Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix Book Review

[lisas3575]

***SPOILERS HEREIN***

Thanks, Rebecca, for the reminder to get this going!

I received an interesting discussion guide concerning the book and issues of moral character. Here it is, copyright Michael Josephson:

Lessons About Character, Ethics and Values Embodied
in Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix

ThereÕs a lot to learn about character, ethics and values from stories like Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix but, like real life experiences, the lessons are best learned when we take some time to reflect and discuss the events and choices that shape and reveal values and character.

We learn more when we ask questions like: 1) What factors influenced the most important choices of the main characters? 2) Were the consequences of their choices what they wanted? 3) Could they have made different choices that would have created better results?

This guide can be used for self-study or as the basis of a discussion with others who have read the book. YouÕll get the most out of it if you write out your answers before discussing them.
I. Everyone can and should learn from life experiences. What important life lessons that should help the character in the future were learned or should have been learned by:
A. Harry


B. Dumbledore


C. Doris Umbridge


D. Cornelius Fudge


II. Throughout the book, Harry became angry and sullen and often failed to control his anger. Make a list of all the times you remember where HarryÕs anger got him into trouble or was unfair to someone who was on his side.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

A. Is there anything Harry could or should have done to better control his temper or is it impossible to do so?

B. What could have changed if Harry had more consistently exercised self-control and overcome his anger?

III. Despite the urging of Dumbledore and Sirius and the reminders of Hermione, Harry refused to practice or learn Occlumency.
A. Why do you think this was so?

B. What would or could have been different if he had exercised the self-discipline to learn Occlumency?

C. Do you know anyone who seems unwilling to exercise self-control or self-discipline? How has this affected his or her life?

D. Are there any areas where your life could be better if you exercised more self-control or self-discipline?

IV. After Harry learned certain unpleasant facts about his father and Snape, he resisted HermioneÕs pleas and decided to break into UmbridgeÕs office so he could talk to Sirius about his father -- even though he knew it could result in expulsion, embarrass McGonagall who had just stood up for him, endanger Sirius, and undermine the mission of the order of the Phoenix.
A. Why did he do this?

B. Was it responsible?

C. Was it essential that he have his answers the moment he wanted them?

D. Is it reasonable to expect anyone to resist these sorts of powerful urges?

V. Was Harry fair in his anger at Dumbledore for ignoring him, not knowing that Dumbledore had good reasons for doing so? What could Dumbledore have done to reduce HarryÕs feeling of abandonment and betrayal?

VI. Should Harry have resisted the temptation to invade SnapeÕs privacy by reading his thoughts in the pensive?
A. Was this a very big violation of respect or a little one?

B. Did Snape have a right to right to feel so angry at what Harry did?

C. If Snape had done the same thing to Harry, would your opinion be any different?

D. Was it proper for Snape to stop teaching Occlumency to Harry after Harry read his thoughts in the pensive? Why or why not?

VII. What might have changed if Ron and Fred had responded differently to the SlytherinsÕ taunting?

VII. There were many examples in the book where individuals were treated unfairly, unkindly or disrespectfully by others including the oneÕs listed below.
A. What overall lessons could be learned from the treatment of:
1. Harry by the Dursleys?

2. Kreatcher by Sirius?

3. Snape by HarryÕs dad?

4. Luna by her classmates?

5. Ron by Malfoy and the Slytherin House?

6. Grawp by Hagrid?

7. Harry by Snape?

8. Harry by Umbridge?

9. Harry by Dumbledore?

10. Firenze by the other centaurs?

11. Mudbloods, half-breeds, nonhuman creatures (like centaurs) and house elves by SiriusÕs mother, Umbridge, the Malfoys and others?

B. Have you ever been treated unfairly, unkindly or disrespectfully by others? How did it feel?

C. Have you ever joined in with others to treat someone in an unkind or disrespectful way?

D. Since Voldemort is not a pure blood wizard himself, why does he promote or allow hatred for everyone who is not a pure blood?

E. The Malfoys, Umbridge and others could be said to have prejudiced or bigoted attitudes about mudbloods, half-breeds and nonhumans they thought they were superior to. Are there people in the real world today who have those kinds of attitudes about other groups? WhatÕs wrong with these sorts of attitudes?

VIII. Phineus Nigellus, the portrait of the old Slytherin headmaster, said to Dumbledore: ÒNever try to understand the students. They hate it. They would much rather be tragically misunderstood.Ó (p.823) What do you think he meant by that? Is there any truth to this statement?

