Hello there! I really enjoyed HPMOR, because it expanded on some of my thoughts and made me feel less alone. I joined now to post a realization about Harry’s (and my) personality. See my 1st post.
Algernoq
I agree that HPMOR is intended to describe reality: the entertaining story is the vehicle meant to entertain, and the theoretical content is the payload meant to be remembered. Long before I found HPMOR, I reacted to the death of a family member by planning how to defeat death with science, because nothing less would give me safety. I was baffled that most people preferred to cry for a bit and then forget about it, without making any effort to save themselves or even to fix the particular problem that caused the one death. I read somewhere that EY had a similar experience and reaction, that is mirrored in HJPEV’s reaction to Hermione’s death.
I’ve also mellowed out (e.g. learned, mostly, to seek my own approval instead of my mother’s or that of managers, etc.) I’m glad to hear you can relate. There are many similar labels that might fit: “Jewish mother”, “tiger mother”, “helicopter parent”, etc.
I suspect most people here have not had this experience, and many that have can’t not idolize their parents, due to denial. Harry claims “Suppressed memory is a load of pseudoscience! People do not repress traumatic memories, they remember them all too well for the rest of their lives!” (Ch. 6), but this is inconsistent with “Her mind was slow to remember [the negative information] for a few seconds, which frightened her” (Ch. 84), and denial is a well-known defense mechanism against trauma. The American Psychological Association website says “shock and denial are typical” reactions to traumatic experiences, a well-known historical example is FDR’s refusal to accept the incurability of his polio, and I can attest from personal experience that denial/repression sometimes happens.
I’m not sure what you mean by “acknowledge that status hierachies are situation-dependent”. It sounds like you mean that it’s usually best not to challenge higher-status or higher-arrogance people, because in most situations that’s the best way to get what you want. This matches my experience at least in professional situations—challenging people risks the failure of negotiations or looking incompetent, and is rarely rewarding because if you actually are right or higher-status you can get the same benefit by using your knowledge/skill in a less confrontational way.
I don’t agree that purely professional relationships are optimal for work relationships—I have learned more and gotten more done (both for myself and for my manager) when I feel that the manager truly cares about me and wants me to succeed, and when I truly care about the manager and the team’s success.
I’m not bothered by well-meant but sociopathic-sounding thoughts—if I was, I would not have finished HPMOR. The question of how self-awareness changes moral responsibility is problematic, because there appears to be no scientifically-testable moral authority as well as many opportunities to claim ignorance/feelings as a mask for thoughtful evil intent. That said, I want to do the right, moral, thing, in the hope that there truly is a right thing to do and that my search for meaning is not just my reaction to loss of my mother’s imposition of good/evil judgments.
Thanks for reading! Random replies:
Probably a lot—of people you know, how many are optimally pursuing their goals? Voluntary psychological screening would make many people happier. However, peoples’ right to be crazy is a civil liberties issue.
Yes—I did this one because it’s personally meaningful to me; I don’t have plans to do others now but I also would enjoy reading similar analysis of other works. You might also enjoy “Please Understand Me” by Kiersey and Bates, which provides insight into the motivations of different personality types but unfortunately does not explore how childhood experiences shape these types.
Yes—provided the author isn’t trying to deceive, the writing reveals how the author sees the world and so is predictive of the author’s thoughts and memories. I strongly suspect that most people who enjoyed HPMOR had parents who strongly encouraged them to learn as much as possible [to satisfy the ego-needs of the parents]. This matches what little data I have [edit: but anecdotes in the comments below suggest I’m wrong]. I would be very interested to see a poll to check this.
One example: one college I know of had voluntary screening for depression and substance abuse. Students would have a short meeting (~10 minutes) with a counselor (someone who had a few hours’ training in giving this kind of test), and the students answered questions about how they feel most of the time and how much they drink. It helped a few people realize they had a problem with these issues, but I don’t know how effective it was overall. Some students had a problem but didn’t realize it or were not interested in changing.
This book helped me, for example by showing what kind of praise different personalities usually want to hear, and by helping me understand the thoughts/goals of someone with a very different personality. It might or might not be a waste of time for others.
