The Author is NOT the Character.

[Thrythlind]

to me, they were already starting the war by that point and that was the only reasonable reaction

[Paynesgrey]

That puts him way further over the edge, but I think I've argued why I see him as anti-hero at length elsewhere so the summary of the summary is; he's willing to start a war that will cost many innocent lives to save Susan. That makes him Not Good in my book.

Curious.  For the sake of arguement, let's go ahead and make the sizable leap of faith and wishful thinkng to conclude that the War could not possibly have happened if Harry had let Bianca kill Susan.  That the Reds would have said "Aw, shucks, he won't fall for it, let's give up trying to start a war and go read a book or something" and that peace would rule the day.

The killing of innocent people every day, in every place the Reds had a presence would have continued unabated.  

Each and every day, more innocent would be murdered to feed their not just their desire to feed, but as recreation.  While people like Cristos ignored those deaths, because it was, after all, just little people, nobody of importance... an infinitely growing body count that already dwarfs the deaths that Harry is accused of "causing", and would have continued to grow as long as there were humans to kill and Reds to kill them.  

So while Cristos and like minded fellows on the Council are mincing and simpering about the Ostentarium congratulating themselves about how they've prevented war and the deaths of innocents, ensured "peace in our time", the Reds are killing more and more innocents.

The fact is, Harry is actually the one guy who did what had to be done and ended the killing, while the prancing idealists like Cristos would have ensured that it to continued, accepting the death as "a reasonable price" to wallow in their inflated sense of moral superiority just because the people dying weren't people they considered important.

[Thrythlind]

Indeed, though I will admit that Harry's motivations in that instance are more focused on Susan and this a bit more selfish, which does edge toward anti-hero.  However, he still cares about the effects on uninvolved bystanders to be truly considered an anti-hero.

And a lot of his "anti-hero" moments have basically been cases where he's been backed into a corner.

The Susan thing, he went to rescue her and Justine before anything happened to them.  He wasn't looking to slaughter the lot of them at the time, it wasn't in his plan.  That only happened after his initial plan failed and he was caught in his escape with the hoards of vamps between him and escape.  It's not ends justifies the means if you're reduced to one means.  Plus, it is implicit in Dresdenverse that vampires are callous, evil monsters, quite apart from the fae, who are dangerous because they are alien and their ways are hard to understand.

When he had Lash with him, he did a few things that were unnecessary, most pointed being the ghoul he tortured since he had a choice there, he wasn't in a corner.

The most recent event in Changes which I will not specify because it is still recent and spoilery where as Grave Peril is a few years back, was also a case where he'd been backed into a corner and given not much in the way of a choice.  That was more specifically a sacrifice, he gave up his own interests for the larger interest of his daughter and then the world.  The world was somewhat secondary, but still, his own interests were placed well back on the list.

[Paynesgrey]

Those are reasons I file Harry under Big Damn Hero who exhibits believable human behaviour rather than as an "antihero".  Harry's heroic traits and attributes greatly outweigh his non-heroey behaviours.  (CLint Eastwood's "Man With No Name" in High Plains Drifter is more of an Antihero.)  Lapses, errors, flares of temper are part of the package for any sane human being.  I suspect the Ghoul Headroast Party was possibly Lash's influence, but then again, how abnormal would it have been for a person to not blow a gasket after seeing a teenage girl eaten alive by ghouls, other children killed by them?  No matter how heroic, everybody's got a breaking point somewhere.

[the neurovore of Zur-En-Aargh]

Each and every day, more innocent would be murdered to feed their not just their desire to feed, but as recreation.  While people like Cristos ignored those deaths, because it was, after all, just little people, nobody of importance... an infinitely growing body count that already dwarfs the deaths that Harry is accused of "causing", and would have continued to grow as long as there were humans to kill and Reds to kill them.  

To my mind, this depends on a lot of numbers we don't have for the number of people the reds actually kill  - which I am inclined to read fairly low; and even for fairly high figures of that, it seems preferable to me to bear with that than to get into a war with a serious risk of getting the Council annihilated and ensuing Vampire World, as Harry figures out the Reds and Whites are planning on in WN.

The fact is, Harry is actually the one guy who did what had to be done and ended the killing, while the prancing idealists like Cristos would have ensured that it to continued, accepting the death as "a reasonable price" to wallow in their inflated sense of moral superiority just because the people dying weren't people they considered important.

Having the author on one's side is a wonderful thing, but it seems a little bit off to me to judge Harry's actions in the situation at the end of GP based on information he did not have and no means to get.

[the neurovore of Zur-En-Aargh]

That only happened after his initial plan failed and he was caught in his escape with the hoards of vamps between him and escape.  It's not ends justifies the means if you're reduced to one means. 

I can avoid the free will argument any time I like.

Plus, it is implicit in Dresdenverse that vampires are callous, evil monsters,

Some readers see it that way, sure.  Harry does not in SF where he gets upset about making Bianca cry.

  That was more specifically a sacrifice, he gave up his own interests for the larger interest of his daughter and then the world.  The world was somewhat secondary, but still, his own interests were placed well back on the list.

That does depend on counting prioritising his daughter above the world as an unselfish choice, seems very much the opposite to me, in that he's valuing someone he knows over other people whom he has no reason to believe are of less worth.

[Paynesgrey]

To my mind, this depends on a lot of numbers we don't have for the number of people the reds actually kill  - which I am inclined to read fairly low; and even for fairly high figures of that, it seems preferable to me to bear with that than to get into a war with a serious risk of getting the Council annihilated and ensuing Vampire World, as Harry figures out the Reds and Whites are planning on in WN.

What in the books leads you that inclination to believe that the Reds actually kill a low number of people? 

