Am I the only one...

[Milz]

No: HPFGUIDX 135012

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "amiabledorsai" 
<amiabledorsai at y...> wrote:
> jlnbtr:
> > 
> > Anyway, what I'm trying to say is that, even though Hermione is 
very 
> > smart, she doesn't have the ability to think abstractly, to 
invent, 
> > create... She can't think outside the box.
> 
> Amiable Dorsai:
> Other than deducing that students were being petrified by a 
basilisk,
> that Harry's Firebolt was most likely sent to him by Sirius Black 
(She
> simply misunderstood his motives), that Lupin was a werewolf, and 
that
> Rita was an Animagus.
> 
> Not to mention realizing that there was another way to get Harry's
> story out than through the Daily Prophet, and that she had the 
perfect
> reporter to use.
> 
> And, of course, there's her creation of Dumbledore's Army, when most
> people would probably have settled for private tutoring from Harry.
> 
> We should probably also notice her spur-of-the-moment inspiration 
for
> preventing Umbridge from using the Cruciatus on Harry (Not a perfect
> plan, but she *was* winging it.)
> 
> Other than that, I agree, there's little evidence of creative 
thought
> on Hermione's part.
> 
> Amiable "Rolls eyes" Dorsai

You're mixing up intelligence by being quick and witty with 
intelligence by the creative and innovative _application_ of base 
knowledge. Has Hermione demonstrated the creative and innovative 
application of magic principles a la Fred and George or even HBP? No. 

As I wrote in an earlier message, would Hermione had been able to 
create the polyjuice potion de novo? In other words, if the polyjuice 
potion never existed in the Potter-verse or if those communication 
coins never existed, would Hermione been able to 1. have the conceive 
of the idea for those things and 2. have the ability to execute that 
idea? My guess is no because she hasn't demonstrated that quality of 
knowledge application--The Weasley Twins, otoh, would in light of 
their joke and jinx creations. 

In the 3 part Rowling Interview she was asked how Fred and George 
figured out how to work the Marauder's Map. Rowling replied that she 
imagined that the Weasley's went through alot of trial and error and 
observing how the map reacted to their efforts. In other words, the 
Weasley's applied the scientific method to this suspicious piece of 
parchment. And in order to successfully apply the scientific method, 
you must dispel belief, in that you have to be open minded and 
willing to look outside of the box. This is where, imo, Hermione 
demonstrates a deficiency in abstraction and application. She stays 
within the confines of the conventional box and works well within it, 
but she doesn't venture out of it too often to show any exceptional 
brilliance. An exceptional person takes what's inside that box, dumps 
it out, mixes it up and creates an new box or an extension of the old 
one. Fred and George have demonstrated this; Hermione has not.

In terms of deductive ability, HP isn't blatantly written like 
an  "English cozy" mystery, so it's isn't read by the readers as one. 
In other words, the readers aren't generally competing with the 
characters to figure out 'whodunit' before the end of the book. If it 
was, would Hermione's "deductive" ability as highly regarded as it 
is? Most likely no. Hermione has nothing on Jane Marple, Brother 
Cadfael or Amelia Peabody. At the end of the HP books, she generally 
hasn't figured out 'whodunit'---it's Harry who does.

Again, Hermione isn't a dummy. But she's not on the same intellectual 
plane as HBP and the Weasley Twins.

Milz