Login  
 
 
Go Back   Chamber of Secrets > Harry Potter > The Stone > Legilimency Studies

The Trio - Group Character Analysis



Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #21  
Old June 27th, 2008, 5:33 am
Beatifically's Avatar
Beatifically  Female.gif Beatifically is offline
Elvendork
 
Joined: 4140 days
Location: Central Perk
Age: 26
Posts: 2,183
Re: The Trio - Group Character Analysis

I was just thinking about something the other day. When the trio asked each other which Hallow they would want to keep, they all had different answers. Harry would have chosen the Resurrection Stone, Hermione would have chosen the Cloak, and Ron would have chosen the wand. What does everyone think about what this means concerning each character's personality?

I can't really figure out what it means for Hermione, but I have a guess about Harry and Ron. Harry's is obvious. It shows that he's prone to nostalgia and misses his loved ones. Ron's means that he wants to be recognized for his own. He was always in the shadow of other people and wanted to have some glory for himself, as was shown in the Mirror of Erised.


__________________

CoS and Pottermore sorted
You will never do anything in this world without courage.
It is the greatest quality of the mind next to honor.

- Aristotle

Specialises in awesome picspams.
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #22  
Old June 27th, 2008, 6:29 pm
ronjalina's Avatar
ronjalina  Female.gif ronjalina is offline
Seventh Year
 
Joined: 4559 days
Location: In the Hallows
Age: 53
Posts: 2,046
Re: The Trio - Group Character Analysis

Quote:
Originally Posted by Beatifically View Post
I was just thinking about something the other day. When the trio asked each other which Hallow they would want to keep, they all had different answers. Harry would have chosen the Resurrection Stone, Hermione would have chosen the Cloak, and Ron would have chosen the wand. What does everyone think about what this means concerning each character's personality?

I can't really figure out what it means for Hermione, but I have a guess about Harry and Ron. Harry's is obvious. It shows that he's prone to nostalgia and misses his loved ones. Ron's means that he wants to be recognized for his own. He was always in the shadow of other people and wanted to have some glory for himself, as was shown in the Mirror of Erised.
I agree about Harry. He has lost the most. Both, Ron and Hermione, still have their parents and Ron even has siblings, but Harry never had that. And since the Dursleys never allowed questions, never told Harry about his parents, he would have thought about them and what kind of people they were a lot. Although he eventually learns a bit about James and Lily over the years, it never can be enough. And his time with Sirius was too short as well. In that way, Harry kind of lives in the past and would want, even for once, see his dead loved ones back.

Hermione's choice to evaluate is the most difficult, on that I agree too. I think she is the provider. She provided the trio during their Horcrux hunt with information, magical protection (she looked up all the protective spells) and shelter (she was the one who thought about packing the tent). And I think Hermione is the most cautious of the three. The cloak provides a certain shelter and it is a means to check the situation before revealing themself, so it would suit a cautious person.

Ron is the defender. I read a lot of comments (not on this forum necessarily) who raked Ron over the coals for being interested in the wand because they assumed he just wanted fame and glory and being invincible. In other words.. he hadn't grown up a bit since GoF. But I think the real reason goes deeper than that. Throughout the books, Ron is shown to defend family and friends, be it from Malfoy's insults, be it stepping in between Harry and a supposed mass-murderer. I think Ron would like to have a powerful, almost unbeatable wand to be able to protect his loved ones as efficiently as possible.


__________________



Avatar by Hunter_Graphics; Signature by Xuxu
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old June 27th, 2008, 6:37 pm
lil_snuffles's Avatar
lil_snuffles  Female.gif lil_snuffles is offline
Animaga terpsichore
 
Joined: 4895 days
Location: California, USA
Age: 28
Posts: 1,708
Re: The Trio - Group Character Analysis

1. What role does each member play in the trio? How did the role of each member of the trio change over the course of the series?

Harry: The leader. The hero.
Ron: The strategist.
Hermione: The brains.
Their roles haven't changed much during the series, but they have matured over the years.


2. What strengths did each member bring to the group?

Harry was the determined one. The one who would do anything for his friends. Ron brought the humor. Hermione had the brains and the heart.

3. What weakness of each member hindered the group?

Harry had his "saving-people-thing."
Ron often got jealous about Harry. (i.e. The Triwizard Tournament.)
Hermione was very emotional.

7. Do you think the members of the group worked better together or alone? Why?

Together. Without each other's help they wouldn't get anywhere. They each had a different strengh that the others needed.


__________________

Keep On Dancing Til The World Ends
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old June 27th, 2008, 8:10 pm
RemusLupinFan's Avatar
RemusLupinFan  Female.gif RemusLupinFan is offline
I want to believe
 
Joined: 5228 days
Location: The office in the basement
Posts: 5,897
Re: The Trio - Group Character Analysis

Regarding the Hallows, I agree that Harry's choice is easy to interpret as he desires to see and be with the family he lost. With Hermione, I like the idea that this represents her cautious nature. Of the trio, Hermione is usually the one who illustrates the concept of "look before you leap". For instance, in OotP, she tries to weigh all of the possible situations right after Harry has the "dream" of Sirius in the DoM. She also advises that they should get away from the Veil at the point where some people can hear voices and are beginning to become entranced by it. So in this case I think the Cloak is an appropriate choice for Hermione.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ronjalina View Post
Throughout the books, Ron is shown to defend family and friends, be it from Malfoy's insults, be it stepping in between Harry and a supposed mass-murderer. I think Ron would like to have a powerful, almost unbeatable wand to be able to protect his loved ones as efficiently as possible.
I agree with all of this, nicely stated.


__________________

X-Files is the property of Ten Thirteen Productions, 20th Century Fox
WolfCloak30 Pottermore
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old July 4th, 2008, 7:14 pm
wickedwickedboy's Avatar
wickedwickedboy  Undisclosed.gif wickedwickedboy is offline
Lycanthrope
 
Joined: 4659 days
Location: Running with the Werewolves
Posts: 9,427
Re: The Trio - Group Character Analysis

Actually, when you think about it; it is pretty amazing that Ron and Harry didn't get into it earlier if Ron had been carrying around jealousy thinking that there was some connection between Hermione and Harry.


__________________
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old July 5th, 2008, 5:30 pm
meesha1971's Avatar
meesha1971  Female.gif meesha1971 is offline
Master of the Magical Arts
 
Joined: 4910 days
Location: The Unknowable Room
Age: 47
Posts: 12,731
Re: The Trio - Group Character Analysis

1. What role does each member play in the trio? How did the role of each member of the trio change over the course of the series?

Harry is the hand. He's the "hero" of the tale and, typically, he takes the action. The circumstances surrounding Harry are the reason they end up in a lot these situations. Harry doesn't have much control over this, but it is part of his role in the trio - his circumstances are the driving force behind their actions.

Hermione is the brain. Her love of learning and habit of reading everything she can getting her hands on is extremely useful both in helping Harry with what needs to be done as well as providing exposition within the story. When they need to know something, Hermione generally has either already read about it, remembers it from one of their classes, or knows where to look to find the information - though there are occasions when the library fails her.

Ron is the heart and soul of the trio. It was his actions that brought the three of them together and he is the glue that holds that friendship together. This is most obvious in DH when Ron leaves and Harry and Hermione do not function well at all without him. He was the mediator - Harry looked to Ron to intervene when Hermione was lecturing him and getting on his nerves. He was also the one to maintain the balance between work and fun - and that is important because everyone needs their down time.

Ron often provides the connection between Harry and Hermione - Hermione figures out what they need to do, Ron figures out how it can be done, and Harry typically does it. These roles did not really change throughout the series - though there are times when their roles are somewhat reversed. Sometimes Harry figures out what to do or how to do it. Sometimes Ron figures out what to do or does it. And sometimes Hermione figures out how to do it or does it.

2. What strengths did each member bring to the group?

Harry has pretty good instincts - not always spot on, but that improves over the years. He's also good at thinking on his feet and acting quickly in the heat of the moment. He has a strong force of will and determination. And, of course, he was very courageous.

Ron's strengths are actually very similar to Harry's - though he's not as consistent because of his insecurities. But Ron also has pretty good instincts and he was always at his best in the heat of the moment - when he didn't have time to second guess himself. I think Ron was even better at thinking on his feet and figuring out what needed to be done - or how - in the heat of the moment. He was very good with strategy and tactics - those chess skills did come in handy. Ron was also very determined and very courageous. It always stood out to me that Ron chose to be part of all this when he didn't have to. And, of course, Ron provided the fun - which Harry really needed with everything he was going through.

Hermione's strength is her desire to learn and her ability to retain information. She provides the answers or knows where to find the answers they need. She was capable of learning how to do things from books whereas Ron and Harry were both "hands on" learners. Hermione's ability to learn from books without being shown was very useful to both Harry and Ron - particularly with the tournament in GOF and the DA in OOTP. Her knowledge of spells was a tremendous asset. She's also very good at planning and preparing for what needs to be done.

3. What weakness of each member hindered the group?

Harry's weaknesses were his tendency to be reckless and act without thinking things through. His "saving people thing" often led to him reacting recklessly instead of acting on a well thought out plan. Harry also had a tendency to be a bit selfish and forget that others had a lot at stake in all of this as well - this was most noticeable in OOTP. Harry also had trust issues - often keeping things to himself when he really should have discussed them with Dumbledore - or at least Ron and Hermione. All of that is understandable with everything that Harry had been through - and he was a teenager - but this did hinder them at times.

Ron's weakness was his insecurity and lack of confidence in himself. This led to him questioning himself and second guessing his actions and that did hold him back from reaching his full potential. That also caused problems between him and Harry on two occasions. Ron was unable to see his own value and - as such - he couldn't see that his friends did need him. He had a tendency to look at situations from the perspective of what he thought Harry or Hermione should want or prefer rather than what they actually did want or prefer. Though he did overcome this in DH.

Hermione's weaknesses tie together for the most part. She was narrow minded and had an almost desperate need to always be right - she was generally unwilling to accept any viewpoint or opinion that differed from her own. Hermione often refused to consider ideas that Harry or Ron came up with and there are times when they were right and she should have listened to them. We see this several times in DH. She was also very reluctant to question authority figures and had a tendency to be too strict in following the rules - particularly early on in the series. As the series progressed, Hermione did learn that there are times when authority figures are wrong and should be questions and there are times when the rules need to be broken - but this was something she struggled with. And Hermione also had a tendency to panic during key moments, which either resulted in her freezing completely or making poor choices with negative consequences. Most of these things likely stemmed from her fear of failure. Hermione seemed to think that her value was in being right/having all the answers and she wasn't always a good "team player" because of this.

4. Was their a dominant leader or did they take turns leading at different times?

On the surface, it would seem that Harry was the dominant leader. However, closer examination reveals that not to be the case. As I said above, it was Harry's circumstances that were the driving force rather than Harry himself. It was actually very rare for Harry to actively lead or tell his friends what to do. Most often, Harry looked to his friends for suggestions and they would decide what to do together. So I would say that there was no dominant leader because the majority of the time, they discussed the situation, the options available, and decided what to do together.

There are occasions when Harry did take the lead and make decisions with the expectation of his friends following him - such as the decision to go to the Ministry to rescue Sirius in OOTP. But there were also times when Ron or Hermione took the lead and made decisions. I think this is where the balance within the trio was significant because it made them more effective as a team. They were each willing to step forward and lead or step back and follow depending on what the situation called for.

I think the best example of this is the obstacles they get through in PS/SS. Each obstacle either focused on an individual strength that one of them had or their combined strengths and they had to work together to get through them. They demonstrated that they could work well together as a team because they were willing to defer to whoever was best suited for the task without argument or feeling resentful as well as combine their strengths when the situation called for it.

5. How did the relationship between Ron/Hermione affect the trio?

There were some rough spots during the times that Ron and Hermione were fighting and didn't speak to each other - the Crookshanks/Scabbers fight in POA, Ron dating Lavender in HBP, and the issue with the locket in DH. However, I think things like this would have happened even if they hadn't had romantic feelings for each other. The circumstances would be different, but even the best of friends are going to have arguments and fights. We also see similar rough spots with Harry and Hermione fighting as well as Harry and Ron fighting.

Overall, I don't think it affected the friendship between the trio too much - three big fights in seven years really isn't that bad when you think about it. I think that the fact that the three of them had such a strong bond between them was a positive and it helped them get through those rough spots because - whatever their romantic feelings were - their friendship was very important to them. There was a period of adjustment for Harry when he realized where their separate relationship was headed, but in the end, Ron and Hermione were still his best friends. There were conflicts, but they served as learning experiences and I think they made the bond of friendship between them even stronger because they overcame those conflicts.

6. What do you think was the trio's strongest/weakest moment?

Their strongest moments were when they were united - working together as a team. Their weakest moments were when they were divided - particularly in DH when Ron left. Harry and Hermione did not function well without Ron and that really demonstrated how strong they were when they were working together as a team.

7. Do you think the members of the group worked better together or alone? Why?

As Jo said - they are stronger together than apart. Their greatest strength was their ability to work together as a team.

8. Do you think that Harry could have defeated Voldemort without the help of Hermione and Ron?

Absolutely not. Harry needed both Ron and Hermione to help him succeed in that - for different reasons, but they were both important and they both contributed to Harry's success.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Beatifically View Post
I was just thinking about something the other day. When the trio asked each other which Hallow they would want to keep, they all had different answers. Harry would have chosen the Resurrection Stone, Hermione would have chosen the Cloak, and Ron would have chosen the wand. What does everyone think about what this means concerning each character's personality?

I can't really figure out what it means for Hermione, but I have a guess about Harry and Ron. Harry's is obvious. It shows that he's prone to nostalgia and misses his loved ones. Ron's means that he wants to be recognized for his own. He was always in the shadow of other people and wanted to have some glory for himself, as was shown in the Mirror of Erised.
I agree with you and ronjalina. Harry choosing the stone highlighted how important family was to him - and there was a sense of nostalgia there as well. He felt guilty about the people who had died because Voldemort chose to come after him. Ron choosing the wand highlights his desire to stand out and be recognized for his individual value - both from his own large family as well as his friends. I think ronjalina explained that very well.

Hermione's choice highlights her practical nature. The stone is something she cannot accept - it's not logical or practical. She refuses to believe such a thing can exist and is unable to see that it's not about bringing someone back from the dead so much as it is a means to communicate with lost loved ones. She sees the idea of an unbeatable wand as fanciful nonsense - it's not logical or practical to her way of thinking. Again, she refuses to believe such a thing can exist and is unwilling to consider the fact that legends generally do have some basis in fact. That is rather ironic when you consider the fact that it was Hermione who pointed out that legends have some basis in fact to Professor Binns in COS to get him to tell them about the legend of the Chamber of Secrets.

