harmful curse.

I can't help reflecting that this morality is all rather convenient for our good guys. :whistle: So Harry can cast a Crucio and be unaffected spiritually by it! Shouldn't someone even as heroic as Harry have to bear the consequences of their actions? :cool:

Isn't he? He does his best not to show how hurt he is. I don't remember him being mean to her about it, or even reminding her of it. In fact, he is aware that part of her disparagement of his troubles with the stolen wand is based on guilt over breaking his real wand, so he doesn't press the issue with her.

Oh, Harry isn't mean to Hermione, sure: he's not a mean person. :) But he is pretty cold towards her in the immediate aftermath of the event. Which is understandable, but hardly selfless.

In my eyes, the true purity of Harry's soul is that he acts so completely unselfishly, even walking in to the forest with the full intention of deliberately allowing Voldemort to kill him. Can you imagine purer heroism than that? Could you do it? Could I? (Yeah - Aragorn probably would, but that's another book! ;))

Frodo already did. :p

As I've already said, that is the highest Harry moment for me. :tu:

And I had forgotten something: in addition to saving Draco - which is no less than I would expect - Harry also tries to save Pettigrew from being strangled by his own silver hand.

So that's at least three selfless acts. ;) Saving Draco, trying to save Peter, and ... oh yes ... saving the world. :)

JK Rowling clarified the issue of whether or not Harry was really a horcrux in the Pottercast interview she did recently. Here is a part of the transcript:
JKR: Well, I'll tell you- do you know what? This will not end the discussion. (MA:Yeah.) (laughs) I know that, and you know that, but here is the thing: for convenience, I had Dumbledore say to Harry, "You were the Horcrux he never meant to make," but I think, by definition, a Horcrux has to be made intentionally. So because Voldemort never went through the grotesque process that I imagine creates a Horcrux with Harry, (SU: Mm-hm.) it was just that he had destabilized his soul so much that it split when he was hit by the backfiring curse. And so this part of it flies off, and attaches to the only living thing in the room. A part of it flees in the very-close-to-death limbo state that Voldemort then goes on and exists in. I suppose it's very close to being a Horcrux, but Harry did not become an evil object. He didn't have curses upon him that the other Horcruxes had. He himself was not contaminated by carrying this bit of parasitic soul. The only time he ever felt it stirring and moving was in Order of the Phoenix, when he himself goes through a very dark time. And there's a moment where he's looking at Dumbledore, and he feels something rear like a snake inside him, and of course, at those times, it's because the piece of soul inside him is feeding off his emotions. He's going through a dark time, and that piece of soul is enjoying it, and making its presence felt, but he doesn't know what he's feeling, of course. Also, I always imagine that the Sorting Hat detected the presence of that piece of soul (JN: Yeah!) when Harry first tried it on, because it's strongly tempted to put him in Slytherin. So that's how I see it. (JN: Wow.) Now, I know that won't end the debate, but I do think that the strict definition of "Horcrux," once I write the Scottish Book, will have to be given, (SU: Yeah.) (JN: Yes.) and that the definition will be that a receptacle is prepared by Dark Magic to become the receptacle of a fragmented piece of soul, and that that piece of soul was deliberately detached from the master soul to act as a future safeguard, or anchor, to life, and a safeguard against death. So that doesn't really clear anything up. Well, I think it- (JN: It does quite a bit.) It at least states what I believe,(MA laughs) but I don't think it's necessarily going to convince people who have a strong feeling one way or the other on the matter. You know what? That's been the case with most of Harry Potter. (JN laughs) I give my explanation, and it just fuels more debate.

But, this is a question that exercises me greatly: in what real sense does Harry's soul remain 'so incredibly pure'?


Harry did use "Sectumsempra" on Draco. He didn't know what the spell would do and it was in self-defense, but it makes me question Harry's "pureness". But not in a bad way. Of course I think Harry's a great guy, dying for everyone and all that jazz. It just shows me Harry's human and he, like everyone else, does not-so-good-things sometimes.

Moving a discussion from the Snape and Lily thread to here, where it probably fits better...

It was suggested on that thread that Harry is a better person than his parents. I agree with this assessment. I would add, that in my opinion, Harry is superior to the Marauders, and his friendships are superior to theirs.

Harry recognized James' cruelty to Snape in OotP, and was disturbed by it. It is also not something Harry would ever do. Another way in which Harry is shown to be better than his father, in my opinion, is their respective 'rescues' of people. James rescues Snape as a boy, and this is of course good, but it is not a selfless act, in the sense that Snape's death or transformation to a werewolf would likely have had dire consequences for James's two best friends, one of whom is partly responsibkle for Snape's danger. Harry, on the other hand, saves Draco, an enemy, in a dangerous situation where he and his friends have nothing to gain from it, and which they did not in any way create.

Harry is superior to his mother, as I see it, in the quality of forgiveness. In DH, I felt Harry's recognition of Dudley's change of heart contrasted with Lily's snide remarks about the vase Petunia sent her, in the letter to Sirius Harry found in Sirius's room. Harry is also able to forgive his best friend when that friend walks out on him in a time of great need. Lily does not hold any hope out to her best friend when he offends her.

Harry's superiority to Lupin is demostrated, in my view, in DH, when Harry confronts him about his desire to leave Tonks and the baby. Not only because Harry better sees how wrong Lupin is acting, but also because he is willing to confront Lupin, the only surviving friend of his father, and risk losing his friendship. (Lupin's great failing is the desire to be liked, which prevented him from standing up to his friends at school when he felt they were in the wrong, and also prevented him from telling Albus what he knew about Sirius Black in PoA).

Harry's superiority to Sirius, in my opinion, comes through most clearly in his dealings with Kreacher. He is able to overcome the hate and revulsion he feels for the House Elf who played a role in Sirius's death and triat him kindly.

Peter, I think, shows the relative flaw in the Marauder friendship, as compared to the friendship the Trio and their friejds share. Many readers have pointed to a supposed similarity between Neville and Peter. I don't see it, myself, except on the most superficial level of relatively lesser magical power and a lack of confidence. But the way Neville is treated by the Trio, compared to how Sirius treats Peter (and the others tolerate it), is like night and day. Harry and his friends never make fun of Neville. They, particularly Harry, support him when others (like Draco) do. James sits by as Sirius insults Peter in the scene we are shown in OotP.

I think Rowling is actually doing something even broader, with showing an improvement in the new generation of Harry and his age cohort with the Mafloys as well, but that is beyond the scope of this thread...

Moving a discussion from the Snape and Lily thread to here, where it probably fits better...

It was suggested on that thread that Harry is a better person than his parents. I agree with this assessment. I would add, that in my opinion, Harry is superior to the Marauders, and his friendships are superior to theirs.

Harry recognized James' cruelty to Snape in OotP, and was disturbed by it. It is also not something Harry would ever do. Another way in which Harry is shown to be better than his father, in my opinion, is their respective 'rescues' of people. James rescues Snape as a boy, and this is of course good, but it is not a selfless act, in the sense that Snape's death or transformation to a werewolf would likely have had dire consequences for James's two best friends, one of whom is partly responsibkle for Snape's danger. Harry, on the other hand, saves Draco, an enemy, in a dangerous situation where he and his friends have nothing to gain from it, and which they did not in any way create.

I thought that JKR was making it clear that Harry was not superior in this regard when he less than intelligently flung an untested curse at Malfoy that was marked "for enemies". That resulted in an act of cruelty that was greater than Harry intended - but the important takeaway was that he knew it was meant to be harmful ("for enemies" would hardly be beneficial) and he used it against his enemy. His father had used a spell against an enemy that was known to him. If it was cruel, then the creator (Snape himself) was cruel to have made it and spread it (or allowed it to be spread) about the school where everyone was using it upon one another.

For Harry, he would be hard to justify his act as less cruel because he knowingly used a curse marked 'for enemies' on a school mate, with the intention of doing harm and not knowing what harm would result. I believe that Harry learned several lessons then and later as a result of his grand error. One of those lessons was that he had confronted his enemy in a far worse manner than his father had - with a curse created by the very man who he'd considered the victim in the earlier scene.

Harry is superior to his mother, as I see it, in the quality of forgiveness. In DH, I felt Harry's recognition of Dudley's change of heart contrasted with Lily's snide remarks about the vase Petunia sent her, in the letter to Sirius Harry found in Sirius's room. Harry is also able to forgive his best friend when that friend walks out on him in a time of great need. Lily does not hold any hope out to her best friend when he offends her.

I believe this comparison is flawed (respecting your view). Harry was not confronted with one of his best friends turning to evil - hunting down muggles and killing them; torturing Order members; killing those against them and holding views of superiority that rendered certain groups of society - inferior, hence worthless, hence to be murdered and eradicated.

I think Harry would have reacted in the same way as his mother in her place. In my opinion of Harry's character, he would not support a person who he'd attempted to sway from such a view and who decidedly chose that way of life over what Harry felt was right.

Harry's superiority to Lupin is demostrated, in my view, in DH, when Harry confronts him about his desire to leave Tonks and the baby. Not only because Harry better sees how wrong Lupin is acting, but also because he is willing to confront Lupin, the only surviving friend of his father, and risk losing his friendship. (Lupin's great failing is the desire to be liked, which prevented him from standing up to his friends at school when he felt they were in the wrong, and also prevented him from telling Albus what he knew about Sirius Black in PoA).

Everyone was superior to Lupin in Lupin's view. If Harry himself felt that he was superior, he was merely supporting Lupin's view.

But the reasoning here is flawed in my opinion (respecting your view). Confrontation does not make one superior. If that was the case, Lupin would be superior because he confronted Harry many more times over his mis-deeds and way of thinking than Harry confronted him. And at the risk of Harry not liking him. So I don't understand that particular point as supporting superiority here. As for the other point, Harry was not disliked for who he was (a human boy) - whereas Lupin was (a werewolf). Thus, a valid comparison could only be made in relation to how Harry would react to being disliked as a werewolf (and how he would then face the world), if he was one, which he was not. The reverse is true as well. Lupin could not know how he would react as a human boy facing the trials of being the Hero marked to kill Voldemort. Both Harry and Lupin could only advise one another as beloved friends, which they did - and that does not make either of them superior, imo.

Harry's superiority to Sirius, in my opinion, comes through most clearly in his dealings with Kreacher. He is able to overcome the hate and revulsion he feels for the House Elf who played a role in Sirius's death and triat him kindly.

I feel the reverse is true. I don't think Sirius responded strongly enough to Kreacher's poor behavior, attitude and actions. I found Harry's befriending Kreacher unbelieveable - thus his 'superiority' in this instance is questionable to me.

Peter, I think, shows the relative flaw in the Marauder friendship, as compared to the friendship the Trio and their friejds share. Many readers have pointed to a supposed similarity between Neville and Peter. I don't see it, myself, except on the most superficial level of relatively lesser magical power and a lack of confidence. But the way Neville is treated by the Trio, compared to how Sirius treats Peter (and the others tolerate it), is like night and day. Harry and his friends never make fun of Neville. They, particularly Harry, support him when others (like Draco) do. James sits by as Sirius insults Peter in the scene we are shown in OotP.

Imo, it would be difficult to find someone who was not superior to Peter.

I think Rowling is actually doing something even broader, with showing an improvement in the new generation of Harry and his age cohort with the Mafloys as well, but that is beyond the scope of this thread...

I don't believe this is true, respecting your view. I think she was showing different generations facing different things with respect to inner relationships. There were similarities, but the differences were quite markedly different, imo.

I thought that JKR was making it clear that Harry was not superior in this regard when he less than intelligently flung an untested curse at Malfoy that was marked "for enemies". That resulted in an act of cruelty that was greater than Harry intended - but the important takeaway was that he knew it was meant to be harmful ("for enemies" would hardly be beneficial) and he used it against his enemy. His father had used a spell against an enemy that was known to him. If it was cruel, then the creator (Snape himself) was cruel to have made it and spread it (or allowed it to be spread) about the school where everyone was using it upon one another.

Harry was mistaken obviously, when he uses an unknown spell to attack another student; I agree. But I don't think he would he have turned Malfoy upside down in front of the whole school and neither would he make fun of others in a way that could hurt. That is because he has been there in Snape's place far too many times to count IMO.

And he saved Malfoy and Goyle even when Ron was shouting to Harry to let them be and save himself; Harry could not do that. That I think is his greatest quality and one I believe his parents and Sirius did not have to the extent Harry did. We don't see such instances in the books anyway.

James -- if we were to take him; he was a good man to his friends, wife and baby. He was a good man to the Order members with whom he fought. How was he, to his enemies and to those he did not like or particularly care? We don't know because we are not shown or told. We see 2 instances though and in both he is not kind; he stood them upside down and renamed them IMO.

Where do I believe Harry differed and was better than James? He is a good man to his friends, his wife, his children, his childhood nemesis, his enemies (Draco), to those who work for him (Kreacher) and smart enough to truly understand a man called Severus Snape and name his child after him.

I think Harry's a HERO too :love:, er...after Snape of course. :D

For Harry, he would be hard to justify his act as less cruel because he knowingly used a curse marked 'for enemies' on a school mate, with the intention of doing harm and not knowing what harm would result. I believe that Harry learned several lessons then and later as a result of his grand error. One of those lessons was that he had confronted his enemy in a far worse manner than his father had - with a curse created by the very man who he'd considered the victim in the earlier scene.

For the sake of argument, Harry was on the receiving end of a crucio and who knew it could have been followed by the Avada Kedavra, and I think he remembered the spell for enemies and cast it on Draco. He was wrong to do so; I agree, but I think these were his reasons for doing so.

I believe this comparison is flawed (respecting your view). Harry was not confronted with one of his best friends turning to evil - hunting down muggles and killing them; torturing Order members; killing those against them and holding views of superiority that rendered certain groups of society - inferior, hence worthless, hence to be murdered and eradicated.


No I don't believe the comparison is flawed, because I think Harry treated his friends far better than James and Sirius treated Peter.

Peter was weak, he was a sycophant and for 7 years the other 3 Marauders displayed appalling lack of judgement towards a boy whom they thought was a dear friend?? And that poor judgement got one killed, one in Azkaban for 13 years and one reduced to absolute poverty.

I think Harry would have reacted in the same way as his mother in her place. In my opinion of Harry's character, he would not support a person who he'd attempted to sway from such a view and who decidedly chose that way of life over what Harry felt was right.

But he does. He went ahead and named his son after that man, who told Voldemort of the Prophecy and became the reason, Voldemort actively pursed him. Of course the Potters would be in danger even if it were not for the Prophecy, but the Prophecy made Voldemort pursue Harry specifically.

Harry I think would have understood, even if he had known about Snape’s love for Lily in his 5th year.

Where I think Lily falls down in my estimation is in her comparison in my mind to Hermione. I think Jo showed us the two girls, who were essentially on the side of the Light, but where both the girls’ friendship had a remarkable effect on the said friends.

Snape and Lily.

Harry and Hermione.

Lily, I think chose between James between Snape and James and broke off with one because she chose the other. I cannot believe she would not know about Snape's spells, his Slytherin friends and the fact she was okay with Snape calling others mudblood for years. It was only when she started crushing on James, Snape's character suddenly seemed unacceptable to her. Kindly note, this is the way I see Lily and her relation to Snape, James and her friendship and love. She broke off with Snape after he called her a mudblood and threw his acts that he had been doing for *years* as the reason. I personally find that uncomfortable. It did not show to me Lily in a good light where she spurns all that is bad, but in a bad light where she is not standing by a sinking friend after she starts crushing on James. Until then, they were best friends with all that Snape did; called others mudblood for years invented the levicorpus and sectumsempra and was friendly with his Slytherin friends.

Hermione; I love for these two actions; standing by Harry in GOF when she was already crushing on Ron and staying with Harry, when she was officially going out with Ron and shared his belief that Harry was not doing enough. She knew Harry would break if she left too, and she chose to stay with him. She was a true friend who chose what was right rather than what was easy and gave Harry the strength to face everything IMO.

As I wrote earlier, had it been Hermione instead of Lily, she would have given Snape the cold shoulder for a few days and then she would have called Snape and told him he had to choose. She would have been open with him and she would placed the onus of that relationship on Snape. And who knows that may have saved Snape as well. Lily may have done all this, but we don't see it or hear about it in the books and so we have to take what we have in the books to form opinions.

The way I see it (and I realize no one else probably sees it this way), is Lily's friendship with Snape brought him down, while Snape's capacity to love takes him to great heights.

Hermione's love for Harry keeps him sane on 2 important occasions where he would have otherwise surely broken. Harry was indeed lucky to have Hermione as a friend; I would not say the same for Snape. This is my opinion only and what I have understood from the books.

