Harry's DADA skill was Re: Albus and Gellert/Voldemort's Power

[Beatrice23]

No: HPFGUIDX 182654

Beatrice:  Okay, I have to add my two cents here.  While I was 
waiting to DH to be published I had many of the concerns that Carol 
voices about Harry's talent.  It seemed to me that Harry was 
too "average"  to defeat LV, but I have had cause to reconsider after 
reading the fine arguments of Carol and Mike.

> Carol earlier:
> > > Well, there's that Patronus, the one spell he's better at than
> Hermione, but he had lots of help and the advantage of training on a
> Boggart!Dementor. whatever Harry's natural gift for casting this
> spell, no one else has the advantage of special training at age
> thirteen from a competent DADA teacher (a rare commoditiy at 
Hogwarts
> in any case), and no one else has the advantage of a Dementor 
Boggart
> to practice on. It's one thing to cast the spell in the DA
> headquarters, where it's just fun; it's another to be able to cast 
it
> against a real Dementor. Harry had the opportunity to overcome his
> fear of a fake Dementor before facing a real one. 

Beatrice: 1st: Fear of a fake Dementor?  It seemed to me that even 
the boggart was able to produce the same effect as a real dementor as 
evidenced by Harry's experience in Lupin's office - he hears his 
mother's death, passes out and has to be revived with chocolate.  It 
also seems to me that Lupin understands that the boggart will do more 
than simply take the shape of a Dementor as he is ready with 
chocolate on hand.

Lots of help?  Well, sure what student doesn't have lots of help?  
(Note also that in Dumbledore's obit, Dodge notes that in school 
Dumbledore developes a correspondence with many notable wizards of in 
his time which seems to indicate to me that DD was seeking outside 
help and knowledge in areas that he was interested in, isn't that 
remarkably similar to what Harry is doing?) Doesn't Harry's desire 
tell us something about his ability?  Just because the spell doesn't 
come easy to him or he needs tutoring doesn't diminish his 
accomplishment.  Even Hermione, who seems to master so many spells 
with ease, has the benefit of dedicated study and practice...It seems 
to me that Harry and Hermione learn in different ways Hermione learns 
from reading, but Harry learns from "hands on experience" which Lupin 
capitalizes on in his lessons and perhaps why Harry is so great at 
Quidditch and the many confrontations he finds himself in. He has 
great reflexes and powers of observation.

  Even then, he
> couldn't do it at thirteen until he saw "James" (really his future
> self) casting one--and he was not actually facing even one Dementor 
at the time. 

Beatrice:  You are right he wasn't facing even one Dementor.  He was 
facing a hundred Dementors and his life, the life of his best friends 
and the life of the only "family" member he had ever known and just 
met was in terrible danger and yet he was able to find a "happy" 
moment even in his life filled with unhappiness.  And here is ONE of 
the things that makes Harry extraordinary: despite the tragic loss of 
his parents; his miserable, abusive childhood; the horrors he has 
witnessed in the WWW; and  the way he is objectified by the majority 
of the WWW he is still able to find happiness and to hold on to it in 
moments of utter despair.  

Carol: > No one else has those advantages (Lupin, a Dementor Boggart) 
or
> circumstances that require them to learn the spell at such an early
> age (Dementors at Hogwarts, which affect Harry more than anyone 
else),
> not to mention a Time-Turner.
> 
> Would he have learned to cast a Patronus at thirteen if Dementors 
had
> not come to Hogwarts that year? Probably not. there would have been 
no
> incentive. Would any other DADA teacher we've seen have given him
> private lessons? 

Beatrice:  Well these are what we call "conditions of possibility," 
but Harry capitalizes on just the right opportunities, perhaps this 
is luck (or more likely issues of plot - I mean really would it be 
more believable for Harry to need to develop a defense against 
Dementors or to discover the Patronus spell on a forray in the 
library and say "hmmm..this looks interesting I think that I will 
learn this one just for ha ha's." (although this might work for 
Hermione).  
> 
> It's all circumstance, coincidence, luck.

Beatrice:  A point which Harry conceeds, but plenty of wizards, 
talented, and super-talented (Moody, DD, Lupin, Sirius, James, Lily, 
Snape, Fred, etc, etc, etc) don't survive on their talent - because 
perhaps one needs more than talent.
> 
Carol: But I think there are perfectly good reasons why
> Harry, unlike most other third years, can cast a corporeal Patronus.
> And we find that many fifth years, and even a fourth year, Colin
> Creevey, can master the spell itself. It's just the part about 
facing
> an actual Dementor that they don't have to deal with (until the 
battle
> of Hgwarts, when they're in either their sixth or seventh year).

