Dumbledore. The answer is Dumbledore.

 

It's never always Lupus Dumbledore!

 

Wrong thread

 

Harry seems to be average to moderately above average in areas of magic outside of his specialty (Defense Against the Dark Arts). In his specialty, he is bordering on genius. Hermione is a good example of a significantly above average witch in his age group, and Harry seems to be in a class above her when it comes to defense, consistently outperforming her in exams (Lupin's test, OWLs) and in practical matters (teaching the D.A., casting the Patronus). That being said, I don't think there is enough evidence to claim he is on par with people like Dumbledore or Voldemort in that subject; we know very little about their skills at that age. They certainly outperformed him in other subjects.

The things that Harry does that are truly extraordinary (Patronus, pushing back Voldemort's magic in the graveyard, resisting Imperius) seem to be those things heavily reliant on willpower and focus. Harry's main issue with casting the Patronus in Prisoner of Azkaban was that he wanted to hear his parents' voices (or maybe just Lily's voice, don't remember), but he was able to do it when he had a reason to cast it. While he has some issues casting it in Deathly Hallows, it is understandable due to his condition at the time.

In conclusion, Harry is above average (but not by much) in most areas, a prodigy (but not necessarily in the same league as others) in Defense Against the Dark Arts, and very, very determined when he needs to be.

 

Yep.

Nope.

If he was a 'prodigy' he'd have received an O+ (like all those fanfics).

He's *good* at defence - getting an 'O' - just like Hermione is *good* at ten of the eleven subjects she took at OWL level.

The 'prodigy' thing breaks down when you try and see exactly what Harry did that makes him so good at defence. The PoA Patronus has been covered earlier in this thread. All you've got left is that Harry can dodge really really well.

Is Dumbledore a prodigy? Sure. He discovered the twelveth use of dragon blood (something like that), is super-powerful, can face down Voldemort, etc. Lots of evidence.

Is Snape a prodigy? I guess so. He was developing new potions and techniques while still at school and inventing new spells to boot.

Is Hermione a prodigy? Maybe. She does nifty things in the canon that turn others' heads.

Is Harry a prodigy? He ... uhm, well, he ... okay, he dodges spells really really well.

(And did a one-off casting of a super-duper Patronus at age 13, which he never did again.)

Nothing Harry does in the last 2-3 books is 'prodigy' level stuff. Yes, he taught the DA. Are all teachers 'prodigies'? No.

I guess I'm 90% in agreement with biloly. Harry's average to moderately above average in everything other than defence. With defence he is XXXX, better than Hermione but less than *real prodigies*.

I just believe with the relationship:

average << XXXXX << prodigy

the word for XXXX that best fits is 'good' rather than 'prodigy but not like the other prodigies'. 'Prodigy' is a powerful word and Harry Potter doesn't fit. 'Very good' is a far better match for the accomplishment of gaining an O for his OWL and ranks him properly between 'average' and the *real* prodigies.

 

A lot of people are referring back to the Patronus Charm to prove that Harry was above average. Although I feel as if the Patronus Charm was not a charm people really cared about and that was why it was a spell many wizards were not able to conjure; simply because it all comes back down to intent. The average witch/wizard would have probably never encounter a Dementor in their lifetime; unless they were sent to Azkaban and ignoring the ones under Voldermort's rule that went about terrorizing people.

But back to the topic question, Harry O.W.Ls (I know they are not the be all and end all but they are a good indicator where a wizard/witch should be) were really extraordinary considering the amount of mental stress he was under. He saw Cedric die the previous year, Snape was giving him occlumency lessons, he was in charge of the D.A. while having a lot of people throwing accusations at him of being a liar. This would be enough to break anyone, yet Harry managed to get really good scores. Imagine if he didn't have these distractions going around and his parents were around to guide him; I would like to think he would be up there in terms of talent in Hogwarts.

 

That is a good point. It certainly would've been interesting to see how Harry's OWL performance would've been if he'd gone into the test without all the crap he had to put up with in his fifth year. Heck, he managed to get an Outstanding in Defense Against the Dark Arts despite having useless teachers for his first two years at Hogwarts, and a fifth-year teacher who was actively sabotaging his education.

 

Meh, that just shows how ridiculously low the standards for defense are. Most adult wizards can't even cast the shield charm, and they presumably made it though Hogwarts just fine.

And really, defense isn't all that important in a peaceful society, so it's kind of understandable that it isn't a top priority in school.

 

One of the biggest problems I have with canon is that I expected Harry to be, well, fucking awesome. And, at most, he's just above average. Between an A and an EE, while he should be an O, etc.

