I don't know if it's funny, or just sad that the self-confidence that inspired Harry's tirade about his accomplishments at the beginning of the book was so easily broken down to his unwillingness to take any credit for them.
Well, at the beginning, he spouted off because he was being treated like an irresponsible child. Now that someone wants to put him in a position of authority, he's quick to back away from any direct involvement. Can't say I blame him. He was lucky in his past four years. Also, I don't think anyone has offered him any authority before. (He did get turned down for prefect.) I think anyone's first reaction would be reluctance (or modesty). After all, he does take it in the end...
McGonagall's gonna feel baaaad if/when she finds out the true nature of the detentions she said didn't have an effect on Harry. And the fact that Hermione agrees . . . well, I think that's pretty disgusting. Hypocritical too, since she was deliberately baiting Umbridge earlier. She's lucky that all Harry did was ignore her during Charms. I would have strangled her. She makes up for it later, but damn that's an awful thing to say.
Well, everyone does seem to take for granted that he's even alive to this point. Why should simple mutilation matter a whole lot?
Now that someone wants to put him in a position of authority, he's quick to back away from any direct involvement. Can't say I blame him. He was lucky in his past four years. Also, I don't think anyone has offered him any authority before.
Harry's got a weirdly push-pull relationship with authority -- the type that's characteric of the ambivalently attached, actually. He doesn't want anyone to control him, but he wants someone to be willing to take up that role, and he doesn't really want to be in charge himself. Well, he wants to be in charge of himself, but definitely not in charge of others. Possibly it's the years of being told that he's a worthless freak.
Well, everyone does seem to take for granted that he's even alive to this point. Why should simple mutilation matter a whole lot?
True, I mean, we've seen the same view point from Dumbledore. Who cares that Harry was abused by the Dursleys (conceivably shaping him in the same manner as Tom Riddle) he's alive! I mean, if you ignore that mere emotional neglect can and has killed infants.
...if you ignore that mere emotional neglect can and has killed infants.
I guess that prophecy acts like a twisted "get-out-guilt-trip-free" card, doesn't it? DD: "He certainly won't die there and that's all I ask." But I guess this discussion is quite a ways away, so I'll hold my tongue...
Oohhh, another "Harry-is-immortal-except-to-Voldemort" fan? Yeah, I'll give Dumbledore a little leeway if that turns out to be true, especially if he wanted Harry's childhood to mimic Tom Riddle's. I'll have a much easier time accepting him if it turns out that he's a manipulative bastard who knows what he's doing, rather than an bastard who can't even competently keep track of his plan and excuses his slip ups on the basis of being old. Whether I'll ever like him is, of course, still up in the air.
Well, at the beginning, he spouted off because he was being treated like an irresponsible child. Now that someone wants to put him in a position of authority, he's quick to back away from any direct involvement. Can't say I blame him. He was lucky in his past four years. Also, I don't think anyone has offered him any authority before. (He did get turned down for prefect.) I think anyone's first reaction would be reluctance (or modesty). After all, he does take it in the end...
McGonagall's gonna feel baaaad if/when she finds out the true nature of the detentions she said didn't have an effect on Harry. And the fact that Hermione agrees . . . well, I think that's pretty disgusting. Hypocritical too, since she was deliberately baiting Umbridge earlier. She's lucky that all Harry did was ignore her during Charms. I would have strangled her. She makes up for it later, but damn that's an awful thing to say.
Well, everyone does seem to take for granted that he's even alive to this point. Why should simple mutilation matter a whole lot?
Reply
Harry's got a weirdly push-pull relationship with authority -- the type that's characteric of the ambivalently attached, actually. He doesn't want anyone to control him, but he wants someone to be willing to take up that role, and he doesn't really want to be in charge himself. Well, he wants to be in charge of himself, but definitely not in charge of others. Possibly it's the years of being told that he's a worthless freak.
Well, everyone does seem to take for granted that he's even alive to this point. Why should simple mutilation matter a whole lot?
True, I mean, we've seen the same view point from Dumbledore. Who cares that Harry was abused by the Dursleys (conceivably shaping him in the same manner as Tom Riddle) he's alive! I mean, if you ignore that mere emotional neglect can and has killed infants.
Reply
I guess that prophecy acts like a twisted "get-out-guilt-trip-free" card, doesn't it? DD: "He certainly won't die there and that's all I ask." But I guess this discussion is quite a ways away, so I'll hold my tongue...
Reply
Reply
Noooooooooooooo!!! Please. LOL
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment