Harry Potter Is Hermione Talented or Hardworking?
- Thread starter zerohour
- Start date
It's just as likely that the notes were just reminders or intended for students who didn't grow up in magic households. It seems like it's common knowledge. Fred's comment seems more like he'd like to use not having one as an excuse to claim he forgot, rather than the note itself being the source of the restriction. In fact, we know it's not.
It's possible she was unaware, tried a few spells, had the Ministry show up and put a stop to it, and then didn't mention it. It would likely have been somewhat embarrassing to bring up. It's doubtful she'd get in trouble for a first offense considering her parents were muggles. It's obviously a law, and not a school rule.
Hermione may have been tested as well. There's no mention of it, but it seems likely that muggle born wizards are tested for ability somehow.
It's also just as likely she might have gotten some practice in while in a designated location, such as Diagon Alley or Hogsmeade. She had to go shopping for her supplies at some point and that would have presented an opportunity.
There may be some sort of home schooling rules as well. So she may have gotten a tutor, though there is no mention of it. Her family is probably pretty well off, not extremely wealthy like old family money, both her parents are Dentists and likely make a pretty good living with only one child. They could probably afford to hire someone to come in and tutor her a little before she went off to Hogwarts. She'd probably be quite pleased with that and may have even convinced them to do it.
Not every witch or wizard goes to Hogwarts. It's pretty likely that home schooling is a thing that is probably pretty common, along with a licensing test of some sort similar to a GED or something. There may also be a wizarding equivalent to public school. Hogwarts is supposedly pretty expensive and somewhat exclusive. It's the wizarding equivalent of a prestigious British boarding school. This is reinforced when Justin Finch-Fletchley talks about how he opted for Hogwarts rather than Eton. It's pretty likely that private tutors are a common thing, and something Harry wouldn't really have access to.
Any of those is far more likely than a 'grace period'. That makes no sense when you consider it's a law that is enforced by the government and they show up if they detect unauthorized or accidental magic being used.
It's possible she was unaware, tried a few spells, had the Ministry show up and put a stop to it, and then didn't mention it. It would likely have been somewhat embarrassing to bring up. It's doubtful she'd get in trouble for a first offense considering her parents were muggles. It's obviously a law, and not a school rule.
Hermione may have been tested as well. There's no mention of it, but it seems likely that muggle born wizards are tested for ability somehow.
It's also just as likely she might have gotten some practice in while in a designated location, such as Diagon Alley or Hogsmeade. She had to go shopping for her supplies at some point and that would have presented an opportunity.
There may be some sort of home schooling rules as well. So she may have gotten a tutor, though there is no mention of it. Her family is probably pretty well off, not extremely wealthy like old family money, both her parents are Dentists and likely make a pretty good living with only one child. They could probably afford to hire someone to come in and tutor her a little before she went off to Hogwarts. She'd probably be quite pleased with that and may have even convinced them to do it.
Not every witch or wizard goes to Hogwarts. It's pretty likely that home schooling is a thing that is probably pretty common, along with a licensing test of some sort similar to a GED or something. There may also be a wizarding equivalent to public school. Hogwarts is supposedly pretty expensive and somewhat exclusive. It's the wizarding equivalent of a prestigious British boarding school. This is reinforced when Justin Finch-Fletchley talks about how he opted for Hogwarts rather than Eton. It's pretty likely that private tutors are a common thing, and something Harry wouldn't really have access to.
Any of those is far more likely than a 'grace period'. That makes no sense when you consider it's a law that is enforced by the government and they show up if they detect unauthorized or accidental magic being used.
How is what you said any different than "we have no idea of when they are told so, only that it is before the end of the school year", which is exactly what I said?
I am inferring it happens in the middle of the school year because Hagrid never told Harry as far as we saw and Harry himself did not have any wizarding contact from then until the Weasleys right before the train. So I can infer it from what we saw.
But I did not make anything up.
If I did so, please point out when I did so.
And as NuitTombee mentioned, there is even a possibility of her doing the magics on the train, which is allowed in the books, so there is the third option of she neither lying or training at home.
By the way, with neither, is it or or nor?
I am inferring it happens in the middle of the school year because Hagrid never told Harry as far as we saw and Harry himself did not have any wizarding contact from then until the Weasleys right before the train. So I can infer it from what we saw.
But I did not make anything up.
If I did so, please point out when I did so.
And as NuitTombee mentioned, there is even a possibility of her doing the magics on the train, which is allowed in the books, so there is the third option of she neither lying or training at home.
By the way, with neither, is it or or nor?
Hagrid is somewhat unreliable for delivering messages like that. He may have been told to say something and it just slipped his mind. It's equally likely that Dumbledore didn't bother trying to get him to tell him about it.
Harry didn't find out until the middle of the school year, but most of the other students probably knew already about the laws regarding underage magic use. Even muggle parents are likely informed, but the Dursleys would have been difficult. Also, given the situation with them, it was probably a conscious decision to not inform them on Dumbledore's part. Harry used it to his advantage briefly in Chamber of Secrets before they found out and it backfired.
Harry is in a unique situation with the Dursleys, who actively keep him away from the wizarding world and anything to do with magic to the best of their ability. It's pretty obvious that they are forced into letting Harry attend Hogwarts, and that there's a certain level of threat hanging over their heads if they interfere. Probably by way of Dumbledore. Hagrid makes that pretty clear when he comes to pick up Harry after the Dursleys run off to their cabin trying to keep him away from the wizards.
There's also this from Deathly Hallows when Snape is telling Lilly about the statute:
The way it's put here does not imply a grace period for practicing magic intentionally, but rather covers accidental magic without a wand. The wording is very specific to that.
If Hermione and her parents were unaware of the laws and she was trying out spells with her wand unsupervised then she probably got a letter from the Ministry about it and had to stop.
It's pretty clear she wasn't talking about accidental magic on the train, and that she was using a wand. So I'd say it can easily be inferred that she either had a tutor, did it under supervision in some place it was deemed okay such as Diagon Alley or Hogsmeade, had to do some sort of aptitude test involving a wand and a few extremely simple spells, or ended up getting a letter from the Ministry and likely complied once she realized it was something she wasn't supposed to be doing.
Given the reading she was doing prior to attending, even if she didn't end up getting a warning from the Ministry, it's very unlikely that she didn't know that underage magic was against the law by the time she went to school. She had memorized the course books and was actively researching the wizarding world. That's exactly the sort of thing that would likely have been mentioned in the kind of reading she was doing.
Here's a question from a FAQ that was answered by Rowling on her site that further reinforces how the Ministry handles things:
This is after Lily was attending school, but it's very likely that they'd handle someone like Hermione who wasn't attending yet and using a wand the same way.
Harry didn't find out until the middle of the school year, but most of the other students probably knew already about the laws regarding underage magic use. Even muggle parents are likely informed, but the Dursleys would have been difficult. Also, given the situation with them, it was probably a conscious decision to not inform them on Dumbledore's part. Harry used it to his advantage briefly in Chamber of Secrets before they found out and it backfired.
Harry is in a unique situation with the Dursleys, who actively keep him away from the wizarding world and anything to do with magic to the best of their ability. It's pretty obvious that they are forced into letting Harry attend Hogwarts, and that there's a certain level of threat hanging over their heads if they interfere. Probably by way of Dumbledore. Hagrid makes that pretty clear when he comes to pick up Harry after the Dursleys run off to their cabin trying to keep him away from the wizards.
There's also this from Deathly Hallows when Snape is telling Lilly about the statute:
The way it's put here does not imply a grace period for practicing magic intentionally, but rather covers accidental magic without a wand. The wording is very specific to that.
If Hermione and her parents were unaware of the laws and she was trying out spells with her wand unsupervised then she probably got a letter from the Ministry about it and had to stop.
It's pretty clear she wasn't talking about accidental magic on the train, and that she was using a wand. So I'd say it can easily be inferred that she either had a tutor, did it under supervision in some place it was deemed okay such as Diagon Alley or Hogsmeade, had to do some sort of aptitude test involving a wand and a few extremely simple spells, or ended up getting a letter from the Ministry and likely complied once she realized it was something she wasn't supposed to be doing.
Given the reading she was doing prior to attending, even if she didn't end up getting a warning from the Ministry, it's very unlikely that she didn't know that underage magic was against the law by the time she went to school. She had memorized the course books and was actively researching the wizarding world. That's exactly the sort of thing that would likely have been mentioned in the kind of reading she was doing.
Here's a question from a FAQ that was answered by Rowling on her site that further reinforces how the Ministry handles things:
This is after Lily was attending school, but it's very likely that they'd handle someone like Hermione who wasn't attending yet and using a wand the same way.
That seems pretty unlikely given her character. She's a stickler for the rules and even sort of defends Snape on the basis that she believes faculty should be given a measure of respect, albeit a lukewarm defense.
She's socially awkward and pushy, but also seems honest to a fault. The thought of someone being dishonest with her would make her aghast and upset, she's also likely to point out any inaccuracies in someone's story if she notices any. It's unlikely she'd leave herself open to criticism by someone else by lying. Even if she did want to lie, I really don't see her being able to do it very well. She seems the type who would fidget and get flustered if she tried, being unable to look someone in the eye. She'd also probably feel bad about it later, if only because she's disappointed in herself.
She grows up some later and could probably pull off a convincing lie by the third or fourth book, but as a first and second year she's very smart, but also somewhat naive and oblivious. More than most other students, though not by a whole lot. I also don't think that even later in the books that her pride would allow her to lie about something like that.
It's particularly notable that I doubt she'd brag about accomplishing something she didn't. She's too proud of her accomplishments and hard work to lie about something she didn't actually do. Particularly since everything else she mentioned, such as memorizing the textbooks for the year, was proven to be true.
It's not impossible that she wasn't being honest and was exaggerating things, but I doubt it given what we learn about her after that. It really doesn't seem like her at all to do something like that.
She's socially awkward and pushy, but also seems honest to a fault. The thought of someone being dishonest with her would make her aghast and upset, she's also likely to point out any inaccuracies in someone's story if she notices any. It's unlikely she'd leave herself open to criticism by someone else by lying. Even if she did want to lie, I really don't see her being able to do it very well. She seems the type who would fidget and get flustered if she tried, being unable to look someone in the eye. She'd also probably feel bad about it later, if only because she's disappointed in herself.
She grows up some later and could probably pull off a convincing lie by the third or fourth book, but as a first and second year she's very smart, but also somewhat naive and oblivious. More than most other students, though not by a whole lot. I also don't think that even later in the books that her pride would allow her to lie about something like that.
It's particularly notable that I doubt she'd brag about accomplishing something she didn't. She's too proud of her accomplishments and hard work to lie about something she didn't actually do. Particularly since everything else she mentioned, such as memorizing the textbooks for the year, was proven to be true.