Don't get me wrong, I never expected him to be like he is in super!Harry fics, but, well. I read somewhere, don't remember where, that Snape got into Hogwarts knowing more spells than most of the seventh years. By 16, he had created a lot of spells. The Marauders had learned Animagus transformation, by 16, as well. I expected Harry to be better than all of them. Not to have done the same things, but the level of awesomeness, you know? Learning the Patronus and teaching them to others is the kind of power I expected from a teacher-like character, like Hermione, not from the supposed hero.

 

I think part of the problem was JKR being a bit too wary of making a Super!Harry, and so his accomplishments are toned down a bit too much in the later books.

In the first four books, we see a lot more emphasis on the idea that Harry is special. He gets through the best defenses Hogwarts' teachers could create in Philosopher's Stone, takes on a thousand year old magical monster in Chamber of Secrets, is learning and using high-level magic in Prisoner of Azkaban, and in Goblet of Fire he's competing just fine with the best 7th year students in the world, and survives a duel with Voldemort.

Then, for whatever reason, his accomplishments start getting toned down. He just doesn't get the same sort of awesome moments in the last three books. I suppose JKR wanted to put more emphasis on Harry as "the kid who's in over his head" rather than "the destined hero." Which isn't a bad choice, but it was a bit of a jarring shift, and feels like his heroic development got a bit derailed.

 

Right!

Harry's super-duper Patronus Charm in his *third year (only!)* is almost the only thing there is that points at Harry being anything spectacular. But I discount that feat, even as it was at the time when Harry was thirteen (let alone four years later, with his potential completely unrealised) because Harry had an advantage that *no-one else ever had* when casting his PoA Patronus. Something that let that 'intent' be ramped up to one thousand percent.

He knew he was going to succeed.

When he twigged on the fact that he had *already witnessed* his success at casting the charm and repelling the dementor horde he *knew* that he would succeed. For a spell fuelled by intent (I think more 'will power') - that was all he needed. For his one-time-only feat of extraordinary magical prowess.

Yes. I think it was really clear that Rowling wanted her series to be the triumph of an 'everyman', an average joe who wanted no more than a normal life. So she threw in everything she could to rescue him and save the day for him. Enter the world's most commercially successful dei ex machina, the Deathly Hallows, letting puppet!Harry win due to no actual ability of his own.

Yes.

I don't *like*, myself, Rowling's choice - I would have preferred a powerful Harry, the same way I prefer Superman over Batman - but it was her choice, and there's no 'error' in her making that call. Just in her ('derailed') execution of same.

 

You heard the first from Sirius, who isn't exactly a reliable source when it comes to Snape, especially since the real quotation is something like 'knew more dark magic/curses than...'

EDIT: This sounds more antagonistic than I mean it to be.

 

Yeah sirius remark is more like insult to snape. He can't know that much of dark arts really. Remember snape is lily childhood friends and both spend great deal of time togather.

 

That's one aspect, that has bugged me quite a bit. Yeah, in the books Harry is an average wizard. It's kinda sad, as in a lot of situations it was luck, which kept him alive. Luck, and the brilliance of Hermione (Ron is a git and useless). Also, I honestly expect more from the child of the legendary Lily and James, who were "the brightest witch and wizard" according to many people.
But no... in the books he simply sucks. He doesn't have the ambition and cunning of a Slytherin, he doesn't have the desire of knowledge of a Ravenclaw, he is a weak mix of Hufflepuff and Gryffindor. Courage for dumb things and loyalty to the few friends he has - which is actually the reason I read fanfiction, a story where he isn't as flawed and powerless.

 

When you talk about an average wizard there are a number of things to consider...
Firstly.. we do not get to see a lot of his day to day classes in the novels do we... so we can't exactly say he is an average wizard or an above average wizard a below average wizard.. as for his grades.. lets face it there are people who inherently have different strengths and weaknesses.. for all you know he might have been good at the practical aspect and might not be so good at the theoretical aspect of it balancing his grades out.

The other factors that you might want to consider is that they spend a lot of time on solving mysteries rather than just studying and when he has solved a mystery and had his yearly death experience he might want to settle down and have fun and not go back to reading books. As for the comparison to Albus and Tom, you cannot say why they were such brilliant wizards but some of it was definitely their drive towards magic. but yes because of that lack of drive he is certainly average in his knowledge of spells. I mean he has a very limited set of spells he uses for combat and the reason why he may be good at combat could be a combination of his reflexes and his ability to think when he is in trouble. He also seems to be a good teacher as seen with the DA though them producing the Patronus doesn't mean as much because the first time they produced it .. it was in a room without dementor exposure. There is also the fact that they might have had better memories of happiness that is required by the charm.