IX. HarryÕs relationship with Cho was constantly damaged by misunderstandings.
A. What did Hermione try to teach Harry and Ron about Cho and about the way some girls think about and deal with emotions? Do you think she is right?

B. Cho never asked Harry directly what his relationship with Hermione was. Why not? Should she have before she jumped to conclusions?

C. Why was Harry always so nervous around Cho? Are there any lessons about feelings and relationships you can learn from the way Harry dealt with his feelings for Cho?

X. Hogwarts has a system of granting and taking away points from each house for good performance or misconduct.
A. Did you see anything unfair in the way the point system was used, especially by the heads of one house against students in another?

B. Was there any system you could predict when and how many points could be deducted and added?

C. It often seemed unfair the way Umbridge and Snape deducted points from Gryffindor, but when McGonagall added a huge number of points back at the end of the book, was that any different? Why or why not?

D. What would be a fairer way of dealing with the point system?

XI. Trustworthiness involves not lying or deceiving, but it also involves forthrightness or candor (sincerity and openness, telling others what they have a right to know or should know).
A. There is a lot of lying, secrecy and trickery in the book. Some cases may have been more justified than others. Were the following examples consistent with the moral duty to be trustworthy? Why or why not?
1. Ron and Hermione not telling Harry everything they knew while Harry was at the Dursleys.

2. Hermione lying to Umbridge to lure her into the forest.

3. Harry lying to Umbridge about knowing where Sirius was.

4. Kreatcher lying to Harry about whether Sirius was at the headquarters.

5. Dumbledore not telling Harry about the prophecy.

6. Dumbledore not telling (or having someone else tell) Harry about why he was ignoring him.

7. Dumbledore not telling (or having someone else tell) Harry about why it was important he learn Occlumency.

8. Sirius and others not telling Harry about the kind of person his dad was, at least at Hogwarts.

9. Voldemort not telling his followers that he was a not a pure blood wizard.

10. Were there times Harry should have revealed more to Dumbledore or Professor McGonagall? If so, why didnÕt he?

B. How important is trust? Why

C. Who could Harry really trust?

D. Could HarryÕs friends always trust him to:
1. Try to help or save them?

2. Tell them the whole truth?

3. Be honest about his feelings?

4. Treat them fairly and with respect?

E. Who is the most trustworthy character in the book?

[lisas3575]

I really enjoyed the book-- I enjoyed the realistic picture of surly teenaged angst. Harry has always been a fairly "normal" in so much as he's not they nicest kid on the block. He's often short with his friends and this book really pointed out his hero complex and woe-is-me-I-must-do-everything-by-myself selfishness. This was the first book that he brought people (against his will, though) to help him in the final battle against Voldemort.

Did anyone spoil the ending for you? DH almost did, he was sooooooooo lucky that his info turned out to be false.

[badunnin]

So much to think about!!!! I'll have to tackle this this evening!

[Molli526]

Wow, those are some deep questions. I will need to read the book again to answer some of those. In my defense, I re-read books 3 & 4 after reading 5, so those are fresh in my memory.

[sneezles]

Lisa,
It's nice to finally see that someone can use the book for learning rather than all those that opose the series just because of the wizards and witches in the sotries. I have only just begun to read it but my sometimes surly 16 yr old DS did nothing else for a week, save eat and barley sleep, to read it (normaly he's on the computer or watching tv...he does have his chores but they were done much quicker that week ). I know he'll groan when I show him this...

[lhall]

No, no one spoiled the ending for me, but I'm the only one in the house who reads those books. I also finished it in two days. DH and DD1 do like the movies though.

I did guess who died. I didn't think she would do away with one of the central characters. I assumed it would be one of the periferal, but recurrent characters and just picked who I thought was the most likely choice.

I really liked the way Harry was portrayed. Very realistic, and it's something kids can learn from.

Lisa,
I'll have to print out your info and respond later. That's definately a lot to think about.

Leigh

[Molli526]

I sat there crying when Sirius died.

I finished the book in 2 days too. Could not put it down.

I have never discussed a book in any formal way, so I apologize if I step out of line somewhere.

[Alethea]

Thanks for posting this, I want to think about it some.

My quick .02 before diving into the questions some more is that overall, I enjoyed the fifth book, though maybe not as much as the third or first books. And I agree that it was good to see Harry portrayed as a teenager with all the mood swings, irrational anger, and petty irritations those years bring.

