Harry Potter: Character Analysis

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 forgives 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?

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?

For the record, I want to say I think it comes from his role in the Dursley house as a jack of all trades who's expected to prove his worth every single day. I want to say Hermione and the Troll on Halloween was the first time we see this in him. Or maybe going after Neville's Remembrall. It's an admirable sentiment, but often a flaw, and EWWW I am almost agreeing with Voldy on that! I was literally holding my breath as he walked into the forest to sacrifice himself - even though I was expecting a similar situation. He had faced death so many times before, I won't say he was numb to it because he wasn't, but it gave him a resolve others would not have had.

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?

Because Harry had so little growing up, he's never had cause to be stingy or spiteful. It's so awful that I think Harry is a better person for having had such a miserable childhood, especially seeing as how Ron takes so much for granted. Sharing the TriWizard Cup with Cedric, telling him about the dragons, giving the money to the twins ONLY if they will help Ron, those are the first things that come to mind.

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

Necessary but unrealistic. The first two thirds of the book were a big disappointment to me and it breaks my heart.

8. Why do you think Harry forgave Snape?

Because everything he thought he knew about him was fundamentally wrong. Harry would certainly not be alive if it weren't for Snape. HE has made the most sacrifices, if you ask me. (I think his folks were even worse that the Dursleys.) I also think with age comes maturity, and that gave Harry a better understanding of the risks required to live the Snape life. Couldn't hurt that the way he died was so...demeaning. You've got to have an awfully hard heart to not make room in there for Severus after viewing his memories.

9. What do you think Harry went on to do after DH? Did he become an Auror or choose a different career?

I think Harry's done his fair share of dark wizard chasing. I want him to play professional Quidditch! Honestly, if I was him, no Auror training for me. There's an awesome fanfic where he drives the Knight Bus (because obviously he doesn't need a six galleon income), which I thought was awesome.

1. His years with Dudley wouldnt have caused Harry to have any personality defects, cause Harry wasnt afraid of him, Dudley was like a leverage for Harry, cause Harry can only speak on normal terms with Dudley and retort at him without consequence. I think it was Dudley that kind of helped Harry overcome the abusive characteristics of Vernon and Petunia. If his parents had lived, he would obviously be different, there would be no Harry Potter at all. If he had been sent to another wizarding family, assuming that they were good people, he wouldnt have that appreciation for people who arent as fortunate as other people, he wouldnt have character. If he was in an orphanage, he'd be worse off than staying at the Dursleys, at least the Dursleys gave Harry a remote sense of family, being in an orphanage would make Harry feel like a stranger and abandoned.

2. During the troll part in the first book, its definitely a strength, cause with most people, living with abusive relatives would make them lose the sense of sympathy and kindness. Harry didnt, he was normal in terms of personality, and he was willing to risk his life even though he didnt know it, all he wanted to do was help someone. His final sacrifice showed just how much he is willing to give for his friends and the world, its not only because of the fact that there is no choice, but also the fact that he was willing to do it. That wasnt just bravery or nobility, it showed that he knows that the whole world depended on him, Harry loved his friends and that was an example of that.

3. Harry's curiosity served him quite well in the books, for most part, if he wasnt curious, he wouldnt have found out a lot of things, like in HBP, he wouldnt have cared about the scribbles, thus not being able to save Ron, and also he wouldnt have been able to figure out RAB was if he wasnt curious. I dont think Dumbledore's death has made an impact on Harry's curiosity, it was his sense of obligation and loyalty that was affected.

7. The use was necessary, given the state of things, besides the readers all have so much hate for Death Eaters anyway that the use of the Unforgivables was actually relieving.

8. Harry found out the truth through the memories, and the fact that Snape wanted Harry to find out further enforces that trust, of course, Snape wasnt a bad person to begin with, Harry had mistaken him as an evil person, when in fact Snape was just more of like a guy who pents up his emotions and stuff.

9. Most likely an Auror, it was the only thing he wanted to do, wouldnt be hard to get a position anyway, since he defeated Voldemort, the greatest Dark wizard of all time.

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?

Living with the Dursleys has allowed Harry to see and understand those who are less fortunate. James had everything in life, and it seems that Lily did too. But Harry could truly empathize with Ron’s poorness and even Tom Riddle in the orphanage. But I believe it was in Harry’s nature to be who he was. He wanted to be in Gryffindor, and even though he didn’t know it at the time, that shows his desire to help other, his desire for good to rule evil.


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?

We don’t think we truly see the lengths he’s willing to go through to save people until GoF, when he’s in the lake. There are other examples of Harry being brave and selfless in the pervious books, but this time was different. While this trait can be seen as both a strength and a flaw, I think it outshines as a strength. Harry wanting to save the other person is so brave and something that many people are scared of. Even if Harry is scared, he tries to help almost everyone.


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?

Curiosity killed the cat, but thankfully Harry wasn’t a feline. This aspect of his personality was vital to everything he ever did, starting with the Invisibility Cloak and the Mirror of Erised in book one. Dumbledore knew Harry was naturally curious, and he worked on that.


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

Strengths – loyalty, braveness, his ability to appreciate those less fortunate

Weaknesses – Harry overcame fear in general, if that makes sense. This is very obvious during the Death March in DH. Harry was not afraid, he wasn’t scared of facing his death head on. Few people would have been able to do that, even if it meant vanquishing Voldemort.


5. How have each of the losses Harry has suffered helped to define who he is?
Each person Harry lost, starting with his parents, lit a fire of burning desire to rid the world of Voldemort. He wouldn’t have been motivated nearly enough had he lived a good life with his parents.


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?

Really just every time Harry shows his selflessness. He risked his life when he was eleven years old to keep Voldemort from coming back. None of the Death Eaters would have done something as brave to help Voldemort return, don’t think ever Bellatrix.


7. What do you think of Harry's use of Unforgivables in DH?
I do hate the fact that Harry used some Unforgivable curses in DH, but it was necessary. He did something that he would usually never, ever do, to help kill Voldemort.


8. Why do you think Harry forgave Snape?

The answer is quite obvious. Snape lived his life for Harry’s mother, keeping Harry safe. It’s not difficult to see the good in him after finding that out.


9. What do you think Harry went on to do after DH? Did he become an Auror or choose a different career?

I’m not really sure, but Auror seems like a fitting job for Harry. Some kind of anti-dark arts job at the ministry, anyway. I don’t think Harry would ever have ceased trying to stop the dark arts.

1. I think living with the Dursley's taught him how to be self sufficiant. He learned basically how to take care of himself. If he had be brought up by another wizarding family he probably wouldn't have been a very humble person when he would be hearing about how great he was everyday of his life.

2. I think it is a strength, he is selfless he takes other peoples safety into account before his own. His final sacrifice was amazing, how many people would really have been able to do it. I really liked that while he was walking towards his death he was realizing just how precious life really is.


4. He was brave and loyal and sympathetic to others and I would say after DH very wise aswell.
I think Harry over came his stuburness to not accept help from others.
He learned that he is not the only one willing to put his neck on the line and that he was worthy of having others care enough about him to put their necks on the line aswell.

7. I think he did what he felt was nessesary.

9. What do you think Harry went on to do after DH? Did he become an Auror or choose a different career?I would think that he probably wanted to live a quite happy life with his Ginny raising a family. I think he would have made a good teacher at Hogwarts, he could have made a great Headmaster.

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?

The Dursleys didn't seem to affect him that much. If they had, I'm sure he would've hated Muggles even more than Voldemort. He would most likely be different if his parents had lived, but not by much. If with another wizarding family, he would probably be a bit spoiled. If at an orphanage, he would have a lot more friends.

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?

It is a strength and a flaw, the first evidence I would say is when he didn't want Ron to sacrifice himself in the SS. I think it was great how he sacrificed himself like that.

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 helps him uncover the Sorcerer's stone, the Chamber of Secrets, Riddle's Diary, his connection to Sirius, Wormtail's secret, the different tasks, and lots of other stuff. He never lost it at Dumbledore's death, it just stopped for a while. And I thought this was post DH chat, but yes, it did resurface with the hunt

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

His strenghts are his bravery, love, and friendship. He also learned how to close his mind

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

With all his losses, he tries to keep what he still has, it strengthens his love and friendships.

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?

He sacrificed himself, attempted to stop Hermione and Ron from coming with him , His final battle, etc

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

I think it was neccesary, the Imperius Curse was used for good intentions, I never thought it was that evil, it really depended on why it was used. And the fact that he used the Cruciatus Curse on Bellatrix Lestrange and not Avada Kedavra shows that he is pure of heart and not evil.

8. Why do you think Harry forgave Snape?

He was so brave and all his intentions was good, and the mastermind behind it all was Dumbledore anyways. Also, his connection to his Mum

9. What do you think Harry went on to do after DH? Did he become an Auror or choose a different career?

I think he became either an Auror, Unspeakable, Quidditch, stay at home dad, etc.

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 Riddle?

Of course he would be a totally different person if his parents had lived or he had grown up with an adoring Wizarding family. Living with the Dursleys built character--literally ;). He is totally selfless and is very appreciative of what he has. If he hadn't grown up without so much he wouldn't know what a pain it is to not have money or family. If he had been sent to an orphanage like Tom he still wouldn't be the same because he would have grown up with so many people just like himself.

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 we really see it coming into play in CoS when Muggleborns were rapidly being attacked. It is both a strength and a flaw. It leads him into traps like in OotP but in the end it all works out. His final sacrifice was very noble and like his character. He knew that it was worth it to save all of those lives and families.


3. Harry's natural curiosity was stifled by the Dursleys. "Don't ask questions!" but it comes out in 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?

He has had and always will have natural curiosity. For knowledge is power and he needed power to defeat Voldemort and find the Horcruxes.

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

I think Harry's selflessness and acceptance of the worst are his greatest strengths. He knew that he must die because he accepted death. He also accepted that it was his job to save all of those people's lives. He overcame his weaknesses of fear of the unknown, the fact that he doesn't have to do everything alone, and knowing what is truly important.

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

The loss of his parents was his strength. The loss of Cedric was the knowledge that Voldemort was pure evil and deserved to die. The loss of Sirius was his drive or motivation. The loss of Dumbledore was his acceptance of death. The loss of Moody was his promise of trust (like when he said they needed to trust each other to get through it). The loss of wormtail defined the power of remorse and mercy. The loss of Tonks and Lupin defined his character by showing that you can't deny love. The loss of Fred represented the importance of family (in a way . . .). The loss of Voldemort defined him by combining all of these factors and letting good prevail.

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

He saves Wormtail when he very well deserved death. He feels the pain of others and gives hope. He is also very honest and trustworthy to just about everybody.

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

I thought it was awesome. I forgave him for it because he didn't use them to necessarily cause immense harm to anyone. The crucio towards the end proved that he wasn't afraid to act on people who deserved it.

8. Why do you think Harry forgave Snape?

Harry then understood that Snape was overall a worthy person. Snape let love drive him and Harry related to that. Harry had seen the effects of unrequited love and felt pity on Snape. Snape also died for the good side.

9. What do you think Harry went on to do after DH? Did he become an Auror or choose a different career?

An Auror, definitely.

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 was very proud of Harry when he decided to face death (or so he thought). It really showed how much his friends and surrogate family meant to him, that he would sacrifice his life to give them a chance at destroying Voldemort.

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

I was very surprised at how much Harry grew. He was even able to perform some sort of Occlumency, to block out Voldemort. I was also glad that (what else?) he comes to appreciate Snape. :lol: You knew I was going to say it, didn't you.

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

I think Harry understands grief and loss very well. It hurts him, but it also drives him to continue what he must do.

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

The Imperiuses were probably necessary (though upsetting for me to read about). However, I think he used the Cruciatus curse at one point, which is never necessary.

8. Why do you think Harry forgave Snape?

Wouldn't you? ;)

9. What do you think Harry went on to do after DH? Did he become an Auror or choose a different career?

No idea. Maybe he took the James route and lived off the small fortune he had. If not, I guess Auror. He was definitely not a teacher at Hogwarts, sice he saw his kids off at platform 9 3/4.

The Imperiuses were probably necessary (though upsetting for me to read about). However, I think he used the Cruciatus curse at one point, which is never necessary.

I didn't like Imperio. It troubled me quite a bit. But cruciatus was crossing the line for me. Don't get me wrong - he did it to Alecto (or Amycus don't remember which is which) after he spat at McGonagall but it still seems like petty revenge to me.

That said one of my favorite moments in the book is the repeat of the duel - Expelliarmus vs. Avada Kedavra. Harry defeated Voldemort without using an Unforgivable and I couldn't have loved him more at that moment.

I didn't like Imperio. It troubled me quite a bit. But cruciatus was crossing the line for me. Don't get me wrong - he did it to Alecto (or Amycus don't remember which is which) after he spat at McGonagall but it still seems like petty revenge to me.

It was Amycus, Alecto was already knocked out by Luna. Personally for me I didn't mind Harry using cruciatus it was just why he used it. Had Amycus been using cruciatus on McGonagall and Harry did it in turn to save her I could have understood it, but for just being crude and spitting in her face? Seems to me a stunning spell or jinx would have sufficed.

That said one of my favorite moments in the book is the repeat of the duel - Expelliarmus vs. Avada Kedavra. Harry defeated Voldemort without using an Unforgivable and I couldn't have loved him more at that moment.

That is one of my favorites as well. It proved you can defeat evil without actually using evil. ;)

oh dear...where is everyone...hero of the story anyone?
I loved Harry in DH. He stuck with his goals in face of incredible odds and he did a great job. I think it's very important that wizards come of age at seventeen, because I think JKR wanted eveyone to know that she views Harry as an adult capable of his own choices.

A few things that jumped out at me:
1) Harry's respect and treatment of Dobby after his death is very telling of his character.
2) Harry's choice at the end to sacrifice himself illustrates his "purity of heart" and everything i like about him.
3) I like that Harry chose to go after the horcruxes instead of the Elder Wand. It was a great choice on his part, and one of the hardest that he had to make.
4) Although I'm not sure that I agree with Harry's description of Snape in the epilogue, I do respect him for his forgiveness of Snape. I respect that Harry was able to respect Snape for the good that he did even in face of his poor motives and all the bad that he did as well.
5) The only thing that really bothered me about Harry was his use of unforgiveables. Not so much that he wanted to use them as that he had the ability to use them - which he hadn't had previously.

1) Harry's respect and treatment of Dobby after his death is very telling of his character.

I loved that. Harry digging the grave with his hands was so beautiful and touching.

I also really liked how his ability to love was the strength he needed to block out Voldemort. He did such a wonderful job in this book of blocking Voldemort from accessing his own mind while plucking useful knowledge from Voldemort's mind.

I went into the book hating the Harrycrux idea but as it played out I thought it was both beautiful and appropriate. Like RAB it was a trite fan idea that she turned into something meaningful.

I didn't like Imperio. It troubled me quite a bit. But cruciatus was crossing the line for me. Don't get me wrong - he did it to Alecto (or Amycus don't remember which is which) after he spat at McGonagall but it still seems like petty revenge to me.

Thanks! I didn't know where it was. And I knew it was not for a good enough reason (is there a good enough reason anyway? I doubt it).


That said one of my favorite moments in the book is the repeat of the duel - Expelliarmus vs. Avada Kedavra. Harry defeated Voldemort without using an Unforgivable and I couldn't have loved him more at that moment.


I was so relieved to read that! Harry's constant use of Unforgivables was making me start to wonder if Harry would use an AK. I'm glad he used Expelliarmus, of all spells. It mirrors the graveyard scene. Except this time, Harry calls Voldemort Tom Riddle! Dumbledore would be proud.

oh dear...where is everyone...hero of the story anyone?


*raises hand* I'm here! Imagine it, me emerging from my little Snape-centric world to talk about Harry. :p Spread the Potter love!

I went into the book hating the Harrycrux idea but as it played out I thought it was both beautiful and appropriate. I'm so happy that we got the Harrycrux and that Harry lived at the same time. I would not be so happy with the harrycrux idea had harry died.
Except this time, Harry calls Voldemort Tom Riddle!Oh I LOVED that! I loved that Harry saw through the bravado that Voldemort displayed to see the flawed person underneath.
That said one of my favorite moments in the book is the repeat of the duel - Expelliarmus vs. Avada Kedavra. Harry defeated Voldemort without using an Unforgivable and I couldn't have loved him more at that moment. I also really appreciate that expelliarmus is harry's "signature" move. I like that in the midst of a raging battle, when everything depends on this one move, that Harry's instinct is to disarm his opponent rather than actively hurt.
*raises hand* I'm here! Imagine it, me emerging from my little Snape-centric world to talk about Harry. Spread the Potter love! YAY :clap:

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 don't think it would have mattered, but I do think he would have less anger in him. That much abuse does have potential for damage, but Harry seemed stronger than what most abused kids display. think he would have been happier if his parents lived. In a way, he sort of spent tine with the Weasleys and I think they gave him a family. I felt it helped him. It depends on the orphanage.


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 we see this characteristic in the first book. He gave Ron the idea of saving Hermione from that troll. I felt his final sacrifice was important. I am sure a lot of people caught on to this, but this parallels the Bible, in which Jesus dies for the good and comes back (twice He comes back) and destroys Satan. Enough with the philosophical answer, this showed that Harry cared for everyone.

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 think it wouldn't have mattered. If I was Harry, it would not have stopped me from asking questions. As we saw, it helped Harry in a lot of ways to ask DD questions.

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

I think his strength is the obvious: his love and compassion. He was also forgiving (Draco's mom and his cousin for example). I felt his main weakness was the understanding of what was in stake for him. If he had known at 11, I think he wouldn't have taken it as seriously.

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

I think Sirius' death gave him that motivation to kick Voldemort's butt. Same with his parents, in which got him ot this situation. Also Hedwig was his first pet (R.I.P *sniff*).

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?

Well, his sacrifice and his disarming charm obsession. He only used the UC a few times, but still preferred *** disarming charm, even when he deveated Voldemort.

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

I was a little shock to be honest. I didn't expect him to use it, but it was funny when he didn't get the imperuis curse right and the goblin and that DE just stood there hypnotized and dazed. Then he got it right.

8. Why do you think Harry forgave Snape?

He knew Snape loved his mom and he knows love is what makes wizards not 100% evil.

9. What do you think Harry went on to do after DH? Did he become an Auror or choose a different career?

I actually think he got into some muggle career, since he spent his childhood in a muggle environment. That doesnt mean he ignores the wizarding world, but combines both since he loves both worlds.

I was so relieved to read that! Harry's constant use of Unforgivables was making me start to wonder if Harry would use an AK. I'm glad he used Expelliarmus, of all spells. It mirrors the graveyard scene. Except this time, Harry calls Voldemort Tom Riddle! Dumbledore would be proud.

Oh I LOVED that! I had been hoping that after everything Harry had seen in HBP he'd be able to throw Riddle's past in his face. Harry calling him Riddle must have been an even bigger insult to Voldemort than Dumbledore doing so.

I was a little disappointed that Harry used so many Unforgivables. When he pointed out that "Ooohh, so THAT'S what Bellatrix meant" I was a little put off by that. I wondered if the Horcruxes or even the connection between Voldy and him was getting the best of him. It was almost as if that part of Voldy within Harry was winning the invisible internal battle Harry was going through. The whole of the horcrux hunt affected Harry and Ron in such a way that I was a little astounded.

I think Harry forgave Snape because he finally understood why it was that Snape even agreed to protect him. They were somewhat connected through their feelings for Lily, though their love obviously was different. I think Harry could identify with that and could finally forgive Snape because of it.

I loved the way Harry's characted matured in DH. He was able to see that it was so much bigger than the grudge he was holding toward Voldy. He gave his life for the entire Wizarding community, and willingly. I think that was a HUGE improvement from the "saving people thing" which I found was still a bit selfish and childish.

I loved the way Harry's characted matured in DH. He was able to see that it was so much bigger than the grudge he was holding toward Voldy. He gave his life for the entire Wizarding community, and willingly. I think that was a HUGE improvement from the "saving people thing" which I found was still a bit selfish and childish. Really? I still think Harry was operating under his "saving people thing" throughout the book, and I think it's one of the most beautiful things about his character. When Harry sees someone in trouble, his first instinct without analyzing anything is to save them. And when he found out that he'd have to sacrifice himself, his first instinct was to save everyone from Voldemort.

I think that's why Harry and Aberforth could never have gotten along completely. Aberforth was all for Harry saving himself, while this was incomprehensible to Harry when there were others in desperate need of help that only he could give.

I have just written a similar thing to what I'm about to say in the Snape section. I hope it's alright to reproduce a tiny bit it here as it is relevant...

Near the end of DH as Harry is on his way to meet Voldermort he starts thinking about Tom Riddle, Snape and himself being the abandoned boys who found a home at Hogwarts. That really caught my attention because all 3 of them are so different and yet come from similar places. I couldn't help but think that Jo was highlighting again the differences in the choices we make. Voldermort chose the easy route of power and turned away from love and friendship. Snape chose to hide his love away and pretend that the better part of himself didn't exist. He was a Death Eater in love with one of the "good" guys after all... He was willing to let James and Harry die as long as it meant Lily survived ans I don't think any of us can believe that Lily would be happy with that choice. Whereas Harry chose his friends and the ones he loved over everything even his own life. He was willing to go into that clearing and give up his life as long as it meant that the people he loved and cared for survived.

Harry could so easily have been a different person had he just gone with what the sorting hat said on his first day. The hat wanted him in Slytherin but from that very first moment in that hall he CHOSE to turn his back on a house that he was being told he would fit into. He chose to go with the unknown but what he also thought was right. It's this that makes Harry different (as Jo kept repeating throughout the books). Harry could easily chicken out (and who would blame him), he could run away from that clearing and not look back. Choose a different future for himself but instead he faces his destiny, faces his (what he thinks is) certain death and does it with an innocence that brings tears to your eyes (his line about "does it hurt" was so bitter sweet it still makes me tear up 4 days later!).