Harry does not act like his mother at all IMO. He, as I said in the Snape/Lily thread is a far better version than his parents IMO.

Harry would never hurt or make fun in a cruel manner of anyone, just because he could; he would never exercise his superior magical power to mock at those who are not as good as him, he lives and let lives IMO. That I think is his greatest quality which makes him superior to everybody else IMO.

Everyone was superior to Lupin in Lupin's view. If Harry himself felt that he was superior, he was merely supporting Lupin's view.

But the reasoning here is flawed in my opinion (respecting your view). Confrontation does not make one superior. If that was the case, Lupin would be superior because he confronted Harry many more times over his mis-deeds and way of thinking than Harry confronted him. And at the risk of Harry not liking him. So I don't understand that particular point as supporting superiority here. As for the other point, Harry was not disliked for who he was (a human boy) - whereas Lupin was (a werewolf). Thus, a valid comparison could only be made in relation to how Harry would react to being disliked as a werewolf (and how he would then face the world), if he was one, which he was not. The reverse is true as well. Lupin could not know how he would react as a human boy facing the trials of being the Hero marked to kill Voldemort. Both Harry and Lupin could only advise one another as beloved friends, which they did - and that does not make either of them superior, imo.

I think Harry's conclusion in that chapter was most important. Harry tells Hermione and Ron that if Lupin would go back to Tonks and the baby, his fallout with Lupin was more than worth it, even knowing as zgirnius said, Lupin was the last link to his parents and Sirius. I think that was very unselfish of him.

I feel the reverse is true. I don't think Sirius responded strongly enough to Kreacher's poor behavior, attitude and actions. I found Harry's befriending Kreacher unbelieveable - thus his 'superiority' in this instance is questionable to me.

Harry was merely kind and he did not mock Kreacher's respect and affection for Regulus. That's all it took for the old elf to turn. Sirius IMO did not bother to make the effort and like Hermione says in DH, Sirius faced the repercussions of his own actions.

Imo, it would be difficult to find someone who was not superior to Peter.

All the more reason IMO for the Marauders to be careful. But for 7 years they are remarkably thick headed and I include Lily in this as well, once she started going out with James, and this reflects their poor judgement and sadly they face the effects of that bad judgement IMO.

The entire post is only my opinion, just in case I have forgotten to post it at the appropriate palces. :)

Imo, it would be difficult to find someone who was not superior to Peter.

I agree. My point was that even though Peter was "A Marauder", the way Harry treated Neville (an outsider, not even a member of "The Trio") was better than the way James and Sirius treated Peter. We see Sirius insulting Peter in "Snape's Worst Memory", in front of their other friends, and the best James omes up with to stop him is to find a target Sirius prefers.

Harry and his friends are supportive to Neville, on the other hand (for example, in PS/SS telling him he is worth ten of Draco).

The way I see it (and I realize no one else probably sees it this way), is Lily's friendship with Snape brought him down
Oh please. Lily's friendship did not bring Snape down. Snape brought Snape down.

Imo, it would be difficult to find someone who was not superior to Peter.

I agree. My point was that even though Peter was "A Marauder", the way Harry treated Neville (an outsider, not even a member of "The Trio") was better than the way James and Sirius treated Peter. We see Sirius insulting Peter in "Snape's Worst Memory", in front of their other friends, and the best James omes up with to stop him is to find a target Sirius prefers.

Harry and his friends are supportive to Neville, on the other hand (for example, in PS/SS telling him he is worth ten of Draco).

But you are basing their entire 7 year school relationship on 1 or 2 scenes. I agree that they likely treated him like that from time to time (not just in those scenes), but there were other times too. We know they helped him become an animagi and so there was friendship there as well. Neville on the other hand was not an intimate of Harry's in the same way as Peter was to the Marauders. Neville did not hang around the trio to the same degree as Peter hung around his mates. They were 4 mauraders and Harry and his friends were 3...hence the trio.

Harry never sympathised with Peter.

Harry was mistaken obviously, when he uses an unknown spell to attack another student; I agree. But I don't think he would he have turned Malfoy upside down in front of the whole school and neither would he make fun of others in a way that could hurt. That is because he has been there in Snape's place far too many times to count IMO.

And he saved Malfoy and Goyle even when Ron was shouting to Harry to let them be and save himself; Harry could not do that. That I think is his greatest quality and one I believe his parents and Sirius did not have to the extent Harry did. We don't see such instances in the books anyway.

James -- if we were to take him; he was a good man to his friends, wife and baby. He was a good man to the Order members with whom he fought. How was he, to his enemies and to those he did not like or particularly care? We don't know because we are not shown or told. We see 2 instances though and in both he is not kind; he stood them upside down and renamed them IMO.

Where do I believe Harry differed and was better than James? He is a good man to his friends, his wife, his children, his childhood nemesis, his enemies (Draco), to those who work for him (Kreacher) and smart enough to truly understand a man called Severus Snape and name his child after him.

I think Harry's a HERO too :love:, er...after Snape of course. :D



For the sake of argument, Harry was on the receiving end of a crucio and who knew it could have been followed by the Avada Kedavra, and I think he remembered the spell for enemies and cast it on Draco. He was wrong to do so; I agree, but I think these were his reasons for doing so.

Be that as it may, imo, Harry's action was much worse.

The way I see it (and I realize no one else probably sees it this way), is Lily's friendship with Snape brought him down, while Snape's capacity to love takes him to great heights.

What do you mean by that? I don't think I understand.

Harry would never hurt or make fun in a cruel manner of anyone, just because he could; he would never exercise his superior magical power to mock at those who are not as good as him, he lives and let lives IMO. That I think is his greatest quality which makes him superior to everybody else IMO.

I can only recommend a re-read of the scenes between Harry and Draco. I would have to respectfully disagree.

I think Harry's conclusion in that chapter was most important. Harry tells Hermione and Ron that if Lupin would go back to Tonks and the baby, his fallout with Lupin was more than worth it, even knowing as zgirnius said, Lupin was the last link to his parents and Sirius. I think that was very unselfish of him.

Well we were discussing confrontation as making someone superior. Since they both confronted one another over different things, neither could be called superior for doing so, imo.

Harry's act was poorly done, but his heart was in the right place - and Lupin needed help. Lest we forget, Harry was Lupin's only link to his beloved friends James and Lily. That was something he treasured as well and risked losing. But these two loved and respected one another, so I am not certain how any of their arguments are proof of anything other than their friendship.

Harry was merely kind and he did not mock Kreacher's respect and affection for Regulus. That's all it took for the old elf to turn. Sirius IMO did not bother to make the effort and like Hermione says in DH, Sirius faced the repercussions of his own actions.

Well I agree, Harry with Hermione worked out a way to deal with Kreacher. But I believe Sirius was way too easy on the spitefully behaving elf in the first place.

The_Green_Woods originally posted:

Harry would never hurt or make fun in a cruel manner of anyone, just because he could; he would never exercise his superior magical power to mock at those who are not as good as him, he lives and let lives IMO. That I think is his greatest quality which makes him superior to everybody else IMO.


I can only recommend a re-read of the scenes between Harry and Draco. I would have to respectfully disagree.

In 99% of the confrontations between Harry and Draco, Harry is responding to provocation. (That is different from James and Severus, who were equally to blame, IMO, for the antipathy between them. And Sev's involvement in the Dark Arts still doesn't justify James's attitude towards him, IMO.)

That doesn't mean Harry is always right in how he responds to Draco, of course. Our Harry has a temper, and is often rash in how he behaves and speaks -- which is one of the things I find endearing about him ... but it is one of his faults! But I agree with The_Green_Woods that Harry is not a cruel, spiteful person who bullies others or picks on them. This was a grave failing in his father, IMO, and Harry (thankfully) has not inherited it. And I don't think Harry would have inherited James's bullying streak had he been brought up by doting parents and not the Dursleys, who abused him. That is because Harry's deepest nature is more like Lily's than James's, as Dumbledore told Snape.

Re: Harry and Draco and the 'Sectumsempra' incident; of course Harry was very wrong to use the spell when he didn't know what it could do. But he was acting in self-defence ... Draco was about to Crucio him! That doesn't wholly exonerate Harry, I agree (and he was absolutely horrified by what he had done) and I certainly don't think he is above reproach or should never be disciplined or reprimanded. Certainly not!

All I'm saying is, bullying is not one of his faults. :cool:

What do you mean by that? I don't think I understand.

I have posted my answer in the Snape/Lily thread wwb, because there was only Snape and Lily. :)

I can only recommend a re-read of the scenes between Harry and Draco. I would have to respectfully disagree.

LOL I will; but I know that even after I read and re-read, I can never bring a Harry Potter who is laughing along with Ron Weasley (he's far more believable IMO, though I doubt Harry and Hermione will let him get away with it, not to mention the howler that will kill his hearing from Molly Weasley), and has Draco strung upside down in front of the whole school and then asks, 'Now who wants to see me remove Drakie's underpants off?'

I would respectfully disagree with you that Harry was capable of doing what James did. I just cannot see him do anything like that, seeing especially the way he was upset and humiliated for Snape's sake after seeing it.

I think that Harry had a enmity with Draco that they could not quite patch up, even after the war; but I just cannot see Harry act the way Sirirus and James did.

JMHO

EDIT :: Pearl_Took, you explained much better than me. :)

I can only recommend a re-read of the scenes between Harry and Draco. I would have to respectfully disagree.

I'm not sure what you are talking about, here. Would you care to post an example of a scene in which you feel Harry acted the way James did in SWM? I'd be happy to look up the actual text, if you could indicate which scene you mean in some way (which book, roughly what happened, etc.)

LOL I will; but I know that even after I read and re-read, I can never bring a Harry Potter who is laughing along with Ron Weasley (he's far more believable IMO, though I doubt Harry and Hermione will let him get away with it, not to mention the howler that will kill his hearing from Molly Weasley), and has Draco strung upside down in front of the whole school and then asks, 'Now who wants to see me remove Drakie's underpants off?'

Totally agree with you. :tu:

I absolutely cannot imagine Ron doing such a thing either. Ron just is not mean. We never see Ron being mean to another person. OK, so he laughed when Moody turns Draco into a ferret. Which was a really mean thing for Moody to do. :whistle: (But then, he was really Barty Crouch Jnr. What do you expect from a Death Eater? :p) No: Ron can be insensitive, jealous and sulky, but he's never spiteful. OK, enough Ron fangirling from me and back on topic. :p

I would respectfully disagree with you that Harry was capable of doing what James did. I just cannot see him do anything like that, seeing especially the way he was upset and humiliated for Snape's sake after seeing it.

And hands up all of you who totally loved Harry for feeling so upset on Snape's behalf after reading that chapter. :love:

I was, like: Harry feels sympathy for SNAPE!!!!!!!!!1111111

:wow:

EDIT :: Pearl_Took, you explained much better than me. :)

Aw. Thanks, hon. :)

I was, like: Harry feels sympathy for SNAPE!!!!!!!!!1111111 :wow:
I agree about your reaction.

That was so out of character and really NOT understandable for me. After all those years of hate and torturment, is it unlikely that someone changes and starts to like a person just because it turned out that they liked their mother. Even if it turned out that Snape is Harry's father, that doesn't makes up for all the things he did to him in the past years.

I don't think that's how it works....

Harry's reaction in this scene is complex, and to me, thoroughly believable. He has had a few years at this point to learn anbout the father he never knbew. he knows he looks like James (except for the eyes, of course), his patronus takes the form of James's animal form, he is good at quiddich.... everyone so far has told him his father was great, and it was a person to look up to, to be proud of, to aspire to.

And then, suddenly, he sees James do something that he, Harry, finds horrifying. Harry, the boy who has had more than his fair share of bullying, and recognises it for what it is, sees his father attacking another person without good reason.

In a way, his father in this scene acts in a way that harry has come to expect from Dudley, and from Draco. And what is more, Harry can sypathise with Neville, the uncool kid who gets bullied by those who see themselves as cool. In short, James acts like various people Harry has come to despise.


At the same time, because he can identify with the bullied person, he can't help identifying with Snape. I am sure that wasn't comortable. It isn't comfortable to be forced to feel for your enemy. Black-and-white worlds are comfortable, shades-of-grey worlds aren't.

Harry's view of the world is turned upside down at this very point, and that's why he is so disturbed about it all.

I think someone with a weaker character may well have managed to interpret the scene in a way that would have allowed him to keep his cosy old perspective (along the lines of 'I know how nasty Snape is, he was probably nasty to my father before this'). It would have been fairly easy to do this. But Harry doesn't, and I DON'T think it is unrealistic. It draws him as a particular kind of person, and I think this particular piece of evidence is consistent with what we otherwise learn to expect of Harry.

Klio, that was a brilliant post. :tu:

I can't think of anything to say except how brilliant it was. :D :)

We never see Ron being mean to another person.

Well, there is an incident in HBP where he turfs a first-year out of one of the common room's comfy chairs.
The way I see it is, Ron is a nice guy, but he has some trouble seeing from another's POV. Hence being surprised at the first-years' heights, turfing them out of chairs, not trusting Harry's word in GoF, and ultimately running away for a while in DH (the locket may have augmented this fault).

Back to Harry--
I think the reason Harry was able to so easily forgive Snape (aside from the fact that Harry is naturally a very nice person) is that what he saw in SWM and TPT very much mirrors the sheer amount pain, loss, and struggle he himself has had to endure. He is able to sympathize.
He also comes to see that, despite Snape's attitude in class, he has been working for a while to protect someone he doesn't even like. Harry is able to respect that, I think.

At the end, Harry doesn't say to Albus Severus that Sev was the nicest person he ever knew. That simply wouldn't be true, and Harry knows this. What he does know is that he has learned that bravery and kindness do not always come together, and that we can love a person for their good traits while still being irritated at them for the bad.

I'm sure that some things Snape has said to him still rankle, and that does matter to Harry. But in the big picture, Snape's actions are much better than his words, and it's the former that count most.

(lol, I wasn't even planning to talk about Snape when I entered this thread. But voila! He and Harry are the topic of the day. What luck! :D)

ETA: Nice post, Klio. :tu:

I agree about your reaction.

That was so out of character and really NOT understandable for me. After all those years of hate and torturment, is it unlikely that someone changes and starts to like a person just because it turned out that they liked their mother. Even if it turned out that Snape is Harry's father, that doesn't makes up for all the things he did to him in the past years.

I think it was Snape helping Harry in his mission to bring Voldemort down that did the trick, rather than his love for Harry's mother. :)

Since free speech is honored, I would say that not everyone agreed with Harry's view of SWM. It came across as immature and highly unrealistic to me, even for a young man who'd never had a date. How could one go from that scene and conclude that it was possible James had forced Lily to marry him? Harry and anyone else who finds that reasonable is in my view, taking a completely fairytale view of life. Even JKR couldn't maintain Harry feeling like he did immediately after seeing SWM for too long. It was even too far-fetched for fantasy. At the end of the very same book we have Harry declaring to Dumbledore: "it's not okay for Sirius to hate Kreacher, but it is okay for Snape to hate my dad?" Clearly not the words of a lad who feels that his dad is deserving of Snape's long-term, unabated hatred. Clearly not a lad who felt what he saw in SWM, upon reflection, was as bad as he had framed it after viewing it.

After SWM, Harry remembered his dad - every act his dad had done and that is all he focused on. But later, apparently he recalled Snape lashing out at his father with Sectumsempra, calling his mother a mudblood, yelling out a stream of curses and threatening his father and friends. It is called a more objective perspective and that is what Harry gained over time. It doesn't make anything that happened in SWM better from his view, but it does give balance to the situation.

Personally, I think James acted completely normal in SWM for a person his age and with his personality in those circumstances. So did Snape. Both were horrible and I think Harry realized that in the end. Harry's sympathy for Snape dwindled as his sympathy for his father rose. That cannot be exemplified any clearer than the statement he made that I wrote above. For if Harry did still feel totally in sympathy with Snape due to that scene, those words would have never left his mouth - because he would agree that Snape had every reason for justifiably hating his father. That is based on Harry's character as shown throughout the series.

Since free speech is honored, I would say that not everyone agreed with Harry's view of SWM. It came across as immature and highly unrealistic to me, even for a young man who'd never had a date. How could one go from that scene and conclude that it was possible James had forced Lily to marry him? Harry and anyone else who finds that reasonable is in my view, taking a completely fairytale view of life.