And finally, because this has been bugging me since I started the book, did anyone else wonder what was up with all the use of "mate" and "bloke"? Yes, I know Rowling was trying to portray the kids as becoming more adult through their actions and speech, but it just seemed a bit overdone to me. Especially the "mate" part, I started to feel like Hogwarts was in Australia!

Can't wait to hear the discussion and people's take on the reader's guide questions.
-Thea

[RebeccaT]

Thanks for starting this, Lisa! I just finished it yesterday.

So do we want to post answers to all of these questions? Or maybe take individual questions and discuss, then move on to the next!

I agree that one of the most important, and interesting, things about Book 5 is that Harry is SUCH a teenager -- angst and all. I think that Phineas expressed the frustration so many adults feel when he said that students of this age don't *want* to be understood. It's hard to be a teenager, with these sudden complex, adult-like thoughts and emotions, but still feeling child-like in so many ways, particularly your expectations from the world around you. I think that Rowling nailed that with Harry.

[gertdog]

I enjoyed the book- worth the wait- but I need to give it a second, more thorough read.

Was I the only one who thought that, when Mr. Weasley was bitten by the snake, he would be the one to die? I sat and cried for a bit before I could read on, and was so glad he wasn't the one.

Early on, I also thought that it could be Percy- that his death might be redemptive in some way after he turned his back on the Weasley family.

I was actually kind of surprised it was Sirius- so sad for Harry to have lost his parents and then the closest thing to a parent he's had. Okay, I know it's only a book, but still!

I still want to know why Dumbledore is so serenely certain that Snape is trustworthy- I feel there is more to Snape's story and that he will play a pivotal role in events further down the road.

I will delve into the questions Lisa posted later on- lots to reflect on. I'm not very good at "book group" type questions but I'll give it a try!

[Molli526]

Originally posted by gertdog


I still want to know why Dumbledore is so serenely certain that Snape is trustworthy- I feel there is more to Snape's story and that he will play a pivotal role in events further down the road.

I can't wait to learn this either. My lame guess is that Snape helped/ rescued/ saved Dumbledore somewhere along the line after Voldemort killed the Potters

[honeygirl1971]

I liked the book. I think Rowling is doing an excellent job of making the characters grow, change, etc. I think it's pretty realistic to see the way Harry's past experiences have affected him, and it's good that it's not always in positive ways. I also liked the way she showed that Harry really needs all the others to help him, but, at the same time, that he's really on his own against Voldemort in important ways too.

I do think that this book was less "fun," though, since the part at Hogwarts was so much more frustrating for the characters--Umbridge was so awful! I kept expecting to see Umbridge and Fudge in league with Voldemort, b/c the things they were doing seemed to go beyond simple "denial," and I was kind of surprised that didn't happen. Although it wasn't as "fun" as the other books, I did really like it and I do think that in order to keep it fresh she had to focus on new challenges and darker problems. If it had been all fun and games, it would have felt shallow and formulaic.

[lisas3575]

Originally posted by RebeccaT
I agree that one of the most important, and interesting, things about Book 5 is that Harry is SUCH a teenager -- angst and all. I think that Phineas expressed the frustration so many adults feel when he said that students of this age don't *want* to be understood. It's hard to be a teenager, with these sudden complex, adult-like thoughts and emotions, but still feeling child-like in so many ways, particularly your expectations from the world around you. I think that Rowling nailed that with Harry.

I agree. I thought it was a great study in human nature on a secondary level to the story. And that's question VII. I came across a really interesting quote the other day that I thought related to this:
"Despair is the absolute extreme of self-love.
It is reached when a man deliberately turns his
back on all help from anyone else in order to
taste the rotten luxury of knowing himself to
be lost."
--Thomas Merton

I loved his description of "rotten luxury". How true! I know that when I'm in dispair and feeling utterly alone, there is a certain part of me that would love to stay there, wallowing in that feeling. It is a "luxury" of sorts, feeling self-pity. What's that all about?

And I didn't post those questions thinking we'd talk about any/all of them-- I just thought they were interesting. If you'd like to tackle one, go ahead, but I don't think there's any groundrules to our discussion.

[MusicMom]

First of all, thank you for posting the study guide- the questions are thought provoking. I agree that you almost need to read the book a second time in order to answer some of the topics. The first time you read the book you're more interested in the plot than character motivations and development.

Here are a couple of my thoughts.