Okay - but they master it under Harry's instruction, with NO dementor 
or even a fake Dementor present (which makes it much less impressive) 
AND in DH they face the Dementors together - not own their own.  And 
not with Harry's past which Lupin tells us in PoA is why he reacts so 
strongly to the dementors.

> 
Carol:  Harry and his skills or powers, which I maintain are not
> for the most part that much greater than those of his fellow 
students
> except in that he's had experiences they haven't had and the need to
> learn spells that they haven't yet been taught. 

Beatrice:  Can one be considered brilliant or talented if they are 
untried or unschooled?  Potential and raw ability can only take one 
so far.  So a lot of Harry's skills and talents are brought to the 
surface by others (teachers, friends, enemies).  Harry is still the 
one who faces down the dangers when for the most part his friends and 
teachers are either not present or standing off to the sidelines. 
Isn't there a talent in Harry's ability to succeed where other fail 
even if we can say part of it is luck?  And is it really luck? Or is 
it Harry's greatest asset, the one that we all (including myself) 
underestimate: love.  Harry's love of other helps him to save them, 
sacrifice himself, learn under extraordinary circumstances, 
understand what others do not, perform where other freeze, etc.  

Let's compare Harry with his "betters" for a second. Hermione: she 
learns at an incredible rate, has great logic, masters advanced 
spells, and has an incredible capacity to remember and apply 
knowledge.  True, sometimes Harry needs more practice and help 
mastering things (except perhaps DADA), but Harry is less interested 
in academics and Harry masters quickly the one (one of several things 
actually, but I can't be here all day)  of the things that stumps 
Hermione: flying a broom and understanding nuances of quidditch.  
Also, Hermione has a great legal mind in her ability to apply 
knowledge (note her discussion with Scrimgour in DH), but Harry's 
ability to think beyond the rules and boundries opens all sorts of 
opportunities for the trio so that even Hermione is led by him.  

Now we could compare Harry to every one but I wanted to point out 
just one simlarity between Harry and Dumbledore.  Dumbledore 
sacrifices himself to save Harry and Harry sacrifices himself freely 
to save everyone else.  If Harry's sacrifice isn't huge I don't know 
what is.  Perhaps one doesn't need talent, when ultimately one is so 
giving and loving as to give up his own life for the whole world...


> SS/PS:
> His mother's love stopped Quirrell!mort, Quirell died when LV left 
his
> body and LV returned to Vapor form, and DD (who had made sure that
> Harry had his Invisibility Cloak and knew how the mirror worked) 
came
> to his rescue. Harry's contribution, aside from catching the key in
> the Charms challenge, was courage, determination, and a pure heart
> that kept him from wanting the stone for himself. But the skill and
> knowledge, aside from the chess game that Ron won, was all 
Hermione's.

Beatrice:  Okay true - but would Ron and Hermione even dare to follow 
Quirrell without Harry?  Would they even know what was happening at 
Hogwarts if they all hadn't worked together?  Isn't this part of the 
difference between LV and the "good" wizards LV accomplishes a lot, 
but he never learns to work with anyone else.  LV never sees anyone's 
value.  But Harry does!  Isn't this the mark of a talented leader, 
one who knows how and where and when to utilize the strengths of 
others?  And yes his mother's love saves him, but it is Harry who 
sees that power and capitalizes on it even if he doesn't quite 
understand it at the time.  Again, Harry although in terrible pain, 
chooses to hold onto Quirrell thinking that he may die, just to keep 
the stone out of LV's hands.
> 
> CoS:
> I'm sure you've read my recent posts, but I'll reiterate, leaving 
out
> my argument that DD provided the protections. Harry spoke 
Parseltongue
> (thanks to LV) and could consequently open the Chamber. Fawkes 
blinded
> the Basilisk, provided the Sorting from which Harry could pull the
> Sword of Gryffindor, healed Harry's wounds, and carried him to 
safety.
> Harry used the Basilisk fang to destroy the diary, not knowing that 
it
> was a Horcrux, which, in turn, restored Ginny's soul to her body. 
What
> did Harry contribute? Quite a bit, but none of it (except
> Parseltongue) depended on Harry's skill and power and knowledge. 