I agree to a point. I think Harry was very upset and that set him off thinking the most impossible things his father could have done. That was to show how let down and upset he was by his father’s behaviour that he even thought his father capable of forcing his mother to marry him. That thought I think displays that. It showed Harry’s utter disappointment with James, who was until then a hero, an idol, and ideal in his eyes. It was to show how bad Harry felt, how dismayed he was with James and Sirius IMO.

Even JKR couldn't maintain Harry feeling like he did immediately after seeing SWM for too long. It was even too far-fetched for fantasy. At the end of the very same book we have Harry declaring to Dumbledore: "it's not okay for Sirius to hate Kreacher, but it is okay for Snape to hate my dad?" Clearly not the words of a lad who feels that his dad is deserving of Snape's long-term, unabated hatred. Clearly not a lad who felt what he saw in SWM, upon reflection, was as bad as he had framed it after viewing it.

Harry also blames Snape for Sirius's death in that scene, clearly he is emotional and it is also understandable because he just lost Sirius. But Harry has this enormous capacity to move on, just as he has an enormous sense of justice; the same sense which made him see Snape as the victim and not justify his father and the same sense that made him walk into the Forest and accept Snape on a level not many people would have the heart or capability of doing so. In that manner he was a lot like Snape, who could and did accept the son of his enemy and the man who married the girl he loved. Snape may have turned for Lily, but all the work he did was for Harry who was not only Lily’s child but also as Snape was fond of saying, the blasted James Potter’s child.

And even though Snape never utters a word about Lily in all the 7 books and openly tells us he hates James Potter in every way possible, still it is the child of that man, Snape’s every action benefits. And Harry understood that. The scene which you have written speaks of a moment of great emotional trauma for Harry, where there is grief mixed with guilt. This scene IMO has no bearing on what he saw in the SWM. JMO.

After SWM, Harry remembered his dad - every act his dad had done and that is all he focused on. But later, apparently he recalled Snape lashing out at his father with Sectumsempra, calling his mother a mudblood, yelling out a stream of curses and threatening his father and friends. It is called a more objective perspective and that is what Harry gained over time. It doesn't make anything that happened in SWM better from his view, but it does give balance to the situation.

Sure he did. Harry could not hate his father, but I am quite sure in my mind that James Potter no longer was seen through rose tinted spectacles by his son. And after the TPT, I think Harry also acknowledged Snape as his greatest protector and also accepted Snape’s love for his mother and Snape himself, completely. The result of which we see in the epilogue where his second son is named for Snape.

Personally, I think James acted completely normal in SWM for a person his age and with his personality in those circumstances. So did Snape. Both were horrible and I think Harry realized that in the end. Harry's sympathy for Snape dwindled as his sympathy for his father rose. That cannot be exemplified any clearer than the statement he made that I wrote above. For if Harry did still feel totally in sympathy with Snape due to that scene, those words would have never left his mouth - because he would agree that Snape had every reason for justifiably hating his father. That is based on Harry's character as shown throughout the series.

I would respectfully disagree with you. He did completely identify with Snape IMO. After the TPT; Harry IMO obviously felt that Snape was justified in his dislike of his father. He named his elder son James because Harry loved his father and his younger son Severus because he agreed with Snape and accepted him, his dislike of James Potter, his love of Lily Potter, everything IMO.

JMO

I agree to a point. I think Harry was very upset and that set him off thinking the most impossible things his father could have done. That was to show how let down and upset he was by his father’s behaviour that he even thought his father capable of forcing his mother to marry him. That thought I think displays that. It showed Harry’s utter disappointment with James, who was until then a hero, an idol, and ideal in his eyes. It was to show how bad Harry felt, how dismayed he was with James and Sirius IMO.



I think there is another very moving aspect to Harry's reaction - in addition to many things that have already been said here. By the time we get to see Snape's worst memory we have somehow got quite used to James, and so has Harry..... and this completely new angle on James brings it home to Harry (and to us) just how little Harry knows about his parents!

I grew up with both my parents, so I find it difficult to tell - but I would guess that it must lead to all sorts of insecurities if you don't know your parents.... in Harry's case this is made worse because he didn't even get to know his parents' world, and then suddenly was expected to succeed in it... and so many people knew his parents. It must be disconcerting enough not to know your parents - but how much worse might it be if everyone keeps telling you that you are like your father? Surely, you'll try to build up an image of them.... and perhaps there are even moments when you might think that you have some sort of idea of what they were like. I think there are points in the story where Harry has the feeling he has the measure of his parents.

But what happens when you suddenly find a pretty good piece of evidence that your idea of them was wrong? I think that Harry's worries about what other nasty things his father may have done reveal a deep insecurity. A sudden reminder that really, he knows almost nothing about his parents, and for all he knows, they could have been completely different from what he has led to believe..... ultimately, he has no chance to find out for himself: he'll always depend on others. I think it is extreme to wonder whether your father forced your mother to marry him - but I think at a moment of complete insecurity such as this it isn't entirely possible that one would at least consider the option (together with other less unbearable ones, of course).





(PS: there is of course the problem that harry seems to ask about his parents far too little in the books.... should we really believe that he never asked anyone what they did for a living,, for example? There are plenty of crucial details like this he didn't know!. I know that this is all there to keep the readers in the dark for long enough. But it is an odd detail).

How do Harry's formative years with the Dursley's influence the person he is now? Would he be the same person if his parents had lived? If he had been sent to live with another wizarding family? If he had been sent to an orphanage like Tom Ridde? MMM Great question..Although I believe that you are a direct result of your upbringing, i think the fact that he had inhereted such a good heart from Lily, he decided to break the cycle that the Dursley's had tried to push on him. I believe Harry's soul would be relatively the same had he had parents vs had he been put in an orphanage. I think he may have preferred to be in an orphanage over the treatment that he received at the Dursley's. I think children in an orphanage get more attention than he received at Privet drive. The bottom line is he CHOSE to make the best of the situation. It was either that or go out on his own which would have lead to his death.

When do we first see evidence of Harry's "saving people" thing? Is this a strength or a flaw? What do you think of his final sacrifice?
We first see it when Malfoy tries to befriend him. He chooses to save himself from becoming part of a less than desireable crowd. He had NO friends at that point so why wouldn't he become friends with Malfor? I think he was chosing to save himself at that point. His saving people is a strength in my mind. Although it gets him into trouble more often than not, being self sacrificial is so rare that it is a gem. His final sacrifice was necessary and since he was such a noble person with others lives in mind, there is no way he could have NOT done it.

I agree to a point. I think Harry was very upset and that set him off thinking the most impossible things his father could have done. That was to show how let down and upset he was by his father’s behaviour that he even thought his father capable of forcing his mother to marry him. That thought I think displays that. It showed Harry’s utter disappointment with James, who was until then a hero, an idol, and ideal in his eyes. It was to show how bad Harry felt, how dismayed he was with James and Sirius IMO.

Harry also blames Snape for Sirius's death in that scene, clearly he is emotional and it is also understandable because he just lost Sirius. But Harry has this enormous capacity to move on, just as he has an enormous sense of justice; the same sense which made him see Snape as the victim and not justify his father and the same sense that made him walk into the Forest and accept Snape on a level not many people would have the heart or capability of doing so. In that manner he was a lot like Snape, who could and did accept the son of his enemy and the man who married the girl he loved. Snape may have turned for Lily, but all the work he did was for Harry who was not only Lily’s child but also as Snape was fond of saying, the blasted James Potter’s child.

And even though Snape never utters a word about Lily in all the 7 books and openly tells us he hates James Potter in every way possible, still it is the child of that man, Snape’s every action benefits. And Harry understood that. The scene which you have written speaks of a moment of great emotional trauma for Harry, where there is grief mixed with guilt. This scene IMO has no bearing on what he saw in the SWM. JMO.

Sure he did. Harry could not hate his father, but I am quite sure in my mind that James Potter no longer was seen through rose tinted spectacles by his son. And after the TPT, I think Harry also acknowledged Snape as his greatest protector and also accepted Snape’s love for his mother and Snape himself, completely. The result of which we see in the epilogue where his second son is named for Snape.

I would respectfully disagree with you. He did completely identify with Snape IMO. After the TPT; Harry IMO obviously felt that Snape was justified in his dislike of his father. He named his elder son James because Harry loved his father and his younger son Severus because he agreed with Snape and accepted him, his dislike of James Potter, his love of Lily Potter, everything IMO. JMO

Well your view is interesting and I can respect it. In the end we can only have personal views and interpretations of everything because we have no idea what Harry felt due to the 19 year leap between the story and the epilogue. Our views are quite distinct. :lol:

How do Harry's formative years with the Dursley's influence the person he is now? Would he be the same person if his parents had lived? If he had been sent to live with another wizarding family? If he had been sent to an orphanage like Tom Riddle? MMM Great question..Although I believe that you are a direct result of your upbringing, i think the fact that he had inhereted such a good heart from Lily, he decided to break the cycle that the Dursley's had tried to push on him. I believe Harry's soul would be relatively the same had he had parents vs had he been put in an orphanage. I think he may have preferred to be in an orphanage over the treatment that he received at the Dursley's. I think children in an orphanage get more attention than he received at Privet drive. The bottom line is he CHOSE to make the best of the situation. It was either that or go out on his own which would have lead to his death.


Interesting take on this.... I just discovered this question and there are some really interesting implications there....

In a way, Harry's character was shaped considerably by the Dursleys, I'd think. His past makes him so susceptible to the plight of others, especially people like Neville. So here we get this cool kid who seems to have (almost) all.... but instead of becoming like his father it is the goodness he inherited from his mother that really comes through.

I wonder how Harry would have been if he had grown up with his parents.... aged one he is already riding a toy broomstick, and I'd say that under the influence of his father and godfather he would probably have been much more at ease with his own popularity and coolness (although of course, in this case he wouldn't have been famous!).

If he had been fostered by a wizarding family much would have depended on who might have taken him in - I'd say that growing up with the Weasleys would probably have produced a pretty balanced young Harry.... but of course still one who would have been much more at ease with his fame and with the wizarding world around him.


I think the fact that Harry was brought up like a muggle is in itself crucial to the story. At times it gives him the chance to 'think outside the box' (hermione does this, too) and simply not to take certain aspects of wizard life for granted. I think that's crucial, too. :)


All in all one would wish that harry hadn't had such a tough time with the Dursleys, but of course, within the story, it is instrumental to creating the character we get to see.... :)

In 99% of the confrontations between Harry and Draco, Harry is responding to provocation. (That is different from James and Severus, who were equally to blame, IMO, for the antipathy between them. And Sev's involvement in the Dark Arts still doesn't justify James's attitude towards him, IMO.)

Be that as it may, while Draco uses words it's usually Harry who turns it into a physical fight. Otherwise? Draco starts the fight but Harry becomes physically aggressive first.

That said, I agree with that Harry would never do this...

LOL I will; but I know that even after I read and re-read, I can never bring a Harry Potter who is laughing along with Ron Weasley (he's far more believable IMO, though I doubt Harry and Hermione will let him get away with it, not to mention the howler that will kill his hearing from Molly Weasley), and has Draco strung upside down in front of the whole school and then asks, 'Now who wants to see me remove Drakie's underpants off?'

Though I don't think Ron would either. I can't think of one instance where Ron was shown to be physically aggressive like that or at all. Harry, Hermione and Ginny are far more physically aggressive than he is.

Honestly, the only person I could see doing that to someone else is, well, Draco.

In a way, Harry's character was shaped considerably by the Dursleys, I'd think. His past makes him so susceptible to the plight of others, especially people like Neville.

great point. didn't even think of that honestly. i think this can also translate into why he takes to Luna as well. Let's face it, Luna had a very 'strange' upbringing as well. She lost a mother AND her father is well a bit loony. i 100% agree with the fact that harry takes to those who are ailing or need saving..as Klio stated, Neville..Luna who desperately needed friends or even acceptance (clearly inferred by the fact she had painted portraits on her ceiling)

do you believe that there was anyone else in the series that Harry is especially drawn to for this reason?

I think there is another very moving aspect to Harry's reaction - in addition to many things that have already been said here. By the time we get to see Snape's worst memory we have somehow got quite used to James, and so has Harry..... and this completely new angle on James brings it home to Harry (and to us) just how little Harry knows about his parents!

I grew up with both my parents, so I find it difficult to tell - but I would guess that it must lead to all sorts of insecurities if you don't know your parents.... in Harry's case this is made worse because he didn't even get to know his parents' world, and then suddenly was expected to succeed in it... and so many people knew his parents. It must be disconcerting enough not to know your parents - but how much worse might it be if everyone keeps telling you that you are like your father? Surely, you'll try to build up an image of them.... and perhaps there are even moments when you might think that you have some sort of idea of what they were like. I think there are points in the story where Harry has the feeling he has the measure of his parents.

But what happens when you suddenly find a pretty good piece of evidence that your idea of them was wrong? I think that Harry's worries about what other nasty things his father may have done reveal a deep insecurity. A sudden reminder that really, he knows almost nothing about his parents, and for all he knows, they could have been completely different from what he has led to believe..... ultimately, he has no chance to find out for himself: he'll always depend on others. I think it is extreme to wonder whether your father forced your mother to marry him - but I think at a moment of complete insecurity such as this it isn't entirely possible that one would at least consider the option (together with other less unbearable ones, of course).

(PS: there is of course the problem that harry seems to ask about his parents far too little in the books.... should we really believe that he never asked anyone what they did for a living,, for example? There are plenty of crucial details like this he didn't know!. I know that this is all there to keep the readers in the dark for long enough. But it is an odd detail).

Yeah but what kid in his right mind would be happy - even in the long run - to think negative thoughts about parents he had never known? And SWM wasn't Harry's first experience with that. Snape had already given him several earfuls of how horrible his father was prior to his seeing the memory. And that influenced Harry's thought because I feel he would have been more objective if he hadn't had Snape demeaning his father prior to that. Harry said, "all of those terrible things Snape said about my father are true".

But once Harry saw it, JKR should have had Sirius or Remus pull out a memory for Harry to see. Not for Harry's sake, but for readers who might come away believing that Snape's single memory was some sort of all-encompassing and complete rendition of James' character. It is nonsensical because if you look at Remus in that memory, you would never peg him as a guy that would jump into battle at the MOM, at Hogwarts in HBP or the big battle in DH. You would never imagine he'd speak sharply to Harry and chastise him in an attempt to guide him. He just seemed too mellow and withdrawn in that memory to do and say many of the things we later saw him do in reality in the books. It is the same with everyone in the memory, it was just a moment in time...

Harry, at least, realized that. Harry wasn't pleased on reflection with every act he'd done while at Hogwarts - like Sectumsempra on Draco or making Hermione cry or causing Ron to feel miserable - or breaking up Dumbledore's office. But he realized that when he did those things, that did not speak to his whole character and he knew the same about his father. People don't always do things that they are proud of, but what is more important is the whole person, not singular events. That is why Harry went on to continue loving his father and continue hating Snape.

But once Harry saw it, JKR should have had Sirius or Remus pull out a memory for Harry to see. Not for Harry's sake, but for readers who might come away believing that Snape's single memory was some sort of all-encompassing and complete rendition of James' character.


I agree and think that JKR ended up giving James too many negative scenes in the series. I thouth even the DH Godrics Hollow memory from Voldemort was off putting in regard to James. All we see of James in the series is 1.)the GoF shadow in the Graveyard, 2.) the memory of bullying teenager James in OotP, 3.)the godrics hollow death memory, 4.) memory of the pampered cocky kid on his first day of Hogwarts and 5.) james out of the ressurection stone. Of those five, two of them, the first and the last are the only resoundingly positive. Those are also on consideration the most authentic of James as a person because they are him as what he became. The ones of James as a kid are both negative. The Godrics Hollow one is sort of in between in that we see James interacting with baby Harry in the beginning, but then the actual death scene was so quick. All of Voldemort's previous statements to Harry implied that James died fighting, so I was personally surprised when we instead got the "Hold him off without a wand in his hand!? version of things. It seemed like JKR was sticking it to him, giving him probably the most inglorious death of any charecter in the series.
The memories of James, provided by Voldemort and Snape, are the only fragments of James actual life that Harry gets and that just came off as really unfair to me.

I'm not claiming that James didnt get his good moments in the series, but I ended up feeling that he got a little too much negative coverage. That left me with an unsettled feeling at the end. I sort of got the same feeling with Sirius also. DH is about being disillusioned. Dumbledore is the main storyline in that book, but he makes a comeback at the end and Harry ends up forgiving him for whatever he put him through. Snape also got forgiveness. I got the impression that James and Sirius got trashed and got no real resolution. But I think I can accept that because HBP and DH were the Lily centered books while the early books focused on James. But its such a big series that by HBP you have half forgotten about the significance of the stag and PoA. I suppose Harry himself never gets enough put off about James though, since his patronus form never changed.

