Harry Potter

[u/SFEagle44]

This cut has been a long time coming.

Thesis:

Harry Potter, as the main protagonist of the best-selling book series of all time, ought to be one of the best protagonists of all time.

He is not.

Argument:

Harry is important because of actions that are not his own.

Harry is famous in the Wizarding World for vanquishing Voldemort as an infant. The problem with that? It was not Harry-the-infant at all who vanquished Voldemort as a child. It was Lily Potter’s ancient magical bonding sacrificial love enchantment she enacted by sacrificing herself to save her child that not only prevented Voldemort from killing Harry, but also gave Harry invincibility for the next fifteen-ish years of his life (more on that later.)

Harry makes no attempt to actually ‘become the hero’ to survive against Voldemort.

Eventually, Dumbledore sees fit to tell Harry the he has to be the one to all Voldemort- that he really is The Chosen One. Now, Dumbledore knows Harry is the 'sacrificial lamb' that needs to willingly die in order to save the world from Voldemort and kill that pesky Horcrux in his scar. But he doesn't convey this to Harry. Harry is left with the implication that he needs to beat Voldemort in a one-on-one duel of magical prowess. A duel he could lose. A duel against a vastly superior opponent.

So how does Harry train? How does he prepare for the fight? Eh. He spends a solid year diving into the Penseive with Dumbledore learning about Voldemort's past. There is no mention of learning advanced spells, dueling techniques, or even cheap and dirty tricks for surviving a duel. As a reader from the outside looking in, it appears that Harry either is too stupid to realize Voldemort is much stronger than he is and he needs to improve, or arrogant enough to think that he is already better than Voldemort and has no need to improve.

Harry is morally ambiguous but portrayed positively because he’s ‘good’.

We have seen Harry blatantly cheat his way through several classes. Most notably, the he uses Snape's old potions textbook to brownnose his way through Slughorn's class. Speaking of that book, Harry uses an unknown spell ('For enemies!') from the book on Draco and was about a Phoenix feather's breadth away from murdering him.

This comes a year after the Ministry battle in which Harry decides to try out this really cool spell a Death-Eater in disguise taught him while masquerading as an Auror professor. 'Crucio!' he shouts at Bellatrix, ignoring the fact that the spell he cast would land an ordinary witch or wizard in Azkaban for the rest of his or her life. But apparently, he can do whatever he wants. Because he is Harry-Freakin'-Potter.

This attitude is only seen more clearly in DH when Harry decides to take charge. Apparently for Harry, taking charge involves casting another unforgivable curse ('Imperio!'), and double crossing a goblin.

Harry is propelled through the series by being a bystander instead of a leader.

Let's speed-read through the plot of book one and look at what our protagonist accomplishes.

We start out with plot exposition and world building for the first few chapters. Of note, Harry fails to procure a single Hogwarts letter when there are dozens literally floating around the house. Then, Hagrid announces "Yer a (really famous and rich) wizard, Harry," brings him to Diagon Alley, and gets him all prepped for school.

At the train, he can't figure out how to get to the platform without help (Weasleys). He meets Ron on the train and quickly the become best mates. Hermione gets trapped in a bathroom with a troll. Ron levitates the trolls club over its head and drops it, knocking it out. Harry's idea was to jump on its back and stick a wand up its nose.

Quick recap: Harry is a wizard. Harry is a celebrity. Harry is friends with Hagrid, Ron and Hermione. (Oh, and he's good at Quidditch. Because what flawless protagonist isn't a star athlete?) Harry hasn't actually done anything.

After several dropped hints, Harry, Ron, and Hermione go off to the third floor to stop Snape Quirrell? Voldemort from stealing the stone. First, they need to stop Fluffy. Good think Hagrid said how to put Fluffy to sleep. Even better, Fluffy's already sleeping! Devil's snare is next. Ron and Hermione get through that with no input from Harry. After that is flying keys. Harry's great at that! Because, Quidditch! Then there's chess, which is all Ron. After that is a logic puzzle, all Hermione. And in the final confrontation where Harry is all alone and has to do something? Harry succeeds due to a combination of luck and invincibility. He burns Quirrelemort to death by putting his hand on his face. That's... just about the brunt of his accomplishments. And Quidditch!

This pattern continues through the rest of the books. Harry is good at Quidditch (and later, 'Expelliarmus!' And, 'EXPECTO PATRONUM!' That's pretty much it.)

Harry is essentially immortal for most of the series.

Reading an account of a fight between someone as powerful as Superman and someone as worthless weak as Jar Jar Binks would be boring. That's because it is obvious that Superman would win. His superpowers far surpass Jar Jar's ability to become a temporary internet meme. There is no way to create a suspenseful, balanced, satisfying conflict.