It's not impossible that she wasn't being honest and was exaggerating things, but I doubt it given what we learn about her after that. It really doesn't seem like her at all to do something like that.
You should maybe re-read the first, second, third, and fourth books if you think Hermione would be terrible at lying, wouldn't do it, and disproves of it, considering she does a shit ton of it in every single book- along with stealing, badmouthing authority, directly going against authority figures, etc etc etc.
Fuck, Hermione becomes friends with Harry and Ron by lying directly to McGonagall's face to keep them from getting in trouble. That was the EXPLICIT START OF THEIR FRIENDSHIP.
Seriously, what fucking books were you reading?
Fuck, Hermione becomes friends with Harry and Ron by lying directly to McGonagall's face to keep them from getting in trouble. That was the EXPLICIT START OF THEIR FRIENDSHIP.
Seriously, what fucking books were you reading?
That's different than what I'm talking about. She had legitimate or selfless motivations for that sort of thing when she did it, and is usually reluctant until it's clear there isn't another option. In fact, in the incident in the bathroom she took the blame on herself as she though that the situation was her fault due to her being in the bathroom when the troll showed up. She didn't want Harry and Ron to get in trouble because of her. It didn't matter that they weren't friends, she felt responsible for what happened and didn't want the boys taking any of the blame.
She's also not a kleptomaniac or pickpocket. She's the one who worries the most about breaking the rules, but circumstances made breaking them the lesser evil and she was smart enough to realize it. Same goes for her respect for the faculty, including Snape at first. You're painting her as much more of a rebellious figure than she actually was, if anything she's the one who kept Ron and Harry somewhat in check and chided them frequently over things like that.
She's easily the most practical one of the group, and probably the most honest among them. She also takes pride in her reputation as a well behaved and trustworthy student. That's how she ended up with the Time Turner. They weren't going to give her something that dangerous just because her grades were good, she had earned the trust of the faculty and was seen as responsible enough to handle it.
She'd have trouble being dishonest for selfish reasons and isn't a sociopath. It's very unlikely she'd lie to make herself look good in the manner you're suggesting. She does take one for the team so to speak on several occasions, but doesn't make things up to make herself look good. There are no examples of her behaving that way in the books.
What you're suggesting doesn't fit Hermione's character. If she's being dishonest or breaking the rules, she feels it's justified and that she has a very good reason for it or she wouldn't be doing it.
Also, I did mention that she loosens up in later books.
She's also not a kleptomaniac or pickpocket. She's the one who worries the most about breaking the rules, but circumstances made breaking them the lesser evil and she was smart enough to realize it. Same goes for her respect for the faculty, including Snape at first. You're painting her as much more of a rebellious figure than she actually was, if anything she's the one who kept Ron and Harry somewhat in check and chided them frequently over things like that.
She's easily the most practical one of the group, and probably the most honest among them. She also takes pride in her reputation as a well behaved and trustworthy student. That's how she ended up with the Time Turner. They weren't going to give her something that dangerous just because her grades were good, she had earned the trust of the faculty and was seen as responsible enough to handle it.
She'd have trouble being dishonest for selfish reasons and isn't a sociopath. It's very unlikely she'd lie to make herself look good in the manner you're suggesting. She does take one for the team so to speak on several occasions, but doesn't make things up to make herself look good. There are no examples of her behaving that way in the books.
What you're suggesting doesn't fit Hermione's character. If she's being dishonest or breaking the rules, she feels it's justified and that she has a very good reason for it or she wouldn't be doing it.
Also, I did mention that she loosens up in later books.
It's not different and you know it.
It's also interesting that you feel she isn't a sociopath, considering there was a discussion a while back on TFF what her deal was. I forget the exact term for it, but it had to do with her explicit love for rules (hoping for guidance) disbelief that people broke them (that's not fair!) and then finally her kinda going out of proportion every time she decided to break the rules (no sense of scale).
Case in point, sending Umbridge to get raped to death by centaurs.
ANyone remember that conversation?
It's also interesting that you feel she isn't a sociopath, considering there was a discussion a while back on TFF what her deal was. I forget the exact term for it, but it had to do with her explicit love for rules (hoping for guidance) disbelief that people broke them (that's not fair!) and then finally her kinda going out of proportion every time she decided to break the rules (no sense of scale).
Case in point, sending Umbridge to get raped to death by centaurs.
ANyone remember that conversation?
It is different. All lies are not equal, and motivations and circumstance matter. Context is important and she doesn't tell lies of the sort you're suggesting at any point in the books. It goes completely against her personality and motivations to do something like that. She wants to prove herself and takes pride in the effort she puts out and what she can accomplish, and lying the way you're implying would go against that. That's something she seems to understand at least.
Also, that's not sociopathic behavior. She's not doing it for personal gain and is often motivated by empathy for others. That alone disqualifies her behavior from being sociopathic or psychopathic. She doesn't have the traits of either and is neither anti-social or lacking in empathy. There are points in the books where she feels bad for other people, and about things she's done, and not just because the consequences impact her personally.
She does do some questionable things because of her temper or a sense of vengeance, and her justification and reasoning is often either immature or misguided. Some of her habits are possibly OCD. She's neither a compulsive or pathological liar, nor is she a kleptomaniac. When she does lie or steal there is always some form of urgency involved and her motivations are usually not self serving.
