Hermione Granger: Character Analysis

[deansboy]

I think Rowling failed to humanize Hermione properly by not having her fall on her face when it came to her bad traits. She had moments of embarrassment and failure but Ron and Harry both had times where the worst of them took over and caused serious issues, Hermione, possibly because Rowling saw herself in the character was not given a healthy dose of humility.

Her habit of reading everything underneath her nose didn't come from a need to learn but a need to show off. It wasn't enough to rip through a test and get a good grade she HAD to come out on top, she HAD to be called upon, she could not understand that not getting everything correct was perfectly fine.

This need for "official" recognition also affected her acceptance of opinions, a Hogwarts' teacher or some expert was given all respect but anyone she considered to not hold such "pedigree" was to be ignored and even ridiculed, best exemplified by her reaction towards the existence of the elder wand when told about by Mr. Lovegood and then Mr. Olivander.

Once she had an opinion in her head it was right because she saw it as such, she's held up as this fighter for the hard done by but it's not pointed out that she completely refused to listen to the house-elves when it came to their enslavement. She did her reading and came up with her own opinion and forced it upon everyone else, not bothering to actually look at the creatures she was trying to help. She seems to have learned, through her interactions with Kreacher, how the mind of the house-elf works but there seemed to be no actual learning curve for her, she simply got it rather then struggling with the fact that she was going about things the wrong way.

If anything Rowling created a great character who showed what determination could achieve, her natural ability was not that of Harry's or Ron's in many ways but her sharp mind and downright obsession with being prepared worked in their favor but she failed to soften the girl's edges properly. Hermione, to the end, remained a bit too cold and condescending in too many ways.

[darklordspal]

Deansboy,

I agree with alot of what you say about Hermione's character.

I'm not sure I agree that she was always "cold", but she could be mean, selfish, and downright cruel both verbally and physically on occasion. Ron and Harry had flashes of this once and awhile, but Hermione's intellect and personality often made these more pronounced with her. And it didn't hurt that the teachers at Hogwarts saw her as more mature than she really was. And often JKR wrote it such a way as to allow the reader to say," That's alright, Hermione had a good reason etc..."

I'm afraid I lost alot of respect for JKR when DH came out mainly b\c of how she handled Hermione. While Harry remained the focus of the drama and mystery of the story, basically all the "heavy lifting" was handed over to Hermione. Hermione became the main "action hero" of DH while Harry becomes focused on finding the Hallows and facing Voldemort and Ron (yet again) has to deal with his insecurities. I really don't understand why JKR basically made Ron's character go backwards. And even though JKR says Ron becomes more of the leader after returning you don't see any actions that bring this out.

Deansboy mentions that Hermione never is forced to develop any humility in the series as compared to Harry and especially Ron. She is stalwart under torture (the noble victim), saves Harry at least a few times (unflappable under stress), sticks with Harry when Ron loses faith (unshakably loyal), and even saves her old nemesis Lavander from Greyback (forgiving saint).

I mean to say, I can understand why some ppl have posted threads wondering if Hermione is the "real hero" of the series instead of Harry.

I love Hermione. I really do, but she is lacking that quality that makes her a well rounded character or believable as a person, and that is facing defeat or failure. Everyone has to face it one time or another. You see Harry and Ron go through this process but not Hermione, at least not at the level of the guys. Ron broken by the Locket and Harry is broken when Sirius dies. Hermione has her heart broke by Ron\Lavender in HBP or when the boys shut her out in POA, but that is not like what JKR puts Harry and Ron through. That leaves a huge hole in understanding Hermione's character. In the end, as Deansboy says, she seems a little cold and distant, IMHO.

[wickedwickedboy]

Originally Posted by darklordspal

Deansboy,

I agree with alot of what you say about Hermione's character.

I'm not sure I agree that she was always "cold", but she could be mean, selfish, and downright cruel both verbally and physically on occasion. Ron and Harry had flashes of this once and awhile, but Hermione's intellect and personality often made these more pronounced with her. And it didn't hurt that the teachers at Hogwarts saw her as more mature than she really was. And often JKR wrote it such a way as to allow the reader to say," That's alright, Hermione had a good reason etc..."

I agree that she came off a bit cold at times and nagging as well. But I kinda feel like that was something to dislike about an otherwise pretty perfect girl. She always wanted to do the right thing, always looking for and often finding solutions, etc. But her character allowed for her to be rather unpopular among the student body (good in terms of her having to hang with Ron and Harry) - while at the same time endowing her with pretty cool gifts. But there was no reason for her to be unpopular just because she was super intelligent - so the 'know it all' attitude, the nagging and the episodes of rash cruelty had to be there to make that believable, imo.

I'm afraid I lost alot of respect for JKR when DH came out mainly b\c of how she handled Hermione. While Harry remained the focus of the drama and mystery of the story, basically all the "heavy lifting" was handed over to Hermione. Hermione became the main "action hero" of DH while Harry becomes focused on finding the Hallows and facing Voldemort and Ron (yet again) has to deal with his insecurities. I really don't understand why JKR basically made Ron's character go backwards. And even though JKR says Ron becomes more of the leader after returning you don't see any actions that bring this out.

Um, I didn't really see her that way - granted I skimmed a bit in the camping scenes, but the gist of it was her overt sadness and determination to keep helping I thought. I didn't really see her as leading the way with action though, more like nagging Harry to stay on track.

Deansboy mentions that Hermione never is forced to develop any humility in the series as compared to Harry and especially Ron. She is stalwart under torture (the noble victim), saves Harry at least a few times (unflappable under stress), sticks with Harry when Ron loses faith (unshakably loyal), and even saves her old nemesis Lavander from Greyback (forgiving saint).

I mean to say, I can understand why some ppl have posted threads wondering if Hermione is the "real hero" of the series instead of Harry.

I love Hermione. I really do, but she is lacking that quality that makes her a well rounded character or believable as a person, and that is facing defeat or failure. Everyone has to face it one time or another. You see Harry and Ron go through this process but not Hermione, at least not at the level of the guys. Ron broken by the Locket and Harry is broken when Sirius dies. Hermione has her heart broke by Ron\Lavender in HBP or when the boys shut her out in POA, but that is not like what JKR puts Harry and Ron through. That leaves a huge hole in understanding Hermione's character. In the end, as Deansboy says, she seems a little cold and distant, IMHO.

Now I got a different impression. To me, what most devastated Hermione were those moments when her intelligence was challenged. I don't think it always came across well, but my impression was that in these moments of grief, she was as devastated as losing a loved one. Granted, for a shorter amount of time, but more frequently than others had their deeper devastations. The thing is, I think it is hard for a reader to feel her grief - I mean as I recall, in high school, I have felt it when I hoped to do well on an exam and get it back marked up with notes and all, but it wasn't really crushing - an hour later I am on to something else. I think Hermione was dashed about that and any other little events where she felt challenged in that regard. This affected her more than losing Ron to Lav Lav I think - because rationally, she knew that was all fluff (although jealousy is a smooth customer anyway). So I wouldn't say she didn't undergo pain in the series, it was just a bit untraditional. I actually knew a guy like that, not a friend, but an acquaintance, who would mope around for hours if he didn't get his A+ on an exam. An "A" was for us lesser beings . So this does affect some people pretty strongly.