I admit that the thing I found most disappointing about harry was that he never he never tried to really get into magic.. i mean the theory of it etc but that could just be because the novels were not targeted at an audience that would enjoy the various explanations into the abstract magical theories. There is also the fact that some people just want the underdog to win and not want the protagonist to be godly who just has to snap his fingers and solve all his problems

In terms of power i guess he is above average its not got anything to with the fact that he was able to produce the patronus at 13 but the fact that he was able to drive a lot of dementers away with just his single one at age 13 going to 14. There is also the fact that in the final battle when his friends came to rescue with their patronus it wasn't until harry joined in with his patronus that they fully retreated (at least i think it was like that i read the books a few years ago).

 

I don't know how average Harry is as a wizard but he is pretty average as far as being Chosen One goes.

 

There's many ways to define a prodigy beyond having the ability to fight. How about having the ability to invent dozens of life-saving potions? Having the ability to invent new magical items and new non-violent spells? There's probably a lot more wizards out there in the world that are better at Harry. Even in quidditch, we know he is nowhere near the best in the world or even the best in his country.

Is Harry better than most of his peers and many wizards/witches in the entire world at fighting? Probably given that most wizards and witches can't seem even to duel and prefer to run from a fight ( like normal civilians everywhere), Harry is better than most of them.

Is he a prodigy on par with Voldemort, Dumbledore, Snape and even his father? Probably not. Harry is basically a good army ranger or even a decent special force operative in a world filled with super soldiers.

To be honest, I wished more fics would actually explore the challenges of being Harry as depicted in the books. He is someone chosen almost purely by luck to be the one to face Voldemort, despite having a special talent. All the top-tier wizards and wizards on his side had been killed off by the time he had to face the best evil wizard alive.

The story of a boy who lived, someone who is never a good warrior being the only hope to save the world? There's so much potential to develop a good story by fanfic authors. There's a lot more ways to explore the sheer amount of challenge and conflict he has to navigate as a character.

He can't be a hero who trains enough until he can match his nemesis in a fight, and that makes the story a lot more interesting in my view. It's not about gaining the ability to punch harder than the enemy, it's about keeping the desire to stay in the fight despite knowing he is severely outmatched.

That really makes him MORE of a hero than most "heroes" nowadays.I don't think it is an issue of luck that saves him in the end. I see it as willpower that allowed Harry to defeat Voldemort. If he had run off at any stage ( once he knew he could never match Voldemort in skill), he would never be lucky enough to discover all the ways he could defeat Voldemort in the first place.

There are lots of ways to tell this story differently from Rowling, it's just a little disappointing we rarely had the chance to read this kind of stories. The story of Harry Potter is almost the same as the story of Frodo Baggins. It's just that Lord of the Rings have other characters who could fight well.

This is almost like asking why Frodo Baggins isn't a badass as the hero of a fantasy story.

 

honestly i felt that harry was an above average wizard. he just strikes me as this slightly lazy kid who when plot dictates pulls a rabbit out of the sorting hat(or sword). harry felt like the every man/boy we can sort of relate to. he just never lived up to his potential because he just wanted to be average

 

The question seems to be more of was Harry an average 'Magic User' not so much an average wizard. He save's Ginny, defeats Voldemort, rescues Sirius. He's a Hero, an exceptional wizard.

Is he a great, or exceptional wizard? I have little idea. For magical children, there seems to be a severe lacking in this casting of magic in book seven. He uses a lot of props -- invisibility cloaks, tent, Hermione, but we don't really feel impressed with his actual magic casting -- Dumbledore in book 5 was awesome. If Harry being called a great wizard requires him to use great magic, well, book four was pretty much the end of that dream for Harry Potter fans. Hell, Crabbe, or was it Goyle cast fiendfyre in book seven i think Harry apparition, cast expelliramus, and two unforgiveables, though not at Voldemort.

 

Harry may not have been as great of a wizard as Dumbledore, Voldemort, or even Snape, but he is definitely above average, even at the point after the final battle, where it is probable that he has not reached his peak, unlike the other three mentioned above. For example, one can look at his casting of the Patronus Charm, a charm so difficult that many adult wizards aren't able to master it.

I disagree. I think that within the books, and within the Trio in particular, it's Ron who occupies the place of "normalcy". That's part of the reason why he was cast aside so easily in the films in favour of Harry and Hermione (both in terms of individual characters and the H/Hr ship itself).