I thought about it this and it just really hit me. How are they that different?

1. Both were left in places they hated.
2. Both are far more powerful than their peers.
3. Both were sent back to places they hated during the summer.
4. Both are highly talented.
5. Both were abused.
6. Both lost their parents.
7. Both are seen as leaders.
8. Both are feared.
9. Both were made what they were by Dumbledore.
10. They both have wands made from Fawkes' feathers.

If you think of more post them and discuss.

 

One BIG difference - for the most of the series Harry has not had the drive to do much of anything, other than playing Quidditch and thwarting Voldemort's latest scheme. He also doesn't want world domination, so I'd say that's a big one in my book.

 

Well one was motivated and intelligent, the otehr isn't, kudos if you can guess who is who.

 

I think thats the point of the entire series is how similar they are yet one is evil and the other isn't.

 

Yeah aside from the major differences. Ones evil, Ones good. Ones driven, Ones not. They arent all that different. Honestly If harry hadnt met Ron first how do you think things would turn out. I personally think if Harry hadnt met Ron and Hagrid when he did he would be a Slytherin and be far more like Tom than Dumbledore or anyone else who knows Tom would like to admit.

 

Well, you know that there is no good or evil, only power and those to weak to seek it. But seriously, the only difference Harry's lack of ambition.

 

Heh, all I see is that Voldemort was looking for revenge, and motivated himself like that. Harry just seems to have been constrained, and for some reaosn he just accepts what happened to him and does't look for vengeance.

Plus...Canon!Tom is intelligent o_o

 

1. Agree, both of them disliked their summer residences.

2. I suppose this is true - much more so for Tom than Harry though.

3. Same as 1.

4. I wouldn't exactly call Harry highly talented...not even plain ordinary talented.

5. There no canon evidence to see that either of them were abused...

The Dursleys were merely unkind to Harry, not abusive, and Dumbledore's memory of Tom at the orphanage seems to show that he wasn't either - even if there was a lack of warmth he wasn't mistreated in any way.

6. True.

7. Wouldn't say Harry is a leader yet...more of a potential leader.

8. Feared...voldemort definatly...Harry perhaps (by Voldemort most of all probably)

9. Even if Riddle was abused as a child (which he wasn't), it wouldn't be Dumbledore's decision to send him back to the orphanage in the summer - that responibility resides with the headmaster (Dippet) alone - perhaps not even him.

10. This is also true.

 

Dumbledore is in part to blame for Tom even Dumbledore takes blame partly for the that in canon(I think). I personally believe the rituals and other things Tom did were so that he could outdo Dumbledore because as it is said Dumbledore is the only one Tom ever feared. Dumbledore never trusted him at Hogwarts. Dumbledore Im sure could have stopped Tom from being sent back to the orphanage.

And I believe Harry to be highly talented and that he merely squandered it unlike Tom. Tom did what Harry should have in Learning all he could when he arrived at Hogwarts but Harry meet Ron and was awed by the world. Harry was raised to never believe he would be worth anything and grew to except that. Tom however always believed that he was special and aimed to make himself the best in the world from the moment he arrived in Hogwarts.

 

You could also say that this is where Tom and Harry start to differ in nature. On the surface, they seem alot alike. But when you take the time to analyze the situation, they are actually polar opposites.

 

The difference..harry's a pussy and voldemort is good. I'll explain... Harry is mostly reluctant to do anything unless pushed hard. For example...he went after the stone in book one because..no one else would. Book two he did it again because Lockhart wouldn't. Book three ...I'll give harry book three...he went after surius. Book four he was pushed again by moody/crouch jr. Book five He went after surius again. Book six...I forgot what happened in book six.


In all the book Voldemort got what he wanted.

 

6. Both lost their parents.

Tom killed his father, that is also a MAJOR difference. Harry has a heart and people he cares for, Tom didn't care nor trust anyone.

 

Harry's problem is that because of his upbringing, he was never encouraged to persue something independantly. His lack of motivation is as much the Dursley's fault as it is his.

 

I meant Toms mom. His dad is kinda obvious.

Yes on the surface they are quite similar. Tom is more of what Harry could have been. For example if he had been a slytherin he would have been much more of a threat to tom. right now he isnt. Rowling screwed up terribly. After GoF it would have been the perfect time for Harry to become much more of a serious person but instead he moped and complained because he didnt get told everything. Dumbledore is partially to blame since he thinks LOVE is the answer.

 

Part of me is still waiting for Rowling to come out and say that the series was meant to be humour.

 

Yeah But I gather that Tom's childhood only added to his hate for muggles. And that was why he hated to go back.

 

1. Harry is not a half-living ugly snake-faced creature (I think?)

2. Harry is not a shallow evil-filled husk of a human being.(I think?)

3.Voldemort doesn't play Quiddich.(Because we all know that brooms chaiffe something awful)

4. Voldemort doesn't run around after red-headed bits of filth when he should be out saving and/or destroying the world.

4.Voldemort is self-obsessed and........wait...er...maybe they do have something in common!

 

Dont be a smart ass. Thats my job.

 

I don't think it's anyones job to be a smart ass. It's not an endearing quality.

Harry has friends as well, Tom never had any, he didn't want any.

And getting the shit kicked out of him by Dudley and the Dursley's pretty much just watching is abuse.