For Hermione, it was all about logic and practicality. She needed to see proof - solid evidence - before she would be willing to even consider the possibility of such fanciful ideas. There was no proof regarding the Resurrection Stone or the Elder Wand and the legends about them frightened her because they were neither logical or practical. The Stone went against all the rules of magic that she knew and she saw the wand as something that was bound to attract trouble. She knew the cloak existed and she knew how useful the cloak had been to them in the past. For her, that was the most logical choice.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ronjalina View Post
Ron is the defender. I read a lot of comments (not on this forum necessarily) who raked Ron over the coals for being interested in the wand because they assumed he just wanted fame and glory and being invincible. In other words.. he hadn't grown up a bit since GoF. But I think the real reason goes deeper than that. Throughout the books, Ron is shown to defend family and friends, be it from Malfoy's insults, be it stepping in between Harry and a supposed mass-murderer. I think Ron would like to have a powerful, almost unbeatable wand to be able to protect his loved ones as efficiently as possible.
Completely agree.


__________________

Reform must come from within, not from without. ~ James Cardinal Gibbons

"So, if people want information on my characters, then they have to accept that I'm going to give them the information on the characters. And if they don't like it, that's the nature of fiction. You have to accept someone else's world because they made that world, so they probably know a little better than you do what goes on there." ~ J.K. Rowling


All posts are my opinions and interpretations based on reading the Harry Potter books and interviews with J.K. Rowling.

Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old July 5th, 2008, 6:04 pm
wickedwickedboy's Avatar
wickedwickedboy  Undisclosed.gif wickedwickedboy is offline
Lycanthrope
 
Joined: 4659 days
Location: Running with the Werewolves
Posts: 9,427
Re: The Trio - Group Character Analysis

What is all of the hoopla over growing up anyway? Ron was shown to still have his fun nature and teasing funny bone in the Epilogue in his thirties. I myself do not feel maturity is defined by a stuffy, boring person who can't crack a smile at an inappropriate time and has no time or space for a cheeky response. To me their growth is stunted in light of their inability to see the big broad world in all of its glory which includes humor, ease, friendliness, happiness and laughter - all components in a fun loving, teasing person's nature. I think responsibility comes in many forms and a little recklessness, fun and craziness can definitely be within the character of a responsible and mature person.

On the fame and glory issue v. maturity. It is not children who are in the world running corporations, but presumably mature adults, and the most of them are not doing so to benefit mankind. It is glory, fame and money that drives them for the most part. Those are not shown to be signs of immaturity at all. Those are simple traits some people have their whole lives. Ditto politicians although there are a few who actually are in it to provide some kind of benefit for others.

I don't feel that Ron was fervently seeking massive fame and glory. But he was the best friend of a boy who got it all without trying. So it is natural for him to wish for the limelight a little bit - it isn't as if he hasn't done anything - he was right with Harry during almost every adventure, risking his life and enduring pain, suffering and sorrow right along with the hero. So I feel that he deserved a little bit of the spotlight and in reality, he never really got it. Hermione was a little different as she didn't seem to want it and she got it anyway from all of her teachers at Hogwarts. Ron, well he got nuthin in that regard.

I could see Ron wanting the wand to protect his family, but also it would give him the spotlight of being the family protector. Again, there is absolutely nothing wrong with that in my eyes because just like Bill Gates, a person deserves the spotlight if they pull off something great. Ron did that and got no credit per se from the wizard world, so naturally he would hunger for it a bit.


__________________
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old July 5th, 2008, 7:53 pm
ronjalina's Avatar
ronjalina  Female.gif ronjalina is offline
Seventh Year
 
Joined: 4559 days
Location: In the Hallows
Age: 53
Posts: 2,046
Re: The Trio - Group Character Analysis

Quote:
Originally Posted by wickedwickedboy View Post
What is all of the hoopla over growing up anyway? Ron was shown to still have his fun nature and teasing funny bone in the Epilogue in his thirties. I myself do not feel maturity is defined by a stuffy, boring person who can't crack a smile at an inappropriate time and has no time or space for a cheeky response.
I definitely agree. I never said being mature excluded being fun loving and humorous. The trio would have grown up but not changed their base character. And part of Ron's character is just being funny and teasing his loved ones.

Quote:
So I feel that he deserved a little bit of the spotlight and in reality, he never really got it. Hermione was a little different as she didn't seem to want it and she got it anyway from all of her teachers at Hogwarts. Ron, well he got nuthin in that regard.

I could see Ron wanting the wand to protect his family, but also it would give him the spotlight of being the family protector. Again, there is absolutely nothing wrong with that in my eyes because just like Bill Gates, a person deserves the spotlight if they pull off something great. Ron did that and got no credit per se from the wizard world, so naturally he would hunger for it a bit.
Didn't JKR say he would be featured on a Chocolate Frog card one day and lable it as 'his finest hour'? Being featured alongside Merlin, Dumbledore and all the other famous wizards is quite some recognition, IMO.


__________________



Avatar by Hunter_Graphics; Signature by Xuxu
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old July 5th, 2008, 8:19 pm
wickedwickedboy's Avatar
wickedwickedboy  Undisclosed.gif wickedwickedboy is offline
Lycanthrope
 
Joined: 4659 days
Location: Running with the Werewolves
Posts: 9,427
Re: The Trio - Group Character Analysis

Oh I wasn't responding to your post, just to the notion that Ron hadn't matured. . And great for Ron, I hadn't heard that one, but he deserves a card (Hermione and Harry too).


__________________
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old July 5th, 2008, 11:50 pm
meesha1971's Avatar
meesha1971  Female.gif meesha1971 is offline
Master of the Magical Arts
 
Joined: 4910 days
Location: The Unknowable Room
Age: 47
Posts: 12,731
Re: The Trio - Group Character Analysis

Quote:
Originally Posted by wickedwickedboy View Post
What is all of the hoopla over growing up anyway? Ron was shown to still have his fun nature and teasing funny bone in the Epilogue in his thirties. I myself do not feel maturity is defined by a stuffy, boring person who can't crack a smile at an inappropriate time and has no time or space for a cheeky response. To me their growth is stunted in light of their inability to see the big broad world in all of its glory which includes humor, ease, friendliness, happiness and laughter - all components in a fun loving, teasing person's nature. I think responsibility comes in many forms and a little recklessness, fun and craziness can definitely be within the character of a responsible and mature person.
Completely agree. I just said something along these same lines in the prequel thread about James and Sirius. Once again, our thoughts are in sync.

Quote:
On the fame and glory issue v. maturity. It is not children who are in the world running corporations, but presumably mature adults, and the most of them are not doing so to benefit mankind. It is glory, fame and money that drives them for the most part. Those are not shown to be signs of immaturity at all. Those are simple traits some people have their whole lives. Ditto politicians although there are a few who actually are in it to provide some kind of benefit for others.

I don't feel that Ron was fervently seeking massive fame and glory. But he was the best friend of a boy who got it all without trying. So it is natural for him to wish for the limelight a little bit - it isn't as if he hasn't done anything - he was right with Harry during almost every adventure, risking his life and enduring pain, suffering and sorrow right along with the hero. So I feel that he deserved a little bit of the spotlight and in reality, he never really got it. Hermione was a little different as she didn't seem to want it and she got it anyway from all of her teachers at Hogwarts. Ron, well he got nuthin in that regard.