I found the story to be very emotional and tense. I read other reviews in the press that mentioned Rowling's success with portraying Harry as a teenager. However, I was bothered by Harry's anger and personally I think it was too frequent and too extreme for him to be a "typical" teenager. Sure, the average teenager has roller coaster emotions, but Harry's were off the scale. I don't know any teenagers that explode with anger that often and I found it disconcerting. The teens I know act more like the other teenage characters in the book.

It seems to me that Harry's anger is more a result of his life experience and emotional connection to Voldemort than his adolescence.

I've always been fascinated by the subplot about the relationship between Snape and Harry. Rowling took it to the next level in this book but didn't resolve the issues that she raised. I suppose she's keeping that development for future installments, but I would have liked for Harry to demonstrate more empathy for Snape after he found out how his father treated him when they were students. In answer to the study questions, I think it was a huge violation of respect when Harry entered the pensieve and Snape had a right to be furious. I can understand why he cancelled the lessons- he knew Harry wasn't really trying anyway and that was the last straw. However, Snape knew how important it was for Harry to learn the skill and should have overcome his personal feelings for the greater good of the wizarding world. Harry should have been told the purpose of the Occlumency lessons so he would have been more invested in them. (But then, we would have had a different climax to the book, wouldn't we?)

A lot happened before Harry had the chance to process the new information about his father and figure out how to respond to Snape. I'm convinced that something will occur in the last book to bring them together.

Finally, my favorite line in the whole book was when Harry tells Ron and Hermione that Cho was crying when she kissed him and Ron says, "Why, are you that bad a kisser?" That was LOL.

[lisas3575]

So why do you think Harry didn't learn Occlumency? I think it was a case of curiousity killing the cat; he wanted to know what his dreams meant, and what Voldermort was up to, and he knew that by closing his mind he may not get those answers...

I also think there is a part of him that is/was hanging on to being a child and not wanting to need to know how to do it, if that makes sense. I think he was in denial.

Certainly, if he'd learned how to do it, he wouldn't have had the false vision about Sirius that lead, ultimately, to his death. I feel that the responsibility of Sirius' death lays on several people-- Harry, for not learning occlumency; Dumbledore and Snape, for not explaining the reason why it was needed; Kreatcher (Creature ) for his deception/double agent-ness; and Sirius, for not staying at HQ.

Do you think Snape had a right to quit the lessons after Harry invaded his private thoughts?

[RebeccaT]

Originally posted by lisas3575
So why do you think Harry didn't learn Occlumency?

I agree that it was his curiosity that got the better of him. I also think that, to some degree, Voldemort's desire to see the prophecy was spilling over and making Harry's desire to know what was behind the door even greater, since they are so in tune with each other's emotions.

Also, he has never been one to be satisfied with not knowing the answer to something, this was not the first time that he was determined to explore a forbidden place (Chamber of Secrets comes to mind). He has also never had to suffer the threatened consequences of his curiosity... I mean, it's always a close call, but he can always get out of it in the end. I think that he really thought that if something bad happened he's probably be able to squeeze his way out of it, because he always has. Now that he knows that his destiny will involve either a murder that he will commit or be the victim of, I wonder if he will become less brash and more careful. What do you think?

Do you think Snape had a right to quit the lessons after Harry invaded his private thoughts?

While he might have had a right, and it might have been understandable, he was the adult in this situation, and he should have acted like it. While he suffered great pain and humiliation at the hand of James Potter, he should have continued with the lessons for the greater good of the Order. If Voldemort wasn't so keen on getting Harry's help in finding the prophecy, he could have used Harry's dreams to gather information on the Order, and that would have been devastating.

[Molli526]

Correct me if I am wrong, but didn't Harry read Snape's thoughts while practicing Occlumency? If I am, just ignore the rest Maybe I just like Harry too much, but I felt that he was trying to learn and didn't do it on purpose but when he saw his dad, he just wanted to learn more b/c he never got to know his dad and this was the way he could see the James so many people told him he was like.

I don't think Snape had the right to stop the lessons, like others have said b/c he is the adult BUT he has always harbored bad feelings toward Harry so it doesn't surprise me. I think there is more to that story than what we've been able to read.

I do think Harry will carry a lot of weight on shoulders about Sirius, but then he will also have a lot of vengeance towards Voldemort, for killing the ones he loved. Especially now knowing that it can either be him or Voldemort.

