The Instigator
Mak-zie
Pro (for)
Losing
2 Points
The Contender
royalpaladin
Con (against)
Winning
9 Points

Harry Potter is mainly a static character

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 3 votes the winner is...
royalpaladin
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/18/2012 Category: Entertainment
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 4,626 times Debate No: 22113
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (4)
Votes (3)

 

Mak-zie

Pro

Static Character- A character who remains the same throughout a narrative. Static characters do not develop or change beyond the way in which they are first presented.
http://library.thinkquest.org...

In this debate, I will be debating that Harry Potter (the character from J.K. Rowling's Harry Potter series) for the most part, does not change throughout the books. Con will be arguing that he is a dynamic character, he does change. Do not accept this debate if you do not know who Harry Potter is! Only accept if you have read the books!

First round acceptance.
No sematics.
royalpaladin

Con

I accept and negate.

a literary or dramatic character who undergoes an important inner change, as a change in personality or attitude: Ebeneezer Scrooge is a dynamic character. Compare static character.

Dictionary.com Unabridged
Based on the Random House Dictionary, � Random House, Inc. 2012.
Cite This Source
|
Link To dynamic character

Example Sentences

Following this, Mellon becomes a more dynamic character and his money takes a more secondary role.
That additional scene makes Charlie a dynamic character rather than a static one.
Neither the narrator nor anyone else is a dynamic character, and corporate power struggles have been described better by others.

Dictionary.com's 21st Century Lexicon

Main Entry:

dynamic character

Part of Speech:

n

Definition:

in literature or drama, a character who undergoes a permanent change in outlook or character during the story; also called [ developing character ]

Dictionary.com's 21st Century Lexicon
Copyright � 2003-2012 Dictionary.com, LLC
Cite This Source
Debate Round No. 1
Mak-zie

Pro

Okay, as my opponent has listed Ebenezer Scrooge as a dynamic character, I'll start by comparing these two characters.

At the beginning of the Christmas Carol:
"'Don't be cross, uncle.' said the nephew.

'What else can I be,' returned the uncle, 'when I live in such a world of fools as this? Merry Christmas! Out upon merry Christmas. What's Christmas time to you but a time for paying bills without money; a time for finding yourself a year older, but not an hour richer; a time for balancing your books and having every item in them through a round dozen of months presented dead against you? If I could work my will,' said Scrooge indignantly,'every idiot who goes about with 'Merry Christmas' on his lips, should be boiled with his own pudding, and buried with a stake of holly through his heart. He should!'"

At the end:
"Scrooge went to church, and walked about the streets, and watched the people hurrying to and fro, and patted the children on the head, and questioned beggars, and looked down into the kitchens of houses, and up to the windows; and found that everything could yield him pleasure. He had never dreamed that any walk -- that anything -- could give him so much happiness."

As you can see Scrooge is what you would call somewhat at the beginning, but by the end, he became kind. The transformation from good to evil or evil to good is the biggest transformation a character could undergo. Harry is good from the beginning, and stays good until the end of the series.

The Beginning of Harry Potter:
For the first eleven years of his life, Harry was raised by his aunt and uncle, who treated him badly, while spoiling their son. He is forced to live in a cupboard and do all of their work, and they don't even care to celebrate his birthday. And even though he received no love as a child, he put all of that behind as he went to Hogwarts, again and again performing brave acts and staying strictly to the "good" side. He is first challenged by this when Draco Malfoy introduces him and holds out his hand after insulting Ron. Harry, keeping loyal to Ron and sensing Draco's true self, refuses to shake his hand. When the Sorting Hat wants to place him in Slytherin, which according to the book, "is where all dark witches and wizards come from." Knowing this, Harry chooses to be in Gryffindor. Harry always chooses the good side and does everything in his power to save Hogwarts.

Good deeds he performed as a child:
1. He saved the Sorcerer's Stone and killed Quirrel.
2. Proved there was a Chamber of Secrets, destroyed a Horcrux, saved Ginny Weasley.
3. Saved his godfather.
4. Won the Triwizard tournament and escaped Lord Voldemort.
5. Fights against the Death Eaters at the Department of Mysteries and destroyed the prophecy.
6. Figures out how many Horcruxes there are.

