[HPforGrownups] Hermione as a Ravenclaw

[Marion Ros]

No: HPFGUIDX 155600


srhchttrsn:
>>I don't know if this topic has already been discussed, but doens't it 
seem that Hermione has qualities better suited to those in Ravenclaw? 

Yes she is honorable and brave, but I feel that more than anything she 
is clever and intellectual. <<


Marion:
Hermione is not an intellectual in the Ravenclaw sense (and it's not as if all Ravenclaws are geniuses; they value learning and knowledge and think they are *right* about what they know, even if it's, um, esoteric knowledge like the Rotfang Conspiracy) Hermione doesn't read all her books because she's so immensly intrigued by the knowledge of how things work (if that was true she would have devoured the HBP potions book - instead she doggedly follows the faulty instructions of the standard potions book) but because she has a deep need to be admired. To be the best. To have *adults* acknowledge her as admirable. That points her straight to Gryffindor. It's not as if the Gryffs are all so very brave and noble and stuff (they'd *like* to be), it's simply that the Gryffs like to be admired. That means that they often will do things that get them admired, such as heroic deeds. Slyths don't care so much for admiration, they just want to succeed, wether people like them or not. The power behind the throne? A Slyth. A Gryff would never resign to be an anomynous, but powerful, force. A Gryff shouts "look at me!" A Gryff cares what people think about them.
A Ravenclaw doesn't care what people think, a 'Claw wants to be *right*, and if all the world proclaimed him or her to be wrong, s/he wouldn't give a damn as long as s/he firmly believed it (Luna Lovegood, anyone?)
A Hufflepuff *does* care what others think. Hufflepuffs live for the group. But 'Puffs don't like oddballs, people who go against the group, people who make trouble for the group. 'Puffs are not the pushovers people think they are. Nor are they so superkind. They're kind to their group, but be an oddball, an outsider, an individual (and Ravenclaws are SuperIndividuals) within their groupthink and they'll show you another side to 'kind' Hufflepuff. Don't underestimate 'Puffs!

In short, it is a total no-brainer for me. The Hermione who tried to impress the boys with her knowledge in the train and before Sorting, the Hermione who raises her hand for every question and does her best to be Teacher's Pet Extraordinaire, the Hermione whose *boggart* turns into a teacher who tells her she *failed* every class, that Hermione is not a Ravenclaw. Ravenclaws don't *care* if they failed a class, if they think the teacher or the book is wrong they will stick with their own opinion and give that as an answer. Can you imagine what Luna Lovegood would anwer on a popquiz? And I doubt Luna is the only Ravenclaw that has her own unique view on the world (although Luna's has taken a certain weird turn due to her father being the editor of the Quibbler). 

Hermione is definately a Gryffindor. She wants to be admired. She wants people to say about her, "oh, see that girl? She got 12 OWLS and 12 NEWTS and they were all O's. She must be the cleverest witch of her age. Let's give her a footnote in 'Hogwarts a History.'" 

I like House system. It puts the children into peergroups that have the same priorities in life. Even if that doesn't always ensure harmony amongst them, it does give them housemates that understand what they are all about. Mostly. (Harry for instance would hate being in Hufflepuff. Hufflepuffs do not appreciate people who set themselves apart from the group and Harry always goes off on his own tangent. Puffs would *not* allow that)
What I dislike is the strange notion that Gryffindors are somehow more brave, more noble, than, say, Ravenclaws or Hufflepuffs. 
Is Lavender Brown more brave than Blaize Zabini? Is Colin Creevey more noble than Cedric? Is Zacharias Smith more loyal than Ron Weasley or Vincent Crabbe more cunning than Hermione?
No, of course not. Quite apart from the fact that you cannot make such a value distinction at age eleven, it is also bollocks. Being brave comes in all kind of packages. As does intelligence, cunning or loyalty. 
What the Hat selects for is not what the children *are*, but how they look at live and what they want of it.
If a child wants to be admired, it's a definite Gryff.
If a child wants to belong, it's a Puff.
If a child want to be on top, to succeed no matter what the cost, it's a Slyth.
And if a child wants to be right about things, to have an opinion and stick to it no matter what, it's a definate Claw.
Even if the Gryff child isn't very brave, the Slyth child isn't very cunning or if the Claw child isn't very intelligent.

Although it's a fair guess that it usually does work out that way. The child that wants to be admired by all will have to step into the limelight to get admired. The child that wants to be right about things will have to be interested into research. The child that wants to belong to a group will know it would have to posses grouployalty for it to work and the child that wants to win, no matter what, will probably have some measure of cunning.
Although that doesn't mean that the children always *succeed* in what they want out of live. There must be hundreds, nay thousands of Gryffs who never did anything slightly heroic and Claws who simply did not have the required sharpness of mind to be a succesfull Claw.

Anyway, Hermione is a total Gryff. She might've liked it better in Ravenclaw (if only because Claws don't care about other Claws being bossy little know it alls) and she does have a tendency to think that she knows best (but that is different from thinking you are *right*) but put a Ravenclaw all alone in a locked tower with nothing but books and she will be happy. Put Hermione in alone in a tower with nothing but books and she'd go nuts. Nobody to *see* how clever she is? Then what would be the point in reading?








[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]