Thanks for the feedback. To address your points:
Traits that are anti-correlated with narcissism include the opposites of the “symptoms” listed. For example, Hermione is not at all narcissistic. She is not grandiose: she reminds Harry that they are young and shouldn’t do anything important yet. She is not selfish: she helps Hufflepuffs with homework. She doesn’t become furious when criticized: she reacts to harsh criticism by being sad and retreating (instead of attacking). Etc.
Identifying Harry as “child of a narcissistic parent” seemed to have strong predictive power, and helped me understand people with similar personalities in the real world. There may be other theories that are simultaneously correct. One possible other theory is that Harry and his parents have a “healthy, loving” relationship, and that Harry’s narcissism is due to the Dark Lord and the scar, not his parents’ influence. Harry’s mother’s insecurity and neglect of Harry’s ego needs is evidence against this theory.
Though the search and website are for “children of narcissistic parents”, the “symptoms” listed are “Symptoms of Narcissistic Personality Disorder”. I argue that (A.) Harry is very narcissistic and (B.) Petunia is a “narcissistic parent”. I used the “narcissistic personality disorder” test for Harry to support (A.) and matching to a description of “narcissistic parent relationship to a child” to support (B.). The argument would be stronger if I could use the “narcissistic personality disorder” test for Petunia too, but she is in the book so little that this is difficult. Instead, I argue that the Harry-Petunia relationship fits a pattern where Petunia seeks emotional validation from others (Harry or Michael), does not meet Harry’s ego needs (respect, understanding), and puts Harry in a role of caring for her ego needs (for example, solving the disagreement with Michael in Ch. 1).
As far as “useful”, I don’t know—it depends on your goals. In “How to Hire the Best People You Ever Worked With”, Marc Andresseen writes that very successful people are motivated by different things, including “the burning desire to make it big” or “guilt, often created by family pressure”. Richard Feynman was famous for doing what he enjoyed instead of what other people (including his parents) wanted. In “The Drama of the Gifted Child”, Alice Miller writes that children of narcissistic parents develop adult skills (sharing, studying, etc.) more quickly, but are trying to please their parents and so do much worse when the parental pressure is removed. From these anecdotes, and presuming the goal of making an economically significant impact on the world, it appears that narcissism and parents’ narcissism may not make a significant difference, but I don’t know of data to be sure about this. As far as happiness, narcissism appears to be anti-correlated with traits that predict happiness such as quality and quantity of relationships, but again, data is lacking.
Glad to hear it. I was worried that most of the LW/HPMOR community might have spent most of their childhood reading books to prove themselves, because most others couldn’t handle Harry’s narcissism. I agree that most educated people were “encouraged to learn” but probably did not have a narcissistic parent, because I’m assuming a low base rate for narcissism and no correlation between narcissism and learning, but I don’t have evidence to support this.
Thanks, glad it’s of interest.
In this case, Harry was narcissistic before he learned about magic, when he had no realistic chance of boundless success (when he was one of many child prodigies, most of whom would turn out “pretty much ordinary” (Ch. 10), not the only magician-scientist), which is evidence that Harry’s narcissism was due to his upbringing, not due to a realistic awareness of his own strengths.
I disagree with the premise that off-the-scale smart people are usually narcissistic, but I agree that many child prodigies are narcissistic. The work of doing research or another off-the-scale smart person activity encourages humility because of repeated failures (incorrect theories, etc.) on the way to new successes. Child prodigies (especially with a narcissistic parent, who distorts results to protect their own ego) can seem to go from success to success without apparent failures and while feeling fundamentally superior to others.
Good point—that is an important difference, and I’m glad many readers were in the former group.
Thanks for pointing out that inconsistency—instead of “relentless criticism and neediness”, I meant “relentless high standards, refusal to be impressed, and need for inappropriate emotional validation from their child”.
To clarify how Harry’s parents fit the narcissistic-parent pattern: they don’t take Harry seriously. If he does something impressive, or makes a good argument, they laugh at him and feel good about themselves. “Both of Harry’s parents howled with laughter at that, like they thought it was all a big joke” (Ch. 2) is their reply to Harry’s description of school as “child conscription”. They’re not directly critical of Harry, but they do laugh at and ignore him, which is similarly harmful.
