Harry as godfather (Was: Sirius Black's role in DH -- why?)

[Carol]

No: HPFGUIDX 179188

Alla wrote:
> 
> I was talking about JKR comparison in the interview, which I thought 
> referred to Harry being a godfather after war. And I still do not 
> remember Harry spending twelve years in Azkaban. <snip>

> What I DO find disagreeable is JKR comparing Harry and Sirius as 
> godfathers, because I think that for Harry to be godfather to little 
> Teddy, was how to put it was much easier affair.
> 
> By the way, while little Teddy was hunted by evil Bella, Teddy still 
> had his parents, so yeah I do not remember Harry needing to do 
> anything for him at that time like Sirius coming to Harry in GoF.
> 
> Let me say it again, I love JKR's opinions and hope she will share 
> as much as she has in her imagination with us, but I find this 
> comparison to be bizarre, very very bizarre.

Carol responds:

Maybe the comparison is not so much regarding the situation of the
baby boys (though I agree with Pippin that both Teddy and his parents
were in danger and had been specifically targeted by Bellatrix) as
regarding the situation of the godfathers, neither of whom was in a
position to be much help in rearing a child or setting an example for
him. Harry's thought in DH (last line of "Shell Cottage" and
specifically attributed to too much wine) relates to recklessness, and
Harry is about to embark on an action (the robbery of Gringotts) that
compares favorably in terms of recklessness with, say, going after
Peter Pettigrew rather than informing the authorities that he's the
real Secret Keeper (or, to use a later incident, breaking out of
Azkaban to commit the murder he was arrested for).

Recklessness (as, surely, even his most devoted fans agree), is Sirius
Black's defining characteristic. Not only did his arrest after his
reckless decision to go after Pettigrew himself cost the child Harry a
relationship with his godfather from infancy to age thirteen, his
recklessness caused Harry to lose him altogether after knowing him
(not particularly intimately) only two years. I'm not talking about
the decision to go to the MoM to help protect Harry and the others,
which I can't blame him for making. As a member of the Order, he was
at no greater risk than anyone else in that battle. I'm talking about
the recklessness of fighting Bellatrix on the dais of the Veil,
standing with his back to it and taunting her. That she died in much
the same way (minus the Veil), underestimating and taunting her
opponent, is surely no coincidence (as Pippin has already noted).

I think it's important that Harry's fear of being as reckless a
godfather to Teddy (assuming that Teddy survives and regardless of
whether his parents also live) as Sirius Black was to him comes just
after he has made a bargain with a Goblin to help him rob Gringotts, a
plan that involves having Hermione pose as the notorious and easily
recognizable Bellatrix Lestrange. Hagrid had told him back in SS/PS
that "yeh'd have to be mad to try an' rob Gringotts" (quoted from
memory)--and the plan itself, as Harry knows, is more Siriusly
reckless than anything the Marauders did at seventeen. (The plan is,
in fact, so seriously flawed that it nearly gets HRH killed and loses
them the weapon they think they need to destroy the Horcruxes.)

And setting aside the Gringotts plan, Harry and his friends are on the
run from Voldemort and the DEs, looking for Horcruxes (one of which
they still know nothing about), all of which they then have to
destroy, all so that Harry can face Voldemort, whom he expects to
fight to the death using Draco's wand. (He doesn't yet know that he
has to sacrifice himself.) All together, I doubt that he expects to
see his godson's first birthday, much less help to rear him if it
parents (at that point protected by a Fidelius Charm) should happen to
be murdered by Bellatrix. James and Lily's choice of Sirius as
godfather (made more from affection than wisdom, IMO) looks sensible
by comparison. Perhaps Lupin and Tonks are merely granting Harry an
honor rather than anticipating a future need in the event that their
son is orphaned (*and* loses his grandmother). The odds of Harry's
surviving to fulfill such an obligation must surely appear slim to
both of Teddy's parents.

As for the interview, which I don't recall verbatim, I don't think
that JKR was talking about Harry's inadequacy as a godfather after the
war. I think she's thinking of seventeen-year-old Harry, still caught
up in the pursuit of Horcruxes and a Dark Lord. The adult Harry didn't
actually need to raise Teddy, who had an apparently loving grandmother
to take care of him, only to provide a kind of role model or mentor or
father figure in the absence of Lupin. Teddy does seem to have spent
plenty of time with Harry, however. According to the epilogue, Teddy
has dinner at the Potter house several times a week, and the Potter
children apparently consider "our Teddy" almost as much a member of
the family as their Weasley cousins (Lily wants him to marry Victoire
so he'll actually be part of the family). So I see nothing to
criticize here, certainly no "recklessness" on the part of the adult
Harry (beyond whatever risks he would face as an Auror, assuming that
he chose that career, and we can take JKR at her word here or not as
we choose since it's not in the book).

Carol, hoping that Alla will quote the passage that she thinks refers
to the adult Harry as a "reckless" godfather so that we can either
deconstruct it or ignore it together <eg>