How important is Hagrid?

[Carol]

No: HPFGUIDX 186702

"hagrid_hut" wrote:
>
> Hello everyone!  I've been reading on and off for a few weeks now and thought it be best to just start a new post rather than risk redundancy in another.
> 
> First let me tell you all that I am obsessed with the character Hagrid--not just because he's so loveable, but also because I find that he plays so many different roles in the series: protector, comic relief, tongue-slipper, etc.  He's a hard character to place because he serves so many functions in the story, but none to a degree that it makes the reader feel as if the story couldn't go on without him (like a Dumbledore does).
> 
> So my question is: Where would you all rank Hagrid in order of importance?
> 
> I hope this is not redundant either.
>
Carol responds:
Hello, Hagrid-hut! (I hope that's what you want us to call you.) Interesting first post--and, no, your question isn't redundant--and we can certainly use a new thread!

I don't want to give Hagrid a numbered rank, which would be extremely difficult to defend and purely subjective, but IMO  he's less important than the primary characters: Harry, Hermione, Ron, Dumbledore, and Snape (whom I'm not listing in any particular order except for Harry). I don't think we can say, for example, that there would be no story without Hagrid or that Harry would not have survived without his help. (Voldemort should also be on my list of primary characters, disappointing though I sometimes find him, since there would be no story without him and because the scar link and soul bit are crucial to the main plot.)

I'd place Hagrid within the ranks of important secondary characters like Draco and his parents, Sirius Black, Lupin, Dobby, and Wormtail, all of whom at some point perform actions that are important to the plot of a particular book without necessarily being central to the series as a whole. He's probably more important than McGonagall and certainly more important than Seamus or Lee Jordan or Charlie Weasley or Fleur.

Hagrid (like Snape, of all people) exemplifies JKR's gift for creating memorable and highly individual characters. He's unique among the staff members in being Harry's personal friend (unless you want to classify Dumbledore as a friend rather than a mentor) and, outside of class, his social equal. (I can't imagine Harry or Hermione pounding on any other teacher's door and ordering them to open up.)

He's also nearly our first clue (along with a cat transforming into a woman and a man dressed like Merlin magically sucking out the light from the streetlights) that the world of Harry Potter is different from the "Muggle" world in which the Dursleys live. In that respect, he's part of the setting, in addition to being a plot device and providing comic relief. He's the first not fully human character with whom Harry forms a personal relationship, introducing us to the theme of prejudice by Wizards against their fellow magical beings (though I hope I'll be forgiven for saying that it really is unwise for a Wizard to marry a Giant and that, in general, Giants should be given a wide berth.)

At any rate, certainly the books wouldn't be the same without Hagrid--no magical motorcycle lent or given him by "young Sirius Black," no hippogriffs, no Blast-Ended Skrewts, no after-hour excursions under the Invisibility Cloak to help Hagrid cope with his current problem, no accidentally revealed information that turns out to be important. No Grawp or Aragog (no loss!).

I don't share your fascination with Hagrid, but I understand it. I felt (and feel) the same way about Snape.

Carol, noting that everything in this post is just my opinion, even the "certainly" remark!