OOTP Chapter Twenty-Seven: "The Centaur and the Sneak"

[for-diddled.livejournal.com]

* First of all, sorry this is so late, I'm afraid I've been a bit busy preparing to go back to university.

* This is the chapter in which Hermione officially crosses the line from “occasionally strident and self-righteous but on the whole likeable and sympathetic character” to “dangerous sociopath”.

* “‘A gorgeous centaur...’ sighed Parvati.” I must say that, given the, erm, associations of centaurs in classical mythology, this sort of thing rather creeps me out. Is JKR aware of the implications of what she’s writing? Or did she just throw it in without bothering to think it through?

* Hermione’s dropping dark hints about what Umbridge is going to do, revealing the plot like any good author avatar would.

* So Harry can remember the names of centaurs he met once four years ago, but in DH he won’t be able to remember a face from a picture from one chapter to the next. *coughplotconveniencecough*

* Wow, centaurs sure are arrogant and condescending people. No wonder Dumbledore felt enough of an affinity with Firenze to hire him as a teacher. He recognises a kindred spirit when he sees one.

* If I were JKR, I’d be hesitant to dignify the wizarding conflicts with the term “war”. They’re more like gang wars than what most people would think of as warfare. Which is why epic fantasy doesn’t really mix with a “secret magical people in this world” plot. Epic fantasy generally centres around mighty empires, big wars and bloody battles, but these things are generally quite noticeable, and any wizards fighting in large-scale conflicts would be found out pretty quickly. So the wizarding war pretty much has to be low-key to make it plausible that Muggles wouldn’t know about it, and the end result is that we get a lot of build-up and very little payoff.

* Firenze spends the whole lesson teaching them something which he doesn’t expect them to do anyway, and which is anyway a bit uncertain and useless. So he’s about as good as the average Hogwarts teacher, then.

* “Indeed, Harry sometimes wondered how Umbridge was going to react when all the members of the DA received ‘Outstanding’ in their Defence Against the Dark Arts OWLs.” Only kidding, Harry will be the only one to get an “Outstanding” mark, because he’s a Mary Sue just the most awesome DADA student ever.

* Although everybody always goes on about how smart Hermione is, and from what we see of her she doesn’t seem noticeably worse in DADA than she does in other subjects, so if she only got an “E” in her Defence OWL, that’s probably because Harry’s not a very good teacher... :p

* Seamus’ Patronus “was definitely something hairy”. *mind goes into the gutter*

* Hermione’s Patronus is an otter, even though she’s one of the least otter-like people in the series. On a Doylist level, this is probably because JKR’s favourite animal is the otter, so her author avatar will have one as her Patronus, obviously. On a Watsonian level, perhaps Patronuses don’t represent what your personality is like, but what you need to guard you and keep you out of trouble. So Hermione’s is an otter because she needs fun-loving people around her to stop her getting too serious about everything, Ron’s is a weasel because he needs smart people to compensate for his mental inadequacy, and Harry’s is a stag because he needs a proper father-figure to help him, not an abusive one like Uncle Vernon or a scheming and manipulative one like Dumbledore. Patronuses which change when somebody falls in love show that their caster needs to be loved by their intended in order to feel happy and secure again.

* Dobby appears, wearing “his usual eight woollen hats”. I quite like the suggestion that it was this sight that made Hermione drop her SPEW activities, as she saw that her hats were all going to this one elf, and that they were therefore pretty useless from a freeing people standpoint. (Can anybody remember if SPEW is brought up again in this book?)

* Umbridge is here! I bet it’s times like this that the DA wish they had a second, secret entrance from the ROR. That way they could slip away while Umbridge and her cronies sat uselessly in front of the main entrance.

* Draco’s concealed “beneath an ugly dragon-shaped vase”, to match his ugly and monstrous soul.

* Umbridge has “an indecent excitement in her voice”. I wonder if this is how Hermione would sound to those on the receiving end of her little schemes.

* When I first read this scene, I didn’t really mind the “Sneak” curse, because I just sort of assumed that Madam Pomfrey managed to find a way of removing them after a couple of weeks. Then we found out that she still had the scars years later and... yikes.

* Not only is that extremely vindictive, but it doesn’t actually help the DA in any way. It didn’t stop them being betrayed in the first place, and it didn’t alert them to the fact that Umbridge was coming to get them. If this had been a one-off incident and the curse hadn’t been permanent, I’d be inclined to put it down to youthful lack of thought, but when you compare it to some of Hermione’s other actions (her treatment of Rita Skeeter, or sending those canaries after Ron), it seems like a rather worrying pattern is starting to emerge...

* Minerva gets all self-righteous about Willy Widdershins being let off. I wonder whether she feels the same about Mundungus Fletcher, or whether petty crooks are OK just as long as they’re on her side.

* Also, she’s not above a bit of petty corruption herself, since she lets Gryffindor Quidditch players off homework when a match is coming up.

* So Kingsley memory-wipes Marietta to stop her telling. You know, this is exactly the sort of mentality that leads DEs to Imperius people and get them to do their bidding: not caring about your victims’ autonomy, just violating their minds when it’s convenient to do so.

* Also, if they are going to mind-wipe Marietta, why not do it to Percy, Fudge and Umbridge too? That would get them out of trouble entirely.

* And really guys, Umbridge has a list of DA members and access to Veritaserum. Obliviating one witness shouldn’t be enough.

* I’m surprised Umbridge thought she could get away with manhandling students like that in front of Dumbledore. I mean, that man’s just so concerned about his students’ welfare.

* Hermione left the membership list pinned to the ROR wall. Well done, Hermione. Not that any DA members will point out this idiocy to her. Nor will they point out the fact that her defensive jinx was (a) vindictive and useless, and (b) not told about to them when they joined up. Maybe they’re all worried she’ll brand the word “COMPLAINER” across their forehead if they speak up.

* Dumbledore taking the rap is all very noble and everything, but I don’t see how it’s meant to help. Fudge can still charge the pupils with attending, even if they didn’t organise it, and now Dumbledore’s ensured that he’s going to be on the run and unable to give them any help.

* Face-scarring aside, I actually quite liked this chapter. It was quite well-paced, and I never really felt like I was wading through pages of filler. It will be interesting to see if the other chapters will be more like this now the book’s reaching its climax, or whether the quality will slip back down again.

Comments

[madderbrad.livejournal.com]

Oh, come on now. Hermione a sociopath?!??

(Puts up 'heroine Hermione' icon in the lady's defence.)

dictionary.com tells me that a 'sociopath' is someone who 'lacks a sense of moral responsibility or social conscience'. That is *not* Hermione Granger. She's the one out of all the characters who worries the most about the plight of the other magical races, the muggle-born and so forth. Who fights - like the rest of the good guys - Voldemort and the Death Eaters. She's not a sociopath, nowhere close.

She doesn't deliberately intend for Umbridge to be 'hurt' by the centaurs ... she only wanted them to 'drive her off'. Full stop. Nothing more than that. I think Hermione just didn't fully discern the depth of Umbridge's xenophobia. She tries to stop the Inquisitor from digging her hole with the centaurs ... "Don't call them that!" and "Be quiet!". But Umbridge doesn't listen.

Umbridge has “an indecent excitement in her voice”. I wonder if this is how Hermione would sound to those on the receiving end of her little schemes.

To answer your question - no. I don't think Hermione would sound like that to others. Furthermore I can't see anywhere in the text where she does. So there's your answer. :-)

I don't have a problem with Hermione's centaur solution. It's not like anyone else came up with a way to save Harry from being tortured. And she tried to stop Umbridge from riling up the centaurs so much.

