(Don't read this if you don't want to. Seriously.) At the risk of belaboring the point, let's talk about this if you want. In the original series, Harry is a dull, formless character whose primary qualities are bravery, love and loyalty. Those are flat, author-given characteristics that can't ever really change or grow. I love the books, but not because of his character; it's good for what it is, but never great. He is also humble, for environmental reasons. In HPMOR, Harry is interesting. As EY talks about in his most recent post, his Harry "exploits" a perfectly valid, exogenous part of the narrative, by having a fair amount of scientific knowledge (but nothing outrageous, not for a smart, interested 11 year old with the right parents) and also being exposed to magic without preconceptions. These are two extremely acceptable narrative points. They require essentially no suspension of belief. If, hypothetically, I had been put in EY's Harry's shoes at that age I would have proceeded to do exactly what Harry does in the story. So would most curious people; it's almost self-evident. (I mean: test magic, experiment, feel disgust for various social institutions, try to convince children they don't need to be bigots.) In that sense, the sense of having different priors to work with and so on, Harry is quite superior to everyone in the story except (somewhat) his antagonist. He acts like it, often too much. That's one of his failings. If he was perfectly humble, there's an argument to be made that everything would be way too easy for him. EY is adding difficulty to the story. Otherwise he'd already have the army of friends that JKR's Harry built when he finally realized he needed one, at the age of 16. And have you ever met a truly brilliant, prodigal 11 year old, who was humble? I haven't. Sorry to jump down your throat and I certainly don't mean to; I love that you're enjoying it. But saying you have to work around a characteristic of the protagonist to enjoy the story ("nonetheless") implies that in all the literature you read, you want all of the protagonists to be perfect, or at least align with your idea of perfection. Protagonists (and 11 year olds) are allowed to be know-it-alls, have few social skills, be annoying. It'd be weirder if EY's Harry wasn't. But it's a common criticism; I only rarely bother to explain my perspective on it -- I feel like I can trust hubski.Harry Potter is sooo annoying when he's all rational! In the original series he's really humble but in HPMOR he thinks that he's so much superior than everyone else I want to strangle him.
Oups, I guess I just didn't express myself properly. I'm frustrated with HP the same way I probably would if I would talk to 11 years old me ( I was such a brat!). I like that I don't like him because it feels like i'm supposed not to like him. I do find him way more interesting then the original HP but I also want to slap him across the face sometimes. But if he was perfect and humble, you're right that the series would just be boring and not worth reading. I wonder if JK Rowling ever read HPMOR and what she would think of it.
Depending on how far you are, you will probably go from not particularly liking him to admiring nearly every facet of his character. Maybe. Maybe not. As far as Rowling goes, EY has received explicit permission from her ... legal entity/agents/company/whatever to write HPMOR, because unlike normal fanfiction, there's money involved tangentially. I doubt she's read it. In past interviews, she's basically said that fanfiction is pretty cool, she likes what she's inspired, but also that a lot of it is creepy and awful. Never commented on an individual story that I know of.