I could see Ron wanting the wand to protect his family, but also it would give him the spotlight of being the family protector. Again, there is absolutely nothing wrong with that in my eyes because just like Bill Gates, a person deserves the spotlight if they pull off something great. Ron did that and got no credit per se from the wizard world, so naturally he would hunger for it a bit.
Again, I completely agree. I don't see anything wrong with Ron wanting a bit of recognition for himself - and there are a lot of times in the books where he certainly deserved recognition. Ron grew up being constantly overshadowed by his older brothers - eventually coming to believe that nothing he did would matter because his brothers would already have done it. It's natural that he would crave recognition for his accomplishments - particularly with all the times that his accomplishments were overlooked.

In spite of that, he still chose to be friends with Harry - knowing full well that Harry's fame would probably mean that he would overshadow him as well. And he chose to stay friends with Harry even thought that turned out to be true - not to mention that being friends with Harry often put his life in danger. The friendship was more important to Ron and he would have gladly given his life to protect Harry. And Harry would have done the same for Ron. They had their rough patches and fought - as all friends do - but they overcame those conflicts and learned from them. They have a very special bond between them - they were closer than brothers.

So I don't fault Ron for wanting to be in the spotlight sometimes - particularly when he had earned it - and I don't fault him for thoroughly enjoying those rare occasions when he did get to be in the spotlight. When you look at how often Ron was overlooked and/or taken for granted - even within his own family - that is a natural response. Ron did not want to be just "another Weasley" or "Harry Potter's friend". He wanted to be recognized for himself - his own accomplishments. And there's nothing wrong with that.

I think Ron wanting the Elder wand would fall under both. It was his nature to protect and defend and I can see where he would feel that an "unbeatable" wand would be beneficial to that. But that would also fall under being recognized for his accomplishments as well because having such a powerful wand would - from his perspective - enable him to accomplish more and be recognized for it.

It's an interesting parallel to Dumbledore if you think about it - which is rather ironic considering how popular the "Ron is Dumbledore from the future" theory was before Jo shot it down. In his youth, Dumbledore craved glory and attention - he wanted to stand apart from his family and be recognized for his accomplishments. His situation was not exactly the same as Ron's, but like Ron, he felt stifled and unappreciated - he resented the responsibility placed upon him just as he was preparing to go out and make his own away apart from his family.

I think that's why Dumbledore demonstrated such a good understanding of Ron in general. He understood what Ron was feeling because he had similar feelings in his youth. I always liked how Dumbledore made sure to recognize Ron for his achievements - awarding him points for the chess game in PS/SS, giving him equal credit and points with Harry in COS, etc... I think things like that meant a lot to Ron.

Though he still considered getting his own chocolate frog card - which he certainly deserved - his finest hour.


__________________

Reform must come from within, not from without. ~ James Cardinal Gibbons

"So, if people want information on my characters, then they have to accept that I'm going to give them the information on the characters. And if they don't like it, that's the nature of fiction. You have to accept someone else's world because they made that world, so they probably know a little better than you do what goes on there." ~ J.K. Rowling


All posts are my opinions and interpretations based on reading the Harry Potter books and interviews with J.K. Rowling.


Last edited by meesha1971; July 5th, 2008 at 11:54 pm.
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old July 6th, 2008, 1:17 am
SusanBones's Avatar
SusanBones  Female.gif SusanBones is offline
Inconceivable!
 
Joined: 5041 days
Location: in a galaxy far, far away
Posts: 4,090
Re: The Trio - Group Character Analysis

I think that it was interesting that Ron chose the wand, too. It is considered the most powerful wand and I think that Ron may have felt that he would be a better wizard if he had it. Harry preferred his old wand. He must have felt confident that he was already good enough as he was. He didn't need the extra strength that the Elder wand would have given him. Ron lacked self-confidence and I don't think Harry did.


__________________


avatar artwork by Ruth Sanderson
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old July 6th, 2008, 1:34 am
wickedwickedboy's Avatar
wickedwickedboy  Undisclosed.gif wickedwickedboy is offline
Lycanthrope
 
Joined: 4659 days
Location: Running with the Werewolves
Posts: 9,427
Re: The Trio - Group Character Analysis

In truth, I found Dumbledore to be more of a glory-hog in his youth than Ron ever was. To be frank, the way Dumbledore was written, he seemed to be one when he got older too. But I wouldn't argue the point because it may just be the way I read it. However, Ron was much more casual and easy going about it for the most part. He seemed to have his moments and then just get over it. Further, other things were far more important to him in general.

One thing was Harry's stand alone personality that got in the way at times - for both Ron and Hermione. I felt Harry was quite an arrogant fellow at times; he'd force his way in an attempt to lead because he was a natural leader. Then too, he had a lot of compassion and he allowed others to step in, especially when he got stuck. . He reminds me a whole lot of James' descriptions with respect to those combined traits (arrogance/leadership). But Ron was no Sirius counterpart for Harry. Sirius had more arrogance than Ron and wouldn't have ever had the self-conscious element because he was good looking and a Black (and all that went with that personality wise and the wealth, etc.). So for example when you have a scene like the one where Ron and Harry blew up and Ron left camp in DH; that would never happen with James and Sirius because they had perfected the idea of shared independence which Harry couldn't seem to grasp - although Ron was good at it. Combined with their stubborn streaks, it was difficult for Ron and Harry to get that give and take going at times.

Not sure if that was clear. But I am speaking about the fact that in SWM, it seemed to Harry that Sirius was the only one who could get James to listen. And Sirius listened to him as well since James was the ringleader. But at the same time, both would act independently while together doing something in accord - for instance in the prequel or even in SWM with their enemy. Harry on the other hand seemed always ready to force his point, sometimes to the total frustration of Ron (and Hermione) - like his decision to obsess over Draco in HBP. Other times, Ron would take the lead (or Hermione), but they didn't seem to get that shared independence going, instead they played a kind of follow the leader that was usually Harry, but sometimes Ron or Hermione.

The way I have written it, may sound as if I prefer one way over the other, but I don't. It is just a different kind of relationship, but I think it did cause more dissention for the trio. Still they all loved one another like brothers and sisters (in addition to Ron and Hermione's romantic feelings) and that glued them together no matter what form their relationship took, imo.


__________________
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old July 6th, 2008, 4:42 am
meesha1971's Avatar
meesha1971  Female.gif meesha1971 is offline
Master of the Magical Arts
 
Joined: 4910 days
Location: The Unknowable Room
Age: 47
Posts: 12,731
Re: The Trio - Group Character Analysis

Quote:
Originally Posted by wickedwickedboy View Post
In truth, I found Dumbledore to be more of a glory-hog in his youth than Ron ever was. To be frank, the way Dumbledore was written, he seemed to be one when he got older too. But I wouldn't argue the point because it may just be the way I read it. However, Ron was much more casual and easy going about it for the most part. He seemed to have his moments and then just get over it. Further, other things were far more important to him in general.
I agree actually. I think there is an interesting parallel there, but there are definitive differences as well. Dumbledore's reasons were more selfish I think - it wasn't that he was overshadowed or taken for granted, he was very confident in himself and wanted to be recognized for his brilliance. He wanted the glory whereas Ron simply wanted to be recognized for his own achievements because he had always been overlooked and/or taken for granted.

However, I do think that this did help Dumbledore understand Ron - and I think the respect he had for Ron stemmed from the fact that Ron's reasons for wanting recognition were not selfish and it was never about getting all the glory for him. He simply wanted to be seen and not overlooked.