The Marietta thing *is* a black mark on Hermione's record. It's not canon that the acne was permanent - that's just Rowling interview flotsam - but it was still present 3+ months later when the kids were heading back to Hogwarts at the start of HBP, under heavy makeup. Maybe it disappeared the very next day. :-)

I'm more concerned about about the fact that the whole jinx thing did absolutely nothing in *preventing* betrayal ... it was only designed to punish the betrayer after the event. Which is pretty slack. This is perhaps the first big sign of the 'dumbing down' that Hermione would receive in spades for the final two books of the series. :-( Don't blame Hermione for being stupid and vindictive; blame her author. :-)

So Harry can remember the names of centaurs he met once four years ago, but in DH he won’t be able to remember a face from a picture from one chapter to the next. *coughplotconveniencecough*

Heh. It's amazing - it's horrible - how DH regressed the kids and the story so much, isn't it? Making the book something of a caricature of the 'serious' ending we all thought we were going to receive. A hero who is as thick as a brick, the 'plan' from Dumbledore which was so stupid only Rowling loyalists could possibly accept it, the Trio sneaking everywhere with invisibility cloak or 2nd-year Polyjuice potion, etc.

Umbridge is here! I bet it’s times like this that the DA wish they had a second, secret entrance from the ROR. That way they could slip away while Umbridge and her cronies sat uselessly in front of the main entrance.

Well, while the ROR's ability to conjure secret entrances was yet another deus ex machina that Rowling materialised at a whim to make her sad story work, she at least presented it as a surprise that Neville & Co. *learnt*, that they hadn't known before. It wasn't flat-out stupidity.

[mmmarcusz.livejournal.com]

dictionary.com tells me that a 'sociopath' is someone who 'lacks a sense of moral responsibility or social conscience'. That is *not* Hermione Granger. She's the one out of all the characters who worries the most about the plight of the other magical races, the muggle-born and so forth. Who fights - like the rest of the good guys - Voldemort and the Death Eaters. She's not a sociopath, nowhere close.

I also find "a lack of empathy and remorse, shallow emotions, egocentricity, and deceptiveness" or "a pervasive pattern of disregard for, and violation of, the rights of others."

Hermione's also the only character who keeps people imprisoned in jars or engages in relationship violence. And her method of "saving" the house-elves did not involve engaging with them, studying them, learning about them, just trying to set them "free" with the assumption that they'd be fine afterwards.

[mary-j-59.livejournal.com]

Like Madderbrad, I used to love Hermione, and I was a Harry/Hermione shipper. But Hermione, like Harry, becomes a thoroughly unpleasant person in the last couple of books. However-

She is not the only person who indulges in relationship violence. James Potter does, too. His actions toward young Severus, in SWM, are also abusive to Lily because they are an attempt to control her by harming someone she cares for. Don't forget that James also threatens Lily physically.

As I've said elsewhere, Rowling does not model healthy relationships in these books.

[sharaz-jek.livejournal.com]

Don't forget that James claims to have reformed while still cursing Snape behind her back (although it's dubious how much she'd have cared post-SWM).

[madderbrad.livejournal.com]

Like Madderbrad, I used to love Hermione, and I was a Harry/Hermione shipper.

You were? Good show!

I admit I cooled off a lot with the canon character too, from the publication of book 6. But it's just yet another indictment of Rowling's poor writing and characterisation in the last two books ... in order to make her poor R/Hr work she had to desperately drag poor Hermione *down* to Ron's level. Killer canaries, confunding a fellow student for Quidditch - QUIDDITCH! - abandoning Harry and so forth.

Poor Hermione. :-(

Thank goodness for fan fiction, which has allowed me to remain a H/Hr shipper.

His actions toward young Severus, in SWM, are also abusive to Lily because they are an attempt to control her by harming someone she cares for.

True. What's the word for that, I'm blanking on it at the moment. Not 'blackmail', but using Snape as a 'hostage' for Lily's favours I guess. Not really a long-term ploy but still nasty.

Don't forget that James also threatens Lily physically.

I've forgotten that one; where does it happen?