They value education in that Petunia, presumably a stay-at-home mother, married an “eminent professor” and has her son educated by “tutors from the endless pool of starving students” and “encouraged to study whatever caught his attention” (Ch. 1). A description of what Petunia actually does all day is conspicuously absent. Taken together, this is evidence that she highly values education but is not highly educated herself.
Harry’s father is usually avoidant: he says only “Huh” when first confronted with magical levitation (Ch. 2) and tries to solve a disagreement with his wife by “reading a book of higher maths to show how smart he was” (Ch. 1). This attitude on top of his time-consuming professor duties indicates that Harry spends most of his time at home around only his mother.
Harry is frustrated with this treatment from his parents: “There! You see what I have to deal with?” (Ch. 2) he says to McGongall when his parents laugh at and ignore him, again.
I could see an older Harry putting together something like LessWrong to show his parents once and for all that he was smart and therefore worthy of respect as an equal, only to be met with disinterest from his father and more requests for love/validation from his mother. It’s difficult to judge how narcissistic the posters here are, due to the excellent moderation and high standard for reason-driven discussion. This analysis is in no way a criticism: I share the goals of solving life’s problems and mysteries using science, and I’m posting this out of a narcissistic wish to refine my own ideas.
“Narcissist” is just a word! Just kidding. It means “arrogant pride”. Here, it also means “arrogant pride as a defense mechanism against parental emotional neglect”.
When I first read about narcissistic parents, I pattern-matched on Petunia laughing at Harry and Harry being kind of arrogant. I expected to find examples in HPMOR for Harry showing about 1⁄2 to 2⁄3 of a list of narcissist traits. I was surprised to find examples for every item on the list.
The label is an efficient way of describing someone with most of or all of these traits. If your computer is memory-limited, storing the label “narcissist” may be more efficient than storing answers to all of a list of questions.
Someone who shows these traits will probably continue to show these traits. Additionally, someone who shows most of these traits probably shows the other traits as well.
I agree: Harry’s goals are meaningful to Harry regardless of why Harry holds them (parental influence, Voldemort influence, etc.).
Understanding why these beliefs are held is useful to make sure there is sufficient evidence for the belief. For example, if Harry’s “unverbalizable fear” of failure (that the sorting hat tells him about) is the fear of being separated from his mother, then Harry could take more appropriate risks by being aware of this. Harry appears biased against friendships/alliances with weaker students (such friendships are seen as threatening by a narcissistic parent) and biased toward terribly risky unilateral actions to protect relationships with parent figures (Quirrell, Hermione). Another example: someone I know who enjoyed HPMOR was nicknamed “genius” by his grade-school friends, but he left an MD/PhD program to become a high-school teacher, presumably so he could continue to be the “genius”. He might have been a good researcher if he had learned how to lose, and recognized that his parents would still love him even if he wasn’t always the smartest person in the room.
Unfortunately, psychology terms/traits are difficult to quantify, e.g. I can’t know someone is “10% narcissistic” in the same way I know a glass of water is “10% full”. I agree, different people have different levels of narcissism.
To test my narcissism detection mechanism, I will look at how narcissistic the main characters of a few other popular books are. This is a better test than looking for narcissism in other characters in HPMOR (where the most-frequently-observed character is the most narcissistic). The evidence against narcissism is the opposite of the traits listed: average or low sense of self-importance, primarily interested in others, goals are usually about others, many relationships, etc.
Pride and Prejudice by Jane Austen: Grandiose? No—Elizabeth has no expectation of becoming Queen or even, initially, of marrying a very rich man. Self-obsessed? No—Elizabeth is concerned for her sisters’ welfare as much as she is for her own. Troubles with normal relationships? No—she has social contacts appropriate for her era and standing. Furious if criticized? No—she reacts to criticism with thoughtful calm in public, followed by private reflection. Fantasies of unbound success, power, etc.? No—she wants to marry a good man and live happily etc.
The Lord of the Rings by JRR Tolkien: Grandiose? No—Frodo longs to remain in the Shire, at peace. Self-obsessed? No—Frodo takes the Ring for the good of other people, and resists the urge to use it himself. Troubles with normal relationships? No—Frodo is well-liked by the Fellowship and many friends attend his going-away party. Requires extreme admiration for everything? No—Frodo is OK with being subservient to Gandalf. etc.