But its such a big series that by HBP you have half forgotten about the significance of the stag and PoA. I suppose Harry himself never gets enough put off about James though, since his patronus form never changed.

Yes, bringing this back to Harry. Harry's Patronus is not a stag because James is a saint, it is a stag because James was Harry's father, he loved Harry, and Harry loves him. That James may also have, arguably, been a jerk, is not the point.

From the Neville – Head of Gryffindor thread
Green_woods you're not taking into account the fact that Harry was the only one of those motherless children whom Voldemort was actually trying to kill and thus the only one we can go on.

I just don't buy the significance of the warning. She already had the choice as to whether or not to defend Harry, she didn't need a verbal cue anymore than Merope, who chose to abandon her child. If a verbal chance is all that separates her from the last parent who might have had this happen then James' death was completely in vain as his attempt to protect his mother did nothing in the end.

If that were the case James death should have also provided a protection. He too died for his baby. He did not run away, apparate away or anything. He too sacrificed. But it was Lily’s sacrifice that provided a protection for Harry, because Voldemort gave her a choice. A choice to live; to step aside and leave Harry to his fate. Now that choice was given by Voldemort because of Snape. Lily did not take that choice preferring to die rather than watch her baby being killed. The moment she died, I think nothing happened. But the moment Voldemort cast the killing curse at Lily, her intentional death which we call a sacrifice, invoked ancient magic (we don’t know what type of magic it invoked and how) that from the very moment the spell was cast from Voldemort’s wand, protected Harry from almost any curse that Voldemort would cast. That is what saved Harry in the Forest all those years later, when Voldemort once again cast the killing curse against Harry. the spell killed; but the blood protection that Voldemort foolishly took into his body that was living at that time, saved Harry yet again.

But Lily’s sacrifice would not have been incredible if she weren’t given a choice that she refused to take; it would have been brave like James’s was. Even Lily did not know about the choice; that her death and sacrifice would provide such vital protection and power to Harry. All this was because Snape begged Voldemort to spare Lily and Voldemort agreed. :)


Interesting take on this.... I just discovered this question and there are some really interesting implications there....
In a way, Harry's character was shaped considerably by the Dursleys, I'd think. His past makes him so susceptible to the plight of others, especially people like Neville. So here we get this cool kid who seems to have (almost) all.... but instead of becoming like his father it is the goodness he inherited from his mother that really comes through.

I wonder how Harry would have been if he had grown up with his parents.... aged one he is already riding a toy broomstick, and I'd say that under the influence of his father and godfather he would probably have been much more at ease with his own popularity and coolness (although of course, in this case he wouldn't have been famous!).

I think he would be a mix really. A lot more arrogance; a lot more confidence, mixed with his innate goodness, making it an explosive mixture. I would draw a lot more parallels to Snape. Harry may be tempted to make a lot of wrong choices, mainly because he would have the backing, enormous backing from his family and Sirius. That might tempt him to do a lot of silly things, explore more dangerously and so on. But like Snape, whose good sense prevailed in the end, where he got his priorities right, I think Harry would have too. He might have suffered a bit too I think, perhaps because he would be over confident.

He would also not know a lot of things he did in the books instinctively, Harry knew what it was to be bullied and because of that was sympathetic to Neville and Luna, never mocked others or made fun of them in any capacity because he was the victim more often than not. With his parents he would never be bullied and that would be very nice for him personally, but he would not inspire Neville like he did now; he would never appreciate Luna as he did in OOTP, when she was the only one (not even Ron and Hermione) to make him accept Sirius's death a little bit and he would never understand Snape’s position in the SWM.

While yes, there may be no reason for him to understand or be friends or come to terms with all those mentioned above, I would want all this to be there; Harry’s appreciation of Luna, Neville, Snape and things like this which was what made me love Harry in the first place. Without all this he would not be the Harry Potter I know and love and we would also not have the books. LOL

All in all one would wish that harry hadn't had such a tough time with the Dursleys, but of course, within the story, it is instrumental to creating the character we get to see.... :)

:tu:

I think there is another very moving aspect to Harry's reaction - in addition to many things that have already been said here. By the time we get to see Snape's worst memory we have somehow got quite used to James, and so has Harry..... and this completely new angle on James brings it home to Harry (and to us) just how little Harry knows about his parents!

And he is as you remarked at the end of the post completely disinterested to know! That was all JKR IMO.

But what happens when you suddenly find a pretty good piece of evidence that your idea of them was wrong? I think that Harry's worries about what other nasty things his father may have done reveal a deep insecurity. A sudden reminder that really, he knows almost nothing about his parents, and for all he knows, they could have been completely different from what he has led to believe..... ultimately, he has no chance to find out for himself: he'll always depend on others. I think it is extreme to wonder whether your father forced your mother to marry him - but I think at a moment of complete insecurity such as this it isn't entirely possible that one would at least consider the option (together with other less unbearable ones, of course).

I would say it is terrible to know your parents are not worthy of your respect when they are living; than when they are dead. Yes Harry saw James in a terrible light that he even wondered if he forced Lily to marry him. But he was able to make his peace quickly IMO because his father was dead. Sirius, Harry did not fight, because he could not afford to. Harry had no one else.

But assume James was alive and for some reason Harry learnt Occlumency from Snape and peeped into the memory. (I am assuming here that even with parents Harry was the same) I think he would have had a loss of trust in his father and Sirius that James and Sirius would have IMO found it difficult to bridge.

Parents falling from their pedestal while alive IMO is the worst that can happen to a child; that can harm the relationship forever. While Harry would not have fought his father openly or anything like that; the trust would be broken; the fact that his father was NOT all that he had thought would not sit well with him and in fact with any kid IMO.

Well your view is interesting and I can respect it. In the end we can only have personal views and interpretations of everything because we have no idea what Harry felt due to the 19 year leap between the story and the epilogue. Our views are quite distinct. :lol:

Wicked, all we need is one word, *Snape* and we, after much argument inevitably agree to disagree LOL. The arguments are fun though. :)

great point. didn't even think of that honestly. i think this can also translate into why he takes to Luna as well. Let's face it, Luna had a very 'strange' upbringing as well. She lost a mother AND her father is well a bit loony. i 100% agree with the fact that harry takes to those who are ailing or need saving..as Klio stated, Neville..Luna who desperately needed friends or even acceptance (clearly inferred by the fact she had painted portraits on her ceiling)

do you believe that there was anyone else in the series that Harry is especially drawn to for this reason?

Snape! More than Neville or Luna.

Yeah but what kid in his right mind would be happy - even in the long run - to think negative thoughts about parents he had never known? And SWM wasn't Harry's first experience with that. Snape had already given him several earfuls of how horrible his father was prior to his seeing the memory. And that influenced Harry's thought because I feel he would have been more objective if he hadn't had Snape demeaning his father prior to that. Harry said, "all of those terrible things Snape said about my father are true".

No kid would take the rants of a person whom they hate, seriously. And Harry hated Snape. Snape’s comments were shrugged off by Harry as sheer vindictiveness. That was why the SWM was such a shock. Harry, all of a sudden was presented with a view of his father, he could not digest. His father, the brave hero, the one who fought Voldemort three times, who loved his mother, who trusted his friends and who was an all around great guy, who inspired greasy ugly gits like Snape, to sprout off nonsense about his father in sheer jealousy was suddenly behaving in the way Harry expected Snape, Draco, Dudley and the Slytherins to behave.

That was why IMO he was so shocked that his mind wandered to his father forcing his mother to marry him. The fact that Snape had a point and Snape was right about James was the confusion in Harry’s mind at that time. That was the worst Harry could bestow on his father. Snape was right about his father and the others were wrong! That shook him on more levels than one IMO.

But once Harry saw it, JKR should have had Sirius or Remus pull out a memory for Harry to see. Not for Harry's sake, but for readers who might come away believing that Snape's single memory was some sort of all-encompassing and complete rendition of James' character. It is nonsensical because if you look at Remus in that memory, you would never peg him as a guy that would jump into battle at the MOM, at Hogwarts in HBP or the big battle in DH. You would never imagine he'd speak sharply to Harry and chastise him in an attempt to guide him. He just seemed too mellow and withdrawn in that memory to do and say many of the things we later saw him do in reality in the books. It is the same with everyone in the memory, it was just a moment in time...

Perhaps JKR did not have any such memories to display. ;)

That was why IMO he was so shocked that his mind wandered to his father forcing his mother to marry him. The fact that Snape had a point and Snape was right about James was the confusion in Harry’s mind at that time. That was the worst Harry could bestow on his father. Snape was right about his father and the others were wrong! That shook him on more levels than one IMO.

I'll say it did - it shook Harry up mentally and later physically when Snape returned and shoved him to the floor with all of his might. I'm unsure why Harry didn't thank Snape for having revealed the truth in such an exemplary way - or why Harry didn't go back to Dumbledore and Hagrid and angrily tell them off for lying about his father.

I'll say it did - it shook Harry up mentally and later physically when Snape returned and shoved him to the floor with all of his might. I'm unsure why Harry didn't thank Snape for having revealed the truth in such an exemplary way - or why Harry didn't go back to Dumbledore and Hagrid and angrily tell them off for lying about his father.

And in the books there is not one thought that was running in Harry's mind about the way Snape pushed him and threw a jar of something, (was it dead cockroaches) at Harry. Harry went out of the Potions class absolutely shocked and horrified at what he saw of his father and Sirius rather than fume about how Snape pushed him away and threw a jar at him.

In fact if I remember right, Harry was stammering inside, trying to tell Snape that he was sorry to have seen and that he would not talk about it to anybody else, but Snape was way too angry to listen. I feel Snape's anger was justified, especially when Harry peeped into his memories without permission and saw him at his humiliated worst IMO.

He did not tell Dumbledore or Hagrid or McGonagall because I think they would have punished him severly for peeping into Snape's memories. And was Dumbledore there in the School at that time? I don't think so and McGonagall would not be sympathetic towards Harry IMO.

And in the books there is not one thought that was running in Harry's mind about the way Snape pushed him and threw a jar of something, (was it dead cockroaches) at Harry. Harry went out of the Potions class absolutely shocked and horrified at what he saw of his father and Sirius rather than fume about how Snape pushed him away and threw a jar at him.

I agree, nor did Harry have a thought about Snape cutting his father with the Sectumsempra or calling his mother a mudblood. Or Lily telling off James and Snape although he did say she was a good person. Mainly though, he only remembered his dad's behavior and words and what Snape had told him before.

In fact if I remember right, Harry was stammering inside, trying to tell Snape that he was sorry to have seen and that he would not talk about it to anybody else, but Snape was way too angry to listen. I feel Snape's anger was justified, especially when Harry peeped into his memories without permission and saw him at his humiliated worst IMO.

Yes, it isn't like Harry to stammer; I am not sure why he couldn't get out the words he was trying to say. I don't know why he didn't send Snape an apology later for snooping in his stuff and for not believing him in the past when he'd been absolutely right about his father.

He did not tell Dumbledore or Hagrid or McGonagall because I think they would have punished him severly for peeping into Snape's memories. And was Dumbledore there in the School at that time? I don't think so and McGonagall would not be sympathetic towards Harry IMO.

Oh I didn't mean he should tell what he'd done. I meant I am unsure why he didn't yell at them all for lying to him about his father.

I would say it is terrible to know your parents are not worthy of your respect when they are living; than when they are dead. Yes Harry saw James in a terrible light that he even wondered if he forced Lily to marry him. But he was able to make his peace quickly IMO because his father was dead. Sirius, Harry did not fight, because he could not afford to. Harry had no one else.

But assume James was alive and for some reason Harry learnt Occlumency from Snape and peeped into the memory. (I am assuming here that even with parents Harry was the same) I think he would have had a loss of trust in his father and Sirius that James and Sirius would have IMO found it difficult to bridge.

Parents falling from their pedestal while alive IMO is the worst that can happen to a child; that can harm the relationship forever. While Harry would not have fought his father openly or anything like that; the trust would be broken; the fact that his father was NOT all that he had thought would not sit well with him and in fact with any kid IMO.

If James had lived and Harry did end up learning Occlumency from Snape and saw SWM, I think James wouldn't have fallen off the pedestal in Harry's eyes any more than if James was dead. Harry's big reaction to that memory was due to the fact he could relate to Snape being bullied. If James and Lily didn't die, Harry would have been raised by two loving parents in a home full of love and he wouldn't be the "boy who lived", and he would be a much happier and confident kid than he was being raised by the Dursleys. I doubt if Harry was raised by his parents, he would be able to relate to Snape as much, and therefore wouldn't be that empathetic after seeing that memory.

Sirius said he wasn't proud of that memory, so what is not to say James probably wasn't either. I think after Harry saw that memory, he would go to his father, and James would probably say he wasn't proud of it either. I'm sure James would be old and mature enough, being a husband and father, to realise what he did was wrong and admit that to Harry.

If his parents had raised him, Harry would realise his parents weren't saints, and they were just like everyone else. James fell off the pedestal [and eventually was forgiven] because Harry just assumed his dad was a saint. Harry was told so many good things about his parents from many people[and in my opinion James and Lily were great people], but it is a bit naive for Harry to have that saint-like image of them. If Harry was raised by James, he would have a more realistic idea of what his dad was like, and then seeing SWM, I think Harry would been "Dad, what the hell ?!" but he also know his dad is human and he would forgive him.

Yes, well, it's true that Harry idealised his parents (and especially James) all the more because he never knew them, so it must have come as a huge shock to find out that it wasn't quite the way he'd imagined. But Harry's thoughts in the weeks after watching the memory are as reflective of Harry's own immaturity, as they are shocked at James's behaviour- as reflected in the fact that he went to far as to think James forced Lily to marry him because she hated him (something that a lot of readers, and J.K. Rowling herself, didn't see in that scene).
Harry didn't catch on to certain undercurrents because he simply couldn't figure out that they were there- and I don't think it's a coincidence that this happened when he was having a bad time with Cho, too..

I think that it took Harry a while to really understand girls. In OotP, Hermione is trying to explain to him and Ron why Cho is behaving the way she is. The boys just don't get it.
It's not surprising, then, that Harry doesn't get what's really going on in SWM. He is able to read Lily's motives about as well as he reads Cho's. :lol:

And I agree with Zg that Harry's Patronus is not representative of James himself, but instead represents the love Harry has for his father (kind of like the silver doe represents Snape's love for Lily, and Hermione's otter Patronus is a symbol of her love for Ron).

I think that it took Harry a while to really understand girls. In OotP, Hermione is trying to explain to him and Ron why Cho is behaving the way she is. The boys just don't get it.
It's not surprising, then, that Harry doesn't get what's really going on in SWM. He is able to read Lily's motives about as well as he reads Cho's. :lol:

And I agree with Zg that Harry's Patronus is not representative of James himself, but instead represents the love Harry has for his father (kind of like the silver doe represents Snape's love for Lily, and Hermione's otter Patronus is a symbol of her love for Ron).

I believe that in addition to it displaying his love for his father - it is also reflective of his own inner animal - which as we have all been told 1000 times by Snape, Dumbledore, Sirius and everyone else - is similar to his dad's. After all, Harry loved his mum too, yet his patronus was not a doe and I doubt he loved one more than the other. In a way, the stag patronus DOES reflect his mum because it reflected James' love for Lily according to JKR. So Harry's stag is kind of a tribute to them both and reflects their gift to the world: Harry.

Too Harry's parents were alike in ways; strong, courageous, brave, compassionate, loving, kind, arrogant, teasing, and with strong similar beliefs, outlooks and ideology. We see that in Harry as well. So his stag reflects him above all else, but it is tied to his parents.

If James had lived and Harry did end up learning Occlumency from Snape and saw SWM, I think James wouldn't have fallen off the pedestal in Harry's eyes any more than if James was dead. Harry's big reaction to that memory was due to the fact he could relate to Snape being bullied. If James and Lily didn't die, Harry would have been raised by two loving parents in a home full of love and he wouldn't be the "boy who lived", and he would be a much happier and confident kid than he was being raised by the Dursleys. I doubt if Harry was raised by his parents, he would be able to relate to Snape as much, and therefore wouldn't be that empathetic after seeing that memory.

Sirius said he wasn't proud of that memory, so what is not to say James probably wasn't either. I think after Harry saw that memory, he would go to his father, and James would probably say he wasn't proud of it either. I'm sure James would be old and mature enough, being a husband and father, to realise what he did was wrong and admit that to Harry.

