Being Good and Evil (was:Re: Harry's arrogance (was Evil ...

[littleleahstill]

No: HPFGUIDX 154790

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "houyhnhnm102" <celizwh at ...> 
wrote:
>
> houyhnhnm:
> 
>> The hex on the parchment was not well thought out either.  
> As many others here have pointed out, it did not serve as a 
> deterrent because no one outside of the inner circle knew 
> about it.  It did not give them any advance warning of 
> betrayal.  Its only pupose was revenge and its action, 
> apparently irreversible facial disfigurement, was overkill.  
> It parallels Harry's use of sectumsempra and I think we 
> are meant to see it that way.  I, too, think there is 
> unfinished business between Hermione and Marietta in book 7.

>> I don't think cruelty was her motive in putting a curse 
> on the parchment that would scar someone for life.  I don't 
> think she thought it out at all.  And that's the problem.
>

Leah:

Apologies for snipping a great deal of this post- I have nothing to 
say about the missing parts except to concur.

However, I'm not sure that I agree entirely that the only purpose of 
the parchment jinx was revenge.  Hermione seems to have some idea of 
it functioning as a warning device:  

'"Someone must have blabbed to her" said Ron angrily....."No, they 
can't have done, because I put a jinx on that piece of paper we all 
signed", said Hermione grimly.  "Believe me, if anyone's run off and 
told Umbridge, we'll know exactly who they are and they will really 
regret it".  

So there seems to me to be some indication there that Hermione will 
not only punish, which I agree seems to be her chief aim, but get 
some indication of betrayal.  It's not a very good indicator, 
because it only works post-betrayal, and I think that is because 
Hermione has muddled the two functions of warning and punishment.

It's possible that Hermione thought she would see the Sneak 
disfigurement, be able to warn the others and Evanesco the 
parchment. Marietta may not have displayed Ravenclaw brightness in 
signing up, but she certainly timed the betrayal to a tee, at at 
time when a meeting was actually taking place, where everyone would 
be caught with proof.  Again, Hermione didn't think that one through.

She and Harry have also failed to really get to grips with the Room 
of Requirement. Lessons have not been learned from the diary.  There 
still seems to be a feeling that if something helps you, it's on 
your side, and I think houyhnhnm is right that the Prince's book is 
another example of this.  The parchment was in the ROR because Pansy 
Parkinson wanted proofs and a proof was provided for her.

As to the scarring for life, I'm not certain (and there is no canon, 
I think one way or the other) that this is what Hermione intended.  
She has a lot to say about jinxes in DADA:

"Mr Slinkhard doesn't like jinxes, does he? But I think they can be 
very useful when they're used defensively"

Umbridge at this point thinks Hermione should get over herself, and 
much as it sticks in the craw, I tend to agree.  (Snape of course 
has spent a lot of time dealing with Hermione's need to be seen to 
be right at all times).  The parchment jinx does help a bit in 
initially preventing further revelations by Marietta, but  that 
seems to be mainly luck- Marietta could have looked at Hermione's 
handiwork and decided to dish the dirt and add a bit more; why be 
hanged for a lamb when a sheep is available to you?   The jinx does 
not operate to prevent the worst effects of Marietta's betrayal.

I wonder, as I've posted before, if Hermione hasn't been too clever 
for her own good here; perhaps the jinx is now working to its own 
rules, remaining until the betrayal is fully played out.  Another 
possibility may have been that destruction of the parchment would 
destroy the promise and the jinx.  In which case, Marietta and 
Hermione have difficulties ahead of them, because the parchment was 
last seen in Umbridge's pudgy hand.

Leah