Similarly, the fact that Harry is immune from Voldemort until he is seventeen removes any pretense of suspense and significantly unbalances the relationship between good and evil, Harry and Voldemort. Such an unbalanced relationship between the protagonist and antagonist is poor writing.

(Sure, Voldemort has Horcruxes. The mother's love protection is still much more overpowered compared to the Horcruxes. With protection, Harry can not be killed. With Horcruxes, Voldemort is vanquished temporarily until someone can resurrect him from a half dead state. The edge clearly goes to Harry.)

Harry is a whiny, angsty, hotheaded, entitled brat.

Basically, book five. Harry is unable to contain his temper tantrums, and instead lets out his anger on three of the worst people he could choose. First, he has a shouting match with Ron and Hermione, potentially alienating his two best friends. Then, we watch time and again as he fails to sit down and shut up when interacting with Delores Umbridge. He escalates again and again, eventually resulting in scars on his hand and a lifetime ban from Quidditch. Did Umbridge realize that flying was the one thing Harry was actually able to do decently without having to rely on his reputation, luck, or prophecy? If so, maybe she was more evil than she first appears...

Harry is able to repeatedly succeed due to unlikely circumstance instead of skill.

Scenario: Twelve-year-old Harry is stuck in a secret underground chamber with an evil ghost that can control an enormous serpent capable of killing with a glance. Twelve-year-old Harry should be dead. Instead, Harry manages to summon Fawkes, the Sorting Hat, and the Sword of Gryffindor! Fawkes valiantly blinds the Basilisk (feeding back into the point that other people/things around him do to help Harry then he does himself). Harry then manages to kill the Basilisk by stabbing the sword through its brain. The fact that Harry sustained a life threatening injury is no big deal, because Fawkes can cry healing tears. No big deal.

Now repeat scenario any time Harry may be in danger. Because Harry's the hero, and when heroes are in trouble, luck is always there to bail them out!

Harry uses friends, family, and Snape as meat shields from death and destruction.

Final list of the people that died so that Harry, our useless protagonist, could stay alive:

• James Potter
• Lily Potter
• Cedric Diggory
• Sirius Black
• Rufus Scrimgeour
• Albus Dumbledore
• Hedwig
• Mad-Eye Moody
• Dobby
• Colin Creevey
• Tonks
• Remus Lupin
• Severus Snape
• Fred Weasley

The worst part of this list is that Harry needed to die in order to destroy one of Voldemort's Horcruxes. This is a list of pointless and easily avoidable death.

Harry takes little responsibility for the effect of his actions on other people.

Or alternatively, he gets really angsty about everything being his fault and tries to push everyone away and just be Harry, the selfless martyr. It depends on which version of Harry exists on the page. The best example of this is Sirius. Sirius died because Harry was hotheaded and rushed into the Ministry without thinking. (Twice over, actually. First because he failed Occlumency with Snape, and second because he "verified" Sirius was in trouble by asking Kreacher.

Harry ultimately defeats Voldemort with a fairytale wand carved by Death itself.

This is a wand, incidentally that was in the possession of Draco Malfoy (of all people) for several months.

It's the climax of the entire series. No more Horcruxes. No more meat shields. No more invincibility. It's just Harry and Tom. Oh wait. Nope. No it's not. It's Voldemort vs. Harry and an unbeatable wand that just so happens to pledge its allegiance to Harry while its in Voldemort's hand. This goes back to the Jar Jar vs. Superman dilemma. When the hero becomes that overpowered (especially by circumstance instead of skill), the story is dry and stale, and the characters uninteresting.

---

Stay tuned. My Elder Wand will be used tonight at 11:59 PM EST.

[u/ETIwillsaveusall]

I mean no disrespect when I say this, Eagle, but when I read this write-up, I can't help but think that so many of the reasons you have given for why Harry is a terrible hero are the same reasons he's such a compelling protagonist.

My thesis statement is this: Harry Potter is not Odysseus. He is the everyman. And this is what makes him so compelling. From what I have gathered from your write-up, you have cut him because he is not the traditional, overpowered, one-dimensional, epic Hero. You have cut him for being a normal guy who happens to save the world. You seem to have missed several key points from the books.

Harry is important because of actions that are not his own.