It's not only his willingness to give up his life that defines him but also the fact that he's the only person who's had contact with the Hallows who turns down the ownership of them. He keeps for himself only the invisibility cloak. I don't know if it's ever mentioned but I assume he's the first person to have ownership of all 3 Hallows and therefore to have power over death and yet he has no want or need of them. He chooses to hide them away and make sure that no-one else will find them. Yet again it is the choices he makes that make him who he is.

very well put, rella00. I think that Harry made some heart wrenching yet good choices in DH. I like how you contrasted him to Snape and to Voldemort. I think that something else that illustrates your point is Harry's conversation with Aberforth. I think that conversation had to be there to show Harry that there was another choice - the easier choice to go off and hide and hope that everyone else would be able to keep Voldemort at bay without him. But in the end, Harry chose the right thing over the easy thing (Dumbledore must have been thinking of Harry when he said that in GoF) and did everything he could to bring down Voldemort because he beleived that to be the moral thing to do.

I still think Harry was operating under his "saving people thing" throughout the book, and I think it's one of the most beautiful things about his character. When Harry sees someone in trouble, his first instinct without analyzing anything is to save them. And when he found out that he'd have to sacrifice himself, his first instinct was to save everyone from Voldemort.

Absolutely. Harry was still woking off his "saving people thing" to the lat minute of duel. Had he abandoned that, not only would Malfoy and Golye have died, but Harry wouldn't have been able to save all of wizardkind by sacrificing himself.

I think that something else that illustrates your point is Harry's conversation with Aberforth. I think that conversation had to be there to show Harry that there was another choice - the easier choice to go off and hide and hope that everyone else would be able to keep Voldemort at bay without him. But in the end, Harry chose the right thing over the easy thing

I hadn't thought of that one but you're right. It's very much highlighted through the books that the decisions we make are a big part of who we turn out to be. I just liked the fact that near the end of the battle she highlighted the fact by pointing out how similar and yet so different those 3 characters were. All 3 made choices about who they were and what they should do and all 3 ended up on very different paths...

I like how you contrasted him to Snape and to Voldemort. I think that something else that illustrates your point is Harry's conversation with Aberforth. I think that conversation had to be there to show Harry that there was another choice - the easier choice to go off and hide and hope that everyone else would be able to keep Voldemort at bay without him.

When Harry disagrees with Aberforth, I think that shows just how different he is from others. Most people would surely take Aberforth's route and hide out, thinking that resistance was hopeless. Harry refuses to give up, because he has seen what Voldemort is capable of and knows that he must be stopped for the sake of the rest of the world.

When Harry disagrees with Aberforth, I think that shows just how different he is from others. Most people would surely take Aberforth's route and hide out, thinking that resistance was hopeless. Harry refuses to give up, because he has seen what Voldemort is capable of and knows that he must be stopped for the sake of the rest of the world.

Which just further proves the Hat was correct in putting Harry in Gryffindor instead of Slytherin because wasn't it Phinneas or Slughorn who said something about Slytherins being brave but looking out for themselves first? That definitely wasn't Harry. Look how he took care of Dobby in death and how when he got everyone out of the Malfoy's he made sure not to leave Griphook behind. To Harry protecting anyone who was innocent was more important than protecting himself first. He was truly more like Lily then even he knew.

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 living with the Dursley's has taught Harry how to be more self-sufficient. If his parents had lived we wouldn't see the Harry that we see know because chances are he wouldn't be fighting LV as much and he may have never became friends with Ron or Hermoine. And they also have influenced him a lot during the series. It would have depended on what kind of wizarding family he was sent to. If it was a family like the Weasley's he may possibly have grown up the same but if it was a Dark Art's family he could have grown up totally different.

4. What do you think are Harry's greatest strengths? What weaknesses did he overcome as the series progressed?
Love would be one of the biggest strenghts Harry has. It has helped him beat LV on numerous occations. Just the ability to Love. We have seem this from the very beginning of the series; in the first book Harry tells Hermoine to take Ron and go back. In the second he doesn't give up until he knows that Ginny is alive and well. In the third he stops Sirius and Lupin from killing Wormtail even though it was Wormtail who turned against his parents. All of these leading up to the sixth book where he broke it off with Ginny whom he loved very much just so that she wouldn't be hurt. And musn't we forget the seventh book where he was willing to sacrifice himself for everyone else's safety, just like his mother. He is very brave as well. We see this a lot throughout the series as well; putting himself into dangerous places and being able to live through it.

5. How have each of the losses Harry has suffered helped to define who he is?
When his parents died and he survived, he was the boy who lived. after sirius died and the ministry relized he was speaking the truth, he was the chosen one. after dumbledore died and voldemort started to take over, he was the undesirable no. 1. Basically everyone else has been putting labels on him his whole life. especially during times when he has lost important people in his life. Being able to cope with these labels and the relization that those people died has definatly made stonger- mentaly and phisically. He has picked up important characteristics from the sad times in his life.

7. What do you think of Harry's use of Unforgivables in DH?
I think that this is Harry Potter we're talking about. He would NEVER have used them unless it was a crutial situation that could result in a life or death scenario. If Harry was at Hogwarts for his final year, he would have objected to using "crucio" if the Carrows had told him to; just like Neville.

8. Why do you think Harry forgave Snape?
Because even though Snape overheard the phrophecy and told LV, the minute he relized it was about Lily Potter he stuck his neck out and asked LV to not kill her. And after that didn't work he went over to the good side, told Dumbledore everything and begged him to protect Lily and her family. He sacrificed a great deal of things by doing that. He may not have liked Harry a lot, but he loved Lily so therefore he cared for Harry and watched out for him. From the time in the first book where he was muttering the counter-curse against Quirrel's junx to the time in the last book when he gave Harry his memories that told him everything he needed to know. Snape may have gone onto the Dark Side for a little while but he came back to help the Potters and never went back.

9. What do you think Harry went on to do after DH? Did he become an Auror or choose a different career?
I think (and hope with all of my might) that Harry went on to become an Auror. He had the characteristics to be one and he had the love and bravery to be a good one. I can't say much more than that.

7. What do you think of Harry's use of Unforgivables in DH?
I have mixed feelings about that. It was kind of time that he tried them out. But I have to admit, I didn't like my hero using such curses. But, as he did in OotP, he used them with righteous anger. Very gallant of him.

9. What do you think Harry went on to do after DH? Did he become an Auror or choose a different career?

Auror, maybe. Famous international Quidditch player? Who can be sure? I just loved the fact that J.K. showcased his career as a loving father.

On a side note: Harry went a little OotP on us while on the run from the Death Eaters, if you know what I mean. He served some of that attitude on everyone, esp. poor Lupin. It had to be done for Lupin's sake, but it was still overtly hurtful.

On a side note: Harry went a little OotP on us while on the run from the Death Eaters, if you know what I mean. He served some of that attitude on everyone, esp. poor Lupin. It had to be done for Lupin's sake, but it was still overtly hurtful. I was kind of annoyed at how Harry talked to Lupin. It's bothering me still.

Really? I actually enjoyed that scene, and was very proud of Harry. I think he spoke the unpleasant truths that Lupin simply did not want to admit to himself. And afterwards, I think Lupin himself was grateful that Harry said what he did. Lupin would have seen that even though Harry was only 17, he was mature enough to stand up and say what he believed was right, even if it would hurt and upset those he cared for-- mature enough to be Godfather to the child Lupin would come to accept and love.

I wasn't upset at what harry said - more about how he said it.

Really? I actually enjoyed that scene, and was very proud of Harry. I think he spoke the unpleasant truths that Lupin simply did not want to admit to himself. And afterwards, I think Lupin himself was grateful that Harry said what he did. Lupin would have seen that even though Harry was only 17, he was mature enough to stand up and say what he believed was right, even if it would hurt and upset those he cared for-- mature enough to be Godfather to the child Lupin would come to accept and love.

I completly agree with you! Well said! :tu::tu:

I was a little disappointed that Harry used so many Unforgivables. When he pointed out that "Ooohh, so THAT'S what Bellatrix meant" I was a little put off by that. I wondered if the Horcruxes or even the connection between Voldy and him was getting the best of him. It was almost as if that part of Voldy within Harry was winning the invisible internal battle Harry was going through. The whole of the horcrux hunt affected Harry and Ron in such a way that I was a little astounded.


At first I was disappointed too, but then I thought in most instances he was desperate and did what he had to do. there was much more at stake than his own neck. The last instance did not fit into that category, however maybe that was one of Rowling's subtle reminders that Harry was human and fallible, a hero not a saint. The way the horcrux affected them is similar to "the one ring" in Tolkien's series. I didn't find it that surprising she hints to it when they first aquire it. I also wondered if it contributed to Umbridges cruelty more than a little.

I think Harry forgave Snape because he risked his neck for him time and again even though he loathed him for being a constant reminder of what he wanted but could never have, and I'm sure in his mind the cause of Lily's death. Snape is far from a saint, but how hard would it be to look at a miniture James day after day knowing Lily died for him?

Ok heres something that i dont know the answer to.

AFter finally understanding Snape's actions during Harry's schooling and Snape's true love for Lily, how could Harry live knowing all those things??

AFter finally understanding Snape's actions during Harry's schooling and Snape's true love for Lily, how could Harry live knowing all those things??

Quite easily I'd of thought. It's not like Snape did any of it for him. It was always for Lily. Plus Snape had never exactly treated him well... As JK herself has said Snape wasn't a hero. He was a spiteful bully who made Harry's (and many others) life miserable. The fact that at the end of his life he was brave and did the right thing doesn't mean that Harry should feel guilty.

I think Harry did at one point feel regretful that he knew Snape very little, once he came to appreciate all that Snape had done. Naturally, he wouldn't be very happy with Snape's actions as a teacher, but Harry was obviously willing to acknowledge the good in Snape far more than the bad. It reminds me of what movie!Lupin said: "[Lily] could see the beauty in others".

I was thinking about the whole dreaded Albus Severus thing (still think he should have named him Albus Squiddy) and I think that part of Snape's lure for Harry post DH is the connection to Lily. He's only ever met friends of James' - even though Sirius and Remus seem to have been friendly with Lily neither of them seem to talk to Harry about her. So Harry has been starved for a connection to his mother and I think that Snape providing him with one by giving him the memories of her is more significant to Harry than the fact that Snape loved her.

I was thinking about the whole dreaded Albus Severus thing (still think he should have named him Albus Squiddy) and I think that part of Snape's lure for Harry post DH is the connection to Lily. He's only ever met friends of James' - even though Sirius and Remus seem to have been friendly with Lily neither of them seem to talk to Harry about her. So Harry has been starved for a connection to his mother and I think that Snape providing him with one by giving him the memories of her is more significant to Harry than the fact that Snape loved her.

That is a good observation. I would have even been okay with Harry telling Al he named him after Lily's best friend. I could have lived with that because I think until the mudblood incident Snape was Lily's best friend. However I still have issues with Harry saying Snape was the bravest man he ever knew when he knew so many men who IMO were braver. Sigh, still love Harry though. ;)

[/FONT]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?

If he had grown up with his parents or with another wizarding family, he would be similar on the surface to the Harry we know, but he would probably be less modest and a lot less selfless, like normal people. I think his years at the Dursleys amplified his sense of loss from the death of his parents, causing him to value the love and friendship he finds later so highly.

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?

It is a weakness when overdone, but ultimately it is by far his greatest strength. When he allows it to overrule logic and the greater good, it can become a liability in the fight against Voldemort. I believe it stems from having experienced the death of his parents, Harry deeply refuses to watch other people die. He even saves Draco and Goyle in Book 7, at great risk to his life and his quest. Dumbledore comments on this trait of Harry's, and he is quite right that Harry is "a remarkably selfless person" and "full of love". As for his final sacrifice.. it's positively Christlike.

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?

Without curiousity, Harry would never have learned the things he needs to know to succeed in his quest. If he had simply been a model student like, for instance, Dumbledore or Percy, he would know only what the Hogwarts curriculum thought he needed to know. We know that book learning is all well and good, but he needs more information. Without his curiousity, he would never have known to go to stop Voldemort/Quirell from stealing the Philosopher's Stone, or Riddle in the Chamber of Secrets, etc etc. His curiousity never truly died, it was just buried for a time under a mountain of grief and shock.

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

His greatest strengths are his capacity for selfless love, curiousity, resourcefulness, courage, and loyalty. As we have seen however, a strength that is overdone becomes a weakness, and so it does for Harry at various points in the series. Courage becomes recklessness, resourcefullness leads him to use Sectumsempra on Draco in Book 6, curiousity becomes nosiness, and selfless love can be a "people saving thing" that lets him be suckered into a trap.

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

Loss and death are Harry's constant companions and teachers. They teach him to love and help him mature. Dumbledore's death marks the end of his childhood. Dobby's death slaps him out of his Hallows obsession and teaches him to control his mind.

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 unbelievably courageous walk to his death withouy defending himself says it all.

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

I think they were understandable, given that he did not use them excessively. You have to realize that this is WAR, as Lupin tries to drill into Harry after the running battle leaving Number 4, Privet Drive. The Imperius he uses only when it is the only option, and he never forces anyone to do something harmful to themselves. As for the Cruciatus, it was not completely necessary, but he uses it only once, to punish someone forcefully who definitely deserved it. He does not revel in the use of either, which is what distinguishes him from the Death Eaters.

8. Why do you think Harry forgave Snape?

He respects the brave sacrifices Snape has made out of love for Harry's mother. Also, he empathizes with the immense suffering Snape has been through. It seems quite clear to me that he has reconcilled himself with Snape when he names his second son Albus Severus, and calls Snape the bravest man he ever knew.

9. What do you think Harry went on to do after DH? Did he become an Auror or choose a different career?

JKR has commented on this on the Today Show. He does indeed become an Auror, and by the scene 19 years later, he has become Head of the Auror Department, completely revolutionizing the way the Aurors and the Ministry in general work. The Ministry would have been completely insane not to take Harry as an Auror, NEWTs or no NEWTs. Given that Kingsley becomes the new Minister of Magic, we can be assured that he would have taken Harry on straightaway.

I was thinking about the whole dreaded Albus Severus thing (still think he should have named him Albus Squiddy) and I think that part of Snape's lure for Harry post DH is the connection to Lily. He's only ever met friends of James' - even though Sirius and Remus seem to have been friendly with Lily neither of them seem to talk to Harry about her. So Harry has been starved for a connection to his mother and I think that Snape providing him with one by giving him the memories of her is more significant to Harry than the fact that Snape loved her.
Isn't naming his daughter after his mother enough connection to Lily?

I have to say DH confirmed my love of Harry as a character. I know that alot of people choose more minor characters as their favourites but Harry has really won me over. Thy guy when you think about it, is absolutely amazing, he is willing to sacrafice everything even his own life for everybody else, yet feel guilty if anyone else has to suffer for him. I mean, call it foolish maybe but its damn well impressive too.

I loved Harry in this book. He's grown up and matured and I was really impressed by his giving out to Lupin, that took guts to do. Yet Harry was so so angry at Lupin because he couldnt understand why Lupin wouldnt be there for Tonks as Harry would be if it was him. He is as Dumbledore said the most selfless person ever.

I dont know where he aquired these traits but maybe being deprived for so long in the Dursleys affected him. His love for Ron, Hermione and Hagrid is incredible because they are the first people who cared about him. After his parents obviously. And he doesnt want anything to hurt them He thinks you should always be there for other people.

I think he's great.

Isn't naming his daughter after his mother enough connection to Lily?

Except his daughter was born after Al and he had no way of knowing he would ever have a daughter, right?

Harry, my favorite character...oh how I loved him so in this 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?
I don't think he would have been the same had his parents lived. Had they lived, he would have never known what it was like to fell loss, and he wouldn't appreciate or fight as hard for what he did have. If he had been sent to live with another wizarding family, I think he would have ego, from growing up with all the fame. If he had been sent to an orphanage...I think he would have turned out the same as with the Dursleys. They were in essence an orphange. They certainly weren't family.

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?
We first see its evidence when he tries to save Ginny. I think it has been both a strength (Ginny, Sirius in PoA, the final sacrifice) and a flaw (Sirius in PoA). It stems from true emotion - pure love, not any desire to be famous, thus it has the potential to be a strength, but it also has the potential to sometimes blind him and be a flaw. I think the final sacrifice was a testament to how he has matured and come into his own. I wanted to cry during "The Forest Again".

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?
The curiosity gets him into a lot of trouble (the stone, the chamber, Sirius, the Department of Mysteries, the potions book), but it also shapes him. Without those adventures, trials, and losses, he wouldn't be who he was when he walked willingly into death's arms. I think after Dumbledore's death, his curiosity changes. He's only curious about things that have to do with Voldemort, and understandably so, his life depends on it.

4. What do you think are Harry's greatest strengths? What weaknesses did he overcome as the series progressed?
His emotions - they fuel all his most powerful magic, like his Patronus. He's not particularly skilled in finesse, but his emotion makes his magic very strong. And his emotions allow him to sacrifice himself. He overcame his rash temper, his insecurities, and his immaturity. He realized that he needed to sacrifice himself, and he did it. He didn't cry or run from it.

5. How have each of the losses Harry has suffered helped to define who he is?
Each loss has given him strength to do what he had to. He sacrificed himself because he didn't want to see anyone else die for him.

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?
He risks his life to save the stone from Voldemort, he risks his life to save Ginny, he risks his life to save Sirius and Buckbeak, he doesn't kill Wormtail, he wants Cedric to take the cup, he brings Cedric's body back, he rushes to Sirius' aid when he sees him being tortured, he treats Dobby as an equal, he buries Dobby with his bare hands, he forgives Dumbledore despite all of Dumbledore's lies and manipulations, he forgives Snape, he is loyal to Dumbledore to the end, he willingly dies for everyone who's fighting with and for him...so much to cite.

7. What do you think of Harry's use of Unforgivables in DH?
I loved that Harry used the Unforgivables. I've always loved Harry's dark side, and I'm glad it came snarling to the forefront. The potential had been there ever since OoTP when he tried to Crucio Bellatrix, and HBP when he used Sectumsempra, but I thought JKR would never have the guts to have her hero really cross that dark line. I thought she was going to leave it at him being unable to do it becasue he didn't really mean it, he was just hurting at the DoM, and the Sectumsempra was born of ignorance and accident. So when she followed through, and he Crucio'd the Death Eater, I cheered. I also loved how he did it to defend McGonagall, even though they haven't had a huge relationship. It just shows his morals. Plus, I love how it showed that not all heros are pure. Good guys do bad things. Alls fair in love and war, and I'm glad that was shown.

8. Why do you think Harry forgave Snape?
Because Snape loved his mother. Because Snape stayed true to Dumbledore to the end. Because Snape was the only one who gave him the whole truth, without him having to beg and plead for it. Because he understood where Snape was coming from, and he understood that while Snape had done horrible things, he wasn't a horrible man.

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 personally don't like to see Harry as an Auror. I viewed that dream of his as part of his Voldemort phase in life. It was practical for him to become an Auror if he hadn't defeated Voldemort at that point. But he did, and I think he deserves peace and quiet. But, if he still wanted to do it, I guess it was okay. It was too predictable, though.

im posting this before i read the rest of the thread, sorry if i repeat someones ideas.


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 all of these situations would make him alittle different. one thing loving with the dursleys taught harry was to expect the orst from people. it makes it much easier for him to apprciate, and accept the best in them.

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?
well we first see it on the train to hogwarts, how fast he is to defend his new friend. this i think is a strength, although it can be used against him his friends know he can be counted on to be thier when he needs them. i like the fact that the final sacrifice didn' stick. as a character its what i would expect of harry, but as a plot device harrry dying for the greater good just ould have been anti-climatic.

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 his curiosity serves him very well throught the books, as each adventure he's having teaches him more and prepares him his destined battle. i don't think he lost his curiosity after DD death, as we see he gets into the horocrux hunt.

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 abilty to think on his feet, his natural leadership abilities, his courage, and his ability to trust in others. the biggest wseakness he is able to overcome in the end is his tendency to judge to quickly, and his stubbornness.

5. How have each of the losses Harry has suffered helped to define who he is?
the losses in harry's life define just about everything that he is. he was raised the way he was because of these losses. he was determined to finish off voldemort because of those losses. he was willing to make the sacrific in part because of those losses.


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? there really are to many. his heart takes him to that bathroom on halloween, it sends him into the chamber of secrets, it taked him to the lake to fight off the dementors when they were what he feared most. it made him step out from behind the headstone in the graveyard. it sent him to the ministry, it sends after bellatrix after she kills sirius.i could kepgoing but i think you get the idea.

7. What do you think of Harry's use of Unforgivables in DH?
i loved it. it showed that harry is just like the rest of us. he's not the patron saint of the wizarding world, we always knew harry had his flaws, but his inability to pull off the unforgivable curses always felt ominous to me.

8. Why do you think Harry forgave Snape?
because i think, in the end, harry decided to put his trust in DD. whatever DD's reason for trusting snape, harry was going to take it at face value. i think when the memory poured out of snape harry reliased that DD was correct and he was about to find out the hole truth. thats why he went to snapes office by himself. thats how he knew the password to the office would be dumbledore.

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?
as to what changrs they could have made, i really couldn't venture a guess. we don't learn alot about how the aurors work. as for it eing a good choice for harry, i think it is. it seems the obvious choice for him, the were stillalot of people to be rounded up.