It is true that all three of the main characters often have poor judgement and try to handle things they should be going to the adults with and make bad decisions as a result. This includes Hermione. However they are trying to do what they think is right at least, and that is what motivates her rule breaking. Ron and Harry are actually a lot more likely to try and get around or bend rules for selfish reasons than she is. When she helps out in those situations, she does so out of empathy for her friends, and usually advises against it at first.
Also, Dumbledore ends up saving Umbridge, and it's very unlikely the students thought she was in mortal danger when they dragged her off. It's doubtful they would have taunted her after the fact if they suspected such a thing. They were probably thinking they were just going to slap her around and just toss her from the grounds, and it's entirely possible that's all they were going to do. I doubt rape or murder really crossed the students' minds as they witnessed her being taken away.
As much as they disliked her, it is doubtful that any of them would have sat well with it if they suspected such a thing was happening. In fact, given the centaurs in HP, it's pretty unlikely that they were planning on raping her. After all, they're supposedly a proud race for which even allowing a human to ride them is considered a taboo, much less raping one. It is possible that her life was in danger, but it might have amounted to nothing more than humiliating her and maybe a beating. We don't ever get details, but rape is pretty much the most unlikely outcome.
The centaurs in HP behave very differently from the ones in Greek myths in mannerism and culture. Even if they were similar, not every centaur legend from ancient Greece involved rape. A lot of Greek myths in general involve rape and seduction actually, it was a fairly common theme throughout them. There isn't really any indication what they planned to do with her exactly, aside from the fact that it was very unpleasant for her. That it was rape is just speculation, and pretty wild speculation at that considering what we know of the centaurs in HP. Only a vague connection to rape in some ancient myths involving centaurs points to that, and that's not really extremely strong evidence as they also acted as teachers and mentors in Greek myths. It doesn't fit with how different the HP centaurs are from their mythical counterparts either. This is Harry Potter, not Berserk.
I do suspect they were planning on lynching her, and that the students weren't aware of how serious the situation was for her. If Dumbledore hadn't stepped in she may have been found hanging from a tree in the woods later or trampled to death in a clearing.
Also, that's not sociopathic behavior. She's not doing it for personal gain and is often motivated by empathy for others. That alone disqualifies her behavior from being sociopathic or psychopathic. She doesn't have the traits of either and is neither anti-social or lacking in empathy. There are points in the books where she feels bad for other people, and about things she's done, and not just because the consequences impact her personally.
She does do some questionable things because of her temper or a sense of vengeance, and her justification and reasoning is often either immature or misguided. Some of her habits are possibly OCD. She's neither a compulsive or pathological liar, nor is she a kleptomaniac. When she does lie or steal there is always some form of urgency involved and her motivations are usually not self serving.
It is true that all three of the main characters often have poor judgement and try to handle things they should be going to the adults with and make bad decisions as a result. This includes Hermione. However they are trying to do what they think is right at least, and that is what motivates her rule breaking. Ron and Harry are actually a lot more likely to try and get around or bend rules for selfish reasons than she is. When she helps out in those situations, she does so out of empathy for her friends, and usually advises against it at first.
Also, Dumbledore ends up saving Umbridge, and it's very unlikely the students thought she was in mortal danger when they dragged her off. It's doubtful they would have taunted her after the fact if they suspected such a thing. They were probably thinking they were just going to slap her around and just toss her from the grounds, and it's entirely possible that's all they were going to do. I doubt rape or murder really crossed the students' minds as they witnessed her being taken away.
As much as they disliked her, it is doubtful that any of them would have sat well with it if they suspected such a thing was happening. In fact, given the centaurs in HP, it's pretty unlikely that they were planning on raping her. After all, they're supposedly a proud race for which even allowing a human to ride them is considered a taboo, much less raping one. It is possible that her life was in danger, but it might have amounted to nothing more than humiliating her and maybe a beating. We don't ever get details, but rape is pretty much the most unlikely outcome.
The centaurs in HP behave very differently from the ones in Greek myths in mannerism and culture. Even if they were similar, not every centaur legend from ancient Greece involved rape. A lot of Greek myths in general involve rape and seduction actually, it was a fairly common theme throughout them. There isn't really any indication what they planned to do with her exactly, aside from the fact that it was very unpleasant for her. That it was rape is just speculation, and pretty wild speculation at that considering what we know of the centaurs in HP. Only a vague connection to rape in some ancient myths involving centaurs points to that, and that's not really extremely strong evidence as they also acted as teachers and mentors in Greek myths. It doesn't fit with how different the HP centaurs are from their mythical counterparts either. This is Harry Potter, not Berserk.
I do suspect they were planning on lynching her, and that the students weren't aware of how serious the situation was for her. If Dumbledore hadn't stepped in she may have been found hanging from a tree in the woods later or trampled to death in a clearing.
ffs is your answer to everything to just lob off a load of so much bullshit people don't even want to bother going through it?
Hermione definitely planned for something distinctly bad to happen to Umbridge- she either took her to the centaur, who she knows are violent and angry, or Grawp, who is violent and protective.
Either way Umbridge was going to get majorly fucked up, with the centaurs actually being the better answer, because at least then there probably wouldn't be bits of umbridge paste all over the clearing.
Centaur would have at least tried for some manner of trial before they did anything, which let Dumbledore ride to the rescue.
As for Hermione's personality, she definitely has issues with sense of social scale.
But it doesn't even matter, you're barely even arguing the point anymore- fact is, she lies if she feels she has a reason, and desperation to impress possible friends would count in her misguided mind.
