[HPforGrownups] Harry's future (was Snape as new DADA teacher)

[imhotep1]

No: HPFGUIDX 72225

mysmacek wrote:

>he crux point is, that Harry is not going to be an auror. 
>
>Well, of course, we all think he is The Best (wink, wink, nudge,
>nudge), but really, he is not suited for that role. As much as we like
>him, the truth is that he is impulsive and rather controlled by his
>heart than his brain. He seems to me to be too easily predictable and
>manipulable - just harp on his feelings, pride or bravery.
>  
>
T.M. Sommers wrote: 

>I agree entirely about Harry's unsuitability to be an auror, 
>especially his lack of paranoia.  Moody, in many ways, reminds me 
>of James Jesus Angleton, formerly head of counter-intelligence at 
>the CIA, who saw so many spies in the CIA that no one ever 
>believed him.
>
Nicholina ODonnell wrote:

>I'm not sure that we should judge all aurors by Moody.  Tonks and Kingsley are aurors, too, and are not nearly so paranoid.  Neither of them think they should go through clouds to throw off followers or that anyone is going to die during Harry's liberation.  To judge all aurors by one is a mistake, I think.  Especially to judge them all by one of the most promenent from the first Voldemort war, which, I would think, would make one more paranoid/sharp/hard than newer aurors might be.
>  
>
Now here's my two cents:  We should judge harry based on his father's 
example.  James was one character in school, and another by the time he 
was killed.  He grew up, and as much as there are clear differences 
between Harry and his father,  I  think it's clear that Harry will go 
through as much (if not more) personal growth and change as did James.  
Personally I am hoping he becomes an auror, and I see no clear cut 
(personality) reason why he won't.  Any rough edges he has will be 
chisled off in the coming battles with LV.  Of course, I could be 
completely wrong.

--imhotep1