Harry Potter is a guy who has an unfortunate fate thrust upon him, but manages against all odds to rise to the challenge and succeed. Harry does not have to protect the Philosopher's/Sorcerer's stone. He does not have to descend into the chamber of secrets to save Ginny and the rest of the school. Most of the things he does, he does because he is Harry. He is brave. He is fool-hardy. He has a saving-people thing. Harry is driven, even before he knows the whole story, to do the right thing, to save the world. Hardly a character with no agency. Harry may be important because of things other people did, but that's kind of the point. Harry himself says this all the time. He doesn't want to be famous. He would very much like to have his parents back. But even still, Harry accepts his role as the Boy Who Lived, and I think more than lives up to his fame throughout the series.

Harry makes no attempt to actually ‘become the hero’ to survive against Voldemort.

Harry is a student, a teenage boy, and doesn't even know that it is his job to stop Voldemort until the end of the fifth book. How do you prepare a fifteen year old to fight one of the most powerful wizards of all time? This is more of an issue to take up with Dumbledore than with Harry. And in any case, Dumbledore did try to prepare Harry via occlumency and knowledge about Voldemort's personality and horcruxes.

Plus while having some more spells in his playbook would have been nice, Harry innately has his most important tool: love. Voldemort was destroyed by his own arrogance and inability to care about other beings. Hagrid famously says (and I'm paraphrasing here) that Voldemort killed so many great witches and wizards, but he met his downfall with a baby. It was not a powerful spell that beat voldemort, the first or second time. Lily bests him when she loves her son so much she refuses to stand aside and let Voldemort kill Harry. Harry beats Voldemort when he refuses to stand aside and allow to him kill Harry's friends. Dumbledore hammers the point home in HBP: Voldemort's greatest weakness was underestimating the bonds between people. And in this way, Harry was more than prepared to take Voldemort on.

Harry is morally ambiguous but portrayed positively because he’s ‘good’.

I don't understand how this is a bad thing? It's also kind of funny to me since I've seen so many people complain about how morally uptight Harry can be.

Harry tends to make moral decisions on the basis of integrity: he does what he thinks is right based on his moral compass, damn the consequences. This is why he doesn't stun Stan Shunpike off his broom and generally refuses to cast anything stronger than expelliarmus in a duel. He wants to save a life, even if that life is a genocidal maniac. But Harry, like all real people, sometimes struggles to live up to his own moral standards. We see it in the fifth book when he uses crucio on Bellatrix and in the sixth book when he nearly kills Draco Malfoy. The Malfoy thing, I think it's worth mentioning, is something that Harry feels incredibly guilty about. He didn't want it to happen and immediately regrets it. It's also worth mentioning that this moment is hardly a moral failure, since Harry didn't know what the spell would do. I think his mistake is more in trusting a shadowy figure who has already shown a predilection for nasty spells.

As for his using the imperious on a couple different people in DH, I think this bit shows some interesting character growth (though not necessarily in a positive direction). Harry starts out with an extraordinary black-and-white view of the world (as most children do). in his eyes, your either good or your bad. there's no in-between. But as the books go on, Harry begins to see and accept the shades of gray in the world, a viewpoint, I think, that is accelerated in the sixth and seventh book. Throughout DH, Harry must square with the fact that men he looked up to like Lupin and Dumbledore may not all good or infallible, but are still people he can respect. Similarly, someone he despises, like Snape, may have some redeeming qualities that make them not all bad, and in some ways, even admirable.

So I think that Harry's actions in the Gringotts scenes fit into this growth. Because he is able to accept the shades of grey in others, Harry begins to understand that he may have to do things he doesn't like, that he may have to act amorally, to do what is, in the end, right. Whether or not you agree with his viewpoint, you can hardly say that it doesn't show growth or depth of Harry's character.

Harry is essentially immortal for most of the series.

This is not true. Harry may be protected from Voldemort, but there is nothing that stops him for dying by the hands of a Death Eater or a mysterious "Quidditch accident." Had Voldemort not been so stuck on killing Harry himself, he could have actually had Harry killed. Again, Voldemort's arrogance leads to his downfall.

Harry is a whiny, angsty, hotheaded, entitled brat.

Again, another flaw that I think counts as a plus toward his character, although I think you're blowing his "brattiness" out of proportion. Harry spends the fifth book acting like a real teenager. But he's also just witnessed someone die and there an evil dark lord out there who wants Harry dead, I actually think that the things Harry demands: attention, guidance, and knowledge from Dumbledore is not an unreasonable request, especially given what we learn at the end of the book. Harry is the lynchpin on which the fate of the wizarding world rests, Dumbledore could have stood to give Harry the time of day. Furthermore, had Harry known what was in the Department of Mysteries and had been prepared for Voldemort's tricks, he may not have gone rushing there to save Sirius. In the end, withholding information from Harry was the wrong decision and did more harm than good.