If his parents had raised him, Harry would realise his parents weren't saints, and they were just like everyone else. James fell off the pedestal [and eventually was forgiven] because Harry just assumed his dad was a saint. Harry was told so many good things about his parents from many people[and in my opinion James and Lily were great people], but it is a bit naive for Harry to have that saint-like image of them. If Harry was raised by James, he would have a more realistic idea of what his dad was like, and then seeing SWM, I think Harry would been "Dad, what the hell ?!" but he also know his dad is human and he would forgive him.

:tu:

I totally agree with this.....

And I think one might add that knocking one's parents off various pedestals is probably part of most people's growing up process, but it comes naturally if the parents are alive....

If harry's parents had lived he'd have had a more realistic view of them, or perhaps not realistic but more... sober, I'd say (aren't parents SO embarrassing and sometimes annoying when you are in your teens?).....

Had he come across Snape's Worst Memory unawares he could actually have challenged his father. I think the whole experience is made worse because he couldn't challenge his father with what he had seen. Sirius is a fairly good second best, and that's why he is so keen to speak to him, in spite of the rather serious risk he is taking. But still - nothing could substitute for a proper chat with his father (which may well have involved sulky and/or accusations by Harry).... there would have been some chance to clear the air that Harry simply didn't have.




All in all I think the whole story around Snape's worst memory addresses a crucial issue about memory..... namely that it is almost impossible to know the truth about events in the past - usually the only thing we can get is points of view (including our own, which is unlikely to be complete, either).

Of course, the pensieve is actually an amazing instrument because you an look into someone else's memory (but even with your own it will be practical) and try to evaluate it, and also try to discover details you didn't spot the first time round. That's an amazing instrument! But even in that case you are not totally safe from the bias of the observer - e.g. Snape probably rarely had the chance to see a good side of James (and there must have been a better side to him even at school - e.g. sticking to Remus as a friend - even if recklessness played a role there, too, what they did for Remus was impressive).... On the other hand, Sirius and Remus may not have found it easy to dig up this particular memory - for Snape it was a huge memorablke incident, for Sirius and Remus if was someting much smaller.....

So, ultimately, a few of those debates we have about character anaysis here won't ever quite come together because JKR quite deliberately gives us different perspectives and often two different interpretations are possible....

And on top of that the main perspective is Harry's point of view.... and although we know Harry as a charitable sort of person, what is going inside his head is often far from level-headed... :D

I think the only sort of bias you get from a Pensieve is either from omissions or the viewer's own personal bias. JKR herself said that what we see in the Pensieve is entirely objective.

I agree with those who say that had James lived long enough for Harry to challenge him with the memory of SWM, he would be ashamed of what he had done-- but I believe this for a different reason.
I should think that after many years of having to deal with his arrogance in peacetime (after the fighting, not having anywhere to channel the root cause of the bullying), being obligated to shoulder the responsibility of being a father, and having had enough time to think through his own mistakes, James would have calmed down a bit. As he was at 21, there was still a bit of risk-taker left in him, some of which contributed to his early grave. :sigh:

I agree with Klio that disillusionment and acceptance of one's parents is a huge part of growing up. And despite never having really known his parents, Harry does experience having to face the awful and stupid things his parents had done and then forgiving them for it anyway because of the love he has for them, and the love they have for him.

Kind of a side note, but has anyone seen that page from the first draft of PS/SS JKR uploaded onto her site? IIRC, it talks about the Sorcerer's Stone being found in Lily and James' vault, and the kids are wondering if Harry's parents stole the stone. It really makes me think about how Harry's discovery of his parents would have gone if JKR had stuck with that plot. Would James and Lily be vindicated, with Harry having to learn about their faults later? Or would Harry have to be faced with the reality of his parents as thieves? How would he react? :hmm: *goes off on a wild thought-tangent*

I agree with others that think Harry reacted the way he did because he never knew his parents. Isn't it normal for someone to have so many burdens to rely on something to bring him comfort? Harry felt that way about his parents - in particular his father. He idolized them and didn't really acknowledge that they were just as flawed as he is.

James was a source of comfort to Harry before he saw SWM. Even after the traumatic experience in GoF he felt uplifted when Hagrid said that he would have done as much as his father would have done. Furthermore, James' stag form was his patronus. According to Remus, the Patronus acts as a guardian. Prongs was Harry's guardian against the creatures that made those in their presence feel miserable.

At the beginning of OotP Harry still felt the same way about his father. When he found out his father was too mischievous to be a prefect, he felt better. When Sirius said that Harry was less like James than he thought, Harry felt bad instantly.

But then SWM came around and James was knocked off his pedestal. Harry was so used to thinking of his father as a saint and seeing his father behave in the way shown in SWM was just a slap in the face. Harry identified with Snape and the worst part for Harry was that the person who bullied Snape like how Dudley bullied him was his own father. Seeing James in a perfect light was like the death of the tooth fairy or Santa Claus for children.

After Sirius and Remus comforted him and explained to him that James changed, Harry's view was different than before he witnessed SWM. It wasn't naive and unrealistic as it had been before SWM, instead it was a more mature love Harry had for his father. Harry understood that James was flawed and made mistakes during his youth that he grew out of, but Harry loved him regardless. James still was a comfort to him. All the following quotes prove this:

"And then, when Chambers came at me about five minutes later - what?" Ron said, stopping mid-sentence at the look on Harry's face. "Why are you grinning?"

"I'm not," said Harry quickly, looking down at his Transfiguration notes and attempting to straighten his face. The truth was that Ron had just reminded Harry forcibly of another Gryffindor Quidditch player who had once sat rumpling his hair under this very tree. "I'm just glad we won, that's all."

"My dad used this spell," said Harry. "I - Lupin told me."

The last part was not true; in fact, Harry had seen his father use the spell on Snape, but he had never told Ron and Hermione that particular excursion into the Pensieve. Now, however, a wonderful possibility occurred to him.Could the Half-Blood Prince possibly be - ?"

With a leap of pleasure, Harry recognized his father; his untidy black hair stuck up at the back like Harry's, and he too wore glasses.

He could not keep the plea out of his voice. Hermione looked sympathetic, Ron uncertain. Harry looked down at his feet, thinking of his father. Would James have backed Harry in what he had said to Lupin, or would he have been angry at how his son had treated his old friend?

All of that, IMO, show that James still admired his father. Sure he knew he wasn't perfect, but he still loved him.

Earlier I mentioned that James was a form of protection for Harry. That didn't change after SWM. When Harry had to make the most difficult choice in his life, James was one of the people that made him stay strong. James and his wife and friends "was [Harry's] courage, and the reason he was able to keep putting one foot in front of the other" (DH, U.S. edition pg 700). And then there was also this quote:

The fact of his own survival burned inside him, a talisman against them, as though his father's stag kept guardian in his heart.

While the image of James shattered in SWM, Harry continued to love him and find comfort in the memory of James. James was there during some of the most difficult times for Harry (fighting dementors in PoA, the graveyard in GoF and the Forbidden Forest in DH), and was able to protect Harry and offer him strength, and even death couldn't prevent that.

:tu:

I think the time when we realise that our parents are NOT perfect, and STILL accept and love them for who they are, warts and all, is the time we truly start to grow up.

:)

I find Harry's relationship to his father very moving and I think it's well done.

Harry loves his father, thinks the world of him, so it is sure to be a shock when his father is shown in memories as a bully even though i think really he is not.

I agree with beautifically about Harry's patronous and the reasons why it is a stag.

:tu:

Kind of a side note, but has anyone seen that page from the first draft of PS/SS JKR uploaded onto her site?

Where on her site is that, ignisia?

1. How do Harry's formative years with the Dursley's influence the person he is now? Would he be the same person if his parents had lived? If he had been sent to live with another wizarding family? If he had been sent to an orphanage like Tom Ridde?
i recon it was what dumbledore wanted. harry is the way he is because he had a bad childhood which made him more repectfull.

2. When do we first see evidence of Harry's "saving people" thing? Is this a strength or a flaw? What do you think of his final sacrifice?
his "saveing people thing" i recon was when he defended Ron on the hogwarts exspress. because he has'nt had friends for so long and people generally just didnt like him, harry wanted to defendall that so he became the hero. harrys final sacrifice was well planed out. its clear that dumbledore taught him alot because it would have been the kind of dumbledore would have wanted him to do. also its what his mum would have done

3. Harry's natural curiosity was stifled by the Dursleys. "Don't ask questions!" but it comes out it full force once he gets to Hogwarts. How does this curiosity serve him through the books? Has he truly lost it after Dumbledore's death or will it return as he hunts for the horcruxes?

well i guess he was always going to be this waty. i recon all students that were raised by muggles would want to find out as much as they could about magic.

4. What do you think are Harry's greatest strengths? What weaknesses did he overcome as the series progressed?
i think his friendship and his revenge was his greatest streangth. Which is what snape gave harry to carry on.


5. How have each of the losses Harry has suffered helped to define who he is?
made him stronger and helped him for when it was his time to die


6 Dumbledore tells him that his pure heart is what seperates him from Voldemort and his Death Eaters. What examples have we seen of this pure heart?
his love for ginny, his loyalty,his friendship,his bravery, his losses.


7. What do you think of Harry's use of Unforgivables in DH?
i recon that it was gonna happen anyway. fire fight fire with fire. it couldent helped but i dont like the fact he used the cruchiatas curse i thought that was unesessary


8. Why do you think Harry forgave Snape?
why shouldent he have done. harry understood compleatly how snape felt about his dad and had every right in the world to have hated him. everything that snape has done has been to protect him and being able to be the spy for that long and protect harry for him like that, he woukld have understood. there hatred for each other kept them both safe and alive and sble to rid voldy once and for all.


9. JKR tells us that he and Ron became Aurors and revolutionized the department? Do you think this was a good choice for him? What changes do you think he might have made?
i thought that harry would have became headmaster of hogwarts. but i think tjhat he may have desided to do that later in life. because of fighting the dark arts for so long and knowing things more about the dark arts i think that harry would have been able to make the auror department better then it would have ever been

Where on her site is that, ignisia?

It's a bit hard to find because you have to solve some puzzles on her site. Luckily, the HP Lexicon has a screenshot here: http://www.hp-lexicon.org/images/jkr/very-early-ps.jpg

as well as a transcript here: http://www.hp-lexicon.org/about/sources/jkr.com/jkr-com-trans-very-early-ps.html

I think the only sort of bias you get from a Pensieve is either from omissions or the viewer's own personal bias. JKR herself said that what we see in the Pensieve is entirely objective.

Do you have a quote for that? I would be interested in reading her take. I would agree that it is objective in nature; however the scene chosen and the starting and stopping point lessens the objectivity to a great extent.

I agree with those who say that had James lived long enough for Harry to challenge him with the memory of SWM, he would be ashamed of what he had done-- but I believe this for a different reason.

I would respectfully disagree that would be James' certain response. What I do think is that we would receive a more comprehensive explanation from James of events leading up to that particular day. I do believe Sirius was ashamed of himself, he said as much.

I should think that after many years of having to deal with his arrogance in peacetime (after the fighting, not having anywhere to channel the root cause of the bullying), being obligated to shoulder the responsibility of being a father, and having had enough time to think through his own mistakes, James would have calmed down a bit. As he was at 21, there was still a bit of risk-taker left in him, some of which contributed to his early grave. :sigh:

I respect your view. I do not feel that any of the events we heard about James as an adult indicate that he acted arrogantly in a negative sense. I personally believe arrogance can be positve (Harry facing Voldemort) as well as negative. Based on the canon, I believe anything James did as an adult that I would regard as arrogant were indicative of arrogance in its positive connotation. I believe that is how Harry regarded it as well; he reacted very strongly in objecting to the Remus' idea that his father was too trusting of his friends. If there is an element of arrogance in trusting ones friends, then it cannot be other than positive, imo. Regarding ones friends with slight mistrust is to me, unthinkable (as Remus was including even Ron, Hermione and himself in that lot, not to mention Molly, Arthur, Hagrid, etc.) However, I do understand that Remus, who had been burned in that regard might feel that way.

I agree with Klio that disillusionment and acceptance of one's parents is a huge part of growing up. And despite never having really known his parents, Harry does experience having to face the awful and stupid things his parents had done and then forgiving them for it anyway because of the love he has for them, and the love they have for him.

I think Harry made a mountain out of a molehill after viewing SWM. I sincerely believe that Harry came to feel that way too. Harry realized his action was immature because no one, parent or otherwise is a saint. But shortly thereafter he adjusted to reality and further placed his parents right back up on a pedastal. That was because I believe he felt that despite any faults they might have had, his parents were representative of very good wizards of the type that people could look up to and hold them out as the type of people whose lives, ideals and outlooks one might which to base their own lives upon. Harry did so himself, asking twice in DH if his actions were akin to what his father might have done in a similar circumstance.

Originally in the Snape Character Analysis thread

I also think James was viewed forever differently in Harry's eyes from the SWM; he still loved his father and Sirius; but I don;t think he thought of them as ideal or as his idols. He saw them as persons who loved him, and he loved them back. But as Heroes! I think the bravest man award went to Snape! :)

I do think that Harry's view of James changed after SWM, as I said in a post earlier. I disagree that Harry didn't admire him or feel proud to be like him, however.

Some people, perhaps, would say that there was little to choose between the two ways, but Dumbledore knew - and so do I, thought Harry, with a rush of fierce pride, and so did my parents - that there was all the difference in the world.

Furthermore, I don't see any canon that indicates he didn't see James as a hero. Even though he saw Snape was an admirable person, I don't see anything that implies Harry didn't think that way about his own father.

Sure he did; Harry I mean; James, Lily and Sirius all died for him, as did Dumbledore and Snape. And he names his kids after all these five people who died so that Harry may live. He thought all of them as Heros, perhaps, but, the only one he acknowledged 19 years later was Snape; the honour did not even go to Dumbledore, whom Harry thought of as his last and greatest protectors. The word he used in his thoughts were *greatest*; but that would not discount his parents' and Sirius's deaths for his sake; only it showed he was moved intensly by the loss of Dumbledore who he cared very much for; and believed that Dumbledore too, cared a little for him in return.

In the epilogue, Harry says the bravest man was Snape; that does not mean he feels James & Co. including DD were not brave. But among them, IMO he recognizes Snape's actions all through his life, once he turned as extraordinarily courageous and tremendously brave, fighting all the odds and working hard for 18 years with a commitment that by itself probably moved Harry to call Snape as he did IMO.

Sure he did; Harry I mean; James, Lily and Sirius all died for him, as did Dumbledore and Snape. And he names his kids after all these five people who died so that Harry may live. He thought all of them as Heros, perhaps, but, the only one he acknowledged 19 years later was Snape; the honour did not even go to Dumbledore, whom Harry thought of as his last and greatest protectors.

How did that honor not go to Lily, James and Sirius? :huh: Harry never outright says that Snape is his hero, just that he was one of the bravest people he had ever met. And didn't Dumbledore get honor too, since Harry's second son was named Albus Potter? I don't see how Harry didn't acknowledge his parents, Sirius or Dumbledore in the same way in the epilogue just because he thought Snape was brave.

How did that honor not go to Lily, James and Sirius? :huh: Harry never outright says that Snape is his hero, just that he was one of the bravest people he had ever met. And didn't Dumbledore get honor too, since Harry's second son was named Albus Potter? I don't see how Harry didn't acknowledge his parents, Sirius or Dumbledore in the same way in the epilogue just because he thought Snape was brave.

Of course it did; he named his first kid, James Sirius did he not? And his daughter Lily? and only his 3rd kid as Albus followed by Severus? The names to me seemed to be in the Order of their deaths. The first boy got James and Sirius, his father the first person who died so that Harry could live. Sirius came next, because this was a boy. His daughter was called Lily after his mother who sacrificed her life after James.

Then came Albus who Harry thought of as his greatest protectors in DD's funeral (HBP). Now would you say that just because Harry thought DD was his greatest protector he forgot all about his parents and Sirius. And I never said so either in my last post.

After DD came Snape, who was according to Harry the bravest man he ever knew; his last protector who died so that Harry may live.

