Hermione's growth

[adsong16]

No: HPFGUIDX 81854

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "elfundeb" <elfundeb at c...> wrote:
 [snip]
> 
> The spotlight is focused on that because while Hermione does make 
mistakes - as she did in the Forbidden Forest with the centaurs - she does not 
experience the consequences of failure, as Harry does. The quick change of 
scene to the Department of Mysteries refocuses everyone's attention - ours 
and Hermione's - elsewhere. 
> 
> Recalling Dumbledore's philosophy of allowing people to try and fail and 
learn from their mistakes (witness his patience with Hagrid's poor teaching), 
though, it seems to me that for Hermione to fully develop as a character, she 
needs to suffer from her mistakes. If there's always a Grawp to rescue her, this 
growth will never happen.  She will become more and more convinced that 
she's right and insistent on doing things her way, and without consulting 
anyone.  Hermione's combination of overconfidence, secrecy and blindness 
to other points of view is a dangerous combination, but only the hanging 
house-elf subplot suggests that there's trouble ahead for her.

Me (Gorda):
Firstly I would like to point out/remind everyone that we only see Hermione 
from Harry's POV, which is necessarily limited. I think Hermione probably felt 
very bad about the whole centaur incident and the subsequent harm that 
Grawp and the centaurs may have done to each other. In fact, JKR tells us 
that right off the bat:

p. 757 US edition:
"'You said you didn't hurt the innocent!' shouted Hermione, REAL tears sliding 
down her face now." emphasis mine
and later, p. 759:
"'Oh no,' said Hermione, quaking so badly that her knees gave way. 'Oh, that 
was horrible. And he might kill them all...'"

Clearly, this is not an experience she's going to foget in a hurry. We don't 
know what thoughts went through her head in the hospital wing, and later 
during the summer holidays. I'm going to bet she realizes her mistake pretty 
keenly and that she will learn from it to be more cautious.

elfundeb:
> She makes another big mistake in OOP (in addition to her miscalculation 
regarding the centaurs). Hermione casts a spell on the parchment all the DA 
members sign so they'll be branded if they tattle. But she doesn't tell anyone, 
and when Marietta does tattle, Harry is nearly expelled and Dumbledore is 
forced to leave. Had she told them the consequences of tattling this would 
likely never have happened.  Hermione's secrecy is not always a virtue.

Me:
It's not like they didn't know NOT to tell. P. 346:
"we all ought to agree not to shout about what we're doing. So if you sign, 
you're agreeing not to tell Umbridge --or anybody else-- what we'reup to."

Even if Hermione had told about the curse, Marietta may have decided that 
the pimples still wouldn't be as bad as getting expelled and her mom losing 
her job at the Ministry. The point was that the members needed to keep their 
word, and Hermione was making sure there would be consequences if they 
didn't.

elfundeb:
> 
> It is not accidental, I think, that Luna Lovegood (the anti-Hermione), first 
appears in this book. Hermione dismisses Luna out of hand and is frequently 
rude to her. Hermione even has time to murmur a snide remark about her in 
the Department of Mysteries. Yet she doesn't hesitate to use Luna's 
connections to the Quibbler when it suits her purposes. 
> 
> David continued:
> 
> <<She rewrites the 
> rules of her bargain with Rita Skeeter, just because it suits her.>>
> 
> And Kneazle255 responded:
> 
> <<She rewrites her agreement with Rita to aid in a WAR.>>  
> 
> This illustrates my point rather well. Because Hermione's ends are good, we 
don't just excuse, we applaud her manipulative techniques. Same thing with 
Hermione's treatment of Umbridge, who is as hateful as they come. But 
doesn't this sound a lot like what a certain hat said about Slytherin? That 
they'll "use any means to achieve their ends"? 
> 
> Hermione reveals in OOP that the Sorting Hat considered her for 
Ravenclaw. I think the Hat might have done well to consider Slytherin. When 
something truly threatens Hermione, she is quite willing to use any means to 
achieve her ends. 
> 
> I think Hermione is often viewed through rose-colored lenses because her 
motives seem very altruistic, as exemplified by her genuine concern for 
others, in particular Harry and the house-elves. In fact, nearly everything 
Hermione does is motivated by self-interest. Hermione's brewing of the 
polyjuice potion in CoS, in order to find out who the Heir of Slytherin really 
was, has been cited as an example of her willingness to break rules to help 
her friends. But as a muggleborn, the Heir of Slytherin was a much greater 
threat to Hermione than Harry at that point. I always found it quite significant 
that the first time she engineered a major flaunting of the rules, the reason 
was a personal threat.
> 
> The same goes for the DA. The DA was obviously a wonderful idea. But 
Hermione faced a dual threat. She has chosen to make her mark in the WW 
and not the muggle one. She knows she won't earn an OWL in DADA without 
practice. But even more fundamentally, Voldemort is a threat to her as well as 
to Harry. He's not after her directly, but she is a muggleborn and a friend of 
Harry's, and a WW with Voldemort in control is not a place where she could 
live safely, or hope to achieve her goals, whether she chooses to be an Auror 
or to win freedom for the house-elves. 
> 
> Hermione does not help Harry just because he's the key to defeating 
Voldemort and eliminating a threat to herself; he's one of her best friends and 
she obviously cares a great deal for him (NOT in a shipping sense). She's 
made it a personal project to keep him on the path he needs to be on, to 
encourage or nag him as needed, to the point of running his life without his 
consent. But it's ignoring facts to suggest she has nothing to gain from it. We 
just don't notice because Harry needs help.
> 
> And while it's true that Hermione doesn't have anything to gain from her 
campaign to free the house-elves, except the satisfaction of having helped 
them, house-elves are, like muggleborns, discriminated against in the WW, so 
drawing attention to their plight raises the consciousness of the WW to their 
prejudicial attitudes in general. 
> 

