Does Harry fall flat as a hero?

[* amanda]

I was about to post this in the Snape thread when I realized I'd prefer to create a new thread, because maybe this particular discussion should be about Harry rather than Snape (although you're welcome to take it either direction.)

I read a fantastic article. It sums up my feelings exactly about the last book, and puts to words perfectly why Snape has become my "favorite character" (as in, favorite character, rather than my most liked character, who would of course be the very likable and clean-haired Harry.)

Although the article puts it better than I can, I'd like to summarize by saying that throughout my reread of DH I've been disappointed. Not that it wasn't a fantastic book, it truly is a wondrous piece of storytelling. But Harry the character fell a bit flat. I hoped he would have more of an internal struggle. More of a flirtation with dark side. More inherent weakness, of serious reservations, of intense selfishness. I think Ron went through this in a satisfactory and realistic level, but Harry and Hermione seemed to rigid; too cold; too flawless, in many ways, because they always knew the right thing to do, which was to press on and continuously make the "right" choice. Face it, they were perfect when it came to making moral and heroic decisions. And that made them hard to relate to. And less impressive as heroes, because they didn't seem... mortal. They seem too above the average folk. And human beings make heroes heroes because they are the average folks; they rise from mere humanity and through their labours and decisions make divine acts; they aren't inherently gods or god-like and dare I say Harry was a bit god-like because of his intuitive sense of good.

So enter Severus: he was totally flawed. He made mistake after mistake. He struggled. He was a bit rotten. But he was completely and utterly human and ultimately decided that love was the most important thing to him; that he would never forgive himself if love didn't drive him to do the right thing. Now that is a hero... who struggled in a journey and discovered how to accomplish what he devoted himself to.

anyways, check out the article here, and especially pay attention to the following excerpt, and post your thoughts.

Rowling has publicly expressed mystification over her readers' fascination with Snape, even suggesting that his appeal is simply "the bad boy syndrome." Instead, her readers, whether consciously or not, have tapped into something that Rowling herself may have failed to recognize.

That something was a need for a protagonist who genuinely struggled to define – and do – the right thing. A passive main character with no authentic moral dilemma is not only hard to relate to, he or she is also no guide in circumstances in which right and wrong are anything less than black and white.

In a society increasingly steeped in moral relativism, it's not the Harrys of the world who will make a difference. It's the Snapes. It's those who need redemption, then choose it. It's those willing to press on and fail and then to press on again – especially when there are no clear answers.

[Fins]

Amanda, you won't get an argument here... Snape is one of the most interesting fictional character written in literary history (my opinion anyway). It would be very interesting in reading the series again with knowing the outcome of Snape's character, especially in HBP at the end when Snape says to Harry, "Don't call me a coward!"... also, the Spinner's End chapter would be an interesting reread.

Its also interesting to note that Snape tasted both sides, the evil side and the good side, before making his ultimate choice. Harry on the other hand chose straight out which side he was on. Does this make him any more or less heroic? Maybe... in a sense. I'm not quite so sure that I believe those that need redemption for past deeds that ultimately achieve it are more heroic or better people because of it... it does make for better drama, though. Certainly one would have to label him the 'Tragic' hero.

As to Harry, he had less help on his quest than he thought... he had very few answers to start with. Then throw in the Deathly Hallows story and ultimately having to choose between that power or continuing the hunt for the horcruxes. He had to figure out much on his own. He was the one that figured out where the cup was, he was the one that figured out where the Diadum was hiding... and he was the one that made the ultimate choice... setting aside the quest for the hallows.

So... which is more heroic... one that gives in to his 'natural' evilness and then repents and redeems himself? or one that is faced with similar choices and having to figure out much on his own, having to go thru his own temptations and avoiding the wrong choices??? ((If only it was Harry and Eve in the Garden of Eden!!!))

I think Harry is the more heroic of the two... just not in a dramatic fashion as Snape. Things were never 'black and white' for Harry (the world isn't divided into good people and Death Eaters). It always seems the world is grey as much as we want it to be black and white. I believe all people have within themselves 'good' and 'bad' and its their choices, with all the temptations available, that make them who they are. Harry was able to more or less choose what is right, even ultimately accepting his own death for the greater good.

[kats]

Snape and Harry are really two completely different kinds of hero.

Snape was a terrible human being who chose to do something for the greater good because he failed to keep the one person who he had ever loved safe. His life was over. He could not see anything in his fututre. He basically chose the path that would punish the one who had taken Lily from his world. Did he act with courage? Yes. Was he a true hero? Maybe. Maybe not. Can you be a hero when your reasons are selfish?