Quote:
One thing was Harry's stand alone personality that got in the way at times - for both Ron and Hermione. I felt Harry was quite an arrogant fellow at times; he'd force his way in an attempt to lead because he was a natural leader. Then too, he had a lot of compassion and he allowed others to step in, especially when he got stuck. . He reminds me a whole lot of James' descriptions with respect to those combined traits (arrogance/leadership). But Ron was no Sirius counterpart for Harry. Sirius had more arrogance than Ron and wouldn't have ever had the self-conscious element because he was good looking and a Black (and all that went with that personality wise and the wealth, etc.). So for example when you have a scene like the one where Ron and Harry blew up and Ron left camp in DH; that would never happen with James and Sirius because they had perfected the idea of shared independence which Harry couldn't seem to grasp - although Ron was good at it. Combined with their stubborn streaks, it was difficult for Ron and Harry to get that give and take going at times.

Not sure if that was clear. But I am speaking about the fact that in SWM, it seemed to Harry that Sirius was the only one who could get James to listen. And Sirius listened to him as well since James was the ringleader. But at the same time, both would act independently while together doing something in accord - for instance in the prequel or even in SWM with their enemy. Harry on the other hand seemed always ready to force his point, sometimes to the total frustration of Ron (and Hermione) - like his decision to obsess over Draco in HBP. Other times, Ron would take the lead (or Hermione), but they didn't seem to get that shared independence going, instead they played a kind of follow the leader that was usually Harry, but sometimes Ron or Hermione.

The way I have written it, may sound as if I prefer one way over the other, but I don't. It is just a different kind of relationship, but I think it did cause more dissention for the trio. Still they all loved one another like brothers and sisters (in addition to Ron and Hermione's romantic feelings) and that glued them together no matter what form their relationship took, imo.
I agree to some extent. Harry did have a tendency to want to act alone - particularly in situations where his friends would be in danger. He is very introverted and keeps a lot of things to himself and we often see that things would have gone a lot smoother for him if he had simply talked to his friends. However, I think it was rare for Harry to try to force himself into the leadership role. Most of the time, he looks to Ron and Hermione for suggestions as to what the best course of action would be. They discuss all the options they can think of and decide what to do together - it was very democratic really. There are only a few occasions where Harry makes a unilateral decision and expects them to follow along with him - such as the decision to go the Ministry to rescue Sirius. Harry was desperate and panicking and that was one time that he was not willing to listen to Ron and Hermione's suggestions. And there are also occasions where Harry defers to Ron or Hermione because he knows they were better suited to the task than he was.

It's very difficult to draw a direct parallel between Harry and Ron and James and Sirius because they are all very similar. James and Sirius were a lot alike - a certain disregard for the rules, very confident in themselves, fairly in regards to their abilities, hated the Dark Arts, similar sense of humor, etc... Likewise Harry and Ron are very similar - a certain disregard for the rules, fairly equal in regards to their abilities, hated the Dark Arts, similar sense of humor, etc... Some of these things overlap so it is difficult to draw a direct parallel because they share so many similar traits. I think the biggest difference between James and Sirius and Harry and Ron is the amount of confidence they had in themselves. Harry and Ron didn't have the same level of confidence - particularly Ron. Harry was more confident in himself than Ron, but not to the same level as his father and Sirius.

However, I think the more accurate comparison for Harry would actually be Sirius because of Harry's circumstances. Both growing up with families they hated, both being taken in by a wizarding family who provided an example of what a loving family really was, both having a tendency to be reckless - and so on. Harry always struck me as having more in common with Sirius than his father - though it is close because James and Sirius were so similar.

I think Ron was very similar to James. The biggest difference there is the fact that James grew up as an only child and did not suffer from the insecurities that Ron did - and Ron, being the second youngest of seven children was never as arrogant as James and didn't have much confidence in himself. But I think they had very similar personalities overall - it's the circumstances that separate them. And we do get a glimpse of Ron behaving like James in those rare moments when he gets to be in the spotlight - he enjoys the attention like James did. And - like James - he befriends the boy who has had an unhappy childhood and brings him into his family. And, in spite of being a much larger family, the Weasleys are similar to the Potters in that they are a very loving family and willing to take Harry in like the Potters took in Sirius.

Hermione, of course - since we are discussing the trio as a group - has a great deal in common with Lupin. Studious nature, more conscious of the rules, having to deal with prejudice, etc....

There are a lot of similarities with the two friendships as well. They loved each other like brothers and listen to each other before anyone else - even Hermione. When Harry was prepared to scoff at Hermione's idea for the DA, it was the fact that Ron thought it was a good idea that made him stop and consider it more seriously. In that regard, Ron does have something in common with Sirius - he is the one that Harry will most likely listen to. Harry and Ron also have a love of adventure and take advantage of the legacies that the Marauders left for Harry - the Invisibility cloak and the Marauder's Map.

But there are differences as well - Harry and Ron never strutted around the school playing pranks on people. That was where the twins were similar to James and Sirius. The trio used the Invisibility cloak and the map primarily to help them with solving whatever mystery they were working on - whereas James and Sirius primarily used them to nick food and sneak out on the grounds during the full moon. James and Sirius didn't have to deal with one of them constantly being under threat so their adventures were more about having fun. The trio's adventures primarily dealt with whatever the current threat to Harry was.

However, I think that is a good thing. While there are similarities to the previous generation, the trio are not cardboard cutouts of the Marauders. They have their own identities separate from the Marauders.


__________________

Reform must come from within, not from without. ~ James Cardinal Gibbons

"So, if people want information on my characters, then they have to accept that I'm going to give them the information on the characters. And if they don't like it, that's the nature of fiction. You have to accept someone else's world because they made that world, so they probably know a little better than you do what goes on there." ~ J.K. Rowling


All posts are my opinions and interpretations based on reading the Harry Potter books and interviews with J.K. Rowling.

Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old July 7th, 2008, 1:16 am
wickedwickedboy's Avatar
wickedwickedboy  Undisclosed.gif wickedwickedboy is offline
Lycanthrope
 
Joined: 4659 days
Location: Running with the Werewolves
Posts: 9,427
Re: The Trio - Group Character Analysis

Quote:
Originally Posted by meesha1971 View Post
I agree to some extent. Harry did have a tendency to want to act alone - particularly in situations where his friends would be in danger. He is very introverted and keeps a lot of things to himself and we often see that things would have gone a lot smoother for him if he had simply talked to his friends. However, I think it was rare for Harry to try to force himself into the leadership role. Most of the time, he looks to Ron and Hermione for suggestions as to what the best course of action would be. They discuss all the options they can think of and decide what to do together - it was very democratic really. There are only a few occasions where Harry makes a unilateral decision and expects them to follow along with him - such as the decision to go the Ministry to rescue Sirius. Harry was desperate and panicking and that was one time that he was not willing to listen to Ron and Hermione's suggestions. And there are also occasions where Harry defers to Ron or Hermione because he knows they were better suited to the task than he was.
I agree, this was the follow the leader thing I was talking about. Only here, the leader was always changing because Harry would defer to his friends at times. However, sometimes he didn't and this is where the dissention I was speaking about came in. And it would sometimes be Ron/Harry v. Hermione or another of the 2 v. 1 deal. But it was no big deal, either way, someone or someones would always give in and they forged ahead.