Watchmen by Alan Moore: Grandiose? No—Dan Dreiberg (Nite Owl) retired from crime-fighting and lives quietly. Self-obsessed? Probably not—While Dreiberg lives alone, he goes out of his way to help Rorschach and Laurie. Troubles with normal relationships? Maybe—Dreiberg lives alone, and it’s not clear what he does with his time outside of the events of the story. Fantasies of unbound success, power, etc? No—Dreiberg is not seeking more power, and only reactivates his crime-fighting gear when driven to it by the events of the story. Feels entitled? No—is frustrated but doesn’t complain much at all when Dr. Manhattan takes Laurie to Mars.
From these negative results I conclude that my narcissism detector is working adequately.
But, I do see what you mean, that listing pro-narcissist examples is less convincing than comparing the number of pro- and anti-narcissist examples. Harry rarely recognizes or cares about what other people are feeling and rarely accepts others’ dominance, and often fails to recognize others’ feelings and often refuses to accept others’ dominance.
I assume this is a “Nope, because of secret author evidence that justifies a one-word rebuttal” or a “Nope, you’re wrong in several ways but I have higher-value things to do than retype the sequences”.
(Also, it’s an honor; I share your goal but take a different road.)
Further evidence that Petunia is emotionally demanding of Harry is the short letter she sends after the Incident With The Troll: “You promised me that you wouldn’t let magic take you away from me. I didn’t raise you to be a boy who would break a promise to his Mum. You must come back safely, because you promised” (Ch.93). The letter is entirely about Petunia’s needs: Petunia does not attempt to help or console Harry.
A book’s content can be predictive of the reader’s and author’s mindstate: reading the Bible predicts religiosity, reading old fiction predicts high education, and reading Japanese predicts living in Japan. I have high confidence that people who enjoy HPMOR have a higher-than-average likelihood of narcissistic parents, because we chose to spend hours reading about a very narcissistic protagonist. In other words, HPMOR is a filter for people who share Harry’s arrogance and desire to save/conquer the Universe using science.
Thanks for the link—it was useful. Generalizing from fictional evidence would be to assume that real-world relationships are like HPMOR relationships, without considering that HPMOR is fiction. It looks as if I’m making this error even though I’m not, because I’m using enjoying reading about a certain kind of personality as evidence that readers are more likely to have that same kind of personality. If I used, for example, enjoying reading about desserts to predict, for example, that readers are less (or more) likely to be diabetic, it would be clearer that I’m not making this error.
I don’t deserve to be arrogant here, not having done anything yet. The goal: I had a sister once, and will do what I can to end death. The road: I’m working as an engineer (and, on reflection, failing to optimize) instead of working on existential risk-reduction. My vision is to build realistic (non-nanotech) self-replicating robots to brute-force the problem of inadequate science funding. I know enough mechanical engineering but am a few years away from knowing enough computer science to do this.
Font fixed, thanks I’m glad to hear this was useful.
That makes sense—this and a few other replies are making me doubt my ability to accurately weigh the evidence. The pro-narcissism examples tend to be vivid and exciting and so are more memorable than anti-narcissism examples which tend to be ordinary and less interesting. One solution might be to re-read a large-enough sample of HPMOR and rate how indicative of narcissism is everything Harry says or does. This would be interesting but would take some time. I’ll be much less confident in my conclusions until I do this.
I have an alternative explanation for Harry’s Dark Side: Harry’s mother is narcissistic, impressed by education, and not particularly smart.
“by far the simplest explanation for this unverbalizable fear of yours is just the fear of losing your fantasy of greatness, of disappointing the people who believe in you” (ch. 77) is textbook thinking for a child of a narcissistic parent. The child feels perpetually ignored because the narcissistic parent needs validation from the child’s accomplishments but refuses to actually listen to the child. Thus, the child is spurred to ever greater heights of intellectual achievement by the parent’s need for more status and withholding of love.
“The black rage began to drain away, as it dawned on him that...his family wasn’t in danger” (ch. 5) suggests that Harry’s Dark Side is Harry desperately trying to stay close to his family.
