Harry Potter News and Commentary
On her blog Quoth the Maven, Janet Batchler has some great comments regarding who is the hero of Harry Potter: Harry Potter or Dumbledore. She’s responding to a story here arguing that Dumbledore is the real hero of the HP series not Harry. Check out both and see what you think.
Previous post: Happy Thanksgiving!
Next post: New Blogengamot Member: Aaron J. Smith
Red Rocker on Well pickle my spleen and boil my weevils! List your favorite fictional character and their expletives
Fricka on Well pickle my spleen and boil my weevils! List your favorite fictional character and their expletives
professor l on Well pickle my spleen and boil my weevils! List your favorite fictional character and their expletives
Rhonda on Mockingjay: Is There Redemption amid the Horror?Red Rocker on Mockingjay: Is There Redemption amid the Horror?
Tom on A Pic from The Deathly Hallows EpilogueRed Rocker on Well pickle my spleen and boil my weevils! List your favorite fictional character and their expletives
Amy @ My Friend Amy on Mockingjay: Is There Redemption amid the Horror?
Jenna St. Hilaire on Mockingjay: Is There Redemption amid the Horror?Red Rocker on Mockingjay: Is There Redemption amid the Horror?
Loading ...
{ 53 comments… read them below or add one }
What Janet said. Eloquently. Clearly. At length. Inarguably. Convincingly. Neatly.
I’d say magical thesis supervisor rather than magical research assistant, but yes, the point is valid: Dumbledore’s role is secondary.
As for you revgeorge, I think it’s dirty pool to post that particular picture on this particular post: it wins the argument without any actual debate.
Does anyone else think Gambon looks like he’s pulling boogers out of his brain when he does that with his wand?
Yup.
Harry – hero. Check.
Dumbledore – mentor. Check.
Snape – hero?
Snape – anti-hero?
Can there be two heroes?
Let the Gambon-bashing commence. *sighs – rolls eyes* Can’t you two leave that poor man alone?!
Thanks for the repost, revgeorge!…. I’ll look forward to seeing everyone’s thoughts….
Janet, eloquent defense! I’ll bet you tethered points the original blog participants never considered. Harry is the hero; he needs some placement and nudging, but he carries out courageous acts of his own free will, and out of the necessity they be done, even when those plans have gone awry, such as Draco getting the wand.
Please note, I did not say word one about Gambon! That being said, I did chose that particular picture with Red Rocker’s reaction in mind.
Who’s the hero, Harry or Dumbledore? Neither, it’s Neville Longbottom, the series is called Harry Potter because Neville Longbottom and the Philosopher’s Stone doesn’t have quite the same ring to it.
Though I’m always wary of making a point like this (it seems a bit too obvious), the books are called Harry Potter and…! Carlson’s piece over-extends the evidence, but I do think he’s dancing around one vague issue we’ve discussed at length here: Harry as a character. Harry is, without question, the hero of the story. But, there’s also something in Harry’s character that many of us find a little lacking. Call it the “too perfect thesis” or the “boring good guy thesis” or whatever. For me, I just never once had the sense that Harry would fail. Thus, his story is one of character development, and he’s surrounded by too many other characters that are far more interesting to me.
I can see how Carlson wanders down the Dumbledore-is-hero road. There are moments when it is difficult to discern what is the outcome of Harry’s actions versus what was simply kickstarted by Dumbledore’s ingenious scheming.
The one thing that kinda/sorta miffed me about Carlson’s piece was his implication that if Harry is the hero, somehow it’s a knock on intelligence. He says that if Dumbledore is the hero, then it’s a feather in the cap of using brains over brawn — as if somehow Harry never uses his smarts, or never relies on Hermione’s intellect. Though Harry is often instinctual rather than analytical, he’s no dummy, either.
Oh Harry’s not stupid by any stretch of the imagination but he’s hardly brilliant either. I suppose JK wanted an everyman hero who would appeal to a broader audience, rather like the Pevensies from The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe who having proven their worth through bravery and loyalty rather than any especial talent, literally become monarchs. Well, they do say the meek shall inherit the earth.
