Views of Hermione

[dumbledore11214]

No: HPFGUIDX 160537

> Wynnleaf
<SNIP>
And
> then there's Hermione's plan which asked Harry and Ron to create an
> explosion in potions class which harmed completely innocent kids.  
And
> if we get to include something beyond direct physical harm, what 
about
> the house-elves?  What did they do to warrant having to risk having
> their whole lives (which they love) entirely disrupted by a sneaky
> trick simply because Hermione thinks it's best for them?  Slavery
> isn't ultimately good for anyone, but good intentions don't justify
> the RL equivalent of taking the safe, happy, well-fed and housed 
slave
> who's known no other life and completely without their approval
> freeing them with zero plan for how to maintain their lives and
> happiness, and no ability to enact a plan if she had it.  Hermione
> didn't *really* consider the elves lives and happiness, only her 
own
> ideas of "rightness."

Alla:

I want to return to this point after book 7 :), nobody argues that 
freeing house elves without their permissions is good, but I 
maintain that JKR will show that freeing elves is indeed good, even 
though Hermione has to completely change her approach to it.

Just a feeling, she talks about hose elves rights too much in the 
interviews for that. So, no, I think Hermione truly thinks about 
their happiness, she just uses the wrong approach, but this is at 
this point  you said and I said, so I am just agreeing to disagree.

Wynnleaf: 
> Crabb and Goyle were completely innocent of the crime Hermione was
> investigating.  Simply being pureblood elitist shouldn't have made
> them, or Draco, a candidate for attempted murder.  After all, who
> exactly decided Draco was a good candidate to be a murderer?  A 12
> year old kid.  Not Dumbledore – and he certainly knew far better 
than
> the trio what kind of home situation Draco came from.  
> 
> By the way, do recall that in COS, the trio had no idea that any 
kids
> were children of death eaters.  All they knew was that Draco was a
> pureblood elitist, his family likewise, and he spouted off comments
> about the fate of mudbloods.

Alla:

Such a **nice** comfortable word, isn't it **elitist**? Change it to 
pure-blooded racist, which is how I see Draco and picture becomes a 
little different?

No, the Trio did not decide that Draco is the good candidate to be a 
murderer, Draco did IMO, by saying that muggleborns deserve to die, 
that in my book  is a good reason for Trio to be suspicious of him 
and investigate him and isn't it showing that even on the Tower when 
Dumbledore should be concerned with more important matters, 
supposedly, he considers it important enough to tell Draco not to 
say **mudblood** in front of him.

So, yeah I do recall that Trio had no idea about them being DE 
children, but they knew enough of what Draco wishes in life IMO and 
that was enough to make them suspicious and rightly so.


Wynnleaf:
> No, the trio decided they knew better than all the teachers,
> Dumbledore included, and that unbeknownst to all, Draco was the 
prime
> candidate and "deserved" to be spied upon, and his friends – just
> because they were friends of the 12 year old opinion of "prime
> candidate" -- deserved to be knocked out for an hour and have their
> identifies stolen for that hour.

Alla:

Yes, and as it turned out they eventually did know better than all 
teachers, didn't they? They discovered the Chamber and four books 
later Draco dear finally signed up for murder.

 Wynnleaf: 
> On another note, I believe brought up by Alla (but am not sure):
> Criticizing Hermione's actions and saying the ends do not justify 
the
> means is in no way contradictory to supporting Snape as DDM.  
> 
> 1.  No one is questioning whether or not Hermione is on the good 
side
> or not.  No one is saying that Hermione's actions indicate she's a 
bad
> guy.    
> 
> 2.  In general, most people who think Snape is DDM are not trying
> support his insulting speech as okay or even justified.  Often, 
those
> who think Snape DDM do try to point out that Snape's  actions as a
> teacher aren't nearly as awful as Harry thinks, or as harmful to 
his
> students as some readers claim.  But that is not the same as saying
> that his insults or unfair decisions as a teacher are justified. 
<SNIP>


Alla:

Yes, I brought it up, but I did not bring up Snape verbal abuse. The 
comparison I made was condemning Hermione for the hex regardless of 
why she did it ( no matter which traitorous actions brought it up, 
etc) and Snape's actions on the Tower.

I really do not remember DD!M Snape theorists condemning Snape for 
committing the murder on the Tower. Nooooo, multitude of the reasons 
had been brought up and the main one of course Dumbledore made Snape 
do it.

That is of course the possibility, but I just find funny that 
reasons for the murder are being constantly brought up as justifying 
circumstances, and the reasons for the hex as punishment for traitor 
are being discarded.

Now, before you ask me - if Hermione's punishment of traitor would 
be to kill her, I would be more than willing to not look at the 
reasons besides it and condemn it, but doing the opposite? When more 
harmful action is being justified over and over again and the hex to 
protect DA while not being perfectly executed is not? 





Wynnleaf:
> By the way, if we really want to find something comparable to 
compare
> Hermione to Snape, I'd suggest Snape's spying on the Marauders, 
trying
> to find out what Lupin was doing every full-moon.  Snape obviously
> knew that it was partly sanctioned by the school, since he'd seen
> Pomfrey escorting Lupin away.  So he must have had reason to think
> that more was going on that the school *wouldn't* approve of, if he
> really was hoping to get them expelled.
<SNIP>

Alla:

Yeah, that was being discussed upthread. To briefly recap - yes, why 
not, action is the same. The problem is that I do not know about 
Snape motivations, but as I said it was discussed upthread.

JMO,

Alla