I don't think everyone has to suffer a grand loss to fill out as a character though; I think Hermione was shown going through a multitude of emotions and situations to give us a great idea of who she was overall. We definitely saw her estatically happy - and isn't that the same thing as suffering a grand loss, just in reverse? But I don't even feel that is necessary - some of the greatest characters are rather bland clear through a book and you still get a great idea of their character - like most detectives in the more refined mystery novels.

[darklordspal]

Wickedwickedboy,

I'm not saying Herrmione doesn't suffer in the series, but you never see her truly defeated the way Harry and Ron are at points in the series. Even Dumbledore learns humility after his sister dies and Snape learns humility after the woman he loves (Lilly) is killed.

I'm not saying I wanted Hermione to lose her parents, but she doesn't seem to face the really big defeats that teach humility (especially to heros).

I've mentioned this before, but the Horcrux's are a prime example. In DH everyone who destroys a horcrux by accident or intent gets hurt or suffers something awful when they do so. RAB dies, Dumbledore is poisoned, Harry is poisoned, Neville is burned, Harry dies (but gets better lol ). Even Crabbe (I think) dies when his fiend fire spell destroys the diadem. But Hermione comes out of the destroying the cup completely unscathed as far as we can tell.

The readers just don't get a chance to see or understand what really makes Hermione feel defeat and what that does to her and her view of herself. The readers see this happen with Harry and Ron, but not Hermione. And that leaves out a large part of an important character.

[wickedwickedboy]

Originally Posted by darklordspal

Wickedwickedboy,

I'm not saying Herrmione doesn't suffer in the series, but you never see her truly defeated the way Harry and Ron are at points in the series. Even Dumbledore learns humility after his sister dies and Snape learns humility after the woman he loves (Lilly) is killed.

I'm not saying I wanted Hermione to lose her parents, but she doesn't seem to face the really big defeats that teach humility (especially to heros).

I've mentioned this before, but the Horcrux's are a prime example. In DH everyone who destroys a horcrux by accident or intent gets hurt or suffers something awful when they do so. RAB dies, Dumbledore is poisoned, Harry is poisoned, Neville is burned, Harry dies (but gets better lol ). Even Crabbe (I think) dies when his fiend fire spell destroys the diadem. But Hermione comes out of the destroying the cup completely unscathed as far as we can tell.

The readers just don't get a chance to see or understand what really makes Hermione feel defeat and what that does to her and her view of herself. The readers see this happen with Harry and Ron, but not Hermione. And that leaves out a large part of an important character.

Well I am not sure I understand what you mean. I rather have to disagree with the premise that a character need suffer through a huge defeat in order for readers to get to know them - or that their suffering a 'grand humility' is necessary for character development (for the character or the reader).

I agree we never saw a "grand defeat" that left her utterly deflated and morose like Harry at the loss of a loved one. But again I have to ask why that is necessary. What information would you garner from that? Harry was in the dulldrums and quick to anger after Sirius' death - but did it really inform us of anything about him that we didn't already know? His getting over it was slow - but that is normal to me. I think most people go through that similarly, no? And when Fred died, I really didn't see any grand character development come out of it for Ron - although there could have been, so I guess I am not really following what you are trying to say.

[meesha1971]

Originally Posted by darklordspal

Deansboy,

I agree with alot of what you say about Hermione's character.

I'm not sure I agree that she was always "cold", but she could be mean, selfish, and downright cruel both verbally and physically on occasion. Ron and Harry had flashes of this once and awhile, but Hermione's intellect and personality often made these more pronounced with her. And it didn't hurt that the teachers at Hogwarts saw her as more mature than she really was. And often JKR wrote it such a way as to allow the reader to say," That's alright, Hermione had a good reason etc..."

I agree. I never really saw Hermione as "cold" either. She was frequently distant and closed off, but she was also a very emotional person so I never saw her as "cold". Emotionally, Hermione struck me as more of a ticking time bomb because she closed herself off so much. I would say that was - at least in part - due to the image of being more mature than others her age. Hermione contributes to that herself - and I think that was intentional to a large degree because she wanted to impress the teachers and other adults. Hermione strives to present herself as an adult even at the age of 11. While the other kids are having fun and joking around, she is carrying around heavy tomes for "a bit of light reading" and giving them disapproving looks or taking it upon herself to lecture them for their "childish" behavior. There are times when she comes across like a mini-McGonagall.

A child putting that much pressure on themselves is bound to crack under it eventually. And we see that in various situations throughout the series. For example, Ron calling her a nightmare and pointing out that nobody likes her results in her spending the entire day in the bathroom crying - skipping her classes even. I think that was in part due to the fact that it was Ron who had said it and it did come across that she was trying to make friends with them - though her social skills were sorely lacking and she ended up irritating them more often than not. But I would say it was also due to the fact that what he said was true. The teachers may have loved her, but the other students were put off by her behavior and lack of social skills.

As I see it, that was Hermione's biggest "defeat" in the series and I think that it was a good learning experience for her on the whole - the entire experience with the troll and everything leads to her becoming friends with Ron and Harry and she learns to relax more - primarily from Ron who I would say is the King of Relaxation. Her social skills improve, but she still has a tendency to present herself as an adult and put a lot of pressure on herself rather than enjoying her childhood. As such, she remains an emotional time bomb throughout the series and that comes out through her bursting into tears or we see her explode with episodes where she is mean, selfish, and downright cruel both verbally and physically.

However, I do agree that much of that was glossed over so the behavior wasn't really addressed and the reader gets a sense of "well, it was okay for Hermione to do that because ..." Other than the situation with the "nightmare" comment Hermione is never really put into the situation of having to deal with her own flaws in that regard. For example, when she went behind Harry's back to tell McGonagall about the Firebolt, it didn't come out as a learning experience for her in the end. The boys didn't talk to her for a while and she was upset by that, but she remains convinced that going behind Harry's back was the right thing to do in spite of that. And, in the end, it comes out that they were all right - Sirius sent the broom, but there was nothing wrong with it. So her negative behavior there was never addressed and it doesn't come across that she learned anything from that. She doesn't go behind Harry's back like that again - which was good - but she didn't really learn to respect the boys' opinions from that either. Same thing with Crookshanks and Scabbers - in the end it comes out that she and Ron were both right because Crookshanks was after Scabbers, but it turned out there was a good reason and he didn't actually eat him.

So we never see Hermione put into the position where she has to accept that she was wrong about something and deal with that. There were a lot of times where she was wrong, but they were either glossed over with Hermione being partially right so she had something to hold on to and be able to say "See! I was right!" or largely ignored when she was completely wrong. Jo treads a very thin line with Hermione and she comes dangerously close to being a "Mary Sue" - and there are times when she does come across that way. I really think there should have been at least one moment for Hermione where she was completely wrong and had to deal with the consequences of it.

I'm afraid I lost alot of respect for JKR when DH came out mainly b\c of how she handled Hermione. While Harry remained the focus of the drama and mystery of the story, basically all the "heavy lifting" was handed over to Hermione. Hermione became the main "action hero" of DH while Harry becomes focused on finding the Hallows and facing Voldemort and Ron (yet again) has to deal with his insecurities. I really don't understand why JKR basically made Ron's character go backwards. And even though JKR says Ron becomes more of the leader after returning you don't see any actions that bring this out.

Deansboy mentions that Hermione never is forced to develop any humility in the series as compared to Harry and especially Ron. She is stalwart under torture (the noble victim), saves Harry at least a few times (unflappable under stress), sticks with Harry when Ron loses faith (unshakably loyal), and even saves her old nemesis Lavander from Greyback (forgiving saint).