I won’t be getting much then!
Kudos, Janet, on that Brilliant defense of Harry as hero.
I’m with Joivre on this:
Harry as hero? check
Dumbledore as mentor? check
Snape as anti hero is an interesting topic, but probably would be more of a red herring here.
I respectfully disagree with Dave the Longwinded that Harry is maybe “too perfect” or ” too boring”. He’s not without flaws, as we see when he’s dealing with either Snape or Malfoy, which to me means we have a more human figure, which makes him anything but boring to me.
As for other characters in the books, look at how they all group together– mostly they are in the “Help Harry” group, as are the Order of the Phoenix and his Gryffindor friends. Others such as Voldemort and the Death Eaters are in the “Destroy Harry” camp. It’s to Rowling’s credit that she manages to make her characters rounded rather than cardboard figues, but if one examines them from an exclusive plot line, it’s clear what their function is. Therefore, it’s Harry who is the main focus and the hero of these books.
Sorry to double post, but I had another thought occur to me after I wrote that. I’m going to play Devil’s Advocate on behalf of Dumbledore and quibble with Janet’s point number three:
“3) Harry defeats Voldemort. Harry does it. Not Dumbledore. Back to that battle in the Ministry: If Dumbledore could have destroyed Voldemort, there was the time. He didn’t do it.”
Harry would not have lived to defeat Voldemort had Dumbledore not come to his rescue in the MOM at that point. Also, Dumbledore was not TRYING to destroy Voldemort, as LV himself observed: “You do not try to kill me, Dumbledore?”. It’s not clear what spell Dumbledore was trying out, but it was certainly a powerful one, from Harry’s reaction to it. I think also we need to remember that almost from the time he heard the prophecy originally, Dumbledore probably realized that it meant that no one BUT Harry could defeat Harry. All those years, then, He’s worked to make sure that Voldemort, if and when he does return, does not know that. So long as Voldemort thinks that Dumbledore stands between him and Harry, he has to act with more caution.
Actually Janet – you brought up some interesting points besides proving Harry the hero – one being, why didn’t Albus dispense with Voldemort sooner. Of course, there’s the little problem of the horcruxes being made at an alarming rate during Riddle’s youth. However, by the time the Albus sees Tom in his office regarding the job appointment, Riddle already is showing physical signs of horcrux-making. It would be interesting to know when Albus knows this. Because it’s not until the diary appears that Albus starts to act on it. By the time the battle occurs in the ministry, Albus knows he cannot kill Voldemort because even if he previously destroyed all the inanimate horcruxes up to that point – he would have to kill Harry. But even that wouldn’t work because isn’t it only Riddle who can destroy the horcrux in Harry? I’m confusing myself now.
Oh well, Dave – yes – Harry is not brilliant, but neither was the Wart. And yes, Harry has the “good-guy” syndrome. (Snape is a hero, not the hero, who doesn’t have that – and that’s what makes him so attractive in the series). James T. Kirk grows up like Sirius, cocky, daring, and talented. Kirk achieves and aspires to greatness – Harry has greatness thrust upon him.
Also – I think that the “Heroes” we admire in culture, books and films, reflect the times we live in to a certain extent. It’s the pendulum effect – sometimes when our culture gets to wild – we want to tame it down with a more decent hero – sometimes when we’re in a more restricted time – we want our hero to be more rebellious.
Good point Fricka! (you posted when I did)
I fear that I may be quoting Forest Gump, but for me a hero is what a hero does. That is to say, it is not any particular quality a hero posesses, whether that be intelligence, knowledge, power, compassion, love, looks or even courage, that makes him a hero. Having those qualities may make for a more attractive hero, but ultimately someone becomes a hero by the actions he (or she, but I’ll use the masculine because I’m lazy) takes. A hero is defined by what he does. Monsters vanquished. Maidens (or youths) rescued from dragons. Mountains climbed. Evil defeated. The idea of a hero’s journey (or Journey) is a formal and standardized definition of this idea.