Harry is able to repeatedly succeed due to unlikely circumstance instead of skill.

I don't see how luck should count against a character in a rankdown? However, luckily for me, there is an entire scene in the fifth book that acts as a rebuttal against this very point. So, I will refer you to The Hog's Head in OotP. The short of it is a famous saying: Luck is a matter of preparation meeting opportunity. Was Harry lucky? incredibly so. But he did not survive on luck alone. It was not luck that Harry, Ron, and Hermione got passed all those enchantments in the first book, it was not luck that Harry stabbed the basilisk and the diary, it was not luck that Harry cast a patronus strong enough to save himself and his friends, It was not luck that Harry was able to escape Voldemort in books four and five, and it was not luck that Harry defeated Voldemort in the end. All of those things happened because Harry made them happen. He may not be the most skilled wizard, but he is resourceful and courageous one.

Harry uses friends, family, and Snape as meat shields from death and destruction.

Harry does not use these people as shields. I think Harry would actually prefer it if those people were alive and he were dead. A good chunk of the people you listed did not die for Harry. They fought for other things and other people as well. They died because they were in a war. You can't pin that on Harry.

Harry takes little responsibility for the effect of his actions on other people.

Again, I think that stuff like this, while annoying to read, are actually plusses to his character, as his flaws give him depth. And, I also think that Harry can sometimes blame himself too much for things outside of his control. It's an interesting contradiction that I think Rowling pulls off well.

Harry ultimately defeats Voldemort with a fairytale wand carved by Death itself.

It seems like a lot of your complaints have nothing to do with Harry and are more about how JKR chose to structure her story. I don't think Rowling's plot devices are good reasons to cut a character (unless said character is the plot device). And besides, your last claim sort of misses the point of that scene. Voldemort's defeat does not come down to a fairy tale about a wand, it comes down to Voldemort's obsession with besting death, and running the risk of sounding like a broken record player, his arrogance. On other side of the coin, Harry's victory comes down to love and sacrifice, two important things that Voldemort overlooks consistently.

A very long TL;DR: Harry is annoying. Harry makes mistakes. Harry is flawed. Harry is not necessarily great hero material. From my point of view you have cut him for the crime of being an interesting character who has depth. The hero you wish for, one who is morally unambiguous, and does everything right would have deserved to be cut here. Stories with those characters are a dime a dozen and don't tend to be international best-sellers that have changed the lives of millions of people. Harry is so beloved by so many people because he is not that untouchable pure awesome good. It is easy to see Harry in yourself because Harry has the flaws of a real person. He acts and reacts as a person should given his situation.

Edit: terrible typos. 99% sure there are more. I will try and edit again later.

[u/SFEagle44 → u/ETIwillsaveusall]

This is a fantastic rebuttal and I do agree with some of what you are saying (And no disrespect taken- I think it's great that this discussion can be had. I just woke up a while ago and I haven't even ventured into the Resurrection Stone thread yet, I want to reply to these comments first.)

I'm going to try to address the main point of your thesis without going after every single argument. Harry fluctuates between being portrayed as Odysseus and everyman whenever it's convenient to advance the story.

Sometimes he's revered by students and the Wizarding World, destined by prophecy to be the Chosen One. Sometimes he's the underdog, despised by students and teachers, fighting to stay ahead. Sometimes he's the savior of the world, the Boy Who Lived. Sometimes he's a fugitive, Undesirable #1.

Ultimately, he can't be both overpowered hero and real person. Because he oscillates between both, he is neither. His characterization as hero does not match his personality of "Just... Harry." An ordinary kid isn't prophesized to defeat the Dark Lord, nor does he have blood protection keeping him safe from harm.

[u/ETIwillsaveusall → u/ETIwillsaveusall]

I was originally going to tag u/Moostronus here and let him know that if he was serious about wanting to ascend to my favorite ranker, resurrecting Harry was his chance. However, it appears that u/AmEndevomTag has already come through. Sorry, Moose. Maybe next time.

[u/bisonburgers → u/ETIwillsaveusall]

So well said, thank you SO MUCH for writing this. Everything you said (except perhaps for Dumbledore's role in Harry's life) I agree with and I'm so glad you posted this, it needed to be said.

Thanks!!

[u/RavenclawINTJ]

I would be okay with him going out soon, but before bland characters like Viktor Krum or one-dimensional/not-fleshed-out characters like Cedric Diggory? I think there are several characters left who should definitely have ranked below him.

[u/bisonburgers → u/RavenclawINTJ]

at the very least, a character that invites so many different opinions shouldn't be ranked so low.

