Hermione again / Was: Invading the enemy's common room (bit long)

[Cyril A Fernandes]

No: HPFGUIDX 160516

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" <justcarol67 at ...>
wrote:
>
> Carol earlier:
> > 
> > > What would Hermione's defenders think if Draco had resorted to
> similar tactics and Polyjuiced Crabbe, Goyle, and himself to look like
> Gryffindors to spy on Harry? Wouldn't readers be up in arms at the
> invasion of privacy? <snip>
> > 
> > Tesha:
> > Draco, at least in the early books, would never openly confront his
> > enemies. He uses his father and his teacher and his 2 body guards to
> > hide behind. You can even see in the later books that he still does
> > not want to face being singly responsible for anything. He uses
> other people to achieve his goal. 
> > 
> > and doesn't he make one of his guards polyjuice into a girl to
> protect the secrecy of a certain door?
> >
> Carol again:
> I'm afraid you've missed my point. I'm not talking about what Draco
> would or would not have done, or about his use of Polyjuice on Crabbe
> and Goyle to hide what he's up to in the RoR. I'm talking about the
> ethics of HRH's actions in using Polyjuice to spy on Draco in his own
> common room. 
> 
> I'll say it again more clearly. Wouldn't HRH--and most readers--be up
> in arms against Draco and his friends if they used Polyjuice to
> infiltrate the *Gryffindor* common room? Yet that's exactly what Harry
> and Ron did (and Hermione would have done if it weren't for the cat
> fur problem) to the Slytherins. Why is it okay for the Gryffindors to
> do what would be considered reprehensible and unforgiveable if the
> Slytherins did it? Would you want "the enemy" in your common room,
> which is supposed to be for your Housemates alone? 
> 
> Sounds like a double standard to me.
> 
> Carol, who thinks that if the tables were turned and Polyjuiced Draco
> had shown up in Gryffindor tower even in second year, readers would be
> condemning him to a fate worse than Marietta's
>

Cyril here (coming close to the limit of five posts for today).

Ah, but these standards are indeed set by which side of the table one
is sitting on.

Just to throw on a different perspective:

DDM!Snape is the Snape who is acting on DD's orders and spying on LV.

ESE!Snape is the Snape acting on LV's orders and spying on DD.

While not totally relevant to this post, OFM!Snape is just living upto
the Slytherin' self-preservation standards.

So both DDM!Snape and ESE!Snape are spies, just on different sides of
the table. Don't we react to them differently, give them different
names and so on.

Sure, we would be up in arms if Draco did the polyjuice with HRH. But
that would not be *because he did the polyjuice*, but because of the
intentions behind the activity.

Sure, I do not agree that the ends justify the means, but it is not
the means that one should *only* look at, also the intentions. After
all, it is our choices (read intentions) that show us what we are, far
more than our abilities (blatantly copied from DD <g>)

At the end of the day, Hermione has good intentions (the big picture),
and that does make some of activities she does questionable. But I see
no reason yet to question her intentions.

But not doing many of the things she does, would put her in the same
bracket as useless, non-thinking, non-acting Order members that we
love to tear apart on this very forum, far better then Greyback could
even dream of <g>

For a gifted witch of her age, I am happy that she uses these gifts,
with the objective of fighting the war against LV. War will have
casualties - and as per JKR - it is pure evil she is helping to fight.  

It is easy to slam Hermione for her actions, but we forget some basic
things when we do that:
a) They are in a war - no sugar coating that fact
b) Her best friend is the biggest target (arguably second to DD?)
c) She, as a Muggleborn, is being denied participation in the WW by
LV's diktat's, even to the point of possible death.

And she is being slammed for:

a) Spiking cupcakes (how different from spiking punch at a high school
party). Well she is only 12 at the time. I do not see them as a lethal
action.

b) Using polyjuice potion - well in the WW, use of the Polyjuice
potion is not considered as Dark magic or criminal activity (at least
I see no canon to that effect). It is only considered as Restricted
magic, very different IMO.

c) Placing a hex on a parchment to which they have all signed. Well, I
do not see why she has to spell out that there are consequences of
breaking a magical contract. The participants in the DA could not
newcomers to the concept in Year 5 (for most of them). Harry did not
get such a chance with the GoF - and he could have died. Marietta got
off easy.

d) Not releasing Marietta by reversing the spell. I must admit that
there has been good argument for her inability to do so, namely that
Marietta has to apologize to the DA before the same may even be
possible. I must also admit that, even if it were not so, I do not
hold Hermione as a bad person for not going ahead and reversing the
spell. Have we been told that Marietta had even asked for the same.
Her mother works at the Ministry - if required, mommy dearest would be
able to pull strings to get Hermione (or someone) to act even if
Hermione was not intending to do so. Looks like Marietta is not
affected (I use the term morally, not emotionally) by what she did
(and I do not believe that the Obliviate was the reason for that).

e) Leading a teacher into danger. Well, given that teacher's recent
confession to sending Dementors after her best frind, not to mention
immediate use of the Cruciactus, I would not rate Hermione's actions
as anything less than quick thinking in a difficult situation. Kudos.
Would even like to add her setting fire to Snape's coat in SS/PS.
Wrong teacher - right intentions (saving Harry's live)

e) Her general tendency to step on toes, and seeming lack of concern
for who gets impacted by it. Well, I do believe that she sees some of
the possible impact, but they are far outweighed by the intentions and
objectives. It is a war, after all. And you cannot make an omlette
without breaking the eggs.

To add a couple of things, in her favor (if you still need more) - she
applies her personal rulebook even to go against friends, or for
non-friends (enemies sounded too harsh)
a) For example, she reported Harry's Firebolt broom to McG in POA. Did
it hurt Harry - sure, Intention - harry's safety.
b) Almost reported the Map in POA - was emotionally blackmailed into
not doing so.
c) Felt need to report the reason for Montague's disorientation - just
so that he could be better helped.

So, has she done wrong things? For sure.
Has she done them with wrong intentions? Am yet to see them
Is she perfect? Absolutely, perfectly, human - makes mistakes like the
rest of us.

Cyril - with the opinion that he/she who has done no wrongdoing should
cast the first stone (copying again blatantly <g>)