Good deeds he performed as an adult (in wizard years):
1. Found and destroyed the last of the Horcruxes.
2. Sacrifices himself and comes back from the dead.
3. Gets the Elder Wand and destroys it because he doesn't want the power.
4. Duels Lord Voldemort and wins.


The End:
By the end of the last book, Harry is still just as kind as he was before. After he defeated Lord Voldemort, he got the opportunity for power, The Elder Wand. But instead of keeping it (the power-hungry path), he used it to fix his old wand, and then threw it away (the good path). As you can see he is making the same good choices that he began his first year of Hogwarts. You may also notice of how there is no "bad deeds" list chart to go along with the good. That's because there weren't any. Besides breaking an occasional rule to help others and help Hogwarts (which is justified, in my opinion), there weren't any.

Harry is always sympathetic towards people throughout all of the books, no matter what they've done to him. e.g. He has the opportunity to kill Bellatrix in the fifth book, but doesn't, even after she killed Sirius. In the last book, he saves Draco Malfoy in the Room of Requirement right after Malfoy tried to kill him. This is another essence of Harry's "goodness" that didn't change.

So although Harry made minor changes throughout the books, which is bound to happen as the books track his life from child to adult, the most important change that could happen to a character, which like I said, good to evil or vice versa, did not change with Harry. Every with Voldemort's influence on him he was strictly good. When comparing his character to that of Scrooge, he most definitely does not make that change.

http://www.bookrags.com...
http://holidays.kaboose.com...
http://harrypotter.wikia.com...
royalpaladin

Con

Framework

In order for a character to be considered dynamic, there only has to be one major change in his or her outlook on a major thematic issue or in his or her personality. This means that my opponent can demonstrate that Harry remains the same in an infinite number of ways, but I would still win if I provide a single example of a major change.


For example, if my opponent claimed that Harry was static because he was able to use magic throughout the course of the series, and I present my case, you vote negative because there are still ways in which he changes.

Case

The negative case rests on the fact that Harry Potter is dynamic in at least two ways. First, his attitude towards the most major theme in the books, death, evolves throughout the course of the series. At the beginning of the series, Harry is frightened of death and resents the deaths of his loved ones. For example, when Bellatrix slaughters Sirius, Harry attempts to torture her in a fit of madness. However, by the end of the series, Harry comes to realize that death is nothing more than a piece of the cycle of life, and thus comes to terms with his own death. When Fred, Tonks, and Lupin die, for example, Harry does not fly into an outrage and attempt to demolish the Death Eaters. Instead, he calmly formulates a plan to sacrifice himself in order to save Hogwarts. The fact that Harry sacrifices himself is also indicative of his changed attitude towards death. By opting to not fight to preserve his own life, Harry comes to respect death and its implications.


Second, Harry becomes less individualistic throughout the course of the series. Although my opponent will undoubtedly note that Harry was always willing to protect others, at the most fundamental level, Harry was an individualistic being. He saved Hermione from the troll in The Sorcerer's Stone out of a sense of personal guilt, for example.Moreover, In The Deathly Hallows, he became incensed when he realized that he was nothing more than Dumbledore's pawn. By the end of the final book, however, Harry comes to recognize and respect the fact that he is merely a part of a larger world. When he gives up his life in hopes that others will be able to demolish the rest of the Horcruxes and when he forgives Dumbledore for using him, Harry realizes that his individual safety is unimportant as long as the rest of the world is free from Voldemort's tyranny.


Opponent's Case

My opponent correctly identifies that Harry remains "good" throughout the series. This, however, is meaningless because he is dyanmic in a variety of other ways. Remember, I only have to provide one way in which he is dynamic in order to prove the resolution false.
Debate Round No. 2
Mak-zie

Pro

"Remember, I only have to provide one way in which he is dynamic in order to prove the resolution false."
This is false. My opponent thinks that by providing one reason he is dynamic will guarantee her a win. There are two reasons for this:

1. The resolution
My resolution reads that "Harry Potter is mainly a static character," emphasis on the mainly. For my opponent to win this debate she would have to prove that there are more SOLID reasons than not that Harry Potter is a static character. If I were to provide an infinite amount, as my opponent said, then I would win. But I would also like to point out that more does not nessacarily mean better. So it all comes down to the actual arguments. The resolution did not say that "Harry Potter goes through no changes throughout the series."