Me:
Well, I suppose Hermione can be seen as quite calculating sometimes. 
However, I see it less as a Machiavellian/Slytherinesque quality and more as 
a result of those keen analytical powers we have discussed. Her brain sees a 
problem (Harry seen as liar and the MoM denying LV's return) and a set of 
tools (Rita, Luna, The Quibbler), and it comes up with a solution (exclusive 
interview).  I also don't see her as motivated by self-interest as much as you 
propose. I think if she had been a pureblood she would still have brewed the 
polyjuice potion in CoS and in general acted in the way she has thus far. She 
genuinely cares for Harry, yes (whether you are a shipper or not), but she also 
has a keen sense of right and wrong (thus her campaign for elf rights). The 
greatest growth she has experienced int he books is that she can now tell the 
difference between a greater Right and Wrong and the smaller right and 
wrong of rules and regulations. She breaks the rules now because/when she 
knows it is for a greater good.

> However, her misguided campaign merely perpetuates the lie of the statue 
at the Department of Mysteries. It's not her role to decide what the house-
elves need, any more than it is the MoM's job. She needs to recognize their 
right - and the centaurs' right - to want something different for themselves. 
> 
The house elf situation shows, to me, a very interesting point. I agree with you 
that Hermione is unwittingly making the same mistake as the majority of hte 
WW, because she doesn't take HE wishes into consideration any more than 
other wizards do. In this she is like many anthropologists, sociologists and 
other Western Europeans who have gone to various areas of the world and 
have been appalled by what they see and moved to change it without 
considering whether the people in question want it changed. int he fictional 
world, the equivalent situation was what gave birth to the Star Trek Prime 
Directive, which states you shouldn't meddle because you'll prob ably cause 
more harm than good.

> And it's not her job to manage Harry's life without his consent, either, even 
though the outcome of OOP make it appear that it was the right thing to do. 
She needs to work *with* those that she cares about, not *for* them.  This is 
how I see Hermione's potential tragic flaw playing out. She sums it up herself, 
in ch. 31 of OOP:
> 
> "On Friday, Harry and Ron had a day off while Hermione sat her Ancient 
> Runes exam . . . .They stretched and yawned beside the open window - 
when
> the portrait hole opened and Hermione clambered in, looking thoroughly 
> bad-tempered.
> 'How were the Runes?' said Ron, yawning and stretching.
> 'I mis-translated ehwaz,' said Hermione furiously. 'It means 
> partnership, not defence; I mixed it
> up with eihwaz.'
> 'Ah well,' said Ron lazily, 'that's only one mistake, isn't it, you'll 
> still get -'
> 'Oh, shut up!' said Hermione angrily. 'It could be the one mistake that 
> makes the difference
> between a pass and a fail.'"
> 
> To paraphrase only slightly, for Hermione this could be the difference 
between success and tragic failure. 
> 
> Debbie (wondering if anyone made it to the end)
> 
Well, if Hermione has a tragic flaw, I don't know that shielding rather than 
partnering with her friends is one. (This may  much more apply to Molly, who 
needs to quit  s/mothering and start treating her kids including Harry more as 
adults). I am more inclined to think that Hermione needs to connect more with 
her emotions than be ruled by logic and ethics, which can only take you so 
far. I think she can be forgiven for bossing her friends around (Goodness 
knows, they need it sometimes!). I also think she should be commended for 
not telling Harry "I told you so" when the DM turned out to be a trap, as she 
had correctly predicted it would be.  

What Hermione needs to learn is that "cool use of intellect" only goes so far in 
taking her where she needs to go, just like Harry needs to learn that playing 
the hero is not always the correct course of action.

Gorda