Harry's assumption VS Everyone's assumption

[dumbledore11214]

No: HPFGUIDX 151726

Ceridwen:
<SNIP>
> A lot of people want JKR to write believably for the Real World, 
in 
> things like comeuppance for characters they see as abusive.  If 
she 
> will, then why not write realistically for children who are still 
too 
> young to see beyond what their limited experience shows them?  

Alla:

Absolutely. I think many of us (myself included) constantly 
switching "modes" when discussing the characters, if that makes 
sense. We discuss characters as "types", characters as reflection 
(partial or full) of RL people personalities, beliefs, etc.

The thing is I think SOME things could only be discussed in 
the "fantasy literature mode". Of course this is just my opinion, 
and I realize that I start to babble again, but bear with me please.

Erm... and of course what I am going to say is just my opinion. It 
is getting tiresome to repeat it in every sentence, so I will just 
say it now.

Abusive teachers like Snape exist in RL, so it is easy to discuss 
Snape conduct as reflection of RL if one so desires, and I 
definitely do. Of course, Snape can also be discussed as "type", 
as "enforcer" of whatever he enforces, etc. I can switch modes when 
discussing Snape, even though my preferable one is to discuss him as 
RL reflection.

Children who are going to save the world, do NOT to the best of my 
knowledge exist in RL :), that is why IMO it is impossible to 
discuss how adults should deal with Harry as savior of the world as 
it would happen to RL. And as Sherry and PAR said, child who is 
going to risk his life to save EVERYBODY in WW, including many 
idiotic adults is in my book entitled to know absolutely everything 
which may somehow assist him in his task, NOT whatever adults deemed 
necessary.

Now, here we come again to very realistic and understandable desire 
of the adults to protect the kid and such emotion surely exists in 
RL, so we can discuss it realistically, BUT when it is measured 
against "Harry as savior of WW", such emotion IMO becomes a mistake.

Understandable, human mistake, mistake for which I cannot begrudge 
the adults of Potterverse, but NOT the right decision, not at all


> Ceridwen:
<SNIP>
  The adults did make mistakes, and 
> Dumbledore most of all because he had decades more experience in 
> dealing with children, then came McGonagall, but she was hampered 
by 
> not knowing everything DD knew.  Molly has her own issues, typical 
> mother issues, of not really seeing that the kids are more mature 
> than she thinks.  And, the whole thing is muddied up by the 
> connection between Harry and Voldemort, and just how much do we 
want 
> Voldemort to know?

Alla:

As long as we agree that adults did make mistakes and Dumbledore 
made plenty of them too, I have no objections to any of that, really.

It is the argument that Dumbledore really did not make any mistakes, 
specifically by virtue of him being an adult (him AND JKR saying to 
the contrary) makes me want to argue really loudly :-)


 
> Ceridwen:
SNIP>
>> And, speaking of Harry as Dumbledore's *man*, Dumbledore did 
treat 
> him more like an adult in HBP, I think.  He didn't cut Harry 
slack, 
> and was short with him a few times.  He's expecting more thought 
from 
> Harry now that he's gotten over his desire to coddle.  I don't 
think 
> Harry fully rose to the occasion, keeping the secret of the 
Horcruxes 
> from McGonagall as he did.  Yes, I know Dumbledore told him not to 
> tell, but that was before Dumbledore's death, which changed 
things.  
> Whoever becomes the leader of the Order will need to know all of 
the 
> information, as well as what DD had planned.  Whoever this is, 
Harry 
> will need to inform that person of his mission - and I don't think 
it 
> will be Harry.  He's got a specific task to do, and can't be 
bothered 
> managing everything else.

Alla:

Ooo, on that I have to disagree. I guess Harry is wrong when he does 
not listen to Dumbledore's directions and when he does, he is wrong 
too? :)

Dumbledore specifically told him not to include ANYONE else in the 
Horcrux hunt, except Ron and Hermione.

And Harry did just that. I understand what you are saying about 
Order needing to know what is going on, BUT that goes to what I 
wrote in the earlier post.

Contrary to what we would like ( and trust me, even though I adore 
Harry's character and enjoy reading about him more than any other  
character, I would love to see adults more involved too), I believe 
that Order will not be relevant AT ALL to the battles in book 7. I 
think that if they are lucky they would get to deal with disarming 
some DE, or something like that.

Harry and his army would be upfront of the battle. If adults get 
supporting roles, I would consider myself lucky :).

But yeah, I think Harry's refusal to include McGonagall in his plans 
is another one of  the indicators that adults will not have much to 
do in book 7. Of course, IMO. Consider it is to be my prediction for 
book 7.

I am hoping that at least some adults will give Harry some help in 
Horcruxes hunt, but I am not holding my breath.

I suspect that Aberworth may play a role , and if another one of my 
wishes will come true, maybe Regulus, but I just don't see Order as 
entity playing an active roll at all.

Ceridwen:
> But, I think that Harry will do a lot of maturing in book 7.  It's 
> the only chance he's got in the confines of the books.  He'll do 
his 
> task, things will sink in, he'll discover things and grow.  I 
think 
> book 7 will be very much Harry's book in this way.


Alla:

Since I think that he DID rose to the occasion of Dumbledore 
treating him as an adult in HBP, I think he already matured 
significantly ( but hey, I am the one who does not think that he was 
wrong about Snape  for the most part, so feel free to disregard.) 

I suspect that Harry's last step in maturing in book 7 would be him 
forgiving Snape.  I think  by " I am not worrying, I am with you", 
Dumbledore acknowledged Harry's maturing too. Oh, and of 
course "Dumbledore's man through and through" I guess also signals 
that.

I would much prefer that Harry would say I am my own man through and 
through to tell you the truth. :)


Ceridwen: 
> Sorry about the 'stream of consciousness' going on.  My 
consciousness 
> isn't that coherent.

Alla:

I love your consciousness ;)

> PAR:
<snip>
 in real life, children have to be told about sexual predators. 
> About avoiding drugs. In some countries, they had better be well 
> knowledgeable about land mines and the fact that bad people might 
> kidnap them and force them to become child soldiers.  I don't know 
> very many children who haven't watched the news which presents 
facts 
> of life in explicit detail.  News about wars, terrorists, gangs.  
If 
> you are putting a child in harm's way, then you aren't treating 
him 
> as a child.  If you put an individual in harm's way, you have the 
> obligation to provide that person as much knowledge and help as 
you 
> can.  And sorry, I don't find that DD has done that.  


Alla:

The thing that stops me from completely embracing your argument is 
that Dumbledore did NOT initially put Harry in the harm way. 
Voldemort did. Dumbledore did not CHOOSE to put that ugly scar on 
Harry's forehead, Voldemort did. He is the one who acted with desire 
to harm Harry, Dumbledore IMO was mostly reacting, trying to help. 
Was he always successful? Oh, of course not and I often wanted to 
slap him for being an "emotional moron", but DD IMO at least tried.

As I said above, I absolutely think that Dumbledore made PLENTY of 
mistakes with Harry and some of them are huge, but those in my book 
were mistakes of the "fools who love", mistakes of wanting to 
protect the child from the harm way as much as possible.

Or, at least that is what I keep telling myself. :)

JMO,

Alla