Now I feel Harry acknowledged Snape's sacrifice as the bravest. James was his father; Lily his mother; Sirius hid Godfather; the three who died for him were very closely related to him; while Albus and Snape were not; infact Snape's sacrifice was so acknowledged by Harry IMO was because Snape not only died for Lily's boy (Lily whom he loved) but also for James's child and Sirius's Godson (both James and Sirius) whom he hated. That IMO plus Snape's actions which were not motivated by parental love & affection, or by godfatherly love was the reason, that Harry accorded that special staus to Snape. Snape died for a boy who was in no way related to him; with whose parents he had a turbulent history and who thought of him only badly until they died. That made IMO his actions so much superior and I would like to think Harry thought so too. :)

The names to me seemed to be in the Order of their deaths. The first boy got James and Sirius, his father the first person who died so that Harry could live. Sirius came next, because this was a boy. His daughter was called Lily after his mother who sacrificed her life after James.
I seriously doubt that the order of their deaths was Harry's main reason for naming his children the way he did :no: His parents were the most important to him and Sirius, his godfather. It had nothing to do with the order they died.

And I strongly disagree that Harry felt Snape's actions "more surperior". It would be almost a dishonor, imo, to all the other people who have died for Harry.

I seriously doubt that the order of their deaths was Harry's main reason for naming his children the way he did :no: His parents were the most important to him and Sirius, his godfather. It had nothing to do with the order they died.

Perhaps; that may be a reason also. :) I agree.

And I strongly disagree that Harry felt Snape's actions "more surperior". It would be almost a dishonor, imo, to all the other people who have died for Harry.

I disagree respectfully on this; Snape's actions were *superior* because of who he was; compared to Harry's parents and Godfather. While their sacrifice may have meant everything to Harry; Dumbledore's and Snape's were different because they specifically sacrificed their lives for this boy, whom they had no relationsip or connection with.

Between the two, Snape's actions were superior because of the hate history Snape and the Maraudes shared. With all that lay between them; Snape still died for Harry. That would make it special.

And please note; I am NOT taking away anything from the others. I am merely saying this in the context of how I feel about this and perhaps, this may be the reason, Harry called on Snape's actions as the bravest instead of the others who were no less brave. :)

Now I feel Harry acknowledged Snape's sacrifice as the bravest. James was his father; Lily his mother; Sirius hid Godfather; the three who died for him were very closely related to him; while Albus and Snape were not; infact Snape's sacrifice was so acknowledged by Harry IMO was because Snape not only died for Lily's boy (Lily whom he loved) but also for James's child and Sirius's Godson (both James and Sirius) whom he hated. That IMO plus Snape's actions which were not motivated by parental love & affection, or by godfatherly love was the reason, that Harry accorded that special staus to Snape. Snape died for a boy who was in no way related to him; with whose parents he had a turbulent history and who thought of him only badly until they died. That made IMO his actions so much superior and I would like to think Harry thought so too. :)

I don't think Harry would ever do that, put Snape over his parents (and Sirius). They were his parents. His parents. They loved him and died for him. It is incomprehensible to me that Harry would rank their sacrifices, and then put Snape's above theirs. Harry acknowledged and apprecaited what Snape had done, but I can't think that can come anywhere close to what Harry holds for his parents (and Sirius). You didn't see Snape coming back with the Resurrection stone with Lily, James, Remus, and Sirius. Lily, James, and Sirius held a big and important part of Harry's heart and that's why he named his children after them (so did Remus, but Teddy was reserved his name). The fact "Snape's actions which were not motivated by parental love & affection, or by godfatherly love was the reason. Snape died for a boy who was in no way related to him; with whose parents he had a turbulent history and who thought of him only badly until they died" is not, IMO, a plus. I see it more of a "despite". "Albus Severus" was given with honor (not that there's anything wrong with that), but "James Sirius" and "Lily Luna" was given with love.

Originally Posted by The_Green_Woods: After DD came Snape, who was according to Harry the bravest man he ever knew; his last protector who died so that Harry may live.

Perhaps; that may be a reason also. :) I agree.

I disagree respectfully on this; Snape's actions were *superior* because of who he was; compared to Harry's parents and Godfather. While their sacrifice may have meant everything to Harry; Dumbledore's and Snape's were different because they specifically sacrificed their lives for this boy, whom they had no relationsip or connection with.

Between the two, Snape's actions were superior because of the hate history Snape and the Maraudes shared. With all that lay between them; Snape still died for Harry. That would make it special.

Why would Harry believe that Snape sacrificed his life for him - even in a metaphorical sense, when Snape flat out said in DH -TPT that he did everything for Lily and not for Harry. That is in a metaphorical sense. In a physical sense, Snape didn't give his life so that Harry could live in any way shape or form. Even if Snape worked out the Elder Wand business in his head, he believed that Harry had to die - dead - so he could not have been thinking that through his death Harry would live, nor did Harry think that Snape believed that because he saw the memories. So I don't understand what you mean when you claim that "Snape died so that Harry may live" when he died thinking Harry had to die.

It is true the others died so that Harry could live, James, Sirius and Lily in the actual act of protecting him and Dumbledore so Harry could be protected down the line. But the same cannot be said of Snape and Harry knew it, imo.

And please note; I am NOT taking away anything from the others. I am merely saying this in the context of how I feel about this and perhaps, this may be the reason, Harry called on Snape's actions as the bravest instead of the others who were no less brave. :)

In the context of the Epilogue, Harry could have hardly said that Slytherin was a great house because James, Sirius, Dumbledore, Lily, Ron, Hermione and himself all belonged to Gryffindor. He had no choice but to use Snape as an example - it was the only person of those his children were named after that he could use. So he elected Snape over anyone else in that sentence so that it would be logical. That is not to say that he didn't feel Snape was brave - but he was after all trying to make his son feel better about Slytherin house. Harry said *probably* the bravest person he knew, and added the probably for a reason - JKR doesn't add words off the cuff. Harry didn't wish to lie, but he had to be convincing.

The fact is, if he thought about it, he would likely have to qualify his statement, but by adding the *probably*, it was truthful, imo.

I "Albus Severus" was given with honor (not that there's anything wrong with that), but "James Sirius" and "Lily Luna" was given with love.

Sure! Harry loved his parents and named his kids after them; and he did not love Snape the way he did his parents. I never said he did. I only spoke of the sacrifice. His parents and Sirius as you said loved Harry; they died for him. Albus too loved Harry as his very own (OOTP - Prophecy I think the chapter was) he died for him, but Snape, though I believed came to care a lot for Harry, still had many unresolved issues with him. And Snape IMO also fought with himself and tried not to acknowledge his concern for Harry. The only time his control breaks is when DD tells him Harry has to die. So Snape's sacrifice was important on that note IMO.

It is true the others died so that Harry could live, James, Sirius and Lily in the actual act of protecting him and Dumbledore so Harry could be protected down the line. But the same cannot be said of Snape and Harry knew it, imo.

I respectfully disagree. I would say that Snape died for Harry; worked for Harry and the Light. He may have turned for Lily; but she died. Snape worked for her child and also the Light because from a DE he came to believe and work for the cause as well. We see that when he remonstrates with Phineas not to call muggleborns *mudblood*. That was how much he changed IMO. And it did not benefit Lily for whom he turned in the first palce; his actions benefited Harry and the Light IMO.

In the context of the Epilogue, Harry could have hardly said that Slytherin was a great house because James, Sirius, Dumbledore, Lily, Ron, Hermione and himself all belonged to Gryffindor. He had no choice but to use Snape as an example - it was the only person of those his children were named after that he could use. So he elected Snape over anyone else in that sentence so that it would be logical. That is not to say that he didn't feel Snape was brave - but he was after all trying to make his son feel better about Slytherin house. Harry said *probably* the bravest person he knew, and added the probably for a reason - JKR doesn't add words off the cuff. Harry didn't wish to lie, but he had to be convincing.

The fact is, if he thought about it, he would likely have to qualify his statement, but by adding the *probably*, it was truthful, imo.

Harry could have just said that Slytherin was not the way it was then, because everything had changed. Why talke the name of a man who had a hand in his parents' deaths to either name his son after him or to use him as an example for Slytherin. I believe that it was because Harry thought highly of his sacrifice, his life and his actions from when he turned, and also accepted the Snape before he turned to the Light as well.

It speaks very highly of Harry as well; but it also shows that there was something in Snape that made Harry speak so highly of him in the first place IMO. :)

Sure! Harry loved his parents and named his kids after them; and he did not love Snape the way he did his parents. I never said he did. I only spoke of the sacrifice. His parents and Sirius as you said loved Harry; they died for him. Albus too loved Harry as his very own (OOTP - Prophecy I think the chapter was) he died for him, but Snape, though I believed came to care a lot for Harry, still had many unresolved issues with him. And Snape IMO also fought with himself and tried not to acknowledge his concern for Harry. The only time his control breaks is when DD tells him Harry has to die. So Snape's sacrifice was important on that note IMO.

I'm really unsure about Snape caring for Harry thing. I remember JKRowling saying how "Snape loathed Harry to the end" or something along those lines. So that kinda makes Harry naming his kid after Snape odd to me. Anyways, James' and Lily's and Sirius' love for Harry are entwined with their sacrifice for him. I don't think that entwinement of love and sacrifice is inferior to Snape's sacrifice. I think it would be totally understandable if Harry considered their sacrifice to be the most important, just for the sheer fact they were his parents and nothing can trump that. Harry went above and beyond in honoring Snape [making sure everyone knew Snape was good, getting Snape's portrait into the headmaster's office, naming his kid after Snape]. Harry doesn't need to rank Snape against his parents.

For Harry not to truly forgive Snape, and simply tell Al what he did only to make the boy feel better without any true emotion attached seems rather a sad waste of page space. The point of that "bravest man" passage, apart from pointing out that Snape did things worthy of honor, was to show that Harry has grown up, forgiven Snape, and learned to acknowledged the man's heroism, even if there was bad blood between them from beginning to end. To show such a mark of Harry's maturity and then take it back with a "ha ha, I didn't really mean that!" seems a wee bit pointless.


And I am also of the opinion that Snape cared about Harry on a certain level. I won't go into it too much here, as that's for the Snape thread, but I would like to point out that when JKR makes an interpretation of her own work, it is merely an interpretation. If the book says otherwise, then the interview snippets are not necessarily canon.

I'm really unsure about Snape caring for Harry thing. I remember JKRowling saying how "Snape loathed Harry to the end" or something along those lines. So that kinda makes Harry naming his kid after Snape odd to me. Anyways, James' and Lily's and Sirius' love for Harry are entwined with their sacrifice for him. I don't think that entwinement of love and sacrifice is inferior to Snape's sacrifice. I think it would be totally understandable if Harry considered their sacrifice to be the most important, just for the sheer fact they were his parents and nothing can trump that. Harry went above and beyond in honoring Snape [making sure everyone Snape was good, getting Snape's portrait into the headmaster's office, naming his kid after Snape]. Harry doesn't need to rank Snape against his parents.

I agree with this. :) It would be very peculiar, to say the least, if Harry had honoured Snape above James and Lily. :whistle: They were his beloved parents, the parents he had never known, who had sacrificed their lives for him! Of course he would name his first child James Sirius, and call his daughter after Lily. :)

All the same, I am also glad that Harry was able to forgive Snape, move on from the past and honour Snape for the part he'd played, and therefore I also agree with what Ignisia says:

For Harry not to truly forgive Snape, and simply tell Al what he did only to make the boy feel better without any true emotion attached seems rather a sad waste of page space. The point of that "bravest man" passage, apart from pointing out that Snape did things worthy of honor, was to show that Harry has grown up, forgiven Snape, and learned to acknowledged the man's heroism, even if there was bad blood between them from beginning to end. To show such a mark of Harry's maturity and then take it back with a "ha ha, I didn't really mean that!" seems a wee bit pointless.

That would be my view too.

I respectfully disagree. I would say that Snape died for Harry; worked for Harry and the Light. He may have turned for Lily; but she died. Snape worked for her child and also the Light because from a DE he came to believe and work for the cause as well. We see that when he remonstrates with Phineas not to call muggleborns *mudblood*. That was how much he changed IMO. And it did not benefit Lily for whom he turned in the first palce; his actions benefited Harry and the Light IMO

According to the canon, Snape did not die in sacrifice so that Harry could live. Snape did not sacrifice his life for Harry period. Snape's death had nothing to do with Harry. Please give some canon reference to support what you are saying because imo, it did not happen in the books. Perhaps I misunderstand what you are saying, because Voldemort killed Snape in cold blood via Nagini, Snape never willingly offered himself as a sacrifice (to die) for anything to the dark lord - in fact, he begged Voldemort to allow him to live and bring Harry to him. At the moment Nagini attacked and Snape fell, he believed he had failed - he hadn't given Harry the message that he must die. So he did not willingly die for any reason, he wished to live and complete his mission.

But from Harry's point of view, Snape purported to have feelings for his mum and did everything for her. Also I agree Harry knew he was working for Dumbledore in the end and gave him the message that he must die to get rid of the horcrux. Harry also said he felt Snape was brave while trying to convince his son Slytherin was a good house. I am not sure if you regard JKR's interviews as canon, but she said that Snape loathed Harry - and Harry knew it. He was not disillusioned into thinking that Snape would sacrifice his life for him and he never said he believed that anywhere in canon. Perhaps I am forgetting something? :)

For Harry not to truly forgive Snape, and simply tell Al what he did only to make the boy feel better without any true emotion attached seems rather a sad waste of page space. The point of that "bravest man" passage, apart from pointing out that Snape did things worthy of honor, was to show that Harry has grown up, forgiven Snape, and learned to acknowledged the man's heroism, even if there was bad blood between them from beginning to end. To show such a mark of Harry's maturity and then take it back with a "ha ha, I didn't really mean that!" seems a wee bit pointless.

I appreciate your interpretation and imo, Harry did think Snape was brave; my further comments referred to a different topic that another poster was speaking about. I would respectfully disagree that Harry thought Snape was a hero, but I do agree he forgave him and wished to show him an honor. :)

And I am also of the opinion that Snape cared about Harry on a certain level. I won't go into it too much here, as that's for the Snape thread, but I would like to point out that when JKR makes an interpretation of her own work, it is merely an interpretation. If the book says otherwise, then the interview snippets are not necessarily canon.

I respect your view, but I do feel that JKR's statements of fact outside of the book are canon, so I take her word for it that Snape loathed Harry and Harry knew it. But as you pointed out, that is not relevant to Harry. From Harry's POV, Snape hated him and imo, Harry didn't like Snape either. He did believe he was brave though and he forgave him for his mistreatment of him, because Harry was a very compassionate young man. Harry also loved his parents, his Godfather and Lupin, which had little to do with compassion and more to do with the love we all naturally have for our families, imo. He claimed in canon that they'd all given their lives for him and he greatly appreciated that, loving them all the more for their selflessness in that regard - I do believe he considered them all personal heroes - the distinction being that during his life they all overtly showed him their love, respect, honor, kindness, goodness and genuine concern for his well being. Thus, he named his children for them and took little Teddy into his heart as a godfather - but that was not necessary at all, he merely wanted to show his love and have a rememberance of them. I am unsure what Harry thought of Dumbledore, but I do believe he felt Dumbledore was brave and very intelligent and obviously he wished to show him an honor for all he'd done, just as he'd done for Snape.

I can't really look at how Harry named his children and say that he considered their sacrifices "better" or "worse" than the others. All Harry said about Snape was that Snape was the bravest man he met, not that he had a greater sacrifice than the ones Lily, James and Sirius made for him. IMO, that would be a really tactless thing to say about the people that loved him most and it doesn't seem like Harry's the type to consider sacrifices less worthy than others. :shrug: While others may believe Snape's decisions were better I can respect, but I can't see Harry ranking any of the people he named his children after.

Harry chose to name his children after Lily, James, Sirius, Luna, and Dumbledore because he loved all of them. He chose to have his second son's middle name be Severus because he wanted to honor Snape and all that he contributed for the fight against Voldemort.

According to the canon, Snape did not die in sacrifice so that Harry could live. Snape did not sacrifice his life for Harry period. Snape's death had nothing to do with Harry. Please give some canon reference to support what you are saying because imo, it did not happen in the books. Perhaps I misunderstand what you are saying, because Voldemort killed Snape in cold blood via Nagini, Snape never willingly offered himself as a sacrifice (to die) for anything to the dark lord - in fact, he begged Voldemort to allow him to live and bring Harry to him. At the moment Nagini attacked and Snape fell, he believed he had failed - he hadn't given Harry the message that he must die. So he did not willingly die for any reason, he wished to live and complete his mission.

I would respectfully disagree.

Snape IMO indeed sacrificed his life for Harry. The only point where I am in doubt and am not able to undertsand canon would be if he knew about his sacrifice or not.

This conclusion is my understanding of the text. I understand if you have come to a different conclusion, though. :)

It was the EW that I believe defeated Voldemort. That wand was placed in Snape's hand by Dumbledore for Harry to win the war against Voldemort.