I mean to say, I can understand why some ppl have posted threads wondering if Hermione is the "real hero" of the series instead of Harry.

I agree with a lot of what you're saying here, but it never came across to me that Hermione was being presented as the heroine. She was always prepared - the beaded bag was a brilliant idea and she showed foresight in making sure everything was packed in case they had to leave quickly. She packed nearly everything they might need - a tent, healing potions, tons of books, clothes, etc... She was responsible for apparating them from place to place since she was the only one who had gotten the license - and I'd say that was also to make sure they all got to the same destination together. And she does get them out of some tight scrapes - apparating them away from the wedding, apparating away from Grimmauld Place as soon as she realizes that the Death Eater had seen it, saving Harry from Nagini, getting away from the Lovegood home, etc...

However, there is also some emphasis on how some of these things don't quite work out as Hermione intended. When she makes that quick change to apparate again immediately as they get to Grimmauld Place - Harry sees a glimpse of the door and their off again - Ron is splinched in the process. She casts an erratic blasting spell to save Harry from Nagini and, in the process, she breaks his wand. She had the foresight to pack almost everything they needed in that brilliant beaded bag - except food. That really surprised me - she was prepared for nearly every other eventuality, but she forgot to pack food. However - apart from Harry getting angry about his wand being broken - those things really don't get addressed. But it did somewhat ease the "Hermione the Great!" aspect when something went wrong like that, IMO.

I wouldn't say Hermione came across like a leader in all that either. She's still essentially the planner, the organizer, and information girl for the most part. It's Harry who decides that Grimmauld Place is the safest place for them to go after they're attacked on Tottenheim Court Rd. Hermione was very reluctant to press forward with their plan to infiltrate the Ministry - I think she would have kept them holed up in Grimmauld Place for months if they'd waited until she felt ready. Harry decides that it's time to go for it because they can't prepare any better than they have. Harry realized early on that one of the Horcruxes was very likely hidden at Hogwarts, but Hermione refused to even consider the possibility and that held them back on the search and destroy mission. Hermione's reluctance to act without being 100% certain that nothing would go wrong prevented her from being a good leader, IMO.

I love Hermione. I really do, but she is lacking that quality that makes her a well rounded character or believable as a person, and that is facing defeat or failure. Everyone has to face it one time or another. You see Harry and Ron go through this process but not Hermione, at least not at the level of the guys. Ron broken by the Locket and Harry is broken when Sirius dies. Hermione has her heart broke by Ron\Lavender in HBP or when the boys shut her out in POA, but that is not like what JKR puts Harry and Ron through. That leaves a huge hole in understanding Hermione's character. In the end, as Deansboy says, she seems a little cold and distant, IMHO.

I agree. Hermione never really had to deal with the consequences of being wrong or failing. She never really got a lesson in humility in the same way that Harry and Ron did. They were both put through the ringer with having to deal with the consequences of their mistakes. The closest we come to that with Hermione was her overhearing the "nightmare" comment in PS/SS and the boys not speaking to her after she went behind Harry's back about the Firebolt and the situation with Crookshanks and Scabbers in POA. The first was more about Hermione improving her social skills a bit and bringing the trio together as friends. The other two were glossed over with Hermione turning out to be partially right so she doesn't really learn much from those situations because she focused on what she was right about so her behavior there was never really addressed.

I thought the situation with the house-elves was going to be used for that kind of character development for Hermione - somebody telling her or her finding out for herself that her actions had actually offended the house-elves and they were refusing to clean Gryffindor Tower so Dobby had to do all the work by himself. I thought that might actually happen in OOTP when Dobby warned the DA because it seemed likely that Hermione would have noticed he was wearing a lot of the hats she had knitted, but it was never addressed on page. I think that would have been a very good learning experience for Hermione - and something like that may have happened off page because Hermione does appear to have realized that she was wrong in DH and started looking at the issue from the house-elves point of view, but we weren't shown how she got to that point.

Originally Posted by darklordspal

Wickedwickedboy,

I'm not saying Herrmione doesn't suffer in the series, but you never see her truly defeated the way Harry and Ron are at points in the series. Even Dumbledore learns humility after his sister dies and Snape learns humility after the woman he loves (Lilly) is killed.

I'm not saying I wanted Hermione to lose her parents, but she doesn't seem to face the really big defeats that teach humility (especially to heros).

I've mentioned this before, but the Horcrux's are a prime example. In DH everyone who destroys a horcrux by accident or intent gets hurt or suffers something awful when they do so. RAB dies, Dumbledore is poisoned, Harry is poisoned, Neville is burned, Harry dies (but gets better lol ). Even Crabbe (I think) dies when his fiend fire spell destroys the diadem. But Hermione comes out of the destroying the cup completely unscathed as far as we can tell.

The readers just don't get a chance to see or understand what really makes Hermione feel defeat and what that does to her and her view of herself. The readers see this happen with Harry and Ron, but not Hermione. And that leaves out a large part of an important character.

Exactly. I'm not sure why Jo didn't try to find a way to have Hermione destroy her Horcrux on page so we could see what she went through with that. Although, when Harry meets back up with Ron and Hermione as they're coming back from that, it really doesn't appear that it was that big of a deal for her. She's rather excited and praising Ron - there's not really any sign that destroying the Horcrux held any trauma for her at all. It's possible that - at that point - she's just caught up in the exhilaration that they managed to get into the chamber and destroy the cup, but I thought that was a bit odd.

I think that would have been an excellent way to show some real insight into Hermione's character - particularly with her fears and insecurities coming to light. Hermione always struck me as someone who was very insecure because she put so much pressure on herself to be the best at whatever she did. But we never really get any insight into why that is. We get that for Harry and Ron - we learn what makes them tick, what they fear, etc... We see them overcome those things. But we don't really get anything like that for Hermione.

[Yoana]

Originally Posted by darklordspal

I love Hermione. I really do, but she is lacking that quality that makes her a well rounded character or believable as a person, and that is facing defeat or failure. Everyone has to face it one time or another. You see Harry and Ron go through this process but not Hermione, at least not at the level of the guys. Ron broken by the Locket and Harry is broken when Sirius dies. Hermione has her heart broke by Ron\Lavender in HBP or when the boys shut her out in POA, but that is not like what JKR puts Harry and Ron through. That leaves a huge hole in understanding Hermione's character. In the end, as Deansboy says, she seems a little cold and distant, IMHO.

I think she does face defeat and failure - in her relationship with Ron. I don't know if you've ever been into a situation like this, but the person you love choosing someone elese over you, and you having to see them together, is a huge, devastating, torturing pain to endure. I think Hermione came off as completely devastated and humiliated in this situation. I felt very bad for her. And I really don't think that one's emotional life is less important than the other aspects of their life.

[meesha1971]

Originally Posted by wickedwickedboy

Well I am not sure I understand what you mean. I rather have to disagree with the premise that a character need suffer through a huge defeat in order for readers to get to know them - or that their suffering a 'grand humility' is necessary for character development (for the character or the reader).

I agree we never saw a "grand defeat" that left her utterly deflated and morose like Harry at the loss of a loved one. But again I have to ask why that is necessary. What information would you garner from that? Harry was in the dulldrums and quick to anger after Sirius' death - but did it really inform us of anything about him that we didn't already know? His getting over it was slow - but that is normal to me. I think most people go through that similarly, no? And when Fred died, I really didn't see any grand character development come out of it for Ron - although there could have been, so I guess I am not really following what you are trying to say.

Well, it wasn't the death itself that was the learning experience for Harry. It was the fact that it was his mistake that played a part in Sirius being killed. He was fooled by Voldemort and led into a trap. He took five of his friends into that trap with him. The Order had to come and rescue them and Sirius was killed in that battle. Of course there were other factors involved, but Harry had to deal with the consequences of his mistake and that helps him grow as a person - within the context of the story.

Ron's big learning experience was his leaving and returning in DH and the destruction of the locket Horcrux. Through that he confronts his deepest fears and insecurities and overcomes them. That was a significant moment in his character development. On a smaller scale is his choice to date Lavender in HBP - which resulted in him hurting both Hermione and then Lavender when they finally broke up. And the Quidditch subplot played into that as well. Various events throughout the series where Ron was put in a situation where he failed or made a big mistake and dealt with the consequences.

Hermione never really had to deal with the consequences of her mistakes in that manner. When she did make a mistake it was glossed over quite a bit and she never really has to deal with the negative aspects of her own behavior and the consequences of it - at least not on page for the reader to see. We aren't presented with a situation where Hermione was completely wrong and comes to learn a lesson in dealing with the consequences of that. We don't really get any insight towards what makes her tick - what her fears and insecurities are. Whenever Hermione makes a mistake, it is presented in a situation where everything works out all right anyway or she was partially right or the mistake is never addressed at all.

That results in a lack of growth for Hermione's character overall in that she never really comes to accept that there are situations where she will be wrong - her deep seated need to always be right is a constant throughout the series. Her tendency to disregard other people's opinions is a constant as well - the exception was always teachers or experts like Ollivander - but everyone else, she rarely gives credence to someone else's opinion if they aren't in complete agreement with her.

She's still an interesting character, but the lack of character development there is puzzling because almost every other significant character was given that kind of development.

Originally Posted by Yoana

I think she does face defeat and failure - in her relationship with Ron. I don't know if you've ever been into a situation like this, but the person you love choosing someone elese over you, and you having to see them together, is a huge, devastating, torturing pain to endure. I think Hermione came off as completely devastated and humiliated in this situation. I felt very bad for her. And I really don't think that one's emotional life is less important than the other aspects of their life.

I agree that Hermione was devastated and humiliated in that situation - I felt bad for her as well. However, the way it was presented, it was not a situation where Hermione was put in the position of having to acknowledge what she did wrong. She made mistakes as well, but the way it all went down, it was possible to blame the whole thing on Ron without considering how her own behavior led to that happening. In that regard - from Hermione's perspective - it wasn't really a failure on her part. At least as far as we were shown. It's possible that there was more to that behind the scenes, but we never really get any indication of that as we do with other characters.

I do think that situation could have been used to give Hermione that kind of development but, for whatever reason, Jo chose not to develop Hermione's character as fully as the others. We don't really see her put into a situation where she knows that she has failed and has to deal with the consequences of that and learn from what happened.

[Yoana]

Originally Posted by meesha1971

I agree that Hermione was devastated and humiliated in that situation - I felt bad for her as well. However, the way it was presented, it was not a situation where Hermione was put in the position of having to acknowledge what she did wrong. She made mistakes as well, but the way it all went down, it was possible to blame the whole thing on Ron without considering how her own behavior led to that happening. In that regard - from Hermione's perspective - it wasn't really a failure on her part. At least as far as we were shown. It's possible that there was more to that behind the scenes, but we never really get any indication of that as we do with other characters.

It's probably a matter of differnce in perception, but to me, both Ron and Hermione seemed terribly lame and pathetic in that situation, and it seemed clear to me that Hermione was as much to blame for how it turned out as was Ron. She was far from being reasonable, and her behaviour certainly didn't take the high ground and rise above Ron's - it's enough to name mockery, jealousy manipulation and physical attack. To me, Hermione did come off as failing at every step in that situation. She could have handled it with dignity and wisdom, thus proving her emotional intelligence is at par with her regular one; instead she acted like a child. When Ron almost died, we see her uncharacteristically quiet and sobbing next to him in the hospital wing. I think this is where she realised what a jerk she had been and was forced to see her behaviour for what it was. She made up with Ron after that, even though he was technically still with Lavender, so that is, in my opinion, a big indication that she had learnt her lesson in this sad and humiliating affair. I want to stress again that it is just my personal understanding of HBP, but I did see Hermione as a complete failure in her lpersonal life at that stage, without a single redeeming quality or act.

[meesha1971]

Originally Posted by Yoana

It's probably a matter of differnce in perception, but to me, both Ron and Hermione seemed terribly lame and pathetic in that situation, and it seemed clear to me that Hermione was as much to blame for how it turned out as was Ron. She was far from being reasonable, and her behaviour certainly didn't take the high ground and rise above Ron's - it's enough to name mockery, jealousy manipulation and physical attack. To me, Hermione did come off as failing at every step in that situation. She could have handled it with dignity and wisdom, thus proving her emotional intelligence is at par with her regular one; instead she acted like a child. When Ron almost died, we see her uncharacteristically quiet and sobbing next to him in the hospital wing. I think this is where she realised what a jerk she had been and was forced to see her behaviour for what it was. She made up with Ron after that, even though he was technically still with Lavender, so that is, in my opinion, a big indication that she had learnt her lesson in this sad and humiliating affair. I want to stress again that it is just my personal understanding of HBP, but I did see Hermione as a complete failure in her lpersonal life at that stage, without a single redeeming quality or act.

Well, that was my point actually - except the lame part because they're teenagers and I never expected them to handle that situation like mature adults. That would have been very unrealistic to me.

Other than that I agree with you for the most part. The reader can see where both of them made mistakes and handled the whole thing badly. They were both to blame for what happened there.

But the question is whether or not Hermione realized that and acknowledged her mistakes. The way it's presented, I don't think it's clear if she did or not. She does have a very emotional reaction to Ron almost dying and forgives him after that, but I think that could also come across as only that - her deciding to forgive him for what he did wrong without acknowledging her own mistakes.

Of course, this is due to the limitation of everything being from Harry's point of view - if Ron and Hermione had such a discussion where they both acknowledged their mistakes and learned from the experience, that would be a private moment without Harry around. And I actually do believe that they did talk about it during Hermione's visits to the hospital wing. But that is entirely speculation on my part because it wasn't something that was really addressed. I think Lavender's comment about Hermione visiting Ron indicates that, but it's still speculation. I think Jo could have found a way to definitively show that Hermione had accepted her own mistakes on page. For example, instead of Hermione sitting there uncharacteristically quiet, she could have been lamenting about how terribly she'd behaved towards Ron and worrying that she wouldn't get a chance to apologize to him and make things right.

One of the bigger flaws presented with Hermione's character was her tendency to disregard other people's opinions unless they were in agreement with her - except for teachers and experts. She was almost obsessive with her need to always be right. I found it odd that Jo took the time to show other characters dealing with their flaws on page - some with big moments - but didn't do so with Hermione. And Hermione destroying the cup Horcrux off page stands out with that as well - everyone else who destroyed a Horcrux had a traumatic experience with it. But as far as we can tell with Hermione - it was a breeze for her to destroy one.

[darklordspal]

Originally Posted by wickedwickedboy

I don't think everyone has to suffer a grand loss to fill out as a character though; I think Hermione was shown going through a multitude of emotions and situations to give us a great idea of who she was overall. We definitely saw her estatically happy - and isn't that the same thing as suffering a grand loss, just in reverse? But I don't even feel that is necessary - some of the greatest characters are rather bland clear through a book and you still get a great idea of their character - like most detectives in the more refined mystery novels.

No, you don't have to suffer a great loss to fill out a character. But JKR has every one of her main characters deal with defeat and loss on page except for Hermione.

JKR isn't writing a mystery novel but an heroic epic. Heros have to face defeat in order to be heroic. Harry faces emotional defeat when he realizes that his mistakes in OoTP helped lead to Sirius' death and there is absolutely nothing he can do about it. This is a defeat that tests your soul and how you value yourself. Ron goes through the same thing in DH when he has to face the reality that he abandoned his friends in their biggest hour of need b\c of his jealousy. JKR has Ron literally face his biggest fears and failures on page when he defeats the Locket.

This doesn't happen with Hermione. Or if it does JKR doesn't make it as important or character changing as she does with Harry and Ron. Harry becomes determined to face his destiny after OoTP. Ron becomes the leader he always wanted to be (JKR says) in the end of DH. Dumbledore drops his belief in wizard superiority after he loses his sister and Snape changes sides to spy for Dumbledore after Lilly is killed.


There doesn't seem to be such a life altering occasion for Hermione. In HBP after Ron is poisoned she is more supportive and friendly but she basically remains the same old Hermione. I know some ppl think Hermione was really hurt during Ron\Lavender, but she wasn't defeated. She fought back with the cold-shoulder treatment and using McLaggen to get at Ron. She still had tricks up her sleeve to use.

In Harry's and Ron's case there was no way for them to avoid facing the fact that they made huge mistakes and others were paying the price for them. And it during times like that you really find out what a person is made of. I never really found out what Hermione was made of IMHO.

Thanks Meesha, You did a better job of expanding on and explaining my point than me (as ususal lol ).

[LyraLovegood]

Another point to consider in this, though it mostly happened off page: Hermione Obliviating her own parents' awareness of her and sending them off to live in Australia as though she didn't exist.

Her struggle with this could have qualified as a life-changing traumatic loss, but as it happened while Harry was with the Dursleys, we don't get to see her dealing with it.

I do think that it would have been good if JKR had finished the development of the S.P.E.W. story arc in such a way that Hermione had realized that she was terribly wrong, and worked as hard to set things right with the Hogwarts House Elves as she had in her misguided attempts to set them free. We do see a slightly better grasp of understanding in her interaction with Kreacher, but it's still not quite spot on. At least she doesn't nag Harry to free Kreacher, which would have been more in character with GoF S.P.E.W. Hermione.

[deansboy]

Originally Posted by LyraLovegood

I do think that it would have been good if JKR had finished the development of the S.P.E.W. story arc in such a way that Hermione had realized that she was terribly wrong, and worked as hard to set things right with the Hogwarts House Elves as she had in her misguided attempts to set them free. We do see a slightly better grasp of understanding in her interaction with Kreacher, but it's still not quite spot on. At least she doesn't nag Harry to free Kreacher, which would have been more in character with GoF S.P.E.W. Hermione.

Seeing this I wonder if Rowling ever saw that Hermione at her worst, the ego, the willingness to only accept breaking of rules in her favor, the condescending attitude towards those whose opinion she considered pointless or less authoritative, actually fit the mold of a Death Eater better than Harry or Ron.

I wonder if Rowling, who compared Hermione to herself, simple couldn't bring herself to give Hermione those softer moments without burying them somehow. Only apologizing for Scabbers when dealing with Hagrid's problems, making up with Ron when he was poisoned, even the birds he conjured, which Harry himself was impressed by her ability to do so in such a situation, had to be used to attack Ron.

In some situations it's funny, like when she called a stop to the stunning lessons when Ron suggested she take his place, but for the most part the character is simply too unbalance. Her fears and disappointments were muffled, blurred and instead the attitude of acceptance that she ended learning later on was transferred in the series to Luna who, for all her weird beliefs, was willing to see past the flaws of the others.

Luna served as a good counterweight but it wasn't enough to truly balance Hermione since she had so much more face time. Immaturity and hardheadedness can be excused but, whether by design or because of a flaw in her writing, Rowling created in Hermione a person who many people could not stand to befriend. A person who's best moments (which are a lot of the time never flashy) were allowed to be hidden.

[AccioLumos]

^ it was that quality that allows Hermione to be endeared even more so to the reader or movie goer.

while many other characters saw Hermione as a smarmy, uncomprimising, know it all, being on the other side of the 4th wall, people were able to see that she was in reality, brave, loyal, caring, vulnerable and strong. much in the way ron and harry could see.

it was this that allowed fans to become even more attached, and to build a stronger connection to the character.

[eaglestreasure]

Originally Posted by deansboy

I think Rowling failed to humanize Hermione properly by not having her fall on her face when it came to her bad traits. She had moments of embarrassment and failure but Ron and Harry both had times where the worst of them took over and caused serious issues, Hermione, possibly because Rowling saw herself in the character was not given a healthy dose of humility.

Her habit of reading everything underneath her nose didn't come from a need to learn but a need to show off. It wasn't enough to rip through a test and get a good grade she HAD to come out on top, she HAD to be called upon, she could not understand that not getting everything correct was perfectly fine.

This need for "official" recognition also affected her acceptance of opinions, a Hogwarts' teacher or some expert was given all respect but anyone she considered to not hold such "pedigree" was to be ignored and even ridiculed, best exemplified by her reaction towards the existence of the elder wand when told about by Mr. Lovegood and then Mr. Olivander.

Once she had an opinion in her head it was right because she saw it as such, she's held up as this fighter for the hard done by but it's not pointed out that she completely refused to listen to the house-elves when it came to their enslavement. She did her reading and came up with her own opinion and forced it upon everyone else, not bothering to actually look at the creatures she was trying to help. She seems to have learned, through her interactions with Kreacher, how the mind of the house-elf works but there seemed to be no actual learning curve for her, she simply got it rather then struggling with the fact that she was going about things the wrong way.

If anything Rowling created a great character who showed what determination could achieve, her natural ability was not that of Harry's or Ron's in many ways but her sharp mind and downright obsession with being prepared worked in their favor but she failed to soften the girl's edges properly. Hermione, to the end, remained a bit too cold and condescending in too many ways.

I have to really disagree here. I hope I don't offend anyone here, but my opinion is going to be strong.

For the bad traits, I think you've gotten a distorted perception. Hermione has never been perfect; this is exemplified by her dependence on relationships (we see her very upset about Ron in HBP), as well as your mentioning that she can be a little narrow-minded, especially when it comes to accepting trivia that might not be fact.

I also highly disagree with your segment about her reading books to show off. We are shown throughout the series, IMO, that Hermione wants to learn and become better. She even went to the point of traveling back in time so that she could keep up with two more classes than anyone else wouldn't care to take in addition.
The reason she loved the classes so much was because she wanted to be learned. She wanted to be successful, and given her lack of social development earlier on in the series, there wouldn't have been a point to showing off because she would have no one to notice it.

It is true that Hermione has been stubborn in accepting something new, but I don't think it's out of arrogance that she would think she was always right. You referenced her reluctance to believe in the Deathly Hallows -- which I would think an example, if anything, of a character flaw. She needs logic to back things up, and that can certainly be a roadblock in new discovery. She didn't reject Mr. Lovegood's story or the Hallows, IMO, because she was arrogant. She did it because there wasn't much logic behind the theory.

