Hermione's Hypocrisy?(was:Re: Kreacher - workable solutions?) (long)

[sophierom]

No: HPFGUIDX 129088

> a_svirn:
> 
> I didn't say that she is "callous" hypocrite who doesn't give a
damn 
> about house-elves. I only said that her attitude towards Kreacher 
> was at the moment of OotP is hypocritical. 

Sophierom now:

To play devil's advocate ... :-D  Actually, this is what you said:
"She doesn't give a damn about Kreacher. She is neither interested in
him, nor does she even see him as a person. He is just a point in her
agenda, or an object of her crusade. I find this attitude
hypocritical" (post 129035).  You're right; you never used the
word "callous."  But to argue that Hermione doesn't "see
him as a person" sounds, to me, synonymous with arguing that she's
being callous.  Forgive me if I misinterpreted.  

> Sophierom in an earlier post:
> <snip>
> > I'd argue that Hermione steps up to defend Kreacher (and she 
> continues
> > to do so, despite the fact that he calls her a Mudblood on several
> > occasions) because she knows what it's like to be thought of as a
> > "nutter" for not being "normal".  Granted, she can't understand
> > Kreacher's point of view, conceding to Ron that Kreacher "is a bit
> > strange," but the fact that she's standing up for him suggests
she 
> is
> > concerned about his feelings.  She doesn't understand his
feelings;
> 
> a_svirn responded:
> 
> And what is so difficult about Kreacher's point of view to 
> understand? It's not like his feelings about the whole situation
are 
> very complex. Intense, yes. Deep, – yes. But not terribly
difficult 
> to grasp. You certainly don't require a degree in Psychology to 
> recognise pure hatred, humiliation, grief and longing. If you want 
> to, that is. Of course if you don't, well, you just dismiss it 
> as "strangeness". 

Sophierom: 

I don't think Hermione has a problem recognizing those emotions.  The
thing that's difficult for her to understand is why the house-elves,
particularly Kreacher, would be so loyal to people who mistreat them
and belittle them.  For Hermione, loyalty is something reserved for
those who offer her the respect she feels she deserves.  For Kreacher,
I would suspect loyalty is something given without condition, for
loyalty and service are what define him as a house-elf. This is a
major cultural gap, and I think it is complex.  Often, Western society
tends to assume that certain values are universal, but in fact, other
societies often place different emphasis on service, individualism,
duty, and loyalty.  So, while those concepts in and of themselves may
not be difficult to grasp, what is difficult is understanding how
particular cultures value those concepts and why they give them that
value.  If you find it easy to explain how and why different cultures
prioritize, then perhaps that's because you've had more experience
with cultural difference and diversity.  But I don't think it's easy
for most people (teenagers or adults) to understand fully why people
from different cultures make the choices they do.  So again, it's
not that Hermione can't recognize Kreacher's emotions; it's
that she can't understand why he is so loyal to the Black family and
therefore so bitter toward the new residents of Grimmauld Place.
Again, from her perspective, the Blacks did nothing to gain Kreacher's
loyalty; from his perspective, perhaps, there was never any question
of loyalty being gained.  It was automatic. 

> a_svirn:
> 
> Ah, but doesn't her "interaction with the house-elves" tells us 
> volumes about her character? I think it is best summed up by 
> Shakespearian phrase about Longeville "Too sharp a wit mutch'd with 
> too blunt a will". A very, very dangerous combination. She might be 
> struggling with "issues" of identity and such, but she is not
really 
> interested in *persons*. She applies her "blunt will" to fulfil her 
> agenda and dismisses anything that doesn't quite fit. 

Sophierom:

That's a great quote, and very appropriate, I think.  Hermione's
methods are indeed "too blunt." Again, I would argue that's because
she can't get past the idea that she would never want to be in the
position of the house-elves.  She can only imagine her own reactions
to the house-elves' experiences. This is why I think we need to look
at the bigger-picture Hermione. (Yes, her interactions with the
house-elves tell us something about Hermione's character, but she
is too complex a character, I'd argue, to be summed up only through
her interactions.)  We need to ask WHY Hermione has "too
blunt a will" in this case.  Is it because she wants to gain a name
for herself as liberator of the house-elves? We've seen no indication
of that.  Is it because she wants to gain favor from others? Obviously
the house-elves don't like her much, and her friends think she's
crazy.  So why would she do this? Motivations DO matter.  I would
argue that Hermione has "too blunt a will" because, once again, she
knows what it's like to be marginalized.  And at this point in her
life, the only way she knows how to cope with this is to assert
herself. She seems to think that the answer is the same for the
house-elves.  She's wrong; her way is not THE way.  But hopefully,
she's learning.   

> a_svirn:
> 
> Doesn't look like she's got really far at the ripe age of 15, does 
> it? Especially if you compare her progress in empathy with her
other 
> achievements. Still I hope you are right and she'll learn. 

Sophierom:

Again, playing devil's advocate ...;-D  Ripe age of 15? Sirius is more
than twice her age, and he's not empathetic. As Dumbledore says at the
end of OotP: Hermione "was quite right, Harry ... I warned Sirius when
we adopted twelve Grimmauld Place as our headquarters that Kreacher
must be treated with kindness and respect.  I also told him that
Kreacher could be dangerous to us.  I do not think that Sirius took me
very seriously, or that he ever saw Kreacher as a being with feelings
as acute as a human's" (Am. ed., 832).

As for comparing Hermione's slow developing empathy with her other
accomplishments, Hermione herself notes at the end of PS/SS: "Books!
And cleverness! There are more important things" (Am. ed., 287).
Emotional maturity is much more difficult to achieve than intellectual
maturity.  Again, I find it hard to fault Hermione too much because
even though she's failing at this point, she's trying, and at the age
of 15, that counts for something. As someone who works with teenagers,
I know that it's all too "cool" to be apathetic.  It would be easier
to be like Ron, who shrugs and says "nutters." 

Hermione recognizes a real problem and attempts to solve it. Good for
her, I say.  Yes, she doesn't do a good job. Yes, she has much to
learn. But I would hope that Rowling's message isn't that Hermione is
a hypocrite for trying to change the world; I'd hope that her message
is that changing the world is difficult, and it requires us to change
ourselves as much as it requires us to change others.  

Thanks for the very thought-provoking debate! 

All the best,
Sophie