Harry was never truly given a choice until the end. He was born into a very difficult situation. He went from The Boy Who Lived, to the Chosen One, etc. By the general population he was hated or loved for things completely beyond his control. Dumbledore began with the intent that Harry would end up the sacrifice to kill Voldy. Dumbledore seemd pleased when he sensed there was a way for Harry to survive. After all he did come to love and respect Harry for himself and his character. However, he never wavered from his original intent to have Harry sacrifice himself for the greater good. Harry's true heroic act was when he offered his life for the good of the world. There was a little revenge there for the deaths of his parents and all the others in taking down Voldy. However, Harry felt responsible for the deaths of all who had stood in front of him. He did not want anyone else to die. He offered his own life, everything he could hope to know in the future, so that others could have a future without Voldy. Did he act courageously? Yes. Did he act heroically? Yes. He thought of the future of others and offered his own.

[Tonks]

what a great topic amanda! of course, it hurt my brain a bit too much to ponder it, lol.

i was really proud of harry throughout the series and through DH. as fins said, harry had to figure out more than he gave himself credit for. yes, ron and hermoine helped a great deal...but it was really harry behind the wheel whether he realized it or not. as kats said, harry was born into a very difficult situation and i believe our hero was really born the day he asked the sorting hat to place him gryffindor. had he said slytherin, the story would have bombed! lol.

i think the truly heroic point in DH (at least for me) where harry proved himself was after obtaining the resurrection stone, standing outside the forbidden forest w/ his parents, sirius and lupin (i think that's who came out?) making the decision to basically walk to his death in order to spare others from voldy's wrath any further. also, to play dead the whole time even being tortured by voldy! that took an amazing amount of courage....not to give up even though your in pain....very unselfish of him.

snape, i don't think was really on the heroic side....more on the brave side, but not heroic.

i would go into this a little more, but i must head to bed for 4am comes awfully early tomorrow.

[sapphire]

Hiya MUGWUMPS.
What an interesting topic, Amanda. My first thought was: how can you malign my Harry? Second: Snape IS a fascinating and well-written character--one of the true classics, for sure.
As I posted on another thread, my biggest gripe with the movies is that they have not seemed to realize just how important his storyline is.
Now, is the question whether Snape is a better person than Harry? A more interesting character? More admirable in how he overcame his struggles with his own demons and finally does the "right thing"?
I understand the argument that Snape is more flawed as a person, and therefore might have had to fight harder to overcome his dark side. I do question just how much he overcame it.
In the scene where he presents himself to Dumbledore in terror because he realizes that Voldemort is going after Lily, Dumbledore makes a really good point: " 'You disgust me,' said Dumbledore, and Harry had never heard so much contempt in his voice. Snape seemed to shrink a little. 'You do not care, then, about the deaths of her husband and child? They can die, as long as you have what you want?' " (DH AE p.677) Do you think he ever came to care about anyone else?
OK, so Snape is more like the rest of us in his selfishness, prejudice and willingness to let evil flourish as long as it doesn't affect us and ours. I suppose it is pretty heroic of him to turn double agent based solely on his love of one person. That's probably more than most of us would ever do.
I argue, though, that his motivation never changed from what works best for Severus Snape, and I never did find him worthy of the honor Harry bestowed upon him by naming his child after him.
The best reason I can figure for Harry doing that is a kind of thank you for loving my mother as much as I did.
I agree that Harry was exceptionally, perhaps unbelievably noble, but that's why I love him so much.
I think Harry was created as a protagonist not for Snape, but for Voldemort. These were the two characters the common backgrounds and I think Jo's intent was to show that it is possible for two people to come from similar horrors and to make different choices which determine not only who they are, but how they affect everyone around them.
While Snape is certainly fascinating and extremely important to the story, his nastiness turns me off and all the LOLIPOPS at the end didn't make him much more admirable. Maybe it's because I am a teacher that his constant humiliation of children turned me so against him. Somehow his "bravery" doesn't overcome his cruelty. He was a nasty piece of work--by choice.
Now, back to Harry. Is he perfect? I don't think so. He did have a predilection for some rule breaking. He gets angry and rude. He has a tendency to exclude people who want to help him, albeit for noble reasons. Is he extraordinarily good? Yeah. He has a naturally kind and caring heart (Dan does portray that so well, doesn't he? ;D) and enormous bravery--more than most of us can imagine. He does seem to know the right thing to do in most instances, although I was both glad and frustrated to find him wandering aimlessly throughout Britain not knowing how to procede, because I wondered how Jo was going to get him started with so little information from Dumbledore. It would have been rotten if he had miraculously just come across all the Horcruxes.
I am rambling at this point, so let me end this here. Is Harry braver, kinder, smarter than most of us? Well, maybe. But not all of us. There ARE extraordinary people out there and they are the ones I admire--not the nasty ones who do something noble for their own selfish reasons.