Quote:
It's very difficult to draw a direct parallel between Harry and Ron and James and Sirius because they are all very similar. James and Sirius were a lot alike - a certain disregard for the rules, very confident in themselves, fairly in regards to their abilities, hated the Dark Arts, similar sense of humor, etc... Likewise Harry and Ron are very similar - a certain disregard for the rules, fairly equal in regards to their abilities, hated the Dark Arts, similar sense of humor, etc... Some of these things overlap so it is difficult to draw a direct parallel because they share so many similar traits. I think the biggest difference between James and Sirius and Harry and Ron is the amount of confidence they had in themselves. Harry and Ron didn't have the same level of confidence - particularly Ron. Harry was more confident in himself than Ron, but not to the same level as his father and Sirius.
I agree, I feel too that the level of confidence of Harry and Ron was less than that of Sirius and James. However, that seemed to come out more in caution than anything else. They still ended up bravely thrashing their way into whatever adventure they set upon, but not with the same cocksureness of the Marauding leaders.

Quote:
However, I think the more accurate comparison for Harry would actually be Sirius because of Harry's circumstances. Both growing up with families they hated, both being taken in by a wizarding family who provided an example of what a loving family really was, both having a tendency to be reckless - and so on. Harry always struck me as having more in common with Sirius than his father - though it is close because James and Sirius were so similar.

I think Ron was very similar to James. The biggest difference there is the fact that James grew up as an only child and did not suffer from the insecurities that Ron did - and Ron, being the second youngest of seven children was never as arrogant as James and didn't have much confidence in himself. But I think they had very similar personalities overall - it's the circumstances that separate them. And we do get a glimpse of Ron behaving like James in those rare moments when he gets to be in the spotlight - he enjoys the attention like James did. And - like James - he befriends the boy who has had an unhappy childhood and brings him into his family. And, in spite of being a much larger family, the Weasleys are similar to the Potters in that they are a very loving family and willing to take Harry in like the Potters took in Sirius.

Hermione, of course - since we are discussing the trio as a group - has a great deal in common with Lupin. Studious nature, more conscious of the rules, having to deal with prejudice, etc....
Yeah I could go both ways and I agree it is because there are so many similarities between all four. There were times when Ron was more like James and at other times he kind of reminded me of Sirius or even Remus. And Harry, well, he mostly reminded me of James because I think James was more cautious than Sirius, but in that way, Ron reminded me of James too. . Harry was more reckless at times like Sirius, but Ron had his little reckless streak going at times as well. Hermione definitely reminded me more of Remus of the group. But in the long run, I agree that the similarities and distinctions are all mussed and mixed so it makes any type of direct comparison nearly impossible. I was more speaking of the overall aura of the groups.

Quote:
There are a lot of similarities with the two friendships as well. They loved each other like brothers and listen to each other before anyone else - even Hermione. When Harry was prepared to scoff at Hermione's idea for the DA, it was the fact that Ron thought it was a good idea that made him stop and consider it more seriously. In that regard, Ron does have something in common with Sirius - he is the one that Harry will most likely listen to. Harry and Ron also have a love of adventure and take advantage of the legacies that the Marauders left for Harry - the Invisibility cloak and the Marauder's Map.

But there are differences as well - Harry and Ron never strutted around the school playing pranks on people. That was where the twins were similar to James and Sirius. The trio used the Invisibility cloak and the map primarily to help them with solving whatever mystery they were working on - whereas James and Sirius primarily used them to nick food and sneak out on the grounds during the full moon. James and Sirius didn't have to deal with one of them constantly being under threat so their adventures were more about having fun. The trio's adventures primarily dealt with whatever the current threat to Harry was.
Indeed. That was a major difference because at least until the end of 6th - 7th year, the Marauders didn't have anything as serious going on. We only have the prequel which was likely around the end of that time and things may have gotten more serious due to helping in the Order. But by then their personalities were a lot more sure. Harry and Ron developed along with their serious adventures, so they carried things out in a different light. Too, Voldy was always trying to kill Harry - specific target. That makes a difference too I believe.

The trio's relationship was just as close in its own way though and I liked their through thick and thin attitude. Even when Ron left camp, it was a fit of anger and he said he tried to get back to them pretty quick actually, but couldn't find them. GoF was the only real anomoly, when Ron thought Harry had snuck his name in the cup. Actually that seemed more of a writing anomoly on Jo's part because it kind of made no sense to me based on Ron's character and Ron and Harry's relationship. I feel she could have used a better issue. By then, Ron knew good and well what Harry was made of. So I tend to ignore that little bit because it seemed a bit like JKR was simply trying to achieve the separation and a nice blow up of friends, but didn't hit on a subject matter that worked well...at least to me.

Quote:
However, I think that is a good thing. While there are similarities to the previous generation, the trio are not cardboard cutouts of the Marauders. They have their own identities separate from the Marauders.
Yes, I just thought it was cool that there were some similarities. But definite differences too. I think the dynamic was also distinct because one of their members was a girl, living in the girls dorms rather than the room with Harry and Ron. But that was of benefit to the overall friendship too in many ways. Of course with she and Ron liking one another, that added yet another dimension to the whole affair. Some of the funniest scenes were Harry's inner POV when Ron and Hermione were going at it. Those cracked me up.


__________________
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old July 7th, 2008, 7:35 am
meesha1971's Avatar
meesha1971  Female.gif meesha1971 is offline
Master of the Magical Arts
 
Joined: 4910 days
Location: The Unknowable Room
Age: 47
Posts: 12,731
Re: The Trio - Group Character Analysis

Quote:
Originally Posted by wickedwickedboy View Post
I agree, this was the follow the leader thing I was talking about. Only here, the leader was always changing because Harry would defer to his friends at times. However, sometimes he didn't and this is where the dissention I was speaking about came in. And it would sometimes be Ron/Harry v. Hermione or another of the 2 v. 1 deal. But it was no big deal, either way, someone or someones would always give in and they forged ahead.
I agree. It was an interesting dynamic because they did change the leader depending on the situation and which of them was best suited to the task. And there are times when it's Harry and Ron teaming up to convince Hermione or Ron and Hermione teaming up to convince Harry. But there were a few times where Harry stepped up and said "we have to do this" and wouldn't listen and that did cause dissention - and often it turned out that Harry should have listened - like in OOTP when he dragged them all to the DoM.

However - overall - I think they had a very good dynamic in how they worked together because, the majority of the time, they were somewhat democratic about how they did things. Discussing the options, making suggestions, and deciding what to do together. And it did sometimes come down to a "vote" because they didn't always agree. I always saw that as one of their strengths because it showed how well they worked together as a team.

Quote:
I agree, I feel too that the level of confidence of Harry and Ron was less than that of Sirius and James. However, that seemed to come out more in caution than anything else. They still ended up bravely thrashing their way into whatever adventure they set upon, but not with the same cocksureness of the Marauding leaders.
I agree. They do show more caution overall, but I think that was due to the fact that they weren't as confident in themselves as James and Sirius were. That was a bigger issue for Ron - he was a lot more insecure - but we see that with Harry as well to some extent. He worries about his abilities and skills and the only thing he feels that he is really good at is flying.