[lhall]

I think Snape's problem is that he can't separate his feelings about Harry's father from Harry himself. He's never liked Harry from day one. Sirius was reminded that Harry wasn't James, but it seems to me that Snape could benefit from the same lecture. Snape should have gotten past his feelings.

I think Dumbledore should have relied more on McGonagall to communication with Harry. Harry deserved and needed to know many things that Dumbledore kept from him. McGonagall was always honest with Harry. I'd say she was the most trustworthy person in the book. She defended Harry when he needed it, and also pointed out mistakes and times he was wrong.

Back to work...

Leigh

[badunnin]

Originally posted by Molli526
Correct me if I am wrong, but didn't Harry read Snape's thoughts while practicing Occlumency? If I am, just ignore the rest

I think Harry saw Snape's thoughts in the Pensieve, so he didn't really read them.

Umbridge definitely disturbed me. I had nightmares after the whole pen thing. I can see that really freaking kids out.

[gertdog]

Originally posted by lisas3575
So why do you think Harry didn't learn Occlumency? I think it was a case of curiousity killing the cat; he wanted to know what his dreams meant, and what Voldermort was up to, and he knew that by closing his mind he may not get those answers...

Do you think Snape had a right to quit the lessons after Harry invaded his private thoughts?

I can understand why Harry looked at Snape's thoughts in the pensieve, though I also think it was the wrong thing to do. I think Snape was wrong to quit the lessons, especially since he didn't tell Dumbledore that he was quitting (did he?). I am fascinated by Snape- I want to know more about who he is, and why he is that person. He's not like so many antagonists in children's books- a good person who's misunderstood- he really is mean, given to temper, unable to forgive (not only can he not forgive James Potter, his anger carries over to the dead man's son!) etc.

Although we've known from early on that Snape is fallible (he was a Death-Eater), we see it again in this book- though he is supposed to be teaching Harry occlumency, he stops after being embarrassed/angered by Harry's intrusion into his memories. I think Snape was more upset by WHAT Harry saw than by the fact that Harry was looking.

[Terrytx]

I agree with many of you about Snape. I think there is more there than meats the eye. I think we are in for something big coming up with him.

One of my favorites is McGonagall. Although she can be strict, she does seem to understand young people and know how they feel and think.

[Alethea]

Originally posted by Molli526
Correct me if I am wrong, but didn't Harry read Snape's thoughts while practicing Occlumency?

Okay, I may very well be wrong on this, but I don't believe Harry read Snape's thoughts while practising occlumency per se. (True, I read this portion at 1:30 in the morning, which is waaaay past my bedtime, so ignore me if I'm wrong. I've lent my copy out, so I can't check.) But I think Harry had arrived for occlumency, and finding Snape's office empty, looked into the pensieve which he knew contained Snape's memories. I remember thinking as I read this that he had no hesitation before looking into the bowl. I do think Harry did Snape a serious wrong by looking into the pensieve, but also that Snape, as the adult, should have continued the lessons. But all said, I thought it was an interesting foil that an adult, one who ultimately seems to be acting as an agent of the good rather than evil, also fell victim to their impulses and anger. I agree with others that Snape is one of the most interesting characters, and I'm greatly interested to learn how his history and actions play out.

I really appreciated the fact that Rowling potrayed Harry's father, and Sirius (despite him being my favorite character), as also having their antagonistic and cruel teenage moments. Without that and Harry's periods of insolence and rebellion, she would have been painting a picture of teenagers that's highly inaccurate, no matter how much they transform and mature.

[colleency]

I think that although Snape should have continued with the lessons, he was portrayed as a very real person. Some people are so unbelievably injured by the way that other children treated them, that they are unable to get over their anger at what happened to them. Snape was almost killed as a result of something Harry's father did, even if you don't count the way he was constantly taunted because Harry's father was bored. Some people really do close in around that kind of pain, and it affects their whole lives.

I don't understand why Dumbledore left Harry in the dark so frequently. I think that led to a great deal of trouble.

I also don't understand why the kids in these books NEVER feel like they can confide in the adults. McGonagle is strict, but very fair. Dumbledore has always been on Harry's side, and yet he never tells them about what's going on. I think a lack of communication is a huge problem in the books....kind of like real life.

I think I enjoyed the book more knowing that a main character would die. Every time someone left the room, I thought, "this is it. They're the one." At different times I thought it would be Ron's mom, Ron, Ron's dad, Ron's brother, Dumbledore, and Hagrid.