As for her writing off anyone without "such pedigree", I disagree again.
Mrs. Weasley was certainly a loving, kind witch, but one could argue that she wasn't as sharp, as, say, Dumbledore, or Bathilda Bagshot. Hermione always treated Mrs. Weasley with respect, however, and learned that experience can eventually lead to wisdom.
Another good example is Harry himself. Hermione could easily have written him off as being too open, illogical, irrational, or hot-tempered, but she chose to beleive him with Voldemort's return. She was willing to fly to London to rescue Sirius Black from the ministry, and there was almost no Dumbledore-like logic involved in a complicated explanation of why she should.

As for being condescending, IMO, you're right -- partially. She was condescending to both Ron, Harry, even Ginny at one point. It's another character flaw that Rowling incorporated (I might add, very well) into her character. But she wasn't condescending all the time. She was loving towards Harry when he needed confidence, and usually spoke out with her "we're all in this together, we want to help you" speech. I also think she was cold at times, but I don't think we can blame her completely. And once again, IMO, she wasn't cold all the time, a strength in patience she had to acquire.

Hermione was an essential character to the series, so please don't take this as a flaming when I ask that no-one write her off as unimportant or condescending.

Originally Posted by wickedwickedboy

I agree that she came off a bit cold at times and nagging as well. But I kinda feel like that was something to dislike about an otherwise pretty perfect girl. She always wanted to do the right thing, always looking for and often finding solutions, etc.

Exactly! I've always felt, personally, that she was the one who was always looking to solutions rather than direct action.

Originally Posted by wickedwickedboy

I don't think everyone has to suffer a grand loss to fill out as a character though; I think Hermione was shown going through a multitude of emotions and situations to give us a great idea of who she was overall.

[Yoana]

Originally Posted by deansboy

the willingness to only accept breaking of rules in her favor

Where? When she brewed the Polyjuice potion, for example, how was that only in her favour?

Also, what concrete evidence gives you the impression that she read to show off rather than just out of a desire to learn/know?

[darklordspal]

Originally Posted by deansboy

Seeing this I wonder if Rowling ever saw that Hermione at her worst, the ego, the willingness to only accept breaking of rules in her favor, the condescending attitude towards those whose opinion she considered pointless or less authoritative, actually fit the mold of a Death Eater better than Harry or Ron.

I wonder if Rowling, who compared Hermione to herself, simple couldn't bring herself to give Hermione those softer moments without burying them somehow. Only apologizing for Scabbers when dealing with Hagrid's problems, making up with Ron when he was poisoned, even the birds he conjured, which Harry himself was impressed by her ability to do so in such a situation, had to be used to attack Ron.

In some situations it's funny, like when she called a stop to the stunning lessons when Ron suggested she take his place, but for the most part the character is simply too unbalance. Her fears and disappointments were muffled, blurred and instead the attitude of acceptance that she ended learning later on was transferred in the series to Luna who, for all her weird beliefs, was willing to see past the flaws of the others.

Luna served as a good counterweight but it wasn't enough to truly balance Hermione since she had so much more face time. Immaturity and hardheadedness can be excused but, whether by design or because of a flaw in her writing, Rowling created in Hermione a person who many people could not stand to befriend. A person who's best moments (which are a lot of the time never flashy) were allowed to be hidden.

I'm sure I don't agree when you imply that Hermione is Death-eater material. That is going a little too far, IMHO.


But I do agree that it is possible JKR buried some of Hermione's character in order not to reveal too much of her own personality.

Your view of Luna is very interesting. I had often wondered what prompted JKR to introduce Luna's eccentric character when she already had a series full of eccentric characters. But the idea that she has those traits that Hermione might have developed if her character had more humility is a fascinating idea. Luna has the terrible moment of seeing her mother die as her catharsis. She learns life is short and precious from this and is thus more acccepting of other ppl's faults as compared to Hermione.

Now, as to Hermione being a person most ppl would not want to befriend, I generally agree in the first 1-3 books of the series. As far as I can tell Hermione's only close friends are Harry and Ron. But JKR has an adult international Quidditch star fall head-over-heels for Hermione in GOF. I found that a little odd. I shrugged that off as one of those things where you can't understand who is going to fall in love with who. But I came to the conclusion that was JKR's first step in continually elevating Hermione for the rest of the series (and holding Ron back in comparison).

But, I agree that JKR seems to mute or blur Hermione when it comes time for the reader to see what is really deep down inside of her character.


Meesha,

Your characterization of Hermione as a ticking time bomb is great. This seems to be true especially in the first books in the series. Later on when she does break she tends to cry rather than lose her temper (except with Ron, of course LOL ).

[meesha1971]

Originally Posted by eaglestreasure

I have to really disagree here. I hope I don't offend anyone here, but my opinion is going to be strong.

For the bad traits, I think you've gotten a distorted perception. Hermione has never been perfect; this is exemplified by her dependence on relationships (we see her very upset about Ron in HBP), as well as your mentioning that she can be a little narrow-minded, especially when it comes to accepting trivia that might not be fact.

No, Hermione was never portrayed as perfect through Harry's perception of her. However, the question would be whether she accepted her flaws - or even saw them as flaws - since she was never put into a situation where she had to deal with the consequences of something she did. The closest we come is in HBP when she berates herself for not realizing that Snape had attacked Professor Flitwick. However, in that situation, she was entirely blameless and was immediately reassured that this was the case so there is no lesson in humility.

In every situation presented that could have resulted in character development with Hermione learning a lesson in humility, the opportunity was snatched away by the circumstances also providing Hermione the means to continue to believe that she was right. The Firebolt did come from Sirius so, even though he was not trying to kill Harry and there was nothing wrong with the broom, Hermione is able to focus on that and say "I told you so" without feeling the need to question her choice of going behind Harry's back. Scabbers turned out to be alive and was an animagus - the man who had betrayed Harry's parents. So Hermione was able to justify her behavior towards Ron and how she dismissed all of his concerns about Crookshanks - even though he was right. Hermione is never put in the position of being completely wrong about something and having to deal with the consequences of that. She never really has to deal with the consequences of her own actions because there's always something she can use to justify them.

I also highly disagree with your segment about her reading books to show off. We are shown throughout the series, IMO, that Hermione wants to learn and become better. She even went to the point of traveling back in time so that she could keep up with two more classes than anyone else wouldn't care to take in addition.
The reason she loved the classes so much was because she wanted to be learned. She wanted to be successful, and given her lack of social development earlier on in the series, there wouldn't have been a point to showing off because she would have no one to notice it.

Well, I do agree that Hermione loved to learn. However, I don't think we can deny that she also loved to show off what she had learned in class. Harry's descriptions are pretty clear - actually standing up in potions because Snape did not acknowledge her raised hand to allow her to answer the question, almost knocking Harry's glasses off in her eagerness to get her hand up first and give the right answer, etc... It wasn't enough for Hermione to just learn new things and know them - she also had to let other people know about it. Primarily, that would have been to impress the teachers, but it would also be a way for her to show her fellow students how smart she is - which she also did at other times - i.e. Harry's depiction of how she "bored them all stupid" quoting flying tips she had read in a book.

Of course, I don't hold any of that against Hermione. I think that was a sign of her insecurity actually. She felt it necessary to prove herself to others and used her grades and showing off how much she knew to do so. I just question why because we never learn enough about Hermione to understand what caused her to be that insecure and feel the need to prove herself so extensively.

It is true that Hermione has been stubborn in accepting something new, but I don't think it's out of arrogance that she would think she was always right. You referenced her reluctance to believe in the Deathly Hallows -- which I would think an example, if anything, of a character flaw. She needs logic to back things up, and that can certainly be a roadblock in new discovery. She didn't reject Mr. Lovegood's story or the Hallows, IMO, because she was arrogant. She did it because there wasn't much logic behind the theory.

Except that there was logic to it - even Ron and Harry could see that. The Invisibility cloak that Xenophilius described did exist - she had seen it and used it. It was unlike any other Invisibility cloak - and it's difficult to believe that Hermione would not have known that as well with how much she loved to read and learn knew things - I'd be willing to bet that she was in the library doing research on Invisibility cloaks after Harry told her about his. And she did acknowledge that Harry's cloak was unique when they discussed that after Xenophilius had left the room.

And she also knew that there were legends about very powerful wands - like the Death Stick. Professor Binns had covered them in class. And it was Hermione who had pointed out to Professor Binns in COS that all legends have some basis in fact. With evidence existing that two of the Hallows did exist, it was logical that there was some basis in fact for that legend and that all three objects did, in fact, exist.

Hermione had a preformed opinion of Xenophilius based on her opinion of the articles he wrote for his paper and Luna's odd ideas. And, while Hermione eventually did come to accept Luna as a friend and be nice to her, she never really accepted that any of her ideas or opinions had much validity to them. It wasn't until Ollivander confirmed that the Elder wand did actually exist that Hermione was willing to admit that there was validity to it.

As for her writing off anyone without "such pedigree", I disagree again.
Mrs. Weasley was certainly a loving, kind witch, but one could argue that she wasn't as sharp, as, say, Dumbledore, or Bathilda Bagshot. Hermione always treated Mrs. Weasley with respect, however, and learned that experience can eventually lead to wisdom.

Molly would still be an authority figure because she was an adult and did know quite a bit. She didn't believe in odd ideas like Xenophilius and showed herself to be sensible. She was presented as someone Hermione would respect.

Another good example is Harry himself. Hermione could easily have written him off as being too open, illogical, irrational, or hot-tempered, but she chose to beleive him with Voldemort's return. She was willing to fly to London to rescue Sirius Black from the ministry, and there was almost no Dumbledore-like logic involved in a complicated explanation of why she should.

Actually, I would have to disagree here. Hermione did believe Harry when he said that Voldemort returned - she never doubted his honesty - but she didn't really demonstrate much respect for Harry's opinion on the whole. She wasn't willing to just fly off to London to rescue Sirius - she insisted that they get proof first. And, yes, she was right about Voldemort laying a trap for Harry, but she showed that she didn't have much faith in Harry there. She didn't trust him enough to discuss her concerns about the Firebolt with him before going to McGonagall - she went behind his back to do that. She refused to even consider the possibility when Harry realized that a Horcrux was likely hidden at Hogwarts. There are a lot of times throughout the series where Hermione demonstrates that she doesn't trust Harry's judgment.

As for being condescending, IMO, you're right -- partially. She was condescending to both Ron, Harry, even Ginny at one point. It's another character flaw that Rowling incorporated (I might add, very well) into her character. But she wasn't condescending all the time. She was loving towards Harry when he needed confidence, and usually spoke out with her "we're all in this together, we want to help you" speech. I also think she was cold at times, but I don't think we can blame her completely. And once again, IMO, she wasn't cold all the time, a strength in patience she had to acquire.

I wouldn't say Hermione was cold either, but she did close herself off personally. She doesn't talk about herself much or share personal stories the way Ron did - at least not when Harry was around to hear it. And that was something that Jo could have used to more fully develop Hermione's character - she grew up in the muggle world so she wouldn't have the same experiences as Ron, but she was a witch so she would also have amusing anecdotes about accidental magic - like Harry turning his teacher's hair blue - and how her parents had handled those situations. I think things like that would have gone a long way towards allowing the reader to get to know who Hermione was as a person much better.

Don't get me wrong here - Hermione is one of my favorite characters in the books. And her flaws are part of that because that made her more realistic and believable. But she becomes less so as the series progresses because none of her flaws are ever really addressed. She loosens up more due to Harry and Ron's influence, but it comes across that she would not have done so otherwise because she doesn't really get a "personal journey" like the other characters did and wasn't fully fleshed out as a character because of that, IMO

Originally Posted by darklordspal

I'm sure I don't agree when you imply that Hermione is Death-eater material. That is going a little too far, IMHO.

I agree - comparing Hermione to Death Eaters is going to far. However, there are some interesting parallels between Hermione and Umbridge in regards to their overall personalities. Hermione's characterization in the first book in particular - before she made friends with Harry and Ron. I could see Umbridge being exactly like that in her first year - going about lecturing others about their behavior and following the rules, a rigid view that authority figures were always right, showing off in class to impress the teachers, etc...

Even in the later books there are some similarities. Hermione's behavior towards the house-elves in GOF and OOTP is really not that different from how Umbridge treated "half-breeds". Of course, Hermione had much better intentions than Umbridge, but her general attitude there is rather condescending. Her behavior demonstrates that she didn't really see the house-elves as equals, but as inferior beings who needed to be told what was best for them by wizards. Her behavior towards the Centaurs was nearly as bad as Umbridge's - and almost got her and Harry killed. She doesn't come out and call them "half-breeds", but she treats them like animals and didn't see them as equals. And she did call Firenze a "horse".

Her chosen method to "punish" anyone who betrayed the DA was to put a jinx on the parchment they all signed - without telling anyone - that would disfigure them if they told anyone about the DA. And that disfigurement appeared to be permanent for Marietta. Marietta being scarred forever with SNEAK across her forehead isn't much different from Harry being scared forever with I must not tell lies on the back of his hand. Again, Hermione's intentions were better than Umbridge's, but the behavior displayed was eerily similar.

It's actually a bit frightening to consider how Hermione might have turned out if she hadn't become friends with Ron and Harry and had them to influence her to ease up a bit and be less rigid.

But I do agree that it is possible JKR buried some of Hermione's character in order not to reveal too much of her own personality.

Your view of Luna is very interesting. I had often wondered what prompted JKR to introduce Luna's eccentric character when she already had a series full of eccentric characters. But the idea that she has those traits that Hermione might have developed if her character had more humility is a fascinating idea. Luna has the terrible moment of seeing her mother die as her catharsis. She learns life is short and precious from this and is thus more acccepting of other ppl's faults as compared to Hermione.

Jo did compare Hermione and Luna - she said that Luna was the "anti-Hermione". I see Hermione and Luna as opposite ends of the spectrum because they are both rather extreme characterizations.

Now, as to Hermione being a person most ppl would not want to befriend, I generally agree in the first 1-3 books of the series. As far as I can tell Hermione's only close friends are Harry and Ron. But JKR has an adult international Quidditch star fall head-over-heels for Hermione in GOF. I found that a little odd. I shrugged that off as one of those things where you can't understand who is going to fall in love with who. But I came to the conclusion that was JKR's first step in continually elevating Hermione for the rest of the series (and holding Ron back in comparison).

What's interesting with the whole situation with Krum is that his interest in Hermione appears to stem from the fact that she was not interested. He had all those girls following him around, trying to get his autograph, giggling over him, etc... But there was Hermione - barely noticing him and, when she did, it was with annoyance because she knew his fan club of giggling girls wouldn't be far behind that that disrupted her studies. So it did come across - to some extent - that his interest in Hermione wasn't due to him liking her for who she was, but rather wanting what he couldn't have - the one girl who wouldn't come running if he snapped his fingers and throw herself at his feet because he was famous.