2. Childhood advances
Before I go on to rebut my opponent's arguments, I'll still be arguing what she has said above. Now listing just one argument is not factual or relevant to this debate if it has to do with childhood advances. Everyone grows up and matures a great deal during their childhood. To say that they do not would be wrong, because yes, every child will be immature until they get put into the "real world," which in Harry Potter is translated to about the time he and his friends begin looking for Horcruxes.

Rebuttals:

"At the beginning of the series, Harry is frightened of death and resents the deaths of his loved ones."
This is an example of childhood advancements. Harry is a young boy who is frightened and needs love. What children aren't? Yes, by the end he is independant and no longer scared...because he is an adult. Obviously adults are not going to be.

"For example, when Bellatrix slaughters Sirius, Harry attempts to torture her in a fit of madness. However, by the end of the series, Harry comes to realize that death is nothing more than a piece of the cycle of life, and thus comes to terms with his own death. When Fred, Tonks, and Lupin die, for example, Harry does not fly into an outrage and attempt to demolish the Death Eaters."
When Sirius dies, Harry is distraught, yes. When all the others my opponent has listed die, he is not really that upset because he wasn't particularly close to any of them. Sirius was like the last family he had left; he didn't have that connection with the others. And Harry doesn't "attempt to torture Bellatrix," he acts mercifully and does not do anything to her. He does not attempt to do anything.

"When he gives up his life in hopes that others will be able to demolish the rest of the Horcruxes and when he forgives Dumbledore for using him, Harry realizes that his individual safety is unimportant as long as the rest of the world is free from Voldemort's tyranny."
He realized this throughout the book. He was constantly saying that he "didn't want anyone to die for him." He was always able to face the music and fight Voldemort whenever he got the chance. He knew before the prophecy that Voldemort wanted him dead. So this argument does not hold any water.

Arguments:

1. Harry remains good throughout the books.
As I have said before, he is always doing brave and heroic things for the "good" side, like my opponent has conceded. "My opponent correctly identifies that Harry remains "good" throughout the series."

2. Harry remains selfless.
He performs many deeds for the good of others and always says "that no one else should die for him." He constantly puts himself in danger for others in every single book and sacrafices himself in the last.

3. Harry remains merciful.
No matter what people do to him, he still helps them. e.g. Malfoy and Dudley.

4. Harry remains compassionate.
In the first book, "Hermione burst into tears. Before Harry could say or do anything, she tucked the enormous book under her arm, and still sobbing, ran toward the staircase to the girls' dormitories and out of sight.
'Can't you give her a break?' Harry asked Ron quietly."
In the last book, Harry even feels compassion for the little piece of Voldemort's soul after he died.

5. Harry remains kind.
Harry did remain kind, except for the fifth book, which was because he was being influenced by Voldemort. He was taking him over and making him mean. Other than that, he was very kind in the books. He kept a loyal friendship with his friends throughout the books. Harry's friends, everyone were eager to follow him. Why, his kindness.

6. Harry remains level-headed.
Starting from the first book, Harry was very successful in Quiddich, but was always very humble and never boasted. In fact, he never boasted with any of his accomplishments, instead humbly saying that he "always had help."

Sources:
My knowledge of the books.

I'd like to point out that my opponent has conceded with my main point and taken advantage of my resolution. I urge a vote for Pro.
Anyway, I thank royalpaladin for a great debate.
royalpaladin

Con

Framework

Resolution

She tells you that she can provide a thousand frivolous reasons that show that Harry Potter does not change in order to prove that he is "mainly" static. The problem with this analysis is that a character cannot be partially static and partially dynamic; the two categories are mutually exclusive because dynamic characters, by definition, are those that undergo major changes. A character cannot undergo a major change and be considered static even if he remains the same in a myriad of other ways. This means that my observation still holds water.


Childhood Advances

I would like you to cleanly extend this argument across the flow because my opponent here concedes that Harry Potter is a "coming of age" story, meaning that it is a story of a dynamic character. Just because changes can be attributed to childhood advances does not mean that the characters who undergo the changes are static; rather, it demonstrates that they are dynamic because they are undergoing major changes. The definition of a dynamic character is not a character who undergoes changes that cannot be accounted for by maturation; rather, it is merely a character who experiences major changes. The changes can be due to a variety of factors, including "growing-up"; in fact, "coming of age" stories are the most classic examples of tales that involve dynamic characters. (Source 1: http://classiclit.about.com...;). Source 2: http://voices.yahoo.com... So, insofar as my opponent concedes in her rebuttal that Harry Potter is a coming of age story, she concedes this debate. This is a prime reason to negate.


Case

Coming to Terms With Death

She concedes here that this is an example of "coming of age", so this proves that Harry is dynamic and you can extend this argument cleanly across the flow.


Bellatrix

Her Bellatrix rebuttal is false. Harry Potter chases Bella across the Ministry of Magic and uses the Cruciatus Curse on her. Harry was close to Lupin, Fred, and Tonks as well; the Weasleys were basically Harry's second family, and Lupin was the last of the Marauders and the only living father figure in the seventh book. In fact, Lupin made Harry his son's godfather.


Sacrificing Life

She says that he "always realized this." This is also false; if you read the chapter in which he views Snape's memory, this causes him a great shock. Yes, he is in the process of coming to terms with his death throughout the entire book, but that just bolsters my claim that he is dynamic because he embarks on a mental journey that culminates in this change.


Individuality Analysis

Please extend the individuality analysis cleanly across the flow because my opponent dropped it. The analysis demonstrates a change in how Harry views the world, meaning that he is a dynamic characer.


Her last piece of analysis is that I conceded to her argument. Refer to the framework debate above; as long as I prove that there is at least one major change, by definition, Harry cannot be static. Remember that state of being static and the state of being dynamic are mutually exclusive; a character cannot be both static and dynamic as she attempts to suggest.


I thank my opponent for this interesting debate and urge a negative ballot.
Debate Round No. 3
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by royalpaladin 5 years ago
royalpaladin
Yes, Harry did use the Cruciatus Curse of Bellatrix.

Proof:

Start at 1:50

Bellatrix Lestrange

Harry Potter

As mentioned above, Harry attempted to use this curse against Bellatrix after she murdered his godfather, Sirius Black. Though the curse gave her a brief moment of terrible pain, it did not cause the excruciating, drawn-out pain it is meant to give.[2]

http://harrypotter.wikia.com...

He uses it on her in Book 5.
Posted by Mak-zie 5 years ago
Mak-zie
Harry never used the Cruiciatus Curse on Bellatrix, and never even used any of the unforgivable curses for that matter. My opponent is just using this to help her argument.
Posted by 16kadams 5 years ago
16kadams
I wanna vote pro, but will abstain because I don't watch the movies or read the books on harry potter.
Posted by Maikuru 5 years ago
Maikuru
Thank you, Pro! I've been saying that for years.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by Grape 5 years ago
Grape
Mak-zieroyalpaladinTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Very good arguments from Con! I originally thought that Harry was not a very dynamic character because his personality remained largely the same, but Con pointed out some interesting ways that Harry changed that I would never have thought of.
Vote Placed by TUF 5 years ago
TUF
Mak-zieroyalpaladinTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:23 
Reasons for voting decision: At first I agreed with pro on this. But after reading Con's arguments, my opinion is starting to change. Con's bellatrix argument showed me the difference harry had in character since when he was a boy. Comparing harry potter from the 1st book and the seventh book, we start to notice a lot of character changes. I feel like both side performed spectacular. I am giving arguments to Con, because she convinced me more by the end. Sources to mak for the hard word put into the arguments and research
Vote Placed by drafterman 5 years ago
drafterman
Mak-zieroyalpaladinTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro placed additional restrictions on the conditions of the resolution as the debate went on. Regarding the INITIAL resolution of Harry Potter not changing, and Con arguing that he does change, Con succeeded. Pro's only rebuttals were to note that the changes were within specific realms (i.e. he changed but was stull overall good) are immaterial as such change was not required in the initial resolution. Any sufficiently general statement can render any change moot (i.e. He was still male)