I am new to this site and have only been on it a few days. Reading through the different forums and what people have written it is quite surprising how many people have come to the conclusion that they actually hate Harry. I know you don't necessarily have to like the character and at times there have been moments that Harry hasn't been the most likable of people but never once have I thought to myself that I hated him and if I ever did I personally would have stopped reading the series.

What is your personal opinion on Harry?
If you truely hate him why and why do you continue to read the books they are after all about him?

Ummm...Harry is not my personal favorite character....
He gets a bit cocky, doesnt like help from anybody, and is too brave for his own good. I do feel very bad for him -- he's lead a very hard life -- but he just is not an amazing person in my eyes....

My top 10 favorite characters goes as so:
1. Albus Dumbledore
2. Hermione Granger
3. Luna Lovegood
4. Sirius Black
5. Minerva McGonagall
6. Harry Potter
7. Lily Evans-Potter
8. Remus Lupin
9. Rubeus Hagrid
10. Neville Longbottom
11. Filius Flitwick (I know I said Top 10, but Flitwick's so cool!)


So, there is my order, and Harry falls out as #6, which goes interchangably with #7, his mother


EDIT: Just want to add a bit more to stay on topic--
I continue reading the series to not only track the progress of Harry, the main character, but also the other characters that we all know and love. Harry gets himself into exciting dilemmas that he cannot get out of (showing his over-bravery), when the other characters (ie Hermione, Ron, Dumbledore) jump in to save him...

_daviD

okay this is getting off topic already and it only has two posts please stick to the question at hand..why do you hate harry (if you do at all) and why do you still read...I couldnt find a topic around here about this so I will let it stay open..but if one of the other mods knows of a 'what character do you hate and why" thread this will unfortunately have to be locked...it will get locked if it turns into another this is who I like thread because we already have one of those...and also if this turns into another list thread..because those have been banned from the forums

Hmmm an interesting thread.

I first read through it and thought 'I like Harry'. But then reading through it again, I have to be honest with myself and say that while I don't HATE him, he probably isn't on my 'list of favourite people'.

There are definitely times where I just want to throttle him. There are some incredibly stupid things that he does without thinking and I suppose being that little bit older (and maybe wiser ) I'm much more of a Hermione type in that I think through things before I do them. Even in the middle of an argument, one which occurred quite recently, while the other person is shouting and becoming incredibly emotional, I tend to keep my temper and monitor just what I say.

This is something that comes from knowing what happens when you lose your temper and how things come back on you when you do them in haste.

The thing with Sirius and the ministry in OOTP really bugged me with Harry. That was probably the point where I realised that there was something wrong with the way that I viewed him. There's a thread in the lounge entitled 'who do you blame' in regards to Dumbledore's death. Well in terms of Sirius'- who was one of my two favourite characters- death, I blame Harry.

Not because of his 'need for saving people' thing, although that is in part of it, but simply because it just seems to me that his acting-without-thinking, irrational motives etc are what are putting his friends into danger. All of these people are risking their lives to help him because they believe in him as the 'chosen one', or whatever you want to call it, and I really don't think he's shown much in return at times.

Why do I still read? A couple of reasons I guess. First of all, while Harry might bug me at times, I still like most of the characters. Secondly, I want to know what happens, especially since there's only a book to go. Thirdly after years of reading the books I, like so many other people, have done minor fanfiction (although unlike a lot of people, mine tends to stay written in my head!), because I- like so many other people- want my favourite characters to stick around, have a past and all of that sort of thing. And finally, because you don't have to like the hero to enjoy the story and read the books. The two aren't connected, however I suppose that if you really couldn't stand Harry, you probably wouldn't read the books unless you were really sucked-in to what happens next.

Finally...I just actually got off of a Harry Potter hate site last night and I discovered one of two things: The people that post on them are either A) Someone who totally hates the series and doesn't care to explain why or Harry Potter fanatics that are unwilling to even think about the series being less than a masterpiece. I have respect for both sides of the spectrum; I apreciate the series for its intrinsic and entertainment value, but I also am very willing to say that it's not anywhere near being a literary masterpiece. I'd actually love to find a thread of people willing to talk objectively (read without getting emotionally invested in their arguments) about Harry Potter, but I know it'll probably never happen because while it might start well, it'd probably end nastily.

As for Harry himself, he's deeply flawed as a character. He's young, reckless, and still rather ignorant. I really couldn't stand him during "Order of the Phoenix" (go back through pretty much any of my HP related posts...you'll find me ranting about how much I don't like that book); his teenage angst boiling over into a frothing puddle of self-pity. He wasn't a hero and there was no real reason to like him at that point because that's what he was modeled to be in the first place. Heroes take the bad times and step above them; it's why they're heroes. I was really stunned but thrilled when I saw how maturely Harry handled things in the beginning of "Half-Blood Prince", how he looked at what life had handed him and said, "Y'know...I'm done with feeling sorry for myself. It's time to get stuff done." That was fabulous; first time I've really liked Harry since probably "Prisoner of Azkaban" or "Chamber of Secrets." Thus, while I think Harry's actions in the past have been rather deplorable, I think his character is finally starting to move towards a better place.

As for why I still read...I can see the haters points about Harry Potter being over-hyped, shipping being fanatical and even strange sometimes, and even how Harry Potter being so famous that it robs the opportunities for other artists to publish their works and get attention from people so focused on Harry, but the point that I don't agree on is yes, it's not a literary masterpiece and yes, it's overhyped, but it still has a basic, good intrinsic value for what it is, which always draws me back to the series. There are great things about it, like the character of Remus Lupin and the exploits of the Weasley twins, not to sound too sentimental. The books are entertaining; what JKR fails at, she makes up in making the books keep a steady flow and keeping them interesting. Everything can be criticized out there because nothing is perfect. Just because Harry Potter isn't perfect doesn't mean that it doesn't have value.

Excellent, excellent question for a first timer on this forum (I'm one myself and I wasn't brave enough to post something like this).

I definitely don't hate harry...far far from it actually. But. there is one thing about him that irks me a bit and that is the fact the he tends to think he knows better then those who obviosuly know more then him, and because of this doesn't put such great importance on things that are truly important.