I've been thinking about Harry's heroism and what's remarkable to me is how much everyone around him suffers in comparison to him. At fifteen James and Sirius were picking on Snape, at fifteen Harry led a secret group that taught students to defend themselves, at sixteen Snape was a budding Death Eater at sixteen Harry helped Dumbledore attempt to retrieve a horcrux, at seventeen Dumbledore was tempted into believing in the superiority of wizards, at seventeen Harry went on a quest to bring down Voldemort.

It's remarkable that someone so heroic can be so genuine at the same time. He's not perfect, he doesn't always do the right thing. But his heart is always in the right place. He is so human and real but also so noble and heroic.

I've been thinking about Harry's heroism and what's remarkable to me is how much everyone around him suffers in comparison to him. At fifteen James and Sirius were picking on Snape, at fifteen Harry led a secret group that taught students to defend themselves, at sixteen Snape was a budding Death Eater at sixteen Harry helped Dumbledore attempt to retrieve a horcrux, at seventeen Dumbledore was tempted into believing in the superiority of wizards, at seventeen Harry went on a quest to bring down Voldemort.

It's remarkable that someone so heroic can be so genuine at the same time. He's not perfect, he doesn't always do the right thing. But his heart is always in the right place. He is so human and real but also so noble and heroic.

And not just all of that but how he feels guilt over every person who died to fight or protect him. He blames himself thinking is unworthy of that kind of loyalty. He blames himself for Fred, Remus and Tonks dying. He doesn't realize that because Fred is in a family that is considered blood traitors he was marked regardless? That Remus was marked because he was a werewolf who dared to still believe in all that was good? That Tonks was marked because she had married a werewolf and brought shame on Bella and Lucius? I think all those years of living with the Dursleys had to big an affect on how Harry saw his value in life and that is possibly the saddest thing of all.

I had the feeling throughout DH that JKR had some trouble writing Harry's lines. She wanted us to see that he had retained his sense of love, care, and sympathy for others, but at the same time she wanted to show that he was 'angry' which she said in an interview. She also seemed to want to show that he had gained some insights that led to maturity, but at the same time remained a tongue-tied teenager.

It didn't always work for me. He seemed to only know exactly what to say when he was being angry and agressive, but had no notion of what to say to show any of his other emotions.

He was at a loss for words with Andromeda when he wanted to express sympathy; he was at a loss with Remus when he wanted to express his happiness; he seemed constantly at a loss in dealing with Hermione and offering her comfort when Ron left; he seemed at a loss when confronting Snape at the end (before he knew of what was in the pensive).

There are more examples, but I felt like I needed to see him express some of the feelings that narrated to make it all more believeable. He had no problems expressing his anger to any of the people above and others when necessary. It just made him seem a little less than human. I realize it is hard at times to express one's self w/ respect to the gentler emotions, but he seemed incapable of doing it. I mean even when it was just actions (hugging Ron/Remus - Kissing Ginny) and no words - it seemed a bit immature of him for all of the growing he had done and all of the anger he seemed so readily able to express.

However, he remains my second favorite character, even if he couldn't express himself and I am very happy he lived to continue to shine his character on the world (and hopefully expressfully so in later years, lol)

I agree and i think it was not only just living with the Dursleys but also all the people that have been part of Harry's life. Dealing with Hagrid and Lupin, two people that are not like all other wizards because of their mixed blood. Then Harry also dealt with people that are less fortunate, the weasleys but mostly Dobby and maybe again some Hagrid. There are also the enlightened such as DD and Hermonie.

If you look at the big picture Harry's morals and ethics are based off the people that surround him. It is fortunate for him to be blessed with such a wide range of people in so many different situations in life.

Imagine if Harry was a stuck up rich preppy kid, there goes the wizarding world!

I've been thinking about Harry's heroism and what's remarkable to me is how much everyone around him suffers in comparison to him. At fifteen James and Sirius were picking on Snape, at fifteen Harry led a secret group that taught students to defend themselves, at sixteen Snape was a budding Death Eater at sixteen Harry helped Dumbledore attempt to retrieve a horcrux, at seventeen Dumbledore was tempted into believing in the superiority of wizards, at seventeen Harry went on a quest to bring down Voldemort.

It's remarkable that someone so heroic can be so genuine at the same time. He's not perfect, he doesn't always do the right thing. But his heart is always in the right place. He is so human and real but also so noble and heroic.
Harry was fantastic in this book. He continued the process of growing up and becoming a leader that he started in HBP. And he was really in control in the final duel. Previously Harry had always "winged it", relying on gut instinct and help from unexpected sources. Now, finally, Harry was in charge of the situation, confident and invincible. No one can say that he was saved by coincidences and accidents now! And his walk through the forest, his "Gethsemane", was amazing. I'm not at all surprised Jo wept after she wrote it. Harry is a true hero!

I also loved the way he let Ron (and later Hermione and Neville) destroy Horcruxes too.

And he was really in control in the final duel.

I think this does show how far Harry had gone. He had finally found faith in Dumbledore and those who have loved him and protected him. He trusted that the information and caring his allies had given him would bring him through this. He knew they were with him always, dead or alive, and that because he and the rest of the world had such love, he would win.
But I also think that there was another person Harry came to trust: he came to trust himself, to trust that he had done everything well. He was confident in his own ability and was aware at how much better a person he was than Voldemort. He even proved how much better he was when he decided to give Voldemort, the man who had murdered his parents and many, many other innocent people, a chance for redemption. It takes an amazing person to even try that.
I think Harry managed to balance these two types of trust well.

I agree Harry found all of those things: self-confidence, love, genuine happiness with himself; his capacity for forgiveness, etc. But he never came to be able to express any of it...which I found kind of killed a part of his character for me. Only because it almost made him seem egocentric in the end. However the narration of the story saved him in my eyes. He was at least thinking some of the things I thought he should be saying...

I also loved the way he let Ron (and later Hermione and Neville) destroy Horcruxes too.

His line to Ron after Ron destroyed the horcrux was great - "those things always sound better than they really are"

Except his daughter was born after Al and he had no way of knowing he would ever have a daughter, right?
Yeah, forgot about that. Ok, but still when Harry wanted to have a connection to his mother, then why not naming the first one "James Severus"? Makes more sense, as his mother and father are united in one person IMO. Although he might didn't want to have his father and Snape in one.

I rather think that he really named Al after two Hogwarts Headmaster, God knows why he thought that he deserves it to be named after Snape.

As for the Unforgivable Curses. I really hated to see Harry using them. Imperio was almost too much, but Crucio gave it the rest. He really could have handled the situation otherwise. Punching him in the face would be more cooler.

As for the Unforgivable Curses. I really hated to see Harry using them. Imperio was almost too much, but Crucio gave it the rest. He really could have handled the situation otherwise. Punching him in the face would be more cooler. It's too bad Hogwarts didn't offer self defense classes. You think they would - "what to do when your opponent disarms you and you can't do magic"

I was also upset with the unforgivables - both that Harry tried them and that he now has the ability to actually do them, which he didn't before. I positively squirmed when he made that comment about understanding what bellatrix meant.

I was also upset with the unforgivables - both that Harry tried them and that he now has the ability to actually do them, which he didn't before. I positively squirmed when he made that comment about understanding what bellatrix meant.
Me too, Rell. I thought that went a little beyond what I wanted him to "know" and understand about them. Harry has not been able to do them because, as Dumbledore has drummed into us, his heart is pure and without blemish. The fact that he now "understood" somewhat contradicted that, which I hated. :(

It's too bad Hogwarts didn't offer self defense classes. You think they would - "what to do when your opponent disarms you and you can't do magic"
He's Muggle raised. He should know how to fight with bare hands. ;)


I was also upset with the unforgivables - both that Harry tried them and that he now has the ability to actually do them, which he didn't before. I positively squirmed when he made that comment about understanding what bellatrix meant.
From Bella's comment, that you need to mean them I understood that you need to be evil deep inside and really want to hurt people, that's why I was shocked that he actually managed to do Crucio.

From Bella's comment, that you need to mean them I understood that you need to be evil deep inside and really want to hurt people, that's why I was shocked that he actually managed to do Crucio.
That's what I thought too. I hated that he was able to manage to be successful at casting them.

Add me to the list of people who hated that part.

I understand that Harry has flaws and a dark side, but I should think he'd be incapable of Unforgivables-- that the "Love Power" negated them.
Especially the Cruciatus Curse. I don't understand why, even through his anger, he did that. He knows about that spell, knows what it does to people. I should think Harry had more empathy than that. It just isn't like the boy who later asks Voldemort of all people to redeem himself So, Voldemort can get a chance at healing, but Amycus Carrow is deserving of torture? o_O

:lol: Harry punching Amycus reminds me of movie!Sirius: "Stay away from my godson." *fistpwn*

Especially the Cruciatus Curse. I don't understand why, even through his anger, he did that. He knows about that spell, knows what it does to people. I should think Harry had more empathy than that. It just isn't like the boy who later asks Voldemort of all people to redeem himself So, Voldemort can get a chance at healing, but Amycus Carrow is deserving of torture? o_O

Agree completely, I am so filled with love of Harry in this book but the Crucuatus curse was definitely his low point. And the way he did it without guilt or self doubt - he was almost boastful for having cast it.

Maybe it was just the pressure getting to him - in his defence he had had a really long day :lol:

His line to Ron after Ron destroyed the horcrux was great - "those things always sound better than they really are"

I loved that line. For 6 years he's been trying to tell everyone that he's not that great, that he's just been in the right place at the wrong time, that he isn't anything special he's just been landed with this huge thing that he had no choice in. Finally Ron sees things from the other side. It's not a big deal it's just something that happens to you.

His line to Ron after Ron destroyed the horcrux was great - "those things always sound better than they really are"

This was one of my favourite lines because now Ron did something that could be considered heroic and it doesn't feel that way to him just like it never felt that way to Harry before. Very moving moment and I think that Harry's and Ron's friendship reached another level.

Maybe it was just the pressure getting to him - in his defence he had had a really long day :lol:

:grumble: I still say it sucks. Voldemort tortures people because he had a bad day. Not Harry.
Thankfully, Harry probably later understood the wrongness of his actions. I think that when he arrived back from the King's Cross Death Dream Sequence Thing, he had attained a state of Enlightenment or something....yeah...*waves hands vaguely, as though trying to mold a thought in the air*


I liked Harry's comment about heroic actions too. They seem great, but they're not always fun. It reminds me of Harry's rant in OotP, about how hard it really is to face Voldemort, and how a lot of it was luck, not skill.

8. Why do you think Harry forgave Snape?

I think he forgave Snape because he saw why he killed Dumbledore and knew that he wasn't a bad person after all.

Why do you think Harry forgave Snape?
I think Harry felt some common ground with Snape when he found out that Snape loved Lily and mourned her just as Harry did.

Why do you think Harry forgave Snape?

I admit that I was surprised that Harry forgave Snape quite so quickly. But we saw how Harry honors Dobby by the burial he gave him. I think that Harry saw the big picture. He appreciated the fact that Snape risked his own life to keep him alive. I think that is what he is honoring.

Harry has traveled a million miles further in his journey than the average person. He had to make the ultimate sacrifice, his own life, so that others could live. Holding a grudge because some teacher in his past called him names seems really petty after all that has happened to Harry. Some people are able to look past that kind of abuse and realize that the abuser is the flawed character and not the abused. He was able to move past what the Dursleys had done to him and he was able to move past the bad things Snape had done.

My favourite Harry Potter remains the HBP Harry Potter. That guy was the realest Harry Potter to me. He was someone I could actually identify with and he came off as completely realistic and a completely true person. I cannot say the same for Deathly Hallows Harry Potter. I read this review of Deathly Hallows (http://news.yahoo.com/s/csm/20070725/cm_csm/ysawyer) and while I don't necessarily agree with all the points she has made she hit upon something I just found really wrong with Harry Potter in Deathly Hallows.

Back to that first principle of storytelling: A story is about someone who changes. And, puberty aside, Harry doesn't change much. As envisioned by Rowling, he walks the path of good so unwaveringly that his final victory over Voldemort feels, not just inevitable, but hollow.
He was too unwaveringly good. It came off a little absurd at times. There was no interesting dilemma for him at all. Even the part where he asked Voldemort if he would show remorse (or something like that). He was completely one-dimensional for the whole book. Hermione was similar too except I was able to really like her character because her relationship with Ron gave her some dimension. I don't know what happened but it's almost as if JK focused all her good character writing and development on Ron Weasley for the first time. He was the most interesting and charismatic member of the Trio this time around. For the first time in all the books, Ron has actually been my definite favourite character and that has never happened before. It has always been Dumbledore and Harry. I realized upon further reflection that it was because Dumbledore was dead and his early life was not as interesting as it could have been and Harry became almost completely one dimensional during this. It was a little disappointing.

Also, I do not get why he named his kid Severus. Maybe JK needs to explain that one a little further. I agree that Snaped helped a lot and without his assistance a lot may have been lost but I just don't see what he did as good enough and morally right enough for Harry to think he was worthy of a name and none of the kids are named after Sirius or Lupin or just anyone else who I think were worthier of the name. Also, doesn't Ginny have anyone special she wants to name her kid after?

Cheers :tu:

Harry named one of his children after Snape because Snape basically gave up his whole life to help Harry. He didn't have to, infact, it would've been much easier for him to simply abandon Harry and the "good guys." But Snape stayed true to his mission until the end, a mission which forced him to split from almost everyone else in the world.

I mean, come on. Snape had no friends. Lily was dead, and she thought that Snape betrayed her by joining Voldemort. The Order of the Phoenix didn't trust him, and they actually ended up hating him because he "murdered" Dumbledore. The Death Eaters were the only people that accepted Severus, and he was working against them! I think that's more than enough reasons for Harry to name someone after Snape, a man who sacrificed his life for the greater good.

Harry certainly had a huge capacity for forgiveness - I can barely fathom it. I still have been unable to forgive past professors for far less than what Snape did to Harry.

On another note, Harry did not express his emotions very much. We never hear him say 'I care about you Sirius or Lupin' yet he called them back for the reunion scene with gathering those around him that mean alot to him to help give him courage to face his death (what he thought was going to be death anyway). His reflections and interchanges with them are not all that revealing, but once you see his final move where they are concerned, you can read between the lines in the books and understand his affection for them.

Snape he felt was brave and he forgave him. I don't know if he reached the point of feeling anything more than that, but that was enough for him to be able to acknowledge the man in the way he did. Again, we have no reflection or verbal confirmation about his feelings except the little in the epilogue (and the even less during the final battle).

The little emotional reflection on Harry's part makes it hard to figure the guy out at times. You have to go by his final actions for the most part and read between the lines with all of the other characters except Snape where there are no lines to read.

We know he cared for Molly...and yet he never tells her so and he never reflects that he does either - his reflections are all of an appreciative nature for what she has shown him. But his actions say a thousand words and in the end most would agree he cared for her.

That's our Harry.

My take on using the Cruciatus Curse on Amycus is: not only had he spat on Prof McGonagall, but he was also going to tell Voldemort that some of the Ravenclaw students had forced Alecto to use her Dark Mark to call him.

Having seen the results of Voldy's bad temper in his vision (look at the result of the Gringotts break-in to his own DEs at the Malfoy Manor), was Harry going to allow either one of the Carrows to punish the students in their stead?

I wished Harry hadn't used the curse, but I can understand his motivation. He did only use it that once and then went back to his "normal" dueling spells/hexes/jinxes; not even when Crabbe was spitting out Crucio and Avada Kedavra in the RoR, did he respond in kind.

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 Riddle?
-The Dursleys teach Harry the inevitable desire to fight, and to prove himself. Living with them also makes him more like Voldemort than he may be willing to admit--i.e, he was living in a place he hated.
If his parents had lived, there would be no need for him to prove himself as he seems to have the desire to throughout the entire series, because there would be no need for him to show that he deserves all of the fame that he was gotten. He would not be quite the same person, and his capacity to love may have even been less because of the fact that he would not have been starved of love.
Any other wizarding family would have pampered him, and he may not have found out all of the things about himself that he did. He would be a "pampered little prince", spoiled, and probably more like Malfoy than like the Harry Potter that we all know and love. Dumbledore was right in his decision in Sorcerer's Stone when he first gave them up to the Dursley's. It formed a good character.
If he had been in an orphanage, he may have been more tough, less likely to love and form such bonded friendships as he did. He may have not been starved of love necessarily, but there would be a serious lack of any parental figure. If not all of that, he may have been unnecessarily needy.

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?
-Harry's "saving people" thing comes to play in the very first book--when he thinks there may be trouble and he sets off to find the cause of it. This desire he has--to save people--is both a strength and flaw, although most of the time, it works to his advantage. It has gotten him in several spots of trouble (mainly in Goblet and Order). His final sacrifice is the exact one that I would have expected him to make. I expect no less of Harry than to want to give up his life so that the rest of the Wizarding world may one day find peace.

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?
-His curiosity leads him, ultimately, to his ability to defeat Voldemort for good. He discovered many things, fought many battles and faced death many times. His knack for surviving leads him to be able to fight stronger and understand things better, even if he does act irrationally. He may have lost his curiosity for a bit after Dumbledore's death, but it does ultimately come back--for his search for the Horcruxes would be nothing without his ability to question relentlessly. And along the way, he discovers several very important details. (Dumbledore's life, the Hallows, etc.)

4. What do you think are Harry's greatest strengths? What weaknesses did he overcome as the series progressed?
-Harry's greatest strength, of course, is his ability to love no matter what, his natural curiosity, his desire to know everything he can about his surroundings and past, and above all, his nature for good to conquer Evil. As the series progressed, we go from an innocent, hot-tempered child to one who learns a bit of restraint. Although he never fully controls his temper, the ability for him to put a lock on it at times was his greatest growth.

5. How have each of the losses Harry has suffered helped to define who he is?
-He learns that he has to love as it comes, and he fights even harder for the people that he cares about. And it also teaches him that nothing in life ever comes easy, and he can't just sit back and let things happen as they will. They also taught him an important lesson in devotion and guilt.

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 desire to help all of the people who are being petrified, his desire to rescue Gabrielle Delacour from the bottom of the ocean, the acceptance of Sirius as his godfather, him saving Pettigrew from death, his forgiveness of both Snape and Dumbledore, wanting to rescue Sirius and Mr. Weasley, and his desire not to be famous, but to have a normal life, and want to do things for the ultimate Good.


7. What do you think of Harry's use of Unforgivables in DH?
-Not as Unforgivable as the name may suggest. He's become a bit hardened over the course of seven years, but it still suggests that he's fighting for what's right, and uses them only in the most supreme situations--and to save lives.

8. Why do you think Harry forgave Snape?
-He saw the ultimate good in what the man did, how brave he was was, and the ultimate sacrifice that he made. Harry could understand, because he sacrificed his happiness with Ginny so that he could go fight the battle, but he eventually got her back. Snape never got the chance to redeem himself to Lily.

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?
-Harry made the right decision in becoming an Auror. It seemed almost chosen for him to do that after fighting dark Wizards his entire life. He probably made several big changes in the department, starting with the curses that can be used, and how to catch the Wizards, along with the punishments. Fairness and equality would be ultimate to him, no matter what you did.

News on Harry using Unforgivables:


Barbara:
I was very disappointed to see harry use crucio and seem to enjoy it his failure to perform that kind of curse in the past has been a credit to his character why the change, and did harry later regret having enjoyed deliberately causing pain

J.K. Rowling:
Harry is not, and never has been, a saint. Like Snape, he is flawed and mortal.

Harry's faults are primarily anger and occasional arrogance.

On this occasion, he is very angry and acts accordingly. He is also in an extreme situation, and attempting to defend somebody very good against a violent and murderous opponent.


We know that Harry is no Saint, he showed it often enough in the books. But using Unforgivables and step on the level of the enemies, when there are other possibilities, is still bad IMO.

Arrogance?

I wished Harry hadn't used the curse, but I can understand his motivation. He did only use it that once and then went back to his "normal" dueling spells/hexes/jinxes; not even when Crabbe was spitting out Crucio and Avada Kedavra in the RoR, did he respond in kind.

Me too. But Harry, despite being a very remarkable person, is still human, and he was severely provoked. I was glad to see that he never used the Avada Kedavra, though, not even against Voldemort!

We know that Harry is no Saint, he showed it often enough in the books. But using Unforgivables and step on the level of the enemies, when there are other possibilities, is still bad IMO.

Arrogance?

No it's not arrogance. If anything anger- I think it was appropriate for Harry to pull out some unforgivable's. You can't keep fighting with pistols when the opposition shows up with machine guns-

News on Harry using Unforgivables:


Barbara:
I was very disappointed to see harry use crucio and seem to enjoy it his failure to perform that kind of curse in the past has been a credit to his character why the change, and did harry later regret having enjoyed deliberately causing pain

J.K. Rowling:
Harry is not, and never has been, a saint. Like Snape, he is flawed and mortal.

Harry's faults are primarily anger and occasional arrogance.

On this occasion, he is very angry and acts accordingly. He is also in an extreme situation, and attempting to defend somebody very good against a violent and murderous opponent.


Arrogance?
from Dictionary.com:
–adjective 1. making claims or pretensions to superior importance or rights; overbearingly assuming; insolently proud: an arrogant public official.

I was a little surprised to hear JK Rowling say that Harry occassionally was arrogant. That makes Snape right :lol: Anyway, looking back at PoA, Harry sneaks off to Hogmead even though everyone is trying their best to keep Harry safe from Sirius Black. Maybe this is an example of Harry's occassional arrogance. He also thinks he must be the one to go on alone, that he can actually save people when others can't (the saving people thing). He went after a basilisk which a normal 12 year old would never even think they were capable of dealing with. Maybe the fact that he thought he could save Ginny when others couldn't is an example of his occaional arrogance. But I certainly don't see him making claims that he is important or superior.