Hermione definitely planned for something distinctly bad to happen to Umbridge- she either took her to the centaur, who she knows are violent and angry, or Grawp, who is violent and protective.
Either way Umbridge was going to get majorly fucked up, with the centaurs actually being the better answer, because at least then there probably wouldn't be bits of umbridge paste all over the clearing.
Centaur would have at least tried for some manner of trial before they did anything, which let Dumbledore ride to the rescue.
As for Hermione's personality, she definitely has issues with sense of social scale.
But it doesn't even matter, you're barely even arguing the point anymore- fact is, she lies if she feels she has a reason, and desperation to impress possible friends would count in her misguided mind.
You're arguing head canon in that last part. The books don't back it up. There are no instances of her lying about that sort of thing anywhere else in the books, and that's not the same as saying she never lies at all. In fact, the books regularly show her backing up such claims.
As for Hermione's sense of social scale. Sure, that fits with what I said about her judgement and reasoning being flawed and misguided. All three of the main characters have the same issues really, partially due to the fact that they are children and immature and each is insecure in their own way, and partially because they try to do things themselves that they have no business doing. However, their reasoning for what they do is at least somewhat noble in spirit most of the time, even if they do end up acting irresponsibly and making things worse half the time. Half the problems for them in the books wouldn't have been problems to begin with if they had gone to the adults rather than trying to solve things in secret themselves.
I never argued against that. She's also not without empathy though, and is neither a compulsive or pathological liar. She's not a sociopath or psychopath and does not fit the criteria for either. That isn't the same thing as saying she never does anything bad, dishonest, or morally questionable. Her motivations are usually at least attempting to be noble though, or at least for her friends' benefit rather than simple selfishness.
You at least partially agree with me about Umbridge. You've gone from 'raped to death' to merely 'fucked up'. That implies that there's a good chance she would have survived. The centaurs in HP are actually rather civilized and neutral beings. She may have ended up fucked up or even killed by them, but as a result of her own actions. As you said, she picked the least extreme of two options. It's very likely that they wouldn't have killed her, though I have my doubts about whether at least some of them intended to or not.
She definitely would have ended up punished somehow, and it would not have been pleasant. I never suggested that she'd get off unscathed, just that the students likely didn't consider that she'd end up murdered.
That really doesn't have anything to do with the actual point, which is Hermione telling the specific lie you're trying to suggest she did does not fit her character at all. In fact, it goes against her principals, personality, and pride. She's out to prove something, and vanity and fear of getting called out on something like that and having her reputation tarnished alone would likely keep her from lying that way. These other things you're bringing up really don't have anything to do with that.
I never said she's never selfish and that her shit doesn't stink. It's just that the specific behavior you're trying to attribute to her does not make any sense in regard to her. It would be completely out of character for her to do something like that, and not because she's some perfect saint who never does anything wrong ever. It directly goes against her motivations and the image she wants to project. There isn't enough to gain for her by doing it, and the risk doesn't seem like one she would take. Her reputation is important to her, as is her ambition, and the lie you're trying to attribute to her doesn't make sense for her character to tell.
It's also backed up later on that she was likely being honest when they're waiting to get into the Great Hall, where she's going over spells and muttering to herself trying to figure out what the test might be that sorts them into their houses. She doesn't seem to lack confidence that she can perform magic if needed, and there's no reason for her to lie while thinking to herself. It's not a direct statement, but implied more than heavily enough that we can easily assume she was being honest on the train about having tried a few practice spells.
As for Hermione's sense of social scale. Sure, that fits with what I said about her judgement and reasoning being flawed and misguided. All three of the main characters have the same issues really, partially due to the fact that they are children and immature and each is insecure in their own way, and partially because they try to do things themselves that they have no business doing. However, their reasoning for what they do is at least somewhat noble in spirit most of the time, even if they do end up acting irresponsibly and making things worse half the time. Half the problems for them in the books wouldn't have been problems to begin with if they had gone to the adults rather than trying to solve things in secret themselves.
I never argued against that. She's also not without empathy though, and is neither a compulsive or pathological liar. She's not a sociopath or psychopath and does not fit the criteria for either. That isn't the same thing as saying she never does anything bad, dishonest, or morally questionable. Her motivations are usually at least attempting to be noble though, or at least for her friends' benefit rather than simple selfishness.
You at least partially agree with me about Umbridge. You've gone from 'raped to death' to merely 'fucked up'. That implies that there's a good chance she would have survived. The centaurs in HP are actually rather civilized and neutral beings. She may have ended up fucked up or even killed by them, but as a result of her own actions. As you said, she picked the least extreme of two options. It's very likely that they wouldn't have killed her, though I have my doubts about whether at least some of them intended to or not.
She definitely would have ended up punished somehow, and it would not have been pleasant. I never suggested that she'd get off unscathed, just that the students likely didn't consider that she'd end up murdered.
That really doesn't have anything to do with the actual point, which is Hermione telling the specific lie you're trying to suggest she did does not fit her character at all. In fact, it goes against her principals, personality, and pride. She's out to prove something, and vanity and fear of getting called out on something like that and having her reputation tarnished alone would likely keep her from lying that way. These other things you're bringing up really don't have anything to do with that.