[mary-j-59.livejournal.com]

Also in SWM. "Ah, Evans, don't make me hex you." We are clearly meant to think that Lily is James' equal in a fight; he's looking warily at her wand, - but, "don't make me hex you." As if a girl defending her friend was responsible for the acts of the attacking boy! Classic, classic abusive behavior; blaming the victim.

And it really worries me that so many Marauders fans absolutely do not see this.

[madderbrad.livejournal.com]

You're trying to push a very heavy wheelbarrow uphill. :-) While Hermione has her faults (although mainly in book 6, where all the kids suffered from Rowling's pushing the obnoxious Ginny into the limelight so blatantly and badly) they fall way short of any definition of 'sociopath'.

'Shallow emotions' - the girl who toiled for weeks trying to mount a defence for Buckbeak. Who went it alone on her (misguided, but sincere) quest to free the house elves from Slavery. Sorry, no.

'A lack of empathy' - the girl who sticks with Harry when he's faced with betrayal by his best mate, who accompanies him to the grave of his parents, who's the one out of the Trio who is able to put herself in Kreacher's shoes when he gives his tale about Regulus. Sorry, no.

'Deceptiveness' - the girl who, out of the three, insists that they NOT lie to Griphook about the disposition of Gryffindor's sword. Sorry, no.

'A pervasive pattern of disregard for, and violation of, the rights of others' - well, that doesn't apply to her putting up her jinxed agreement for the D.A. to *voluntarily* sign. Accepting their 'right' to sign or walk away. Nor her catching Rita Skeeter in a criminal act and *temporarily* incarcerating her in a jar. Sorry, no.

Hermione's also the only character who keeps people imprisoned in jars -

After capturing her (not 'people', just one person) in the act of a crime. And keeping her in a jar for only a few days. Following which she voluntarily releases that person.

Just one person, for a few days, after catching her in the act of a crime. No 'pervasive pattern' of the sociopath here!

... or engages in relationship violence.

Again, just the one time with the killer canaries. And as others have noted, she's sadly not the only person pushed to nastiness with her supposed 'soul mate'. Blame Rowling (who seemed only able to paint her 'romances' using negatives, like violence and jealousy), not Hermione. :-)

And her method of "saving" the house-elves did not involve engaging with them, studying them, learning about them, just trying to set them "free" with the assumption that they'd be fine afterwards.

All of which means that Hermione is misguided in her altruistic attempts to improve their lot in life. Which is still way on the other side of the fence from being a 'sociopath'.

[oryx_leucoryx]

But Hermione does often show lack of empathy. Her argument with Lavender about the rabbit, her reaction to Ron's fear for Scabbers, her idiotic remarks about Fleur in GOF.

After capturing her (not 'people', just one person) in the act of a crime. And keeping her in a jar for only a few days. Following which she voluntarily releases that person.

Only because she has something with which to blackmail her (and thus to in fact become an accomplice to the original crime). If you want to claim Hermione performed a citizen's arrest she should have brought Rita to the authorities. Since she did not she had no business capturing Rita.

[sunnyskywalker]

She didn't even turn Rita in to Dumbledore. Hermione was still clever in GoF, so I just don't buy that it didn't occur to her that Dumbledore might want to know that a journalist who is apparently tight with the Malfoys had just overheard all their plans about sheltering an escaped con and starting some sort of extra-governmental resistance group. Why withhold information potentially damaging to one of the authority figures she trusts most and potentially to herself (if Rita causes trouble some way other than publishing which can't be traced back to her)? Unless blackmail really was her top priority.

[madderbrad.livejournal.com]

She sometimes shows empathy, sometimes doesn't. A 'sociopath' doesn't have a social conscience full stop, right? Hermione is just a normal girl (okay, she's an amazing wonderful girl and the heroine of the series; refer to icon :)) who is sometimes rude/uncaring. If that intermittent behaviour is proof that one is a sociopath then I think most of the planet would be in that category.