My favourite Harry Potter remains the HBP Harry Potter. That guy was the realest Harry Potter to me. He was someone I could actually identify with and he came off as completely realistic and a completely true person. I cannot say the same for Deathly Hallows Harry Potter. I read this review of Deathly Hallows (http://news.yahoo.com/s/csm/20070725/cm_csm/ysawyer) and while I don't necessarily agree with all the points she has made she hit upon something I just found really wrong with Harry Potter in Deathly Hallows.

Back to that first principle of storytelling: A story is about someone who changes. And, puberty aside, Harry doesn't change much. As envisioned by Rowling, he walks the path of good so unwaveringly that his final victory over Voldemort feels, not just inevitable, but hollow.
He was too unwaveringly good. It came off a little absurd at times. There was no interesting dilemma for him at all. Even the part where he asked Voldemort if he would show remorse (or something like that). He was completely one-dimensional for the whole book. Hermione was similar too except I was able to really like her character because her relationship with Ron gave her some dimension. I don't know what happened but it's almost as if JK focused all her good character writing and development on Ron Weasley for the first time. He was the most interesting and charismatic member of the Trio this time around. For the first time in all the books, Ron has actually been my definite favourite character and that has never happened before. It has always been Dumbledore and Harry. I realized upon further reflection that it was because Dumbledore was dead and his early life was not as interesting as it could have been and Harry became almost completely one dimensional during this. It was a little disappointing.

Also, I do not get why he named his kid Severus. Maybe JK needs to explain that one a little further. I agree that Snaped helped a lot and without his assistance a lot may have been lost but I just don't see what he did as good enough and morally right enough for Harry to think he was worthy of a name and none of the kids are named after Sirius or Lupin or just anyone else who I think were worthier of the name. Also, doesn't Ginny have anyone special she wants to name her kid after?

Cheers :tu:

I think this post hit the nail right on the head. Harry did seem very one dimensional. Many of his emotions are thought and not shown and JKR has a way of cutting short his emotional reflections so he comes across sometimes as a bit of a scatterbrain. It is like she was saying, why do you wish to see inside of his head? There is nothing to see! But I don't think she wanted us to feel that way, it is just the way the book is written.

Sirius was totally left out of the naming scenario. Harry had Teddy Remus Lupin over his house four times a week at least so he had the Remus covered. But I thought Albus-Severus instead of a nod to his godfather was a little too unbelieveable. It is one thing to forgive and even think someone brave. But to substitute Severus for Sirius was like a slap in the face to 3 books of agnoizing reflection by Harry over Sirius and made him seem even more 1 dimensional and flat, like totally missing several marbles.

Again, I don't think that was what JKR intended, and maybe only some people felt that way, but if so, I was certainly one of them.

I, in a way, agree with harry lacking depth-

As the review said Harry followed the path of good a little too unwaveringly- Should he have expressed more doubt in what he was bound to do?

I, in a way, agree with harry lacking depth- As the review said Harry followed the path of good a little too unwaveringly- Should he have expressed more doubt in what he was bound to do? I think he did in previous books. By the time Harry got to be seventeen, he was ready.
Me too. But Harry, despite being a very remarkable person, is still human, and he was severely provoked. I was glad to see that he never used the Avada Kedavra, though, not even against Voldemort! After the other two unforgiveables were used, I was really worried that Harry was going to try to Avada Kedavra Voldemort. I would have been very dissapointed if that's how Harry killed him in the end. I liked that Harry's "signature move", the disarming spell was used in the end.

Harry has always struggled with his problems, and will always continue to do so, because that's life.

I think Harry's obvious goodness is both a blessing and a curse in terms of his character. On one hand, we have a character we can love and look up to for his beautiful and open heart. On the other hand, that leaves us with no suspense over his true path.

It doesn't bother me so much. I'm happy with Harry as our eyes and ears. It's good to have a character we know as well as we know ourselves. It's like an anchor we can cling to as we drift through this new world (even if that anchor floats the wrong direction every so often :lol:).

He also thinks he must be the one to go on alone, that he can actually save people when others can't (the saving people thing). He went after a basilisk which a normal 12 year old would never even think they were capable of dealing with. Maybe the fact that he thought he could save Ginny when others couldn't is an example of his occaional arrogance. But I certainly don't see him making claims that he is important or superior.
Yes, I think this must be what she means. Even as an 11 year old, Harry took it upon himself to save the Philosopher's Stone, thereby saving the world from Voldemort. I don't really see this as arrogance, because we all know it's Harry's fate, and that he is being manipulated by Dumbledore to try his hand at these things (showing him the Mirror, leaving the school that night, etc). What choice did Harry have? What choice does he ever have? But none of the other 11 year olds felt it their personal duty to fight Voldemort.

Sirius was totally left out of the naming scenario. Harry had Teddy Remus Lupin over his house four times a week at least so he had the Remus covered. But I thought Albus-Severus instead of a nod to his godfather was a little too unbelieveable. It is one thing to forgive and even think someone brave. But to substitute Severus for Sirius was like a slap in the face to 3 books of agnoizing reflection by Harry over Sirius and made him seem even more 1 dimensional and flat, like totally missing several marbles.

Again, I don't think that was what JKR intended, and maybe only some people felt that way, but if so, I was certainly one of them.
We didn't hear James's middle name, did we? He may have been James Sirius Potter.

Harry has traveled a million miles further in his journey than the average person.

He really has.One thing that struck me was when he realised he had to die,and told Neveille to kill the Snake.Even thee,even in the last moments of his life,he's still thinking of his mission,what he has to do.

Even though Rowling says it herself ,I can't see any arrogance really,just indignation at certain comments.

No it's not arrogance. If anything anger- I think it was appropriate for Harry to pull out some unforgivable's. You can't keep fighting with pistols when the opposition shows up with machine guns-
No, sorry I was pondering what Jo meant with "arrogance" in this case. :)

As for the other point. Yes, you can. They fought all the time with other weapons and were successful.

from Dictionary.com:
–adjective 1. making claims or pretensions to superior importance or rights; overbearingly assuming; insolently proud: an arrogant public official.

I was a little surprised to hear JK Rowling say that Harry occassionally was arrogant. That makes Snape right :lol: Anyway, looking back at PoA, Harry sneaks off to Hogmead even though everyone is trying their best to keep Harry safe from Sirius Black. Maybe this is an example of Harry's occassional arrogance. He also thinks he must be the one to go on alone, that he can actually save people when others can't (the saving people thing). He went after a basilisk which a normal 12 year old would never even think they were capable of dealing with. Maybe the fact that he thought he could save Ginny when others couldn't is an example of his occaional arrogance. But I certainly don't see him making claims that he is important or superior.
Thanks Susan. ;)

Ok, that sounds really like Snape would describe Harry.

I always viewed the examples you gave as pure carelessness and sometimes stupidity.

I agree with you about the last sentence. He showed often enough that he doesn't want to stand in the spot light, despite being famous.

I mean, come on. Snape had no friends. Lily was dead, and she thought that Snape betrayed her by joining Voldemort. The Order of the Phoenix didn't trust him, and they actually ended up hating him because he "murdered" Dumbledore. The Death Eaters were the only people that accepted Severus, and he was working against them! I think that's more than enough reasons for Harry to name someone after Snape, a man who sacrificed his life for the greater good.
Well said! :)We didn't hear James's middle name, did we? He may have been James Sirius Potter
Or he may be the one that Ginny named - "James Arthur" after both his grandfathers?

Well said! :)
Or he may be the one that Ginny named - "James Arthur" after both his grandfathers?

As much as I had originally wanted it to be James Sirius I think James Arthur is much more fitting cause like you said he would have both of his grandfathers names. Maybe James or Al can use Sirius (and Remus) when they have kids. :tu:

Harry already celebrated "Remus' in having Teddy Remus Lupin as his godson. Only Sirius seems to have been left out. On Ginny's part, Arthur does seem to have been left out, but another of her siblings may have already given their son that name.

Harry did seem to hog all of the titles though! lol.

Harry already celebrated "Remus' in having Teddy Remus Lupin as his godson. Only Sirius seems to have been left out. On Ginny's part, Arthur does seem to have been left out, but another of her siblings may have already given their son that name.

Harry did seem to hog all of the titles though! lol.

Well Bill's full name was William Arthur Weasley so maybe he intended to use it again? Although Harry's name is Harry James Potter so maybe James' name is James Harry? Could be some sort of wizarding tradition.

Or he may be the one that Ginny named - "James Arthur" after both his grandfathers?

I'm betting he's James Sirius. Arthur has loads of grandchildren. Sirius was very important to Harry, and he wouldn't overlook that when naming his children.Harry already celebrated "Remus' in having Teddy Remus Lupin as his godson. Only Sirius seems to have been left out. On Ginny's part, Arthur does seem to have been left out, but another of her siblings may have already given their son that name.

Harry did seem to hog all of the titles though! lol.

Well, Tonks and Remus named their son themselves - that wasn't Harry's fault! :lol:

Yeah I think that James's middle name is Sirius, because Sirius was his father-figure (of sorts) and meant a lot to him. And as Arthur's name is already someone elses middle name: Bill's, and possibly another Weasley had aready middle named their kid Arthur (Hugo Arthur??). But which ever it is I'm sure that it was agreed upon by both Harry AND Ginny!
And as for Ginny not having much of a say on what to name her own children. Do you really think that given what we know about her character (fiesty, not one to be pushed around, and not doing what people tell her to do when she doesn't want to) that she would let him name their kids something that she didn't want or like? For all we know it was her idea to name their first boy James and later their first girl Lily and let Harry pick the middle names (if his middle name is actually Sirius, we don't really know what Lily's is. Lily Molly after his two mothers?) or maybe she pick all the names as she knew that that's what Harry was most likley going to want to name his son and daughter anyway. And if it was Harry that picked the names (he certainly picked Albus Severus I can't really see Ginny picking that one:lol:) I don't really think that Ginny would have minded that much (though she may have thrown in other suggestions, I certainly would:lol:) and let Harry honor the people that he loved (with exception of Snape, maybe more respected:lol:) and lost during the war, and she would have known that it was important for him to do so.
I know that Ginny had also suffered losses during the war (Fred, and maybe some friends as we never really found out who her friends were and who died, aside from the major deaths). Maybe she did think of naming one kid Fred, but thought that George should be the one to name a kid after his beloved other half. George might have already named a kid Fred before any of the Potter kids were born. JKR said that George did, indeed, name a child after Fred. Well actually she said something like "I can see him naming a child after Fred" and as she's the author I can all but assume that he did.
So yeah I really don't think that Ginny would just sit there and let him pick all the names without having her imput, whether it be approving the name or making some suggestions. Maybe they compromised and let one pick the first name and the other one the middle. and then who ever picked the first name of the last child would pick the middle of the next ect.ect. Or perhaps each picked the full name of one kid then the other would pick the full name of the next kid?
Whatever system they used I'm sure that they both played a part in the naming of their children!
Thanks and until next post,
CDL

Yes, I'm sure Ginny would have had a say in the matter! But I'm not sure who might be important to her apart from the people who are also important to Harry. She got on very well with Tonks, but it seems a bit harsh to name a child Lily Nymphadora! (Although not quite as bad as Albus Severus!). Perhaps just Lily Dora? Or perhaps Lily Muriel, because Aunt Muriel did let all the Weasleys hide out at her house under the Fidelius charm.

Maybe we could get this more on Harry's character and less on possible middle names for his children?

I'm betting he's James Sirius. Arthur has loads of grandchildren. Sirius was very important to Harry, and he wouldn't overlook that when naming his children.
Well, Tonks and Remus named their son themselves - that wasn't Harry's fault! :lol:

I know...I just meant he already had a kid running around with Remus as a namesake, so he wouldn't likely name another kid Remus. Maybe, but usually it is to honor the person in some way and that he had bestowed by coming godfather to a T Remus Lupin.

My favourite Harry Potter remains the HBP Harry Potter. That guy was the realest Harry Potter to me. He was someone I could actually identify with and he came off as completely realistic and a completely true person. I cannot say the same for Deathly Hallows Harry Potter. I read this review of Deathly Hallows (http://news.yahoo.com/s/csm/20070725/cm_csm/ysawyer) and while I don't necessarily agree with all the points she has made she hit upon something I just found really wrong with Harry Potter in Deathly Hallows.

Back to that first principle of storytelling: A story is about someone who changes. And, puberty aside, Harry doesn't change much. As envisioned by Rowling, he walks the path of good so unwaveringly that his final victory over Voldemort feels, not just inevitable, but hollow.
He was too unwaveringly good. It came off a little absurd at times. There was no interesting dilemma for him at all. Even the part where he asked Voldemort if he would show remorse (or something like that). He was completely one-dimensional for the whole book.
Cheers :tu:


I agree that certainly in DH Harry does come off as one dimensional and unwaveringly good and yes that does take from the suspense of the final book and indeed by the time Harry actually faces Voldemort there is no question of what will happen, it is more of a formality in showing how far Harry has come than any real question of how he will do.

But I dont think Harry has always been like this, I think by the time DH comes around Harry is acceptant of his destiny and I think this occurs firstly in OotP and finally in HBP. In OotP he learns who he is and what is expected of him. He still wants to do it, determined to as well but he doesnt fully take on the role until the end of HBP when he breaks up with Ginny because he knows he cant have a normal life just yet. So yes there is very little character development in Harry in DH because he has already gone through his journey.

I still find him remarkable. I think the arrogance JKR refers tois his recklessness to the point of arrogance, which we saw many many times in the first six books. But that is gone by DH, by DH he is even less willing than ever before to risk anyone to help him. This trait has always been part of him but it took several years to come to fruition.

I agree that certainly in DH Harry does come off as one dimensional and unwaveringly good and yes that does take from the suspense of the final book and indeed by the time Harry actually faces Voldemort there is no question of what will happen, it is more of a formality in showing how far Harry has come than any real question of how he will do.

But I dont think Harry has always been like this, I think by the time DH comes around Harry is acceptant of his destiny and I think this occurs firstly in OotP and finally in HBP. In OotP he learns who he is and what is expected of him. He still wants to do it, determined to as well but he doesnt fully take on the role until the end of HBP when he breaks up with Ginny because he knows he cant have a normal life just yet. So yes there is very little character development in Harry in DH because he has already gone through his journey.

I still find him remarkable. I think the arrogance JKR refers tois his recklessness to the point of arrogance, which we saw many many times in the first six books. But that is gone by DH, by DH he is even less willing than ever before to risk anyone to help him. This trait has always been part of him but it took several years to come to fruition.

I think you are right. But I still think JKR could have written his character to include a bit more dimension. We had to fill in the blanks so much on what he was "actually" feeling, I felt like I was playing 'connect the dots' while reading.

I think you are right. But I still think JKR could have written his character to include a bit more dimension. We had to fill in the blanks so much on what he was "actually" feeling, I felt like I was playing 'connect the dots' while reading.

It's funny you should mention that, because that's the central point of the latest literary theory of modern times, developed in Europe in the 80s, and still unchalanged by a newer one - the Receptivists, originated in Constants, Germany, and developed by Wolfgang Iser and Hans Robert Jauss - extremely basically put, they maintain that for a novel to be good it needs to have 'gaps' (that's the term they use) that offer the reader the opportunity to be an active part of the literary work by filling them. Because their thesis is that a literary work only happens in the act of reading ("the Act of Reading" is Iser's fundamental work.). I find it a most fascinating theory and, if you look at Deathlly Hallows (and indeed, all seven books and the story as a whole) through that prism, it's a very well written story.

By 'gaps' they don't mean missing facts, of course, but room for invention, interpretation and alternatives. I personally am thrilled by the receptivists. And if you think about it, all great novels comply with that theory.

But I dont think Harry has always been like this, I think by the time DH comes around Harry is acceptant of his destiny and I think this occurs firstly in OotP and finally in HBP. In OotP he learns who he is and what is expected of him. He still wants to do it, determined to as well but he doesnt fully take on the role until the end of HBP when he breaks up with Ginny because he knows he cant have a normal life just yet. So yes there is very little character development in Harry in DH because he has already gone through his journey.

I agree.By DH Harry has to a great extent come to terms with what has to be done and that he has to do it.I actually like how Harry was unwavering.He said what he did and did what he said.He was one of the truly admirable characters.

I still find him remarkable. I think the arrogance JKR refers tois his recklessness to the point of arrogance, which we saw many many times in the first six books. But that is gone by DH, by DH he is even less willing than ever before to risk anyone to help him. This trait has always been part of him but it took several years to come to fruition.

Honestly I didn't see any real arrogance.Just irritation at times,which given some of the situaiton was understandable.

So this is my first post in a Harry Potter forum :) It got really long and addresses somethings that haven't been mentioned for several posts because I wrote it last night but couldn't post yet. So I do apologize if it seems rambling...Anyway...

I had a slightly different take on the uses of Unforgivables, which also sort of addresses Harry's seemingly unchanging too-good-to-be-true goodness as well as his inability to express feelings... I sort of went through a few different emotions when I read those scenes... At the first Imperio I figured it was just a necessary evil, but then I was disappointed... It did seem like there was no other way, but I couldn't help thinking that two or three years earlier, Harry or Ron or Hermione would have come up with some other ingenious plot, whereas here they were taking the easy way out. But after letting it sit in my head awhile, I really appreciate that those scenes were written in. It helped get across a point that I think was one of the main themes in the book, which Dumbledore so memorably stated several years back: It's our choices that make us who we are in life.

We've seen many parallels drawn between Harry and Voldemort (I'm sure I don't need to rehash them all), and in DH we also see similarities between Harry and Snape and between Harry and Dumbledore. JKR shows us in these four characters four different responses to adverse situations, with Harry and Voldemort being the two extremes. The way those two deal with conflict in their lives reminds me of the way one of my English teachers defined tragedy and comedy when we were discussing Shakespeare: Tragedies end with people being thrown apart (e.g. war or death in Shakespeare); comedies bring people together (e.g. marriage). Voldemort is Tragedy for me: he takes his troubles and wallows in self-pity, choosing not to trust other people, to push everyone away, and as a result becomes arrogant and careless of others. His selfishness and his refusal to reach out to anyone else takes him from sad to angry to full of rage to hatred to pure evil. Harry, on the other hand, tries to rise above his misfortunes. He seeks guidance from Dumbledore and friendship in Ron and Hermione. He trusts the other members of the Order, even though trust has sometimes backfired for him. He aims for the same togetherness and cooperation that bring about happy endings to Shakespearean comedies, rather than the self-absorbtion and sulking that ends up killing all the characters in Act V of Hamlet. Throughout the Harry Potter series, I've seen these differences laid out.

Then came book 7. This is where JKR shows how easy it is to slip into Voldemort's path, to become engrossed in one's own problems, cut others off, and go, as Voldemort does, from depression to rage to arrogance and hatred and evil, all the way to the dark side. Other posters mentioned Harry's apparent inability to express himself. I see this as Harry growing up, learning to deal with complex emotions, etc, and as he's faced with these things he begins to keep them inside, not trusting them to other people. These are the first warning signs to me that Harry may be trying to deal with his coming of age the same way Voldemort did: alone, not letting anyone else in on it. The Unforgivables are a definite step toward the dark side for Harry. The first Imperio seemed necessary, but that didn't change the fact that it was an Unforgivable--just the fact that Harry could execute the curse indicates more trouble within him. But although the situation at Gringott's seemed to require drastic measures, the Crucio in the Ravenclaw common room was so unnecessary and cold, and Harry executed it so thoughtlessly, that he really reminded me of Bellatrix. Harry slid so far down the slippery slope, tread so close to that line that Voldemort crossed long ago, that I was almost ready to believe he would give himself over to evil. It was sad and strangely beautiful (I thought) to see all of this darkness evolve in the character who is supposed to be the hero. It really does show how easy it is to make the wrong decisions, to become self-obsessed and slip from good to evil, when dealing with adversity, whether that adversity is death or unrequited love or just teenage angst. That was the beauty of Deathly Hallows for me.

Luckily, in the end, Harry proves himself different from Voldemort. I think the turning point is when he looks at Snape's memories--choosing to forgive Snape after hating him for so long brought Harry back from Tragedy to Comedy in the sense of connecting with other people--Harry had to somehow empathize at least a little bit with Snape in order to forgive him, and he did this by quite literally stepping into Snape's memories, reaching out, and trying to understand someone other than himself. Then he does the most selfless thing of all by accepting his fate and giving up his life, his whole self, to save everyone else. That's when he really becomes the hero. It proves he wasn't just born good--he comes closer and closer to being just like Voldemort--but he chooses selflessness, to put others over himself, and that's what sets him apart.

So I started out just wanting to talk about the Unforgivables and ended up with basically my thesis on the theme of the entire story: No one can live this life totally alone--those who try end up spiraling through self-pity, self-absorption, arrogance, hatred, and evil. We must step up to the plate and take on our destinies, but we have to think of other people at the same time--we can't simply blame the world for things we don't like or we end up taking out our anger on innocent people. And things like trust and forgiveness do not make us nearly as vulnerable as do the mistakes we make in arrogance (like silly Voldemort, thinking no one would ever find that diadem or being caught off guard by the Malfoys' betrayal because he didn't care enough to understand Narcissa's motivation--her love for Draco). And ultimately, to be good or evil, the decision is ours.

You know I really can't believe I wrote all that. I am so sorry to anyone who's actually bothered to read all that! (lol) That was probably longer than half the papers I've written for class, and I did it in like 1/100000 the time.

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?

The Dursleys accomplished one positive thing: Harry did not grow up thinking he was the greatest thing since sliced bread. The fact that he did not also succumb to low self-esteem and despair at the Dursleys is testament to the person Harry is.

I think Harry and Riddle had similar experiences until they reached the age of eleven and came to Hogwarts. The Dursleys were hardly better than the orphanage Riddle resided in. Their reactions to such tough placements were very different, however.

