----- Original Message ----- From: "Gautam Mukunda" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <brin-l@mccmedia.com> Sent: Sunday, July 17, 2005 5:57 PM Subject: Re: Harry Potter Discussion (Spoilers!!!) L3
> > That's true, but I think it understates the power of > the scenes where Harry is at the Dursley's. There > he's clearly the oppressed one, and Rowling > (significantly, until this book) is careful to give us > a good long taste of what it's like for Harry to live > there. Sure, but after his first year at Hogswarts, he is acually more powerful than his opressors. He does, of course, lose control in "Prisoner" and inflate his uncle's sister, IIRC. But, the ministry of magic dismisses this as minor. After that, he's bright enough to see that he can do a lot to them in small ways to make their life as miserable as they make his. But, he doesn't. He behaves ethically from the beginning. Yes, he has teenage angst in Phoenix, and does some dumb things, but he really doesn't do wrong. I think it is somewhat amazing that Rowling can make the arch from doing the right thing because one wishes to please a father figure (Dumbledore), to still doing the right thing after finding out that he can get very mad at Dumbledore, and that Dumbledore does make mistakes. It's amazing because she also has him as inherently good from the start, perhaps due to the magic of his parent's love supporting him after their deaths (blood will tell is certainly not the reason). >Similarly, it may be true that only Snape is against him - but the other teachers really do little > to help him, while Snape does a great deal to harm him. So I think it's true that Harry stuck by > ordinary people from the beginning - but it's different to do so when your primary identification is > as one of the downtrodden, and another when you're the elite. Hmm, doesn't his house patron get him on the Quiddich team after he is found flying when he really isn't suppose to? And, he has Dumbledore in his corner from day one. Even though Snapes can give him a really hard time, having the headmaster on one's side is akin to holding trumps. > I think that it's true that he was only an outcast at > Hogwarts for some periods. But he was an outcast for > _the first 11 years of his life_. And Rowling is > careful to make that status clear in all of the > earlier books. Sure she does, but she let kids know that things would get better for Harry very early in even the first book. In a sense, the books ask this question: "you've been taken out of a very opressive situation and now have chances and potential that are truely magical. What are you going to do with this chance? Once he gets to Hogswort he doesn't deal with real opression any more; just conflict. One very good example of this is how, at the beginning of "Phoenix" everyone expects him to be the proctor. Instead, it is Ron. Even Ron's mom is shocked. The moral challange for Harry was to be happy for his friend, even though everyone kinda expected the honor to naturally belong to Harry. > > I agree that, after setting up a classic "prince in > > hiding" scenario, > > Rowling changes it into what you said....which is > > well done. I think that > > our disagreement on Snape is tied into the nuances > > of the moral message we > > think Rowling is teaching. If Snape turns out to be > > a hero in the end, I > > think that it will tied up with a key lesson that > > Harry has to learn. > > > > Dan M. > > I'm not really sure what the lesson would be, though. > Things aren't always what they appear? Didn't Harry > learn that from the Sirius Black affair? Whether or > not Snape turns out to be a good guy, he's an awful > person who, at best, is seeking to redeem himself for > unforgiveable acts. He shows himself to be a tremendously flawed person, who is doing a dreadful job of overcoming the problems of his early years. He lets his feelings/attitudes show with Harry from the beginning....he cannot/will not separate Harry from the torment Harry's very popular father inflicted on him. In many little ways, his has often done the wrong thing. But, until this book, when the chips were down, he did the right thing. He is the only deatheater that we know of to have repented (assuming my read of the end of the story is correct). I see the potential for a significant moral lesson in the finale. Let me offer one potential scenario...Rawling will probably be better at this than I am. ;-) Harry rightfully considers Snape a jerk, who has not treated Harry very well, who has done horrible things in the past, and who has killed Dumbledore...who's man Harry still is. Somewhere Harry will have to trust Snape's and accept his explanation. He will struggle with it, because of his feelings, but will see that the only real chance for success. And, Snape acts in a manner that allows Harry to win, even though he still hates Harry. I think the moral lesson will involve wisdom, and the complicated nature of people. Without excusing Snape's behavior, Rawling will let Harry, and us, better understand it. In short, the moral lesson will involve the redemption of a highly flawed individual. Dan M. _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