1) Occulmancy lessons. If he would have listened to DD and Sirius and Lupin, and forgot about his stupid vendetta with Snape, Sirius would still be alive.

2) The slughorn memory. If he would have gotten that memory from Slughorn, or even atleast tried to more than once, then he proabably could have gotten it A LOT earlier and HBP might not have had to end the way it did.

Those are just two of the major instances that I could think of off the top of my head. But everyone is flawed so I don't think any less of harry because of these traits. He has plenty of good ones to out weigh the few bad

I must admit that I did use to hate Harry, but that was before I became a big Harry Potter fan. I didn't so much hate him as a person, but I used to feel that his character was too bland in the first four books, and then made a massive turn-around in book five, where he became positively insufferable. I was especially furious with him when he took his friends to the DoM -- why didn't he use the mirrors that Sirius gave him??? I also hated the way that he thought that the rules were positively beneath him.

On the other hand, even though I had started to hate him, I still wanted to read book six, just out of curiosity. Besides, even if I didn't like Harry, I didn't necessarily want him to die!

Then I read the sixth book, following which I became a more avid Harry Potter fan. I liked Harry much more in this book because I felt that he was learning to control his temper, or at least making an effort. Then I began re-reading the earlier books, and I suddenly readlized that Harry wasn't bland, but I hadn't read the books carefully enough. In fact, I actually started to really like him, a little more with each re-reading, and I started being much more sympathetic to his mood swings in OotP.

At this point, Harry is one of my favorite characters, although my all-time fav is Mr. Weasly. As much as I like him, however, I can totally relate to people who hate him. It does get a bit annoying to see how much he feels the rules are beneath him, yet he does manage to remain DD's favorite -- and I don't think that's only because he got rid of Voldemort.

I think our hatred for Harry also taps into people's hatred for the kids in school who always thought they knew best and then got away with murder. I think that's way I actually really like the parts where he gets in trouble with McGonagall, because then I feel, finally! (I personally thinks that she deals with Harry the best -- I find DD too lenient, and Snape too punitive.)

-McG

I like Snape more.
[Mod Edit]Hi, please elaborate beyond a single line of text as the rules describe, thanks.

This is a good question...

I think the one thing that really keeps me from disliking Harry is his surprising wisdom and modesty. Think about it - he had a horrible childhood and he never had a mother or a father to cuddle him or ruffle his hair (not that it needs ruffling, but anyway). But he hadn't really given up on life - he was actually looking forward to going to Stonewall High, because then he'd be away from Dudley. I found that unusually wise for an 11 year old.

Then he hears that he is 1) a wizard 2) a very famous one and 3) he had conquered a Dark Lord at the age of one. It didn't turn his head at all! I've been a prat about much less glamorous things before, and Harry took all of this is his stride.

Also, I think he was being very sincere when he resisted Hermione's idea of him teaching Defense. I like that he still has reasonable doubt in his abilities. He isn't under the illusion that he has fought the Dark Lord and that he must be sort of wonderful because of that.

Anyway - yes, he has his moments. He is a litlle self-satisfied (for all the reasons mentioned above) and too impulsive and blundering. He's at his best when he has given something some thought. What's great about too is that he isn't immune to all the subtle things in the world. His pity and sincere freindship for Luna and Neville moved him up quite a few notches in my esteem, and also his pity for Snape after seeing his worst memory.

All in all, I think I like Harry because he isn't perfect. I don't look up to him and wonder at what a hero he is. The respect I have for him is a lot like the respect I'd have for a friend. Someone who you'd tell if they were being a prat, while still liking them for who they are.

I've noticed this too, Rory Taylor, and I think it is quite stupid. Why read a book when you hate the main character? I once read a book that I really hated, and I didn't give a crap abou the main character. So how can you be a Harry Potter fantatic and not like Harry Potter himself?
I admit, Harry Potter can be stupid sometimes, maybe a little cocky, sometimes too heroic, but come on, he's a teenager! You've got to cut him some slack. He's a good person who has a lot of trauma in his past. He's my favorite character.
Harry sort of reminds me of myself in a way. I guess I'm not as brave as him, but there's just something about him that is so me. I could never hate Harry, because I know he's just like me.
If he dies I'll most likely mourn for 5 years and cry on and off until my dying day.

I don't like Harry simply because he is too normal, when really in real life there is no normal. It is something authors make up, a character that acts normal apperently relates to the reader making the book more likable. You see it all the time. And a major problem with Harry is that you don't see any real character development.

Hate Harry Potter? Naw, Harry is a teenager, and teenagers do a lot of things that (to them) seem important or heroic or brave and in reality are stupid, dumb, and inconsequential. Someday Harry, just like the rest of us will some day be middle aged and look back on his adventures with the Chamber of Secrets and think "Wow, that was dumb, if I had it to do over again, I'd do it differently." Unfortunately, a lot of time will have to pass before that happens. I'm sure the incident in the Hall of Mysteries and Sirius Black will haunt him for a very long time. (Do wizards have therapists?)
I think people hate Harry Potter because they love to see that "fall from grace", that moment when it is revealed that the hero is no better than the rest of us and in some cases, not even as good.
Now Hermione is a different story. I DO NOT like Hermione but that is because she doesn't like horses. There is something wrong with a person who does not like horses.

Hiya!
I guess we all wanna ee something different in books and thus can't digest the fact that Harry is just like any other teenager!
That's why we get into hating him!

Chels.

People think that Harry may be too "conceited" but it's not like he necessarily wants to be famous for being the boy who lived. He's dealing with what life has dealt him and trying to be a good person so it's hard to NOT like him

Although he is not my favorite character in the books, I certainly don't hate Harry. He is a teenager and is going to make stupid mistakes (lord knows I did when I was his age). I appreciate the fact that he is flawed - it makes him a real human being. That said, the one thing that has always bugged me about him was his shifting the blame onto Snape for the death of Sirius, while refusing (except for an instant) to accept responsibility for the fact that if he had tried to contact Sirius with the 2 way mirror, Sirius would probably still be alive. Sirius' death is almost completely Harry's fault, yet he refuses to take responsibility for it.

Hey...
Never thought I'd find a topic with this name
I don't hate Harry Potter, I just don't like him...
He's cocky and seems to be a little selfish. But that's just my point of view. Some fanfic writers make him seem as the best person in the whole world, and some make him depressed and dark, even evil at times. I think it's cool the way some manages to shape his path through their plots, but I do not care too much of the way he is in the books. Though it's amazing and very, I repeat, very well written.
I can understand that he's supposed to be the hero, because it was the part he was given from the day he was born, and I honestly think it makes the book what it is to have a troubled and young mind deciding on things that no teenager should ever have to deal with, and without Harry the brave and strong hearted Gryffindor, what would the books be then?
So, I don't hate him... I just don't like him Nobody really hates him(he's just a bloody character!), 'cause hate is a strong word. And, as some have said, he's the whole story! And I like the story, so, therefore, I must also like Harry... Now I'm confused... Argh, don't blame me for my lack of determination, I bet it's my mother who passed on that quality... I'm going to stop now

~WillowySybelle~

*gapes*

Okay, I really don't get where the so-called hate for Harry Potter is coming from. I mean, what exactly makes Harry selfish? Is it so wrong to not want to be the saviour of mankind? Is it wrong to want to live a normal life? I'm sorry, but everybody's entitled to a bit of selfishness sometimes, especially Harry.

What makes him conceited? As much as I love Snape, I know that he bullies Harry too much. Honestly, my guess is if Harry were to take things lying down, people would be saying, "Harry is so pathetic! He can't stand up for himself!" The way I see it, if Harry is actually conceited, then he'd be the one deliberately provoking Snape and/or Malfoy.

As for what Spider22 said, yeah, I agree that there is no normal, but there is typical teenage behavior, and to me, Harry's emotions are those of a typical teenager. Of course he hates Snape. Snape started all of it. Snape is the one carrying the 20-year-old grudge and wrongfully taking it out on Harry. It's hard for a kid to simply take an old wizard's word to trust someone who hates them. Harry's actions are understandable.

Is he always putting the blame on Snape for Sirius death? I don't remember quite clearly, although I do agree that it's mostly his fault. He should have applied himself more to Occlumency, but again, Snape was not exactly on his best behaviour.

*shrugs* I don't know. I always thought that Harry was a great character. Still do, in fact. And I disagree that there is no character development. The mistake he made in OotP was necessary, because he had to learn that actions always have consequences. Harry has matured. It's Ron who's actually falling behind a little bit, but that's another story. And I don't hate Ron.

There's a great essay defending Harry's character actually (aptly named "In Defence of Harry"). I was reading it just last night, and I couldn't have phrased it better myself. I don't know if I'm allowed to post a link though.

What is your personal opinion on Harry?
If you truly hate him why and why do you continue to read the books they are after all about him?

I don't hate Harry Potter; I just don't like him personally that much.
He is to needy and spoiled sometimes. Not to mention that whole attitude problem in OoTP.
I really hated him in that book. He's one of those kids that I wouldn't be mean to, but I wouldn't talk to a whole lot. I'd be polite, but wish he wasn't talking to me.

I continue to read the books because of three simple reasons.
1) The books are fascinating. They take you to a place that would normally only exist in your dreams. Not to mention the books in plain words "suck you in". The books leave you wanting more and asking questions. "Will Harry die? Who is going to die? Whats going to happen to (insert name here)."

2) Just beacuse I don't like Harry doesn't mean that I hate all the other characters. I love Remus Lupin and Severus Snape. I have to read the books to find out what is going on with them, and the other characters. "What are they going to do? What will they say? Is Sanpe really evil? Will Remus get together with Tonks?"

3) The books register with people. There is a little of every character in all of us. From adults to children to teens. The characters are not just characters to some, if not all of us. They are like family. They are like friends. When one of our family members dies we cry, we mourn. Same for or HP familys. We connect with them and form relationships.

Hello, what on earth made you hating Harry Potter?
You are wrong, there might only be few people who hate him but he's famous along with the books in the world! I don't hate him and are you advising people that whoever hate him should stop reading the series? They will do it theirselves, not asking for opinions. And lastly, I think you have never read all the books of series or never tried to understand what kind of wizard is Harry? Or the books!

I have to say that I don't like Harry the "Person" very much, as he has a bit of a victim complex and he whines alot. But I also realise that he probably has a right to, and I feel bad for everything he's been through. Quite honestly, I think that, in real life, if anyone went through everything he has been through, I don't know how they would survive. So I understand why he is the way he is, but if he was a real life person, I don't think we would get along. That's probably just cos I am rather impatient.

As for the character of Harry Potter, in the context of the stories, I think he is great - very well written and really well developed.

And I read because the stories are fabulous, and I don't think it matters whether or not you find the characters in a story likeable, and actually some characters are written so that they are distinctly unlikeable (e.g. Draco, Snape). It is a sign of an excellent writer that she can manipulate our emotions, making us dislike the persona of a character (In this case, the main character) but still keep us glued to the page, wondering what is going to happen to him next, and hanging out in forums like this one because we need to channel our obsession while we hang out for the next installment.

I'm glad that i found this topic because i've been questioning how much i like Harry's character myself. He's definitely not one of my favorite characters, but his life story and what he has been through makes me feel kind of sorry for him. He's never known his parents and the only parent-like figures in his life have been killed. Harry complains a lot about not asking for his fame but who can blame him?
This might be a little off-topic, but has anyone noticed how Harry seems to be such an mediocre wizard. For the hero of the story, he doesn't show any special powers (besides magic of course). He isn't nearly as talented as Hermione is, and he only managed one Outstanding on his O.W.L.'s. Thats ironic to me how a seemingly average wizard is supposed to defeat the darkest wizard of all time, but that would make for a better story (if he lives, that is).
Harry would probably be my third or fourth favorite character, but i don't hate him.I just don't like him as much as a hero should be liked.

