"Slytherin" Hermione? (was Re: The Beetle At Bay)

[huntergreen_3]

No: HPFGUIDX 112352

Susana wrote:
>>I don't think Slytherin requires 'pure ancestry' - half-blood is 
hardly considered 'pure ancestry'. Tom Riddle was half blooded but he 
believed in the supremacy of pure blood. I always assumed the 
requirement was that believe and not the pure blood ancestry
(though I agree that a muggleborn wouldn't be sorted in to Slytherin -
 it would be strange if he/she *believed*).<<

HunterGreen:
An exact quote from the sorting hat's song in OotP:

' Said Slytherin, "We'll teach just those 
whose ancestry is purest." '

I assume that after 1000 years that Slytherin's views have been 
watered down a bit to allow half-bloods, but not muggleborns. I doubt 
the hat would sort a muggleborn into there. Of course, that's just my 
own interpretation. I don't think that it would sort someone based on 
their *belief*, because how many 11-year-olds believe that strongly 
in the purity of blood? (as YB pointed out, how could Tom Riddle 
believe in blood purity when he *started* Hogwarts and presumably 
knew nothing about it?). I think its just common for Slytherins to 
happen to carry that ideal, but there's never been anything to say 
that having that belief is a requirement for being in Slytherin. 
There are many, many Slytherins we don't know about, do *they* all 
have that belief? 

Susana:
>>There's a difference between pursuing ones
objective and doing it at all costs. I don't think Hermione would use 
*all* means to achieve her ends - only those she thinks are 
justifiable.<<

HunterGreen:
And using any means she sees justifiable is not *any* means? What she 
considers justifiable is a rather large amount of things (things that 
I doubt Ron or Harry would be comfortable with). 

Susana:
>> One may
argue that her means are *not* justifiable, but I'm arguing that *she*
believes they are. You seem to be implying that she draws no line; I'm
saying she draws a line that some people consider excessive.<<

HunterGreen:
I wouldn't say that she draws no line, but then again I have yet to 
see her draw one. 

Susana:
>> People who fight for a cause that transcend their own welfare 
(house elves rights/muggle rights/etc.) are often a lot more 
dangerous than people who 'just' seek power - who are 'just' 
ambitious.
Ambitious people tend to draw a completely different line that has 
nothing to do with 'justifiable': How much will they sacrifice 
*their* present welfare for their goals. That line usually makes them 
predictable and even controllable. But the right/wrong line is 
completely unpredictable.[snip]
Back to Hermione, I rather not use the word 'ambitious' because it's 
too flexible.<<

HunterGreen:
Do you think that ambition only covers ambition for power or monetary 
sucess? I would say that Hermione is extremely ambitious when it 
comes to things like house-elf rights and when it came to "getting" 
Rita Skeeter. 




Susana:
>>A certain disregard for the rules is definitely Slytherin, and 
Hermione has it. But then again, she's a teenager. Even Percy could 
be found with a girl in an empty classroom late at night. Braking 
rules is part of growing up.<<

HunterGreen:
But disregarding them? Hermione is interesting because she seems 
determined to follow the rules to the letter unless they get in her 
way. Its not breaking rules for the sake of breaking them (which is 
essentially what teenagers do, brain chemistry at that age makes you 
want to do anything you are told not to do, just because you are told 
not to do it). Hermione likes rules, she likes order, but not when it 
gets in her way. She doesn't stop and say "lets not do the polyjuice 
potion because we'll have to steal ingredients to make it", but 
instead finds ways around the rules. I guess its the difference 
between rebelling (like Harry sneaking to Hogsmeade in PoA) and 
breaking rules when its necessary to break rules (like saving Sirius 
in PoA).

Susana:
>>Are you implying (again) that the sorting is based on ones family? -
 Even if you mean that it's so only for the Slytherin House, do you 
mean Percy chose his ambition over the rest but Salazar-Slytherin-in-
the-hat refused him because *his family* loves muggles?<<

HunterGreen:
I think the sorting house takes some considerations with Slytherin in 
that respect, yes. I don't know about Percy, to me he seems like a 
clear Slytherin, so I don't know why he wasn't sorted there (I don't 
think the student *usually* has a choice when it comes to sorting, 
perhaps in Percy's case the hat deliberated and he pushed it toward 
Gryffindor since that's where his older brothers were, and because of 
his family's beliefs). 

Susana:
>>This is the same discussion as above: is it *pure blood* or *belief 
in pure blood supremacy*? I chose the later because our believes are 
our choice; our ancestry is not. Hermione and Percy are in Gryfindor 
because they *chose* to; Not because they were rejected by the other 
houses!<<

HunterGreen:
Well, actually, they are in certain houses because the sorting hat 
put them there, it is after all, the point of the hat. They didn't 
really have that much choice in the matter (most likely). I don't 
think *everything* in the series comes down to choice. Hermione 
wouldn't have been able to choose Slytherin if she wanted to (and she 
didn't anyway, she was talking about Gryffindor on the train), 
because Slytherin almost certainly doesn't take muggle born wizards. 
He himself wanted to leave the school because he wanted to keep 
magical learning within all magic families, and the point of the 
sorting hat is to pick the students for each house that the founders 
would have chosen themselves if they were still alive. Considering 
how much he hated muggleborns (as evidenced by the secret chamber 
with the monster to kill them), I doubt he would have allowed any in 
his house (he didn't even want them in the school at all). 
I don't think a belief in pure-blood supremacy at the age of eleven 
is a choice any more than being a pureblood is. Especially 
considering that they have no primary schools. There are very few 
children who would be able to recognize on their own that this is the 
wrong idea before leaving home for school (how could they? they'd be 
surrounded by their parent's beliefs all the time, and not educated 
differently until they left for school). 

I don't see how beliefs has anything to do with the houses, I thought 
it was based on values and personality traits. To make it simple, 
Slytherins value ambition/success, Gryffindors value courage, 
Hufflepuffs fair play and hard work, and Ravenclaw's cleverness. 
Being evil or prejudiced is not a requirement for being a Slytherin 
at all. 


Susana
>>Why do you say Draco is not a good seeker? Harry is better than 
Draco because he's *very* good but the Slytherin always seem to be a 
strong candidate to the Quidditch cup. And I recall that Draco knew 
how to fly before entering Hogwarts. I know he bought his place on 
the team, but that doesn't mean his lousy.<<

HunterGreen:
He knew how to fly because he had been taught how to fly, not because 
he was specially talented or anything. I think the incident in CoS 
when he's more interested in taunting Harry than catching the snitch 
is why I think he's not such a good player.

' "Training for the ballet, Potter?" yelled Malfoy as Harry was 
forced to do a stupid kind of twirl in midair to dodge the Bludger, 
and he fled, the Bludger trailing a few feet behind him; and then, 
glaring back at Malfoy in hatred, he saw it - the Golden Snitch. It 
was hovering inches above Malfoy's left ear - and Malfoy, busy 
laughing at Harry, hadn't seen it. '
(CoS, chapter ten)

Also, in the game in PoA (after he lied about his arm so their team 
wouldn't have to play in the bad weather), he cheats a little bit by 
pulling on the end of Harry's broom. He just seems a little too cocky 
of a player, like he only wanted to be on the quidditch team because 
Harry was on a quidditch team. I think he's adequate at best.