Venturing into uncharted territory, where perhaps no poster has gone before, I wonder at JK Rowling's understanding of WAR as it compares to those of C S Lewis, Tolkien, and if I may be so bold to compare - with George Lucas.

Hagrid felt the onset of war (OotP). Armies assembled (Narnia). "War is already upon your borders." (LotR: Two Towers - Aragorn to Theoden) - Victory in war is synonymous with honor (Theoden). "You know of the Rebellion against the Empire? . . . I want to learn the ways of the Force, and become a Jedi -- like my father." (Star Wars, Empire Strikes Back: Luke Skywalker).

"Away put your weapon. I mean you no harm." . . . "I am looking for someone." . . . "Looking? Found someone you have . . . No, no, help you - find your friend . . . "I am looking for a Great Warrior." . . . "Mmm. Wars Not Make One Great. . . . "I seek a Jedi master." . . . You seek Yoda." . . . "You know Yoda?" . . . "Take you to him I will."

Harry has no escape: Prophesy or not. Members of The Order and DA choose to protect themselves and others; not to provoke war. Aragorn (as Strider the Ranger) flees his mission as the last of the Numenor bloodline to command assault against Sauron until the Ring is found, thus the blade that was broken is reforged. Young Luke knows very little of war - living way out in the Outer Rim. But the Rebellion has a way of finding him.

Well, let's see if we can't get a bit of a discussion going. What makes wars and warriors great? Well, if we're talking revolutionary war, or a war where the, uh, "good" side decides to take action against the forces of evil (the "baddies") who are in control of everything, then, in that sense I think war may be considered "great."

Mind, warfare is a messy business, a messy business indeed, and to label it great goes against my gut instincts....let's just say some wars are more necessary than others.

I found this line interesting:


But, by choosing to protect themselves, by making the concrete choice to take a side, to take a stand - isn't that, in essence, not so much provoking war, but taking part in one that, due to circumstances beyond their control, is already taking place?

In other words, the "war" has been started by those in power, or those attempting to assume power. By taking a defensive stance, can it not then be argued that the DA and Order are already part of that war? They may not have formed with the thought of provoking war, but they must have been aware on some level that by doing what they were doing, they were drawing a line in the sand....a line that clearly stated, "this means war."

Arguably so. Delores Umbrage (OotP) clearly reached this conclusion; confirmed (?) by Professor Dumbledore. But, as you say, the wheels were already in motion. (Please excuse the next Star Wars-Yoda quote, but I feel it is important to this discussion): "Always in motion the future is."

Yes, I believe that the Order and DA were always engaged in something war-like (whether you separate Voldemort's first war from that of the final books of the series, or not). The final battle (DH) is indeed quite revealing. The HEAT of war. Death all around. Pain. Senseless killing. And for what? What did the Death Eaters expect to gain? Just following orders? So this is war. Or is it?

Who are the warriors? Voldemort? B. Lestrange? McGonagal? Weasely family? Hagrid? Lupin? Tonks? Kingsley? Snape? (well . . . ) What about Harry? Ron? Hermione? Luna? Neville? Dobby? Griphook? Olivander? Aw, come on. Certainly Mad Eye!?

So are we any closer? What makes a warrior great? War is really not my bag. Reason: Kid games and sports like "cops and robbers", electonic war games, etc. Even Quidditch, if you know what I mean. It's "fun" to win. War's different. Warriors, I think, are different. They do what they must. Centered. Protective/Defensive. Pursuing peace. Not mercenaries.

How about these military type people: George Washington? Ike Eisenhower? Alexander the Great? Hey! Batman? Superman? Aragorn? Frodo? (I think Pippin has "the right stuff") and Yoda. "Much do you still have to learn my young Padawan."

The world loves a Great hero and Great heroes are often made by war - regrettably.

The word war is interesting though. Although war in English is associated with killing, in German it is 'Krieg.' And 'Krieg' comes from the word 'kriegen' / to get, to catch. It implies aggression but its figurative meaning is to battle, similar to our 'war of words.' I think there is also a certain need for a 'declaration of war' for killing to be legitimate - at least in the muggle world.

In the Harry Potter world it is just signaled by Voldamort's aggression. I don't really think that Rowling is aggrandizing war at all - in fact her hero is Great because of his reluctance to kill (but not to fight). I think that she takes a stance very much like Tolkien's LOTR, where war is the curse of civilization. But there are many more violent heroes and much more killing in most of the stories you mention. The only killing we see that is applauded in HP is Molly killing Bellatrix. Of course Harry defeats Voldamort, but his own violence, reversed, is what kills him. But Rowling even acknowledges that heroes are made by war. Harry is in fact a hero, DD is a hero of the first war. And even Ollivander says, "He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named did great things -- terrible yes, but great."

Yoda seemed to know a thing or two, eh?

We seem to be no closer to answering the question of what makes a warrior great. I like your point that warriors are different than the wars they actually fight in that they do what they must. Harry and his friends did what they felt they needed to do during war time - it was a defensive tactic, and no, they most assuredly are not mercenaries.

The same cannot be said of the Death Eaters and their fearful leader, can it? Is Voldemort a warrior? I think of him more as a dictator, personally, but then again, it could easily be argued that a dictator is also a warrior - which seems to get us nowhere.

Dictionary.com gives us the follwing definition(s) of a warrior:

Well, if we were to take this definition into consideration, then, yes, even the villains in Rowling's world can be considered warriors. Bella and her fellow Death Eaters were certainly engaged and/or experienced in warfare, and they were certainly soldiers in Voldemort's army. And it definitely takes a certain amount of great courage to be a warrior - no matter the direction one wishes to take that courage (in Voldemort's case, he's courageous in his quest for power and his aggressiveness in getting what he wants - although he clearly lacks courage in other, and ultimately more important matters.)

chloe sums it up nicely:

So, based on the definitions we have for a warrior - would we consider Voldemort to be a great warrior? - Perhaps like Achilles, he had his flaw, his weakness - but overall, he was great in his own way.

what are the qualities we see admired in a great warrior in the heroic literature - valor - prowess in the arts of war - loyalty to one's fellows and to the cause - leadership - admiration from one's fellows - great strength - perserverance??

Achilles - the great hero of the Greeks - is probably the most famous of great warriors in the heroic tradition - and certainly one of his qualities was his seeming invincibility so perhaps that belongs on the list. Then we have Hector - Achilles foe - and one who is said to have been the best of all those who fought in the Trojan War - he was known as fair - just - so more important qualities.

It seems also to me that all of our great warriors in the mythological traditions have a weapon that is somehow endowed with magical or astonishing craftsmanship - Arthur's excalibur comes to mind.

Harry surely seems to possess many of these attributes - loyalty, courage, leadership, perserverance. His cloak may be considered to be his special magical weapon of a sort.

War is many things happening at the same time, usually over a period of time, imo. Thus the warriors are not always the generals and captains of the campaign. Aren't soldiers, however, trained to be "warriors"? But I don't think that's what makes them so.

Yet warriors fight many battles, often on many fronts. Nurses, Doctors, Police, and Firemen. Social workers, Advocates, Attorneys. The "war" though could be a very different thing than against "Death Eaters".