The reasons for which I have stated in the DD/Snape thread. Which is my interpretation of canon.

Snape was killed for the Elder wand. Other wise he would have been alive. Voldemort did not suspect him as a traitor and kill him. He killed Snape because he was the Master of the EW.

I infer from that that Snape was sacrificed by DD for Harry if Snape did not know and Snape himself sacrificed for Harry if he did know abourt the EW.

Both IMO are sacrifices that were made so that Harry would win the war against Voldemort and live.

It would not have been possible for Harry to win the war IMO from the way I understood canon, if it were not for Snape's death and that I call a sacrifice.

I can respect that you don't call his death a sacrifice and perhaps you don't feel Snape had anything to do with Harry's victory.

But I would be interested to know your resons for the same.

And Wicked, perhaps in the Snape thread. We are getting out of topic here. :)


postd by beatifically
Harry chose to name his children after Lily, James, Sirius, Luna, and Dumbledore because he loved all of them. He chose to have his second son's middle name be Severus because he wanted to honor Snape and all that he contributed for the fight against Voldemort.

That IMO was not necessary, if he did only intended to name his son after Snape. Remus too, gave his life, and so did Fred and a host of others. Snape's life was in some way special to Harry, so special that he decided to honour Snape the way he did. The was he honoured his parents, his Godfather and a dear mentor.

Harry IMO saw somthing more in the way Snape fought and sacrificed his life so that Harry may win the war. And he saw that sacrifice as equal to his parents', Sirius adn DD. That is how I see Harry's intentions. :)

That IMO was not necessary, if he did only intended to name his son after Snape. Remus too, gave his life, and so did Fred and a host of others. Snape's life was in some way special to Harry, so special that he decided to honour Snape the way he did. The was he honoured his parents, his Godfather and a dear mentor.

Harry IMO saw somthing more in the way Snape fought and sacrificed his life so that Harry may win the war. And he saw that sacrifice as equal to his parents', Sirius adn DD. That is how I see Harry's intentions. :)


Not necessarily.

Mostly everyone, if not everyone, who died in the war had a family and would be surely honored by them. Fred was reserved for Geroge. Remus and Tonks were reserved for Teddy. Colin was reserved for his brother, I guess.

But Snape had no one. Everyone still thought he was a Death Eater, and even though Harry campainged to have his innocence known, there were probably a lot people who didn't care and just forgot about him. There weren't a lot people who liked Snape to begin with so I can see that happening.

And I'm guessing Harry knew that. Give a few years, and probably a lot people would forget about Snape and just remembr the bad things about him. No one would waste their time honoring Snape. So Harry took that task upon himself.

The way I see it is, Harry felt really bad for Snape because even though Harry made sure everyone knew Snape was a good guy, they probably still didn't like him. And Snape had no family to honor him. So Harry named his kid after him so Snape would get some of the respect he deserved and proof that someone still remember him and the good things he did. Harry didn't need to name his kids after Snape, but he did because he had a big heart, I guess. Anyways, this is just how I feel and I know you have a different opinion.

Harry IMO saw somthing more in the way Snape fought and sacrificed his life so that Harry may win the war. And he saw that sacrifice as equal to his parents', Sirius adn DD. That is how I see Harry's intentions. :)

The way I see it is, Harry felt really bad for Snape because even though Harry made sure everyone knew Snape was a good guy, they probably still didn't like him. And Snape had no family to honor him. So Harry named his kid after him so Snape would get some of the respect he deserved and proof that someone still remember him and the good things he did. Harry didn't need to name his kids after Snape, but he did because he had a big heart, I guess.

I think you are both right. It was in part Snape's decision to do anything to first keep Lily safe, and later protect Harry, that made him the lonely, friendless, bitter figure Harry knew. Harry was the closest thing to a family Snape had, and I think Harry recognized that, and this was the reason he felt a responsibility to be the person who took the lead in getting Snape his (posthumous) due. Snape may not have been an ideal family member in some ways ;) but after learning of Snape's lifetime love for his mother and his work for Dumbledore firsthand, I do not think Harry was still able or willing to overlook the many times Snape did what it took to keep Harry alive and safe, sometimes at risk to himself.

Totally OT, but I also think Minerva McGonagall regretted her last words to Snape. :)

But Snape had no one. The way I see it is, Harry felt really bad for Snape because even though Harry made sure everyone knew Snape was a good guy, they probably still didn't like him.

I also agree that Harry felt Snape should be honoured, but the name is a bit more than that. That meant to me that Harry thought of Albus and Severus like he did James, Lily and Sirius; and that's the highest honour he could give Snape IMO. :)

And I agree with zg on MCGonagall.

That IMO was not necessary, if he did only intended to name his son after Snape. Remus too, gave his life, and so did Fred and a host of others.

Well, other children already were named after them. (Teddy and Fred.) I don't necessarily think that because Harry named a child after Snape means that he thought Snape's sacrifice was greater. He just wanted to honor what Snape did for him and I see no canon that suggests he thought Snape made a sacrifice greater than the ones others made for him.

Well, other children already were named after them. (Teddy and Fred.) I don't necessarily think that because Harry named a child after Snape means that he thought Snape's sacrifice was greater. He just wanted to honor what Snape did for him and I see no canon that suggests he thought Snape made a sacrifice greater than the ones others made for him.


There is the obvious, that whatever sacrifice he made, seemed to Harry to make him "probably the bravest man I ever knew".

There is the obvious, that whatever sacrifice he made, seemed to Harry to make him "probably the bravest man I ever knew".

Harry does say Snape is the bravest man he ever knew, but nothing says that Harry considered Snape's sacrifice greater than the sacrifices other people made. I can't imagine Harry actually ranking sacrifices that were made during the war, therefore I don't think that he considered the other sacrifices made to be of any lesser value than Snape's.

Harry does say Snape is the bravest man he ever knew, but nothing says that Harry considered Snape's sacrifice greater than the sacrifices other people made. I can't imagine Harry actually ranking sacrifices that were made during the war, therefore I don't think that he considered the other sacrifices made to be of any lesser value than Snape's.

Bravest man, means one who is the most brave among all those who are generally deemed to be brave. I don't think Harry's taking away anything from his parents or Sirius, but he is telling us readers, that his opinion of Snape has changed; he had now understood him and accepted him; so much that he has placed him on the same level as his parents and Godfather and above all, he has understood that very complex man, his motivations, his behaviour and his life and has completely accepted every single bit of Severus Snape as his.

Bravest man, means one who is the most brave among all those who are generally deemed to be brave. I don't think Harry's taking away anything from his parents or Sirius, but he is telling us readers, that his opinion of Snape has changed; he had now understood him and accepted him; so much that he has placed him on the same level as his parents and Godfather and above all, he has understood that very complex man, his motivations, his behaviour and his life and has completely accepted every single bit of Severus Snape as his.

Harry forgave Snape, something I was hoping since I thought Snape was on the good side before DH. He acknowledged Snape's courage and contribution to the second war. Harry didn't really place Snape on the same level as the others because Harry loved the other people he had his children named after. I don't think Harry ever did love Snape, especially since JKR said Harry wouldn't visit Snape's portrait. He honored Snape for his heroism, but he also knew that Snape wasn't a saint and made plenty of mistakes in his life. He forgave Snape, but I never thought Harry excused Snape for what he did, either.

The idea of forgiveness is to let go anf hold no grudges. I don't see how Harry can forgive but not excuse. It's contradictory, in my opinion. And I really doubt 20 years after school Harry would still hold a grudge against Snape for treating him unjustly or badly in class. That would have been [etty, in my opinion, and Harry definitely doesn't come across as petty.

Harry forgave Snape, something I was hoping since I thought Snape was on the good side before DH.

Me too! :agree: I definitely thought there would be some kind of resolution between these two characters in DH. (JKR made me wait for it for about 600 pages. :D )

He acknowledged Snape's courage and contribution to the second war. Harry didn't really place Snape on the same level as the others because Harry loved the other people he had his children named after. I don't think Harry ever did love Snape, especially since JKR said Harry wouldn't visit Snape's portrait. He honored Snape for his heroism, but he also knew that Snape wasn't a saint and made plenty of mistakes in his life. He forgave Snape, but I never thought Harry excused Snape for what he did, either.

Yep ... 'love' would be putting it a tad strongly, I agree! However, the intriguing thing to me is that Harry felt some kind of emotional connection to Snape: why else name one of his sons after him?

Re: Harry's feelings about Snape, we are in the realm of speculation, period. We can only theorise and analyse these characters from what we see of them in the text. I believe that JKR said in one of her interviews that she thought that Harry probably wouldn't visit Snape's portrait. And personally I don't take that kind of statement from the author as officially part of canon. (I take exactly the same line regarding JKR saying that Harry would probably campaign for Snape's heroism to be broadcast to the wizarding world.)

The idea of forgiveness is to let go anf hold no grudges. I don't see how Harry can forgive but not excuse. It's contradictory, in my opinion.

Actually, I do think there is a difference between forgiveness and merely 'excusing' someone. :)

I think it is possible to forgive someone who has wronged you terribly, but not to make excuses for their behaviour. E.g. I once watched a very moving documentary on TV about a concentration camp victim who - incredibly - had chosen, deliberately, not to hate the people who had tortured her. That doesn't mean she thought their original actions were OK! - of course not. It did mean that she refused to let hatred destroy her.

I think that's the problem people sometimes have with forgiveness: they think that if you forgive the abuser, you are saying the original abuse was OK. No, that's not what forgiveness is about: it recognises that a great wrong was committed, and doesn't rationalise that or make excuses for it -- yet still forgives.

I hope that makes sense. :)

And I really doubt 20 years after school Harry would still hold a grudge against Snape for treating him unjustly or badly in class. That would have been petty, in my opinion, and Harry definitely doesn't come across as petty.

Oh, absolutely not. :) Harry is many things - rash, impulsive, tending to make rash judgements at times - but pettiness certainly is never part of his character. And I am sure that Harry had rather a lot to process re: his feelings about Snape after the war! But the Harry we see in DH does an awful lot of growing up. And he is also a guy who has a fierce sense of justice. :tu:

Good points on the difference between forgiveness and excuses, Pearl.... I absolutely agree. This is a crucial distinction seems to be forgotten so often (especially in the baying tabloid press) - and I think JKR is again showing here that Harry has a very special strength and a great heart, too..... :)

Again, recognising bravery is really quite something - especially since so many people Harry knew dies in that conflict. NOT being blinded by admiration for Sirius, for ecxample, and acknowledging that Snape was more brave - that's impressive. But it doesn't have to mean MORE than that, either.


Personally, I really DO hope that Harry did his very best to make sure that Snape's role in the whole story became widely known.... He had become quite media savvy over the years (or at least Hermione had!) and in the weeks after V fell Harry would have had a chance to use his standing to repair Snape's reputation.

I sincerely hope that Snape's memories were not lost during the battle and someone actually preserved them somewhere, as a testimony to his bravery.

I think Harry would have been able to be that generous - even in those heady days of sorrow, grief and at the same time triumph and elation. I really hope that they gave Snape a very honourable funeral, too. And again, Harry would have had to initiate that.

Sorry .... drifted off into speculation for a moment....



Anyway - I don't think he would have landed his son with the middle name Severus if Snape's heroism and actions had NOT been known in the wizarding world.

Good points on the difference between forgiveness and excuses, Pearl.... I absolutely agree. This is a crucial distinction seems to be forgotten so often (especially in the baying tabloid press) - and I think JKR is again showing here that Harry has a very special strength and a great heart, too..... :)

Indeed. :) Harry has a very big heart. :love:

In fact, Harry lays that whole Marauder/Snape debacle to rest by naming his son after Snape. IMO. :cool:

Personally, I really DO hope that Harry did his very best to make sure that Snape's role in the whole story became widely known.... He had become quite media savvy over the years (or at least Hermione had!) and in the weeks after V fell Harry would have had a chance to use his standing to repair Snape's reputation.

I sincerely hope that Snape's memories were not lost during the battle and someone actually preserved them somewhere, as a testimony to his bravery.

I think Harry would have been able to be that generous - even in those heady days of sorrow, grief and at the same time triumph and elation. I really hope that they gave Snape a very honourable funeral, too. And again, Harry would have had to initiate that.

Sorry .... drifted off into speculation for a moment....

Heh. :tu: And the fanfiction writers have been busy, Klio, on all of the above ... :D :)

Anyway - I don't think he would have landed his son with the middle name Severus if Snape's heroism and actions had NOT been known in the wizarding world.

That's what I think! :)

P.S. Funny how you and I often think so alike, eh, Klio? :D :)

The idea of forgiveness is to let go anf hold no grudges. I don't see how Harry can forgive but not excuse. It's contradictory, in my opinion. And I really doubt 20 years after school Harry would still hold a grudge against Snape for treating him unjustly or badly in class. That would have been [etty, in my opinion, and Harry definitely doesn't come across as petty.

To excuse someone doesn't go with forgiving someone, IMO. Forgiving someone means to let go of grudges and not letting the hatred eat up a person. I've forgiven the "best friends" that betrayed me, but that doesn't mean I'm going to excuse their behavior. What they did was wrong and I know that, but I'm not going to hold onto grudges against that person. That's what I think about Harry as well. He may have forgiven Snape but he still knew that what Snape did was wrong. When I said that I didn't think Harry would excuse Snape, I meant that I didn't think Harry would say that Snape's behavior towards his students was "okay" because of whatever he was dealing with. So, basically, my point is that, while Harry may have forgiven Snape, he wouldn't say that what Snape did was right.

Yep ... 'love' would be putting it a tad strongly, I agree! However, the intriguing thing to me is that Harry felt some kind of emotional connection to Snape: why else name one of his sons after him?

I don't know if the way Harry felt towards Snape would be the same as the way he felt towards his friends or family. IMO, he respected Snape and acknowledged how much Snape had done in his life, but I never thought he actually loved him. I think Harry respected and felt gratitude towards Snape. I personally can't see Harry going to talk to Snape in the afterlife or even visiting his portrait. :shrug: Part of it has to do with my belief that JKR's word is canon, but I never felt that Harry would feel anything beyond the emotions I described earlier.

I don't know if the way Harry felt towards Snape would be the same as the way he felt towards his friends or family. IMO, he respected Snape and acknowledged how much Snape had done in his life, but I never thought he actually loved him. I think Harry respected and felt gratitude towards Snape. I personally can't see Harry going to talk to Snape in the afterlife or even visiting his portrait. :shrug: Part of it has to do with my belief that JKR's word is canon, but I never felt that Harry would feel anything beyond the emotions I described earlier.

In my opinion, Harry still disliked Snape, the man. It was not active dislike because Snape was dead and he let it go. However, if he was forced to speak of the man himself and the way he behaved and acted toward Harry and many of the students, as well as many of his own peers, he would not glamorize or gloss over Snape's character. Everything Harry knew about Snape, the man, was negative.

However, that is not what Harry focused on because allowing active dislike of a person to endure can eat away at you (i.e., the way Snape felt about James). Instead, Harry put that behind him and focused on the fact that Snape had been working for Dumbledore all along and died a horrible death in the line of that work. Also, his efforts in that regard went largely unrecognized. I think it took several years for Harry to reach the point where he could look at things that way, but when he could, he realized that Snape's efforts I referred to were honorable. Harry loved Dumbledore when he was growing up, however, after discovering the 'real' Dumbledore, I am not so certain he loved him as he once had. Nonetheless, I feel he still felt that overall, Dumbledore too had acted honorably. Ginny apparently agreed and they decided to name their third son for the two men out of respect. I think Harry felt that his parents, as compassionate as he was, would have wanted him to do it. He may have been wrong about that.

I don't know if the way Harry felt towards Snape would be the same as the way he felt towards his friends or family. IMO, he respected Snape and acknowledged how much Snape had done in his life, but I never thought he actually loved him.

Oh, I wouldn't claim that either! :) And even if Harry did ever come to feel some affection for Snape - :whistle: - of course it would not compare with the love he had for his parents, even though he never knew them, or for Sirius, whom he had known, and loved deeply. Snape-defender though I be, :D, I would never claim that sort of comparison.

I think Harry respected and felt gratitude towards Snape.

Agreed.

I personally can't see Harry going to talk to Snape in the afterlife or even visiting his portrait. :shrug: Part of it has to do with my belief that JKR's word is canon, but I never felt that Harry would feel anything beyond the emotions I described earlier.