Looking at it from that perspective (which Janet refers to in her article), both characters do heroic things, and perhaps can both be called heroes, but Harry is the hero of this particular story, and Dumbeldore is a supporting character. The mission, to defeat evil in its current incarnation as Voldemort, is Harry’s mission. DD provides some logistic support (cloak, sword, and snitch) and some intelligence reports (although his briefings are woefully inadequate), but it’s Harry who has to do stuff: seek out and destroy horcruxes, sacrifice his life, go into the underworld (literally this time, instead of figuratively like the previous six times), be resurrected, take down Voldemort, dispose of the wand of ultimate power, that kind of thing.
This doesn’t mean that Dumbledore couldn’t be the hero of his own story. But that story happened earlier, and reached its climax with the defeat of Grindelwald. And if you think about it, that mission was more important for Dumbledore than Voldemort and the horcruxes, for several reasons. First, like Harry, he was the one best suited for the taking down of GG. Second, he owed the world, and himself, and his family, this act of redemption. By the time Voldemort takes out Lily and James and inadvertantly sets in place the makings of his own doom, Dumbledore is yesterday’s man. He is the ancient warrior, gracefully retiring into the background, sharing his knowledge with the next generation.
I would love to read a book about Albus as hero. This graceful, polite, soft-spoken gentlewizard that is wrought by guilt, stowed with power, with gorgeous auburn locks and cuts a lean, but mean form in a purple velvet suit, seduced by edgy ideologies, obsessed by love and inwardly destroyed by the betrayal of his greatest love whom he himself must destroy. Hmmmmm – am I getting hot for Dumbledorre?! I think I’m off in search of some Albus fanfiction!
Sounds like a great read!
Your last paragraph, Red Rocker, especially, “Dumbledore is yesterday’s man.” Yes, I think you’ve got it. Certainly Albus was the moving force behind defeating LV, but his personal day as front and center hero had passed. Defeating the current generation’s evil was up to the current generation and he knew that. (That said, his actions in Volde War I and II were heroic, and if he’d had to do it himself, he would have.)
Knowing when to pass the torch is a better part of wisdom.
(It’s always a relief to be particiapting on computer instead of iPod, because once I do bolding and italicizing, it sticks for the rest of the copy. Anybody know what’s up with that?)
I’ve been spending too long with my kids – I’m still laughing over Red Rocker’s boogers joke!
They are both heros (with flaws). DD primarily for figuring out about the horcruxes and tracking down all the supporting info. But Harry is THE hero of the series for his actions, courage, and unswerving commitment to the side of the Light. And as several people said the books are “Harry Potter and . . . “
I’m glad someone found it funny.
BTW, HBP is coming out December 8th. Can’t wait. It’s a visual treat, booger-brains notwithstanding.
Yes, yes, I too have been hanging out with kids. There is nothing funnier to a 9-year old than a booger joke, unless it’s a fart joke.
There is nothing funnier to a 9-year old than a booger joke, unless it’s a fart joke.
This is true of grad students as their brains turn to mush, as well! I laughed heartily. I’ve missed hanging around the pub…
Kids, grad students and geniuses + Fart joke = 5 minute laugh
Mozart loved a good fart joke.
Harry is the hero. The only reason there is any doubt is he is not the classic hero. His power comes from love, empathy and self sacrifice.
It’s all in how one defines “the hero.” There are people here who are far more familiar than I with literary conventions, including the characteristics of a hero. I haven’t posted in a while, so I’ll just say that anthropology tends to inform my perspective.
In this case, I’m wondering why we ask this question and why it’s so important to have one hero, just as we usually have “a” (one) leader. Rowling has given us a story in which we see things from Harry’s perspective, and from this view Dumbledore progresses from kindly headmaster to mentor to manipulator. Harry kills Voldemort. But who defeats him and his movement? Who holds the resistance together, organizes an intelligence network, trains the next generation (we know he gives Hermione some support in POA, and we don’t know who else, besides, ambiguously, Snape, he’s mentored)? In literary convention, this is not being a hero, but in life perhaps it would be enough. That’s why I actually find it rather troubling to ask “who’s the hero?” – though I have also quite enjoyed the original column, Batchler’s response, and the comments here.