Think about this: when you first meet a person and really hit it off, then you adore them, bu people you have known for years always seem to annoy you. Harry Potter is the person that everyone knows way too well and gets under our skin. Because we have read the books so many times, we know him better then we know ourselves. We don't know the other characters as well, so we like them more. Also, in my case, I am a little bit older then Harry, and I would get annoyed if one of my best friends had the maturity level of a sixteen-year-old.


Chubbles

Interesting topic to post.. very valid tho..

\I have found myself "disliking" Harry at times (or maybe more accurately, his behaviour), especially in OOTP.. but think about it.. he is a normal kid growing up with a whole bunch of pressure on him.. how many of us can honestly say we have (or had) never been an annoying kid, throwing tantrums, acting on information before we truely understand it, or being selfish because it is all getting too much?

I think it is testament(sp? - sorry) to JKR's writing that we are able to dislike Harry at times; it keeps him real, and allows us to indentify more readily with him as a real character in an unreal world.

I know that if I had to be on the receiving end of some of the abuse and public perception that Harry has over his life, I might not have dealt with it as well as he did.. may have neded up far more angry at the worl..

i really like harry but not as the best character but i see him sometiimes stupid in some of his actions, but i do know several people who hate him so much like my mother she sees that hermione must be the hero of this story and my cousin she sees draco is better than harry. and i'm sure a lot of people think other characters are better than harry its opinions afterall and everyone has his own opinion,

I was getting horrendously off topic in the "Ginny's Characterisation" thread, but I would like to continue the conversation I was having with mayfair, and this thread seemed the most appropriate out of all the ones I looked at

So here's hoping that you notice this, mayfair! Okay...



Yes, I agree. It was a bad choice of words, but I was rushing and that was the first one that came to mind. I suppose I should have said elders rather than superiors. That word has rather a negative connotation that wasn't meant to be implied. All I'm saying is that, for me, at many points in HBP, Harry was arrogant in presuming that he was the only one who could possibly have been right. Maybe he was, he is the hero after all, but there is a fine line between confidence and sticking to your guns and being arrogant. For me, Harry was arrogant. I'm sure that's not the way the author intended him to come across, but I have to call it as I see it.



I can see your point, and I wish I could see a redemption in his character here because of it, but I can't. There is a much wider picture here, you see...and it's to do with why, in general, I hated HBP so much. Snape's apparent betrayal was a large part of that. I personally don't like that Harry was right all along and Snape is a creep. It makes Dumbledore out to be a fool, which I didn't believe he was. I know that Harry is the hero and thus meant to be brave and intelligent and able to see people for what they are, but I wish that didn't have to be accomplished by diminishing other characters such as Dumbledore and Snape, who I found far more interesting because I believed they were more complex than they appeared to be. Apparently not.



Yes, I understand that. I can see what JKR was trying to do. But she didn't succeed for me. I don't like that Harry was raised up by bringing other people down, and that is undoubtedly what she did.



Yes, I do. And no, I don't think so. I liked Harry up until HBP, even through his tantrums and tempers in OotP because I understood. I didn't like the smackings of arrogance he showed in HBP. If he is right about Snape and he really is a creep, I can assure you that I will be hurling my copy of DH at the wall and wondering what on earth I've been doing with my time for the last three, almost four, years I've been a member of this site.



Perhaps, in some places. For example, when he refused to be Scrimgeour's puppet. But that is the one and only incident that springs to mind, and coming on the back of so many things that annoyed me, I'm afraid that this was just too little, too late.

It's the arrogance of youth, most teenagers believe they know better than the adults around them, and it turns out to be rarely true. It's precisely this arrogance that makes him human, that makes us love him even when we don't like him. (But I, too, see the arrogance. He doesn't listen to reason, he doesn't ask for help from those who are wiser than he, he just comes to his own conclusions and acts or stews.)



Louise, if I may add to your rebuttal, , trust would be believing that Dumbledore was right. And letting his otherwise theories drop. That's the definition of faith "Belief in things unseen"

What Harry showed was respect, by not arguing with an elder. True trust and faith would have been something very different.



Adding again, but Harry is the boy who cried wolf. All along he's being saying that Snape is evil. All along people have very good reason to tell him to shut his piehole. He's wrong; Snape had been protecting him. So, those people have very good reason not to believe him, or to at least find a reason why the very biased Harry Potter should not be believed... (As well, I'm still not sure that there is any proof that Snape is disloyal. Mean, nasty, jerk? Sure. Disloyal, sure there's a little evidence, but far more supporting his double agentdom.)




I changed the above quote to fit how I feel. Harry might be the "Boy Who Lived", and he is set up to be the Christ character, but that doesn't mean that he will be right when the Greatest Wizard of All Time (who I read as the God character) disagrees with him. Even Jesus sat in the temple at 13 and learned everything he could. He was 30 and very well-learned before he began challenging the scholars.



See, I don't see it. The time when he had more character than anyone else was in the beginning of this book. Before he really began to act as if he knew more than everyone. His arrogance has been building throughout the series, but this book it took over. He could be taught nothing. He ignored a direct order from the man he claims to admire above all others. He spoke extremely disrespectfully to a teacher; sure that teacher was a jerk, but he's a teenaged boy acting out, not showing some great moral fortitude.

As an aside, sometimes it seems strange to me that the Harry character feels no guilt that his parents died because of him, his mother saving his life, and that Sirius died because he was too arrogant to A) take the instruction and use the darn mirror and because he raced off on a foolhardy mission without fully examining everything that could be happening and asking for help. He grieves that they are gone, but he feels no guilt.

That's the only not real part of the character. It's part of the normal grief process; he should feel guilt in order to properly grieve. He needs to forgive himself for Sirius' death -- but before he can do that he has to acknowledge his own failings.

Oh my goodness, thank you Arabella! I was beginning to think that I was a heathen in the temple of HP for thinking what I do about Harry!

You've basically echoed everything I feel about the series, and Harry in particular. And I completely agree that having faith and trusting in someone would have led Harry to take Dumbledore's word, and it was arrogance that made him believe he was right when the greatest wizard of all time - who I think we can credit with just a little more wisdom from experience than Harry, otherwise the books are simply not realistic - told him that Snape was to be trusted. He respected Dumbledore, but that's not the same thing.



