Dirty Harry (WAS: The intended murder of Pettigrew and

[Kelsey Dangelo]

No: HPFGUIDX 116648


Kelsey Dangelo <kelsey_dangelo at y...> wrote:
>Oh, I love this idea (and the name!
>"Dirty Harry"). Wouldn't that be a twist?.
>[?] But I think I might see a hole in that
>bucket of water. Harry's an angry teenager,
>but he's a goody-two-shoes. 
 
Eggplant:
> In the first 3 books Harry was a bit of a goody two shoes, but less so in 
> book 4 and much less so in book 5; I hope to see this trend continue. The 
> character Dirty Harry was not an evil person, he didn't need redeeming like 
> Anakin Skywalker did because he already knew right from wrong and did the 
> right thing most of the time; it's just that Dirty Harry was very very tough 
> and he did what he had to do; and if he had to put a bullet in the brain of 
> a bad guy he could sleep soundly the next night and not agonize about it the 
> next morning. I think it would be interesting if Rowling started to move in 
> that direction, in fact I once wrote a short fan fiction about Harry Potter 
> turning into Dirty Harry. 

 
Kelsey:
I still want to believe in the Dirty Harry scenario.

But I can’t.

Remember, Anakin Skywalker knew right from wrong (he was trained as a Jedi and started off as a good kid), he just chose wrong because he wanted the power to be able to protect people and do good things. And he was willing to use the dark side.

I’ve never seen that trait in Harry. He wants to help people, but he never really seems willing to be a hero, or a leader (Hermione has to convince him to lead the DA) to gain power or rewards. He’s not tempted to use the dark side--except on Bellatrix, but he failed (no slaughter of a town full of Tusken Raiders). Harry almost chose to die (“Just let it end, then I’ll be with Sirius”) rather than to turn to the dark side (which would be the case if he used dark arts).

I have to disagree that he’s become less goody-goody since POA. Harry is very angry in OOP, but I still think he’s a goody-two-shoes. A very angry, rule-bending-for-the-sake-of-goodness goody-two-shoes, but still a goody-goody. He never hurts anyone, never seems to want revenge (I never see him target Malfoy). In fact, I think that in GOF, Harry’s more goody-goody than before. Ever since he nearly murdered his innocent and beloved godfather in POA, he seems to be stepping away from the whole murdering and the vengeance ideas (I think this was Harry’s major lesson). 

In GOF, he, out of the goodness of his heart, decides to share the trophy with Cedric, save the other people captured by the merpeople, and give his money to Fred and George. I don’t really remember as incidents where he turns from goodness.

And, at the end of OOP, he doesn’t want to even think about the fact that his life will “either end in or include murder”. And that’s referring to Voldemort, his arch-enemy, the dude that’s killed his parents, caused the death of his godfather, caused death and destruction and other horrible things. Harry doesn’t want to murder Voldemort, much less anyone else.

I still have to think that Harry’s intrinsically and profoundly good. He’s going to be angry, hurting, tormented, anguished, damaged, but I don’t think morally so.


Kelsey, who’s suddenly reminded of Star Wars and mud-baths.