Their appetites seem rather large, as do their numbers.  As for preventing a Vampire World, it's clear that the Council underestimated them, and intended to continue to do so.  Allowing them to gain even more strength and numbers while the Peace In Our Time Faction of the Council ensured complacency would have positively guaranteed the extermination of the Council. 

Having the author on one's side is a wonderful thing, but it seems a little bit off to me to judge Harry's actions in the situation at the end of GP based on information he did not have and no means to get.

Unless one cares to argue that the "author wrote it wrong", then it seems that the author's view on the actions his characters take is pretty much a clincher. 

Well, Harry did recognize that the Reds were aggressive predators, and Harry is bright enough to realize that when you show such creatures weakness that they are more, not less, likely to attack.  If the arguement that the Reds have no free will is in fact true, then they'd be compelled by their nature to attack beings showing such cowardice and weakness.  As representative of the WC, Harry would have also been demonstrating weakness on the WC's behalf, showing them as well to be nothing more than weak, vulnerable and cowardsly Food Animals... further encouragement for war.  Nothing screams "weak prey animal" more than meekly walking off while one's mate is killed. 

Harry understood that any peace offering was false, something even Langtry finally admitted.  Although that pompous buffoon Cristos simply would not accept either fact regardless of how frequently and clearly it was demonstrated.  While Harry was indeed motiviated by his emotional attachement to Susan, he was also motivated by an accurate understanding of the nature of the Reds.  An understanding the Council's leadership clearly did not have.

[the neurovore of Zur-En-Aargh]

What in the books leads you that inclination to believe that the Reds actually kill a low number of people? 

Ortega talking about essentially farming humans as a sustainable activity.

Allowing them to gain even more strength and numbers while the Peace In Our Time Faction of the Council ensured complacency would have positively guaranteed the extermination of the Council. 

I think we may be at axiom lock on this one.

Unless one cares to argue that the "author wrote it wrong", then it seems that the author's view on the actions his characters take is pretty much a clincher. 

I don't see that the consequences that an author presents an act having are necessarily indicative of approval of said act.

Well, Harry did recognize that the Reds were aggressive predators, and Harry is bright enough to realize that when you show such creatures weakness that they are more, not less, likely to attack.  If the arguement that the Reds have no free will is in fact true, then they'd be compelled by their nature to attack beings showing such cowardice and weakness.  As representative of the WC, Harry would have also been demonstrating weakness on the WC's behalf, showing them as well to be nothing more than weak, vulnerable and cowardsly Food Animals... further encouragement for war.  Nothing screams "weak prey animal" more than meekly walking off while one's mate is killed. 

How does this argument, form the other side, not apply to the Reds meekly not starting a war after harry burns down Bianca's party ?

Harry understood that any peace offering was false, something even Langtry finally admitted. 

I see no reason to believe he is right in doing so.

[Spectacular Sameth]

I should hope I'm not my character. She's a teenage girl with a strange curse on her.

[OZ]

I have been avoiding the "is Harry a hero or an anti-hero" debate because it seems to totter on the precipice of religion, politics, or some other sticky topic. I have to say however that the only thing he's done that I might classify as anti-hero would be the the manner in which he set Susan up. I have no problem with his attempted rescue of Susan. I do not believe that the greatest good for the greatest number is always the only heroic path. Sometimes what is good for one may ultimately be what is best for all. Since we can't read the future, we have to do the best we can in the moment. I think that is what Harry has done.

[Paynesgrey]

Ortega talking about essentially farming humans as a sustainable activity.

Ummm... couple of issues with that.  First, that means nothing more than "not killing mankind off faster than we can breed 'em."  Hardly a ringing promise of a low body count.  These are creatures who nerve gassed a hospital and several blocks of the surrounding city.  Second, "Well, if Ortega said it, then it must be true" isn't doesn't really bring much credibility to a statement. 

I think we may be at axiom lock on this one.

Only if one denies that the evidence that the Reds were building their strength and preparing for war.  Is there anything, anything at all in the books that indicates the Reds were actually longing for peaceful coexistance, and had absolutely no intention of attacking the Council later on?  The way they handed the Council it's collective butt on a number of occassions indicated they'd been planning and building for qutie some time.  And of course, there remains what The Merlin said about any offer of peace from them being false, a ploy to allow them to gain an advantage?  It is doubtful that the Merlin, great mind and wise, noble leader just jumped up in the middle of a Council meeting sometime just before Changes with an epiphany.  "Wow!  We.  Can't. Trust.  The.  Reds!  They're sneaky and they lie!  Man, lucky for you guys I figured this out after all these centuries of dealing with them.  That's what I'm talking about!  THAT'S why I'm the Merlin!" 

I don't see that the consequences that an author presents an act having are necessarily indicative of approval of said act

.

Could you clarify:  Are you saying you don't think the Author approves of Harry's decision?  Or are you saying that when consequences and results prove Harry right, he was still wrong?

How does this argument, form the other side, not apply to the Reds meekly not starting a war after harry burns down Bianca's party ?

For one thing, the Reds understood that the White Council wasn't seeking war, and would avoid war when possible.  They exploited that fact, as you might recall, with their false peace offers.  The Reds clearly accepted the reality regarding the White Council's nature and happily used that knowledge to their advantage even as the leadership of the White Council refused to accept the nature of the Red Court.  The Reds knew they didn't need to fear the White Council as long as they kept to killing people that the Council considered unimportant.

I see no reason to believe he is right in doing so.

Just to be clear:  Are you saying that Harry had no reason whatsoever to mistrust the Red Court, and every reason whatsover to trust the bloodthirsty homocidal, slaughter happy monsters who revel in petty brutality and the suffering of innocents, who were practiced masters of deception and betrayal? 

[Tbora]

I want to read the rest of this little debate, please continue !