No, I'm afraid I can't agree with that. But that's a personal preference rather than an opinion based on analysis of the text, so I don't think I can really argue there.



Yes, he learned respect and tried to educate himself before challenging long held beliefs. Harry has not done that. He was too busy throughout HBP trying to get everyone to think the way that he does.



I couldn't agree more. I'm presuming that we were meant to admire Harry for this behaviour, but I'm afraid I can't. There are ways of disagreeing with someone without being rude. Yes, I know he's a teenager and all that, but really, that's no excuse. I was a teenager once and I had respect for my elders. Granted, that's not something one sees a great deal of these days, but there we are...sad reflection of the times in which we live.

Your comment about Harry's lack of guilt was an interesting one and not something that I've ever considered before, but I suppose that the death of his parents is still something of an abstract concept to him. Sirius was very real to him, and it is undoubtedly partly his fault that Sirius died - again, because of his arrogant refusal to believe that other people may know more about a situation than he does and thus act accordingly. It seems to be a foreign concept to him.

I forgave him at the end of OotP though because I thought he would have learned his lesson after Sirius' death, but nope...there's the arrogance again in HBP. I can't forgive him for it again.

I believe this is arrogance of a person who believes that he she knows better than anyone else and what they say is not open for discussion (in response to your comments in the other thread on Snape). I have rarely seen arrogance from Harry. He's anything but. Arrogant is what his father was in that memory, what Malfoy is what Snape is what Tom is etc. If you brand Harry arrogant, then I wonder what you'll call others. His childhood forced him to look out for himself because none of "those who are wiser" came to his help when his aunt and uncle mistreated him, when Dudley bullied him around, when he was forced to go hungry, when he was forced to stay put inside the cupboard. All this forced him to be independent and a few years in an environment like Hogwarts does not wash away years of emotional scars that have imprinted on his psyche. Where you see arrogance, I see strength of character, being one's own person and courage. Perhaps "those who are wiser" should redeem themselves for all the times they failed him before expecting the moon from him



That's an even bigger quality. He did not agree with Dumbledore but agreed to let the issue drop because of the respect for the man. That's a strength of character that most people lack. As far a belief in dumbledore being right, Harry has seen Dumbledore admitting to making humongous mistakes especially when Harry is concerned, so excuse me if he has his own doubts at some of the things Dumbledore has said and done, especially when they may not make sense to him and he's seen first hand how Dumbledore can be wrong about many things. Most sensible humans would do the same thing



Well none of them have been treated the way Harry has been so he's justified in not trusting Snape and perhpas those who told him to shut up should have shut up their own pieholes and tried to understand that Harry is a boy and not a piece of meat. He's been treated badly for most of his life and that will not endear Snape to him. As far as Snape protecting Harry goes, just because you feel so doesn't mean all do and just because he doesn't like your loved character, does not make him arrogant. If Snape can be "nasty, jerk, evil" while still "loyal" (to whom?), Harry has all right in the world to form an opinion on Snape that does not need certification from "those wiser" or Snape apologists.



That goes both ways. Just because you perceive "the greatest wizard" of all times to be "God character" doesn't mean that all do and "The God" has made many mistakes pertaining to your "arrogant hero" to take the sheen of his divine stature. Not everyone is blinded to the actions of a god-like figure and Harry certainly isn't. It's almost like you hate him because he has the audacity to question two characters whom you blindly support.



Your perception is so coloured that it seems you refused to consider the events that took place in HBP and it would be much better if you could put forth some evidences to support your arguments than simply saying "I feel he's arrogant so he is". It seems that he's arrogant because he stood up to an immature person who does not deserve to be a teacher. With power comes responsibility and "that teacher" should have acted like one if he expects an respect



Now this is plain ridiculous. I have no other words for that except the suggestion that you read it yourself and see if you even realise what you are trying to say.



He's missed his parents forever. He never knew them enough for him to miss them. But he longs for them as evident from the scene in the mirror. He grieved over Sirius and respected his godfather by pulling himself together. You begrudge him for that? I wonder if you actually wished that he never got on with his life.



Perhaps what annoyed you, endeared him to many fans like me. It's all a matter of perception. If you could mention those instances, I would like to respond with my views on them.



I disagree. I believe it was Ginny that was brought up by directly bringing others down and not Harry.



but that's not a valid reason for disliking Harry in HBP. Does it make sense that you hate someone just because he/she was right and you wrong. It happens, but does not make it right. In the end you may turn out right after all, then perhaps you'll have another set of comments on Harry.

Yes, all of them were arrogant. That alone does not make Harry not arrogant. It's false logic to assume that because A is true, B cannot be.




You're putting thoughts that the text doesn't bear out in Harry's head. He never actually blames Dumbledore for anything. He's grateful to be found, grateful for the school, considers Dumbledore a mentor and Harry claims to be 100% loyal to the man. You are claiming now that he feels Dumbledore is fallible, but nowhere does Harry actually think this.

He doesn't believe that Dumbledore has ever failed him, and even though Dumbledore admits to having made mistakes with him, Harry rarely acknowledges that. He continues putting Dumbledore on a pedestal

Yes he has emotional scarring, yes he has been neglected, but that doesn't excuse him from growing up. From acknowledging that he doesn't know everything. He doesn't, and the one wizard whom he believes does even admits that he doesn't. But somehow, our Harry believes that Harry Potter does. If that's not textbook arrogance, I don't know what is.

It is only when it's convenient to disregard Dumbledore that he does. He never disagrees or questions Dumbledore about anything unrelated to how things affect his own life - which would be the mark of truly accepting someone's fallibility. He doesn't. He just holds more tightly to his own perception, his own dislike of a particular character than to the belief than to what he is told.



Nowhere in the text does Harry acknowledge that Dumbledore is fallible. We see that he is, Dumbledore admits that he his, but all along, Harry's claim is that he's "Dumbledore's man" but he's too arrogant to actually put his feet where he speaks. He says it, but living it is too hard.