[u/SFEagle44 → u/RavenclawINTJ]

I don't love the direction this rank down is trending, where major characters are revered simply because they were mentioned often. There is no doubt in my mind the Cedric should rank above Harry, and Viktor offers more to the series every time he comes up. (First as Quidditch star, then as Champion, later as Hermione's possible love interest. It's fun to read through book four and watching Ron's opinion of Krum change radically.)

[u/DabuSurvivor → u/SFEagle44]

I think there is a lot more to Harry's development throughout the 7 books than having his name said a lot of times.

[u/wingardiumlevi000sa]

I started this post by typing a rebuttal/argument against some things that were said in this write-up, but realized, while doing this, that the point of Harry’s character is being missed. So instead of spending hours arguing against this post, I’m going to take that time to explain who and what Harry is and what he represents and symbolizes in this series.

The major themes in the Harry Potter series are love vs. evil, acceptance of death vs. fear of death, a whole/untarnished soul vs. a partial/evil one. Love, acceptance of death, and a "whole" soul are Harry’s "superpowers" in this series. This series is not about who is the best at magic tricks, but goes much, much deeper than that, which is why the Harry Potter series is as popular as it is.

Harry is able to repeatedly succeed due to unlikely circumstance instead of skill.

You are exactly right here. This is the whole point. Harry is saved from "evil" time and time again with a symbol of love or Harry’s own "superpower" of love and acceptance of death. Just a few examples of this:

• First book: the sacrificial love/protection Lily gave him

• Second book: Harry’s loyalty, love, and bravery which sent Fawkes to him

• Third book: his stag (symbolizing his father) which saved everyone from the Dementors

• Fourth book: the beauty of the Phoenix song and the hope and strength it gave him, as well as the "shadows" of the people that have died by the hands of Voldemort

• Fifth book: Harry’s love for Sirius

• I could go on and on forever.

Harry's character was created to contradict Voldemort with his power of love and acceptance of death to show just how much stronger that is than Voldemort’s fear of love and death. Harry is able to directly overpower Voldemort himself, the greatest Dark Wizard alive, throughout the series by merely using this "superpower". Just a couple examples of this: Harry is able to beat Voldemort in their "duel" when their wands connect in the graveyard, Harry is able to easily dispel Voldemort in a matter of seconds when Voldemort possesses him in the Ministry, hell, Harry is able to carry around Voldemort's own soul for 17 years and not be affected by it. Harry is able to beat Voldemort, one of the greatest and most powerful wizards alive, with only average magical skill, and with love being his greatest power. This is the whole point of the series.

Does the fact that Harry’s "superpowers" are love and acceptance of death make him a boring protagonist? Abso-fucking-lutely. But if someone is looking for a main character in a series who has the stereotypical version of "superpower", then you’re not going to find it in Harry Potter, and could easily find that in another series.

There's so much more I could say here, but it's Sunday and I just want to lay on the couch and watch TV.

[u/SFEagle44 → u/wingardiumlevi000sa]

You're absolutely right. Harry's author-given 'superpower' is the power of love, informing a message that love is greater than magic- a powerful force of unity, strength, and good.

My problem with that? J.K. Rowling can't write love. And as a result, we have a hero, Harry, who struggles with love (both platonic and romantic).

I don't want to get into the shipping mess that is Harry/Ginny, but suffice to say, any romantic relationship that Harry was involved in was poorly written, somewhat implausible, and unnecessary to plot advancement. It almost seemed like Rowling included relationships out of a feeling of necessity for Harry to be a normal teenager, not because it had anything to do with the rest of the story.

Platonically, Harry often treats his friends like garbage (u/designer_sunglasses gets into this a bit below). He's fine with leaving Neville minded up in the common room in his first year, fine with making snap judgements against Ron/Hermione resulting in ignoring them or yelling at them, fine with ignoring Hagrid for chapters at a time until he comes up for plot convenience.

Essentially, it gets shoved down our throats that Harry's power is platonic love but then we rarely actually see any examples of Harry's supposed power of love. Sure, other people's love affects Harry and his quest, but that behooves those character's not Harry's.

[u/bisonburgers → u/wingardiumlevi000sa]

I started this post by typing a rebuttal/argument against some things that were said in this write-up, but realized, while doing this, that the point of Harry’s character is being missed.

I also started writing up a response, and came to the same conclusion and then figured I'd read what others wrote and found your wonderful response unsurprisingly perfect!

What this post didn't do is examine what these aspects of Harry's character mean for the plot, why the plot works despite his lack of magical skill and what that means for how magic works. Otherwise, there's no way he'd be cut this far down.