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?

Sorcerer's Stone was the first time I can recall - when he told Malfoy to give back Neville's rememberall in the Great Hall. I am, of course, interpreting his "saving people thing" as his great heart and good will toward others.

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 have always found Harry's lack of curiosity as little more than a plot device used by Jo to keep her secrets. It struck me as inconsistent with the Harry she wrote into the books. No way would Harry not have asked questions a lot more than he actually did.

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

His great heart, his courage, his sense of right and wrong are all strengths. His greatest weakness was his inexplicable lack of curiosity about James and Lily and so many other things hidden in his past.

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

He had to grow up in a hurry - and to realize that he could only depend upon himself, Ron, and Hermione to accomplish what had to be done.

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?

The mirror, his response to Voldemort in Sorcerer's Stone, his determination to find the truth and respond to it in all the books.

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

Appropriate.

8. Why do you think Harry forgave Snape?

Big heart, I guess? I wouldn't have done it.

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?

Great choice for both of them.

It's funny you should mention that, because that's the central point of the latest literary theory of modern times, developed in Europe in the 80s, and still unchalanged by a newer one - the Receptivists, originated in Constants, Germany, and developed by Wolfgang Iser and Hans Robert Jauss - extremely basically put, they maintain that for a novel to be good it needs to have 'gaps' (that's the term they use) that offer the reader the opportunity to be an active part of the literary work by filling them. Because their thesis is that a literary work only happens in the act of reading ("the Act of Reading" is Iser's fundamental work.). I find it a most fascinating theory and, if you look at Deathlly Hallows (and indeed, all seven books and the story as a whole) through that prism, it's a very well written story. By 'gaps' they don't mean missing facts, of course, but room for invention, interpretation and alternatives. I personally am thrilled by the receptivists. And if you think about it, all great novels comply with that theory. Thank you for mentioning this, yoana. It really put the book in a different perspective. Personally, I never had a problem being able to tell what Harry was feeling in DH, but as I'm rereading, I'm not seeing a whole lot of blatant description. I think I'm just naturally filling in, which could be what the author intended.

------------------
nice post, simonecalzone. I would add also, that at the end, it was not an unforgiveable that defeated Voldemort, but a disarming spell, which is also Harry's primary dueling spell of choice.

Thank you for mentioning this, yoana. It really put the book in a different perspective. Personally, I never had a problem being able to tell what Harry was feeling in DH, but as I'm rereading, I'm not seeing a whole lot of blatant description. I think I'm just naturally filling in, which could be what the author intended.

Yes, that's the idea of the theory as well, that the reading as a process does involve filling in, otherwise it's just the process of being informed. Literature has another goal, and the act of reading fiction differs a great deal from the act of reading anything else.

I would add also, that at the end, it was not an unforgiveable that defeated Voldemort, but a disarming spell, which is also Harry's primary dueling spell of choice.
This was an interesting touch of irony. Upon my reread, I noticed that Expelliarmus was the curse that was considered to be Harry's trademark. When he used it against Stan Shunpike in the escape from Privot Drive scene, it was how the Death Eaters knew it was the real Harry. Then he uses his signature move against Voldemort in the final scene, successfully vanquishing him. I really liked that little touch. The fact that Harry's trademark is a defensive spell rather than an offensive spell says a lot about him.

It's funny you should mention that, because that's the central point of the latest literary theory of modern times, developed in Europe in the 80s, and still unchalanged by a newer one - the Receptivists, originated in Constants, Germany, and developed by Wolfgang Iser and Hans Robert Jauss - extremely basically put, they maintain that for a novel to be good it needs to have 'gaps' (that's the term they use) that offer the reader the opportunity to be an active part of the literary work by filling them. Because their thesis is that a literary work only happens in the act of reading ("the Act of Reading" is Iser's fundamental work.). I find it a most fascinating theory and, if you look at Deathlly Hallows (and indeed, all seven books and the story as a whole) through that prism, it's a very well written story.

By 'gaps' they don't mean missing facts, of course, but room for invention, interpretation and alternatives. I personally am thrilled by the receptivists. And if you think about it, all great novels comply with that theory.

Actually I agree with that ideology, I too am a fan of the sort of 'gaps' they speak of. I don't think I made myself clear.

Harry's primary characteristic in the book was anger. Now it is true the Author stated it would be and Harry had A LOT to be angry about. However, there was a clear display of uncompleted emotion on his part. He kept thinking things like 'remorse, comfort, love, sorrow, pain, etc.,' but he never acted upon them (physically or verbally) except on rare occassions. Too rare in my opinion and it made him seem a lot shallower than he has been in past books - not just angrier.

In an example, when Ron leaves, Harry gets mad. Hermione is terribly upset the next day and Harry has a moment where he is also upset about it (narrated) but then he gets angry again before ever expressing it. Hermione breaks down and Harry again thinks (narration) that he should comfort her, but he does not, verbally or physically. This time he stays rather distraught about it yet expresses nothing. Now in past books we have seen him fairly verbal (if not physically expressive) about his feelings. Yet the only one he seems capable of expressing in this book was Anger.

Remember Hermione being crucioed by Bella and Ron going crazy with emotion? For me, in that scene, Harry came off flat as a stickman; not a word or even a narration about his feelings and what he did say were things like 'stop yelling, let's plan'. Finally her 100th scream or so 'shoots through Harry like physical pain', but again just narration and the narration came a dollar late and a day short. No comfort for Ron, not a word for Hermione. In that same scene he meets up with Luna who they were worried about for some time and Harry's reaction to finding her is again flat. There are other events like this, many that just made his character seem flat to me.

So it was notable when Ron returned and they hugged because I hadn't seen anything like it yet in the book. (Except a kiss for Ginny early on when I thought Harry was going to continue to be his normal expressive self -either physically or verbally). Another notable moment is when Remus arrived and made him godfather and they hugged - and while granted, JKR had been building the 'will Remus ever let Harry get close' theme for 4 books, and so it was expected she's show that, it was notable because there was so little expression from Harry to that point. Also when Harry furiously digs Dobby's grave, we get the physical expression and again in the Reunion scene; when Ginny & Tonks come to Hogwarts; and Voldy's death. There may be a few more...the point is, they were so few and far between, it wasn't enough to bouy is character throughout as it has for me in the last 6 books.

So for that reason, with so few events where Harry verbally or physically expresses himself, I was left feeling like the character had not grown, but rather shrank in dimension.

I may read it again one day and I am open to the idea that I might feel differently knowing whats going on ahead of time.

I think Harry is wayyy too goody-two-shoes to be true.

He has no flaws. Weaknesses yes, but no flaws.

I think Harry is wayyy too goody-two-shoes to be true.

He has no flaws. Weaknesses yes, but no flaws.
Isn't a weakness a flaw? Harry's temper, his use of unforgiveable curses etc. can all be considered flaws. They are not flaws that make him a bad person, but they make him very human.

Isn't a weakness a flaw? Harry's temper, his use of unforgiveable curses etc. can all be considered flaws. They are not flaws that make him a bad person, but they make him very human.

No flaws are something detestable. Like a hunger for power or no conscience.

Weaknesses are something you're not good at but can be worked on.

No flaws are something detestable. Like a hunger for power or no conscience.

Weaknesses are something you're not good at but can be worked on.
By your definition of flaws that would make most people on the planet a goody-two-shoes, right? Harry is no different from most people because most people don't hunger for power, are without a conscience, or have a detestable attribute.

Harry seems very real to me because he has weaknesses like everyone else. He misjudges things/people and is not made out to be perfect. He goes so far as to use unforgivable curses. That does not make him a goody-two-shoes.

people don't hunger for power, are without a conscience, or have a detestable attribute.


Power hungry and no conscience are extreme examples.

Most people are greedy, selfish, etc. Harry Potter is the epitome of a classic 'hero'.

I think greed did tempt him though, in the form of the Hallows... he spent a long time getting distracted by those when they could have been going after horcruxes.

I think that Harry's biggest flaw is his obsessions. When he becomes hooked on a question or a problem, he becomes so obsessed that he cannot think about anything else. His obsession about Malfoy or about the potions book in HBP would be examples of this.

According to JKR Harry's biggest flaws are anger and occasional arrogance. I remember many instances of his anger....but arrogance?

I think greed did tempt him though, in the form of the Hallows... he spent a long time getting distracted by those when they could have been going after horcruxes.

I don't think that was personal greed, though. I think Harry was tempted by the power the Hallows offered, but he wasn't thinking of what he could do for himself with it. He would have used it to defeat Voldemort - "for the greater good". But I think it's important that Harry was tempted, because it enabled him to understand Dumbledore's weakness better. And it makes him human.

I think that Harry's biggest flaw is his obsessions. When he becomes hooked on a question or a problem, he becomes so obsessed that he cannot think about anything else. His obsession about Malfoy or about the potions book in HBP would be examples of this.
His "obsessions" are often right, though. He was dead right about Malfoy, for example, and he was right that Dumbledore wanted him to know about the Hallows, even though Ron and Hermione didn't believe him. Harry's "obsessions" are often based on a mix of inside-knowledge and intuition.

His "obsessions" are often right, though. He was dead right about Malfoy, for example, and he was right that Dumbledore wanted him to know about the Hallows, even though Ron and Hermione didn't believe him. Harry's "obsessions" are often based on a mix of inside-knowledge and intuition. Sure he was right, I just think that he needs to remember that other people exist while he's busy thinking of nothing else.

I happen to think this is Harry's flaw, and as you say it is less of one because he is right so often. He is a great person. I like Harry a lot.

Sure he was right, I just think that he needs to remember that other people exist while he's busy thinking of nothing else.

I happen to think this is Harry's flaw, and as you say it is less of one because he is right so often. He is a great person. I like Harry a lot.

I agree with you on the point about Harry seeming to forget others exist - but mainly in DH. He showed so few moments of actually verbally or physically expressing his feelings, that if it were not for the narration, we could think him a very cold and unresponsive (unfeeling) person. Every time Harry physically or verbally expressed any emotion other than "anger" in the book, I "took note" because they were so few and far between.

Admittedly, sometimes his "anger" was an expression of Love and Pain, like when Ron left or When he argued with Remus, but, I refer to most instances.

Sure he was going through a lot in DH, but he seemed to lose a portion of his character in the book IMO.

According to JKR Harry's biggest flaws are anger and occasional arrogance. I remember many instances of his anger....but arrogance?
A couple synonyms for "arrogance" are "insolence" and "disdain". I think we can all think of times when Harry was insolent, or displayed disdain, especially with Snape. And she did say "occasional", that's why it seems strange at first to think about Harry that way.

According to JKR Harry's biggest flaws are anger and occasional arrogance. I remember many instances of his anger....but arrogance?From the top of my head I'm thinking about OotP when Harry didn't want to be seen by Cho while he was in the company of Neville and Luna, or when he was resentful that Ron was made prefect over him. I think Harry grew out of it though.

Reinterpreting Harry’s Character from the Perspective of being a Horcrux

================================================== ==========================

I intended to start a new thread with this topic, but searched first and found this one. I don’t want to disrupt the intelligent discussion already going on in this character analysis thread concerning Harry; however, I feel that the horcrux or harrycrux aspect should be carefully considered. This topic may even deserve its separate thread, but that depends upon interest in these questions that I have. I’ll defer to the moderators on this one. But it definitely is related to this thread. So…………………

================================================== ==========================

Horcruxes drastically influence people within their proximity. When people grow fond of a horcrux, it can possess them. The diary affected Ginny and Harry. The locket affected the trio; and it probably drastically influenced Kreacher too at various times, once Regulus gave it to him with his expressed orders for it to be destroyed. Now that we know that Harry was a horcrux, we can go back through the series and better understand the relationships and events that occurred. The mere fact of him being a horcrux could change our perspective on most everything that happened. It even offers an additional explanation for why Harry used the crucio and imperius curses. There may be more depth to Harry’s character than we first thought. Does harrycrux provide the missing fatal flaw in our hero?

1. How is normal horcrux influence on others different in the case of Harry?

2. How much influence over others was actually Harry and how much was horcrux (or harrycrux)? …and when? Does when make a difference?

3. Which was more powerful Harry the horcrux or Harry himself? …or was either any more powerful than the other? Would Lily’s protection somehow play a role in this?

4. How does this change our perspective concerning Harry’s true character?

5. What skills were actually Harry’s and how did this affect his development?

6. Was Harry’s relationship with Ron and Hermione influenced by him being a horcrux and in what way? …what about his relationship with other students, faculty, or family? How might the Dursleys been affected by Harry being a horcrux?

I’m looking forward to seeing opinions from others. I’m not sure what to believe yet. I never seriously considered harrycrux until the middle of Deathly Hallows. I thought it was impossible to create an unintentional horcrux. The fact has forced me to reconsider a lot of things. I hope others are willing to help me.

From the top of my head I'm thinking about OotP when Harry didn't want to be seen by Cho while he was in the company of Neville and Luna, or when he was resentful that Ron was made prefect over him. I think Harry grew out of it though.
Yes, he did in HBP when he tells off Romilda Vane on the train to Hogwarts, when she insults Neville & Luna.

From the top of my head I'm thinking about OotP when Harry didn't want to be seen by Cho while he was in the company of Neville and Luna, or when he was resentful that Ron was made prefect over him. I think Harry grew out of it though.
I don't think the first example showed arrogance - it showed teenage insecurity and a desire to look "cool" in front of the girl he fancied. Harry was embarrassed, not arrogant. I really loved it in the next book, though, when Harry is confident enough to state that Luna and Neville are cool enough for him! That could actually be interpreted by some as arrogance, but I see it as loyalty to his friends.

With the second example, yes, perhaps a little arrogance, but everyone else expected Harry to be made prefect too. He was a better leader than Ron from the age of 11.

I don't think the first example showed arrogance - it showed teenage insecurity and a desire to look "cool" in front of the girl he fancied. Harry was embarrassed, not arrogant. I really loved it in the next book, though, when Harry is confident enough to state that Luna and Neville are cool enough for him! That could actually be interpreted by some as arrogance, but I see it as loyalty to his friends. I think that Harry had a very realistic teenage insecurity stage. I know that a lot of people were annoyed by it, but I thought it was both believable and age appropriate - especially considering what Harry was going through at the time. He grew out of it very gracefully and quickly as well.

Power hungry and no conscience are extreme examples.

Most people are greedy, selfish, etc. Harry Potter is the epitome of a classic 'hero'.

There are actually people like this in the world too.Rare but they still exist,so it's fair that they get represented.

Power hungry and no conscience are extreme examples.

Most people are greedy, selfish, etc. Harry Potter is the epitome of a classic 'hero'.

I love a Hero that acts like a Hero, no matter how lame and cliche' it becomes. I hate a Hero, that is supposedly a Hero, and then suddenly turns into some soap opera star.
Actually, that was my subtle critique for Eclipse.

<3

Well Bill's full name was William Arthur Weasley so maybe he intended to use it again? Although Harry's name is Harry James Potter so maybe James' name is James Harry? Could be some sort of wizarding tradition.
I'm thinking the same. I automatically assumed that Harry's son, James, has a middle name after his father.

Isn't a weakness a flaw? Harry's temper, his use of unforgiveable curses etc. can all be considered flaws. They are not flaws that make him a bad person, but they make him very human.
Agreed. Harry's temper (or as Dumbledore said "hot head") would be considered a flaw. And he's not perfect, he has to deal with insecurities, jealousy, etc., just like everyone else.

aww, this thread is all neglected and dusty :(

In HBP and even in the beggining of DH, Harry seemed to have a lot of trouble asking his friends for help and trusting them to stay with him. Dumbledore actively encouraged Harry to confide in his friends, which Harry did, but he always considered his task of defeating Voldemort to be something for him alone.

I think that in DH, Harry really overcame this problem - especially with Hermione, and I think that once Harry came to trust Hermione, they complemented each other very well.

For instance, Harry probably would have stormed off to the ministry the minute that he found out that Umbridge had the locket, but Hermione had the sense to plan. On the other hand, Hermione probably really would have waited a month if Harry hadn't pushed them to go ahead.

In HBP and even in the beggining of DH, Harry seemed to have a lot of trouble asking his friends for help and trusting them to stay with him. Dumbledore actively encouraged Harry to confide in his friends, which Harry did, but he always considered his task of defeating Voldemort to be something for him alone.

Very true, but I think that his problem was not so much that he considered it his own burden, but that he did not want to endanger the ones he loved. I think that this is one of his most defining qualities, though he shows his flawed character through his method of refusal. I think that is most shown from his walk to death and his stubborn unwillingness to say goodbye to the ones he loved.

I thought it was strange that Harry and Dumbledore drew so many parallels because I don't actually think they were alike at all. Besides the obvious reasons given by Dumbledore, that Harry was better because he did not desire power, I feel that the two are very different. Dumbledore was a wonderful strategist and planner, with his downfall being secrecy. Harry is really not that great at either, but chooses to confide in others when Dumbledore would not have. I didn't much like the constant references in the book to their similarities either.

I thought it was strange that Harry and Dumbledore drew so many parallels because I don't actually think they were alike at all. Besides the obvious reasons given by Dumbledore, that Harry was better because he did not desire power, I feel that the two are very different. Dumbledore was a wonderful strategist and planner, with his downfall being secrecy. Harry is really not that great at either, but chooses to confide in others when Dumbledore would not have. I didn't much like the constant references in the book to their similarities either. It's interesting that Dumbledore pushed Harry to include his friends when he never did so himself. I think Dumbledore knew that Harry would need this in order to get anywhere.

aww, this thread is all neglected and dusty :(

In HBP and even in the beggining of DH, Harry seemed to have a lot of trouble asking his friends for help and trusting them to stay with him. Dumbledore actively encouraged Harry to confide in his friends, which Harry did, but he always considered his task of defeating Voldemort to be something for him alone.

I think that in DH, Harry really overcame this problem - especially with Hermione, and I think that once Harry came to trust Hermione, they complemented each other very well.

For instance, Harry probably would have stormed off to the ministry the minute that he found out that Umbridge had the locket, but Hermione had the sense to plan. On the other hand, Hermione probably really would have waited a month if Harry hadn't pushed them to go ahead.

True. But in the end, Harry's instincts were right, he alone had to defeat Voldemort. And I agree with your assessment about Harry & Hermione, he trusted her completely in DH. I don't think it was merely trust issues with Harry, he really didn't want his friends putting themselves in danger for something he felt was his responsibility. But they all worked so well together in DH, especially after Ron came back and smashed the locket. Ron seemed comfortable and at ease, something that was never quite there before.

I read something in another thread that I thought I would bring into this thread and I agree with the original poster. Harry's choice between Hallows or Horcruxes really shows what he's about. I think it shows so much of his character that he chose Horcruxes over Hallows. In essence, he chose to save the wizarding world over saving himself, just as he has always done in "acting the hero."

I thought it was strange that Harry and Dumbledore drew so many parallels because I don't actually think they were alike at all. Besides the obvious reasons given by Dumbledore, that Harry was better because he did not desire power, I feel that the two are very different. Dumbledore was a wonderful strategist and planner, with his downfall being secrecy. Harry is really not that great at either, but chooses to confide in others when Dumbledore would not have. I didn't much like the constant references in the book to their similarities either.

I really like the frequent comparisons between Harry and Dumbledore and I would take it a step further, in saying I see a familial relationship between Harry, Snape and Dumbledore.

Dumbledore was a parental figure to Harry, or perhaps one would call him a grandfather figure, because he was more openly fond and indulgent with Harry. Snape was the strict, Victorian father that was irritated by what he saw as Dumbledore's doting attitude, and worried constantly about what dunderheaded thing Potter was going to do next. Dumbledore twinkled and offered lemon drops, while Snape disciplined Harry.

Harry was the kid who was watched over, taught and protected by both men. When Dumbledore was gone, it was Snape who inherited the knowledge and understanding to assist Harry with vanquishing Voldemort. Then when Snape was no more, it was Harry who took on the burden and the knowledge, finally able to accomplish his mission, thanks to Dumbledore and Snape.

I really like the frequent comparisons between Harry and Dumbledore and I would take it a step further, in saying I see a familial relationship between Harry, Snape and Dumbledore.

Dumbledore was a parental figure to Harry, or perhaps one would call him a grandfather figure, because he was more openly fond and indulgent with Harry. Snape was the strict, Victorian father that was irritated by what he saw as Dumbledore's doting attitude, and worried constantly about what dunderheaded thing Potter was going to do next. Dumbledore twinkled and offered lemon drops, while Snape disciplined Harry.

Harry was the kid who was watched over, taught and protected by both men. When Dumbledore was gone, it was Snape who inherited the knowledge and understanding to assist Harry with vanquishing Voldemort. Then when Snape was no more, it was Harry who took on the burden and the knowledge, finally able to accomplish his mission, thanks to Dumbledore and Snape.

Well, I can agree that they were similar in background, and I would add Voldemort to that list of comparisons. But that's where I believe the similarities to end. They each had very different personalities, beliefs, morals, and mannerisms in my opinion. Basically, I could not see either walking in the other's proverbial shoes. I think that is highlighted by the very different ways Harry and Dumbledore perceived the way to vanquish Voldemort. I think that Dumbledore only understood the theory of love as a powerful magic, while Harry actually lived it. Harry never looked at the whole plan, never had thoughts of the long-term plan. I think Dumbledore's mind was much broader than Harry's.

I also like the perception of them as Harry's family, and I agree mostly with the roles you've stated. I always thought of Dumbledore as grandfatherly and Snape as evil stepfatherly though :lol:

I like your idea of handing down the burden too. Almost like Harry was the Heir of vanquishing Voldemort.