Harry certainly can form an opinion on Snape. Nobody said he couldn't. But maybe he needs to have some evidence, if after multiple times he has claimed the same opinion and been proven wrong. Instead, he sulks. He behaves like a child. (Which he is, and it is this arrogance that again, makes me love Harry even when I feel he is unlikable. The arrogance is a reminder that he's still a child.) We see him retreat to his room thinking "I'm right and they're wrong."

I'm pointing out a parallel to Snape's behavior in the real world. You reject it because it doesn't fit your theory. I didn't excuse the behavior, I think it's abhorrent, (both in Snape's case and in athletic parents) but there is a remarkable similarity. Certainly, there could be other motivations. Since we aren't explicitly told those motivations, we have to draw conclusions.



It's a classic good vs evil story. All of them have a God character, a Christ character and a Lucifer character. Up to this point, this series has followed the mold whether you want to acknowledge it or not. For that reason, I feel it is fair to analyze it based on its structure.

As for blind support, I don't blindly support them. If I blindly supported either of them, I wouldn't be acknowledging their own fallibility. Dumbledore has made mistakes. Snape has mistreated Harry. But time and again their behaviors have been, on balance, in Harry's best interests. Dumbledore did what he thought was best - many times he was right. Occasionally he was wrong. Snape treated Harry poorly, but in all cases Snape has been protecting Harry; he battled Quirrell at the Quidditch match. He stepped in front of a werewolf.

They're not infallible people, but their most significant behaviors have, up to this point, indicated that they care for Harry. I choose to let 5 years of Snape's protecting Harry, as well as the fact that he was protecting another student at the time of said "betrayal" lead me to give him the benefit of the doubt...

If Dumbledore had been more open with Harry, maybe Harry would have not done some of the things we see that he has done. I agree with you, but you seem to be crediting Harry with this same knowledge and information when we have no evidence of it. None. Nowhere in the series does Harry think "If only Dumbledore had told me that before..."



I'm not sure how I'm ignoring what happened in the book. Each event I've discussed happened. Harry was treated poorly. Sure, that allows him to dislike his teacher, but not to accuse his teacher of being a legion of the evilest wizard ever. I've had awful verbally abusive teachers. That's all they were. I didn't try to get them arrested because they humiliated students - which is the equivalent of what Harry has done up to this point. He has attributed far eviler things to Snape than his humiliation has warranted. Again, he knows something nobody else sees. Even other students in the same classroom, who have also been mistreated and have seen him mistreat Harry.

I didn't shout at my or insist that they call me "Sir." I stood up to them, not had emotional outbursts. I asked them not to humiliate me. I asked them not to speak to me that way. I didn't give them back the same attitude they gave me. Someone else's poor behavior does not justify Harry's.

He point-blank refuses get Slughorn's memory, even after being told by someone he supposedly trusts, that is the most important thing he has to do. He dumps it down the list. Again, arrogance. Or is that again, strength of character?



I'm saying that he ought to feel guilty. It's part of the grief process. I am not laying their deaths at his feet - they chose to love him. Lily chose to die to protect him. That does not make him guilty of their deaths. But to properly grieve, healthy people blame themselves for things that are not their fault. Then during the grieving, they realize that they really held no blame, they let that go, and they continue the grieving process.

He has never done that. He has just accepted that it happened.




I don't begrudge him for getting on with his life. I begrudge him for not facing that Sirius would be alive if Harry had only trusted the people who could help him before he ran off to the Department of Mysteries. If he had properly listened to Sirius in the first place and used the darn mirror to communicate, the misunderstanding wouldn't have happened in the first place.

He hasn't fully grieved for Sirius, because he hasn't ever acknowledged, anywhere, that he isn't perfect. Once he does he'll be able to forgive himself, to learn from this particular instance of his own failing (he'll learn that he is, in fact, fallible) and then he will be able to accept his pain and move on.



No, but the arrogance that he displays is. I, too, at 16 thought I knew everything. I thought the people around me were all fools because they didn't see things exactly as I did. And you know what? Some of those times I was even right, but rarely.

If I hadn't been so convinced that I was always right and always knew more than my betters, maybe they would have listened when I was correct.

That is unfortunately the position Harry is in. He always believes he knows what is most important, what is right, and since nobody backs down, his elders don't have any reason to acknowledge the things he feels most strongly about.

I have never put any thoughts or words into Harry's mind or mouth here. All that I have said is that there are plenty of reasons for Harry to lose some of his absolute faith in Dumbledore, but still he retains his faith and trust in the man. I never said that Harry thinks this, just that he has reasons to think so. Juts like you strongly emphasised in your other posts that according to you there are plenty of reasons for Harry to trust Snape, but Harry has his doubts. I have made the same point only in a different context



He does not believe that. It's you who believes that Harry thinks that way. There are enough evidences in the books that show that Harry does not think himself to be "omniscient God", so the question of arrogance does not arise. But he also believes that no one is "Omniscient" and there is nothing wrong with that. As far as growing up is concerned, he's far more mature than many other kids of his age and one only needs to look at the examples of Tom Riddle and Snape to see what may become of a person with a horrific childhood. That Harry has turned out the way he is irrespective of all that is a testimony to the strength and innate goodness of his character. If you wish to begrudge him for that, so be it.



That means that he has the ability to think for himself. How many of us would be comfortable with the fact that we are not in control of our own lives. I wouldn't and neither is Harry. He'll not allow anyone to blindly dictate his life and what's wrong about that? Even then he's done what Dumbledore asked him to do so more often than not. He's questioned the headmaster when he didn't see the reason and he's perfectly justified in that. Of course his distraction from the task of retrieving the memory even after Dumbledore impressed upon its importance was unbecoming of his nature.



I never said that it's mentioned anywhere in text that Harry thinks Dumbledore is fallible, but that Dumbledore has himself admitted to his fallibility especially with regard to Harry in seevral instances and Harry has every reason to have doubts in placing absolute faith in Dumbledore. But he does.



Snape sulks and acts like a child more often than not. Snape has done nothing to redeem himself in Harry's eyes and Harry is fully justified in his views about Snape. Harry is a child but more mature than many adults such as Snape. It's this strength of character that I admire.