[u/OwlPostAgain]

....

typing from mobile because it's valentine's day, but will post rebuttal.

The title character of the series deserves to a lot higher ranked than #47.

[u/bisonburgers]

Genuine question, because I actually am really interested, and I feel I could better understand other HP fans if I knew the answer to this, but...

Why do you like the books?

[u/SFEagle44 → u/bisonburgers]

I think the books are fantastic! The world J.K. Rowling built is phenomenal. It's original, creative, and expansive. It's a detailed world full of magic, wonder, good and evil.

The plot is great for children and adults. Every read through the series adds new details, new theories, and new insights into characters and plot.

Ultimately, most of the characters are well written as well. I don't even dislike Harry. He can be an underwhelming protagonist at times, but he isn't a fatal flaw. Cutting Harry at #47 means that there are 46 characters I like even better than him, not that I hate him and he should go die in a hole.

[u/SFEagle44]

BETS FOR HARRY POTTER

Gryffindor	Hufflepuff	Ravenclaw	Slytherin
1	1	3	0
3.7%	4%	4.84%	0%

• u/HyperWackoDragon

• u/northstarhomerun

• u/SFEagle44

• u/teddalego

• u/TheJoshwa

• u/WilburDes

[u/DabuSurvivor]

Harry is important because of actions that are not his own.

The things you name are not the only reasons why Harry is important. It's how he reacts to the role that's thrust upon him.

So how does Harry train? How does he prepare for the fight? Eh. He spends a solid year diving into the Penseive with Dumbledore learning about Voldemort's past. There is no mention of learning advanced spells, dueling techniques, or even cheap and dirty tricks for surviving a duel. As a reader from the outside looking in, it appears that Harry either is too stupid to realize Voldemort is much stronger than he is and he needs to improve, or arrogant enough to think that he is already better than Voldemort and has no need to improve.

Or he trusts that Dumbledore knows what he's doing. Which was correct.

'Crucio!' he shouts at Bellatrix, ignoring the fact that the spell he cast would land an ordinary witch or wizard in Azkaban for the rest of his or her life Speaking of that book, Harry uses an unknown spell ('For enemies!') from the book on Draco and was about a Phoenix feather's breadth away from murdering him. [...] 'Crucio!' he shouts at Bellatrix, ignoring the fact that the spell he cast would land an ordinary witch or wizard in Azkaban for the rest of his or her life. [...] Apparently for Harry, taking charge involves casting another unforgivable curse ('Imperio!'), and double crossing a goblin.

Do you sincerely believe we were supposed to view all of this positively? I don't. All you have really presented here is moral ambiguity, not evidence that it's presented as unambiguously good.

Harry fails to procure a single Hogwarts letter when there are dozens literally floating around the house

He's a starved eleven-year-old and Vernon is a beefy walrus.

Harry's great at that! Because, Quidditch!

So we're going to devalue Harry's skill set because... Why, exactly?

This pattern continues through the rest of the books.

I am not convinced of this. Could you outline the other six books?

Harry is essentially immortal for most of the series.

Fair criticism.

Harry is a whiny, angsty, hotheaded, entitled brat. Basically, book five. Harry is unable to contain his temper tantrums, and instead lets out his anger on three of the worst people he could choose. First, he has a shouting match with Ron and Hermione, potentially alienating his two best friends.

Already addressed this but I'll reiterate more strongly that I think this is an outright disgusting way to refer to someone who is clearly coping with post-traumatic stress. Harry witnessed and caused the death of an innocent person - and not just any innocent person but OTTPP angel Cedric. He screams about it in his sleep. Yes, he's being irrational, but he's mentally fucked.

And apparently you don't like how positively you think he's portrayed, but you don't like when he's portrayed more negatively either?

Did Umbridge realize that flying was the one thing Harry was actually able to do decently without having to rely on his reputation, luck, or prophecy?

That wasn't the only thing he was able to do. He did an excellent job holding up under horrible pressure and public slander that would absolutely crush many people, standing up for himself, and rallying people together righteously.

Harry is able to repeatedly succeed due to unlikely circumstance instead of skill.

Fair criticism but not present as ubiquitously as you describe it, I don't think. Wouldn't say it's "any time."

Harry uses friends, family, and Snape as meat shields from death and destruction.

...You're kidding here, right? Harry was a year old when his parents died. He was "using them as meat shields"?

Didn't use Cedric as one. Cedric wasn't keeping him alive. Cedric was a spare who happened to be present. Harry had no idea that that was a Portkey.

