I think it was just a contrivance to both make a sport for the books while also allowing the Main Character to automatically be the most important person all the time (like basically everything else in the books).
Yeah the truth is that Harry is more or less completely useless at anything other than quidditch in the books. He’s just a symbol that actually talented people rally around
Hermione blackmailed a journalist and kept her in a jar for several weeks. The following year she cursed a fellow student and left them permanently disfigured. I’m not sure that I would consider her more reliably moral… a good person overall, but with flaws.
I think it was just a contrivance to both make a sport for the books while also allowing the Main Character to automatically be the most important person all the time (like basically everything else in the books).
Yeah the truth is that Harry is more or less completely useless at anything other than quidditch in the books. He’s just a symbol that actually talented people rally around
Functionally, he’s good at being reliably moral. See: the mirror of erised, the second GoF task, going willingly to his death.
Reliably moral by traditional wizarding standards*. Hermione is more reliably moral by standards external to the wizarding world.
Hermione blackmailed a journalist and kept her in a jar for several weeks. The following year she cursed a fellow student and left them permanently disfigured. I’m not sure that I would consider her more reliably moral… a good person overall, but with flaws.