I once found myself on the Wizarding World website, scrolling through articles on everything from obscure bits of lore to writers engaging in debates about various “what ifs.”
Then I stumbled upon one with an intriguing argument—what would change if Dumbledore had told Harry about the prophecy earlier?
Many of us would guess Harry would’ve felt a little more prepared for his fate. Maybe he could’ve started the horcrux hunt earlier, and avoided much of the drama that happened later in the series.
But this writer in particular had instead insisted Harry would’ve turned out to be an egotistical monster. Their reasoning was similar to one of the excuses Dumbledore had given for why Harry had “had to be” raised with the Dursleys—if the boy was treated like crap, then he wouldn’t have ended up as full of himself as James was.
I was a little appalled, to say the least. To insist the only outcome of such a scenario was that “Harry would’ve been a spoiled asshole”? Why? Just because James had had confidence as a teenager didn’t mean Harry would’ve turned out as an insufferable jerk. (Notwithstanding the argument that James eventually grew out of his arrogant teenage phase; and even when he had been allegedly “insufferable,” he’d still also been kind and fiercely protective of his friends. Also, let’s not forget that, while James’s bullying was still wrong, he wasn’t picking on innocent students, but kids who had already expressed racist pureblood views and actively tormented other innocent students.)
The most glaring issue with this argument is that it isn’t taking into account the nature side of Harry’s personality. Nature and nurture both play a role in how someone turns out. Just because the knowledge of his role in defeating Voldemort could’ve earned Harry some popularity doesn’t mean Harry would’ve automatically become an ass. There’s something to be said for who he us—and who are we to believe that is, if we can’t even imagine that anything but nature shaped his personality?
Tough times don’t shape people; they reveal people. Harry wasn’t in any way gentle, kind, or loving because he was abused—and to insist any integral part of his character was dependent on his abuse is grossly insulting. Some people suffer abuse and repeat the cycle, while others do everything in their power to stop it. It’s not because of their circumstances; it’s because of who they are.
Kind people can be born of kind circumstances. Kind people can be born into or attain fame. Cruel people can be born of cruel circumstances, and can be cruel regardless of whether or not they ever attain fame. Someone’s experiences can embitter them or soften them; but someone who empathizes with others is not going to have their sense of empathy rubbed out by being treated poorly or being treated too well.
If anything, the worst Harry could’ve done is gone through a period of behaving like James—acting cocky but compassionate, while remaining a dedicated protector of his friends. (And, let’s be honest, a “know-it-all” phase isn’t that unusual among teenage development anyway.)
But like James, Harry would’ve likely grown out of that phase and strove to be the best person he could be.
Or are we to believe the Boy Who Lived was a Gilderoy Lockhart in the making, spared his ego by a dose of humbling at the hands of ignorance and abuse?
Speaking of our favorite resident ass, the article also made an interesting comparison, wondering bluntly if Harry could’ve evolved into a man like Lockhart.
Of course, that line of questioning makes no sense in this context. The issue with Lockhart isn’t that he became an asshole because he was famous—he became famous because he was an asshole. Before anyone knew who he was, he decided to gain his fame by hunting down people who had performed great feats of magic, learning about their stories, and then Obliviating them and selling off their experiences as his own. His fame was built on his horrible behavior, not the other way around. There is no way Harry could’ve turned out like Lockhart simply by being raised with kindness—because Harry never had an intrinsic tendency to harm or take advantage of others in the first place.
To another point, I would (hopefully) assume the reason Dumbledore would’ve told Harry about the prophecy would’ve been to prepare him for his fate—not just to let him know of the popularity he could’ve taken advantage of. Wouldn’t the implication of responsibility have grounded Harry at least a little bit? A prophecy isn’t a thing to be taken lightly. Many other stories involving Chosen Ones deal heavily with the repercussions of the burden the main character has to carry.
But in the Wizarding World, it’s just another notch in your belt to be hunted by the Dark Lord, I suppose.
There is definitely some sort of a pattern among the men of the Wizarding World seizing upon any sort of an excuse to become an asshole…but perhaps that’s a blog post for another time.
Leave a comment