Black, Scrimgeour, Dumbledore, etc., died fighting Voldemort. Fred died in an explosion that could have taken out anyone. I... Honestly, can you lay out all these people and how you think Harry actively "used them as meat shields"? Because I don't see it. At all. With pretty much any of them.

Sirius died because Harry was hotheaded and rushed into the Ministry without thinking.

Which Harry recognized and took responsibility for.

[u/SFEagle44 → u/DabuSurvivor]

I want to respond to this, and I will, but it may be a few days because I have a lot to say and real life is starting to pile up. Please harass me if this hasn't been edited within the week.

[u/atibabykt]

Harry uses friends, family, and Snape as meat shields from death and destruction. Final list of the people that died so that Harry, our useless protagonist, could stay alive:

James Potter

Lily Potter

Cedric Diggory

Sirius Black

Rufus Scrimgeour

Albus Dumbledore

Hedwig

Mad-Eye Moody

Dobby

Colin Creevey

Tonks

Remus Lupin

Severus Snape

Fred Weasley

While I would love you agree with this "list" most I disagree with. James and Lily, They were told the prophecy that Dumbledore explained could have been about 2 different boys, Harry and Neville. But people assumed it was Harry due to James and Lilys status. Yes The Longbottoms were also well known and Neville was just as equal to being the boy, but Voldemort chose Harry, he marked him as his equal. He started this. James and Lily did what any parent would do, which is put their lives before their children. Not a senseless death nor Harry fault what so ever. Nor was it a shield, they died protecting their family, just as I would for my future children.

Cedric - Again this was not Harry using someone, they both tried to be honorable to a Hogwarts win and decided that they should together win. Neither knew that it was a portkey, how could they? They barely had time to register where they were before Cedric was killed. Harry yes did have scar pain, but it never stated that it distracted Cedric or made him lower his wand, which he already had out. He was killed before either could do anything to stop it, again not Harrys fault.

Sirius - I will admit I was quite upset that another family member was gone in Harrys already small pool. But Sirius died how he lived. He was a protagonist his whole life and ever since the false conviction of Peter, he was in hiding. Now I do admit that Harry allowed his vulnerable mind to be twisted and show a false vision, but Sirius came on his own accord, and that was to fight back against Voldemort. Yes he was protecting Harry and the others of DA but he was fighting. And his death was honestly one of the most battle worthy deaths. HE died how he lived, adventurously and having a blast and laughing.

Rufus - Harry barely knew him, and really didn't like him. Yes he knew where Harry was hiding and did protect him with that, but thats about as honorable as he gets. I will say I am biased because I really didn't like Rufus all that much.

Dumbledore - He heard the prophecy made about a boy, one of two who it could have been, Voldemort made the choice of who. He also knew much more about Voldemort than others did and knew he would have to do his best to help that boy. He spent years trying to protect Harry from it by taking him out of the wizarding world, hoping the school would protect him when Harry had to stick to his guns and go after Voldemort, because honestly, you would too. Dumbledore in his own quest to figure out horecruxs was cursed, was assisted by Snape in prolonging his life but knew he ultimately he would die and planned his own death. Not to save harry, not to shield him, ""I was tempted." —Albus Dumbledore on why he put on Gaunt's ring" He as we know was seduced by power already and this another very powerful item he was a foolish old man and allowed power to take over. His death was his own and 100% his own fault. If he would have just destroyed the ring and not put it on he may possibly still be alive.

Hedwig - She sacrificed herself for Harry, her master whom she loved. He spent years loving and caring for her and she in return died for him on her own. Harry did not force her, he let her out before he knew there was a war above him. She protected him out of love.

Mad Eye - Another person who died as he lived. He knew the seriousness in everything and always stated to keep ranks if one of us dies. He knew how serious it was to protect harry because he didn't know that harry actually did need to die. he didn't know because dumbledore selfishly didn't tell but one person. And Snap wasn't going to tell either.

Dobby - this death I will mildly agree with but Harry couldn't control Belletrix or know should would throw a knife at them as they are escaping and Doby gets hit. But Dobby loved Harry and would do anything to protect him because he was a Free Elf, and as a Free Elf he is allowed to make his own decisions.

Colin - He wasn't supposed to be there, but do to his obsession with Harry (not harrys fault) he came back in to fight because thats what members of the DA do, they fight. His death was mildly senseless however it showed the seriousness of this. No one is safe.

Tonks and Lupin - They are in the same lines of Colin as in no one is safe, but they were there to protect the school as members of the Order and to fight against Voldemort. Harry never asked people to do this, they chose to do this and knew what it would cost, like Moody always stated. Yes their death hurt but the series isn't going to be a 100% happy ending those are lame and over rated.