You know, another interesting discussion might be about Dumbledore: Hero or master manipulator?

[kats]

Sapphire,
Start the Dd thread! Now there is another interesting character. We always assumed him to be so perfect. Always a bad assumption.

[* amanda]

I love everyone's comments!

As a reminder, I was commenting on Snape the character, not the man. How JKR fabricated him vs. Harry.

Some of you tapped into the flaw of my argument, which is to say, that Harry really did struggle, too. He struggled to make some of the right choices - his entire childhood was a struggle yet he chose to be unlike his aunt and uncle and be true to what he felt was right despite that adversity. Secondly, he chose, ultimately, to handle the terrifying events in his young life: the death of Cedric, Sirius, and Dumbledore, with strength and courage instead of hate, revenge, and fear. I think JKR tried to convey a struggle there, though it was nothing quite as obvious as Snape's struggles.

I also think there's a difference in some of our opinions about Snape's choice to help Dd/Harry. kats/sapphi, you think he was still acting on his selfish wants. But what, really, was his decision to help Dd going to do? He knew it wouldn't bring Lily back, and that she'd never know. He didn't want anyone else to know about it either, so not even fame or public acknowledgment of his wrong was what he was going after. Therefore, I think that his enormous decision was more than selfishness. I think his selfish reasoning led him to discover how he had gone so wrong and that caused him to turn around and really want to help. It took courage, rather than selfishness, to do what he did. I think that's why Harry named his son after him; for two reasons, as sapphi said, as a thank you for loving my mom/an homage to her. But also, an ode to what he saw as a moment where Snape realized what was right - and that moment was brought to Snape by Lily's death.

I think one of the tragedies of Snape's life was probably that if he'd gotten over his beef with James he could have really been a support system and great help to Harry. They could have had a respect for each other. I think he was more like Harry than Dumbledore was and they probably could have related even better than Harry related to Dd (which I didn't think he really did, anyways, so maybe that's not saying much). If he'd lived, I think they'd be having beers every Friday night. hehe, ok, maybe not. But there's something about Snape's story that parallels Harry's so much - but I suppose we can chalk up his treatment of Harry as yet another one of his poor decisions that he maybe never realized or realized too late. And that adds to his whole tragic hero story.

Next up, the Dd thread! OK --- I have some things to say about that. I really hated Dd after this book.

[kats]

I know that people want Snape to be some tragic hero, but he was just tragic. Even as he got near the end he had not changed. Sapphi quoted the part where Dd was disgusted that Snape didn't care if Harry and James died as long as Lily lived. He did not care that her heart would be broken. That's not love but a need to possess. In the last year, when Snape searched Sirius' house, he tore the picture in half. He took the part with Lily but could not stand to have baby Harry zooming around on the broom be a part of the picture. He had not gone through some wonderful change that made him understand the error of his ways. Even then he wanted Lily as his own, only Lily. His motive for helping The Order was never to help Harry. It was to avenge Lily. A much less noble motive.

[Richard]

No, Harry doesn't fall flat as a hero (at least, IMHO). Sure, in the last book, his gut feeling was right several times, and he makes the right decisions, but when you put this book in the perspective of the entire series, you see that that is the result of a long learning process. The things he does right in this book, he did wrong in the previous books. In 7 he learned how to control himself (well, most of the times, except when he's defending McG), Voldemort couldn't enter his mind, yet Harry could go into Voldemort's mind, and most importantly of all, he learns to think before he acts.

And why did anyone want him to be tempted by the dark side? I actually never expected that to happen at all. It has been done in so many fantasy / sci-fi stories before, why would HP need that particular element as well? Ever since the first book we know Harry will never ever be tempted by Voldemort's power.

And it was Harry that made the difference in the end. Sure, Snape played his role, but Harry brought down Voldemort, Harry chose to trust Dumbledore and the path he lay down for him. If Harry would have failed, would Snape stood up against Voldemort? I don't believe he would, even though Voldemort killed the love of his life.

For me, Harry will always be this great, very human hero I've witnessed growing up and becoming a man. As Dumbledore puts it so eloquently: 'You brave boy, you wonderful man'.

Long live Harry Potter!

Richard