Quote:
Yeah I could go both ways and I agree it is because there are so many similarities between all four. There were times when Ron was more like James and at other times he kind of reminded me of Sirius or even Remus. And Harry, well, he mostly reminded me of James because I think James was more cautious than Sirius, but in that way, Ron reminded me of James too. . Harry was more reckless at times like Sirius, but Ron had his little reckless streak going at times as well. Hermione definitely reminded me more of Remus of the group. But in the long run, I agree that the similarities and distinctions are all mussed and mixed so it makes any type of direct comparison nearly impossible. I was more speaking of the overall aura of the groups.
Exactly. I think the most direct comparison can be made between Hermione and Lupin. Harry and Ron are so similar to each other - as were James and Sirius - it is very difficult to make a comparison to just one of them. But there is a very similar dynamic between the two groups of friends.

Quote:
Indeed. That was a major difference because at least until the end of 6th - 7th year, the Marauders didn't have anything as serious going on. We only have the prequel which was likely around the end of that time and things may have gotten more serious due to helping in the Order. But by then their personalities were a lot more sure. Harry and Ron developed along with their serious adventures, so they carried things out in a different light. Too, Voldy was always trying to kill Harry - specific target. That makes a difference too I believe.
I agree. I think it is a significant difference that none of the Marauders were specific targets like Harry was. The first war was in full swing when they were students, but it wasn't something that affected them directly while they were students. It was an issue that they cared about - they joined in fighting against Voldemort as soon as they could - but they didn't have to worry about Voldemort coming after one of them specifically when they were students. That makes a difference in the types of adventures they had. They had a more normal childhood overall.

The trio did have some "normal" adventures - particularly in the first book - but most often, they were out to solve a mystery or find some way to protect Harry.

Quote:
The trio's relationship was just as close in its own way though and I liked their through thick and thin attitude. Even when Ron left camp, it was a fit of anger and he said he tried to get back to them pretty quick actually, but couldn't find them. GoF was the only real anomoly, when Ron thought Harry had snuck his name in the cup. Actually that seemed more of a writing anomoly on Jo's part because it kind of made no sense to me based on Ron's character and Ron and Harry's relationship. I feel she could have used a better issue. By then, Ron knew good and well what Harry was made of. So I tend to ignore that little bit because it seemed a bit like JKR was simply trying to achieve the separation and a nice blow up of friends, but didn't hit on a subject matter that worked well...at least to me.
Actually, I understood the fight in GOF. I can see where Ron was coming from with that because the evidence was against Harry and Harry's own behavior made it appear that he was lying. And I can see why Harry was so upset by the whole thing because he expected Ron to believe him without having to explain anything. They both made mistakes there and didn't communicate well - and then they let their pride stop them from making up afterward.

However, I agree that the events of DH make the fight in GOF confusing. At the time, Jo said that the point of that was for Ron to deal with his jealousy - and it did appear that he had done so once the fight was over. At the time, it seemed that this was an important learning experience for both of them - learning from their mistakes and making their friendship stronger. But then she turns around and brings it all up again in DH so it appears that the fight in GOF didn't actually accomplish anything. So what was the point of it? After reading DH, the fight in GOF does come across as an anomaly and it doesn't quite fit.

But even with the various conflicts that rose up within the trio, they did maintain a very close bond between the three of them - and that is comparable to the bond that the Marauders shared - excluding Pettigrew of course. They might have argued over broomsticks or pets and had misunderstandings, but when push came to shove, they were always there for each other and would have died for each other.

Quote:
Yes, I just thought it was cool that there were some similarities. But definite differences too. I think the dynamic was also distinct because one of their members was a girl, living in the girls dorms rather than the room with Harry and Ron. But that was of benefit to the overall friendship too in many ways. Of course with she and Ron liking one another, that added yet another dimension to the whole affair. Some of the funniest scenes were Harry's inner POV when Ron and Hermione were going at it. Those cracked me up.
I agree. It's interesting to look at the similarities between the two groups, but I think the distinctions between them stand out more. Hermione being a girl does change the dynamic. The Marauders were pretty much always together - classes, free time, sharing a dorm, etc... But Hermione has to go to the girls dorm so there is more interaction between Harry and Ron overall. And I'm sure the Marauders could have benefitted from having a female perspective on certain issues. I was always hoping Hermione would write that book after Ron made that comment in OOTP.

Ron and Hermione's potential romance does create a whole new dynamic in their friendship. That was something that the Marauders never dealt with. It's interesting how that plays out because the strong friendship they share both brings Ron and Hermione closer together and keeps them apart because they're both so worried about the potential risk to their friendship if they get involved romantically. And Harry worries about that a bit in HBP as well - though he comes to realize that it will do more damage for them to keep dancing around each other after the whole thing with Lavender. And I agree - Harry's thoughts about them bickering were hilarious.


__________________

Reform must come from within, not from without. ~ James Cardinal Gibbons

"So, if people want information on my characters, then they have to accept that I'm going to give them the information on the characters. And if they don't like it, that's the nature of fiction. You have to accept someone else's world because they made that world, so they probably know a little better than you do what goes on there." ~ J.K. Rowling


All posts are my opinions and interpretations based on reading the Harry Potter books and interviews with J.K. Rowling.

Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old July 7th, 2008, 11:12 am
wickedwickedboy's Avatar
wickedwickedboy  Undisclosed.gif wickedwickedboy is offline
Lycanthrope
 
Joined: 4659 days
Location: Running with the Werewolves
Posts: 9,427
Re: The Trio - Group Character Analysis

Quote:
Originally Posted by meesha1971 View Post
I agree. It was an interesting dynamic because they did change the leader depending on the situation and which of them was best suited to the task. And there are times when it's Harry and Ron teaming up to convince Hermione or Ron and Hermione teaming up to convince Harry. But there were a few times where Harry stepped up and said "we have to do this" and wouldn't listen and that did cause dissention - and often it turned out that Harry should have listened - like in OOTP when he dragged them all to the DoM.
Yup and it was a defining dynamic which was the "aura of the trio" I was talking about because while the Marauder's "aura" was distinct, the cohesiveness, loyalty and trust was there in the end, despite times when those features went temporarily missing. Naturally I speak of just the three remaining Marauders and that is intresting also because you actually have two "trios" at the finish for both groups. But note when the lack of cohesiveness, loyalty and trust faded in either group, it came back fiercely. Ron after GoF and after the camping scene - Hermione at the beginning and Harry after his willfullness in HBP. And with the Marauders Lupin was mistrustful for an entire 13 years (although Sirius perhaps only a couple of weeks) yet note how strongly they instantly bonded again in POA; Sirius violently defending Lupin a few pages later and Lupin becoming Sirius' fierce defender in OOTP.

So while the dynamics were distinct, I think there were those similar features I mentioned above in the overall "trio" relationship of both groups and I feel JKR did this quite on purpose. Note the patronuses; Harry and James are Stags and Ron and Sirius are both types of dogs (big black and terrier). While, both Hermione and Remus have patroni quite distinctive from the others, I don't feel that was planned, (assuming Remus' is a werewolf), but in a way it is because JKR made their patroni pertinent to them, which would be distinctive in both cases - if you know what I mean.

There is a dual aspect to this. Patronus means "protector" or "guardian" in Latin, reflecting the role the Patronus Charm plays. In archaic Latin, it meant "father", which is interesting, considering that Harry Potter's Patronus is the same as his father's Patronus and Animagus form. The Latin word exspecto or expecto means "I watch for" or "I await", thus the charm's incantation roughly translates into "I await a protector. So while Harry's patronus is relevant to his father in that way - it is also relevant to Ron's in that both he and his father's best male friends were a type of dog in line with the compatibility and loyal friends idea.

