~~ self-sacrifice and individualism in hp

i know i said no meta till i get my fics done-- and face it, if i predict something like that, i should know the universe will bite me in the ass. i will write them, though. as my harry-plushie is my witness, i will write them. ahem. (the reason i keep mentioning them as if i'm -serious- or something is because i -am- serious. these are -long-. i probably need a -beta- [and no, i don't know who to ask, no]. these have -plot-, man. i'm -serious-! one of them is a h/d how-they-got-together fic!! in multiple parts!! holy guacamole, etc. no, really. it's.... it's just a special thing for me, since i've never come so very very close before. it's not like it's The Ultimate H/D Reena Fic or anything, but.... *infatuated siiiigh*)
~~

i was thinking about people's differing opinions on what it would take for harry to win.

in particular, there are people who probably think they're supporting his "hero's quest" and individualist ideals in general by saying that harry needs to defeat Evil by himself, and that he wouldn't have time or protective energy to spare for 'love'. he has a job to do, right, and love and attachments-- especially to his -enemy-, of course-- would be a -weakness-, they would -undermine- him somehow. it would be much more of a -challenge- for harry to do what he has to do if he had a demanding personal relationship to worry about.

i'm thinking of a particular fic, actually. harry & draco get together under the auspices of having meaningless sex. months pass, they have lots of it, everything is fine, except draco is starting to get too attached-- or so thinks snape. he tells draco, well, don't you -know- what you're risking here? your father will disown you, voldemort will use you against harry, where will either of you turn, how will you explain this to the wizarding world, blahblah. draco is upset because he "knows it's the truth". he meets harry for the last time, and somehow harry knows already, and they break up without discussing anything; the end. in the comments, the author says, well, i think it's better for both of them in the long run.

and this isn't a totally unusual position-- lots of people think that love is a -weakness- somehow, that the challenges of keeping it are much more plentiful than the potential rewards of -having- it in the first place. i mean, there's sex and giddy happiness, but strength? that's friendship, not love, right?
    there's this wide-spread feeling in modern pop-psychology that love involves co-dependency, that it weakens one's resolve, that it creates windows where your enemies could take advantage of you. that intensely personal, individual quests like the hero's one-on-one defeat of his arch-nemesis should be left to the lone crusader.

    all in all, i think this is an underestimation and a misunderstanding of love. and i'm not about to imply that love "saves the day" or anything of the sort. the -will- to love can give a person the -strength- to overcome external as well as internal obstacles, yes. love itself is merely an emotion that binds you to another person, not really necessitating you to -act- any more than any other emotion does. love binds your emotions to someone, at the basic level, right? some people think emotions make you weaker the stronger they are, of course, and an emotion that takes control away from you-- that gives some of it to another person-- must make you even weaker still, in that vein of thought.
    whatever the case with love in general, this isn't how it seems to work in the hp books, anyway.

( there's this interplay of self-sacrifice, unity and the free will that seem to be the ingredients to personal and larger victory.... )