Typically, children of narcissistic parents inherit either narcissistic or people-pleasing traits. Comparing Harry’s personality to these traits (google “Children of narcissistic parents”, 1st link) shows that Harry has textbook narcissist traits:
Grandiose sense of self-importance? Check. He wants to “optimize” the entire Universe
Obsessed with himself? Check. He appears to only care about people who are smarter or more powerful than him—people who can help him. He also has contempt for most students and their interests (Quidditch, etc.)
Goals are selfish? Check. Harry claims to want to save everyone, but in practice he tries to increase his own power most quickly. The saving-Hermione thing is still selfish because Harry sees Hermione in the same way he sees his mother—weak in many ways and bound by emotions and convention, but someone Harry must impress. “It’s disrespectful to her, to think someone could only like her in that way” (ch. 91) makes sense in that a child would be disgusted by Oedipal implications. If Harry’s mother was not narcissistic, then Harry would not have worked so hard to impress Hermione and would have been less disgusted by the thought of being sexually attracted to her.
Troubles with normal relationships? Check. Harry is playing high-stakes mind games with those he is closest to (Quirrell, Draco, Hermione, Dumbeldore), which is emphatically not normal friend behavior. Harry has contempt for nearly everyone else, and is currently hiding alone under an invisibility cloak.
Becomes furious if criticized? Check. When Snape mocked Harry in Potions class, Harry tried to destroy Snape’s career. Quirrell explained, “When it looked like you might lose, you unsheathed your claws, heedless of the danger. You escalated, and then you escalated again.” (Ch. 19)
Has fantasies of unbound success, power, intelligence, etc.? Check. Harry wants to conquer the entire Universe with the power of his intelligence.
Believes that he is special and should only be around other high-status people? Check. Harry avoids average students when possible, and certainly does not hang out with them for fun. A possible exception is Harry’s army, but minimal text is devoted to Harry instructing them, while much text explains how powerful (in battle) and high-status the students in the army have become. In Harry’s mind, the army is a tool to use and an opportunity to show off, not an opportunity to give back and help friends improve their skills for their own sake.
Requires extreme admiration for everything? Check. Harry takes anything less than admiration for his brilliance as an insult, and responds by striving for new levels of intellectual achievement and arrogance, until the others recognize his dominance. Quirrell’s lesson on how to lose described how to avoid making powerful enemies, not how to empathize and care for others—the insatiable need for admiration is merely delayed and repressed, not corrected.
Feels entitled—has unreasonable expectations of special treatment? Check. Harry requires subservience from the school administration, and special magic items such as the time-turner. “McGonagall said, “but I do have a very special something else to give you. I see that I have greatly wronged you in my thoughts, Mr. Potter...this is an item which is ordinarily lent only to children who have already shown themselves to be highly responsible” (Ch. 14).
Takes advantage of others to further his own need? Check. “I only used you in ways that made you stronger. That’s what it means to be used by a friend.” (Ch. 97)
Does not recognize the feelings of others? Check. “Er, can I take it from this that you have been through puberty?” (Ch. 87)
Envious or believes they are envied? Check. Quirrell said to Harry, “You have everything now that I wanted then. All that I know of human nature says that I should hate you. And yet I do not. It is a very strange thing.” (Ch. 74)
Behaves arrogantly? Check. “Minerva’s body swayed with the force of that blow, with the sheer raw lese majeste. Even Severus looked shocked.” (Ch. 19) I can’t think offhand of a single instance when Harry is not arrogant.
“The Drama of the Gifted Child” by Dr. Alice Miller (Google for the .pdf) spells out what a child raised by one narcissistic parent and one distant parent typically looks like. It looks a lot like H.J.P.E.V.
I can relate personally—my mother drove me to extreme academic success so she could feel good about herself. I succeeded, then (99th percentile on standardized tests, attended a prestigous and excellent college that I will not name here) but it harmed my ability to relate to people, to distinguish my actual dreams from my mother’s grandiosity/insecurity, and to succeed academically once I had surpassed my mother’s ability to judge progress. When I first found HPMOR I was overjoyed that I was not alone in my arrogance and hope for immortality. It’s only recently that I realized why that is, and what that cost. “Every time I call on it… it uses up my childhood.” (Ch. 91). Suffice it to say that I studied obsessively for years.
I thought about spoiler-warning this to avoid memetic hazard, but apparently on this site “that which can be destroyed by the truth should be”.