Beatrice:  NONE of it?  Harry finds the Chamber, which Dumbledore 
could not.  And I know, I know DD doesn't speak parseltongue.  But DD 
doesn't try to work with Harry to find the entrance making me think 
that DD doesn't make the connection between this ability and the 
entrance to the chamber or even that it is a basilisk. And I disagree 
that DD send Fawkes to Harry, I think that Harry calls Fawkes to him 
by showing DD such loyalty - DD says so himself.  Okay so Harry 
destroys the Diaray - mere coincidence you argue.  WHAT?!?  a twelve 
year old who has just slew a monster with a sword (a sword that he 
has never wielded) and now with a giant tooth sticking out of an open 
wound in his arm and poison coursing through his body...he doesn't 
simply moan in his last moments of pain - he plucks out the tooth 
from his own bloody arm (his right arm by the way - and his dominant 
hand) and uses it as the only weapon at hand  (BTW: the sword would 
have worked here too as it already slew the basilisk).  Harry is a 
warrior, through and through and he doesn't let his own pain get in 
the way of protecting someone else (Ginny).  Sure some people are 
more talented - but often more talented wizards are bested by their 
own fears and pain.

 
Carol: > GoF:
> The spells he masters, under Hermione's direction, are ordinary DADA
> spells that he should have learned under a competent teacher. 

Beatrice:  Is it mastering that is difficult or knowing what spell to 
use when or being able to use things under pressure.  Hermione who is 
so talented freezes when confronted with the devil's snare in SS and 
at other times, but Harry never freezes up.  

Snip: 
Carol: > So, yes. He wins the TWT, more or less, having used 
Quidditch skills
> to get past the dragon, gillyweed to survive the Second Task (true, 
he
> got past "zee grindylows" and Fleur didn't) and the ordinary DADA
> spells that Fake!Moody should have taught the whole class to get 
past
> the Acromantula and the Skrewt (the Sphinx only asked a Riddle and
> Fake!Moody had cleared most of the obstacles out of Harry's way), 
but
> the confrontation against Voldemort was won with Expelliarmus--and
> only because Harry's wand was the brother wand of Voldemort's. Had 
the
> echoes not come out of the wand and allowed him to escape, neither
> courage nor quick thinking would have helped him.
Snip:  Nor would Harry have survived if it
> hadn't been for the brother wands. He can resist an Imperius Curse,
> true, but he can't fight a Crucio. As for AK, no one can survive
> that--unless they're protected by fate, luck, their mother's
> self-sacrifice, and a drop of blood that they happen to share with
> Voldemort. (Voldie's mistakes always help Harry without Harry 
needing
> any special powers other than the ones residing in the scar or his 
own
> wand.)

Beatrice:  Isn't love Harry's special power?  Or is it only a power 
if one can manifest it and use it as a weapon?  Is it not "really" a 
win for a sports team if the other team makes a mistake and the 
winning team capitalizes on it?  Doesn't it take some talent to see 
an opening, an opportunity and to take it?  What about great 
courage?  What does it take for a 14 year old to stand up and duel 
with a fully grown wizard, let alone the wizard who killed your 
parents and is so feared that almost no one will even utter his 
name?  And okay he can't fight a Crucio - but who can? - but he CAN 
withstand the pain, he can hold him self tall and proud instead of 
writhing on the ground and groveling for mercy.


> 
> OoP:
> Harry does better than the other DA members (whose DA lessons 
haven't
> adequately prepared them to deal with DEs, much less LV himself)
> against the DEs, but he's ready to hand the Prophecy Orb to Lucius
> Malfoy when the Order members arrive. 

Beatrice:  To hand over the orb to save his friends!  To hand over 
some kind of knowledge to LV about himself to leave himself 
vulnerable to help others.  Who does this?  Truly?  Who?  

Carol: And he manages an inept Crucio
> against Bellatrix but doesn't get much of a chance to duel with her
> because LV and DD arrive. Harry and Bellatrix are both pinned to the
> wall by parts of the Fountain of Magical Brethren, taking no part in
> the battle between the superwizards. LV possesses Harry and is
> defeated, not by Harry's skill or magical power, in the sense of
> ability to cast powerful spells, but by "the power that the Dark 
Lord
> knows not," love. 

Beatrice:  Okay, but this time it is Harry's love, not his mother's 
love that saves him.  Sure Lily's love saves Harry, but Harry's love 
ends up saving the world.  Whose else's love is this powerful?  Who 
else has the courage to do this?

> 
> HBP:
> Harry doesn't fight, LV, only his supposed lieutenant, Snape, and is
> trounced.

Beatrice: This is certainly evidence that Harry isn't talented.  One 
of the patterns I noticed in this series is that whenever Harry is 
angry he fails to achieve his goal.  (Trying to capture Snape in HBP, 
chasing after Bellatrix in OotP, going after Sirius in PoA, etc.)  
Harry is successful when he is resolved to do what has to be done, 
even if it means sacrificing himself, but more importantly when he 
acts out of necessity not out of anger he usually wins.  Perhaps 
because anger clouds his ability to see (or to seek if you will).  
When he is angry he cannot see all of the aspects of the game, the 
players, their goals, their strageties, etc.  This seems to me to be 
a rather interesting talent and one that few other wizards seem to 
demonstrate, except perhaps DD.
> 
> DH:
> Harry defeats LV, with the help of Hermione, Ron, Snape, and the
> participants in the Battle of Hogwarts, not to mention Dobby,
> Griphook, Ollivander, Mr. Lovegood, and even Vincent Crabbe, Snip

Beatrice: A fair point.  But you forgot to mention that LV doesn't 
fight his battles without help.  He uses people, sends them on tasks, 
willingly sacrifices them as if they are insects in his war against 
the WWW.  Dumbledore, too, is aided by other people in the war.  Is 
Harry only exceptional if he does everything himself?  If having help 
diminishes Harry, what does it do for LV and DD? Harry could have 
gone to the CoS and destroyed the horcrux, but he was busy working on 
other things - pretty important things too and really did we need to 
see him go down there again?  Okay, so Crabbe destroys the diadem, 
but this isn't a display of talented magic, Crabbe is such a dolt 
that he offs himself in the process, because he knew only the spell, 
but not how to master it.  True the other characters play their 
roles, but none of them have the capacity that Harry does not one has 
the ability to vanquish LV.  Snape contributes a lot, but he is like 
a bug on LV's gigantic windshield. Mr. Lovegood provides a story - 
that is like saying that Professor Binns is really responsible for 
Harry's defeat of the Basilisk because he tells the trio (et al) 
about the rumours of the CoS.  I could go on and on but "no man is an 
island..."

> 
> Carol:
> Exactly! That's my whole point. Harry's power and his talent  are 
beside the point.
> 
> Harry doesn't defeat Voldemort because he's better at DADA than 
anyone
> else (thanks to special circumstances like the TWT). He's just an
> ordinary Wizard kid when it comes to school subjects, which he only
> studies when he has to, not a genius or a prodigy at anything except
> Quidditch. 
> What helps Harry against Voldemort is first, the powers that LV
> inadvertenly gave him when he "marked him as his equal"--
Parseltongue
> and the scar connection--and second, setting aside luck and help 
from
> more talented friends, as Snape puts it, "the power that the Dark 
Lord
> knows not," love.

Beatrice:  These are powerful contributions no doubt, but I think 
that you underestimate the importance of love here or at least the 
magic of it as the texts suggest.  You also forget Harry's courage 
which is his and his alone - I don't think that LV has much courage 
frankly just over confidence, so he doesn't get it from him; and his 
friends while courageous in their own rights have nothing on Harry.  
Harry's agility and speed - thanks to his quidditch training and 
probably also to the Dursley's (ducking out of the way of Dudley, 
Vernon's and Petunia's fists and frying pans).  His unique knowledge 
both of LV through DD and through his own experiences (growing up 
unloved in a muggle house, his scar - although his scar didn't help 
him realize that the cup was in Gringotts).   Harry also has great 
strength of character which is why he can resist the imperius 
curse.   
> the main argument above, but what I meant (feel free to disagree) is
> that the talents we're born with are not our own doing. I'm good at
> spelling, for example, but to the extent that that's a natural
> ability, as opposed to something I briefly worked at to win some
> spelling championships at age thirteen, I don't see why I should
> receive credit for that ability any more than Harry should receive
> credit for being a Parselmouth (or Hermione for the good memory that
> she's born with, as opposed to the hard work that she puts into her
> homework, for which I do give her credit). Now, if Harry had managed
> to master Occlumency after effort and fighting his own antipathy
> toward Snape and his desire to have that dream, I'd give him credit,
> lots of credit, for that. 

Beatrice: So because some of his talents come to him naturally, 
either by birth, by his mother's sacrifice, by LV AK spell, or by his 
friends that Harry doesn't deserve credit for using these "gifts"  or 
he can only be considered special for what he achieves inspite of his 
natural talents or lack thereof?  I guess I just have to go back to 
my earlier statement that plenty of people are born with abilities, 
but it requires more than just being given talents to develop them 
and use them well which for the most part Harry does.
>