Great discussion. And great rebuttal, Janet. Score on all points.
A technical rabbit trail: Harry is the POV character. It’s Harry’s story, not Dumbledore’s. Sorry, Joivre, but you do have to wait for fan-fiction. (But unless you’re even more anonymous than you’re letting on, I think Dumbledore’s interests might be otherwise inclined…)
That, at least, answers the basic question. JKR is telling Harry’s story.
But does that make him the hero? Not necessarily, though Janet has proved pretty well that he is. But consider this:
Harry could not have defeated LV without Dumbledore, but
Dumbledore could not have defeated LV without Snape, but
Snape could not have defeated LV without Neville, but
Neville could not have defeated LV without Dumbledore and Snape thinking that Harry would defeat LV.
Again, JKR keeps things delightfully ambiguous. In the end, who was the prophecy referring to? Neville or Harry? Neville, after all, saves Hogwarts and destroys the last Horcrux. And I haven’t even mentioned Ron and Hermione, without whom Harry could not have defeated LV, regardless of Dumbledore.
Our live, JKR brilliantly observes, are intertwined in more ways that we can imagine.
Also–Snape is a hero. He is a better hero than Dumbledore. That’s all I have to say.
Selene – that’s a good point. Honestly – when I read the books – I’ve never consciously thought to myself – “Who is the hero here?”. I just instinctively knew from reading tons of books by western civilisation authors who it was. It’s as easy to understand as the difference between a major and minor chord for me. It comes from lifetimes of literature ingrained in my DNA.
And Mr. Pond – you don’t have to say anymore about Snape being a better hero to me. Yes, he is a great hero of this story. And I wish he had more time in the books.
Also – yes, Albus plays for the other team (I am not so anonymous to admit my hetero femaleness). I couldn’t find any fanfiction because I didn’t look. I knew that it would ultimately be a lesson in frustration. That said – I will always hold a soft spot in my adolescent heart for my crush of yore on a sweet transvestite from Transexual, Transylvania.
Rocky Horror references are a very good thing!
Aha! It was the link that wouldn’t allow me to copy and send it!
So – in that case….
*gasp!* Revgeorge?! I would never have guessed.
(This is not my own myspace page.)
http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.individual&videoID=1107909696
Been a while since I’ve seen that. Tim Curry is still good. I think I appreciate him more now than I did before.
I have to admit that my first response to the Carlson post was an eyeroll, but, well, he raised a legitimate point – though rather late in the day. Perhaps he’d be less disappointed in the series if he’d taken an interest in its ambiguities a bit earlier on.
Harry would agree with him about not being the hero, in fact. Mr Pond, you’ve pointed out that Harry couldn’t have done it without etc etc. When Harry decides to give himself up to Voldemort he gives up entirely the notion of victory and of himself as victorious hero. He trusts his friends to carry on and win without need of him, and – by telling him about the snake – sets up Neville as the Voldemort-vanquishing hero.
That’s a good point, woman_ironing: Harry evolves from being a hot-headed kid who has to do everything himself to a planner and a strategist. He is no longer a foot soldier but a general. I don’t think this makes him less of a hero – just a different kind of hero: one who can think as well as act.
“He trusts his friends to carry on and win without need of him….”
Why, how very Dumbledoreish!
Joivre, I ought to have acknowledged your question about whether there can be two heroes. , I even think Snape is a better hero than Harry. But, as you observe, Harry is the POV character and therefore the likeliest hero of this story.