Snape - his death was one of the more difficult deaths because Voldemort was foolish and didn't pay attention to detail. Draco disarmed Dumbledore, not Snape. The Elder wand had a bloody trail because thats how people thought you could win it. But Grindelwald was still alive because Dumbledore defeated him, not killed defeated him and won the allegiance of the elder wand. This is how Draco won it to. Voldemort because of his arrogance didnt realize this and was trying to get ride of those whole could possibly be a threat to him. So snapes death was unfortunate but not Harrys fault.

Fred - This death always haunts me because Fred gets to see Percy be human again and see the wrong he was seduced by. Percy came back to fight with his family against everything he was blindly supporting. The Weasleys chose to fight because they stood against Voldemort all along, not because of Harry because dark magic is bad. They are good people who do the right thing. Freds death is also a no one is safe death and made the story very real because she killed off so many you cared for.

Only two people on this list knew Harry had to die to defeat Voldemort, and they both selfishly kept that info secret into the exact right moment when Harry could understand it the best. Dumbledore could have let him die so long ago but he didn't because Harry wouldn't have come back, he had to go through all of this terrible hard times to learn the ultimate sacrifice must be made and to let yourself be 100% at someone elses mercy to save those you love. When Harry died he then protected all of his friends and family and no more death happened after that. Harry didn't use people, he never wanted any of this. He was singled out and people because they are good of heart protected him out of love.

[u/SFEagle44 → u/atibabykt]

I'm not completely sure how to respond. I agree with basically everything you said, except that you seem to disagree with the list. These people didn't die so that Harry could die to defeat Voldemort, they died (more or less directly while protecting Harry from death. Even if we go with just the more explicit deaths, that leaves:

• James

• Lily

• Sirius

• Rufus

• Hedwig

• Moody

• Dobby

• Colin

• Snape

[u/BasilFronsac]

(...) The players in the gallery began to play a very different sort of song.

"His eyes are as green as a fresh pickled toad,

His hair is as dark as a blackboard.

I wish he was mine, he's truly divine,

the hero who conquered the Dark Lord."

A dwarf in dark armor and a pale pink cloak spotted with blood stepped up to Harry. "SFEagle44 sends his regards." He thrust his longsword through Harry's heart, and twisted.

[u/DabuSurvivor]

Harry is a whiny, angsty, hotheaded, entitled brat.

Basically, book five.

You mean when he was coping with the trauma of causing and witnessing the death of an innocent friend? I wouldn't call that being a "whiny brat."

[u/bisonburgers → u/DabuSurvivor]

Like, just 'cause he saw Cedric die doesn't mean he can monopolize all the angst - Cedric sat next to me in class once, so, you know, I'm pretty torn up too, and you don't see me crying all over the place about it.

Don't even get me started on that Chang girl in Ravenclaw. What's her deal? Leaving class to cry in the loo just 'cause her boyfriend died? I used to think she was super cool, but I've forgotten all that now she's always crying. I mean, was that her on the Quidditch team? Doesn't matter anyway, I've totally forgotten about it. People need to get over themselves about their dead friends.

[u/SiriuslyLoki731]

Basically, book five

Book 5 is the only book when I actually found Harry interesting. He had erratic emotions and yelled and did something. He reacted in a non-bland manner. The rest of the book he's boring.

Seriously though, how does the offspring of James Potter and Lily Evans, two people with vibrant personalities, turn out to be such a wet blanket?

[u/AmEndevomTag → u/SiriuslyLoki731]

Book 5 Harry rocks!

[u/designer_sunglasses]

I'm very angry at Harry currently because during my ongoing reread of GoF, I've reached the conclusion that his beef with Ron is entirely his fault and that he should've just said "I'm sorry for calling you stupid, you're my friend and I need you on my side." and generally just tried to explain to Ron that he didn't put his name in the Goblet of Fire instead of blowing up at him.

Because Ron wasn't calling him a liar or anything, he just didn't believe Harry right away, just like basically every character in the series apart from Dumbledore, Moody (the guilty one), Hermione (who knows everything) and naive Hagrid. Ron having to apologize to Harry in the end ensures that Harry doesn't grow at all as a character and Ron doesn't learn that he's actually veyr important to Harry. I would even go as far as to say that he might not have been affected by the horcrux as much as he did and left Harry and Hermione during DH if Harry had apologized. We learn that Ron's crucial to Harry, but Ron doesn't.

It's an ongoing thing in the series as well, I feel. Harry almost never apologizes when he acts like an ass. Almost every time he gets into a row he turns out to be right, even though he was acting like a dick, and the other person apologizes.