Exactly. If you think it's fit to draw conclusions here, then it's apt that it will be done elsewhere as well even if it's not explicitly mentioned in text as you stated above



That's one way of looking at it and the werewolf scene was in the movie and not the book, so does not count here. He did not battle Quirell to save Harry because it was right. He did it to escape the life debt cast on him by James Potter and he hasn't done anything remotely similar since.



Again, if it's deemed fit to draw conclusions at some places it's apt that the same be done elsewhere as well.



Exactly. He knows things about Snape that others don't. How many students have had their abusive teacher been directly responsible for their parents deaths? How many students have had their abusive teachers hate them because they hated their parents?



It was five years in coming. There's a limit to everything. If you desire respect, then earn it not command it.



He did not refuse, but got distracted and made only half-hearted attempts. Juts goes on to show that he's not perfect. But after the guilt trip from dumbledore, he decided to fulfill the task and he did.



He grieves for them, he misses them and loves them. He does not need to feel guilty, even if he does.



Because that's something he was brought up with. He never knew them and all he has is some memories. He's accepted it but never forgotten and that's the key here.



Of course. Those were the mistakes he did and happened. Who knows what he did or not during his days at Dursleys when he refused all meals.



In have stated reasons why Harry never sees himself as perfect



Harry has never acted like that. Where he has, he's had his reasons and he was right about Malfoy wasn't he, when others felt that Tom would never recruit him.



I disagree for the reasons stated above

Very interesting discussion!

I think I'll start off neutral, because there are elements of both sides that I can agree with. I usually know by the end of my post what I really mean to say. (Or not, in this particular case, I see).

I'll start with the fact that there is a self-centredness to Harry that I've been watching over the course of 6 books. Maybe it's just a culture thing, but one of the first things that both my dad and I noticed about him is that whenever someone asks him in PS how he is, he says fine, but he never enquires after the other person. He's not tuned into how others are feeling. The Ginny and Tom Riddle example is a later manifestation of Harry's way of getting totally caught up in his own world without instinctively thinking of others.

On the other hand, he does care about people deeply, and his love for Sirius, his respect for Dumbledore, his longing for his parents - all that isn't all of a sudden fake and insincere (and I know that hasn't been implied here). I just think that, because he grew up having to fend for himself in a lonely world, the feelings of others and having to accommodate others in how he goes about his business is quite foreign to him. He does feel sorry for not putting others before himself, but he's still not used to doing it.

Taking my speculation to a whole new level, I think that's where his hero-complex comes from. He wants to mean something to others, but he has trouble expressing that by genuinely putting others before him in his thoughts, so he compromises by wanting to be their hero. I don't think he's really interested in the praises that comes from saving people, but I think he wants to feel needed on a personal level.

It's not ideal, all this, but given his childhood, I do believe he deserves some credit for at least striving to love.

Snape is a whole other story too. I could carry on about him all day, but suffice to say that, although he's a highly unpleasant man, I believe there is more (good) to him than meets the eye. I think he deserved being cheeked by Harry (which doesn't make me like Harry any more - less even), but if he has been acting on Dumbledore's orders to protect Harry, I believe there is some redemption for him. He's not just a misunderstood emo nerd, he's much darker and more complex than that, but I don't particularly feel like Harry owes him anything. Snape hates Harry, that's for sure, and Snape doesn't deserve Harry's respect for the way he's treated him personally, but I think Harry owes it to Dumbledore, who he himself professes to support beyond anyone else, to trust Snape.

In that sense I do think Harry is arrogant and short-sighted. If Harry was right about Snape all along, it would reduce Dumbledore to a joke of a character, and then I would throw DH into the nearest drain. I think it comes down to our definitions of respect and which kinds of things deserve various amounts of respect.

Yes, but you are presuming that those "plenty of reasons", which Harry has never acknowledged, are the basis for his behavior. I'm only noting a similarity in behaviors. I have never asserted that Snape loves Harry or feels fatherly to him. Those feelings aren't necessary to his behaviors. Snape could hate Harry Potter with every fiber of his being - he has still repeatedly acted in Harry's best interests.



I don't begrudge him for being a good person. I just think he is an arrogant good person, based on what he ultimately does.



No, truly thinking for himself is questioning everything, or at least things that don't necessarily involve himself as well. He doesn't. He accepts that Dumbledore is right about every single thing, including a lot of things about him, without consideration. It is only when it is about Snape, when he wants to go play Quidditch, or admitting that he is different that he chooses to disregard what Dumbledore thinks.

That's not thinking for oneself. That's selfishness.



He hasn't done anything remotely similar since? What about contacting the Order when Snape realized that some of the members of Dumbledore's Army had gone off to the Department of Ministries to save Sirius. If the Order had not shown up, which they did because of Snape, there is no way Harry and the others could have survived. If Snape had just waited to contact them, or pretended he knew nothing, or had no suspicion that the DA had taken off to the Department, Voldemort would have had the prophecy and Harry, too.

Only loyalty to Dumbledore or Hary or the Order in general could have forced him to do it. And Harry ought to realize that.



But they must be logical conclusions. You make an enormous leap between Harry having reasons to think these things and that he does actually think them.

The leap that Snape is loyal, because he more often than not behaves as if he is, is not such a leap. Maybe he truly hates Harry, and the similarity between the way athletic parents treat their children and the way Snape treats Harry is completely coincidental. It still doesn't change what Snape ultimately does. When Harry is in danger, Snape protects his life (or in the final scene of HBP refuses to harm him, even though he could). He also gives Harry some good advice "No Unforgivable Curses out of you, Potter" and prevents him from completing one.

But your conclusion has you reading so much into behaviors that the behaviors themselves go unacknowledged. You work so hard to justify why he does something, that you in effect discredit the act. You justify away any act of defiance, in order to not see that Harry is being defiant. Regardless of why he is defiant and arrogant, that's what his behavior is.

You may be noting similarity in behaviours, but behaviour itself does not mean anything. It's how you interpret it, makes sense. Snape has acted in his self interests and if Harry's interests seem to coincide with that, it's fine. All his actions have come about with the aim of self-preservation and nothing else. If Snape can hate Harry with every fibre of his being, Harry deserves the same right.



