Most of the evidence for this theory presented came down to:
If Harry’s mother is narcissistic, then Harry will be narcissistic.
Harry is narcissistic
Therefore, Harry’s mother is narcissistic
Even if we stipulate 1 and 2, getting to 3 is just affirming the consequent. Affirming the consequent can be a valid Bayesian inference, but I don’t think it works well here. Harry’s narcissism would be explained away by Voldemort accidentally bestowing his conceit when marking Harry as his equal. Or professor Michael Verres-Evans’ raising a far more confident child than Uncle Vernon. Or Harry’s narcissism just being part of the this author’s conception of Harry. There are many reasons Harry could be narcissistic, and very little of the probability mass comes from Harry’s mother being narcissistic.
Most of my prior evidence speaks against this reading (Harry challenging his parents repeatedly where Draco and Hermione do not, Harry’s parents’ jaw-droppingly good letters of consolation, a conspicuous lack of evidence for Petunia’s narcissism in Status Differential, Harry’s happy thought being “you can never have enough books”). I have no doubt that you can think of reasons for all of those to fit the theory, but please keep in mind confirmation bias.
Though I did update slightly in favor of Petunia being narcissistic, I still mentally put the odds at 9 to 1 against. That was before the author of the story swooped in and said “Nope.”
Thanks for clarifying. I agree there are other possible explanations, but I see evidence in the text for Petunia’s narcissism that you don’t see. I’ve shared the theory and evidence I wanted to share so I understand if further argument is not worthwhile. My confidence in my own sanity decreases as this discussion continues. Plunging ahead regardless:
In “Status Differential” (Ch.36), there’s more evidence that Harry’s parents pushed Harry to be a prodigy for their own (narcissistic) validation:
″...his own father had always done everything he could to support Harry’s development as a prodigy and always encouraged him to reach higher and never belittled a single one of his accomplishments...”
“”Hermione has always been quite good in school,” said Dr. Leo Granger in a satisfied tone.
“Harry competes at the national level!” said Professor Michael Verres-Evans.
“Dear!” said Petunia.
Here, Harry’s parents want Harry to be a prodigy—specifically, better than others—while Hermione’s parents care about Hermione regardless of her achievements. Hermione says her parents “don’t know that [she is a prodigy], and (Harry will) never be able to tell them, but they love (her) anyway.”
Harry’s mother’s letter of consolation talks only about her needs (for Harry to survive because Harry owes it to her), not about Harry’s needs.
The happy thought refers to Harry’s father, not Petunia.
Harry challenges his parents only to protect them and their connection to him (e.g. after the Troll Incident) but recognizes their dominance in other situations (early chapters).
I’m still not sure what to make of the “nope”, because it doesn’t say why or what part of the theory is wrong. Additionally, it’s possible (though somewhat unlikely) that the author is basing Petunia on a real person whose narcissism he does not recognize. This seems like a “don’t poke the sleeping bear” situation.
I wouldn’t question your sanity, and I wouldn’t speak against interpreting the story as you have. It doesn’t matter one way or another if an image is the author’s interpretation; if you get something out of it, go for it.
Most of the evidence for this theory presented came down to:
If Harry’s mother is narcissistic, then Harry will be narcissistic.
Harry is narcissistic
Therefore, Harry’s mother is narcissistic
Even if we stipulate 1 and 2, getting to 3 is just affirming the consequent. Affirming the consequent can be a valid Bayesian inference, but I don’t think it works well here. Harry’s narcissism would be explained away by Voldemort accidentally bestowing his conceit when marking Harry as his equal. Or professor Michael Verres-Evans’ raising a far more confident child than Uncle Vernon. Or Harry’s narcissism just being part of the this author’s conception of Harry. There are many reasons Harry could be narcissistic, and very little of the probability mass comes from Harry’s mother being narcissistic.
Most of my prior evidence speaks against this reading (Harry challenging his parents repeatedly where Draco and Hermione do not, Harry’s parents’ jaw-droppingly good letters of consolation, a conspicuous lack of evidence for Petunia’s narcissism in Status Differential, Harry’s happy thought being “you can never have enough books”). I have no doubt that you can think of reasons for all of those to fit the theory, but please keep in mind confirmation bias.
Though I did update slightly in favor of Petunia being narcissistic, I still mentally put the odds at 9 to 1 against. That was before the author of the story swooped in and said “Nope.”
Thanks for clarifying. I agree there are other possible explanations, but I see evidence in the text for Petunia’s narcissism that you don’t see. I’ve shared the theory and evidence I wanted to share so I understand if further argument is not worthwhile. My confidence in my own sanity decreases as this discussion continues. Plunging ahead regardless:
In “Status Differential” (Ch.36), there’s more evidence that Harry’s parents pushed Harry to be a prodigy for their own (narcissistic) validation:
Here, Harry’s parents want Harry to be a prodigy—specifically, better than others—while Hermione’s parents care about Hermione regardless of her achievements. Hermione says her parents “don’t know that [she is a prodigy], and (Harry will) never be able to tell them, but they love (her) anyway.”
Harry’s mother’s letter of consolation talks only about her needs (for Harry to survive because Harry owes it to her), not about Harry’s needs.
The happy thought refers to Harry’s father, not Petunia.
Harry challenges his parents only to protect them and their connection to him (e.g. after the Troll Incident) but recognizes their dominance in other situations (early chapters).
I’m still not sure what to make of the “nope”, because it doesn’t say why or what part of the theory is wrong. Additionally, it’s possible (though somewhat unlikely) that the author is basing Petunia on a real person whose narcissism he does not recognize. This seems like a “don’t poke the sleeping bear” situation.
I wouldn’t question your sanity, and I wouldn’t speak against interpreting the story as you have. It doesn’t matter one way or another if an image is the author’s interpretation; if you get something out of it, go for it.