I read something in another thread that I thought I would bring into this thread and I agree with the original poster. Harry's choice between Hallows or Horcruxes really shows what he's about. I think it shows so much of his character that he chose Horcruxes over Hallows. In essence, he chose to save the wizarding world over saving himself, just as he has always done in "acting the hero." Yes, very good point. And Harry also showed that he wanted to defeat Voldemort in the quickest time possible, to save as many people as he could. Harry didn't feel that he needed to be the most powerful, which is one of the reasons I think his "signature move" is the disarming spell - he doesn't need to prove his prowess at fighting, but wants to end in the cleanest way possible.

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 don't think he would have. I mean, being with the dursleys shaped him to the way he is now. Independent and unselfish.

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 we first saw it in ss when he took the initiative to go down and get the Sorceres stone. He knew that if someone didn't do it, voldemort would come back. It's a strength of his, I think. Because, even though it has led him to danger, he has saved alot of lives. His final sacrific is EXTREMELY powerful. Knowing that he has to die to save everybody is a very moving. And he actually decided to go through with it...

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? his curiosity gets him very far in places! I mean, look at chamber of secrets! He could've stepped aside and let the grown ups handle it but he couldn't sit still! I don't think he lost it after dumbledores death. I think it was stifled for a bit, but his earnest to get the horcruxes so he could end it once and for all, made it possible for his curiosity to come back. And then there's that whole curiosity he had with the deathly hallows so...yeah...I don't think it was gone...

4. What do you think are Harry's greatest strengths? What weaknesses did he overcome as the series progressed? his bravery definitley. Everytime I read the series I go "how the heck is he getting through this? I would've backed out a long time ago!" but he has that couragous drive...the one weakness I don't think he overcame was his anger....there were several times in dh that I felt like yelling because he let his anger get away with him, but I guess it didn't matter cause it all turned okay in the end! the weakness he overcame was excepting death. That was the biggest thing! Everyone that he's loved has died and when it comes time for him to die, he excepts it.

5. How have each of the losses Harry has suffered helped to define who he is? again, his exceptance to death. He learns, just as dumbledore said, that death isn't the worst thing that can happen to someone. Death is but the next great adventure and I think he had to learn that the hard way. But with so many loved ones dead in his life, it really shaped him to be more humble and understanding to death.

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 save people thing, his courage to do what is right, Voldemort couldn't touch harry because of the love he had, and just getting inside his head when he loses a loved one...it's heart breaking to read it....

7. What do you think of Harry's use of Unforgivables in DH? imperio didn't seem that much of a big deal but when he crucioed at the end, I was shocked. I knew Harry and a wreckless angry streak but I didn't think he could actually perform the curse. I mean, he tried in ootp on bellatrix but, bellatrix said he had to mean it....I just didn't think he'd ever mean it....

8. Why do you think Harry forgave Snape? because, he ultimatley did everything because he loved his mother so much....that's just a strong connection that they shared (in diffrent ways, but still)

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? perfect! considering he has a save people thing....no changes!

1. I dont think harry's personality would have changed where ever he went. its just the way he is and it was how his parents were and those traits were passed down to him and if they were living they would have encouraged it.

2. i think we saw harry's "saving people thing" in SS. he took so much interest in getting to the bottom of that mystery when he really didnt have to do anything. i think this trait is a strength because throughout the books he saves so many lives. and his final sacrifice was extreamly brave. He was willing to give up his life for others, not many would ever do that.

3.His curiosity gets the better of him sometimes, and it is good and bad. He obviously saves many lives because of his curiosity and does help out a lot but he could have saved himself a lot of trouble, especially in SS and CoS. he could have just let the adults handle it.

4.his bravery obviously and his loyalty to his friends and people around him.

5. Well Sirius was probably the hardest death for him and i think his death feuled Harry to keep fighting for revenge.

6.There are countless occasions where Harry shows his pure heart: his loyalty to his friends and how much he cares about them, his saving people thing, ect.

7. I think Harry could do it if he was angry enough and it was a matter of saving the wizarding world and defeating voldemort so he had to do them.

8. He forgave Snape because he ultimatley helped Harry to kill voldemort even though he treated him badly, he had to forgive him.

9. I would have liked to see Harry settle down a bit, but yeah i think its a perfect job for him. As for Ron, i dont think it is suited for him he should have done something with Quidditch.

5. Well Sirius was probably the hardest death for him and i think his death feuled Harry to keep fighting for revenge.
I don't think Harry ever fought for revenge. I think he fought for what was right. What was right was to stop Voldemort and his Death Eaters. Sirius's death and Dumbledore's death did fuel him, but I think it fueled him to do what is necessary and not just for the sake of revenge. He rid the world of Voldemort for the good of the world, not just because his parents were killed but because countless numbers of people were killed and affected by Voldemort. Well, that's my opinion. :)

I don't think Harry ever fought for revenge. I think he fought for what was right. What was right was to stop Voldemort and his Death Eaters. Sirius's death and Dumbledore's death did fuel him, but I think it fueled him to do what is necessary and not just for the sake of revenge. He rid the world of Voldemort for the good of the world, not just because his parents were killed but because countless numbers of people were killed and affected by Voldemort. Well, that's my opinion. :)

I think the one time Harry was going for revenge (after OOP) was in the Great Hall at the end of DH. Harry was under the cloak and heading for Bellatrix (fighting Luna, Hermione, and Ginny), she had just sent the killing curse close to Ginny, but Molly knocked him out of the way and "took care" of Bella, herself. :lol:

I started a thread: The Not so Incredible Secrets of Harry's Scar Revealed in DH

I noticed JKR in DH symbolically changed the way Harry was "touching" or affecting his scar differently than any previous book. It shows the gradual "character" change of Harry & his scar with LV gone at the end.

I picked this up doing a search through the entire book, so this should be an accurate capture. (Well, some might find this interesting to know the HP character-scar transformation & symbolic meaning changes in this thread too.) :) At the very least, it's some HP scar trivia too. :lol:

Amazingly, the meaning of Harry's Scar changes dramatically in DH by transformation from hatred/anger to -> hatred/anger vs love to -> finally, just love.

This change works on the principle that there are two sides to one coin. I would like to ask for your comments about it, and your ideas about the meaning of the scar and its changes in DH.

JKR has always shown and emphasized a one-sided coin of that scar. The hatred and anger of Voldemort, Harry touches or feels it, but there is also Lily's side, the other side, of that scar too. The scar was created by love (Lily) and hate (Voldemort). Both Lily & Voldemort created the scar. Put another way HP is a story about love vs hate or life vs death all symbolized by that scar.

The ultimate winning side of the coin or scar is Lily's sacrifice for love and life.

The ultimate losing side of the coin or scar is Voldemort's evil sacrifices of hatred and death for fear of death.

Until DH the scar is always seen with the connection to LV of Harry touching his scar whenever LV is angry or there is approaching danger. Most of HP is always seeing this connection, this one-sided LV connection, to the scar.

But what about Lily's scar connection too?

In DH Harry's scar is also gradually associated to love, and JKR has Harry reaching for the scar differently too to show the differences in the scar connection. Here is the other side of the scar never seen before until DH...

In DH we get the first glimpse of the scar being associated with love when burying Dobby. JKR writes the new scar revelations as follows:

I want to do it properly, were the first words of which Harry was fully
conscious of speaking. Not by magic. Have you got a spade? And shortly
afterward he had set to work, alone, digging the grave in the place that Bill
had shown him at the end of the garden, between bushes. He dug with a kind
of fury, relishing the manual work, glorying in the non-magic of it, for every
drop of his sweat and every blister felt like a gift to the elf who had saved their
lives.

His scar burned, but he was master of the pain, he felt it, yet was apart from
it. He had learned control at last, learned to shut his mind to Voldemort, the
very thing Dumbledore had wanted him to learn from Snape. Just as Voldemort
had not been able to possess Harry while Harry was consumed with grief for
Sirius, so his thoughts could not penetrate Harry now while he mourned Dobby.
Grief, it seemed, drove Voldemort out. . . though Dumbledore, of course, would
have said that it was love.

and more comments with Harry touching his scar...

Griphook looked at him out of the corners of his slanting black eyes.
You are an unusual wizard, Harry Potter.
In what way? asked Harry, rubbing his scar absently.
You dug the grave.

and again the scar being associated with Harry's good traits...

The goblin looked slantwise at Harry, and the lightning scar on Harry
forehead prickled, but he ignored it, refusing to acknowledge its pain or its
invitation.
If there was a wizard of whom I would believe that they did not seek personal
gain, said Griphook finally, it would be you, Harry Potter. Goblins and
elves are not used to the protection or the respect that you have shown this
night. Not from wand-carriers.

and with DD at King's Crossing another positive trait dying for love...

Then . . . I'm dead too?
Ah, said Dumbledore, smiling still more broadly. That is the question,
isn't it? On the whole, dear boy, I think not.
They looked at each other, the old man still beaming.
Not? repeated Harry.
Not, said Dumbledore.
But . . . Harry raised his hand instinctively towards the lightning scar. It
did not seem to be there. But I should have died I didn't defend myself! I
meant to let him kill me!

We certainly see this connection, the Lily side of the scar, on the last page of the entire Harry Potter series in the epilogue. Here is the unique or hidden surprise in a setting of love:

A great number of faces, both on the train and off, seemed to be turned toward Harry.
Why are they all staring? demanded Albus as he and Rose craned around to look at the other students.
Don't let it worry you, said Ron. It's me. I'm extremely famous.
Albus, Rose, Hugo, and Lily laughed. The train began to move, and Harry walked along side it, watching his son's thin face, already ablaze with excitement. Harry kept smiling and waving, even though it was like a little breavement, watching his son glide away from him.
The last trace of steam evaporated in the autumn air. The train sounded a corner.

Harry's hand was still raised in farewell.
He'll be all right, murmured Ginny.

As Harry looked at her, he lowered his hand absentmindedly and touched the lightning scar on his forehead.

I know he will.

The scar had not pained Harry for nineteen years. All was well.

(The End... alas, no more.)


JKR magically touches us to the scar with Harry to always remind us the closing and final act of the scar and HP is love!

Lord Voldemort is dead. The scar is still there and all that remains is love. There is no pain! So, Lily's side of the scar is there at the very end of HP! Sweet. Harry is now touching her love.

Harry has achieved it all, touching that scar of Lily's too, now love, for love and the living... life goes on.

What comments could be added about the scar and its meaning?

Is it a two-sided coin of love vs hatred with love the winning act?

What about Lily's side of the scar?


(If this seems interesting check-out the link below.)

I'm starting to write a fanfic A Better Trio Ending for DH. Here is the post that is being edited and updated for that story, but be forewarned it's only in the "rough storyline" and idea phase. I don't think it will be finished for another month or so, but you might find it interesting to follow along & post your comments about it too.

Click Here to Read: A Trio Ending (http://www.cosforums.com/showthread.php?p=4714794#post4714794)


Luna blessings... :tu:

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 Harry, living with the Dursley's has seen that some people aren't as fortunate as others. I think he has also become quite strong because of the fact he wasn't treated well, he was a bullying target by dudley, that has built him a wall that has made him a strong person.
I think if his parents had lived he would be more or less the same, except he could have been better with a loving mother and father at his side. he almost envies ron because he has a loving family, a family and parents is probably what he has always wanted most. i think he would have been more confident.
i think if harry wa sent to an oorphanage like tom, i think he would have become more like tom. Not fascinated by dark arts and hurting people, but he would have been alone, more alone i think than at the dursleys. his wall of strong will wouldn't have been there.

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 don't think harry has a saving people thing! It may look like that after he seems t want to save the people around him, but can you blame him? It shows strength, he is willing to help others, he will go at high risks to save those he loves around him. This just tells us about his character, he is strong and loving. This shows his powre of love, he will try and dave the people around him because of his love for the people.
his sacrifice was beautiful. It really showed us his courage, love for everyone and his strength. It really showed us how powerful harry is in the emotional side. he was willing to die for all of those people, not just one or two, but the whole of the wizarding world and the muggle world too. you can't tell me that he isn;t a loving child!

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?

His curiosity in the first couple fo books is more that he has been plunged ino a new world that he knows nothign of. He has never been able to ask questions before, and there is so much he is eager to know. That is natural. As i said, he was never given permission to ask questions, so now that he has of course he will be a bit nosy. lol i think his curiosity also helps him and brings out his strength.

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

His love for the people around him. His weakness could be the fact that he has lost so much, so many people he loved. he could have easily given up, but his greatness is that he didn't give up. He carried on for the people he loved, his love made him carry on so no-one else he cared for would fall as they alrready had.

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

I think his losses have made him stronger and inspired him to finish voldemort so no more people he cared for will die. also as most of the deaths are of people very close to harry, it urges him on even more. he had to be strong to carry on with life after sirius, his parents, dd died. that shows courage and strength.
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?

understandable. He had had enough, he wasn't going to fool around. it was importnat that he finished voldemort, he couldn;t let anything get in the way of it. He had to use one some time through it. he couldn't be completely innocent all the way through it. And besides it was the only way he could do what he needed to do to get the horcruxes and finish it all.

8. Why do you think Harry forgave Snape?

he knew that he had been looking after him throughout hogwarts. he had been protecting harry for lily, and had died for him too. I think an understanding had become between them. he finally realised that snape wasn't a coward, but brave from what he had done to protect him for lily.

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 is a good thing for him. i don't think he could have after finishing voldemort just have settled down to staying at home all day. i think he needed to be out there, to make sure there would be no more trouble like voldemort. i also think it would be a comfort to the wizarding world, harry as an auror. a very good idea.

This is another question I have about Harry. Had it been him instead of Ron who was to destroy the locket horcrux, what would it have done. Would it have attmpted to play off all of Harry's insecurities as it did with Ron, or would it do something else. If it were the former, what would he have seen.

This is another question I have about Harry. Had it been him instead of Ron who was to destroy the locket horcrux, what would it have done. Would it have attmpted to play off all of Harry's insecurities as it did with Ron, or would it do something else. If it were the former, what would he have seen. Ooh, good question. I think that Harry second guessed himself a lot in DH, and he was worried that he was supposed to be coming up with all these brilliant plans and ideas and such - so probably the horcrux would have played off of that.

This is another question I have about Harry. Had it been him instead of Ron who was to destroy the locket horcrux, what would it have done. Would it have attmpted to play off all of Harry's insecurities as it did with Ron, or would it do something else. If it were the former, what would he have seen.
Excellent question! I bet it would have played on Harry's doubts about Dumbledore, and his worries about Hermione and Ron caring more for each other than for him (he did feel left out in Grimmauld Place when he saw that they had fallen asleep holding hands).

It might also have played on his desire to own all three Hallows.

Excellent question! I bet it would have played on Harry's doubts about Dumbledore, and his worries about Hermione and Ron caring more for each other than for him (he did feel left out in Grimmauld Place when he saw that they had fallen asleep holding hands).

It might also have played on his desire to own all three Hallows.

The only problem with this thinking is at the time of the locket being destroyed, the Trio did not know about the Hallows. They don't learn about them until they visit Luna's house.

Harry has so many insecurities that it would be hard to pick just one. Certainly the fact that Hermione stayed with him instead of leaving with Ron, no real plan for finding the Horcruxes, and the terrible result of the Godric's Hollow visit (including losing the use of his own wand) as an example of recent events. Breaking up with Ginny, when he didn't want to, is she alright, has she found another boyfriend?

Like I say, a lot of possibilities for Harry to dwell on, in addition to the old "tried and true" ones that you have mentioned.

The only problem with this thinking is at the time of the locket being destroyed, the Trio did not know about the Hallows. They don't learn about them until they visit Luna's house.
My bad. I was mixing up the trip to Luna's house with the trip to Godric's Hollow, which is obviously wrong!

anabel - I'm pretty good with timeline and logic, but ask me about my theories - I'm lost. Back to the topic:

What I really liked in this book, is how much Harry has matured. In the part where Harry gives Hermione, Bella's wand to use, she talks about "I really hate it. It feels all wrong, it doesn't work properly for me....It's like a bit of her" (first page of chapter 26 - Gringotts - italics in text). He remembers how she dismissed his "loathing" of the blackthorn wand as just needing to "simply practice" with it. He chose not to repeat her own advice back to her, however; the eve of their attempted assault on Gringotts felt like the wrong moment to antagonize her. (same page)

Now he actually thought about throwing the advice back in her face, but realized it would serve no real purpose and they had more important things to worry about/discuss. There is a time and a place to point out someone's elses faults/misunderstandings, this wasn't it. A real sign of maturity to me.

Of course, that doesn't mean he can't bring it up again when all this is over, probably good for a few laughs at the Weasley family gatherings ("Harry, if you tell that story one more time, I will hex you"). That scenario I can see. :lol:

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?
While living with the Dursley's, he was never loved as a child. Because of this he has became a very strong person. If he had gone to an orphange, he would probably be the same because he wouldn't have anyone that would love him like any normal family would. If his parents had lived, I believe that he would be the same, but as a child he would be blessed with a loving family.

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?
We first see it in Chamber of Secrets when he and Ron go find Ginny. When he sacrificed himself, you know then that he cares for other people and does'nt want others to get hurt.

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?
He jumos into action before he thinks anything through because he was never allowed to ask questions when he was living with the Dursleys. Because of this, his curiosity has shown through every book.

4. What do you think are Harry's greatest strengths? What weaknesses did he overcome as the series progressed?
His greatest strength is love. When someone is in trouble that he cares about, he does whatever he can to save them. His weaknesses could be that he doesn't think anything through and jumps into action. But can you blame him?

5. How have each of the losses Harry has suffered helped to define who he is?
Harry has lost so many people in his life. His parents, Sirius, Cedric, Dumbledore, etc. Their losses has helped Harry realize that 1) All wizards arent good and 2) war is real and anything can happen.

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?
The fact that he has love in his heart.

7. What do you think of Harry's use of Unforgivables in DH?
I dont blame him. he had a good reason to use them. I mean, come one, he's part of the war and when the time comes you have to use spells you never thought that you would be able to even attempt.

8. Why do you think Harry forgave Snape?
Yes I believe he did.

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 he's the perfect chocie for the position.

Does Harry use the unforgivable curse in the seventh book? If so when does he use it? I am sorry but I have lent my book to my friend and I want to know... :lol:

Does Harry use the unforgivable curse in the seventh book? If so when does he use it?
He uses the Imperius Curse on the guards at the entrance of Gringotts when they attempt to check Hermione, and on Bogrod the goblin when he seems suspicious of them. And the Cruciatus Curse is what Harry uses on Amycus Carrow when he spits in McGonagall's face in the Ravenclaw Common Room.

He uses the Imperius Curse on the guards at the entrance of Gringotts when they attempt to check Hermione, and on Bogrod the goblin when he seems suspicious of them. And the Cruciatus Curse is what Harry uses on Amycus Carrow when he spits in McGonagall's face in the Ravenclaw Common Room.
Oh right I completely forgot! For some reason his using the imperio curse did not strike as "unforgivable" to me... Thanks! :wave:

I think the Imperius curses at Gringotts fall under the category "All's fair in love and war". Aurors were authorised to use Unforgivables too. Of course, I'd rather not have seen Harry resort to them, but he's human too, and he had an almost impossible mission to fulfil. I'm glad he never used the Avada Kedavra curse, though!

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 guess he'd be different if he had a different upbringing. He kind of had his parent's characteristics anyway, so maybe it wouldn't matter. I think he would have been more powerful magically if he'd been raised by Lupin (in seclusion) with DD taking him during the full moons. I don't know that I would have trusted anyone else. Maybe the Weasleys - but they had a packload of their own to take care of.


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?

it is a strength. he saved the snake at the zoo...guess that was the first instance. Not a person, but a living being.

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?

Yes he is curious. Good trait that. Helps him and hinders him, but that is the nature of curiousity.

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

Strengths: arrogance, ability to comeback when he's beaten down, humility, loyalty, trusting, brave, friendly, kind, caring, capacity to love everyone no matter what (including creatures), capacity for forgiveness.

Weakness: A little short-sighted when he has time to think things over - very odd that.

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

totally.

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?

I don't know what that is :whistle:

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

MORE!!!!!

8. Why do you think Harry forgave Snape?

He didn't think that thru very carefully. It is good to let go of things, but some stuff Snape did was unforgiveable and that Harry should have recognized. 1. belittling his dead father under any circumstances; 2. loathing Harry till the day he died. 3. bravery = recklessness when courageous like acts are done with a bad motivation like obsessing over a woman your whole life - especially when the two of you never had a love relationship or were mutually in love.

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?

Sure. Although I hope he plays recreational Quidditch with his wife and mates. He was good. He probably helped Kingsley and Hermione administrate the equalization of all magical creatures and half breeds. Then began training others in the fighting of Dark Lords (Voldemort not being the best example of an exemplary dark lord. I don't know who they would use...)

:hmm:...James thread's running way ahead of Harry now. Something's not making sense about that...

Anyways, yay Harry! He seems a good example of a "real" hero - he is flawed. He was still insecure at times. He admits to his mistakes. But, he's essentially ego-less. That's so rare - that's the quality DD noted in him that he (DD) completely didn't have. DD had a big ego; harry had virtually no ego. And that's so rare among heroes and among the talented and brave and skilled.

I think the Imperius curses at Gringotts fall under the category "All's fair in love and war". Aurors were authorised to use Unforgivables too. Of course, I'd rather not have seen Harry resort to them, but he's human too, and he had an almost impossible mission to fulfil. I'm glad he never used the Avada Kedavra curse, though!

Agreed. And he never meant to hurt them when using the Imperius curse; he was doing this to protect Hermione.

Harry's use of the Crutiatus was different, however. He was doing it to harm Amycus, and McGonagall wasn't in any immediate danger. I agree with anabel though that yes, Harry's human, and his anger was reaching boiling point. Also, we have to understand that Harry has part of Voldemort's soul within him, and as we see in OotP, it can warp his emotions. I feel his anger was blown out of proportions because of this, and he resorted to something Voldemort would have. I can't see post-war Harry using the Crutiatus curse (only in extreme situations).

...James thread's running way ahead of Harry now. Something's not making sense about that...:clap:
Anyways, yay Harry! He seems a good example of a "real" hero - he is flawed. He was still insecure at times. He admits to his mistakes. But, he's essentially ego-less. That's so rare - that's the quality DD noted in him that he (DD) completely didn't have. DD had a big ego; harry had virtually no ego. And that's so rare among heroes and among the talented and brave and skilled. I like Harry a lot as a hero because even though he had faults, I really see what Dumbledore meant by "pure of heart" in Harry. His whole goal in life from a young age was to save everyone by killing Voldemort. He was such a nice and sympatheric person, even though he lived practically his whole life wiht a piece of Voldemort's soul in him. It's really amazing.

:hmm:...James thread's running way ahead of Harry now. Something's not making sense about that...

Lemme help heap on the saccharine praise of Harry. I vastly prefer Harry over James...Gee, wonder why Iggy-the-Snape-lover doesn't like James. :rotfl:

Harry's immediate and unhesitant decision to sacrifice himself "for the greater good" was amazing when you compare him to characters like Voldemort or Wormtail, who were self-serving to the last. At 17, he's developed a certain wisdom that many people never learn to grasp. Naturally, he's frightened, but he cares enough about those he loves that he goes ahead anyway.

I'm glad you brought up the fact that Harry had a bit of Voldemort's soul in him all along, Rell. It's suprising that we don't see much of that come out in Harry in terms of attitude (I attribute CAPSLOCK!Harry entirely to Harry's teenage angst) and most just in scar twinges and flashes into Voldemort's mind.

I like Harry a lot as a hero because even though he had faults, I really see what Dumbledore meant by "pure of heart" in Harry. His whole goal in life from a young age was to save everyone by killing Voldemort. He was such a nice and sympatheric person, even though he lived practically his whole life wiht a piece of Voldemort's soul in him. It's really amazing.

Yeah, he suppressed Harrycrux quite nicely - and he was fairly single-minded in his pursuit "Kill Voldy". I'm sure it didn't take long for him to "Marry Ginny" as his single pursuit afterwards. :lol:

I'm glad you brought up the fact that Harry had a bit of Voldemort's soul in him all along, Rell. It's suprising that we don't see much of that come out in Harry in terms of attitude (I attribute CAPSLOCK!Harry entirely to Harry's teenage angst) and most just in scar twinges and flashes into Voldemort's mind. Harry was more connected to Voldemort in OotP and in DH than any other time of his life - so I agree that it's not a coincidence that that's when we see most of his mood surges and unforgiveable curse experimentation. Some of Harry's teenage angst was a result of normal teenage behaviors, and reactions to injustices beyond his control (his hearing, Dumbledore's infuriating silence, Umbridge), or I think we would have seen a repeat in DH, but some of it could be contributed to his soul connection to Voldemort.

Harry was more connected to Voldemort in OotP and in DH than any other time of his life - so I agree that it's not a coincidence that that's when we see most of his mood surges and unforgiveable curse experimentation. Some of Harry's teenage angst was a result of normal teenage behaviors, and reactions to injustices beyond his control (his hearing, Dumbledore's infuriating silence, Umbridge), or I think we would have seen a repeat in DH, but some of it could be contributed to his soul connection to Voldemort.

To add: 15 is one of the roughest years, and the anger and emotions that tackle you throughout teenage years probably made it much easier for Voldemort's own emotions to take over him through the soul connection.

You are so insightful Rell ;)

Very interesting points on the Harrycrux situation. We've seen Ginny posessed by Riddle to the point where her self is almost gone, we've seen Ron, Hermione and Harry himself suffer from wearing the locket-crux, but the piece of soul inside Harry has never tempted him or drawn him to the dark side. As much as he scoffs he really has been protected by love. Remarkable considering how little he received in the first eleven years of his life.

Very interesting points on the Harrycrux situation. We've seen Ginny posessed by Riddle to the point where her self is almost gone, we've seen Ron, Hermione and Harry himself suffer from wearing the locket-crux, but the piece of soul inside Harry has never tempted him or drawn him to the dark side. As much as he scoffs he really has been protected by love. Remarkable considering how little he received in the first eleven years of his life.

I think that the magic of the Diary and the Locket is what caused that...not merely that it had a piece of Voldemort's soul in it. The Harrycrux was an accident, so I wouldn't be surprised if that was the reason it didn't have too much effect on Harry other than the connection between their minds.

Also, I wonder if Voldemort would be able to put the same curses he put on the locket onto a living thing like Nagini or Harry. But I suppose that wouldn't be for this thread.

Harry was more connected to Voldemort in OotP and in DH than any other time of his life - so I agree that it's not a coincidence that that's when we see most of his mood surges and unforgiveable curse experimentation. Some of Harry's teenage angst was a result of normal teenage behaviors, and reactions to injustices beyond his control (his hearing, Dumbledore's infuriating silence, Umbridge), or I think we would have seen a repeat in DH, but some of it could be contributed to his soul connection to Voldemort.

To add: 15 is one of the roughest years, and the anger and emotions that tackle you throughout teenage years probably made it much easier for Voldemort's own emotions to take over him through the soul connection.


Very interesting points on the Harrycrux situation. We've seen Ginny posessed by Riddle to the point where her self is almost gone, we've seen Ron, Hermione and Harry himself suffer from wearing the locket-crux, but the piece of soul inside Harry has never tempted him or drawn him to the dark side. As much as he scoffs he really has been protected by love. Remarkable considering how little he received in the first eleven years of his life.

I really hadn't made this connection until a bit ago about Harrycrux. He was affected by far the least of anyone we saw being possessed or even near Voldy's soul. Lily's protection must have been quite strong - I do wonder how much that helped in resisting Harrycrux.

Good point Jessica - how he was treated his entire life make it more remarkable. His lack of ego may have came from his humble upbringing, but he could have become one of the world's angriest kids. And he didn't.

:clap:
I like Harry a lot as a hero because even though he had faults, I really see what Dumbledore meant by "pure of heart" in Harry. His whole goal in life from a young age was to save everyone by killing Voldemort. He was such a nice and sympatheric person, even though he lived practically his whole life wiht a piece of Voldemort's soul in him. It's really amazing.

Faults are important in a hero! If he had no fear, his bravery would have meant little. Without the internal struggle, we (the readers) could not see the process and relate to our hero. Harry had to be able to "choose", or the moral of the story means nothing. His struggle against his own weaknesses made him stronger in the end.

How interesting would it be to have a hero who just did the right thing, never struggled within or have any temptations?

His lack of ego is such purity. It is a rare quality in the human race, and what many of us admire in the character of Harry.

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?

I think that while he was lying on the ground in the forest, essentially at the mercy of V. and the Death Eaters, that he still reached out to Narcissa, of all people, in her pain and reassured her--and I'm sure would have done the same thing even if it could not possibly have helped him in any way--says a lot of defining things about the purity of his heart.

8. Why do you think Harry forgave Snape?
I think that for one thing, he felt empathy for someone who he came to realize, shared the exquisite pain of Lily not being in the world, despite huge love and longing. I think he understood how grindingly difficult it was for Snape to have to see, deal with, and try to assist someone who had the eyes of the woman he loved and the face of the man he hated. He also realized, knowing better than anyone the vile viciousness of Voldemort, the immense danger Snape had put himself in to be a turncoat in V's ranks for the cause of good.

Another factor could be that, in finding out that Dumbledore had not been perfect, that he had awful things in his background that he should have known better than when he did them, but that DD was able to repent of them and become a truly good person, made it easier to see that Snape could do the same and sincerely turn from his Death Eater past and work for good.

Faults are important in a hero! If he had no fear, his bravery would have meant little. Without the internal struggle, we (the readers) could not see the process and relate to our hero. Harry had to be able to "choose", or the moral of the story means nothing. His struggle against his own weaknesses made him stronger in the end.

How interesting would it be to have a hero who just did the right thing, never struggled within or have any temptations?

His lack of ego is such purity. It is a rare quality in the human race, and what many of us admire in the character of Harry.

Faults make for a more real hero - just like seeing the background for characters make a more real character. I think your post really shows the similarities and differences between Dumbledore and Harry. On the first two points, DD and Harry are quite similar. But on the third - the key point - they're very, very different. I wish I could be as ego-less as Harry, but alas, I tend to be more towards DD at times.

Faults make for a more real hero - just like seeing the background for characters make a more real character. I think your post really shows the similarities and differences between Dumbledore and Harry. On the first two points, DD and Harry are quite similar. But on the third - the key point - they're very, very different. I wish I could be as ego-less as Harry, but alas, I tend to be more towards DD at times.

What three points are you talking about?...sorry, I get lost easily :whistle:.

What three points are you talking about?...sorry, I get lost easily :whistle:.

Redhart's three points :p. Or, if you prefer, the three paragraphs. In paragraphs one and two Harry and DD are similar in their traits. In paragraph three, they're different.

Firstly I can't believe this has so little pages! would have thought there'd be so many more for Harry!!!


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?

This is a real nature v nurture debate! I think that Harry's nature definitely helped to develop who he is, as he didn't get much 'nurturing' from the Dursleys. In fact, I think that if he had been sent to an orphanage like Tom Riddle was, he possibly could have turned out to be the same person he became, as he would have received the same if not more nurturing in an orphanage as he did at the Dursleys. We've got to remember that there is a big difference between orphanges of Riddle's time to the orphanages of Harry's time. It's possible even that Harry would have been adopted by a loving family and would have had a happier childhood. If Harry had lived with a wizarding family, well it would have entirely depended on the family. If it was like the Weasley's then I think that he would have grown up loved and treated normally and would have been a normal happy child. However other families could have treated him very specially because of who he is and he could have grown up spoilt and indulged like Draco & Dudley so obviously were.

However because he grew up with the Dursleys, I think this childhood gave him the humility and patience to be able to deal with the attention he was receiving at school and the ability to sense other children's loss, such as Neville's, once Harry learnt about what had happened to Nevilles parents.

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 that this is a strength, it shows that Harry has the ability to love and care for other people enough to try and save them when they are in danger. This is a big difference to Voldemort who doesn't have this ability.

As for the final sacrifice, well I have to say I thought that was amazing. It showed that Harry can and will love others enough to be willing to die for them, and this is what ultimately saved him and made him stand apart from many other people who wouldn't be able to make that sacrifice as willingly or as selflessly.


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

Harry's greatest strength in the end is his ability to love people. If Harry did not have this ability he wouldn't have walked into the forest and willingly given himself up in order to save everyone he loved and cared for.

Harry's weakness was that he wanted to protect the people he loved, and therefore didn't want to include people in the hunt for the horcruxes. In the end I think that Harry learnt that he couldn't do everything by himself. When Harry tells Neville that someone should kill Nagini we can see that he has learnt and overcome his weakness as he realises that he can't defeat Voldemort by himself, that he needs other people to help him.

Firstly I can't believe this has so little pages! would have thought there'd be so many more for Harry!!!


This is a real nature v nurture debate! I think that Harry's nature definitely helped to develop who he is, as he didn't get much 'nurturing' from the Dursleys. In fact, I think that if he had been sent to an orphanage like Tom Riddle was, he possibly could have turned out to be the same person he became, as he would have received the same if not more nurturing in an orphanage as he did at the Dursleys.

Lots of nice thoughts in here - including that we gotta get more analysis of Our Hero going :p

I do think that Harry would have ended up almost the same if he grew up in an orphanage. The way Harry's genes were arranged dictated that he'd be selfless and caring. The amazing lack of ego that Harry has may have been muted somewhat by being at an orphanage, but not that much.

Lots of nice thoughts in here - including that we gotta get more analysis of Our Hero going :p

I do think that Harry would have ended up almost the same if he grew up in an orphanage. The way Harry's genes were arranged dictated that he'd be selfless and caring. The amazing lack of ego that Harry has may have been muted somewhat by being at an orphanage, but not that much.

Thanks :)

I think if Harry had been in an orphanage he'd probably have been in a muggle orphanage, as there doesn't seem to be orphanages in the wizarding world, so Harry still wouldn't have known about his ties to the magical world or why he was so famous. So he probably would have been pretty much the same in terms of ego.

Have to agree. Can't see how an orphanage would have been any worse than the Dursleys. Might even have been better since someone might have been nice to him and he wouldn't be constantly rejected by his only family :lol:

Have to agree. Can't see how an orphanage would have been any worse than the Dursleys. Might even have been better since someone might have been nice to him and he wouldn't be constantly rejected by his only family :lol:

Yeah, and I don't see Harry being the type to hone bullying skills at an orphanage. I see him more as one who'd blend in with the crowd - he may not have been bullied, but he wouldn't be bullying.

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?
Harry's tendency to attempt to save people is first shown in PS/SS when Harry asks Ron to help him go save Hermione from the troll.
I don't think that Harry's "saving people thing" is a flaw. It's a big part of who he is. It shows that Harry is truly loyal to his friends and to those who are treated unfairly by others. He was treated unfairly for most of his childhood and he was probably trying to save others from going through the similar situations.
The only problem with him saving people is that his enemies tend to use this to their advantage which gets Harry in trouble! But the blame for his decisions to fall into these traps is his rash behavior when the occaision arises. When humans are afraid, logic is usually not used. So, of course, Harry doesn't think everything out logically (such as in OotP) and bases his decisions on his emotions.

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 nobility, courage and strong loyalty towards his friends. His flaws are that he tends to blame himself and feel self-pitying a lot.

7. What do you think of Harry's use of Unforgivables in DH?
Like JKR says, Harry is not a saint. But his use of the Imperius Curse in DH are mainly because he needs to attain a horcrux.

8. Why do you think Harry forgave Snape?
Once Harry found out the devotion and love Snape had for Lily, he realized that Snape does have a good heart. Snape put himself in incredible danger just for his love, Lily, and Harry realized what a brave man Snape was.

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?
Yes. Harry has been through so much action in his adolescent years that if he did a job much more laid back, it wouldn't satisfy him. Harry is against the Dark Arts because of what it did to rip apart his family and how it robbed him of a normal upbringing. Harry has a tendency to want to save people, and I think catching Dark Wizards is a benefit to all of society, so Harry would naturally be drawn to that.

2. When do we first see evidence of Harry's "saving people" thing?
Harry's 'saving-people' thing first showed up with a being that wasn't even a person- the Brazilian boa constrictor at the zoo. He certainly didn't intend to set it free, and the motive was also mixed up with scaring Dudley, but I still think the snake was the first 'rescue' he conducted- even if he didn't mean to.

yeah. Harry being at muggle orphanage would probably be better circumstances for harry. I mean, the dursleys didn't really care for him. But at an orphanage at least someone would be nice to him. But I think living at the dursleys gave him humility.

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 Harry probably has more empathy for the underdog than he would have had if he had grown up with his parents his whole life.

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

It did not bother me. The raid on Gringotts would have been impossible without using Imperius, and it had to be done, in my opinion. The Crucio on Amycus Carrow lacks any such justification, it was wrong, but Harry was very angry when he did it, and I would have been in his shoes. :D

8. Why do you think Harry forgave Snape?

Because Harry has a heart.

I think that there would be a few subtle differences between Orphanage!Harry and Dursley!Harry. In an orphanage, Harry would not have been forbidden to ask questions, nor would he have been punished every time he made something strange happen. Also no Dudley punching him while the Dursleys turned a blind eye. These things I think may have increased his curiosity, recklessness, and empathy.

I think that Harry's nature definitely helped to develop who he is, as he didn't get much 'nurturing' from the Dursleys.

Well, I think the Dursley did have some effect on him. They gave him none of the "nice" kind of nurturing, but a child's development is definitely influenced by the people around them.
Another thing to consider is the brief period when Harry did have nice nurturing from his parents. I think that was a "base", so to speak, upon which the Dursleys (unknowingly) built a boy, and that it helped Harry not to become bitter.
The thing is, it's hard to tell what Harry's "nature" really is. Is it his big heart and his empathy? Perhaps, but something tells me he developed that from the suffering he felt. If he had been raised by doting parents/parental figures who spoiled him rotten, we'd be seeing James II.

8. Why do you think Harry forgave Snape?

Because Harry has a heart.

Couldn't agree more. ;)

8. Why do you think Harry forgave Snape?


Harry forgave Snape once he had attained the level of maturity needed to understand him. Beyond forgiveness there was then respect and admiration.

When he was younger, Snape's memories might have confused Harry a good deal. But Harry grows in wisdom during his years at Hogwarts. He suffers and grows even more in DH, and when the time is right, he receives Snape's memories and recognizes their common humanity, the fact that they have suffered in similar ways and that both of their lives have been deeply impacted by Lily's choices. Harry's loving heart cannot help but recognize the love and the goodness he discovers in Snape. All his previous, childish misunderstandings disappear in the face of the truth. :)

Sorry to change the subject, but I was thinking about this earlier - Before going to Hogwarts, Harry had had no friends and most of his interactions with those in his age group was as a victim of bullying. Yet, he seems to have remarkably good social skills and makes a friend before even arriving at school. He also rejects Draco's offer of protection without a second thought even though someone without social skills might be tempted to take such an offer.

Sorry to change the subject, but I was thinking about this earlier - Before going to Hogwarts, Harry had had no friends and most of his interactions with those in his age group was as a victim of bullying. Yet, he seems to have remarkably good social skills and makes a friend before even arriving at school. He also rejects Draco's offer of protection without a second thought even though someone without social skills might be tempted to take such an offer.

Yeah he was terribly well adjusted for having been so mis-treated at the Dursleys. That kind of makes you remember that it is fiction, lol. But he never was overly prone to express his emotions physically or say "I love you" to those he loved, so in that way I think he did reflect some of his upbringing. Maybe the year with his parents was enough for him to go on - too, he spent a lot of time alone growing up - so perhaps he simply formed much on his own - memories of his parents in his subconscious.

I think it's fantastic that there are so many parallels between Harry and Voldemort, only to find that Harry makes the right choice and Voldie the wrong one.

-Both are brought up in neglected households, but Harry is nothing like how Riddle was at his age, not using his outbursts of magic to bully Dudley.
-Both are offered the chance to go to Slytherin, but Harry's active refusal compared to Tom's eagerness also strikes a note
-Both have plenty of followers, but Harry's are friends who respect him for who he is; Voldie's followers only admire him for his power

It really makes it seem that Dumbledore's quote about choices representing personalities could define the whole series.

When he was younger, Snape's memories might have confused Harry a good deal. But Harry grows in wisdom during his years at Hogwarts. He suffers and grows even more in DH, and when the time is right, he receives Snape's memories and recognizes their common humanity, the fact that they have suffered in similar ways and that both of their lives have been deeply impacted by Lily's choices.

You make an interesting point, about Snape and Harry suffering in similar ways. It had not quite hit me until you said it, but this is true in quite specific ways.

The very first memory Harry sees has to remind him of his own pre-Hogwarts days, when he was the kid oddly dressed in Dudley's castoffs who had no friends. In the memory of Snape's trip in the Hogwarts Express, Harry hears the echo of Draco's comment (about Hufflepuff) in James' comment (about Slytherin). In Snape's 'worst' memory Harry already saw a common experience in OotP, and remarked on it to himself.

This is where their lives diverged in a big way. For, of course, as Dumbledore and Harry discuss, Harry is protected for any temptation to follow Voldemort. Voldemort murdered his parents, after all. Snape has no such protection, and in fact succumbs to that temptation.

In the later memories with Dumbledore, Harry sees an echo of his own frustration with Dumbledore not telling him everything. The GoF era memory reminds him that like him, Snape has had to face Voldemort. The discussion after the Ring Curse cannot help but to remind him of his own experiences in the Cave. And Snape's anger and sense of betrayal when he learns that Harry must die, are echoed by Harry's own feelings. There really is a lot there for him to understand in a very personal way.

This is where their lives diverged in a big way. For, of course, as Dumbledore and Harry discuss, Harry is protected for any temptation to follow Voldemort. Voldemort murdered his parents, after all. Snape has no such protection, and in fact succumbs to that temptation.



I would respectfully disagree that Harry would have even been even slightly tempted to follow Voldemort if given the chance. Snape inadvertantly gave Harry that chance when he left his Potions book lying around. Harry had a taste of it and was disgusted with the dark magic portion. He didn't need protection from turning from the dark arts, it was not in his make up. His parents were all that is light and that is what his basic make up was based on. Harry chose his friend from day one without any influence at all - Ron, not Draco. That speaks volumes for his character in relation to the dark arts draw. He recognized things in Draco right away that spoke to the darker side and had no desire whatsoever to go there. Snape too picked his friend, Lily all that is light - and tried to lead her down the Slytherin path and failed. That is a huge distinction in basic character. So I would have to respectfully disagree.

I would respectfully disagree that Harry would have even been even slightly tempted to follow Voldemort if given the chance. Snape inadvertantly gave Harry that chance when he left his Potions book lying around. Harry had a taste of it and was disgusted with the dark magic portion. He didn't need protection from turning from the dark arts, it was not in his make up. His parents were all that is light and that is what his basic make up was based on. Harry chose his friend from day one without any influence at all - Ron, not Draco. That speaks volumes for his character in relation to the dark arts draw. He recognized things in Draco right away that spoke to the darker side and had no desire whatsoever to go there. Snape too picked his friend, Lily all that is light - and tried to lead her down the Slytherin path and failed. That is a huge distinction in basic character. So I would have to respectfully disagree.

What you say may be true. I think you overstate your case, since despite Harry's supposed horror of Sectumsempra he is happy to use it again a few weeks later, and to use Crucio and the Imperius Curse in Book 7. I do think there is a difference between him and young Snape, but not of the type, or perhaps intensity, that you suppose.

