Harry's Characterization (was: Satisfaction of the story to date )

[justcarol67]

No: HPFGUIDX 163469


Mike wrote:
<snip> I will disagree with Carol on this point; 
> I do think Harry has *the power* irrespective of what Voldemort gave 
> him on that fateful Holloween night. Did he get it from some 
> serendipitous confluence of Potter and Evans genes? I'll let JKR 
> enlighten me. But I'm sure we'll find out. <snip>

Carol responds:
Then how do you interpret the line in the Prophecy, "He will mark him
as his equal"? I take that to mean that the scar both "marks" and
holds within itself some of Voldie's own powers, the powers that make
Harry his equal. And we do know that Harry has some of Voldemort's
powers, which he was not born with. And "the power the Dark Lord knows
not" is surely the power of Love, not innate to Harry but the result
of Lily's sacrifice. No one except Harry has this "serendipitous
confluence" of Love and power. No one but Harry has the scar that
marks him as Voldemort's equal. Ironic as it may be, if it weren't for
GH, Harry would not, IMO, have "the power to vanquish the Dark Lord."
That's why Dumbledore, more powerful and far wiser than Harry, can't
do it. Harry and Harry alone can defeat Voldemort because Voldemort
inadvertently created his own nemesis. Had he not tried to thwart the
Prophecy, he would not have passed on to Harry the powers that can
destroy him.
>
Mike: 
> He isn't Superman, nor even Spiderman. He's much closer to Peter 
> Parker. (Sorry, just watched Spiderman 2) In this way I agree with 
> Carol's characterization of "Everykid". Hey, maybe he's the 
> Incredible Hulk in reverse, his powers multiply when he feels love 
> instead of anger. ;D <snip>

Carol:
Exactly. He's in some respects an ordinary Wizarding kid, not
excelling in most of his classes, struggling to learn even some
defensive spells despite DADA being his forte. As Harry says himself
in GoF, the only thing he can do well is fly (or play Seeker, if you
prefer). That, I think, is an innate power, inherited from James. But
the rest, powers like Parseltongue that are rare in the WW but shared
by LV and Harry, are the heritage of GH, and it's those powers, plus
Love (the result of Lily's sacrifice and not inborn in Harry) that
will make the difference in the final confrontation. (Parseltongue,
for example, may help Harry to kill Nagini.) 

There's also, BTW, the shared Phoenix feather core in their wands.
Just as the yew wand chose Voldemort, the holly wand chose Harry,
sensing, I think, the same powers in Harry that its brother sensed in
Tom Riddle, powers not innate to Harry but acquired at Godric's Hollow
when the AK was deflected onto Voldemort.

Mike:
 Did you realize that Snape hadn't yet cast a spell when Harry's
"Protego" knocked him back? That was Harry's power, not Snape's power
rebounding. 
> 
Carol:
We don't know that since Snape's spell would have been nonverbal. And
a Shield Charm (Protego) casts a wall around the caster that deflects
the opponent's spell back onto him, exactly as Snape's Legilimens was
deflected back onto him in OoP:. Here's the original description of
the Charm when Harry is first trying to learn it:

"He [Harry] was still having trouble with the Shield Charm, though.
This was supposed to cast a temporary, invisible wall around himself
that deflected minor curses" (GoF Am. ed. 608).

What it does *not* do is knock the opponent off his feet--unless, of
course, the opponent's curse would have knocked him off his own feet
but was deflected onto the caster. So if Snape had cast a nonverbal
Jelly-Legs, the effect would be for *Snape* to have wobbly legs. Look
at the name--*Shield* Charm. It *shields* (protects) the person
casting it ("protego" = "I protect") by creating an invisible wall
that not only prevents the opponent's spell from striking its target
but deflects it onto the caster--exactly as Voldemort's AK was
deflected onto him by Lily's (inadvertent) ancient magic. (BTW, I've
always thought that the scar was an eihwaz rune, which stands for
defense or protection, and I'm still hoping for Luna or Hermione to
figure that out in DH.)  

> Mike:
> The *power* of love. In JKR's world, love is not just an emotion, 
> it's a power. It's in Harry's constitutional make-up, this power.
And Harry has more of this *power* than any other witch or wizard, and 
> *that* is why Harry is more *powerfully magical* than anyone. <snip>

Carol:
I don't think that the power of Love, a particular form of ancient
magic that IMO is diametrically opposed to the Dark magic of, say, the
spells and potions that created Fetal!mort and restored Voldemort to
his body, is the same as magical power in general. Voldemort is
powerfully magical, more so, probably, than Harry except with regard
to his own powers that Harry, and only Harry, acquired from him. Barty
Crouch Sr. was "powerfully magical," but he authorized the use of
Unforgiveable Curses by the Aurors, used one of those curses to
control his own son, and was Imperio'd in his turn and AK'd by the son
he had kept captive for twelve years. Not an example of the power of
Love. Dumbledore, also extremely powerful and the greatest wizard of
the age, understands the power of Love magic and uses it, but it is
not what makes him innately powerful (as he clearly was even as a
student given Professor Marchbanks's reaction to his OWLs and NEWTs).

So I don't think that Harry is "more *powerfully magical* than anyone"
despite the impression that the films create. I think he has some
natural talents (his genetic heritage), courage, and the reactions of
a natural athlete honed by Quidditch practice, but James, too, had
these traits and they did not enable him to survive. Nor did Lily's
ability to love, which Harry does not exactly share but reaped the
benefits of, enable her to survive. Harry has their combined gifts or
heritage, but more important, he has the powers that reside in his
scar, powets unique to himself and Voldemort that forge a bond between
them.

Mike:
This just struck me. Does anyone know if there is an old English
usage of the word "mark" that might shed further light on the
prophesy? When JKR said she worded the prophesy carefully, this could
be one of those careful words.

Carol:
Interesting question! What immediately comes to my mind is the Mark of
Cain: "And God placed a mark upon Cain lest any finding him should
kill him" (Gen. 4:15). Granted, Cain was a murderer, but nevertheless,
the mark, whatever it is, protects him from death.

I don't think there's much in the etymology of "mark" as either a verb
(Old English mearcian) or a noun (Old English mearc) that will help
us. It just means a sign (originally marking a boundary). (Think of
the Westmarch in LOTR or the Marcher lords who lived on the boundaries
of Wales in the time of the Plantagenet kings of England.) However, if
we think of "mark" as a synonym for "sign," perhpas Merriam-Webster's
definition 6a for "sign" (n.) is significant: "something material or
external that stands for or signifies something spiritual." The scar
could be a sign of Harry's "spiritual" power, the power of Love, as
well as whatever powers Voldemort (unwillingly and unwittingly) gave
to Harry, the powers that will enable Harry, otherwise a mere
"Everykid" with ordinary Wizard powers and no great aptitude for
learning, to defeat him. At the very least, the scar *marks* Harry as,
first, the Boy Who Lived and, now, as the Chosen One. It provides a
mind link to Voldemort, but it also symbolizes that link as it
symbolizes both his history and his destiny. Without the scar, Harry
might as well be Neville for all the luck he would have in defeating
Voldemort.

Carol, sure that "the power to defeat the Dark Lord" is not innate but
resides in the scar (but also sure that the scar is not a Horcrux,
which can only be intentionally created)