I never said she's never selfish and that her shit doesn't stink. It's just that the specific behavior you're trying to attribute to her does not make any sense in regard to her. It would be completely out of character for her to do something like that, and not because she's some perfect saint who never does anything wrong ever. It directly goes against her motivations and the image she wants to project. There isn't enough to gain for her by doing it, and the risk doesn't seem like one she would take. Her reputation is important to her, as is her ambition, and the lie you're trying to attribute to her doesn't make sense for her character to tell.
It's also backed up later on that she was likely being honest when they're waiting to get into the Great Hall, where she's going over spells and muttering to herself trying to figure out what the test might be that sorts them into their houses. She doesn't seem to lack confidence that she can perform magic if needed, and there's no reason for her to lie while thinking to herself. It's not a direct statement, but implied more than heavily enough that we can easily assume she was being honest on the train about having tried a few practice spells.
This is nothing but an ad-hom deflection. It is neither a defense of your position nor an argument against mine.
If you actually had a reasonable rebuttal, you wouldn't have bothered resorting to an ad-hom position to try and derail the topic.
Funny how you went for this kind of argument rather than bringing up an example from the source that supports your position. Such as another instance of Hermione lying by bragging about having done something she hasn't to make herself look good and impress people, or something that reinforces that she might have done something like that.
You know, like I did when I supported my position by bringing up her talking to herself about what magic she needed to remember to pass whatever sort of test it was while waiting outside the hall before the Sorting Ceremony. It's not absolute proof, but it does reinforce that she was likely being honest on the train. I'd think you'd provide an example of her telling that same sort of lie later on if you could.
You haven't done that because it doesn't ever happen, and what you're suggesting is out of character for her. Hermione simply being dishonest sometimes in and of itself isn't enough to make that case as the motivation and context behind those instances is completely different than what you're suggesting here. If anything, the books reinforce that she was probably being honest by having her back up such claims by having her pull off what she says she can do.
If you actually had a reasonable rebuttal, you wouldn't have bothered resorting to an ad-hom position to try and derail the topic.
Funny how you went for this kind of argument rather than bringing up an example from the source that supports your position. Such as another instance of Hermione lying by bragging about having done something she hasn't to make herself look good and impress people, or something that reinforces that she might have done something like that.
You know, like I did when I supported my position by bringing up her talking to herself about what magic she needed to remember to pass whatever sort of test it was while waiting outside the hall before the Sorting Ceremony. It's not absolute proof, but it does reinforce that she was likely being honest on the train. I'd think you'd provide an example of her telling that same sort of lie later on if you could.
You haven't done that because it doesn't ever happen, and what you're suggesting is out of character for her. Hermione simply being dishonest sometimes in and of itself isn't enough to make that case as the motivation and context behind those instances is completely different than what you're suggesting here. If anything, the books reinforce that she was probably being honest by having her back up such claims by having her pull off what she says she can do.
It's funny that you act like you were forced into this, and that you don't participate in discussions like this all the time and end up resorting to an ad-hom defense when things don't go your way.
It's a nerd argument on the internet so I don't really expect you to admit that you're wrong to begin with, but you are. Half the fun of arguing on the internet is getting someone to the point where ad-hom is the only defense they have left. It's the message board equivalent of getting someone to rage quit in a pvp online match by way of fair gameplay. You like doing it to others too and you know it.
I have a full time job. I'm not spending the four to five hours it would take to rebut every single one of your incorrect assumptions and opinions-presented-as-facts, especially when I've already done so and was summarily ignored. Having more time to make up bullshit than the other guy has to time or willingness to rebut it is hardly a victory- nor is it an 'ad hom attack' to say so. I've covered, multiple times, the issues with both your position and your points. Your response is to start reiterating your exact same flawed position and supporting arguments in a more wordy manner, with even more assumptions and declarations without proof. I've also noticed your habit of sliding 3-4 things that are true, but unrelated, so that you have something to point to that is completely truthful and backed with sources for when you are called out on your habits. The fact that you're claiming I'm 'attacking you' and that it 'wins your the argument' after you've spent a page and a half over 2-3 topics spamming the exact same thing is sad.
Here's a perfect example of what I mean. You slide in two small details, but they make a mockery of your entire position. You present an opinion, bereft of proof for or against- you just state something and then assume we must take your words as gospel. Even better, you present as truth that you're debating 'in fair faith' or by way of fair gameplay not a sentence later.
Just because you think something is true doesn't make it so- it just makes you an awful person to interact with online, especially when people are trying to have an interesting conversation without you.
For everyone else: I believe we were discussing the merits of whether or not Hermione actually learned the entire first year curriculum or just the theory part before stepping on the Hogwarts Express.
Several opinions are: she was lying about doing the spells prior to Hogwarts, she actually did the spells prior to Hogwarts, or she did the spells as soon as she got on the train- which we never got to discuss before the topic got jacked.
Does anyone know when/what time period Hermione reached Harry and Ron, and whereabouts they were in the train? Do we know if she started in the same compartment as Neville? Might narrow down if she cast anything on the train or not.
E.G. If they were in the middle of the train and she started in the same car as Neville (I can't remember if JK Rowling explained once that that was how they met or not- anyone know?) and it was fairly early into the train ride (before snack lady) then she probably wouldn't have time I would think.
Here's a perfect example of what I mean. You slide in two small details, but they make a mockery of your entire position. You present an opinion, bereft of proof for or against- you just state something and then assume we must take your words as gospel. Even better, you present as truth that you're debating 'in fair faith' or by way of fair gameplay not a sentence later.
Just because you think something is true doesn't make it so- it just makes you an awful person to interact with online, especially when people are trying to have an interesting conversation without you.
