Compassionate hero (WAS Re: Appeal of the story to the reader)

[lizzyben04]

No: HPFGUIDX 175736

<snip regarding reluctance to cry>
Va32h:

I have to disagree with you there.

In PS, Dumbledore tells Harry how his mother's love protected him so
that Quirrel could not bear to touch him: "It was agony to touch a
person marked by something so good."

Then, Dumbledore pretended to be very interested in a bird outside
the window "which gave Harry time to dry his eyes on the sheet."

In GoF, when Harry is telling Dumbledore about what happened in the
graveyard, there comes a time when he "found his throat obstructed"
which requires more interpretation on our parts but which I consider
choking back tears.
<snip>
And of course, in Deathly Hallows, Harry very clearly cries at his
parents' graves.

So perhaps three clear instances and two vague allusions to crying
over the course of 7 years and umpteen traumatic experiences isn't
much, but Harry *does* cry. He would just prefer not to, and
certainly not to do it in front of others.


lizzyben:

Well, this might be a cultural thing more than anything else - Harry's
general reluctance to cry might be more of a British stiff-upper lip
thing. And you're right, there are more instances of Harry tearing up
than I remembered. However, we really only see Harry truly *cry* once,
at the grave of his parents. When only Hermione can see him. And in
general, it does seem like Gryffindors view "weepy" people as weak or
cowardly - which goes in line w/the expected fiery "courage" traits
they're expected to show instead. 

I was mostly thinking of that scene in GOF, when Harry has suffered a
traumatic experience, and Mrs. Weasley is hugging him - and he screws
up his face to resist from sobbing. 

It says: "Now the burning feeling was in his throat too. He wished Ron
would look away. ... The thing against which he had been fighting on
and off ever since he had come out the maze was threatening to
overpower him. He could feel a burning, prickling feeling in the inner
corners of his eyes. He blinked and stared up at the ceiling.... until
he was screwing up his face against the howl of misery fighting to get
out of him." But he never lets that howl of misery out, never just
lets go & cries. He sees his incredible pain as a "thing he must fight
against". It's like Harry (or JKR) wouldn't allow himself to truly let
out his grief because crying is something he sees as weak or shameful.


va32h:
I have to wonder what kind of response Baby Harry received from the
Dursleys, when he cried in those first few weeks at Privet Drive? I
would guess that Harry learned at a very early age not to cry.

lizzyben:
Maybe Baby Harry did learn early on at the Dursleys that adults will
ignore your cries, and that crying won't bring help or comfort. This
just makes the "King's Cross" scene even odder - the crying baby that
the adults ignore. 


houyhnhnm:

That's a good point that Harry's inability to *allow*
himself to cry may be a result of psychological damage
suffered at the hands of the Dursleys. It's not that he
doesn't feel sorrow strongly enough to bring tears. He
does. But he seems to feel the need to repress it.
<snip>
Harry's just been told how his mother died to save him.
If ever there were an appropriate occasion for the public
display of grief, this would be the time it seems to me.
Now, I can see why Harry, with his history, had difficulty
showing grief. What seems off to me is the fact that
Dumbledore had to pretend not to observe that Harry was
crying, as if Harry's tears were somehow shameful.
Contrast that with Dumbeldore's calm acceptance of Harry's
rampage after the battle at the MoM. Rage is nothing to
be ashamed of. Tears are.

lizzyben:

Yes, because rage & anger are acceptable fiery Gryffindor traits, and
so nothing to be ashamed of. DD does give Harry the message that tears
are shameful, and that's reinforced by other Gryffindors at other times. 

houyhnhnm:
<snip>
"The thing" That seems a very peculiar way to describe
very natural feelings after watching a classmate murdered
in cold blood. He has to blink and stare at the ceiling.
He has to fight "the thing". It just seems like a weird
choice of words to me.

lizzyben:

Doesn't it? It almost seems like Harry views his pain as something
separate from him, a foreign "thing" that he has to fight against &
repress & stuff under a chair.... and ignore, because adults won't try
to help ease the crying & suffering anyway.

He thinks of his love for Ginny the same way - that infamous "chest
monster". It's a monster, separate from him, nothing to do with him
really. And he tries to repress & ignore those emotions as well. The
love "chest monster" and the pain "thing" have just taken up residence
inside him - and he wishes they'd go away. So, Harry the Gryffindor
sees both romantic love & sadness as almost separate entities -
shameful entities that he has to hide from others. And these emotions
are also "water" traits, associated w/the evil "other" Slytherins....
I don't think I'm making this up here. 

In one sense, Harry is given the message to suppress his shameful
weepiness & express pain w/anger & rage instead, as he does in OOTP.
As Sydney said it - "Ignore the crying & the pain; beat up some Bad
People instead! You'll feel better!"

In another sense, those very qualities of which he is most ashamed,
most eager to repress, are the very qualities associated w/the
"other". By beating up the "other", he's also fighting against those
qualities in himself that he's been taught to repress. The "Bad
people" are also the shameful emotions - and by getting rid of one, he
can get rid of the other. So the Evil Slytherin is also the crying
suffering thing that he wants to stuff out of sight... that's King's
Cross in a nutshell.

That's classic shadow projection. The shadow isn't bad, it's just what
you think you shouldn't be. And Gryffindors & Harry get a relentless
message that they must *always* be brave & courageous & strong &
daring. If you're anything else, you're not a "true Gryffindor" & have
no identity. This practically begs for someone that they can project
all those unacceptable non-Gryf traits upon & maintain their idealized
self-image. Slytherins function very well as the scapegoat for
Gryfindors' sins & the projected shadow for the Gryffindors' own
unacceptable traits. They NEED the Slytherins around so that they
don't have to face themselves in the mirror. IMO, this is also why we
see very little personal growth from the Trio - they've never learned
to accept & integrate their perceived flaws, but have instead
projected them outward onto the "other".


lizzyben