Special treatment - yes or no/ a bit of Draco POV about Harry again/Nprbert

[dumbledore11214]

No: HPFGUIDX 145992

Irene Mikhlin  wrote:
<snip>
> You don't need to refute it with the claims that Harry
> is a nice
> kid who didn't ask for special treatment, but deserves
> it all 
> anyway.

Alla:

OK, I will just address a few, since other people already said a lot 
what I agree with (especially Valky - thank you), but I want to 
rephrase this sentence of yours. I think that in the HUGE majority 
of those instances special treatment is given to Harry NOT because 
he is a nice kid who did not ask for special treatment, but deserves 
it, (although I do think he is a nice kid of course), BUT because he 
NEEDS it (IMO there is a difference between NEEDS and DESERVES) and 
also IMO need to help the kid stay alive, since somebody is 
constantly after his life, IS an absolute justification to give him 
special treatment sometimes.

Especially since we saw that if needed such special treatment is 
given to anybody in Hogwarts, so I don't think it is really special 
treatment. But as people said Dumbledore gave such special treatment 
to the boy who planned his assassination, and treated him especially 
to such extent that he ignored that in the meantime he nearly killed 
two other students, so I think it is very reasonable to help Harry 
stay alive. IMO of course.

Irene:
> 14. That's a big one: the very same Professor, who
> just happens to be a Gryffindor, covers a huge
> rule-breaking episode (never mind madly
> security-breaking), and Harry gets off without any
> punishment.

Alla:

I completely disagree. Harry indeed got off without "Snape style" 
punishment, IMO. And I so loved Remus for coming just on time. Remus 
punished Harry and punished him VERY effectively IMO. So what if it 
was just a lecture? It WORKED on Harry and that is what matters IMO. 
Punishment should help student to recognize that his behavior was 
wrong and not to do it again, punishment should not needlessly 
embarrass student, making him be afraid for the life of his pet or 
being humiliated in front of his peers (and yeah, before you ask, I 
will say it again - that Mcgonagall did that to Neville was WRONG, 
very WRONG)


Irene:
 > Letting Harry into the tournament is not exactly a
> special treatment, as any student would have had to
> compete under the binding magical contract. However,
> taking his word that he didn't ask an older student to
> put his name in, might well be.

Alla:

I am glad we agree that being forced to compete in something is not 
special treatment, but what do you mean " taking his word for'? What 
would you suggest Dumbledore to do? Use Veritaserum on Harry or 
something like that? it may not be even legal to use on children, 
IMO.


Irene:
> 16. The Headmaster accepts Hogsmeade permission from
> someone who is not Harry's parent or guardian,
> nevermind being a convicted criminal at the time.

Alla:

Erm... Yes, he is a guardian IMO. The one which Lily and James would 
want. Since Albus now knows that he is innocent, why shouldn't he 
accept the form?


Irene:
> Again - I know that saving the world is more important
> than following the rules. But first of all other
> characters are not privy to "saving the world"
> context, and some of the cases above have nothing to
> do with it.

Alla:

Honestly, I think that huge majority of those cases DOES have to do 
with either saving the world or saving Harry from the madman and I 
see no proof in the books that DD would not have gone to such great 
lengths to any other students. IMO of course

As to other characters not being privy too, well, yes, of course, 
but that is why I keep insisting that for example even though Draco 
may not know downsides of Harry's fame, (although I think even he is 
aware that Harry's parents got killed and Harry was left with being 
a Chosen One,) and may think of Harry' situation as one which is a 
lot of fun to be with, it is quite easy to see that he is wrong.

Because Harry's celebrity status is mainly negative one IMO and 
while Draco may think that it is cool to be in the newspaper,etc, 
there is no escape from FACT ( IMO of course) that Harry is a 
celebrity because he is marked either for death or for killing 
someone ( well, we don't know how that will play out of course, but 
that is how the situation stands right now, right? - to kill or be 
killed) and I honestly don't see ANY reason to wish for being in 
Harry's skin.

It is objective, no? Harry may die at any time basically. If Draco 
would realise it, would he REALLY envy Harry?

Now, if Draco would envy Harry being rich, THAT I could objectively 
understand, I suppose. I mean, Harry being rich has nothing to do 
with the fact that Harry is trying to escape death every day, IMO 
and even if Harry does not enjoy money, I can understand that having 
money could be nice, I suppose. But Draco is rich himself, so I 
doubt that he envies Harry in that aspect, I think he envies Harry 
celebrity status and in that I think he is completely wrong.

I am not even saying that being celebrity does not have its perks, 
but IMO "Harry as a celebrity" is a situation which every normal 
person would not want to be in, unless such person has a death wish 
of course.

Valky:
<SNIP of the whole post basically)
> I think the trio did the right thing to break the rules to protect
> Norbert, the thing Dumbledore would have done except that they 
never
> asked him to. 

Alla:

Yes, I agree and consider a nice contrast of what Ron does for 
Norbert, who bites him and what Draco does for Buckbeak in PoA. I 
love Ron, had I mentioned it recently? :-)

JMO of course,

Alla