But you seem to begrudge him because he does not do what you would like him to. You think he's arrogant based on what he does, I feel he's anything but based on what he does.



You forget that Harry has no one to think for him and he's always found himself alone in this world. He accepts that Dumbledore is wise and knows more than him and has his reasons for keeping things from Harry. It's you who assumes that Dumbledore knows everything and is right about everything, not Harry. Harry has all the right to know why should he trust the man who was responsible for his parents deaths. He's been let down by authority figures ever since he was born and does not have the luxury of being pampered like some, so to claim that one knows what's best for Harry is an example of sheer arrogance and selfishness.



He did it for self-preservation and nothing else and Harry realises that. You want Harry to realise only what you like nothing else.



I have made no leaps, only inferred what's written in the texts, which happens to be different from the way you perceive things. There's still enough doubt about Snape's true loyalties and his secrets, to inferring them in one direction is a leap. In your attempts to justify Snape's actions, you turn your guns on Harry with something like "How dare he not like Snape, he's definitely arrogant". Like I said behaviour is interpreted differently by different people and our interpretations differ which is perfectly natural. I have provided reasons on why I feel that Harry is defiant and backed them with examples. You on the other hand have failed to give a valid reason for why Harry should believe in everything Dumbledore says even when the texts have shown that Dumbledore has made mistakes most of them with respect to Harry. He's not a piece of electronic circuitry for people to tinker around experimenting different combinations and having seen first hand the consequences of others mistakes that he's had to face, he's cautious about taking someone for their word. You seem to begrudge him that and that's your prerogative.

He's defiant because he'll not allow anyone to dictate his life, that's self-respect, if you wish to call it arrogance, feel free to do so. I call it strength of character. You call him arrogant because if he's right about things that Dumbledore was wrong about, you claim that it makes Dumbledore look like a fool. Dumbledore's mistakes have been plenty and have ultimately affected Harry more than anyone. Quirrel stayed for an entire year in the school, Chamber of Secrets, Barty Crouch junior impersonating Moody and Harry entered into the tournament. Did they make him look like a fool, though one may argue that he was fooled. No they didn't. they only went on to show that even great men make mistakes,but they admit to them and that's Dumbledore's greatness.

Hmmm, well I don't hate Harry, hate is just such a big word... but I certainly don't like him all that much. He's often annoying, selfish, egocentric, difficult to handle, thinking he's the best and everyone should have the greatest respect for all that he's been through...

Like in the fifth book, oh my god, poor Ron and Hermione, the way Harry treated them Mr. Potter was so stupid to think Occlumency isn't necessary and just follow whatever he thinks he sees... "shut up Hermione, I have to go to the ministry, Sirius is dying and if I see that Sirius is dying, then he is, so there! And don't you think of following me, I'm a big boy, I'm the chosen one, I can handle it myself"

The twit He ended up being responsible for Sirius death! He and he alone! But does Mr. Potter admit that he was wrong? Nooooo, Mr. Potter blames my darling Snape and even my most beloved character, sweet Albus! That boy sure has an attitude!! Screaming at an old man who has always been on his side, turning that same man's office into a pile of junk...

So NO: I do not like Harry Potter (as a character) at all!



But I love the books though, because of the story itself and the other characters such as Albus and Snape and Gred & Forge

But when it comes to Potter as a person, ugh

In general, I really like Harry. He is brave and so very willing to help others and to make sure that no one is hurt as a result of his actions. I think he has a huge heart and despite his circumstances, retains the ability to love and to not judge immediately. I have to agree with Laurette on the first page and say that he possesses a lot of wisdom for someone so young, and has so many redeeming qualites.


But


He can be incredibly annoying. He refuses to accept that he may be wrong, with disastrous consequences. At the ministry Sirius died, his friends were seriously injured and exposed to death, he almost died and the Death Eaters almost gained some very valuable information. I felt so horrible when Harry realised that it was a trap and he'd potentially led everyone to their deaths, but it could so easily have been avoided if he'd just listened to Hermione (but then I was very angry at Hermione because she was always right).

He is also very hot-headed. I don't think that he was arrogant - I think he could definitely be perceived as such but overall I don't think so. But he definitely needed to control his emotions a lot more and look at situations holistically and rationally, before running off absolutely convinced that he was right. However, again, I'll forgive him this as he was usually right. Going along with the emotions thing again, I had minor hang-ups with him being so obsessed with his parents etc, but then he is an orphan. I can't exactly relate to this - given that both my own parents are alive and kicking - but I'd imagine he didn't particularly enjoy the fact. He definitely wasn't using his orphan status to gain sympathy, he was not manipulative to that extent. But the way he treated everyone in OotP! Keep your temper in check boy! Don't take your near-unfounded feelings out on those who care about you. Don't accuse if you don't have the full story. Don't believe that no one understands you when you don't give them the chance. Don't believe you're the only one in situations, it effects everyone (though he did learn that in the end).

His constant herosim did get to me as well. I don't blame him in the slightest for feeling terrible at having caused so much destruction - Sirius, Cedric, Wormtail getting away in PoA, the entire Battle at the end - but he kept constantly feeling remorseful to all these people who knew the risks involved in defeating Voldemort. Making it clear once to Hermione and Ron about them not having to go is cool, after that it gets a bit tedious and oh-so-slightly attention seeking. He is far too hard on himself. Though he had suffered quite a bit of loss, which naturally over-sensitizes you.


However, despite all of the above, Harry remains on of my very favourite characters. I don't think that simply because he is hot-headed he is necessarily 'bad', as he is such a good friend and - despite his loss - hasn't closed up to the idea of relationships (romantic or otherwise). Frankly (as horribly cheesy as it sounds ) I find him a bit of an inspiration. I love him (not as in kissy kissy love lol) because he is human.

I don't love Harry, oh no. But hating.. he's not very charming [my opinion] and he loses his temper quickly. But he has good points too, like courage and he isn't dumb. It's just that there are so many more people who I like more..