Harry's character development: Static or Dynamic? Was: Saving Private Draco

[Carol]

No: HPFGUIDX 183706

Alla wrote:
> 
> <snip> I keep wondering again what character  development means
exactly, since maybe we are again thinking of different definitions.
<snip>
> 
> Because to me character development's means any changes in the 
character throughout the book, no matter how small and those changes 
really do not have to be earth shattering for me to qualify as such.

Carol responds:

Maybe it would help to look at some definitions of character types.
Obviously, Harry is what E. M. Forster would call a "round" (complex,
many-faceted) character as opposed to a "flat" (one-dimensional)
character like Umbridge or Amycus Carrow or Madam Hooch.

But is Harry "static" (unchanged by the events around him) or dynamic
(changed in some fundamental and lasting way by those events)?
Obviously, Harry changes from year to year as he grows up. Harry at
eleven and Harry at seventeen are as different as any real-life little
boy from the teenager he develops into. But is child!Harry the same
person in all other respects except size and hormones as teen!Harry?

We see what seems to be a fundamental change at the end of SS/PS when
he's learned who he is: he's no longer the little nobody who sleeps
under the stairs but a famous Wizard. And yet the basic elements of
Harry's character remain stable. Possibly learning who he is merely
*revealed* those traits to Harry and to us.

We also see a change at the end of OoP when he leads the way out of
Platform 9 3/4 rather than meekly following the Dursleys. But is that
a fundamental change, a step toward leadership, or is it just a
reaction to the Order members confronting the Dursleys?

Another change involves his ability to judge other people. Harry is,
at first, rather a bad judge of character. Setting aside Ron vs.
Draco, where he makes the right but obvious choice, and the later
friendship with Hermione, which stems from confronting a Troll
together, he seems to misjudge a lot of people, especially the fake
Mad-eye Moody, Luna, Neville, and Snape. The first has to be revealed
before his eyes as Barty Crouch Jr. and to tell his story under the
influence of Veritaserum before Harry can see the truth. Luna and
Neville he learns to judge correctly after the MoM, and even more,
after the Battle of Hogwarts. Snape has to leave him a vial full of
memories as he dies (which Harry has to visit in the Pensieve) before
he can judge him clearly. Is having the scales lifted from his eyes,
learning to respect Snape and admire his courage, a fundamental change
that qualifies Harry as a dynamic character?

We can compare Harry with both Snape and Dumbledore, also "round"
(complex) characters who are dynamic only in the change from their
youthful delusions, for which both feel excruciating remorse, but as
adults are static (unchanging). They only *appear* to be dynamic as
their true nature is revealed--bit by bit in the earlier books but in
large chunks in DH.

FWIW, here are the definitions of "dynamic character" and "static
character" from a pretty good website on literary terms:

"Dynamic Character  A dynamic character "is one who is modified by
actions and experiences, and one objective of the work in which the
character appears is to reveal the consequences of these actions." 
(Harmon, Holman page 89)

"Static Character  "A static character is one who changes little if at
all.  Things happen to such a character without things happening
within.  The pattern of action reveals the character rather than
showing the appearance of changing simply because our picture of the
character is revealed bit by bit; this is true of Uncle Toby in
Tristram Shandy, who does not change, although our view of him
steadily changes." (Harmon, Holman page 89)"

I have no idea who Holman Harmon is, but the website can be found at 

http://home.earthlink.net/~milam/tlwl/lwlterms.html

if anyone is interested. Other definitions can be found on other websites.

My inclination at the moment is to believe that while Harry develops
and changes in small ways (and certainly changes his view of Snape!),
he remains essentially the same person that he was at eleven. Our
choices *reveal* who we are (which is not to say that we can't change,
as DD and SS did in their youth, but their choices reveal rather than
create that change).

And yet Harry does give up the pursuit of revenge, not only against
Snape (whose death shocks rather than gratifies him) but against
Voldemort himself, instead offering himself as a sacrifice and then
trusting to luck or fate and the Elder Wand and Expelliarmus to
destroy Voldemort rather than "murdering" him as he had expected to
do. Another change, which comes almost too late, is his decision to
rely on others to help him rather than doing everything himself, with
a bit of help from Ron and Hermione.

At any rate, I agree with Alla that Harry grows and develops to some
degree over the series, but I'm not at all sure that those changes are
sufficient to classify him as a "dynamic character" in the technical
sense I'm discussing here.

We could ask the same question of Ron and Hermione. Neville, OTOH, is
quite clearly a "dynamic character." He always had that courage in him
(like the fattest and most timid Hobbit), but only in DH does he
emerge as a leader, fearlessly confronting Voldemort even when he's
lost his wand and slaying the dragon--erm, snake--like a hero out of
myth or legend. Luna, bless her, is static. It's only Harry's view of
her, not Luna herself, that changes.

Does Harry change "within"? Is one objective of the work (or the
author, assuming that we can infer her intentions) to show the effects
of those events and actions on Harry?

Compare Frodo, who is obviously changed by his experiences, including
his own failure (and its near-disastrous consequences), to the point
where even Saruman says, "You have grown, Halfling."

Can we say of Harry that he has grown (other than growing from boy to
man)? Or is the journey to adulthood (the whole concept of a
Bildungsroman) sufficient to make him a "dynamic character"? Does he
change even as much as Pippin in LOTR? What do you think?

Carol, who thinks that Harry's character growth can be measured in
inches and poor Frodo's in miles