One of things I love about fan fiction is that there are stories out there written from alternative perspectives from which either Dumbledore or Snape, or the combination of the two, are the key factors in removing LV, and Harry really only the pawn. I think one of the things that makes Rowling a greater writer than anyone could have foreseen from the first few books is precisely the subtlety of interlocking people who were necessary to defeat LV, as Mr Pond points out. The strength of their characterization has led to the passion in a lot of the fanfic: people see and pursue different perspectives and paths than Rowling did. Now there’s the measure of a great work! (To me, but I know others see it very differently)
So Harry’s the hero, but which played the greatest role? And if anyone were to be named “Most important wizard of the 20th century,” from what we know, it would have to be Dumbledore IMHO.
Whoa there on the all caps, selene. You’re among friends here–no need to shout to be heard. As to who would be voted the most important wizard of the 20th century, I think it would be a tie between Dumbledore and Harry Potter. Dumbldore, for defeating Grindlewald and making the Wizarding World safer, and Harry Potter, for defeating Voldemort in the second war, and making the Wizarding(and muggle) World safer.
Sorry about that – I failed to close the code after bolding the name; it wasn’t intentional. Unfortunately this doesn’t show up in preview.
I respectfully disagree, Fricka., and here’s my reasoning: after Dumbledore brought down Grindlewald he went on to lead the fight against LV – or so it seems to me from how the adults accept D as the leader. What I got from the epilogue and other JKR comments is that, although Harry heads the auror office, and probably will reform it, Harry’s glad to retire from the role of savior of the world. Dumbledore’s extraordinary strength as a wizard seems to greatly exceed that of any but the 2 dark wizards, whereas I agree with others (Tom, 908ssp) that Harry’s more of an everyman hero.
Perhaps I am dragging us too far afield, however, if the question of Snape as hero is too much of a distraction. I see there’s now a list of fictional mentors; how about one of works where the title and/or POV character isn’t the hero? There must be many . . .
Selene, something that comes to my mind in answer to your last question is Wicked. While Elphaba might be the main character of the novel (and musical) and the hero of her own story, she is ultimately the villain. However, this raises all sorts of questions about POV and the definition of good and evil.
Another techie note: POV characters are not always the heroes, or even the central protagonist. Case in point, Holmes and Watson. Thus, Elphaba is a ‘protagonist’, the central POV character the story follows. But she is not a ‘hero(ine)’ in the classical sense.
Oh, tut-tut, woman_ironing! While point very granted about Neville, the relinquishment of a victorious central role does not mean Harry has resigned his role as the hero. He gives up his old notion of victory–but reaches into a deeper, more powerful sort of heroism. He moves from being simply a warrior-hero to becoming a Messiah figure. Like Frodo, toiling away to Mordor, even though he does not expect to return. Also, I think Harry knows, or suspects, that the killing curse will rebound on Voldemort. So, through his sacrifice, he actually emerges as the greatest hero of the book.
As far as greatest wizard of 20th century goes–JKR leaves that unambiguous at the end of HBP. She refers to Dumbledore as, in so many words, the greatest wizard Harry had ever met or would ever meet. (Snape the close second, of course.)
I always wondered what little Scorpio’s middle name was. Maybe it was also Albus – or may be it was also Severus. Don’t think it would be Harry, though I actually think Harry was the greatest wizard of the 20th century. A lot of people saved Draco.
Mr Pond, I have no argument with Harry as hero of the story. But Harry himself was never interested in being a hero – or a messiah. His struggle with Voldemort was about his survival. Actually, though, what was most important to him was the people he loved, and a lot of the time it was them he was fighting for. Voldemort realised this and so issued his ultimatum. Having seen Snape’s memories, what Harry knew was that he couldn’t vanquish Voldemort and he couldn’t survive. He must accept death: he was a horcrux and would have to let Voldemort kill him. Yes, Harry accepted Voldemort’s ultimatum and sacrificed himself for his friends but beyond that – I think anyway – he reached an understanding of himself in the world that had nothing to do with being a hero or messiah. This – as Dumbledore had hoped – was the very thing that would enable Harry to survive and vanquish Voldemort. This in turn meant Harry became the wizarding world’s messiah, which he endured heroically for a couple of hours before sneaking off to ditch the elder wand, have some kip, and muse on the possibility of a sandwich!
But, red rocker, isn’t the Neville thing about faith, hope and love rather more than strategy? Harry thinks (Is this like ‘Garbo laughs’?!) but I’m not sure it makes him a strategist.
I don’t think that faith, hope and love on the one hand, and strategy on the other, are mutually exclusive. Look at Dumbledore.
And in fact that’s exactly what JKR tells us:
The awfulness of that possibilty, smothered him for a moment, made it impossible to keep talking. But he pulled himself together again: this was crucial, he must be like Dumbledore, keep a cool head, make sure there were back-ups, others to carry on. Dumbledore had died knowing that three people still knew about the Horcruxes; now Neville would take Harry’s place: there would still be three in the secret.
‘Just in case thy’re – busy – and you get the chance -’
‘Kill the snake?’
‘Kill the snake,’ Harry repeated.
Neville takes Harry’s place as the foot soldier. Harry takes Dumbledore’s place as the planner. There’s a neat symmetry to it.
Quite right, woman_ironing–if it comes to what Harry intends then I quite agree with you. He’s just trying to find his place in life, which he does, and one which has more to do with himself as an individual than with the great hopes and ambitions that the wizarding community may have for The Great H. Potter
But he gets to be both a messiah figure and a war-hero. It almost seems that he gets to kill Volemort as an added bonus. In that way, here JKR seems to shy away from the issues surrounding heroism and our understanding of it (or lack thereof), and deals with them less slightly aggressively than JRRT did with Frodo. (Frodo, for instance, never confronts the Dark Lord in person, and never really gets the credit due him.) Or at least draws different conclusions.
Mr Pond,
That’s an interesting point. Maybe it has something to do with Tolkien actually having been a soldier in war-time and the feelings that develops even when you’re on the victorious side.
Red Rocker: Harry is trying, bless him, but he’s not coming over as a natural with the strategy thing.
Dumbledore came over as believing in love in a sort of theoretical way, without actually feeling it for anyone* – at least not until he got to know Harry, who surprised him completely. Didn’t DD say in OotP that his love for Harry buggered up his great plan?
*Hence his exploitation of Snape – an important part of his strategy.
Harry seemed to grow into strategizing on an as-needed basis. Which goes along with how he came into most of this hero thing: not by choice but by circumstance, but not making a bad job of it at all when he had to. At least that’s how I see it.
I always thought that one of the main things about DD was that he fell in love – hard – as a youth, and made a fool of himself and lost his sister as a result, and that was why he never fell in love again. We know that he loved Harry. And I don’t see how that love made a ha’porth’s worth of difference to any of his actions. I think that he kept his own counsel, shed crocodile tears, made emotional but false confessions and went to his grave sticking to his plan – which stuck it to Harry.
That’s the thing about Dumbledore’s love, the thing that his goat-loving brother was trying to explain to Harry: it mostly meant bad news for the ones he loved.
And that’s also the thing about Harry: he learned all this about Dumbledore, but found it in his heart to forgive him because he was sorry for him.
I love Rowling.
Yes Woman_Ironing, (by the way – I love your moniker, is that in ref. to Picasso or Degas?) Harry does not have that natural inborn quality of leadership – but he achieves it. Much like Mozart was born a genius and naturally did great things and Beethoven was born and raised underprivilaged economically and familially and yet achieved greatness. Beethoven refused to acquiesce to Fate.
What’s interesting about the HP series is Fate plays such a huge part of Harry’s life (at one he becomes the chosen one for example) and yet it seems Fate has not given him to tools to achieve his Fate! He achieves his destiny of greatness by will. And Fate – no longer useful, falls to the wayside.
I have read stories of how differently the two of them worked. For Mozart making music was easy – his pieces would come to him already worked out when he woke up in the morning, there seemed to be little work involved, it seemed more as if he were transcribing something he was hearing. Beethoven on the other hand had a rough time of it. He’d write, scratch out, write again, crumple and throw out, try again. I even read a story that he’d place his compositions around him and beat them with a stick, like unruly children (they used to beat children in those days). His manuscripts, which are full of crossings out, give evidence to his struggles. But I think that all this was more indicative of the two men’s temperaments than their genius. They both had an abundance of the latter. But one of them was easygoing and funloving. The other one fought everyone and everything from day 1. On his report card his Kindergarten teacher had written: “Doesn’t play well with others.”
Joivre, Scorpius’ middle name is Hyperion per JKR’s website (there’s a set of family trees of the characters hidden on there).
POV character as villain: The Murder of Roger Ackroyd
There were many heros, including all those, children and adults, who stayed to defend the school.
I was going to say that Dumbledore gave bugger all about Harry, but decided to rethink my choice of words.
Red Rocker – Really!? About the kindergarten report card? That is hilarious if it’s true! Yes – Little Ludwig had a rough time of it as did Harry. His Father was worse than both the Dursley’s put together times ten. And Like Harry he wasn’t born a genius – he struggled. And he struggled all the way to the end and like Harry he wanted equality for the disenfranchised, dignity for the lowly, and freedom from tyranny. If you just look at the output compared to Mozart it’s illuminating. Symphonies 9 to Mozart’s 41, Piano Concertos 5 to Mozart’s 27, Operas 1 to Mozart’s 22. Oh – but are there any more famous four notes in the history of music than da -da -da DAAAAAH! You know what it is – and you’re note hearing it, you’re seeing it – I could go to Oslo, Anchorage, Madrid, Tokyo, Lima, Cairo and sing those four notes and everyone would say “Ah – Beethoven” – now that’s genius.
PS – I never heard he beat his compositions with a stick! That brought on the laughs out loud for me. By the way I did get the honor of seeing one of his composition notebooks up close at Juilliard. There were coffee and mustard stains all over them. He was messy.
Without Beethoven we wouldn’t have Schroeder of Peanuts. Nor the hilarious skits that John Belushi did on the early seasons of Saturday Night Live of Beethoven. Nor would we have A Clockwork Orange with the glorious “Ninth.”
Of course, Mozart did give us “Rock Me Amadeus” by Falco.
Once again, revgeorge, you leave me speechless.
Revgeorge, leave it to you to give us Rock Me Amadeus. But have you ever played the video game Amadeus Revenge?
http://www.mobygames.com/game/amadeus-revenge
I always get a kick out of the way Lucy fawns over Schroeder.
Sorry to break into this nice little chat about Mozart and Beethoven[BTW, revgeorge, you forgot Roll Over, Beethoven by the Beatles!
]but I’m wondering why it’s not apparent to every reader that Harry’s the hero in this set of books. Was Gandalf the hero in The Hobbit? No, it was little Bilbo Baggins, who did not want to go on adventure, but got involved in one anyway, and ended up facing a dragon (besides the trolls, goblins, spiders, and wargs on the way)and being quite a different hobbit at the end of the story. Similarly in The Chronicles of Narnia–Aslan and the other magical creatures are not the featured heroes of that story. It’s the Pevensie children. Dumbledore and Gandalf may be brilliant wizards and master manipulators, but do we see them go through the kind of character growth that we see in Harry, Bilbo, Frodo, and the Pevensies? Huh? Huh?
Fricka, didn’t mention “Roll Over, Beethoven” ’cause I never liked that song.
On your other points, right on! There really shouldn’t be any question over this. Dumbledore is a hero, the heroic mentor, but Harry is the Hero of the story.
RR: The only thing I’d say in DD’s defence is that he did know that Harry could survive and Harry’s survival was part of his plan. Not an essential part, admittedly.
Joivre: Degas was at the back of my mind, but it’s about housework in fact.
I am so sorry to hear that is Scorpius’ middle name. I was hoping it was Scorpius Wulfric Malfoy. A subtle tip to Dumbledore and a cool sound.