(For what it's worth I'm on Hermione's side when it comes to Lavender's bunny. Oh, I'm not a sociopath, I should mention. :-))

[charlottehywd.livejournal.com]

As far as the lack of empathy thing, you forgot what she did to her parents in book 7. Unforgivable.

[sunnyskywalker]

I'd probably give Hermione a pass for the centaur thing if after the fact she expressed dismay that it had been so much more awful than she intended, said she hadn't fully thought it through, Umbridge was awful but whatever happened was still a terrible thing to happen to anyone, etc. But she laughed right along with Ginny when Ron made the clip-clop noises to terrify Umbridge. After having had plenty of time to think it over and see the state Umbridge was in. So, I'm not seeing signs of empathy, moral responsibility, conscience, or any of that, just amusement that her enemy is traumatized.

The elves thing is tough to call. She does seem to have a visceral reaction that slavery is wrong - but has no empathy whatsoever for individual elves, doesn't listen to them, and makes no attempt to find out details like whether there's some magical reason (externally imposed in the past or otherwise) freeing elves would harm most of them (and so is ignoring the possibility that she might have another problem to solve if she really wants to help the elves). Then once she finds that her campaign isn't succeeding right off the bat, instead of persisting and doing more research and trying alternate strategies, as far as we see she just gives up.

And yeah, I do blame JKR for this, but I can't just overlook several books in a row of this kind of thing when she has other characters - like Neville, as you pointed out - actually learn things and start helping others more than in the past (the Trio ditched the DA once it wasn't useful to them personally anymore, but Neville started his resistance at great risk to himself even when as a Pureblood he could have kept his head down and escaped a lot of the trouble).

[madderbrad.livejournal.com]

So, I'm not seeing signs of empathy, moral responsibility, conscience, or any of that, just amusement that her enemy is traumatized.

*after the fact*, yes. But Hermione *tried to prevent* it - or at least ameliorate any punishment by the centaurs on Umbridge. She tried to get Umbridge to shut up when things escalated beyond her planned intent. No sociopath there.

Sure, after it was all over Hermione got a giggle over Umbridge's fate. (Blame Ginny for that; we see here a precursor to Rowling's boosting Ginny into the limelight in book 6, where Hermione and Harry found everything the youngest Weasley said or did - belittling Fleur, tripping Ron, mocking other students - hilarious.)

Regardless of what happens *afterwards* a sociopath wouldn't have tried to get Umbridge out of her predicament while it was actually taking place. Hermione did so try.

but has no empathy whatsoever for individual elves

But that's just not right, she has heaps of pity/empathy for Kreacher, in several scenes.

And Winky, too. I just found one scene where Hermione shows her *sincere empathy* for individual elves:

"You know, house-elves get a very raw deal!" said Hermione indignantly. "It's slavery, that's what it is! That Mr. Crouch made her go up to the top of the stadium, and she was terrified, and he's got her bewitched so she can't even run when they start trampling tents! Why doesn't anyone do something about it?"

Sorry, you're wrong. Hermione was very much "in Winky's head" with that scene, consciously considerate of the elf's feelings.

Then once she finds that her campaign isn't succeeding right off the bat, instead of persisting and doing more research and trying alternate strategies, as far as we see she just gives up.

Which means she isn't the best social evangelist in the world ... but still nothing close to a sociopath. Sociopaths don't try and help people (even if they're incompetent in delivering that help).

[lynn-waterfall.livejournal.com]

She tried to get Umbridge to shut up when things escalated beyond her planned intent.

I don't really see her actions in the forest as trying to protect Umbridge so much as anger at Umbridge's open bigotry. It's reasonable anger, of course... but I don't believe it had anything to do with trying to protect her from the consequences of her words.

[lynn-waterfall.livejournal.com]

Hermione was very much "in Winky's head" with that scene, consciously considerate of the elf's feelings.

Really? Take this exchange:

"And how much is Professor Dumbledore paying you, Winky?" Hermione asked kindly.

If she had thought this would cheer up Winky, she was wildly mistaken. Winky did stop crying, but when she sat up she was glaring at Hermione through her massive brown eyes, her whole face sopping wet and suddenly furious.