For everyone else: I believe we were discussing the merits of whether or not Hermione actually learned the entire first year curriculum or just the theory part before stepping on the Hogwarts Express.
Several opinions are: she was lying about doing the spells prior to Hogwarts, she actually did the spells prior to Hogwarts, or she did the spells as soon as she got on the train- which we never got to discuss before the topic got jacked.
Does anyone know when/what time period Hermione reached Harry and Ron, and whereabouts they were in the train? Do we know if she started in the same compartment as Neville? Might narrow down if she cast anything on the train or not.
E.G. If they were in the middle of the train and she started in the same car as Neville (I can't remember if JK Rowling explained once that that was how they met or not- anyone know?) and it was fairly early into the train ride (before snack lady) then she probably wouldn't have time I would think.
Again, I say it's very doubtful that she was lying, simply because all it would take was Ron or Harry telling her to put up or shut up to prove her a liar. If Ron had been in a fouler mood for her essentially mocking him, he might have just to be spiteful.
Train left at eleven, and the last time we have mentioned before she arrives is twelve thirty, when the snack lady shows up. harry and Ron spend some time eating various snacks, and the country side changes, so probably she showed up anywhere between one and four in the afternoon, or two to five hours after departure. Let's say she sat around/helped Neville for an hour, which gives her one to fur hours where she could have been doing magic.
That does leave her with ample time to practice a couple of spells, though I think that given her studious nature, she would have kept going until they got to school if it were the first time she actually performed magic. Can't say one way or another, but that seems like the "Hermione" thing to do.
No idea where they started relative to each other, but Harry chose a compartment near the end, and Hermione probably would have started at the front of the train and worked her way back. Or at the back and working her way to the front. No idea how long the train was, but a rough estimate of four compartments per car with enough room for four people each means sixteen people per car. There are forty first years, so about 280 children total, assuming some variance, I'd say at least ten cars, probably a couple more for Prefects, the Snack Lady, and so on. Train might be longer than that depending on if its size has been adjusted due to Voldemort killing a bunch of people for ten years, so it could be a lot longer than that, though it's doubtful, since Ron says everywhere else is full. (Unless he's lying, and is part of a conspiracy)
Let's say 5 minutes per car, taking one minute for each compartment and one more for the hallway, so about an hour to get to Harry, leaving between zero and three hours she could have been doing magic, roughly.
New point: When everyone is freaking about the test, I notice that Harry didn't think he should have practiced beforehand, just that he was nervous. Could mean he messed about with magic a bit before school, but not really hard evidence either way.
Train left at eleven, and the last time we have mentioned before she arrives is twelve thirty, when the snack lady shows up. harry and Ron spend some time eating various snacks, and the country side changes, so probably she showed up anywhere between one and four in the afternoon, or two to five hours after departure. Let's say she sat around/helped Neville for an hour, which gives her one to fur hours where she could have been doing magic.
That does leave her with ample time to practice a couple of spells, though I think that given her studious nature, she would have kept going until they got to school if it were the first time she actually performed magic. Can't say one way or another, but that seems like the "Hermione" thing to do.
No idea where they started relative to each other, but Harry chose a compartment near the end, and Hermione probably would have started at the front of the train and worked her way back. Or at the back and working her way to the front. No idea how long the train was, but a rough estimate of four compartments per car with enough room for four people each means sixteen people per car. There are forty first years, so about 280 children total, assuming some variance, I'd say at least ten cars, probably a couple more for Prefects, the Snack Lady, and so on. Train might be longer than that depending on if its size has been adjusted due to Voldemort killing a bunch of people for ten years, so it could be a lot longer than that, though it's doubtful, since Ron says everywhere else is full. (Unless he's lying, and is part of a conspiracy)
Let's say 5 minutes per car, taking one minute for each compartment and one more for the hallway, so about an hour to get to Harry, leaving between zero and three hours she could have been doing magic, roughly.
New point: When everyone is freaking about the test, I notice that Harry didn't think he should have practiced beforehand, just that he was nervous. Could mean he messed about with magic a bit before school, but not really hard evidence either way.
Yet you took the time to type all this up and continue the discussion. A strange way to spend your "limited time" if you really find it as distasteful as you claim.
You've really got no room to go on about others being 'awful to interact with' by the way. I'm not the one who started tossing insults and attacking character. It doesn't bother me, but since you brought it up and are trying to throw that shit at me and make it stick, I was staying on topic and arguing my position without going there. You're the one who broke off and started that, so don't go pointing a finger as if it was me who went hostile and bitchy first.
I'm not perfect, but the vast majority of the time my position is that if you can dish it out, you can take it, and if you can't, you shouldn't have. I generally try to avoid being the first one to go down that road, but don't mind going down it if someone else decides to. It can be entertaining and interesting in its own way sometimes. If that doesn't interest you, don't start throwing stones in the greenhouse, because I'll just start having fun throwing them too.
At any rate, you've not managed to show any actual flaw in my position, nor can you provide specific examples to support your own. Hermione simply lying at other points in completely different situations with completely different motivations doesn't cut it.
The only evidence you've presented really is that she lied about the troll to cover for Ron and Harry and take responsibility herself. Something she felt partially responsible for as she was the reason they were there to begin with. She wasn't doing it to impress them or the teacher, or to make friends with Ron and Harry, she wasn't getting along with either of them prior to that incident. They had just saved her life and had gone out of their way to find her and risked their necks to try and warn her about the danger, so gratitude had something to do with it as well.
