Harry's Good Will?

[Sirius Kase]

No: HPFGUIDX 43330

Thanks bboy_mn for helping me out.  Sometimes I don't express myself as 
clearly as I'd like.  But one thing I want to make perfectly clear is that I
like Harry - a whole lot.  He never misbehaves without some sort of
justification, he isn't power hungry and although he sometimes laughs at the
misfortunes of others, he isn't the instigator of any of that.  I don't find
anything terribly out of the ordinary about his flaws (and he'd be no good
as a character if he had none) and given his background, I'm surprised that
he is as good of a kid as he is.

My post wasn't about my opinion.  As bboy_mn clarifies, I'm describing a
different point of view and that would be the opinion of a wizard who
doesn't know Harry personally but forms an opinion based on history, the
media and the grapevine.  Everyone *knows* that Harry is a powerful wizard
who did something good when young.   Everyone knows he's a Quidditch hero.
But they also know that he gets into weird situations with rather incredible
explanations.  Because of his history with Voldemort, he begins life in the
Wizard World with a huge supply of good will.  The typical wizard on the
street wants to believe him when they hear about his continuing struggle
with the Dark Side.  Especially since his continuing story is told by the
respected headmaster Dumbledore, hero of the 40's War.  Besides, he's to
young to be evil.

But, there is no hard evidence that Harry is telling the truth.  So it
shouldn't be surprising that not all wizards think well of Harry.  Power
corrupts, ya know.  My contention is the group of wizards who have
reservations about his character may be growing.  Some will believe him and
Dumbledore, some will think badly of him, and a large group will just not
know whom to trust.  It doesn't help that Dumbledore's heroic reputation was
earned  over fifty years ago, and that he has a weird sense of humor and
comes across as "barking mad" (i.e. crazy)

Harry's enemies are doing a great job of getting out the unfavorable
interpretation of the observable evidence.  Remember, Rita and the Malfoys
have not been publicly discredited.  *We* know that they are baddies, but
they are influential.  Harry doesn't toot his own horn.  He lets his friends
do the talking.  But, his friends respect Harry's privacy and don't say much
to help his public image.  They mean well, but by not talking, they aren't
giving Harry a positive character reference to counter the negative.

Reread what I said with all that in mind.  I hope it will make more sense
now.

Sirius Kase Originally said:
> Because of Harry's history, the wizarding public is also inclined
> to like him and accept Dumbledore's explanations. But as the
> story wears on, I think that Harry is using up his store of Good
> Will and will eventually use up much of Dumbledore's political
> capital as well. I mean, how far can you go based on something
> you did as baby, being a sports hero, and the incredible
> explanations of a senile old guy who has lost whatever ability he
> ever had to hire good teachers and run a safe school? If
> Dumbledore's pet continues to leave dead and unconscious bodies
> in his wake, that must be troubling even if one is inclined to
> like Harry.>

> jenny_ravenclaw Replied:
> I had trouble following your point in this post, but this part truly
> has me confused. What are you implying about Harry here? Are you
> saying that he is a jerk who expects others to take up for him and
> spend time on his cause? Where did you find evidence in canon that
> makes you believe Dumbledore is senile? Do you think Harry is a
> murderer?
>
> Harry is a good kid. He doesn't like getting attention and what
> he wants more than anything is to blend in. ....
>

Yep, he's a good kid, but there is no hard evidence that he isn't a murderer
 nor is there evidence that he is.  In times of crisis, some societies will
take
 the more conservative position that Harry's innocence should be proven
rather
 than his guilt.  Remember how Hagrid and Sirius were jailed with no proof?

bboy_mn's explanation regarding the general public having incomplete
information is better than mine, so I'll go with it.

bboy_mn Adds:
I>  won't attempt to speak for the author, but I will give my take on
> what was said.
>
> First, as a reader you have direct knowledge of Harry. We as the
> reader even know more about Harry than his best friends; there are
> things he has told us, that he hasn't told them. So we view from a
> privilaged position. To understand Sirius Kase, you need to place
> yourself in the position of the average wizard who has only the
> legend, the media, and rumors to go on, but no direct knowledge of
> Harry's personality or day to day existance. From that perspective,
> from that base of limited information, I think Sirius Kase statements
> should be clearer.
>
> I mean, even Fudge who does have some direct knowledge of Harry, and
> has some small sense of his personality, still puts a great deal of
> stock in what he reads in the papers.
>
> So people on the outside with limited and frequently distorted
> knowledge are going to be less forgiving that people who know Harry
> personally.
>
> The same goes for Dumbledore, while the average wizard certainly knows
> who he is and probably respects him, they have very little knowledge
> to base that on. They don't know him personally, and the don't have
> direct knowledge of his beliefs or of his ability to run Hogwarts. So,
> their judgments can easily be swayed by limited, inaccurate, and
> distorted information.
>
> Those outside of the immediate circle are not going to be as forgiving
> or understanding as those on the inside of the circle.
>
> Just some thoughts.
> bboy_mn

And for all these reasons, I think that public opinion is shifting away from
Harry's favor,
  Dumbledore's reputation is being damaged, and our heros and the rest of
the Wizarding World are in big trouble.

Sirius Kase