"Winky is a disgraced elf, but Winky is not yet getting paid!" she squeaked. "Winky is not sunk so low as that! Winky is properly ashamed of being freed!"

"Ashamed?" said Hermione blankly. "But - Winky, come on! It's Mr. Crouch who should be ashamed, not you! You didn't do anything wrong, he was really horrible to you -"

But at these words, Winky clapped her hands over the holes in her hat, flattening her ears so that she couldn't hear a word, and screeched, "You is not insulting my master, miss!

This is what I believe sunnyskywalker meant by "individual elves" -- Hermione has beliefs about what the elves should be feeling, and she's angry at the people that she believes the elves should be angry at, but she sure isn't in the head of the actual person in front of her in this scene.

[oryx_leucoryx]

No, Hermione is not 'in Winky's head' - she doesn't understand the meaning of service to a house-elf. She assumes house-elves have the same wishes and preferences people she knows have, even when repeatedly she is told and shown this is not the case. Ron is the one who understands house-elves on their own terms much better.

[sunnyskywalker]

Sure there's a reason she might try to shut Umbridge up that has nothing to do with empathy: getting Umbridge chased off or distracted is one thing, but if she actually gets hurt, then Hermione could get in trouble later. That's what she worried about when they knocked out Snape in PoA. Plus, if the centaurs get angry enough, it might interfere with the kids escaping to go help Sirius. I don't see any reason to assume she's actually worried about Umbridge's welfare for Umbridge's sake.

Sociopaths will absolutely help people when it serves their own purposes. They might be nice to old ladies whose magical artifacts they intend to steal later, for instance. They might volunteer for charity events if it gets them a good reputation (a useful thing to have) or lets them meet people they intend to use. They can rail against injustice so others will think well of them, or to wind people up, or for any number of reasons. Which isn't to stay that Hermione is definitely a sociopath, but it doesn't rule it out - sociopaths aren't committed to never doing any good deeds for any reason, just to not doing good deeds that don't also benefit them in some way. Hermione could have started the house-elf campaign without having genuine empathy for the elves. (Lynn and Oryx have covered that part pretty well, I think.)

[sharaz-jek.livejournal.com]

'lacks a sense of moral responsibility or social conscience'.

Does it count when she only displays this either to a pet cause that gets abandoned once it runs into setbacks or to her friends and her particular group? We don't see her complain even once about wizarding treatment of Muggles - quite the reverse.

[sunnyskywalker]

Come to think of it, how much did Harry tell her of Dobby's story in CoS? Because Dobby said lots of house-elves were "treated like vermin" under Voldemort's reign, and they would know that at least Dobby was still in the possession of a DE family being treated poorly until the end of that year. So if Harry didn't forget to mention that part - and he very well might have - then she knew since CoS that there were potentially at least several house-elves out there being mistreated by former Voldemort supporters. But none of the Trio ever seem to realize this, not even to insult Slytherins (you would think "I bet the Goyles and the Parkinsons are dirty slaveowners just like the Malfoys were!" would be a pretty good reason to hate them whenever the subject of bad Slytherins came up).

[madderbrad.livejournal.com]

Does it count when she only displays this either to a pet cause that gets abandoned once it runs into setbacks or to her friends and her particular group?

Sure it does!

A 'sociopath' wouldn't have the social conscience in the first place.

Hermione may not have been the super-fantastically efficient social evangelist that we would have liked her to have been, but her heart was in the right place - that's incontrovertible - and thus she's light years away from being a 'sociopath'.

We don't see her complain even once about wizarding treatment of Muggles - quite the reverse.

I don't think *anyone* complains about the treatment of muggles. (Only we muggle readers. :-)). Sorry, I don't think making the entire wizarding world out to be sociopaths - every man, woman and child - is going to help here. :-)

[charlottehywd.livejournal.com]

But doesn't it seem strange that she doesn't seem to care what happens to her parents and all the other people that she grew up with? I mean, even before the cruelty in book 7, we see her pretty much ditching her family almost every summer to go hang out with her wizarding friends. Think about how that must have felt for them, to have their daughter keep choosing to go somewhere where they either can't get or aren't welcome (I wonder if Mrs. Weasley would be able to keep her prejudiced comments to herself if they visited?). They don't seem to be dictatorial enough parents to forbid her going, but the pain would still surely be there. And in all that time, she barely even thinks of them or mentions them- it's almost like she's already absorbed the wizarding perceptions that they can't be worthwhile people, since they are only muggles. Even if they are the muggles who cared for her, loved her and raised her for more than half of her life.

I'm sorry, but I can't just excuse her callousness here. This is not the behavior of a compassionate person.

[the-bitter-word.livejournal.com]

I don't think Hermione is a sociopath. She does have a habit of trying to or actually forcing others to act according to her will (house elves, Rita Skeeter, her parents) and meting out punishment without warning or purpose other than to satisfy her sense of vengeance (Marietta, Ron). I would call her an authoritarian (http://www.ehow.com/how_2179992_recognize-authoritarian-personality.html). She mutes these tendencies for teachers, who she respects, and Harry, who she actually seems to fear at times and over-praises at others.

She is a lot like Umbridge, without the overt enjoyment of others' suffering. She does what she think she has to, first and foremost for a male she considers her superior, and second, because she feels it is right, for his cause. She kidnaps, blackmails, maims, and even obliterates memories thinking this will increase her leader's happiness -- any means necessary to advance Harry's and, by extension, Ron's (McLaggen) ends.

As for Marietta, I think hers is a tragic situation only because I knew someone who was in a similar circumstance, who was caught between two groups. A young, radicalized group he was part of felt he betrayed them, in his case by not speaking about what happened in a meeting of school administrators and other student groups -- he naively agreed to be sworn to secrecy. He was following his conscience, and he ended up paying for it because there was no way he felt he could stay in school. So, I can read into Marietta someone who may have thought, misguidedly, that she was doing the right thing.

[dracasadiablo.livejournal.com]

and Harry, who she actually seems to fear at times and over-praises at others....
She does what she think she has to, first and foremost for a male she considers her superior, and second, because she feels it is right, for his cause. She kidnaps, blackmails, maims, and even obliterates memories thinking this will increase her leader's happiness -- any means necessary to advance Harry's and, by extension, Ron's (McLaggen) ends.
You make Hermione / Harry's relationship sound like Bellatrix / Voldemort's one. :D
If they "went Dark" (well, darker then they already are) I think they could have ended like that.

And now I want to read some Dark!Harry and Dark!Hermione fanfice. Any recommendations? ;)

[the-bitter-word.livejournal.com]

You make Hermione / Harry's relationship sound like Bellatrix / Voldemort's one.

Except Hermione always often takes over to do what she thinks will be good for Harry (Harry isn't an authoritarian - she makes the decision that he had to lead the DA), and only backs down when Harry insists (usually, on doing something stupid). I can't see Bellatrix presuming to know better than Voldemort what's good for him or telling him directly to think it over before he proceeds with his plans, or nagging him in any way. When Bellatrix tries to act on her own, she goes over-the-top violent and forgets the goal. She's better off under Voldemort's thumb -- whereas Hermione is always trying to put others under her thumb, for Harry's sake. It is more like Umbridge/Fudge, an "I've got to take care of this, he needs me" thing.

I can't say I've come across any Dark!Harry and Dark!Hermione fanfic, but it's probably out there!

Dark Hermione

[terri-testing.livejournal.com]

There are a lot of Dark Harry fics out there (a lot of them Snarries), but in most of them Hermione is a victim or a trying-futilely-to-rein-him-in follower.

The best Dark Hermione I've read is "Caveat Inimici" (Her secret motto: let my enemies beware.)

http://www.fanfiction.net/s/5508237/1/Caveat_Inimici