But why not? :) After all, there really is nothing in canon to prohibit such a speculation. ;) Especially if Harry did feel some respect and gratitude to Snape, as you say (which to me is proved by his naming his son after him).

Personally I really like the idea of Harry going to talk to Snape's portrait, to effect some, uh, closure. :p

That would be a verrrry interesting conversation. :evil: :lol:

Wonderful material for the fanfiction writers! ;) :)

Harry loved Dumbledore when he was growing up, however, after discovering the 'real' Dumbledore, I am not so certain he loved him as he once had.

What makes you think Harry stopped loving Dumbledore once he got to saw him for who he really was, flaws and all? I never got the impression that Harry stopped loving him after he realized Dumbledore wasn't perfect, so I'd be interested in hearing your view. :)

But why not? :) After all, there really is nothing in canon to prohibit such a speculation. ;) Especially if Harry did feel some respect and gratitude to Snape, as you say (which to me is proved by his naming his son after him).

My reason for not believing Harry felt anything affectionate towards Snape is really stupid: I just have that gut feeling that he didn't. I can't put my finger on it, but I just have this feeling that he didn't have affection towards Snape. I don't know any canon that goes against the theory, as you said, but naming his second son after Snape doesn't suffice for me, personally. A person can respect and feel gratitude towards a person and not feel anything more, IMO.

Wonderful material for the fanfiction writers! ;) :)

:rotfl: I'd love to read something that involves that.

Personally I really like the idea of Harry going to talk to Snape's portrait, to effect some, uh, closure. :p

Well, as JKR said that Harry would have made sure that Snape's portrait was installed at Hogwarts, perhaps they did have a short conversation. I can see Harry stopping by to make sure the portrait was really there. It's difficult to imagine what tone would prevail, since the portrait is an echo of the individual, Snape's shortcomings would be present....but he would have no further need to keep his mind blocked with no Voldy.....still, warm & fuzzy doesn't come to mind.:lol:

Harry loved Dumbledore when he was growing up, however, after discovering the 'real' Dumbledore, I am not so certain he loved him as he once had.
I'd be interested to hear why you would think this. Although Harry did show some anger/frustration with Dumbledore in King's Cross, he also was very compassionate with Dumbledore. And he further would not ask, nor wished to know, if Dumbledore ever found out what spell killed Ariana, and the reason seems clear -- Harry wanted to spare Dumbledore any more pain. To me, these are indications that Harry's feelings had not changed towards Dumbledore.

The clincher, for me, is his behavior at the end of DH. As soon as the battle is over, he wants to go back and talk to Dumbledore.

Harry seems to have an extraordinary ability to forgive; we see that with Ron, with Dumbledore, Snape, his father and Sirius, where he accepts all of them for what they are and moves on.

I'd be interested to hear why you would think this. Although Harry did show some anger/frustration with Dumbledore in King's Cross, he also was very compassionate with Dumbledore. And he further would not ask, nor wished to know, if Dumbledore ever found out what spell killed Ariana, and the reason seems clear -- Harry wanted to spare Dumbledore any more pain. To me, these are indications that Harry's feelings had not changed towards Dumbledore.

Well I agree that Harry was the most compassionate person known to mankind, I didn't mean to say he wasn't, that was made extremely obvious. However, one can show a lot of compassion and not love a person. My statement wasn't definitive, it is one of those things I picked up on during the reading. Harry wanted to love Dumbledore, he really really did. He defended Dumbledore from himself in Kings Cross, commisserated and even remained silent when there was no answer that could be found that wouldn't be negative. Honestly, I think the problem was that as much as JKR wanted Harry to love Dumbledore, she herself found the tenor of her love for the character of Dumbledore changing - tumbling a bit - as his character came fully to light on the page. That reflected in Harry the more they spoke together. He goes from avid defender and compassionate friend, to a kind of silently judgmental, even sullen Harry by the end of their conversation.

After 19 years of reflection on what Dumbledore had been, he named his son, Albus Severus. That is odd on two levels for me. I believe he still disliked Snape as a person (not actively - he'd not waste time holding a grudge - but rather the man's character in as far as how he treated the students and others), though he honored the acts Snape ahd performed for the good side and the bravery he felt that he had shown. Putting Snape's name together with Albus', who he supposedly loved as he had before, would be like planting a permanent cloud over the sun. I feel he still had affection for Dumbedore because the man had shown him a great amount of kindness during his life, but he had lost a lot of his love for the old wizard who had:

1. Left him at the Dursley's for 11 years without intervening (even with magic) to make them treat him better. And kept all of Harry's parent's friends from him - to which I still fail to see the purpose of.

2. Allowed him to be mistreated at Hogwarts.

3. Raised him knowing that there was a chance he would be sending him to his death - and would have if necessary - in order to kill Voldemort (the bigger goal and to Dumbledore, the greater good). And he told Harry nothing about it.

4. Allowed Sirius to be jailed without a trial (his beloved Godfather) when he clearly had enough presence and importance in the Ministry to insist upon it. We know this because his merely telling them that Snape was no longer a DE was good enough to keep him from Azkaban.

5. Failed to tell him that he'd set Snape up to kill him (Dumbledore), making Harry mis-read a number of situations and nearly come to great harm or worse.

6. Made him struggle in collecting the Horcruxes and left him mysteries galore with the clues about the Hallows and all for what amounted to a very poor excuse.

7. Lied to him point blank when he told him in his youth that he was revealing the whole truth to him.

8. Lied (via omission) to others who Harry knew and resulted in the deaths of several people (and Hedwig) who Harry was fond of or respected greatly.

Now Harry definitely forgave Dumbledore for those things and understood why Dumbledore had done the things he had. But when Harry thought of Sirius or his Dad or Lupin or Molly - he wouldn't be able to imagine any of those people doing to him what Dumbledore had.

Love is a gift, something that is given to those one cherishes and you can forgive people a myriad of horrible things and still love them. However, imo, the tenor of that love changes. When I say Harry didn't love him as much, perhaps that is not quite accurate. What I mean is that the tenor of his love changed - he didn't love him unconditionally as he once had because Dumbledore was not the man he had known and loved. Dumbledore was a man who would do the types of things Dumbledore did - that would distort Harry's love for him from something free of burden, to something that carried burdens within it. That is because it wasn't a single act or a childish act or some other momentary impression he might get from witnessing something he didn't like that Dumbledore did; but rather because Dumbledore's adult and permanent character was manipulative (puppet master), a bit machiavellian and he was willing to bring those parts of his character to bear upon Harry - and Harry's well being.

Remember, this is not just because of "who Dumbledore was", but also "what Dumbledore was willing to do and did do to Harry" from his point of view. Those he loved unconditionally, his mum and dad, Sirius, Lupin, etc., had never done - and would never do - anything to him like Dumbledore had. On top of Snape's behavior and negative feelings for Harry; Harry found out that Snape too had known that he was a horcrux and would have to die for quite some time, but also said nothing - that didn't help matters with respect to his feelings about Snape, imo. So putting the names together made sense in light of all of that.

Once little Albus Severus was born, Harry found that the child looked like him - which means of course it looked just like James, but with green eyes. Yet he didn't change the child's name. It was like the madest irony and a show of forgiveness all wrapped up in one. Dumbledore would look upon the lad and feel shame for what he'd done to Harry and Snape - well to be honest - I think Snape would just hate it and be completely upset by the gesture. Harry showed a bit of himself with that gesture, imo.

JKR said Harry wouldn't go and speak with Snape's portrait - but little Albus might be forced to when he was sent to the Headmaster's office. I know that paintings are just impressions, but I think poor little Albus would get a mouthfull from Snape and find a rather diminutive Dumbledore in portrait before him. These were one of JKR's "I'd like to think" statements, so we are left to decide in the end. I personally like to think they didn't put Snape's portrait up so that Harry wouldn't have to explain to his kid why Snape, the man who he was named after, was particularly unkind to him. :lol:

My reason for not believing Harry felt anything affectionate towards Snape is really stupid: I just have that gut feeling that he didn't. I can't put my finger on it, but I just have this feeling that he didn't have affection towards Snape. I don't know any canon that goes against the theory, as you said, but naming his second son after Snape doesn't suffice for me, personally. A person can respect and feel gratitude towards a person and not feel anything more, IMO.

I think I would agree that 'affection' might be putting it a tad strongly. ;)

:rotfl: I'd love to read something that involves that.

Well, if you are interested, I can Owl you a link to a really great 'Snape's portrait' story. There's been a slew of them, naturally, but this is simply the best I've ever read. Harry more than holds his own against The Snarky One. :lol: Yay, Harry! :D And Hermione and Minerva are both great in this fic too. :)

Well, as JKR said that Harry would have made sure that Snape's portrait was installed at Hogwarts, perhaps they did have a short conversation. I can see Harry stopping by to make sure the portrait was really there. It's difficult to imagine what tone would prevail, since the portrait is an echo of the individual, Snape's shortcomings would be present....but he would have no further need to keep his mind blocked with no Voldy.....still, warm & fuzzy doesn't come to mind.:lol:

Warm and fuzzy ... noooooooo. :p If I were Harry, sheer curiosity might make me go and talk to the portrait. ;) I mean, the worst that can happen is that Snape could just walk out of the frame in a huff. :lol:

I feel he still had affection for Dumbedore because the man had shown him a great amount of kindness during his life, but he had lost a lot of his love for the old wizard who had:

1. Left him at the Dursley's for 11 years without intervening (even with magic) to make them treat him better. And kept all of Harry's parent's friends from him - to which I still fail to see the purpose of.

2. Allowed him to be mistreated at Hogwarts.

3. Raised him knowing that there was a chance he would be sending him to his death - and would have if necessary - in order to kill Voldemort (the bigger goal and to Dumbledore, the greater good). And he told Harry nothing about it.

4. Allowed Sirius to be jailed without a trial (his beloved Godfather) when he clearly had enough presence and importance in the Ministry to insist upon it. We know this because his merely telling them that Snape was no longer a DE was good enough to keep him from Azkaban.

5. Failed to tell him that he'd set Snape up to kill him (Dumbledore), making Harry mis-read a number of situations and nearly come to great harm or worse.

6. Made him struggle in collecting the Horcruxes and left him mysteries galore with the clues about the Hallows and all for what amounted to a very poor excuse.

7. Lied to him point blank when he told him in his youth that he was revealing the whole truth to him.

8. Lied (via omission) to others who Harry knew and resulted in the deaths of several people (and Hedwig) who Harry was fond of or respected greatly.


All these things are true. I've never been a particular fan of Albus. I've always judged him against Gandalf and found him wanting. :lol:

But I think your list is symptomatic of a flaw in the series: the fact JKR tends to make her characters serve her plot, not the other way round. I could come up with a similar list for other characters too. But that's for another thread. :whistle:

Regarding Harry's love for Albus ... I think he did always love him - and certainly forgave him - but that love lost its youthful naivety.

5. Failed to tell him that he'd set Snape up to kill him (Dumbledore), making Harry mis-read a number of situations and nearly come to great harm or worse.


I thought that Harry didn't know about Dumbledore's plan of being killed by Snape in case it got back to Voldemort somehow. Snape was perfectly capable of protecting the plan, but with Harry being as terrible at Occlumency as he was they couldn't risk him knowing.

Voldemort was not entering Harry's head. It was Harry entering Voldemort's head. There was no risk of Harry knowing anything. Otherwise, Voldemort would have known that Harry was hunting horcruxes. And he didn't learn until it was too late, and he didn't learn it from Harry, anyway. Alternatively, Voldemort would have learned where Harry was hiding and could have captured him.

Voldemort was not entering Harry's head. It was Harry entering Voldemort's head. There was no risk of Harry knowing anything. Otherwise, Voldemort would have known that Harry was hunting horcruxes. And he didn't learn until it was too late, and he didn't learn it from Harry, anyway. Alternatively, Voldemort would have learned where Harry was hiding and could have captured him.


Sorry, I'm a bit slow sometimes :blush:

When I say Harry didn't love him as much, perhaps that is not quite accurate. What I mean is that the tenor of his love changed - he didn't love him unconditionally as he once had because Dumbledore was not the man he had known and loved. Dumbledore was a man who would do the types of things Dumbledore did - that would distort Harry's love for him from something free of burden, to something that carried burdens within it. That is because it wasn't a single act or a childish act or some other momentary impression he might get from witnessing something he didn't like that Dumbledore did; but rather because Dumbledore's adult and permanent character was manipulative (puppet master), a bit machiavellian and he was willing to bring those parts of his character to bear upon Harry - and Harry's well being.

I read your whole post and, even though I'm a big fan of Dumbledore, I can understand that he made a lot of mistakes. Harry knew that and most readers are aware of that as well, but how does acknowledgement of Dumbledore's flaws mean that Harry doesn't love him unconditionally? Isn't loving someone unconditionally meaning loving someone despite flaws?

Harry was angry and bitter towards Dumbledore for a big portion of Deathly Hallows, but I never took that to mean that he loved Dumbledore less. I agree with Hermione - Harry was just upset and disappointed that Dumbledore never told Harry the things that Harry discovered on his own. Harry, though he seemed to have accepted it in HBP, never truly grasped what it would be like to go hunt for Horcruxes without Dumbledore's guidance. He was let down by Dumbledore, but I never got the impression that Harry's love dropped.

By the end of DH, I'm sure Harry was aware of Dumbledore's manipulative nature. Harry loved James after he found out James was flawed and made mistakes, and I believe that was the same case with Dumbledore. I saw the revelation of Dumbledore's darker side and Harry's reaction to be very similar to how Harry reacted after SWM. In the end, he accepted Dumbledore's flaws and loved him, therefore his love was unconditional.

I think I would agree that 'affection' might be putting it a tad strongly. ;)

Affection was just used because I couldn't figure out a better word for it. Basically, I can't fathom Harry feeling anything deeper than respect and gratitude towards Snape.

Well, if you are interested, I can Owl you a link to a really great 'Snape's portrait' story. There's been a slew of them, naturally, but this is simply the best I've ever read. Harry more than holds his own against The Snarky One. :lol: Yay, Harry! :D And Hermione and Minerva are both great in this fic too. :)

Ooh, I'm really interested! :D

I read your whole post and, even though I'm a big fan of Dumbledore, I can understand that he made a lot of mistakes. Harry knew that and most readers are aware of that as well, but how does acknowledgement of Dumbledore's flaws mean that Harry doesn't love him unconditionally? Isn't loving someone unconditionally meaning loving someone despite flaws?

Yes, but I don't think he loved Dumbledore unconditionally as of the end of DH.

By the end of DH, I'm sure Harry was aware of Dumbledore's manipulative nature. Harry loved James after he found out James was flawed and made mistakes, and I believe that was the same case with Dumbledore. I saw the revelation of Dumbledore's darker side and Harry's reaction to be very similar to how Harry reacted after SWM. In the end, he accepted Dumbledore's flaws and loved him, therefore his love was unconditional.

Imo, they are totally distinct. James never did, never would and would not even contemplate raising his son for the slaughter. Neither would Molly, or Sirius, or Lily, or Lupin and I can go on...

This isn't about who Dumbledore was as a person, this is about what Dumbledore was willing to do to Harry. For 14 years he was raising him to die at the hands of Voldemort - dead - no chance for life. And he allowed him to live miserably at the Dursleys anyway then have a hard time at Hogwarts in the mean time.

It was only a little better after GoF when he determined there was a possibility Harry might live. Even then he was not 100% sure. And all the while he said nothing to Harry.

But nondisclosure is secondary to the notion that Dumbledore was fully prepared to present Harry to Voldemort, to be killed, likely via an AK curse, just like his parents - eyes vacant staring up into space. And you call this a "flaw" of Dumbledore's akin to a flaw of James, or Sirius? I would beg to differ and I think Harry would see it as quite distinct as well. This wasn't just a "flaw" that Dumbledore had as a child and corrected over time, nor was it a one time poor showing of character on Dumbledoer's part - Dumbledore was essentially playing God with Harry's life without telling him or anyone else. And remember for 14 years, Dumbledore felt Harry had to die, there was no other way.

This is not a case of Harry maturing and coming to the realization that Dumbledore is not a saint (as he may have James, Lily, Sirius, etc.). This is something that even as an adult Harry would not think of as a "normal moral" way for a person to behave, imo. Can you imagine Harry raising Teddy Lupin for the slaughter? Honing him to be the type of lad who would give his life for Harry's cause based on a miserable life Harry metered out for him? No way, imo.

This is something no mature person would think was right, especially if they loved Harry. If Dumbledore had shared his plans with the adult Lupin and Sirius, Snape wouldn't have had to kill Dumbledore, if you know what I mean. :lol: