_____________________________________________________
English 60-90: C – Essay
_____________________________________________________
Becoming The Chosen One
The choice, identity and destiny of Harry Potter
Oscar Holst
EN3300 – English as a World Language Spring 2008
Högskolan i Kalmar
Supervisor: Anna Greek Examiner: Johan Höglund
Table of Contents
Introduction……….1
Method……….2
Background………..4
The nature of the Free Will problem………4
The concept of Free Will and the threats to it………..4
Literary criticism on the subject of Harry Potter and Choice………..6
1. The choice of being part of a society – the world of wizards………...9
Harry determined? ………10
2. The choice of being part of a group - houses of Hogwarts……….12
The aspect of difference/similarity……….13
The aspect of division/unity………...16
The aspect of constancy/change……….18
Harry determined?………..19
3. The choice of being an individual - Harry Potter………...25
The advocate of Determinism – Professor Trelawney ……….26
The advocate of Free Will – Professor Dumbledore………..28
Harry determined?………..30
Conclusion……….36
References………..37
Introduction
The Road Not Taken
Two roads diverged in a yellow wood, And sorry I could not travel both And be one traveler, long as I stood And looked down one as far as I could To where it bent in the undergrowth;
Then took the other, as just as fair, And having perhaps the better claim, … Yet knowing how way leads on to way, I doubted if I should ever come back.
I shall be telling this with a sigh Somewhere ages and ages hence: Two roads diverged in a wood, and I – I took the one less traveled by,
And that has made all the difference (Robert Frost, 1916)
We cannot have it all. We cannot tread all the paths before us. What, then, is the road to be taken? How is a choice to be made? Are all choices equally good? Is there such a thing as the
right choice? Then, how are we to discern it from the wrong choice?
Throughout history, mankind has used different strategies to help the individual make the correct choice. It is no coincidence that the concept known as “morality” exists. Rule and religion have been used to teach humans to tell right from wrong. But what is right in a post-modern world where the power of traditional authorities is wavering, in the age of
individualism?
Joanne Kathleen Rowling, Scottish author of the books about the boy Harry Potter, is
arguably one individual who holds power over the minds of a young generation of people. As of June 2008, the seven-book series has sold more than 400 million copies and have been translated into more than 64 languages (http://www.thebookseller.com/). British children’s
literature scholar Peter Hunt argues that the novels read by the greatest number of children are those that are most important to study carefully, as it is these authors “whose attitudes and politics are most likely to be stamped (through subconscious osmosis) into the national consciousness”. (Hunt 36)
What kind of morality then, is put forward in the Harry Potter books? Harry is arguably a good person who generally makes morally defendable choices. But can it be said that these choices emanate from a kind of self within Harry (a supposed Free Will)? Or, are there external forces that irrevocably force him in one direction? The paper analyses the
development of Harry Potter and his identity through studying some key choices he makes throughout the entire series.The purpose of the study is to contribute to an understanding of what images of choice, identity and morality are conveyed to a new generation of readers. Can we really choose freely or is it just an illusion? In the cases where it can be debated whether this is true, what are the bases for doubt?
Method
The primary research question falls into two parts: What important, irrevocable character-defining choices does Harry make, and what is it that governs his decisions? In order to answer these questions, the three arguably most important character choices for Harry Potter have been selected for analysis. Each is discussed under a separate heading in the paper, however there are important links between them. The first heading deals with the choice of being part of a certain society rather than another - in Harry’s case, the world of wizards instead of that of “ordinary” people. The second choice is that of belonging to a certain group, sharing friendship and ideals – in Harry’s case, the school house of Gryffindor. Lastly, there is the choice of being a certain individual – put into other words it has to do with whether your fate is truly yours. Each heading is in turn divided into two main parts. The purpose of the first part is to describe and analyze the environment around Harry, and how it narrows down the choices available to him. The second part (called “Harry Determined?” under each heading) aims at analyzing Harry’s changing perceptions of his own choices and at figuring out why he assumes this attitude.
Harry’s choices take place in a fictional world. However people can relate to them as representing defining moments in your life where a person has to make choices that will
determine the rest of his or her life - together, these choices would constitute “the road taken”. In this context, however, it should be pointed out that these choices become important
because people make them important.
Two different approaches have been used in carrying out the analysis. They are a cultural approach and a philosophical approach. The reason for this is to on the one hand describe the paranormal world in which Harry Potter and the other wizards live. The objective of this approach is to discern how this fictional world is ordered as regards to the limitations of choices that the character of Harry Potter can make. The philosophical approach has been used as a tool to enable the discussion of whether or not other choices could have been made. I would like to add that other strategies could have been used, such as for example using the religious concept of predestination in describing the behavior of Harry. Focus has been put on the de-facto choices made by Harry and what they mean in the social and cultural context in which he acts.
The background section is divided into two parts. The first part briefly distinguishes the philosophical concepts of Free Will and Determinism, as the difference between them forms the basis for the method of analysis. This discussion is important, as belief in the truth of Free Will or Determinism affects, as I will demonstrate, how choices are made and whether people are morally responsible for their choices or not. As a natural consequence then, the second part of the background presents some of the contrasting, evaluative attitudes and
interpretations on Harry Potter’s choices held by various authors.
Lastly it should be said that for the sake of clarity, a short appendix has been added at the end of the essay. It lists the seven books in the series in the order that they were written, the same order in which the story unfolds. This can be used as a help in sorting out the correspondence between the books and the timeline of the story.
Background
The nature of the Free Will problem
Are human beings free to act as they will? This is a highly complex problem. For a start, what does being free mean? There are two uses of the term “freedom”, one referring to political liberty and the other to action control (Pink 3). Political freedom has to do with the ways in which states restrict the activities of its citizens by using, for example, laws. But it is as referring to action control that Free Will has occupied the minds of philosophers, and it is primarily this meaning of the term that will be discussed in this essay.
Many of us intuitively believe that we do have action control and thus, in a sense, we have freedom. This is a widely spread conception throughout the Western world today. It is the line of thought that could be described as “common sense”. As Thomas Pink puts it, “The idea of being a free agent – of being in control of how we act – seems … to lie at the heart of our moral thinking”. (9) This is why, unless you have a very serious case of mental sickness, you are considered responsible for your actions. However it is also generally believed that feelings and desires are not as easily controlled. “This is why we are responsible for our actions, and not for our feelings and desires”. (9)
However, the nature of the Free Will problem is such that it seems impossible to ever be able to find an accurate answer that we know to be true. Therefore, there is serious disagreement among philosophers about whether these views – that we are all in control and can thus be held responsible for how we act - really should constitute our common sense. After all, the question remains unanswered: to what degree are we really in control of our actions and choices?
The concept of Free Will and the threats to it
The Free Will theory is considered one of the critical concepts of philosophy and has been discussed in the Western world at least since the time of the ancient civilizations of Greece and Rome. Up until present day, numerous theories have been put forward to provide for a more complex understanding of casual mechanisms. What scientists agree on is that we can say that people function mentally by using what is called mental – and neural events. Ted Honderich makes an attempt at defining them: “Mental events are in space and time and they have a discernible character or nature … As for neural events, which are less baffling, we can
say that they have electro-chemical properties and leave it at that.“ (22) But what is it that makes these specific events happen? This is where scholars disagree.
Libertarians are those philosophers that believe that people have a self or soul of some kind that originates choices. This “originator”, according to strict libertarians, is a power that is capable of originating genuinely different choices and actions. According to this theory, if one was able to go back in time and have exactly the same situation, one could really make a different choice. However, there are some serious problems facing libertarians of which the most serious is often called the “random” problem. In short, this type of criticism has to do with an idea that if there is absolutely no explanation that can be found as to why a certain action occurs, it would seem to be random (such as a twitch in the leg, for example).
Randomness would agreeably not constitute a more free way of acting than if everything was determined, as randomness per definition means that something occurs outside control (Pink 81).
Gregory Bassham identifies “three major challenges to human freedom and responsibility”. These he calls the “scientific challenge”, the “religious challenge” and the “paranormal challenge” (214). In his analysis he focuses mostly on the paranormal challenge, as this is according to him “the one raised most clearly in the Potter books.” This essay however will, as previously stated, not rule out any explanation for fate possibly being true. Most focus has been put, however, on the scientific and paranormal perspectives.
In scientific discussion opposed to Libertarians, we find those scholars that are usually classified “determinists”. Honderich states that “Determinism is the theory that our choices and decisions and what gives rise to them are effects.” (6) Because an effect is a direct result of something, what this view essentially means is that the present is a result of the past and what will come to be is a result of what is now. According to this view, it would theoretically be possible to predict the future because the world as it is now can only develop in one way. However it does not mean that the universe develops in some kind of logical way that would actually be able for human beings to predict. For that, the world is far too complex.
Does determinism rule out Free Will? Many philosophers have believed so. According to this view, free choice as we perceive it is an illusion – we think that we make completely free choices but what really happens is that they come about because of what has happened before.
For this reason determinism is looked upon by many as a threat (Pink 14). The theory may at a quick glance sound incredibly pessimistic. However it is a very well developed, complex theory, supported by many philosophers still today. Many of them do not exclude free will, but are to various degrees “compatibilists”, believing in a world that does not exclude either deterministic forces or some degree of Free Will. Unfortunately, it is not possible to here linger and further explore the very many intricate and very interesting ideas that have been put forward. For the purpose of this study we shall be satisfied with knowing that scientific
thought on the subject is incredibly diverse.
Literary criticism on the subject of Harry Potter and Choice
The academic world has increasingly taken an interest in the cultural phenomenon of Harry Potter since the release of the first novel in the late 90’s. The process of writing this paper has made clear just how much serious writing has been devoted to analyzing it, some of which discusses topics along the lines of this essay. It has been my aim to relate this work to writing representing different viewpoints. It should be made clear that the sheer volume of academic material available on Harry Potter is very large, and there is definitely more to be found on the matter. What is interesting, for the purpose of my paper, are the comments on Choice that have been made in them. Considering the amount of writing available, I have been surprised to find rather little that aims towards investigating this particular topic.
Much attention has been given to relating the Potter-books to Christianity, giving rise to heated debates whether or not the books convey a message that correspond to that of Christianity. Harry Potter and the Bible belongs to the category of writing that criticizes Harry Potter. A few of the points that Richard Abanes makes about Choice in this book are certainly worthy of thought. The strongest is that many of Rowling’s characters have a high tendency to cheat and get away with it (130-132). It may indeed be seen as troubling that Harry is a flawed character. To this he adds the quite accurate perception that characters like Rita Skeeter, Percy Weasley and Severus Snape, people who are prone to obeying rules and criticizing others for their inability to do the same (although he conveniently forgets that they do so for their own purposes), are portrayed as “nasty” or a “dreadful stick-in-the-mud”. Abanes may be excused for not having had access to the last three books, however there are a couple of things that he completely overlooks. One of them is the potential for growth that Harry is blessed with during his seven years at Hogwarts – his morals are by no means perfect
when he enters the school. Instead he learns from his experiences and from the guidance of various influential figures around him. Rowling herself has openly declared that she does not see Harry as morally perfect. “Harry is not, and never has been, a saint. Like Snape [a teacher that Harry strongly dislikes], he is flawed and mortal. Harry’s faults are primarily anger and occasional arrogance” (http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/). What is even more troubling is that Abanes seems unable to see any value in the dilemmas of making choices: and sometimes having to live with knowing that you made the wrong one. He just dismisses Rowling’s morality as being, for example, “confusing” (7) or “relative” (37).
Just what Richard Abanes disregards in his analysis is very well articulated by Chantel Lavoie in her article “Safe as Houses: Sorting and School Houses at Hogwarts”:
Children, too, have important decisions to make, and Rowling’s texts emphasize that they need to consider individual preference, conscience, and right and wrong rather than what the majority think and do. These choices should be informed, reflecting both self-reliance and cooperation – involving group or family loyalty and “grown-up”
negotiations between those shifting boundaries. This idea is not something from which Rowling shies. (Critical Perspectives 42)
A different Christian writer, John Granger, looks upon Harry Potter in another light than Abanes. In his book Looking for God in Harry Potter he appreciates the development that takes place in Harry’s character. For example, this is what he has to say about Harry Potter
and the Prisoner of Azkaban.
When he learns in the Shrieking Shack of Pettigrew’s Judas-like betrayal, he has been changed so much by his choices in therapy and his consequent enlightenment that not only does he refrain from attacking Pettigrew, but he risks his life to save Wormtail [Pettigrew]. He has transformed from a passionate child rushing to judgement and punishment on Privet Drive to a young adult capable of great discernment and semidivine mercy. (Granger 84)
This is the judgement passed on the books as a whole: “Whereas our popular culture often excuses people based on their circumstances, these books raise the question of responsibility for our actions and point out that our choices have moral significance” (86). He praises Harry
because he “consistently chooses what is right over what is easy”. What I think should be pointed out as a bit problematic in Granger, though, is that he believes that “Choice is the human ability to decide between two points” (77). What actually faces Harry are often situations where a multitude of choices and solutions are available. Even where there are seemingly only two choices, it is often unclear which is the right one to make. It can also very much be discussed whether Harry in all situations makes the right choice.
In their article Character, Choice and Harry Potter Catherine and David Deavel even more closely develops the theme of Choice. They claim that “Character is, more important, the mark that is left on the world by a person’s chosen actions or, if you prefer, his way of being in the world” (Deavel & Deavel 50) thus very closely connecting the concepts of Character and Choice. They also have a very important response to the likes of Richard Abanes who claims that Harry is never punished by good authority.
Harry is not a “boy of destiny” for Dumbledore or any of the “good authorities”. True, Remus Lupin, a “good authority,” covers for Harry after he dangerously sneaks out for a good time in the nearby magical village, but Lupin’s reprimand is tougher than
punishment. Lupin reminds Harry of his parents’ sacrifice, saying, “A poor way to repay them – gambling their sacrifice for a bag of tricks”. (Deavel & Deavel 53)
In his article “The Courageous Harry Potter” Tom Morris brings up another very interesting aspect of Harry and his relation to his choices. He claims that Harry’s courage is his
foundation of his being able to make choices, as “thinking and reasoning about what we should do can take us only so far…The evidence available will never be fully sufficient for any truly important personal decision” (Harry Potter and philosophy 21). As he puts it, Harry is ultimately forced to take “the leap of faith”, a concept coined by the great nineteenth century philosopher Søren Kierkegaard.
1. The choice of being part of a society – the world of wizards
Harry Potter’s first ten years of life take place in a world which is supposed to be ours. On the back of the very first Harry Potter-book, Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone, these are the very first words that we read:
Harry Potter thinks he is an ordinary boy – until he is rescued by a beetle-eyed giant of a man, enrols at Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry, learns to play Quidditch and does battle in a deadly duel. The Reason: HARRY POTTER IS A WIZARD.
Harry’s life turns upside down. He no longer knows what to expect from life but for Harry, the mysteries of what can be found outside the confining walls of the Dursley family (to whom he was orphaned) are far to alluring to withstand. What was perceived by Harry as the life of an “ordinary” boy – in his case life with the Dursleys – grows increasingly repulsive to him the more he realizes what he really should be expecting from life. However, the
prerequisite for this happening seems to have nothing to do with Harry’s own actions.
Without specific lineage, in other words descending from a wizard family, Harry would never have been able to leave the Dursleys. On the other hand, the very fact that Harry is (or at least his mother was) a wizard is arguably the reason that made him an outcast in the first place. His heritage is, to use a classic metaphor, a double edged sword. And in this way, Rowling’s world is very different from ours – the division of human beings into wizards and nonwizards (also known as muggles) adds a scope to the story that severely determine the actions of various characters depending on their heritage. Rowling does make her magical world complex by peopling it with so called half-bloods (wizards with one magically competent parent), squibs (wizards who lack magical abilities despite their heritage) and muggle-born wizards (wizards with no magical heritage), but the bottom line is either you have magical
abilities or you don’t. There are no examples of muggles who have been able to slowly learn
magic, if they have not been born with some magical abilities. The muggle-born wizards, such as Harry’s close friend Hermione, are all recognized as having magical abilities very early on in their lives. Interestingly, after finishing all the books, Rowling commented in an Internet-chat that she originally intended to include a character who arrived to Hogwarts without using magic ever before. However this is an idea that she had abandoned by the time she was working on the third book (http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/). Innate talent, rather than training, then, is what decides whether people can be allowed into a school of magic such as
Hogwarts. The basic assumption of innate talent, however, does not mean that training and nurture are not required in order to actually use magic. Heilman and Gregory criticize Rowling for having created an
ideological world presenting privileged insiders and outcast outsiders across a wide range of signifiers. These include gender, social class, peer group affiliations, race, culture, and nationality. As such, the Harry Potter books legitimize numerous forms of social inequality and their related cultural forms of social inequality… (Critical
Perspectives 242)
While this might certainly be a valid observation, Rowling’s world also serves to make the vision we have of outsiders more complex. Despite their varied social standing within the wizard community, all the characters in Rowling’s world share being outcasts from the non-magical world. And while it may be argued that the muggles are excluded from the wizard community, those who advocate wizard supremacy are consistently represented as bad. The further we get in reading Harry Potter, we realize that the wizards are, like muggles, not primarily wizards, but individuals.
There is another important point that must be made when talking about the nature of
Rowling’s world. The issues and problems of her split up world are by no means disregarded by Rowling. The further we get into the series, the more we realize how many of her
characters have suffered from this division of the world into those who are able to perform magic and those who are not. The best example of this would arguably be the archenemy Voldemort, who was the son of a man who left his wife when he found out she was a witch. The distance between wizards and muggles is great, which readers are often reminded of. One could even argue that the choice of being part of the wizard community is not really a choice at all. I still choose to perceive it as such, though undeniably it would take an individual of very strong character to be able to defy these old boundaries.
Harry determined?
Did Harry have a choice of whether to enter Hogwarts or not? When Harry initially gets his letter of invitation, his uncle Vernon confiscates it and forbids Harry to read it. It is not until Harry meets the half-giant Hagrid that he finds out what the letters are about. At that point,
given the misery of his life with the Dursleys, the choice is easy for Harry. Meeting new people, like Hagrid, for one thing seems as good a reason as any to go to Hogwarts. Hagrid wishes Harry a happy birthday (something that his aunt and uncle would never do) and also tells him of his parents, about whom Harry knows next to nothing. He also tells Harry that he himself is famous. Harry finally gets to see the letter which informs him that he “has a place at Hogwarts…” and that “we await your owl by no later than 31 July” (Philosopher’s Stone 42-43). Hagrid seems to not even consider the possibility that Harry would not come, as he immediately writes a letter to headmaster Dumbledore, saying that he is “taking [Harry] to buy his things tomorrow” (Philosopher’s Stone 43). The effect on Harry is not surprising: “Questions exploded inside Harry’s head like fireworks and he couldn’t decide which to ask first” (Philosopher’s Stone 43). In other words, Harry is overwhelmed by different
impressions and new knowledge. A combination of strong external pressure and internal motivation decides the outcome: Harry will from now on be labeled a wizard or at least a member of the wizard community. The idea of not going seems to never occur to him at all. What is very interesting, though, is that Harry never explicitly complies. He just does not protest. He does not really ever reflect over the nature of being a wizard as opposed to a muggle throughout the series – for good and bad, it seems as natural to him as being a human being. Though Harry does not suffer in being excluded from the world of muggles (ordinary people without magical skill), his determined heritage hinders him, like all other wizards, to participate in the world outside.
2. The choice of being part of a group - houses of Hogwarts
After arriving at Hogwarts, Harry and his fellow first-year students soon realize that they will not only be wizards. They will also be defined as a member of a so called “house”. Whether to be part of a house at all is not something you can choose – all students go into one of four categories. The sorting is done by the so called Sorting Hat, a very old hat that you put over your face, and the hat then shouts the name of the house that you have to enter. The
importance of the houses is immediately made clear when Harry and the other new students arrive at the castle: the moment the door of the castle opens, Professor McGonagall meets them and leads them off to the “sorting ceremony”.
‘The sorting is a very important ceremony because, while you are here, your house will be something of a family within Hogwarts. You will have classes with the rest of your house, sleep in your house dormitory and spend free time in your house common room. ‘The four houses are called Gryffindor, Hufflepuff,
Ravenclaw and Slytherin. Each house has its own noble history and each has produced outstanding witches and wizards. … The sorting ceremony will take place in a few minutes in front of the rest of the school. I suggest you all smarten yourselves up as much as you can while you are waiting’. (Philosopher’s Stone 85)
Through this introductory statement, McGonagall immediately shows the importance of the houses and how being part of a house is very closely linked to your identity as a wizard. The houses are identified through their history and the people who have distinguished themselves and who have been able to bring glory to their house. We can probably expect that even after leaving the school, a wizard might often recall and identify himself as having been part of a certain house. In this section, I will discuss the meaning of this sorting within Rowling’s world of wizards, and how it seems to generally affect peoples’ freedom and identity. I will do this by identifying a number of aspects – properties, traits or characteristics that can be said to apply to the sorting. They are not entirely easy to separate, as they intertwine and form a rather unified whole. Even so, for the sake of analysis, an attempt has been made at this.
The aspect of difference/similarity
What makes a person go to a certain house? Or perhaps we should say “Why is someone put in a certain house”? It is difficult in itself to satisfactorily describe the casual mechanisms that govern this relationship. This should be noted when attempts are made here to describe it. There must be some criteria that decides the outcome, unless the students are sorted at random – which they clearly are not. What can be established is that the sorting is not done, for
example, by any teachers or the students taking a test that is observable . Instead, it is a “pointed wizard’s hat, (…) patched and frayed and extremely dirty” that does the sorting (Philosopher’s Stone 87). But what is it really? The nature of the hat and the sorting ritual is something that is explored continually throughout the entire series. At this point we are given limited clues through the hat’s song:
‘Oh, you may not think I’m pretty, But don’t judge on what you see, I’ll eat myself if you can find A smarter hat than me. (…)
There’s nothing hidden in your head The sorting hat can’t see,
So try me on and I will tell you
Where you ought to be.’ (Philosopher’s Stone 88)
At this point it is implied that the sorting is a one-way process with the hat making the
decision. However it does reveal that it will not judge the students by their appearance, but by their heads. (and, notably, it also encourages the students to do the same!) At the end of The
Chamber of Secrets, it is claimed by Headmaster Dumbledore that there is a strong element of
choice during the Sorting (Chamber 245).
However there is also criteria based on personality and talent. Every year the sorting hat sings a song before the sorting, probably with the purpose of giving the students a chance at
understanding the sorting ritual. The songs also provide important clues about what qualities are looked for among the new students:
You might belong in Gryffindor, Where dwell the brave at heart,
Their daring, nerve and chivalry Set Gryffindors apart;
You might belong in Hufflepuff, Where they are just and loyal, Those patient Hufflepuffs are true And unafraid of toil;
Or yet in wise old Ravenclaw, If you’ve a ready mind,
Where those of wit and learning, Will always find their kind; Or perhaps in Slytherin You’ll make your real friends, Those cunning folk use any means
To achieve their ends. (Philosopher’s Stone 88)
So, the hat puts people into different houses, depending on what they are like. In other words, there seems to be some sort of essence that can be found in all members of a certain house. Is this a deterministic description of life that Rowling presents to us? To what degree is the hat omniscient? Is it capable of predicting the future? Throughout the series, we get some clues that can help answer these questions, to a degree. We can definitely say that it is not always very clear where a person should be put. According to Tom Morris, “it was the intent of the founders of these houses to give each student a place for development of whatever might be his or her greatest strength or most distinctive quality” (10). Elisabeth Heilman and Anne Gregory state in their article “Images of the Privileged Insider and the Outcast Outsider” that “house membership establishes the way in which students are perceived by the others around them as well as the way in which they perceive themselves” (246). However, Rowling demonstrates that her world can not be neatly divided into four distinct categories of people. The evidence for this is, for one thing, that the Sorting Hat sometimes takes more time in making its decision. In other cases, such as that of Draco Malfoy for example, “the hat had barely touched his head when it screamed, ‘SLYTHERIN!’” (Philosopher’s Stone 90). In Harry’s case, the hat seems more unsure, and ponders whether it should put him in Slytherin though ultimately, Gryffindor is chosen. (Philosopher’s Stone 91). There are also examples of characters that seem, considering what we learn of their personality throughout the series, slightly misplaced. I will briefly discuss some of the most distinguished cases in the series.
Neville Longbottom comes across as a rather clumsy and insecure boy, who does not possess the same kind of self-confidence that is so typical of Gryffindors and that could be found in, for example, Harry or Ron. His down-to-earth demeanor, along with his skill in Herbology (a subject usually favoured by Hufflepuffs) can be considered a hint that perhaps he should have been better off in Hufflepuff instead. Percy Weasley, like all the other members of his family, also belongs in Gryffindor. He is self confident and successful in his studies, but very clearly lacks the kind of critical thinking and rule-breaking attitude that also distinguishes
Gryffindors. Hermione, finally, also has trouble going against authorities and is very talented – readers might already in Philosopher’s Stone have the thought that it was odd that she didn’t end up in Ravenclaw. Rowling plays a bit on this as she finally reveals, in the Order of the
Phoenix, that the Sorting Hat did indeed consider putting her in Ravenclaw, before choosing
Gryffindor (Phoenix 353). It would have been interesting to study a few students who at some point in their lives regretted their choice. Chantel Lavoie argues that there is at least one such case: “It was a Gryffindor, Peter Pettigrew, who supported Voldemort and betrayed Harry’s parents…It is clear that the sniveling Pettigrew is a Slytherin at heart, even though, in effect he turned Slytherin after leaving Hogwarts” (Reading Harry Potter 41). To Lavoie, is does not matter that you were once initiated into a house if you cannot live up to what is expected of you as a member of that house – in which case you might “turn” to another. To her, Pettigrew’s case is proof that the “the annual sorting ritual is not deterministic but merely reflective” (41). Another character that adds to this complexity is Severus Snape, the Head of Slytherin house. Throughout the entire series, the reader is invited to join Harry in his
constant suspicion that Snape is secretly supporting the Dark Lord. As revealed at the end of the final book, this is not the case. Dumbledore actually hints that perhaps Snape would have been better off in Gryffindor. This is definitely not something that Snape would admit to, however. Snape’s secrets are arguably the best kept information in the entire series, and a prime example of the abilities of some people to accommodating their exterior to what is expected of them. Then ultimately, what are the houses for? According to Deborah De Rosa, author of the article “Wizardly Challenges to and Affirmations of the Initiation Paradigm in Harry Potter”, “the school socializes its students about the dynamics necessary for negotiating their place in the community” (Critical Perspectives 179). In other words, there is a complex interplay between students (and teachers as well!) in constructing the identity of individuals. All of this contribute to our gradually deepening understanding of the complexity of
The aspect of division/unity
During Harry’s second year, the Gryffindor students learn the history of the four founders of Hogwarts during a history lesson. The school was founded over a thousand years ago by the “four greatest witches and wizards of the age”. Harmony soon turned into strife and division, as the founders had different visions for what students should be accepted. Apparently, differences between Godric Gryffindor, Helga Hufflepuff and Rowena Ravenclaw were not serious enough for them to stop collaborating. Instead, it was the fourth founder, Salazar Slytherin, who finally could not accept working with the others and left the school. The story of Hogwarts creation sets the stage for future conflict and strife. During his second and third year, Harry misses the sorting ritual for various reasons. However during his fourth year, he makes an interesting observation – the Hat’s song has been changed.
‘That’s not the song it sang when it sorted us,’ said Harry, clapping along with everyone else.’
‘Sings a different one every year, said Ron. ‘It’s got to be a pretty boring life, hasn’t it, being a hat? I suppose it spends all year thinking up the next’ . (Goblet 158)
What Ron fails to see at this point, is that the most probable reason for the song changing is that the Hat wants the students to continually reflect on the nature of the houses. This idea is confirmed during his fifth year, when the ceremony gets even more interesting. The sorting Hat now retells the old story, and the image of a lost paradise is enhanced further:
The houses that, like pillars four, Had once held up the school, Now turned upon each other and, Divided, sought to rule. (…) And at last there came a morning When old Slytherin departed
And though the fighting then died out He left us quite downhearted.
Never since the founders four Were whittled down to three Have the houses been united
As they were meant to be. (Phoenix 186)
What is interesting to note is that the picture conveyed is a bit different – we learn that the other founders were not really happy to see Slytherin go, but looked upon him as a fourth pillar: a piece of the construct that builds the whole. Slytherin’s leaving seems to have affected the other founders, and made their individual work less great. In other words:
difference and sometimes perhaps even strife is preferred to an actual parting of the ways. But the Hat goes on:
…this year I’ll go further Listen to my song:
Though condemned I am to split you Still I worry that it’s wrong,
Though I must fulfil my duty And must quarter every year, Still I wonder whether Sorting May not bring the end I fear. Oh, know the perils, read the signs, The warning history shows,
For our Hogwarts is in danger, From external, deadly foes And we must unite inside her Or we’ll crumble from within I have told you, I have warned you…
Let the Sorting now begin. (Phoenix 186-187)
In this new light, the Sorting certainly becomes problematic. The message: it is inclusion that is needed, not exclusion, for the school (and for the wizard community as a whole) to survive. Considering this, it is a big tragedy that when it is finally time for the last battle against Voldemort, the only member of Slytherin house who does note evacuate but instead fights is the Head of House, Slughorn (Hallows 491). Nevertheless, even after the final battle has taken place, the house system is retained, still including Slytherin (Hallows 606-607).
And yet, there are certainly many aspects of Hogwarts that reflect the competitive and sometimes hostile attitude between the houses. “Gryffindor and Slytherin students loathed each other on principle” (Prince 137) .On the most basic level, the students spend most their time together with people from their own house – going to classes with them, eating together, sleeping in the same hall and so on. There is also, every year, a House Cup contest in which points are awarded or deducted for different kinds of actions: for example an extraordinary performance in the classroom may award points, while breaking rules loses points from the house. It should be said that there are very often clear examples of favoritism. There is also the Quidditch Cup that adds an additional amount of tension. Of course all this could be said to be good sportsmanship, but it is not unproblematic as it may direct students towards like-mindedness and outward hostility.
The aspect of constancy and change
The importance of history is especially prominent in The Chamber of Secrets. Rumours abound in the school that the so called heir of Slytherin has come to purge the school and live up to the founder’s old legacy. Professor Binns, the teacher of History, reluctantly tells the children of the old legend and this is the first time that they get to hear about the founding of the school and the parting of Slytherin. What is to be made of history? Are we, like the scientifically minded Professor Binns, to simply not believe the old stories going around? History and myth blend – Hogwarts itself defies logic and complete understanding. Even Dumbledore himself admits that “Oh, I would never dream of assuming I know all of Hogwarts’ secrets” (a rather humble statement that arguably adds to his greatness) (Goblet 363).
More importantly, how should we interpret history? Memory is carried on, through the actions and choices of new generations. Dealing with history becomes a crucial challenge for Harry during his second year. As we have seen, just like in the real world, there are forces at work in Rowling’s imaginary one that perpetuate old patterns. The Sorting Hat is an excellent
example of this. What should definitely be noted about the hat is that it is itself caught up in a deterministic process! As Chantel Lavoie puts it: “The song [of the sorting Hat], varied yearly, links the past, present and future” (Reading Harry Potter 35). Up until their fifth year, Harry and his fellow students have every reason to believe that the Hat might be some sort of god that places Harry neatly into the divine order created by the god. As we see in The Order
long as the Headmaster of Hogwarts maintains the house system), even if he feels it may not be right anymore. Could the Hat be removed? Even Dumbledore never seems to consider this intriguing possibility at all. He does say once, though, that he thinks “maybe we are sorting people too soon”. Voldemort makes an attempt at destroying the Hat with fire but it seems that it cannot be destroyed (Hallows 586-587). The house system, with all its benefits and faults, is retained after Voldemort has been defeated (Hallows 606-607). People, for example teachers, parents, and politicians, are really the ones who make sure that the system does not change. An example is the introductory statement (see page 11-12 of the essay) by
McGonagall, an excellent teacher with high moral standards, by the way, that makes people regard the current system as something worthy of admiration and respect. We can imagine how, year after year, she keeps telling new students about the importance of carrying on the old legacy. Through family, friends and society, old perceptions are conveyed to the new generation. Chantel Lavoie articulates the issue well: “[Gryffindor’s] intelligence is demonstrated in that it was he who came up with the solution to the problem of perpetual sorting by taking from his own head the hat into which the four founders then placed their brains” (Reading Harry Potter 43). In other words, Gryffindor’s brilliance was so great that he managed to perpetuate his own ideas - with what followed as a result. This problem will be more thoroughly discussed in the section about Harry’s perspective.
In theory then - if we have made the right assumptions about the nature of the sorting hat – any wizard, regardless of talent, could use their free will to go to any of the houses. The old patterns could be broken up and the houses could assume new identities. In this light then, it becomes more and more obvious that the Sorting – though it is an extremely established tradition within the wizard community – is still a human construction and not of divine progeny. As such, it is not necessarily the most rational way of constructing the world. However the present reality that Rowling depicts seems to be more along the lines that nearly a thousand years worth of individuals have done little to change old patterns.
Harry determined?
When Harry Potter finds out that he is to be sorted into a house, he seems very uncomfortable with it. He seems much more reluctant to be sorted into a house than being labeled a wizard. Why is this? In getting to Hogwarts, many of his greatest wishes are already made true – he gets away from the Dursleys, he gets to meet knew people and he faces the possibility of
personal development and learning (not least about his parents). What would the sorting into a house add to the benefits? Initially, Harry can see no advantages. He can definitely grasp the concept of being able to do magic versus not being able to do magic (thus the reason for using the labels “wizard” and “muggle”), but he can not see any distinction between different houses. In other words, there is a lack of knowledge on his part. I argue in the following that one of the really important developments for Harry throughout the series is the understanding of what it means to be part of a house. As there is a gradual development of his
understanding, I will describe it chronologically.
The first time he ever hears about the houses is also the first time that he meets Draco Malfoy, a boy that he immediately grows to dislike. The basic understanding that we can expect of him is that depending on what family you belong to, you go to a certain house. In other words, the deciding factor is heritage.
‘Know what house you´ll be in yet?’
‘No, said Harry, feeling more stupid by the minute.’
‘Well, no one really knows until they get there, do they, but I know I´ll be in Slytherin, all our family have been – imagine being in Hufflepuff, I think I´d leave, wouldn´t you?’ (Philosopher’s Stone 60)
Though Harry is close to completely ignorant, he now gets his first ideas (which might not necessarily be true). First of all Draco, who should be Harry’s equal – they are the same age and are both attending their first year at Hogwarts – is very confident and seems to know things that Harry doesn’t. Draco also presents to Harry the horrible assumption that the houses are unequal and that some are more desirable than others. This view could imply a wider perception of the world of wizards as a whole: that it is also a world of winners and losers, something that Harry would scorn as he himself has clearly been on the losing side up until this moment. The very fact that Draco is so very confident that he will be in Slytherin is, as we will later see, the very reason for his going there. But, importantly, this in not something that Harry or probably even Draco understand at this stage. Both of them seek comfort and security but they are doing it in two very different ways: for Draco this would be equivalent to staying in the same house as his whole family have – for Harry, who doesn’t really know anything about his ancestry, the houses rather become a threat. He would prefer not having to
belong in a specific house. It is easy to judge Draco as being easily deluded or judgmental. However Ron Weasley, who later becomes Harry’s best friend, is not altogether different.
‘What house are your brothers in?’ asked Harry. ´Gryffindor,’ said Ron. Gloom seemed to be settling on him again. ‘Mum and Dad were in it, too. I don´t know what they´ll say if I’m not. I don’t suppose Ravenclaw would be too bad, but imagine if they put me in Slytherin.’ ‘That’s the house Vol- I mean, You-Know-Who was in?’ ‘Yeah, said Ron. He flopped back into his seat, looking depressed.’ (Philosopher’s Stone 80)
Is Ron really any better than Draco? Just like Draco’s, Ron’s attitude contributes to
maintaining a pattern where certain families go into certain houses. But not only immature children believe in this. The old and experienced teacher Slughorn claims that “Yes, it usually goes in families. Not always, though” (Prince 71). In short, many of the characters believe that there is a strong deterministic pattern based on family and heritage. Though Ron thinks that his parents would accept him going to another house than Gryffindor, he is not
completely sure. This shadow of a doubt may very well be what in the end tips the scales.
Ron, like Draco, is unable to free himself of the pressure of previous generations. Of course we can also feel pity for Ron, as well as for Draco –
For some reason, he was looking gloomy. ‘I’m the sixth in our family to go to
Hogwarts. You could say I’ve got a lot to live up to. Bill and Charlie have already left – Bill was Head Boy and Charlie was captain of Quidditch. Now Percy’s a Prefect. Fred and George mess around a lot , but they’re really funny. Everyone expects me to do as well as the others, but if I do, it’s no big deal, because they did it first.’ (Philosopher’s
Stone 75)
This may very well be Ron’s biggest problem – unlike Harry he has got a whole lot to live up to. Family, or rather what is expected of you because you are a part of a family, can be a liability. Also, let us not forget McGonagall’s first words to her new students, possibly ringing in the ears long after they have been uttered: “while you are here, your house will be
something of a family within Hogwarts” (Philosopher’s Stone 85). Of course this could seem
like a golden opportunity for Harry to compensate for the loss of his real family but at this very early state, it instead invokes fear and insecurity in him.
Another aspect of Harry’s initial dislike of the house system seems is the idea that being in a house means performing. This would comply with the view that houses are ranked and that one house may be simply better than others (at least for some time). As we have seen, this is a view that is encouraged from the part of the school, if we consider the annual Quidditch- and House Cup contests. Every new year, losing houses get a new chance at redeeming their honor as there is a new contest. On the surface this seems to be what the houses are for. Intuitively this also seems to be the idea among students, particularly new ones – their understanding is based on rumors and simple explanations. For example, consider this quote:
‘How exactly do they sort us into houses?’ he asked Ron.
‘Some sort of test, I think. Fred says it hurts a lot, but I think he was joking.’
‘Harry’s heart gave a terrible jolt. A test? In front of the whole school? But he didn’t know any magic yet – what on earth would he have to do? He looked around and saw that everyone else looked terrified too. No one was talking much except Hermione Granger, who was whispering very fast about all the spells she’d learnt and wondering which one she’d need’. (Philosopher’s Stone 86)
Being put in a certain house is, as Harry understands it at this stage, based on what you do, not what you are. It would seem that the other students are thinking along the same lines.
A third, possible explanation for Harry’s dismay at the house system is that might be
considered as divisive and establishing prejudice. However this is, tragically, something that none of the characters in the novels, including Harry, is able to fully escape. After meeting Draco for the first time, where he has got the idea that the houses are hierarchical, he consults Hagrid on the matter:
‘And what are Slytherin and Hufflepuff?’ ‘School houses. There’s four. Everyone says Hufflepuff are a lot o’duffers, but –’ ‘I bet I’m in Hufflepuff,’ said Harry gloomingly. ‘Better Hufflepuff than Slytherin’, said Hagrid darkly. ‘There’s not a single witch or wizard who went bad who wasn’t in Slytherin’. (Philosopher’s Stone 61)
Hagrid gives two pieces of new information here. Firstly, that members of certain houses have certain traits that they share. Secondly, and more problematic, is the inevitability of these traits. That is, if you go to Slytherin, there is no chance that you will not turn out bad. Note
that Harry says “I bet I’m in Hufflepuff”, as if, in a typically deterministic fashion, the decision has already been made for him. Thus, Hagrid (who is supposed to be a good guy, by the way) encourages a simplistic view on the houses. Very few people seem to really live up to the Sorting Hat’s encouragement to “not judge by what you see” (Philosopher’s Stone 88).
What is made clear to Harry after putting on the hat, though, is that he himself has some influence over the choice. The hat recognizes his unwillingness to go to Slytherin, and this is ultimately what puts him in Gryffindor instead. Now, let us suppose that Harry had no clear idea or will or force that guided him toward a certain house. Where then would he go? Would it not be Slytherin? Does the hat really have a conversation with all the students? We can almost certainly say that not all would be making as determined a choice as Harry. If so, would they be left vulnerable to the power the Sorting Hat? Let us also consider this: it may seem that Harry made a very conscious choice here and demonstrated a good amount of free will, but is that really so? His reasons for not wanting to go to Slytherin were completely based on the opinions of a few others, most explicitly those of Draco and Hagrid. Considering this, Harry hardly makes a very informed choice. On the other hand, how could he? Do any students make really informed choices? Even Hermione Granger, who is always very well informed, is reasoning in a way that illustrates this problem very clearly:
‘Do either of you know what house you’ll be in? I’ve been asking around and I hope I’m in Gryffindor, it sounds by far the best, I hear Dumbledore himself was one, but I suppose Ravenclaw wouldn’t be too bad…’ (Philosopher’s Stone 79)
Hermione ultimately finds herself in Gryffindor house. It is clear that this has to do with her own choice. But why does she favor Gryffindor so? The only explanation that can be found is that she knows that the headmaster of the school, the great magician Dumbledore, was once a Gryffindor. But Ravenclaw would seem at least a good choice for her as Gryffindor, as this is a house that accepts gifted students that are heavily devoted to their studies. It seems that Hermione makes her choice based on the reputation of the houses.
His perceptions and ideas as stated above cause confusion and for the whole duration of his second year, Harry wonders whether he really should be a member of Gryffindor. It is not until he battles Voldemort at the end of the year that he gets what he accepts as proof that the Sorting Hat did not misplace him – the hat appears in the midst of the battle and allows him to
draw out the Sword of Gryffindor with which he is able to defeat Voldemort. Whether or not the Sorting should be considered a representation of pure determinism could be discussed. At the very least, Harry is encouraged by Dumbledore at the end of The Chamber of Secrets to look upon his sorting as the result of a conscious choice. By believing that his choice was really his and that it was right, he is able to build a stronger sense of identity in spite of whether he was determined to end up in Gryffindor or not. This is very much in line with the thought that humankind often like to believe, that we are truly in charge of our destiny. As we will see, this way of constructing his view of himself and his abilities forms the base for how Harry will be able to confront his later challenges.
3. The choice of being an individual - Harry Potter
The world of wizards is one where there are some people and creatures who indulge in
predicting the future. During his last years at school, Harry’s faith in his own free will is most fiercely challenged by the fact that if the prophecies were true, this would pose a serious threat to Free Will. This section will first discuss the deterministic perspective, with benefits and downsides. Then we will look at the Free Will-perspective.
From the third book, The Prisoner of Azkaban, and onwards, readers learn that Rowling’s world is one where seers exist. In the fifth book, The Order of the Phoenix, the presence of a Prophecy-room, containing a very big number of predictions, at the Ministry of Magic (the government of the Wizard World in England) is revealed. What is this suggesting? First of all, the obvious fact that predictions might not be as rare as we previously thought. Secondly, as we find them collected in a single secret room within the government offices, that they are certainly taken seriously by the wizard community. But why are they all locked away in the same place? Two different interpretations can be made. The first is that the prophecies are regarded as so valuable (and desirable to listen to) that they have to be safeguarded. The fact that they are very fragile and easily broken implies this. Harry himself accidentally breaks his own prophecy in the midst of fighting and fails to hear it. The second interpretation is that they are considered best locked away, never to be heard by those whom it concerns. Despite this interference by the wizard officials, it is also revealed in The Order of the Phoenix that the only ones who can ultimately access the prophecies are those to whom they refer. Though wizards differ from muggles in that they can use magic, Rowling is very obviously trying to convey a message in these books that putting faith into such things as fortune-telling is highly problematic even within her own magical world.
By the end of his fifth year, Harry learns that the reason that his family and himself were attacked by the Dark Lord when Harry was only one year old, was because of a prophecy. One of the spies of the Dark Lord overheard the prophecy being uttered by the seer
Trelawney, but only the first part of it: ‘The one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord approaches…born to those who have thrice defied him, born as the seventh month dies…’ (Phoenix 741) In his eagerness to extinguish the threat, the Dark Lord Voldemort located the boy he suspected the prophecy referred to and tried to kill him – but failed. Since then, Harry’s status as an ordinary boy is challenged by the fact that since he was only one year
old, he has become known as the only wizard ever to survive an attack by the Dark Lord of Voldemort - “The Boy Who Lived”. The attack has left a scar on his forehead, a literally painfully close link to his nemesis. There is a strong duality, as Chantel Lavoie put it, that “is emphasized in the curious similarities between Harry and Voldemort (Reading Harry Potter 42). This is not, however, very troubling for Harry during his first years at Hogwarts, during the time he is struggling to come to terms with his identity as a Gryffindor.
Dumbledore heard the entire prophecy, but chose to keep quiet until Harry became older. However at the end of his fifth year, Harry ends up in the Room of Prophecies in the Ministry. After this, Dumbledore chooses to tell Harry the full contents of the prophecy: “the Dark Lord will mark him as his equal, but he will have power the Dark Lord knows not…and either must die at the hand of the other for neither can live while the other survives…” (Phoenix 741). Then, what is to be made of it? The question of whether things can be foretold is one of the fundamental questions that split the wizard society in two and it is also one of the important explanations for the rift between the Hogwarts houses. Before we move on to analyzing Harry’s interpretation, let us take a look at the most important advocates for and against the prophecy.
The advocate of Determinism – Professor Trelawney
True seers are apparently very rare. This is stated by a number of people in the series, not only seers Trelawney and Firenze themselves but also people like McGonagall and Dumbledore. Fortune-telling apparently requires talent – either you were born with the ability or you were not. The probability of being gifted seems to have a connection to heritage. Trelawney, for example, is the great-great-granddaughter or a very famous Seer (Phoenix 740). The centaur Firenze, however, claims that all humans are very poor seers indeed (though he does not deny that there are some humans who have been able to come up with true prophecies). However, regardless of whether “true” prophecies could be made, it is certainly a problem of inequality that some are gifted and some are not. Just like the fact that some are able to do magic, that some are endowed with the gift of fortune-telling while others are not has a strong potential of dividing the society, creating jealousy and strife. Also, how can we know what is true and not?
One of the very few seers that we actually hear about in the books is the teacher of Divination at Hogwarts, Sybill Trelawney. She is proof that even if we could have the gift of predicting
the future, is would certainly not be unproblematic – perhaps it would even be undesirable. Trelawney is a very flawed teacher. Partly, this is not her own fault. She seems thoroughly unable to control her abilities, and she seldom makes any real predictions. If the gift is this rare, then, it is no wonder that she has difficulties teaching it.
However, there are other problems with the character of Trelawney. One is the fact that she endorses talent over nurture. This is what she say during Harry’s very first class of
Divination: “I must warn you at the outset that if you do not have the Sight, there is very little I will be able to teach you. Books can take you only so far in this field…It is a gift granted to few.” (Prisoner 79-80) In this particular respect, Trelawney’s philosophy is rather close to that of Slytherin. Though we might find this belief unsympathetic, we cannot really prove that Trelawney lies! And it does not mean that she endorses the views held by many Slytherins – that people are born fundamentally different in other respects as well, and that that would mean people are to be valued differently. Still, Harry and many Gryffindors (especially Hermione) who refuse to believe in talent over nurture are annoyed with her. There is yet another problem. Trelawney has a strong tendency towards simply giving in to what she herself has predicted – thus in a sense confirming and legitimizing herself as a Seer. Consider the following scene for example:
‘I have decided to introduce the crystal ball a little earlier than I had planned,’ said Professor Trelawney, seating herself with her back to the fire and gazing around. ‘The fates have informed me that your examination in June will concern the Orb, and I am anxious to give you sufficient practice.’ Hermione snorted. ‘Well, honestly… “the fates have informed her”…who sets the exam? She does! What an amazing prediction’ she said, not troubling to keep her voice low. (Prisoner of Azkaban 218-219)
In this scene Hermione very clearly points out what is problematic with Trelawney, namely that she does not question her prophecies at all, even if they are completely illogical. By yielding to her visions, she immediately removes all doubt that they will come true.
What are we then, ultimately to make of Trelawney, the advocate of determinism? Richard Abanes, author of Harry Potter and the Bible: the Menace behind the Magick, is very disturbed by Rowling’s books as they create, according to him, an “intensified blur between Rowling’s so-called “fantasy” magic and actual occultism. He claims, for example, that Harry
is portrayed as a “True Seer” in the books (189), which is downright incorrect. He does not make a single prediction in the entire series. Quite the opposite really, as Rowling makes a very convincing point of the serious trouble of believing in paranormal things like divination. He also claims that “Divination is used in Rowling’s series as a means of accurately
foretelling the future” (122). He does not get much further than actually claiming that the portrayal of the occult itself is bad as it in turn might corrupt youth, possibly towards acts like murder.1 Tom Morris, by contrast, claims that “Harry’s reality is a world full of magic, and yet the people within it have loads of challenging problems just like folks in our world…and their problems are rarely solved by use of magic, but rather by intelligence, planning, courage, determination, persistence…” (Harry Potter and philosophy 9-10) Or, as Deavel and Deavel put it: “Harry Potter is not really about magic, but about character” (50).
The advocate of Free Will – Professor Dumbledore
As previously stated, Dumbledore finally chooses to tell Harry what the prophecy is when they talk at the end of year five. Dumbledore’s opinion is that because the prophecy was heard, Harry needs to be prepared to face the consequences of this fact. We can most probably say that Dumbledore endorses a situation in which most prophecies remained untouched at the shelves of the Ministry of Magic. With things as they are, it is important, according to
Dumbledore, that Harry hears the prophecy, in order to counter the effects on it. In other words, because Voldemort chooses to act on the prophecy, Harry needs to do it too.
When Harry thinks that he sees Trelawney making a real prediction for once, in The Prisoner
of Azkaban, he confronts Dumbledore about his uncertainties about what to believe.
Dumbledore, unusually surprised, agrees that Trelawney may have indeed made a real
prophecy (as he is well aware of Trelawney’s many fake ones). However, Dumbledore’s idea is that even a real prophecy may not necessarily come true. If we are to take Dumbledore’s words literally, we could see him as a Libertarian with a firm belief in Free Will. Possibly he might be a Compatibilist2. What really goes on inside Dumbledore’s mind is one of the mysteries of the Harry Potter novels, but there are a few pieces of material that can be used to support the theory that even Dumbledore may have doubts about the truth of Free Will. For one thing, he has himself never studied Divination. It could be argued that this means he is not
1
Consider for example the case that he develops on pages 177-186, quite separate from the Harry Potter-discussion
2
really qualified to discuss the truthfulness of the subject. Also, Dumbledore of course lacks solid proof that Free Will is true. We do not hear of any prophecies that have been heard and that have not come true. Dumbledore does not talk of any such cases and as such, he does not prove that Free Will is true. Instead, Dumbledore’s strategy is to convince Harry of this. In his article The Seeker of Secrets: Images of Learning, Knowing and Schooling, Charles Elster describes Dumbledore in an interesting way: “He exists as the standoffish God who seems to have a plan for good people to prove they can vanquish evil. He rarely helps directly,
although he occasionally appears in order to provide information…” (215). However,
importantly, as Karen Manners Smith points out in her article Harry Potter’s Schooldays: J.K.
Rowling and the British Boarding School Novel, “Dumbledore’s messages are about character
and morality without being specifically Christian. Rowling makes Dumbledore a sage adviser for the child reader of any belief system” (79). Dumbledore wants Harry to take up the
challenge to try to destroy Voldemort, and then he is going to have to accept that, as a side-effect, the prophecy will be fulfilled. Dumbledore’s arguments are as follows: First, he is assuming that Harry wants to kill Voldemort for his own sake. He says to Harry: “If
Voldemort had never murdered your father, would he have impaired in you a furious desire for revenge? Of course not!” (Prince 477) Secondly, Harry has to kill Voldemort for the sake of the greater good.
‘I’ve got to kill him, or,’ - ‘Got to?’ said Dumbledore. ‘Of course you’ve got to! But not because of the prophecy! Because you, yourself, will never rest until you tried! We both know it!’ … Harry watched Dumbledore striding up and down in front of him, and thought. He thought of his mother, his father and Sirius. He thought of Cedric Diggory. He thought of all the horrible deeds he knew Voldemort had done. (Prince 478)
Dumbledore’s third argument is that if Harry does not take up the battle against Voldemort, the Dark Lord will kill him anyway. “He will continue to hunt you…which makes certain, really, that’ – ‘That one of us is going to end up killing the other,’ said Harry. ‘Yes.” (Prince 479)
But if Dumbledore truly does not believe in the prophecy, then that would also mean he believes that Harry is not necessarily the one who has to defeat Voldemort. Why then, does he insist that Harry is the one to do it? Well, he never explicitly states that he really is sure that Harry will succeed! In the beginning of The Deathly Hallows, Dumbledore is revealed to have
said the following before his death: “Harry is the best hope we have. Trust him” (Hallows 65). This sentence, I think, is of monumental importance. This is because not knowing how it all will end is, paradoxically, a comfort to Harry! Believing Dumbledore is right, he can focus on doing his best rather than imagining a fixed result. He can also find solace in that, though unlikely, Voldemort could be defeated in some other way.
Harry determined?
Criss-crossing these voices, then, what is Harry to make of it? Who should he listen to? After having gone through two crises of identity – that of being a wizard at and that of being a certain kind of wizard – this third and final crisis may be described as the problem of being a
specific person with a specific future. It is during his third year that Harry learns of seers and
he renews his suspicions that there may be deterministic forces in the world. He finds it out because he has to choose new subjects for study during the third year – and he chooses Divination. Though the reasons for his choice are stated as very innocent (peer pressure), one cannot help but ponder the attraction of that very subject for Harry. The Divination teacher, Professor Trelawney, challenges Harry’s thoughts and once again he must struggle to claim his free will.
Interestingly, it is after Harry has decided to start studying Divination that he starts seeing what he thinks are omens. When he goes to buy books for his third year of school, he cannot help himself but gazes towards what he knows he should not be looking at:
His eyes had fallen on another book, which was among a display on a small table: Death Omens: What to Do When You Know the Worst is Coming. ‘Oh, I wouldn’t read that if I were you,’ said the assistant lightly, looking to see what Harry was staring at. ‘You’ll start seeing death omens everywhere, it’s enough to frighten anyone to death.’ But Harry continued to stare at the front cover of the book; it showed a black dog large as a bear, with gleaming eyes. It looked oddly familiar… (Prisoner 45)
What happens then, at this early point, is that Harry cannot disregard these omens. As we have seen in the above scene, he just cannot help his curiosity. He wants to know what is predicted for him. But when he finds out the omens are supposed to indicate death, his initial reaction is denial:
