Harry Potter types

[AphroditeGoneAwry]

Yes!
I'm also a fan of the "unsuspecting hero" - sort of like Frodo Baggins, except I'd want my heroes to have more of a dark side .. I love thrusting characters with the most unsuspecting qualities into really tough situations and making them squirm, and then triumph over that adversity. I love personal growth, too.


This is pretty much how he is. =,) (That makes me happy.. haha!) It's just, I guess the particular behavior and quirk-set could be attributed to a few cores. It makes me feel a bit better that I have his tritype down, quite clearly.

I'm very obsessive about my characters and plot, and all the background stuff. I'm not amazing at the craft of writing but I'd hand it over to an editor at that phase. I actually came to study enneagram and MBTI for this reason - to get a different perspective on people which can help me to understand my characters even more. Of course, I would never write a character on that basis; I'd let them develop naturally, and use these systems to evaluate them for my own further understanding during the editing phase.

Sometimes, though, I wonder if it's more of a hindrance than a help.

I think of Harry Potter as a very unsuspecting hero. My fav part of all of it is that he is always not sure of his role as The One. This reminds me of Neo, which is another great character, though I cannot stand Keanu Reeves as an actor. :ack: I would totally have cast that differently! Anyway, that unlikely One my favorite protagonist archetype.


I think the Phantom was a wonderful character. I cannot believe Christine did not choose him.

 

[Animal]

A few things:

What is the one thing that Harry desires more than anything? A family. A security net of people, which for the longest time, he never had himself, and in which he finds it with the Weasleys, and continues to build. It's something he's always seeking.

This is an excellent point.

What do you think an 8 would do in that situation? I'd want to say they'd seek vengeance for the murder of their family. But, that would be the makings of a villain. 8s can be heroes too, right? I'd say a heroic 8 would still cry when looking in the mirror and seeing their dead family members who were unjustly killed. However, the next point is good: that his answer to this is to seek a security net of people. I do wonder, though, if a kid is that young, and finds a family that will accept him, if he'd go with it. For instance, I know someone who I'm quite sure is an 8 - he's classic - and stayed with my family for a while when he was young because his own family was not working out so well. He seeks autonomy, travels on his own all the time, won't settle down, etc, and always had a very independent/ autonomous/ anti-family unit mindset, but he still enjoyed the comfort and love of a new family. The Weasley issue doesn't necessarily seem incongruent. In that situation, who wouldn't feel better having a family who loves them? What, in the makeup of an 8, would cause them to necessarily reject that? I wanted to move out of my house when I was 16, and ran away all the time as a kid, but I knew I could come back. If I had no place to go at the tender age of 11, and existed in a world of magic where my survival was at stake, I can't guarantee I wouldn't take up an offer from a kind , generous family to take care of me, even if I wouldn't look to them for opinions on what I should do with my life, etc. It's a matter of survival really. (Although, if he's an 8, it does make a lot less sense that he didn't run away from his aunt and uncle when he was young.)

However, this point is an irrefutable one:

He's seeking guidance from authority figures, or maybe trying to replace parental figures, throughout all the 7 books - Mr. and Mrs. Weasley, Dumbledore, Lupin, Sirius. I don't see the go-it-alone, I-don't-need-anybody mentality in Harry. In the end of book 7, he does "go-it-alone" to face Voldemort, but the reasons why he does that are coming from a different place than a need for autonomy and control.

You're right here. He did it alone because he didn't want any of his friends to die because of him. However the other list of authorities that you mention here, who he leaned on for support (outside of simply, survival) is definitely more authorities than an 8 would bother with.

Making an alliance with Dumbledore is intelligent: it's a matter of having power in the school. If you have the most powerful person in your back pocket you have more power. Bingo. Some people would say this is 3-like thinking, but I think if Corporate CEO is a stereotype for 8s, too, then 8s must also know how to climb up the ladder. I'd agree, though, that Harry's particular method of suckuppery is a tad un-iddish, but it still *could* fall into the category of survival mechanisms, or gaining power, as a behavior (but you're right to point out, the motives are probably different). Living with the Weasleys could be seen as an act of seeking survival opportunities. However Lupin, Sirius, etc; unnecessary. Still, having allies does give a person more power. But the reasons are what we'd be looking at, in terms of enneagram. I can buy your argument that he did this because he is seeking a new 'family structure.' It does make more sense, with his character, than doing it because it's pragmatic. He gets very attached to these people and their place in his life. He goes to them for advice regularly.

I do think that Harry is CP6. One, his fear is not overtly present in his thought processes, the fact of the matter is he is still motivated by it. He fears losing the new life that he loves, Hogwarts and his friends. Also, Harry doubts and questions himself all the time, doubts his own mind, and exhibits circular 6-ish thinking. He does not think he's the hero that everyone says he is. This label that everyone thrusts on him never truly goes to his head. Two, he doesn't avoid his fears; he faces them head on, in true counterphobic fashion. Also, his rule-breaking and his questioning of authority that he doesn't agree with, which he sees as unfair, like with Snape. Harry does not blindly accept authority. And although 6s do not have a monopoly on loyalty, Harry is completely loyal to his friends, the Weasleys and Dumbledore. Granted, he wavers and questions that, especially when his expectations and illusions of Dumbledore are broken and challenged, but even then he's still loyal to Dumbledore...Dumbledore's man to the last.

Him not believing he's a hero is a key point you made here. I didn't think of that before when I posted (like I said, I didn't think it through, and it's been a while since I watched/ read the books) ... but you're right, the size of his ego is un-8ish. An 8 would probably feel right at home with that power, deep down, even if he didn't boast; but boasting would be inevitable as well, when he's less healthy. In fact, when I read the book, I remember thinking, "He's so badass, why is it so hard for him to think of himself as a hero?" Admirable modesty.

The circular thinking and doubting of his own mind - another good point, and something I'd forgotten from the book.
Can you pinpoint a disintegration to 3 and integration to 9?

His actions are also ruled by superego. He acts to make things right or to help people. He's courageous, but he's got a huge savior/white knight complex. (This is may indicate a 2-fix as well, although I haven't quite pinned this aspect of him.)

Savior/white knight complex - is this necessarily incongruent with an 8?
8s think of themselves as magnanimous. Usually more of a 'dark, independent' knight mentality, but still, any 8 will convince himself or herself that they save the innocent, etc.

World dominating 358s unite!!!

I can't help that I'm awesome.

*fingers kukri*

Oh god. I have one of you guys at home

Rofl! Lucky you

I hope you have some weapons of your own. =,)

 

[Animal]

I think of Harry Potter as a very unsuspecting hero. My fav part of all of it is that he is always not sure of his role as The One. This reminds me of Neo, which is another great character, though I cannot stand Keanu Reeves as an actor. :ack: I would totally have cast that differently! Anyway, that unlikely One my favorite protagonist archetype.


I think the Phantom was a wonderful character. I cannot believe Christine did not choose him.

Haha.. I can see why Christine didn't choose him, in a way. She was clearly crazy about him, but then he started acting psycho. It was cold of her to go for Raul, and it's understandable that the Phantom felt the way he did, but his reactions reveal that there's something wrong with him. I don't think that the reason she rejected him is because Raul was better looking. At the end she even says "it is within your soul that the true distortion lies" and she's right.

The Phantom is the more exciting, inspiring guy, but Raul is reliable. Had the phantom handled the rejection more like a man, he might have won his woman yet. Yes, I have high standards for my suitors.

 

[Animal]

[MENTION=16013]madhatter[/MENTION]

I just got home (I wrote that post at a mac store!) and the whole ride home, I was thinking about this discussion. I think it finally kicked in what "Cp-6" actually means. I've been trying to wrap my head around it since I first encountered enneagram. Thanks, because now I know what angles to use to invade the 6 forum and figure out even more! =) This was a great discussion and shed light on this topic for me.

 

[Entropic]

[MENTION=17912]Vergil[/MENTION], I'm finally home so I can give you a proper response:

I do think your point about 1s is fair enough. It's true that not every 1 is going to be like that since what perfectionism means differs between 1s. Just noting on a general tendency here though that I've noted among many 1s and how 1s also tend to have this funny megalomaniac streak to them XD.

Anyway, onto Harry, I think the problem suggesting that he's a 9 regardless of wing (I think at this point it's more useful to look at core type and how it lines up with a character's behavior and what seems to motivate it) is that he seems to lack many apparent traits that I associate with 9, for example psychospiritual laziness, that he is clearly not exhibiting positive thinking in line with the positive triad or that he seems ignorant of his own anger or for the matter and I think most importantly, he is not conflict-avoidant. It is often Harry who initiates conflict during the course of the story part because of his brash and impulsive behavior. A big aspect of the trio's character dynamic depends on Harry being the iniator on action, Ron often wishing to be like Harry but chickening out and Hermione getting frustrated as a result of what she perceives to be such thoughtless behavior.

If Harry was indeed a 9, I would imagine him being more akin to Luna Lovegood, I good candidate for a 469 or 479 trityper. Clearly they are worlds apart and Luna exhibits all the traits and behaviors I'd more properly associnate with a core enneagram 9. I fail to see how some people type her as a 4. It is clear that envy is not the driving force. Just because she's different and quirky (and I think a large part to blame for that is in fact her father) doesn't mean she must be a 4. All in all, I still posit that Harry is of the 468 tritype although I kind of agree with [MENTION=16013]madhatter[/MENTION]'s analysis for 6 as a potential core type.

However, I wish also to bring up a very important point when we discuss characters in fiction and that is character development. As was pointed out with regards to villains, antagonists and protagonists tend to not always be very fleshed out in some areas in order to make them overall more relateable. This is why the concept of character development is important because characters in all works of fiction tend to fall under specific archetypes during their conception. If we for example analyze Harry Potter according to Joseph Campbell's monomyth theory, it is obvious that Dumbledore's archetype is that of the mentor, later perhaps replaced by Sirius to a degree (the circular nature of the monomyth means that several characters can inhabit the same archetype several times or independently of each other during the course of the story). Since the protagonist is indeed the hero, he, because in the case of the monomyth, he is sadly 99% of the time a he, he also performs the archetypal role of the hero.

In modern fiction, as I pointed out to Maybe earlier, it seems that male teenage protagonists often seem to fall under the same character stereotype: they are often labelled as special in some way that reinforces their transgressive nature. They are not quite normal but not quite different. The hero's struggle thus revolves around being able to transcend the boundaries of difference and normalcy and become his own being. He may be born with special powers or abilities, he may be chosen by fate or he may be mentioned in an important prophecy to save the world. It is thus clear that our hero is different but not by choice and much of the hero's time is spent longing towards a sense of normalcy. It is at this point in the character's background and conception that the 4 fixation is established. Also ironically enough, the hero is rarely of the bookish or intellectual kind. Instead he is more immersed in the physical world around him and he's aggressive, brash and impulsive. The hero may for example have a history with physical violence. Because of often being mistreated for his perceived difference in the past, the hero has thus been forced into a social exile and find himself in a world where he must struggle to maintain his own survival. It is also often common for the hero to have lost at least one parent or being separated from his parents at birth. Part of the hero's journey tends to revolve around the hero being able to reunite and reconcile this sense of loss or lack caused by his parents. In a few cases it is also possible that the parent/s is neglectful and oblivious to the hero's plight and he feels that he lacks the support and care a loving parent should provide him. Again, this causes a sense of being alone in this world and it is his job to ensure that he survives. This explains the 8 fixation.

Thus, finding himself in a world that depises him for being different and he secretely longs for the normalcy and happiness everyone else seem to possess while constantly sensing like he must struggle to survive, he starts to question his purpose and why he is here and why the world exists in the way it does in a paranoid manner. One could also of course note often the quite utter lack of a strong authority figure present in the hero's life prior to his call to adventure, or the existence of such an authority figure so strong that the hero is expected to be molded into this authority figure's image by the social environment in which he exists in; instead of accepting him to walk his own path. Clearly the world is out to get him. This explains the 6 fixation. Also often keeping to himself and seeking stability, I think the hero tends to be sp first. He never lets people know of his internal suffering (sp 4), he can be very magnamanious and giving to those around him that he cares about (sp 8) often being willing to sacrifice his own life for them and he is utterly dedicated to find out about the truth about the state of the world affairs once he has accepted the call to adventure and becomes involved with the quite often, (rebel) group or organization that provides the social stability he so utterly sought (sp 6).

I also find that this kind of teenage male protagonist can be any of these three core types. Cloud Strife in Advent Children is clearly a 4, Kurosaki Ichigo in Bleach is clearly a 4, Nero in Devil May Cry 4 is a 6, Uzumaki Naruto in Naruto is a 6 and Dante in the new DmC: Devil May Cry game is most likely an 8. Another funny aspect I found that these characters have in common is that they tend to be introverts and judging dominants although it is not always true, but they tend to be. They also tend to be feelers and they tend to be Fi types as opposed to Fe types. Does it mean that popular fiction thinks that today's boy youth all consists of xSFP 468s LOL?!

So, to my main point (the little that I had), is that when we talk about character development in fiction, it is the archetype of the hero that changes. We can sometimes ascribe the archetype he seems to embody as the hero at times, for example the prodigy child (although I think in modern fiction aimed for adolescent boys in particular this is getting less common, nowadays it is the protagonist who must struggle the most while still possessing innate but poorly expressed talent), and how this relates to type is important because whereas we actual human beings tend to be stuck with our type and simply move along it's spectrum, this is not always true for a fictive character. A character of the 468 tritype can for example start out as an ISTP 6 e.g. Cloud Strife in Final Fantasy VII, but because the vision of his character changed because the authors either wanted to change him or due to natural character progression, we now find that Cloud Strife is often typed as an INFP 4w5. Another example I already mentioned is Kurosaki Ichigo who similarly seemed to start out as some kind of stereotypical CP6 ISTP at the beginning of Bleach but is now usually typed as an ISFP 4w5. So when we discuss a character's type in a story that has been developed over a long time e.g. Harry Potter which was written over the course of 10 years and later also filmed over the course of 7+ years, an important question to raise is when. At which point in time are we discussing the character? Harry is not the same in The Order of the Phoenix as he is in The Philospoher's Stone.

 

[Animal]

[MENTION=16405]LeaT[/MENTION]

I like the point you made about how the core of characters can change throughout fiction, even if this doesn't happen in real life. That is a great point.

I also think [MENTION=16013]madhatter[/MENTION]'s points about core 6 were excellent.

Also - Luna never struck me as a core 4, either. There's nothing masochistic about her. 9w1 makes sense.
What would you make of Ginny's type?

 

[Entropic]

@LeaT

I like the point you made about how the core of characters can change throughout fiction, even if this doesn't happen in real life. That is a great point.

Noted this problem over at PersC too in the celebrities type me subforum where people would often attempt to type famous characters. One of my favorite shows is Dexter but it is clear that Dexter in season 1 is quite different to Dexter i seaosn 8 and they may not be the same core type or even same tritype anymore.

I also think @madhatter's points about core 6 were excellent.

I agree, and I would have to reread the books if I were to refute it.

Also - Luna never struck me as a core 4, either. There's nothing masochistic about her. 9w1 makes sense.

Agreed. The fact that Luna is quirky because her father is quirky actually shows how much Luna is conflict-avoidant and compliant towards her father, not wanting to take the conflict with him and why the Lovegood family is perceived as laughing stock in the wizard world. If Luna was a 4, she'd try to separate herself from her father's influence and develop her own identity instead of simply adopting his way of being and even defend him whenever criticism is raised towards his sanity in particular.

What would you make of Ginny's type?

I honestly don't know. In my mind, Ginny was so poorly developed and was more a name of a person Harry longed for than an actual character with an actual personality, it's like I have no real grasp of her. I don't know why I intuitively want to say 2 though. One of the problems I think the HP universe suffers from is ironically too large a cast. The character development among the characters is incredibly uneven and I think only Snape truly ended up being developed in a way that felt fully satisfying for the audience. His development was complete; I can't say that this is true for the rest of the cast including Dumbledore that is often a very popular choice among the fans.

As you noted yourself, Voldemort was handled incredibly poorly for a villain. I know Rowling wanted to make him seem evil even in his youth, but I think what she did was just almost something akin to a Mary Sue. Hardly an example of great writing. I think a villain I really enjoy in contrast is Sephiroth in the Final Fantansy VII franchise. He has clear motives, a well-developed background story and his reasons why he wants to destroy the world and the universe are understandable and even perhaps relateable despite being clearly insane towards the end.

Then there are the kind of characters who are so evil to the point it becomes comical and are likeable for such a reason because a villains, they are simply just truly entertaining. It's like Dr. Evil in Austin Powers. Kefka from Final Fantasy VI is probably such an example who is often mentioned as one of the best villains along with Sepiroth in the Final Fantasy-verse. Snape as you say, was more of an anti-villain.

The problem when we speak of character development for the primary antagonist is that in order for the antagonist to remain an antagonist, the antagonist cannot change. If the antagonist changes to such a degree that he, because it is often a he that we speak about here, becomes relateable in the sense of actually appearing human, he is no longer the antagonist. Imagine if a lot of time was spent in Lord of the Rings trying to explain Sauron's motives and he is really just a lonely person who became insane and corrupt by power. Despite doing such ill, would we truly think of him as an antagonist? A good example from the same universe is Gollum who to some degree due to his character development, becomes someone the audience can sympathize with. He thus stops becoming an antagonist but rather an anti-villain just like Snape because Gollum is clearly simply a victim of circumstance.

Personally though in my opinion, the best villains and antagonists are those heroes turned antagonists. At least to me, the development feels realistic and natural. The actions we choose to take and the consequences of them will change the outcome of our loyalties. I think there's a reason why the archetype I am going to refer to as the rival is so popular. The rival is often indeed a rival to the hero. He is better than him, more talented and more intelligent. The hero always struggles to not be outshone. If he didn't there would be no rivalry. A common twist to the rival archetype is when the rival betrays the hero's friendship or becomes the hero's ally. In the Harry Potter universe, the rival archetype is clearly depicted in Draco Malfoy. It is however not Draco I am thinking of here when I think of an extremely good example of a well-developed rival archetype character. Instead I am thinking of Uchiha Sasuke in Naruto and how Sasuke was initially set out to be Naruto's rival but they later become friends. However, Sasuke seeking revenge over what happened towards his family and his clan betrays Naruto and joins the evil forces. Perhaps one of the more climactic portions of the story in Naruto is the development between the increased animosity between Naruto and Sasuke and Sasuke is I should add, an immensely popular character. Something which cannot be said about Draco Malfoy (in actuality though, I think aside Snape, I am not sure there is any such popular character to compare to simply because I have to say, Rowling's characterization is not that good as a whole). I think a similar character with similar development that I just thought of is Vegeta from the Dragonball series who was first set out to be the primary antagonist in the original Dragonball. Then he became an evil rival in Dragonball Z to finally join the forces with the heroes after being defeated. Vegeta is also an immensely popular character in the Dragonball-verse.

Another great example of a villain of this type Aizen Sosuke in Bleach who in the first arc was depicted as being allied with the protagonists. He is however later found to murdered, but as the story progresses, it turns out that Aizen simply staged his own murder and he is in fact well and alive and he is the main antagonist of the series. Even though Kubo Tite established Aizen quite early as the antagonist (Bleach is running its 12th year now), he did not stop develop Aizen as a character although there is an equal amount of mystery surrounding his persona. However, in the series thus far primary climax, Kubo Tite decides to make Aizen appear as simply being lonely and misunderstood. He stops being a villain. This is further reinforced because the primary protagonist, Ichigo, sympathizes with Aizen and his actions. The reason why I think Aizen is thus a great villain is simply because we can sympathize with him. I think this is in general one of Kubo Tite's trademarks in writing in that he is very keen on establishing his villains as having very human motives and flaws. However, as is expected when the villain stops being a villain, Kubo Tite had to introduce a new one so he did. Then he pulled the same card on us with Ginjo Kuugo and it is now strongly suggested that Ginjo is in fact going to join the main supporting cast.

So Kub is stuck creating yet another villain who is yet to be truly revealed because I like many others, do not believe that Juha Bach is the final villain of the series. I wouldn't surprise me at all if Kubo is going to pull the "he is simply lonely and misunderstood" card on Juha Bach too when the time is nigh. But anyway, for most of the part, turning the primary villain into a non-villain is not the end of the world if the story is ending at this point anyway. It only becomes a problem if the story is going to continue beyond this point. It is however important to note that prior to the point where Aizen became a non-villain, he received little to no character development. He was simply the spider pulling the strings behind the scenes but we saw and heard little of his actual character. Instead what we were presented were often the result of his decisions and actions. It was only when Kubo was nearing the climax of the Karakura Town arc that he began truly developing Aizen, first by giving us the Turn Back the Pendulum mini-arc which is akin to the Half-Blood Prince in the Harry Potter series, later simply making most of the Karakura Town battle actually being about Aizen's character.

As I noted, a similar development can be discerned in Harry Potter. It was only in the Half-Blood Prince that Voldemort was really fleshed out as a character. I think Rowling's main mistake with the Half-Blood Prince except overall just being a very butchered and rushed book is that the star of the story was actually Snape, he is the half-blood prince, not Voldemort/Tom Riddle. She should have decided her primary focus. Is the book about Snape or Voldemort? But I disgress and you get my point.

 

[madhatter]

This is an excellent point.

What do you think an 8 would do in that situation? I'd want to say they'd seek vengeance for the murder of their family. But, that would be the makings of a villain. 8s can be heroes too, right? I'd say a heroic 8 would still cry when looking in the mirror and seeing their dead family members who were unjustly killed. However, the next point is good: that his answer to this is to seek a security net of people. I do wonder, though, if a kid is that young, and finds a family that will accept him, if he'd go with it. For instance, I know someone who I'm quite sure is an 8 - he's classic - and stayed with my family for a while when he was young because his own family was not working out so well. He seeks autonomy, travels on his own all the time, won't settle down, etc, and always had a very independent/ autonomous/ anti-family unit mindset, but he still enjoyed the comfort and love of a new family. The Weasley issue doesn't necessarily seem incongruent. In that situation, who wouldn't feel better having a family who loves them? What, in the makeup of an 8, would cause them to necessarily reject that? I wanted to move out of my house when I was 16, and ran away all the time as a kid, but I knew I could come back. If I had no place to go at the tender age of 11, and existed in a world of magic where my survival was at stake, I can't guarantee I wouldn't take up an offer from a kind , generous family to take care of me, even if I wouldn't look to them for opinions on what I should do with my life, etc. It's a matter of survival really. (Although, if he's an 8, it does make a lot less sense that he didn't run away from his aunt and uncle when he was young.)

I'm not really sure what an 8 would do. It all comes down to motivations I suppose. Two different types will do the same thing for different reasons. Harry doesn't attach himself to the Weasleys for survival reasons. He attaches himself to them because of the friendship, acceptance, and belonging that he's always longed for.

However, it's not necessarily incongruent with 8, because I do think Harry has a 8-fix, but rather that it's more likely fed through a 6-core. Harry does run away from the Dursleys, once, in book 3, after he reached the end of his tolerance with Aunt Marjorie. And also in book 3, when Harry thinks Sirius betrayed his family, Harry has thoughts of vengeance, but ultimately doesn't go through with it. He sticks to his principles, and he spares Peter Pettigrew's life. This is not to say that 8s don't forgive or have no restraint, of course! It's very 6-8 here for Harry to stick by what he believes is right.

However, this point is an irrefutable one:

You're right here. He did it alone because he didn't want any of his friends to die because of him. However the other list of authorities that you mention here, who he leaned on for support (outside of simply, survival) is definitely more authorities than an 8 would bother with.

Making an alliance with Dumbledore is intelligent: it's a matter of having power in the school. If you have the most powerful person in your back pocket you have more power. Bingo. Some people would say this is 3-like thinking, but I think if Corporate CEO is a stereotype for 8s, too, then 8s must also know how to climb up the ladder. I'd agree, though, that Harry's particular method of suckuppery is a tad un-iddish, but it still *could* fall into the category of survival mechanisms, or gaining power, as a behavior (but you're right to point out, the motives are probably different). Living with the Weasleys could be seen as an act of seeking survival opportunities. However Lupin, Sirius, etc; unnecessary. Still, having allies does give a person more power. But the reasons are what we'd be looking at, in terms of enneagram. I can buy your argument that he did this because he is seeking a new 'family structure.' It does make more sense, with his character, than doing it because it's pragmatic. He gets very attached to these people and their place in his life. He goes to them for advice regularly.

The bold sounds like something that Tom Riddle/Voldemort did, not Harry. The books follow Harry's POV and thought process, and he just doesn't think in these terms of gaining power.

Harry obviously wants to be given more control and responsibilities though, because he's proven that he can handle it. I think this is indicative of a 8-fix.

Him not believing he's a hero is a key point you made here. I didn't think of that before when I posted (like I said, I didn't think it through, and it's been a while since I watched/ read the books) ... but you're right, the size of his ego is un-8ish. An 8 would probably feel right at home with that power, deep down, even if he didn't boast; but boasting would be inevitable as well, when he's less healthy. In fact, when I read the book, I remember thinking, "He's so badass, why is it so hard for him to think of himself as a hero?" Admirable modesty.

The circular thinking and doubting of his own mind - another good point, and something I'd forgotten from the book.
Can you pinpoint a disintegration to 3 and integration to 9?

Yes exactly. As for disintegration/integration, I can't think of anything right now. I'll get back to you on that one.

Savior/white knight complex - is this necessarily incongruent with an 8?
8s think of themselves as magnanimous. Usually more of a 'dark, independent' knight mentality, but still, any 8 will convince himself or herself that they save the innocent, etc.

No, not necessarily incongruent with 8. I just see his motivations stemming more from superego. I don't really view core-8s as white knights. Like my dad, the SP8. He looks out for me, but moreso by teaching me to look out for myself. But, as we've talked about, my dad loves to help people too. He's 862, and I think Harry is probably 682 (maybe 684, but I really am skeptical about a 4-fix for him).

LOL. Where do you get all those commands?

Under the emoticons on the right, there is a hyperlink that says [more]. Click and enjoy.

[MENTION=16013]madhatter[/MENTION]

I just got home (I wrote that post at a mac store!) and the whole ride home, I was thinking about this discussion. I think it finally kicked in what "Cp-6" actually means. I've been trying to wrap my head around it since I first encountered enneagram. Thanks, because now I know what angles to use to invade the 6 forum and figure out even more! =) This was a great discussion and shed light on this topic for me.

You're welcome! Sorry it took me a bit to respond. I'm actually at work, and I've been picking away at this post.

I love talking about books and characters that I love. Let's talk some more.

 

[Entropic]

[MENTION=16013]madhatter[/MENTION], what are you reasons for Harry being 2-fixed?

 

[madhatter]

madhatter, what are you reasons for Harry being 2-fixed?

I am not as sure of the 2-fix as I am of the other two. Essentially, at this point, I'm saying 2-fix, because I don't see much evidence for a heart fix at all, so it makes sense it would be his last fix. He could have a 4-fix, but I am going have to be convinced of that. So, it's more of an impression and subject to change with further though, but I'll try to deconstruct what I'm thinking now.

Take for instance, in book 2, when Harry's not getting any letters or news from his Hogwarts life. He bemoans the fact they're ignoring him and doing stuff without him, after all he did for them, after he saved their life at the end of book 1. This "after all I did for them" attitude, strikes me as very 2-ish. To me, this comes off as 2-fix. Also, Harry in his unhealthy stages has no trouble guilt-tripping Ron and Hermione, like in book 5, again when Harry has been kept out of the loop. This also comes across as 2-fix to me. My mom is core-2 and my dad has a 2-fix, and I have received the guilt trip from both of them a time or two (actually a lot of times, but that requires a book in itself lol).

Also, Harry spent his formative years essentially being told he was not good enough. He was not worthy of love or special attention. He can't do anything right in the Dursleys' eyes. And Harry accepts this. I don't think he reacted to it all as a 4-fixer might (although granted, I am a self-professed 4 ignoramus). He thinks he's not good enough or deserving enough. Like when he gets special attention from Hagrid at first on his 11th birthday, there is still a part of him that is surprised about at all, the "oh, you really didn't need to do this", part genuine humility, part pride, that I have come to associate with 2. He does that with Mrs. Weasley as well.

Harry is not concerned with being or appearing the best as a 3-fixer would, nor does he compartmentalize his emotions. Nor does he seem overly concerning with uniqueness, or being separate and forming his own unique identity, as a 4-fixer. He is concerned with authenticity and integrity, but I think these stem from other areas. He does put on what a core-2 I know calls "masks". He'll put on a mask when he doesn't want to emotionally revealing, or burden others with his emotional problems. Like lying to Lupin saying everything is okay when everything obviously is not, putting on a positive mask. He doesn't do this to the extent that the IRL core-2 does, but it is only a fix. But the core-2 I know is a terrible liar, and I easily see through the masks. She really wears her heart on her sleeve, and I think Harry does too.

Anyway, my arguments are not as solid for the heart-fix as they were for 6, but I think part of that is Harry just doesn't have core heart-triad issues. I really had to wrack my brain for examples in the book that point to a heart-fix at all, let alone differentiating it, haha.

 

[Nicki]

Harry's a 9 with a really strong 8 wing. I'd say he's a 9w8>6w7>2w1 sx/sp (he has a lot of sx intensity)

He's very conflict avoidant! Especially with Hermione.

"What d'you think, Sirius?" Harry said loudly, and Ron and Hermione stopped bickering to listen."

"But why haven't you got Occlumency lessons any more?' said Hermione, frowning.

'I've told you,' Harry muttered. 'Snape reckons I can carry on by myself now I've got the basics.'

'So you've stopped having funny dreams?' said Hermione sceptically.

'Pretty much,' said Harry, not looking at her."

'What's wrong, Harry?'

'What?' he said quickly. 'Nothing.'

He seized his copy of Defensive Magical Theory and pretended to be looking something up in the index. Crookshanks gave him up as a bad job and slunk away under Hermione's chair.

'I saw Cho earlier,' said Hermione tentatively. 'She looked really miserable, too... have you two had a row again?'

'Wha - oh, yeah, we have,' said Harry, seizing gratefully on the excuse."

He rarely ever seeks conflict with Draco and his gang. Draco nearly always initiates things. He seems to have a lot of Fi explosions though.

 

[Nicki]

I personally like villains with substance. I love the Harry Potter series, and also LOTR and Star Wars, but I think out of all the series, Star Wars has the closest thing to good villains, and even though episodes 4, 5, and 6 are so much better, the content of the villains' characters is more laid out in episodes 1, 2, and 3. I know the acting is terrible and the CGI is overdone, but the idea of Annikin and his personal struggle is more relatable, and the Emperor's quest for power is not that far off from your local politician. I'd prefer to have villains who are human, who have vulnerabilities and specific motives; something that would line up with an enneagram type. That's why, although I find Harry Potter to be an amazing series, and JK Rowling so inspiring, the villain is disappointing.

The only thing that makes him even remotely human is seeing that he's abused as a kid, but that is just SO typical. And even as a kid he's a pure sociopath. I'd like a villain with fully developed frontal lobes, and a serious internal conflict, thankuverymuch. Someone who I kind of want to have wild sex with, but kind of want to kill. I want to feel that conflict inside of myself; I want to taste my own need for revenge; I want to feel my own powerlust and anger and disappointment and fear coursing through my veins when a villain starts to lose his mind and slowly transition from a passionate kid to an off-the-hook psycho. I want to FEEL it. I want to wish I could shake him and set him straight. I want to feel strong because I saved myself, by contrast. I want to wonder whether I really did save myself. This is what would make a great villain, to me.

Top notch villain:
The Phantom in Phantom of the Opera.

Severus Snape is a good anti-hero. Even Draco Malfoy is a decently sympathetic "villain." Better than Voldemort. Voldemort is so unreal that I can't even hate him. I just want to laugh in his weird face.

Completely agree with you! J.K. gave us all this information about Voldemort's personal background in the 6th book and in the 7th, he's just reduced to a typical children's book villain? It's not really like her to do that sort of thing.

 

[Vergil]

[MENTION=16405]LeaT[/MENTION], [MENTION=16013]madhatter[/MENTION], [MENTION=17911]Maybe[/MENTION]

Well, I don't have a good memory for stuff I've read and I am not exactly a great fan of HP. I read all the books until I got pissed off, due to JKR's killing of Sirius and I did not read book 6 because of said pissing off. BUT, I did read book 7 because I wanted Harry to die along with Voldy, which I believe would have been a fitting end to both the story and that world (I do not wish to draw too many parallels between our world and theirs, because it seems like we'd be comparing apples and oranges).

The point I am trying to make by saying all of the above is that my typing was based heavily on my impression of Harry as I recall it right now. Which is to say, my memory may be way, way off. But I still believe Harry lacked very strongly in the "initiative" department, which is very unlike any assertive type, IMO. Even if you consider the whole disintegration phenomenon, HP didn't seem as detached as an 8 moving to 5 would/should/could be. He had an 8-ish angle to most things he did in the series, which I would attribute to a wing on a core 9 fix. His conflict avoidance seemed very obvious to me throughout the book.

An instance that comes to mind (that probably supports 9, based on my recall) is dinner with an Aunt Marge, I think. He did something to her due to pent up anger that he had not expressed, only to have it leak out in ways he did not understand until much later (and during "much later" he experienced this leakage of anger once more, but understood it and just didn't give a rats ass about it).

As for character development, yeah, I agree with you. Books and all their -agonists (Oh, the agony ) are never of any one fixed type, due to changing conceptions about them in the author's mind over the course of writing/creation. I also have another point to add, as I said to [MENTION=17911]Maybe[/MENTION] during our conversation about HP. A lot of actions of HP in the book are more likely to be inconsistent with whatever types we can come up for him, because at certain points, an author is likely to add elements which may be due to, or, may lead to one following effects -

• higher sales due to typical appeal, E.g. Twilight (sorry Twilight fans, no offense intended)
• preconceived notions/unconscious standards about how a certain -agonist "should" be
• desperate need to have a certian outcome; author's stubborness with how the story should pan out
• leakage of author's own self through the actions of the character, etc.

So, on the whole, we need look at what we want to do. Endeavors such as these (typing of fictional characters) will be rendered useless if we start to think of them as creations that changed over time due to the author's changing life conditions, moods, intentions, needs, etc. If we want to type someone, we must necessarily overlook anything that would change our conception of the character as a real person in a real world. Any typing should necessarily not take into account any of the above. It is hard to do that, but then again, who said it'd be easy to begin with?

(forgive any typos, I have not taken the time to edit)

 

[Entropic]

I am not as sure of the 2-fix as I am of the other two. Essentially, at this point, I'm saying 2-fix, because I don't see much evidence for a heart fix at all, so it makes sense it would be his last fix. He could have a 4-fix, but I am going have to be convinced of that. So, it's more of an impression and subject to change with further though, but I'll try to deconstruct what I'm thinking now.

Take for instance, in book 2, when Harry's not getting any letters or news from his Hogwarts life. He bemoans the fact they're ignoring him and doing stuff without him, after all he did for them, after he saved their life at the end of book 1. This "after all I did for them" attitude, strikes me as very 2-ish. To me, this comes off as 2-fix. Also, Harry in his unhealthy stages has no trouble guilt-tripping Ron and Hermione, like in book 5, again when Harry has been kept out of the loop. This also comes across as 2-fix to me. My mom is core-2 and my dad has a 2-fix, and I have received the guilt trip from both of them a time or two (actually a lot of times, but that requires a book in itself lol).

Also, Harry spent his formative years essentially being told he was not good enough. He was not worthy of love or special attention. He can't do anything right in the Dursleys' eyes. And Harry accepts this. I don't think he reacted to it all as a 4-fixer might (although granted, I am a self-professed 4 ignoramus). He thinks he's not good enough or deserving enough. Like when he gets special attention from Hagrid at first on his 11th birthday, there is still a part of him that is surprised about at all, the "oh, you really didn't need to do this", part genuine humility, part pride, that I have come to associate with 2. He does that with Mrs. Weasley as well.

Harry is not concerned with being or appearing the best as a 3-fixer would, nor does he compartmentalize his emotions. Nor does he seem overly concerning with uniqueness, or being separate and forming his own unique identity, as a 4-fixer. He is concerned with authenticity and integrity, but I think these stem from other areas. He does put on what a core-2 I know calls "masks". He'll put on a mask when he doesn't want to emotionally revealing, or burden others with his emotional problems. Like lying to Lupin saying everything is okay when everything obviously is not, putting on a positive mask. He doesn't do this to the extent that the IRL core-2 does, but it is only a fix. But the core-2 I know is a terrible liar, and I easily see through the masks. She really wears her heart on her sleeve, and I think Harry does too.

Anyway, my arguments are not as solid for the heart-fix as they were for 6, but I think part of that is Harry just doesn't have core heart-triad issues. I really had to wrack my brain for examples in the book that point to a heart-fix at all, let alone differentiating it, haha.

Right, yes, I see what you mean, and I see why you feel your arguments aren't so strong because I mean, I do this too aside the guilt-tripping.

 

[Entropic]

Godamn double-posts.

 

[Entropic]

[MENTION=17912]Vergil[/MENTION] all fair points. I'm the same, HP is not what I'm a fan of (haha, if you couldn't tell already I am of Bleach though). Just like you, I operate based off memory. It's been years since I saw the last film and the books. Just like you I got so pissed when she killed off Sirius like that. Shittiest writing ever to create conflict and drama in a story much? As you mentioned in your list, it definitely falls under the author needing to have the story develop a certain way but the way the story naturally developed went against this idea. Ergo that terrible asspull. Sirius is the second best candidate Rowling can offer as a complete character after Snape but whereas Snape's death was satisfying due to him ultimately being written as a tragic character (and all tragic characters need to die to atone their mistakes), Sirius' death was just that... an asspull that came out of nowhere because Rowling couldn't deal with the fact that if Harry ran off with Sirius he would probably forget the whole "let's save the world from Voldemort" instead of constantly following Sirius around like a little puppy if I exaggerate. And thus... there would have been no genuine resolve to the conflict. And a simple way to deal with that would to randomly kill off Sirius.
[MENTION=15963]Aleda[/MENTION], on the other hand, why would he necessarily seek conflict if he doesn't have to? Conflict-avoidance is not alone a strong argument towards 9 in my opinion. Where's the positivity? Where's the psychospiritual laziness? Aside 8s and perhaps to a degree 3s and 7s (no surprise there, all fall under the assertive triad), most other types tend to shy conflict at average health (unhealthy types regardless of type can start picking conflicts with people) because seeking conflict is not natural for them. Even a CP6 is ultimately conflict-avoidant because CP6s use their "barking louder than their bite" attitude in order to avoid conflict. They deal with their anxiety by lashing out but by barking so loudly, they hope they will be able to intimidate their opponent who will be scared of them and pull back. That way the 6 does not have to deal with the conflict longer than necessary. The problem for CP6s is when the conflict drags out because their opponent is not intimidated by their barking because being in a conflict is again not natural for them. Snape most likely being some kind of 458 combination and also on top of that unhealthy, has no problems causing conflict or lashing out because he's unhealthy.

Assuming of course, that Harry is a CP6. The argument could be rephrased to fit most enneatypes though. Also, when 9s avoid conflict, they do it in a positive manner. Again, compare Luna Lovegood to Harry Potter. She's a perfect example of a 9. During book 4 when I think it was Ron who got jinxed and all his bones in his body disappeared, she started making funny remarks about how his current physical state isn't so bad. Think of all the positive things he could do now instead of before! This is a perfect example of 9 think and 9s reaching simple and truthful but yet painfully unrealistic conclusions and instead of dealing with the fact that Ron's ultimately being in a terrible physical state, she tries to cover this up with these positive fantasies. Where does Harry ever seem to do this in the book? Does he ever purposefully avoid negative emotions by thinking positively? Does he ever seem to express a slothful attitude of "conflict takes too much effort, why can't we all just get along?" kind of mentality that a 9 would? Also, at some level I think a 9 in Harry's scenario would have an immensely difficult time accepting the conflict and rivalry between himself and Voldemort. Imagine at the beginning in book 1 when Harry is told of Voldemort's existence and the backstory of the boy-who-lived and people say that you should not mention his name? What does Harry do? He starts reacting that it's stupid. Why should you care about whether you call him Voldemort instead of you-know-who? I think that's at least a rational head approach. A 9 would not react the way he did in my opinion.

 

[madhatter]

Character development and plot development:

I disagree. If you look at the structure in all 7 books, it's so tight and the way themes mirror each other, it had to be planned out before she wrote any of them. The main characters are well-rounded, and as they grow up in the books, I don't think they ever act in a way that is unnatural for the story. I don't see their growth as switching types or whatnot to suit the story. Their changes throughout the books are what is an accurate depiction of growing up. They do change between book 1 and book 7, but how they change is consistent to their characters.

Some side characters, like Voldemort, you get the sense that these characters are not completely rounded and fleshed out, but that makes sense. He doesn't even have a body until book 4, and before that, he's a half-spirit or a memory in a journal. Even with Dumbledore, you don't get a true sense of his personality or character until the later books, when Harry actually gets to know him. Before that, Dumbledore just seems like a grandfatherly figure, the mentor figure, with only a hint of what he's actually like. But that makes sense as well. When book 1 starts, Harry is 11. Kids see adults, mentors, parents, etc. a certain way. They build up expectations and illusions about these people in their lives whom they idealize, which is very one-sided, and not an accurate representation. Harry's illusions of Dumbledore were shattered in book 5. But the other thing that I love about the characters in the books: they are all flawed. On the flipside, even many of the villains (with the exception of Voldemort who is beyond redemption) have redeeming qualities. Book 5 is brilliant. Dumbledore is revealed as a flawed man who can make mistakes, and because of his position of power, his mistakes can be on a monumental scale, as evidenced by Sirius' death.

I don't think Sirius' death was meaningless, or a cheap tactic to create conflict and drama in the story. I see it as a meaningful consequence of all the characters' actions in book 5: Harry's, Dumbledore's, even Sirius'. Unlike the first three books, this isn't a game or adventure anymore. This is a war, and people die. Dumbledore screwed up by not being straight-up with Harry and treating him like a child. Harry screwed up because he was angry, he was impulsive, and he didn't take his Occlumency lessons seriously, and therefore opened himself up to be fooled and manipulated. Sirius was impulsive and he loved Harry, so of course, he's going to rush to his rescue. Sirius has also been cooped up for months and months (another mishandling on Dumbledore's part). Maybe if he wasn't going stir-crazy and had a chance to take action, he wouldn't have been so reckless. But also, Sirius was a flawed man, especially with how he treated Kreacher, which was his undoing in the end. I did not see his death as an asspull at all. It was inevitable.

 

[Entropic]

Character development and plot development:

I disagree. If you look at the structure in all 7 books, it's so tight and the way themes mirror each other, it had to be planned out before she wrote any of them. The main characters are well-rounded, and as they grow up in the books, I don't think they ever act in a way that is unnatural for the story. I don't see their growth as switching types or whatnot to suit the story. Their changes throughout the books are what is an accurate depiction of growing up. They do change between book 1 and book 7, but how they change is consistent to their characters.

I am not saying this has to be 100% true for Harry Potter specifically. I am just pointing out that this is prone to happen in fiction as a whole once in a while.

Some side characters, like Voldemort, you get the sense that these characters are not completely rounded and fleshed out, but that makes sense. He doesn't even have a body until book 4, and before that, he's a half-spirit or a memory in a journal. Even with Dumbledore, you don't get a true sense of his personality or character until the later books, when Harry actually gets to know him. Before that, Dumbledore just seems like a grandfatherly figure, the mentor figure, with only a hint of what he's actually like. But that makes sense as well. When book 1 starts, Harry is 11. Kids see adults, mentors, parents, etc. a certain way. They build up expectations and illusions about these people in their lives whom they idealize, which is very one-sided, and not an accurate representation. Harry's illusions of Dumbledore were shattered in book 5. But the other thing that I love about the characters in the books: they are all flawed. On the flipside, even many of the villains (with the exception of Voldemort who is beyond redemption) have redeeming qualities. Book 5 is brilliant. Dumbledore is revealed as a flawed man who can make mistakes, and because of his position of power, his mistakes can be on a monumental scale, as evidenced by Sirius' death.

I agree though. I do like book 5 the most of all the books, part because I think I found Harry to be the most relateable to me in book 5. The more light-hearted fairy tale nature of the first books were more difficult for me to swallow. It was only after book 3 and the introduction of the dementors (I could argue she didn't pull that far enough though, but meh) that I thought the overall darker tone spoke to me more. I do think Harry expresses a lot of 8 anger in book 5 but meh. So long since I read it and so long since I was the age when I read it. I can see why I could see parallels between myself and Harry thought because I was also a very angry person as a teenager.

I don't think Sirius' death was meaningless, or a cheap tactic to create conflict and drama in the story. I see it as a meaningful consequence of all the characters' actions in book 5: Harry's, Dumbledore's, even Sirius'. Unlike the first three books, this isn't a game or adventure anymore. This is a war, and people die. Dumbledore screwed up by not being straight-up with Harry and treating him like a child. Harry screwed up because he was angry, he was impulsive, and he didn't take his Occlumency lessons seriously, and therefore opened himself up to be fooled and manipulated. Sirius was impulsive and he loved Harry, so of course, he's going to rush to his rescue. Sirius has also been cooped up for months and months (another mishandling on Dumbledore's part). Maybe if he wasn't going stir-crazy and had a chance to take action, he wouldn't have been so reckless. But also, Sirius was a flawed man, especially with how he treated Kreacher, which was his undoing in the end. I did not see his death as an asspull at all. It was inevitable.

Fine, we agree to disagree on this.

 

[Nicki]

[MENTION=16405]LeaT[/MENTION]

"Again, compare Luna Lovegood to Harry Potter. She's a perfect example of a 9. During book 4 when I think it was Ron who got jinxed and all his bones in his body disappeared, she started making funny remarks about how his current physical state isn't so bad. Think of all the positive things he could do now instead of before! This is a perfect example of 9 think and 9s reaching simple and truthful but yet painfully unrealistic conclusions and instead of dealing with the fact that Ron's ultimately being in a terrible physical state, she tries to cover this up with these positive fantasies. Where does Harry ever seem to do this in the book? Does he ever purposefully avoid negative emotions by thinking positively? Does he ever seem to express a slothful attitude of "conflict takes too much effort, why can't we all just get along?" kind of mentality that a 9 would"

That never happened. It was Harry who got all his bones jinxed in 2nd year after Dobby hexed a bludger. Harry, Ron, and Hermione never met Luna until their 5th year. Are you talking about Ron in 6th year?

In HBP, he tries to avoid thinking about Sirius whenever his thoughts wander to him. He also represses a lot of his negative feelings and pretends he's doing okay most of the time. OoTP was the only time Harry ever let out his pent up anger. With Ron and Hermione, he constantly has that attitude.

 

[Entropic]

[MENTION=16405]LeaT[/MENTION]

"Again, compare Luna Lovegood to Harry Potter. She's a perfect example of a 9. During book 4 when I think it was Ron who got jinxed and all his bones in his body disappeared, she started making funny remarks about how his current physical state isn't so bad. Think of all the positive things he could do now instead of before! This is a perfect example of 9 think and 9s reaching simple and truthful but yet painfully unrealistic conclusions and instead of dealing with the fact that Ron's ultimately being in a terrible physical state, she tries to cover this up with these positive fantasies. Where does Harry ever seem to do this in the book? Does he ever purposefully avoid negative emotions by thinking positively? Does he ever seem to express a slothful attitude of "conflict takes too much effort, why can't we all just get along?" kind of mentality that a 9 would"

That never happened. It was Harry who got all his bones jinxed in 2nd year after Dobby hexed a bludger. Harry, Ron, and Hermione never met Luna until their 5th year. Are you talking about Ron in 6th year?

In HBP, he tries to avoid thinking about Sirius whenever his thoughts wander to him. He also represses a lot of his negative feelings and pretends he's doing okay most of the time. OoTP was the only time Harry ever let out his pent up anger. With Ron and Hermione, he constantly has that attitude.

Perhaps I am confusing. It's a long time since I saw either film or read the books.

My overall point still stands though since I fail to see how you refuted them. Telling others you are doing ok emotionally doesn't point towards a positive outlook. I can just easily contrast to Kurosaki Ichigo from Bleach who is most likely a 4w5 and he does the same thing and he doesn't even have 9 in his tritype.