Quote:
However - overall - I think they had a very good dynamic in how they worked together because, the majority of the time, they were somewhat democratic about how they did things. Discussing the options, making suggestions, and deciding what to do together. And it did sometimes come down to a "vote" because they didn't always agree. I always saw that as one of their strengths because it showed how well they worked together as a team.
Exactly.

Quote:
I agree. They do show more caution overall, but I think that was due to the fact that they weren't as confident in themselves as James and Sirius were. That was a bigger issue for Ron - he was a lot more insecure - but we see that with Harry as well to some extent. He worries about his abilities and skills and the only thing he feels that he is really good at is flying.
Yup. But I think some of that lack of confidence was because they grew into their roles and their friendship while doing battle against Voldemort from 11 years old. Note their distinct behavior in the Epilogue - Ron admitting to Harry that he confunded the test supervisor and I can imagine Harry's conspiratory smile. I feel that the cocksureness we saw in the earlier James-Sirius relationship developed once these two had more time free of the worry of being chased and captured by Voldemort. Too, Sirius and James' relationship likely became a lot more like Harry and Ron's in their youth during the time James and Lily were in hiding - both feeling less confident due to the circumstances. Similarities are coming to me in every direction now. .

Quote:
Actually, I understood the fight in GOF. I can see where Ron was coming from with that because the evidence was against Harry and Harry's own behavior made it appear that he was lying. And I can see why Harry was so upset by the whole thing because he expected Ron to believe him without having to explain anything. They both made mistakes there and didn't communicate well - and then they let their pride stop them from making up afterward.

However, I agree that the events of DH make the fight in GOF confusing. At the time, Jo said that the point of that was for Ron to deal with his jealousy - and it did appear that he had done so once the fight was over. At the time, it seemed that this was an important learning experience for both of them - learning from their mistakes and making their friendship stronger. But then she turns around and brings it all up again in DH so it appears that the fight in GOF didn't actually accomplish anything. So what was the point of it? After reading DH, the fight in GOF does come across as an anomaly and it doesn't quite fit.
I hadn't put my finger on it in quite that way because I didn't hear Jo's comment about Ron dealing with his Jealousy in GoF. But that would make much more sense of what she did. However, you are right, DH made that rather senseless. . I would imagine that JKR felt Ron had not completely dealt with it in GoF and had to get it completely settled in DH. In a way that makes sense because Hermione and Ron hadn't gotten anything really established yet. JKR wanted to resolve all of those lingering issues - she did the same for Lupin and his furry little problem - blowing it up into a magnificent issue in order for him to really have to deal with it. I suppose she felt that she had to do that with Ron too. It is odd how she went to such lengths with some characters like Ron and Lupin to make these points terrifically clear, and then left other issues totally undealt with.

Quote:
But even with the various conflicts that rose up within the trio, they did maintain a very close bond between the three of them - and that is comparable to the bond that the Marauders shared - excluding Pettigrew of course. They might have argued over broomsticks or pets and had misunderstandings, but when push came to shove, they were always there for each other and would have died for each other.
I agree; that is what I was saying above. That cohesiveness, loyalty and loving friendship was the lasting legacy for both "trios" in the end.

Quote:
Ron and Hermione's potential romance does create a whole new dynamic in their friendship. That was something that the Marauders never dealt with. It's interesting how that plays out because the strong friendship they share both brings Ron and Hermione closer together and keeps them apart because they're both so worried about the potential risk to their friendship if they get involved romantically. And Harry worries about that a bit in HBP as well - though he comes to realize that it will do more damage for them to keep dancing around each other after the whole thing with Lavender. And I agree - Harry's thoughts about them bickering were hilarious.
Indeed, but I think once Lily stepped into the picture, the Marauders finally had a similar element within the scope of their friendship. However, very distinctive as well. I also agree that it would have likely assisted them to have had Lily as a Marauder all along. But in the end it all worked out, so that is the point. I feel JKR was content to have the Marauders (and Lily) rejoined in the afterlife and the trio all surviving the war together in the earthly one. Thus, you had this pervasive group dynamic going on in both dimensions. .


__________________
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old June 4th, 2010, 5:00 pm
Meggy  Female.gif Meggy is offline
Second Year
 
Joined: 3338 days
Posts: 203
Re: The Trio - Group Character Analysis

I wonder how the Trio changed later in life? I mean since Ron and Hermione became husband and wife they would naturally confide in each other more and in Harry less so, because married couples don't always tell their friends everything. But seeing as Harry was such a close friend I wonder whether he would feel pushed out? He already felt they were talking about him in the DH. Also when Hermione and Ron fight, it's not as though Hermione can go running to Harry and complain because as somebody's wife, you don't just go running to another man and start pouring your heart out even if you are friends. In the Epilogue I got the general overall sense that Ron and Harry had remained close (perhaps going for a drink every week or something and seeing each other regularly) whilst with Hermione, she had become more distant from him as she was busy with her kids and being a mother and a wife.


__________________
Ravenclaw

I won Voldemort's Excellence Award for the Fifth Task

Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old June 8th, 2010, 4:31 pm
lightreading  Female.gif lightreading is offline
Fourth Year
 
Joined: 3029 days
Location: USA
Posts: 512
Re: The Trio - Group Character Analysis

I think that later on they remained close, but yes, their marriages may have interfered with their friendships. It's depressing to think about, but I think in some ways, they drifted apart. Of course, they all got along very, very well--Hermione & Ginny, Ginny & Ron, Hermione & Ron, Harry & Ron, Harry & Ginny, Harry & Hermione... so i think it had to have helped that they all cared about each other.For instance, if Hermione & Ginny disliked each other, Harry & Ron would have had a tough time staying friends-- it would put a huge strain on their friendship. But they all got along, and so there wasn't any tension that would keep Harry, Hermione, & Ron from remaining friends.


Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old July 19th, 2010, 10:17 am
craiggles  Male.gif craiggles is offline
Third Year
 
Joined: 2989 days
Location: California
Age: 26
Posts: 349
Re: The Trio - Group Character Analysis

I'm just wondering (and sorry if this has been asked already), do people feel that the relationship between the trio is realistic? Do you find friendships like that in real life, where everyone complements each other and the flaws are totally outshone by their good qualities?

Their relationship is what attracts me to the HP series. The magic, the danger, the plot, that's all good too, but I think the incredibly well-drawn characters and the bonds between them are what make HP shine as a series. I love that Rowling let the characters take precedence; a lot of other fantasy books focus on the...well, fantasy. I've been into HP for 10 years now, and like someone on this thread said, I feel like I know the characters, and they're almost like real people to me.


__________________
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old July 19th, 2010, 11:36 am
Yoana's Avatar
Yoana  Female.gif Yoana is offline
Assistant to Minister Granger
 
Joined: 4615 days
Location: Bulgaria
Age: 36
Posts: 6,431
Re: The Trio - Group Character Analysis

Quote:
Originally Posted by craiggles View Post
I'm just wondering (and sorry if this has been asked already), do people feel that the relationship between the trio is realistic? Do you find friendships like that in real life, where everyone complements each other and the flaws are totally outshone by their good qualities?
Yes, I have. I've been extremely lucky though, I imagine.


Reply With Quote
Reply
Go Back  Chamber of Secrets > Harry Potter > The Stone > Legilimency Studies

Bookmarks

Tags
character analysis, the trio


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 6:07 am.


Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Original content is Copyright MMII - MMVIII, CoSForums.com. All Rights Reserved.
Other content (posts, images, etc) is Copyright its respective owners.