I was discussing, however, not the truth of Harry's nature, but how Harry himself sees the matter. It's how Harry thinks about the thing that determines how he will think about Snape, not how Harry really is.

When discussing this with Dumbledore, Harry does not express sentiments like "I abhor Dark Magic", he says "Voldemort killed my parents". It seems he thinks about it as a personal matter, and if he does, he can recognize that for Snape, it wasn't. That's all I was trying to say.

What you say may be true. I think you overstate your case, since despite Harry's supposed horror of Sectumsempra he is happy to use it again a few weeks later, and to use Crucio and the Imperius Curse in Book 7. I do think there is a difference between him and young Snape, but not of the type, or perhaps intensity, that you suppose.

I was discussing, however, not the truth of Harry's nature, but how Harry himself sees the matter. It's how Harry thinks about the thing that determines how he will think about Snape, not how Harry really is.

When discussing this with Dumbledore, Harry does not express sentiments like "I abhor Dark Magic", he says "Voldemort killed my parents". It seems he thinks about it as a personal matter, and if he does, he can recognize that for Snape, it wasn't. That's all I was trying to say.

I see what you mean, actually I knew what you meant :) My point is, when thinking about it, in my opinion, Harry would not think, 'but for the protection I had against following the dark arts and Voldemort killing my parents, I would have been tempted by the lure of the dark arts'. My impression is that he would look at the specific distinction we are talking about and say 'Snape was tempted by the dark arts and Voldemort, I would never be.'

The sectumsempra example of mine was merely to show Harry's disinterest in the dark arts, not to imply that he would never use an unforgiveable or dark curse (less the AK). Occassional use does not make you a follower of the dark arts or Voldemort in my opinion. They were definitely a part of Voldy's package, but so was the promise of power - something that is a good thing unless doled out by the wrong hands, like Voldemort. :)

Sorry to change the subject, but I was thinking about this earlier - Before going to Hogwarts, Harry had had no friends and most of his interactions with those in his age group was as a victim of bullying. Yet, he seems to have remarkably good social skills and makes a friend before even arriving at school. He also rejects Draco's offer of protection without a second thought even though someone without social skills might be tempted to take such an offer.

That's a good point.I suppose it wasn't so much that Harry didn't know how to act but was never really given the chance(becasue of Dudley).When he's about to start in a different school from Dudley he's excited by the prospect.He's someone who comfortable with himself.

When discussing this with Dumbledore, Harry does not express sentiments like "I abhor Dark Magic", he says "Voldemort killed my parents". It seems he thinks about it as a personal matter, and if he does, he can recognize that for Snape, it wasn't. That's all I was trying to say.
This is a good point, Zgirnius. Harry is a feeling person, rather than a person who approaches things dispassionately or thoughtfully. Ironically, so is Snape, although he presents the appearance of a cold, logical man. Part of what Harry responds to in Snape's memory is Snape's feelings. Harry sees what is really behind the facade, and recognizes a kindred spirit. They've both suffered, they've both lost people they loved. they share some unique things, including the fact that Snape is the only person Snape knows who has been face-to-face with Voldemort. Snape is the only one who understands what Harry is up against from personal experience.

From his immature, child's view of Snape, Harry sees the surface appearance of Severus Snape and thinks he's a mean, greasy git. A normal 11 or 12 year old reaction. but it's after Harry has been tempered by suffering and loss, and grown emotionally into a young man that he learns to judge the adults around him. Not simply Snape, but Lupin, Dumbledore and all of his friends. The result of his maturity is that he understands people in an adult way. Of course he would forgive Snape.

Sorry to change the subject, but I was thinking about this earlier - Before going to Hogwarts, Harry had had no friends and most of his interactions with those in his age group was as a victim of bullying. Yet, he seems to have remarkably good social skills and makes a friend before even arriving at school. He also rejects Draco's offer of protection without a second thought even though someone without social skills might be tempted to take such an offer.

I think Harry was affected in that he keeps a lot of things to himself-- or, at least, tries to. He doesn't talk to Hermione about his fear before the First Task in GoF, for instance. It's up to Hermione to figure out that he's upset. Someone who is bullied isn't likely to just offhandedly reveal every thought that comes into their heads.
Then again, maybe it's just a boy thing to keep quiet. :p

From his immature, child's view of Snape, Harry sees the surface appearance of Severus Snape and thinks he's a mean, greasy git. A normal 11 or 12 year old reaction. but it's after Harry has been tempered by suffering and loss, and grown emotionally into a young man that he learns to judge the adults around him. Not simply Snape, but Lupin, Dumbledore and all of his friends. The result of his maturity is that he understands people in an adult way. Of course he would forgive Snape.

That's a good point. Harry is becoming an adult himself, and so becoming their equal. His glasses are coming off, and he's looking at the world "with an eye to see things as they are".

His glasses are coming off...
Well, not literally, if what Hermione had to say about his eyesight was anything to go by...:lol:. Unless wizards can have laser eye surgery, that is.

Well, not literally, if what Hermione had to say about his eyesight was anything to go by...:lol:. Unless wizards can have laser eye surgery, that is.

Metaphorically. He does not need them in King's Cross. :)

From his immature, child's view of Snape, Harry sees the surface appearance of Severus Snape and thinks he's a mean, greasy git. A normal 11 or 12 year old reaction. but it's after Harry has been tempered by suffering and loss, and grown emotionally into a young man that he learns to judge the adults around him. Not simply Snape, but Lupin, Dumbledore and all of his friends. The result of his maturity is that he understands people in an adult way. Of course he would forgive Snape.

I would agree. I think that as written, Harry's character remained immature in some ways for quite some time. When he saw SWM, he was 15. At 15 and after having the experiences he had in life, one would imagine Harry to have come to certain realizations about life - and yet his reaction to watching it came across as very immature. He doesn't like the pranking he sees going on and walks away thinking his father was a horrible despot and had remained that way his whole life (forcing his mother to marry him, etc). And yet he saw Sirius acting the same way in the memory and runs to Sirius to talk about it, not feeling like Sirius was a horrible despot because he actually knew Sirius as an adult and knew that the man's character was not totally reflected by the one memory.

And yet, Harry could not translate in his mind that simple learned lesson about Sirius to his father. Harry had the same outlook with Remus - sees him not running to comfort Snape in the memory, but had seen him run to comfort Molly as an adult and ascribed a maturity to his character - and yet again, could not translate that real experience to his father.

On a more personal level, Harry himself had been involved in many hex wars with Malfoy. He even thinks to himself, after seeing SWM, that if Snape were like Malfoy, he could see fred and George or his father dangling the man upside down in the memory. From what Harry knows of Snape's character at that point, he is like Malfoy in his eyes. Bitter, nasty to him, cruel and a tendency to humiliate others. And yet, Harry still does not make the connection between that and what he saw in the memory. It wasn't as if Harry's battles with Malfoy were always over serious and mature issues, they would break out hexing/fighting because Malfoy claimed Ron's parents were too poor to buy him clothes and his robes were shabby. Kid stuff - and yet, Harry can't seem to understand that his own father was too a kid who would break out hexing/fighting over non-sensical issues.

I found Harry to be quite immature in his view of the memory. Even after talking to Sirius and Remus about it, like many readers, he wasn't certain that his father was just a normal kid - he still retained doubts that he might be a horrible despot. And his mentors were even fair about it, admitting they had been idiotic kids (like all kids including Harry) and that they had grown up. That the hexing was two way - just like Harry and Draco's - but still Harry was unable to make a connection. He was certain he was above what he'd seen in the memory.

Finally, the seventh time the issue is addressed to him, this time by Dumbledore, Harry at last makes the connection. And all Dumbledore did was point out Harry's personal experiences to him, indicating that his father and Snape (which was what he'd seen in the memory) was akin to He and Draco. He realized that 1 memory and a number of comments by his father's sworn enemy was not a proper basis to make a judgment about his father. But what a long process that was.

In the Sectumsempra incident, it was finally brought home to him in a real way that appearances were not always as they seem. If Draco showed that memory to Harry's son, his son would know nothing about the Potions book or that Harry thought the curse was not as harmful as it turned out to be. All his son would see was that he had shred Draco to bits and if the memory ended there, he'd think his father was a budding Voldemort. I think the lesson was firmly planted on his consciousness at that point.

Harry on other occassions, even in DH, was slow to take lessons of this sort home. He had a huge problem understanding that self-defense killing was morally all right, until he realized Ron would have died if he'd not killed in self-defense. He had a tough time recognizing this lesson until it was made personal, the same problem he had at 15.

Now I personally give Harry a break beause for all of his hardship, he was after all only 17 when we last saw him in action. He had indeed matured in some ways, but he remained proned to angry outbursts that he felt remorseful for later, had problems with anger management, at times his arrogance made him a bit shortsighted and he had trouble expressing his emotions. But on the other hand, his compassion, love for others, care for others and logical thinking skills had improved. His sense of values had also matured as had his ability to face his friends - all of them including the adults - as he was technically an adult himself.

But again, it would have been a bit far-fetched to expect a young Harry to have matured to perfection in social skills and thought processing at such a young age. I think he was basically just a teenager - immature in someways and mature in others, but who would grow up to be a well-adjusted adult.

ATTENTION PLEASE

I'd like to direct your attention to:

REVISED: Character Bashing/Worship: aka Shades of Gray (http://www.cosforums.com/showthread.php?t=108021)

Please read it carefully and post accordingly!

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 that maybe he pursued something else. Maybe he would work in some other Ministry department or anywhere here and there; but I think that if a time ever comes, he would take up arms almost as a vigilante against any form of Dark Arts if it were to spring up again.

I've been thinking about how Harry managed to keep his pure heart despite living with the Dursleys and having a fragment of Voldemort's sould inside him. I think it comes back to Lily. Harry was marked by love. Quirrel couldn't bear to touch him because of this love and it seems to me that this must have acted as a talisman for him and kept him safe both from the Voldemort influence and from the hurt and neglect.

I've been thinking about how Harry managed to keep his pure heart despite living with the Dursleys and having a fragment of Voldemort's sould inside him. I think it comes back to Lily. Harry was marked by love. Quirrel couldn't bear to touch him because of this love and it seems to me that this must have acted as a talisman for him and kept him safe both from the Voldemort influence and from the hurt and neglect.

Good thought...so even before Voldemort did his trick in GoF with getting Lily's "protection" and really sealing the connection the Love sacrifice from Lily was keeping Harry pure...I like that explanation. It does explain how remarkable selfless Harry was.

I've been thinking about how Harry managed to keep his pure heart despite living with the Dursleys and having a fragment of Voldemort's sould inside him. I think it comes back to Lily. Harry was marked by love. Quirrel couldn't bear to touch him because of this love and it seems to me that this must have acted as a talisman for him and kept him safe both from the Voldemort influence and from the hurt and neglect.
I hope that it isn't the explanation for Harry's strength of character. Somehow it contradicts what Jo says about right vs. easy choices. If Harry only copes with everything with the help of some magical protection, the right but hard choices wouldn't be that hard after all. My childhood was pretty bad - with some similarities to Harry's - but I learned to live with it, too.

I hope that it isn't the explanation for Harry's strength of character. Somehow it contradicts what Jo says about right vs. easy choices. If Harry only copes with everything with the help of some magical protection, the right but hard choices wouldn't be that hard after all.

I agree to an extent. I do think the magical protection that Jessica suggests is a fine explanation for why the soul-bit had no influence. Expecting a toddler to resist the malign influence of a bit of soul from an evil, mass-murdering Dark Wizard is a bit much. But I agree that it would be a cheap explanation of Harry's survival of the Dursleys.

I do think that having a stable, loving family environment in the first fifteen months of his life helped too. Research shows that is important to a developing baby. But that just gave him a foundation to make those right choices, as you phrase it.

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?
Harry’s years with the Dursleys have vastly influenced who he is, I think. Those years made Harry very self-reliant, and I believe, a bit unwilling to ask others for help. I also think his time with the Dursleys - while it didn’t stifle his curiosity – stifled his instinct to ask questions. It is interesting to wonder if Harry would have been the same if his parents had lived, or if he’d lived with other people. If his parents had lived, I think Harry would have been much more emotionally stable, since he wouldn’t have had to go through losing his parents. But with the gaining of emotional stability, I wonder if his greatest strengths (ie bravery, selflessness) would have been developed quite as much as they are because of the experiences Harry was forced to go through. I do think they would have been there because I see them as being a part of Harry no matter what, but I don’t think they would have been developed to the degree that they are at present. If Harry had lived with another wizarding family, I think he might have grown up kind of spoiled – a “pampered prince”, to use Dumbledore’s words. The reason for this is that the surrogate family would know of his status as “The Boy Who Lived” and would undoubtedly treat him as such. So he’d have grown up knowing he was special. As for living in an orphanage, the result might have been similar to his years at the Dursleys, assuming his orphanage was like Tom Riddle’s.

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 “saving people thing” probably dates back to as early as the Troll incident in PS/SS. That was the very first time we see Harry stick his neck out for someone else, someone he barely knew, no less. It can be both a strength and a flaw, because it's such a noble quality, but it often gets him into trouble (both in breaking the rules, and putting his life in danger). Also Voldemort was able to manipulate him because of this trait when he showed him false images of Sirius in the DoM. Harry's final sacrifice was the ultimate expression of his saving-people thing, and at that point it was one of his greatest strengths. If he hadn't had the saving-people thing he may not have done what he did.

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?
We know now that Harry's curiosity allowed him to stick with the Horcrux hunt and to inquire about the Deathly Hallows, which was crucial.

4. What do you think are Harry's greatest strengths? What weaknesses did he overcome as the series progressed?
Harry’s greatest strengths are bravery, the ability to love, selflessness, and improvisation (in dangerous situations). One weakness he overcame in DH was not rejecting the help of others, and I think learing to reign in his anger a bit.

5. How have each of the losses Harry has suffered helped to define who he is?
James and Lily – Their deaths were really what made Harry want to go after Voldemort. They probably had the strongest influence on Harry because they were his true family.
Cedric – Cedric’s death was the first needless death Harry witnessed, which likely showed Harry all over again just how cruel and cold Voldemort is.
Sirius – Like his parents’ deaths, losing Sirius was like losing a close family member. But Sirius’ death gave Harry strength of heart, as his love for Sirius made it impossible for Voldemort to possess him. I’m sure Sirius’ death instilled the same resolve to destroy Voldemort that his parents’ death gave him.
Dumbledore – Once again, losing Dumbledore was like losing a family member. However, this death makes Harry enraged against Snape rather than Voldemort. But it also forces Harry to be more independent than ever.
Losses in DH - All of the losses Harry sustains in DH - Dobby and the others - serve to make Harry even more determined to do whatever it takes to defeat Voldemort.

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?
The most prominent example of Harry’s pureness of heart is his sacrifice in DH. In general, he puts other people’s well-being above his own, which is shown most clearly by his willingness to give his life for everyone else. But other examples include not wanting to use the Sorcerer’s Stone, giving Fred and George his prize money so they could live their dream, and being able to love others so deeply.

7. What do you think of Harry's use of Unforgivables in DH?
I'm not too thrilled about it because it sort of puts him on the same level as the Death Eaters, but on the other hand, I understand that they were in desperate circumstances that required desperate actions.

8. Why do you think Harry forgave Snape?
I guess because he realized that Snape was trying to help him, even if it was for his own personal reasons. And also because Harry was able to mature beyond holding a grudge.

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?
Yes I think it was a great choice for him, considering his aptitude for DADA and all of his experience. Maybe he changed the way Aurors are trained/devised a new training program.

I've been thinking about how Harry managed to keep his pure heart despite living with the Dursleys and having a fragment of Voldemort's soul inside him. I think it comes back to Lily. Harry was marked by love. Quirrell couldn't bear to touch him because of this love and it seems to me that this must have acted as a talisman for him and kept him safe both from the Voldemort influence and from the hurt and neglect.

I agree. We speculated on this several years ago, and I've found nothing since to contradict the idea. Harry's survival, more or less unharmed, after 10 years with the Dursleys is nothing less than extraordinary, so I think the idea that Lily's sacrifice protected him from more than just Voldemort and the Death Eaters makes sense.

I agree. We speculated on this several years ago, and I've found nothing since to contradict the idea. Harry's survival, more or less unharmed, after 10 years with the Dursleys is nothing less than extraordinary, so I think the idea that Lily's sacrifice protected him from more than just Voldemort and the Death Eaters makes sense.

It could be that he merely had a strong character. While most children living in those conditions end up fairly poor adjusted teenagers, not all do. He had the love of this parents for over a year which helped him as well. He seemed to have an 'attitude' with the Dursleys, never thinking less of himself for what they put him through. That speaks to me of a strong character, much like his mother and father. One of the dudes I volunteer with (working with kids with unfortunate upbringing/backgrounds) was beaten as a child and terribly neglected. However, he took a very protagonistic view and came out of it with a will to fight his way past that. Unfortunately, the percentage of kids that come out well is small - but not nonexistent, so Harry could have been one of those in the small percentage that is simply strong enough to rise above such beginnings.

In Norway, children like that are called "dandelion children" - because dandelions grow in the most unexpected and inhospitable places. A dandelion child is one who grows into a well-balanced adult despite having a difficult childhood. Harry is a prime example of a dandelion child, but I still like the idea that the love protection Lily left in his very skin, helped him survive those difficult years (and the difficult years that followed too!).

In Norway, children like that are called "dandelion children" - because dandelions grow in the most unexpected and inhospitable places. A dandelion child is one who grows into a well-balanced adult despite having a difficult childhood. Harry is a prime example of a dandelion child, but I still like the idea that the love protection Lily left in his very skin, helped him survive those difficult years (and the difficult years that followed too!).

LOL, I like it to from a magical point of view :) I was just pointing out that it was a possibility...

In Norway, children like that are called "dandelion children" - because dandelions grow in the most unexpected and inhospitable places. A dandelion child is one who grows into a well-balanced adult despite having a difficult childhood. Harry is a prime example of a dandelion child, but I still like the idea that the love protection Lily left in his very skin, helped him survive those difficult years (and the difficult years that followed too!). I absolutely LOVE this comparison - thank you for sharing.

Although some of Harry's push for how great he turned out likely came from the magic of Lily's sacrifice, I do not think it is in the spirit of the personal choice theme found in the books if it were completely the case. I think what it did in essence, was bring Harry from a place where he might not have had a choice but to be evil (a toddler with a mass murdering dictator's soul...), to a place where he could choose to be good person.

I feel, with all the problems Harry has had with the MoM in the past....he would never work for them. But, to be asked to work for Kingsley, that's a different matter. Becoming an Auror and heading the department and moulding it into shape under Kingsley would be Harry's idea, but once Kingsley leaves, I think Harry would follow. (uness another member of The Order became Minister)

I can see Harry staying if the new minister is a good one. After all, Harry has grown up enough to try to see what the new minister is like before he passes judgments. The person doesn't have to be an Order member, they just have to know what they're doing.

I used to dislike Harry's desire to become an Auror, but after thinking about it, it seems like a good career for him. He's been to he*l and back. He knows what it's like to face dark wizards, and I think that using the knowledge he's gathered over those dark years fighting Voldemort to help and protect people is truly perfect job for the Boy who Loved. :love:

I used to dislike Harry's desire to become an Auror, but after thinking about it, it seems like a good career for him. He's been to he*l and back. He knows what it's like to face dark wizards, and I think that using the knowledge he's gathered over those dark years fighting Voldemort to help and protect people is truly perfect job for the Boy who Loved. There's nothing better than practical experience. Harry would have gone into this profession knowing full well the dangers it entailed and that he had a natural intuition to do the job right.

Welcome to the post-DH discussion of Harry Potter.Previous discussion without spoilers can be found here: Harry Potter: Character Analysis

8. Why do you think Harry forgave Snape?

This is truly a question I have struggled with since discovering it was the case. When I finished DH, I had no idea why he'd given his son his middle name, but I decided it must have been because he found Snape brave. Still, it didn't really make sense to me because it didn't account for all of the mistreatment I felt Harry had received at Snape's hands, nor for the fact that I felt Snape had gone to his grave with a strong dislike for Harry and his father - which signaled to me that Snape held no remorse for the fact that he'd played a role in James death.

But then JKR said in an interview that she wanted Harry to see the good in Snape - his courage, the fact that he had the capacity to love and his willingness to agree to protect Harry although he hated him (none of which Harry believed at all prior to the Princes Tale). She also said that she wanted those things to help Harry have some forgiveness for Snape for the wrongs I cited in the first paragraph and find some redemption of his character. And she also indicated that Harry found all of that even though Snape died still hating Harry.

So at that point I understood why JKR had Harry do the naming and what she was trying to show. Still, JKR didn't explain to us how Harry worked that out in his head and so it was difficult for me as a reader to come to terms with following Harry's lead and forgiving Snape for his past deeds as a professor - which never changed, his continued Hatred of Harry and James and his lack of remorse in association with James. The good that Harry saw (capacity for Love, agreeing to help protect Harry against his will and the courage he showed in relation to spying) I saw that as well, but it was not near enough for me as a reader to forgive Snape - nor find redemption for his character based on the factors I felt were necessary for that to happen. It seemed to me that Harry's naming action showed a lack of respect for both his father and himself, and I can't square that in my head no matter how hard I try because as JKR indicated, Snape hated them both until his death.

So in the end I still do not know the answer to the question why Harry forgave Snape - or in truth what he actually did was 'find some forgiveness for Snape' - which is perhaps not complete forgiveness, but even that qualification doesn't explain Harry's point of view in the end. I would really love to hear how Harry worked it out in his head, I think that would be helpful to me as a reader in understanding his ability to forgive Snape better. :)