Views of Hermione (was:Re: witches of the world (was: Lavender vs Hermione)

[amiabledorsai]

No: HPFGUIDX 160478

 wynnleaf:
> I am always interested at the comments from supporters of
> Hermione's hex and how often those comments are consistent in
> their attempts to re-write canon.  The above comments are simply
> examples of the usual re-writes.
> 
> 1.  "horribly disfigured by a series of close-set purple pustules"
> gets re-written in "acne."  Very convenient if one wants to soften
> what Hermione did.

Amiable Dorsai:
Mea culpa.  Perhaps this was in reaction to the idea that
collaboration with a torturer is the sort of mistake anyone could make.

wynnleaf:
> 2.  We are told that Hermione did this in an effort to protect the
> DA, rather than an effort to simply find out who told.  As though
> the hex did anything at all to prevent someone telling, which it
> obviously did not, particularly when Hermione did it secretly so
> that no one knew there was any consequence for telling anyone.  It
> was zero protection.

Amiable Dorsai:
In fact, it did save Harry (at least, there's no telling how far the
purge would have gone) from expulsion.  It caused Marietta to clam up
long enough for Shacklebolt to Obliviate her, and for Dumbledore to
spin his tale.

Hermione seems to have done whatever she did in order to give warning
that they had been betrayed, rather than to prevent betrayal.  I have
repeatedly agreed that it would have been better tactics (and better
manners) for her to warn the DA of what she had done, and did so again
in the post that Alla responded to.

wynnleaf:
> 3.  Canon tells us that no one had been able to end the hex, even
> over the summer.  One has to assume that even skilled wizards or
> witches couldn't do it.  Yet supporters of the hex seem blithly
> assured that it's not permanent.

Amiable Dorsai:
I can't speak for others, but I have speculated that the hex was the
penalty clause of a magical contract that Marietta agreed (however
unknowingly) to with 27 other students.  If so, as Hermione was not
the only party to the contract who was betrayed, I've further guessed
that she cannot lift the hex by herself.

All we can do is speculate, canon is silent on the issue.

wynnleaf:
> 4.  Hex supporters feel strongly that Marietta should apologize for
> what she did and be sorry.  Strange how they forget that she'd been
> obliviated and can't even remember anything about the DA, much
> less going to it.  But (not yet in this discussion) hex supporters
> have in the past commented that they're certain that the obliviation
> wasn't permanent, even though all the canon evidence we have is that
> those sorts of memory modifications are permenant.  

Amiable Dorsai:
Myself, I've never addressed the issue of the permanence or lack
thereof of the Memory Charm on Marietta.  Frankly, I have no clue. I
do think it likely that someone might have mentioned her treason to
her, you know, in passing.

Wynnleaf:
> 5.  And another one I've seen often is the assertion from some hex
> supporters that the DA members should have known they were
> signing a "magical contract" as though all contracts in the WW *are*
> magical, 

Amiable Dorsai:
Again, while I can't speak for others, I've never claimed such.
 
I do think that, magical contract or not, a person should keep her
promises, and that betraying ones fellows is a very bad thing.

wynnleaf:
> and so they should have known some sort of magical result
> would occur if they broke it.  Supporters of this argument happily
> disregard the fact that Hermione put the hex in *secretly* 
.

Amiable Dorsai:
Nope, sorry, I've always said she should have mentioned it, never
claimed otherwise.  

wynnleaf:
> But the biggest thing that interests me is how a discussion on
> Hermione's willingness to harm others including the innocent, trick
> innocent individuals, lie, steal, and otherwise break  rules in
> order to get her way is diverted into this one issue of Marietta,
> apparently for the purpose of being able to argue that in this case,
> the person deserved it, completely overlooking the main point, which
> is that Hermione doesn't really *care* if a person deserves what
> happens to them, as long as she gets the result she wants.

Amiable Dorsai:
Odd, what I see is that a girl whose first instincts are to raise the
downtrodden and protect the innocent, who has been fighting Voldemort
from her first year as a Hogwarts student, and who has regularly put
her own life on the line to defend others, has suddenly, over this
incident, been nominated for the "Girl Most Likely to go Dark" slot in
the Hogwarts yearbook. It seems like a bit of a stretch, to me.

Is she perfect?  Hell no.  Could she occasionally use a heapin'
helpin' o' humility?  You bet.

Is she evil?  Don't be silly.

Amiable Dorsai