I did very much enjoy the book, but I read it much too quickly. I'll have to read it again with the reading guide in mind.

[foodfiend]

I enjoyed the Order of the Phoenix. I preferred it to the Goblet of Fire. I think Rowling had a few points she wanted to show with this book:
1) Harry is becoming a teenager (temper tantrums, hormones)
2) Adults are fallible (Sirius and James were arrogant teenagers, Dumbledore miscalculates the strategy against Voldemort)

What I like most about her books are the characterizations. I read through the book in two days, and it felt like I was spending time with old friends.
As to why Harry didn't finish Occlumency lessons and why Dumbledore didn't intervene more directly, I actually think that's a weakness about Rowling's writing. The least satisfying part of her books are the endings where we find out why people did things, which were key to the chain of events. I find them a bit farfetched. For example, in the Goblet of Fire, Barty Crouch gives a long story about how he avoided Azkaban, killed his father, set off the Dark Mark (?). It explained a lot of events in the book, but I didn't find it believable.

I will miss Sirius, though. Rowling portrayed him as immature in this last book, but I like to think that's because she knew he was going to be killed and wanted to distance him a bit. I would have liked it if McGonagall got killed by the Ministry of Magic while protecting Hagrid. That would have been exciting and unexpected.

[RebeccaT]

Originally posted by colleency
Every time someone left the room, I thought, "this is it. They're the one." At different times I thought it would be Ron's mom, Ron, Ron's dad, Ron's brother, Dumbledore, and Hagrid.

I did the exact same thing! My heart would start pounding, and I'd go "Oh no! It's going to be him/her/IT!" I think that leak was VERY much on purpose, and it definitely added to the excitement and dread.

Oh, and Harry did get into Snape's thoughts once during Occulmency. He was able to see snippets of Snape's childhood, being a child in the corner crying while his parents fought for instance. That part confused me, though, since I thought the whole point was not for him to get inside the head of the one attacking him, but to close his mind to attack.

How do you all think that the Ministry of Magic is going to behave in the next book? The have finally realized that Voldemort is back, and have been forced to admit it. Will the members of the Order who work for the Ministry go out in the open? Will Fudge continue to work closely with Lucius Malfoy, now that Harry is believed and the Death Eaters have been identified? The dementors have abandoned Azkaban, so how will the Ministry maintain law and order? They say that the war has begun... I am interested to know what side the Ministry ends up being on. Especially Percy, who I think will have a huge role to play in the final outcome.

[badunnin]

Originally posted by RebeccaT
I think that leak was VERY much on purpose, and it definitely added to the excitement and dread.

I didn't like reading it knowing someone would die. That's all I read for - to find out who it was. And reading a second time, I realise how MUCH I missed.

[lisas3575]

Originally posted by RebeccaT

Will Fudge continue to work closely with Lucius Malfoy, now that Harry is believed and the Death Eaters have been identified?

At the end of the book, Draco confronts Harry, and they discuss the fact that Lucious and his fellow Death Eaters that broke into the Ministry offices were sent to Azkaban. Draco implied that, now that the dementors had left to rejoin Voldemort, his father and the others would have an easy time escaping. So I don't think he'll be back working with Fudge, he'll probably escape and go directly to You-Know-Who.

[lisas3575]

I'd be interested in any thoughts on these two questions:

Since Voldemort is not a pure blood wizard himself, why does he promote or allow hatred for everyone who is not a pure blood?
and Who is the most trustworthy character in the book?

My vote for the latter goes to Neville.

[Grace]

Originally posted by lisas3575
Since Voldemort is not a pure blood wizard himself, why does he promote or allow hatred for everyone who is not a pure blood?

The same reason Hitler did.

[RebeccaT]

Lisa, I agree that Neville is one of the most trustworthy characters, although I think he has a lot more to accomplish. We haven't seen the best from him, yet.

This may sound cliche, but I honestly was so impressed with the understanding and consistency with which Hermoine and Ron served Harry throughout this book. Instead of abandoning him during his temper tantrums, they chose to offer him exactly what he'd been missing his entire life - consistent love that never wavered. It sometimes required them to be tough on Harry, and it certainly didn't mean that they loved him blindly and without acknowledgement of his many faults. But they were steadfast. This probably prevented Harry from making even worse mistakes as a result of his insolence and frustration... instead of storming off in a huff when he took out his anxiety on them, which probably would have made Harry feel justified, they quietly confronted him. I think that, in many instances, this may have saved Harry from himself.