No one said she doesn't ever lie, brag, or act selfishly, but the specific lie you're trying to attribute to her is both out of character for her and counter to her motivations. This is backed up by her actions later in the book where she's the only one able to manage to alter the match she was given to turn into a needle in Transfiguration, her muttering to herself prior to the Sorting, and the fact that she backs up her words on a regular basis when claiming she can do or has done something before. The scene in Charms where she corrects Ron and then easily performs the charm after he challenges her over it is a good example. Something that easily could have happened to her on the train and backfired on her if she was lying, and she's smart enough to have realized that.
All evidence in the first book points to you being wrong and her being honest about her claim on the train. I'm not the one being abrasive and stubborn while trying to shove my view down anyone's throat here. You're just wrong about this, and the first book makes it as clear as it possibly can without directly stating that she wasn't lying.
You've really got no room to go on about others being 'awful to interact with' by the way. I'm not the one who started tossing insults and attacking character. It doesn't bother me, but since you brought it up and are trying to throw that shit at me and make it stick, I was staying on topic and arguing my position without going there. You're the one who broke off and started that, so don't go pointing a finger as if it was me who went hostile and bitchy first.
I'm not perfect, but the vast majority of the time my position is that if you can dish it out, you can take it, and if you can't, you shouldn't have. I generally try to avoid being the first one to go down that road, but don't mind going down it if someone else decides to. It can be entertaining and interesting in its own way sometimes. If that doesn't interest you, don't start throwing stones in the greenhouse, because I'll just start having fun throwing them too.
At any rate, you've not managed to show any actual flaw in my position, nor can you provide specific examples to support your own. Hermione simply lying at other points in completely different situations with completely different motivations doesn't cut it.
The only evidence you've presented really is that she lied about the troll to cover for Ron and Harry and take responsibility herself. Something she felt partially responsible for as she was the reason they were there to begin with. She wasn't doing it to impress them or the teacher, or to make friends with Ron and Harry, she wasn't getting along with either of them prior to that incident. They had just saved her life and had gone out of their way to find her and risked their necks to try and warn her about the danger, so gratitude had something to do with it as well.
No one said she doesn't ever lie, brag, or act selfishly, but the specific lie you're trying to attribute to her is both out of character for her and counter to her motivations. This is backed up by her actions later in the book where she's the only one able to manage to alter the match she was given to turn into a needle in Transfiguration, her muttering to herself prior to the Sorting, and the fact that she backs up her words on a regular basis when claiming she can do or has done something before. The scene in Charms where she corrects Ron and then easily performs the charm after he challenges her over it is a good example. Something that easily could have happened to her on the train and backfired on her if she was lying, and she's smart enough to have realized that.
All evidence in the first book points to you being wrong and her being honest about her claim on the train. I'm not the one being abrasive and stubborn while trying to shove my view down anyone's throat here. You're just wrong about this, and the first book makes it as clear as it possibly can without directly stating that she wasn't lying.
AoMythology@Shirotsume: Hermione never said she did everything, just that she tried a couple of spells and they worked (unless my memory has failed me). Obviously, if she said she's learned all of the books, she meant the theory. So, it's well within her capabilities to have learned the spells on the train.
We're never given details, but her having done it on the train seems a bit less likely than her having done it before that day.
I only say that because tihe way she words it does make me think it was probably before that, but that's not a strong assertion at all.
The way she puts it is quite open and could easily mean she tried it at any point between when she bought her wand right up to shortly before she barges in on Harry and Ron. Still, if it was very recent, you'd think she'd say something along the lines of 'I was just practicing' rather than a more general and open statement. People tend to get more and more general about time the longer it's been from an event they are describing.
That's not proof of anything, but it does make me think that it was probably something she did before that day, but I also admit that it's not really terribly unlikely that it was something she did while on the train that day.
We're never given details, but her having done it on the train seems a bit less likely than her having done it before that day.
I only say that because tihe way she words it does make me think it was probably before that, but that's not a strong assertion at all.
The way she puts it is quite open and could easily mean she tried it at any point between when she bought her wand right up to shortly before she barges in on Harry and Ron. Still, if it was very recent, you'd think she'd say something along the lines of 'I was just practicing' rather than a more general and open statement. People tend to get more and more general about time the longer it's been from an event they are describing.
That's not proof of anything, but it does make me think that it was probably something she did before that day, but I also admit that it's not really terribly unlikely that it was something she did while on the train that day.
The train doesn't arrive at the station until evening, and she doesn't show up until near the end of the trip unless Ron went on about Quidditch for hours between when she left and when Draco showed up, which I doubt. If it got dark at eight o'clock, then it's a nine hour trip. I'd assume dusk being somewhere between seven or eight given the time of year, so it's probably more like somewhere between six to eight hours that she would have been able to try a few practice spells if she wanted.
I also doubt that Hermione really went from one end of the train to another. It was a lost toad, so they probably never left the car. She returned shortly after without Neville, so they probably found his toad almost immediately after they left. It's mentioned later that he 'kept losing his toad' implying that it was found within whatever time passed between her first arrival and Draco running off and then lost again.
I also doubt that Hermione really went from one end of the train to another. It was a lost toad, so they probably never left the car. She returned shortly after without Neville, so they probably found his toad almost immediately after they left. It's mentioned later that he 'kept losing his toad' implying that it was found within whatever time passed between her first arrival and Draco running off and then lost again.