What makes Harry special? (was Chicken Meat)

[caliburncy at yahoo.com]

No: HPFGUIDX 23495

My third reponse to David's questions and one of the ones I am most 
interested in responding to, because of a post I made earlier.  I 
somehow don't think I've brought anything strictly *new* to the 
discussion here, but, well, I'm saying it my way so maybe it will be 
kind of unique.  :)

--- In HPforGrownups at y..., dfrankiswork at n... wrote:
> What makes Harry special?  This has been explored a good deal, but I 
> think to some extent perceived as 'special Harry' versus 'ordinary 
> Harry'.  I would say that Harry, even as conceived by the 'ordinary' 
> proponents, is special, and that we have more of a triangular set of 
> possibilities:
> a. Harry is special in his innate characteristics (as foreshadowed 
> by his Quidditch and Imperius resisting abilities, but with 
> something more needed to defeat Voldemort)
> b. Harry is special in his relationships, mainly that his mother 
> loved him, but possibly also what he got from Voldemort
> (Parseltongue, the scar) or Gryffindor
> c. Harry is special in his choices, in some ways the most 
> interesting as he could stop being special at any time by changing 
> his choices.
> 
> This topic is difficult to debate because the single most compelling 
> piece of evidence that we have of his specialness, that Voldemort 
> singled him out for attack, doesn't help us decide.  But all three 
> views are firmly embedded in canon.  Can we put them together?

Thanks for bringing this up.  I also, after my post about not being 
fond of the Super Harry theory, noticed this problem with 
distinctions.  I also consider it more triangular than dual, though I 
perhaps would draw the lines differently.

I started to explain in the same format where I would draw the lines, 
but that only served to muddle my overall point so I'm going to skip 
it and describe how I think Harry is special.

Harry is firstly special in the way most main characters are which is 
that he is more of a fighter, has stronger morals, makes bigger 
mistakes, harbors greater passions, has more to overcome, etc. than 
some of the other characters.  Along the same lines, he is special 
from the personality aptitudes he has shown.  All the characters in 
the books have aptitudes of their own, but it happens that Harry's are 
a lot of what is needed for the struggle of good and evil that he is 
caught up in.  He has a strong will, perserverance, grace under fire, 
compassion, courage, keen intelligence, etc.  He also trusts and 
relies on his friends, which IS a personality aptitude.  He has other 
aptitudes as well such as skill at Quidditch that do not necessarilly 
(but in some cases might) come into play in this greater struggle.

These should not be discounted.  They are in many ways the most 
important of all.  Harry could have the scar and boundless magical 
talent and be the heir of God himself and it wouldn't mean anything 
without this kind of "basic" specialness.  These qualities affect all 
the choices he makes.  These qualities give him his drive and the 
reason for him to be the kind of hero he is.  They also lead him a 
great deal of the way on his path to success.  You might even explain 
some of his exceptional abilities through this alone, although you 
certainly don't have to.  Like his resistance to the Imperious Curse. 
 Harry is a very strong-willed, independant kid.  This force of will 
is far more important than his wizarding skills as regards the 
Imperious Curse.  He need not necessarilly be a more powerful wizard 
than other fully-trained adult wizards to have an easier time 
resisting the Imperious Curse than they do.  He may well be a more 
powerful wizard once fully-trained, but I think it is his personality, 
his will-power that was a bigger factor in this particular instance 
(though perhaps not the only factor).

Harry is secondly special in his connections to Voldemort.  These are 
the most blatantly obvious ways in which he is different from others. 
 He has the scar and its special powers, speaks Parseltongue, is 
chosen by the brother to Voldemort's wand, etc.  These are the result 
of his experiences.  Specifically the results of the rebounded Avada 
Kedavra curse.  Note that, with the exception of being a Parseltongue, 
these things are really only useful versus Voldemort.  Harry and 
Voldemort are inextricably linked as adversaries, both as cause and 
effect.  If Harry went up against, say, Grindelwald (assuming here 
were still alive) these things would not be helpful to him.  He may 
well prove to be the strongest wizard alive some day, but that has no 
bearing on how these special advantages play out.  And he might even 
be able to beat Voldemort without being the strongest wizard alive as 
a result of some of these advantages.

I personally do not believe Harry is special in the third way, which 
is one of two things: the Super Harry theory or the Heir of Gryffindor 
theory (or both, I guess, as they're not mutually exclusive).  These 
two are different in letter, but to me similar in spirit.  They both 
imply in one way or another that Harry is different from other wizards 
in some genetic way.  That's actually the reason I personally don't 
like them.  But they are entirely valid, readily supportable theories, 
so the fact that I don't like them doesn't mean anything.  I only hope 
that it doesn't go this route, because to me it violates Dumblebore's 
notion that blood is not important.  In my opinion, Harry should not 
be able to win because he is genetically superior either via the Super 
Harry/Mage Factor way or by having some of Godric Gryffindor's DNA.  
How is needing to be a Gryffindor descendant or needing to have a Mage 
Factor any different in order to be more powerful than Voldemort than 
the kind of Pure-blood fanatacism Slytherin embraced?

Many people think you can't explain why Voldemort came after Harry or 
why he couldn't kill him without a third kind of specialness like 
this.  They may be right.  I do actually have some alternate 
explanations, but that's not the point.  My objection to this third 
kind of specialness is more on principle than evidence.

I have so much more to say on this, but I think I'll wait for 
responses.

-Luke