I don't think Jo was intentionally trying to elevate Hermione or hold Ron back. But I would agree that it did work out that way to some extent because it does not appear that Jo ever had an individual journey planned out for Hermione to the same degree as the other characters. Hermione got SPEW, but that turned out not to be a personal journey for her, but a means to work the issue of house-elves into the story for the purpose of the subplots involving Dobby and Kreacher.

Even the "romance" with Krum was glossed over for the most part - they had one date and Krum mooned over her for a while, but Hermione comes through that relatively unscathed emotionally. There was no concern on her part about hurting him demonstrated. We did not see her having a dilemma about how to handle the situation. She remained matter of fact and fairly indifferent throughout and even manages to keep Krum as a friend with no hard feelings. Ginny tells Ron that Hermione and Krum snogged when they argued in HBP - and that does affect Hermione because of Ron's reaction - but there's no evidence given that Hermione was ever aware that Ginny said that or why Ron got so upset with her. We don't even get any confirmation as to whether Ginny's statement was true because Hermione never heard about it on page.

Other characters had personal journeys that had an effect on their emotional development. Harry is obvious since it was all his point of view so I won't go into that. Ginny had the situation with the diary, her crush on Harry developing into deeper feelings, learning to come out of her shell and be herself around Harry, trying to move on and date other people, issues with her family being overprotective of her - particularly her brothers attitudes about her dating, problems with her relationship with Dean, etc... Ron had his insecurities and lack of self-esteem, feeling overshadowed by his brothers, fear that his mother didn't love him as much as the others, concerns about being poor and never having nice things, being envious of Harry, problems with Quidditch, the whole situation with Lavender and their eventual break up, his feelings for Hermione and concerns that she wouldn't return them, the locket, etc...

Hermione doesn't get anything like that. A political cause that doesn't really go anywhere in regards to her emotional development, insecurity that was never explained or addressed, a "romance" that consisted of one date and maybe one kiss that was very easy for her and had little to no effect on her emotional development, her feelings for Ron, being hurt/jealous when Ron dates Lavender - though the focus there was almost entirely on what Ron did and her mistakes were never addressed, being hurt when Ron left and angry at him when he came back - which also focused on what Ron did, etc...

The closest Hermione comes to a personal journey like the others had is the difficulties she had in her developing relationship with Ron - but the majority of that focuses on Ron's behavior and how he feels he needs to be "worthy" of her. Hermione's behavior and mistakes in that regard were never addressed on page and we never saw her have to deal with emotional issues like the other characters.

Meesha,

Your characterization of Hermione as a ticking time bomb is great. This seems to be true especially in the first books in the series. Later on when she does break she tends to cry rather than lose her temper (except with Ron, of course LOL ).

I would say crying was her emotional outlet for almost everything - even losing her temper resulted in crying on occasion. Hermione had a tendency to burst into tears over pretty much anything - whether she was really happy, sad, hurt/jealous, angry - tears were her emotional outlet a lot of the time. I think she tended to have such extreme reactions because she put so much pressure on herself and bottled things up inside.

[stumps101]

I completely agree that Hermione's character arc is lacking in that she doesn't ever really face her failures or fears or insecurities. It is rather off-putting because there was ample opportunity to do so but it wasn't done, and so all in all, I just can't completely get into her character because of that glaring fact and just aspects of her personality.

Originally Posted by meesha1971

I agree - comparing Hermione to Death Eaters is going to far. However, there are some interesting parallels between Hermione and Umbridge in regards to their overall personalities. Hermione's characterization in the first book in particular - before she made friends with Harry and Ron. I could see Umbridge being exactly like that in her first year - going about lecturing others about their behavior and following the rules, a rigid view that authority figures were always right, showing off in class to impress the teachers, etc...

Even in the later books there are some similarities. Hermione's behavior towards the house-elves in GOF and OOTP is really not that different from how Umbridge treated "half-breeds". Of course, Hermione had much better intentions than Umbridge, but her general attitude there is rather condescending. Her behavior demonstrates that she didn't really see the house-elves as equals, but as inferior beings who needed to be told what was best for them by wizards. Her behavior towards the Centaurs was nearly as bad as Umbridge's - and almost got her and Harry killed. She doesn't come out and call them "half-breeds", but she treats them like animals and didn't see them as equals. And she did call Firenze a "horse".

Her chosen method to "punish" anyone who betrayed the DA was to put a jinx on the parchment they all signed - without telling anyone - that would disfigure them if they told anyone about the DA. And that disfigurement appeared to be permanent for Marietta. Marietta being scarred forever with SNEAK across her forehead isn't much different from Harry being scared forever with I must not tell lies on the back of his hand. Again, Hermione's intentions were better than Umbridge's, but the behavior displayed was eerily similar.

It's actually a bit frightening to consider how Hermione might have turned out if she hadn't become friends with Ron and Harry and had them to influence her to ease up a bit and be less rigid.

I completely agree with you here. Since OoTP I've thought that Umbridge was a good example of what Hermione could have been had she not met Ron and Harry. Even still, there are many similarities between her and Umbridge and I am so glad someone else agrees because I have gotten a lot of umm stuff thrown at me because of it before. Unfortunately, these striking similarities never get acknowledged....

[Yoana]

Originally Posted by stumps101

I completely agree with you here. Since OoTP I've thought that Umbridge was a good example of what Hermione could have been had she not met Ron and Harry.

I strongly disagree. There's something crucial that Hermione has and Umbridge doesn't which in my opinion is the main reason why Umbridge can be what she is and Hermione can't - compassion. You may nto like Hermione personally, but saying she could be like Umbridge - cruel with no remorse - is in my opinion insupportable.

Hermione is the one who stands up to Umbridge in her class with sound resolution. Hermione is the one who has so little tolerance fo Umbridge's regime and way of doingt things that she cannot just sit and take it, and decides to start the DA. The fact that they both supposedly like order and lecturing others (which I don't think is true of Umbridge, by the way - I never saw her lecturing anyone, just hadning out punishments) is such a superficial and unconsequential similarity that it hardly warrants mentioning, let alone building whole parallels over it. It's like saying saying Harry could have become Voldemort because he they both felt Hogwarts was their real home. What's the main and final difference between Harry and Voldemort? Compassion. Well, I think the same is true for Hermione and Umbridge. Liking order and rules (not to mention that Hermione does compromise with the rules more than once when she knows it's the better decision to do so) was not what made Umbridge cruel and narrow-minded, so I don't see any support for the claim that Hermione was likely to become like Umbridge. Even if Umbridge was like Hermione when she was young (which is just speculation anyway), there's no evidence that she would have grown to be like her at all. There's no link between being orderly and strict and being cruel that I can see.

Another glaring difference between Hermione and Umbridge is conformity - Umbridge is shown always conforming to the order of *** day - she was with Fudge when Fudge was in office, she then went on with Voldemort's regime of rounding up muggleborns - while Hermione is by no means afraid of resistence and sticking to her beleifs, no matter how dangerous it would be for her personally, and I think we see that very early, before she became friends with Rona dn Harry, when she tried to stop them in their midnight meeting with Malfoy in the first year, or when she stand up for Neville and helps him even though it's clear he's the most uncool kid there is. Hermione and Umbridge are nothing like each other.