Hermoine, compassion, and idealism

[malic-ba.livejournal.com]

Hi everyone

First post, hope this works!

This started out as a comment in response to DH chapter 9, below, but I decided to put it where it can be seen more easily because I'd really like to learn what people think.

The discussion was about Hermione as compassionate and/or ruthless, which grew out of a discussion of her changing her parents' identities.

To me it seems that she cares about the rights of others as an ideal, from her own perspective. That does show compassion but it's patronising. I think that's something pretty common among Western do-gooders (and probably do-gooders more generally) and it's something I have to struggle against myself. It's entirely likely in someone so young.

The scary thought is her level of potential power and the lack of guidance in the WW to help her really consider those she's trying to help. Ron points out that house elf values are different - whether because he actually considers them or to protect the status quo - but Hermione doesn't respect anything he says. Her approach agrees perfectly with the most 'enlightened' wizarding attitudes to muggles, and there are plenty of wizards who've grown up with them. I can easily see a 'greater good' type attitude developing as Hermione gains power in the Ministry.

Since JKR worked for Amnesty I wonder if this aspect of Hermione is based on what she found there?

Also, I wonder what message she was trying to send. Is it supposed to be a good or bad part of Hermoine's character? Or, with unusual subtlety for these books, both? The message almost seems to be that 'do-gooding' is pointless - SPEW is a misguided joke, compassion is wasted on goblins and giants, and no-one questions the inferiority of muggles. At the same time I'm sure it's meant to show Hermoine's courage and goodness.

What does anyone think? Is JKR really trying to turn people off idealism? If so, does that have anything to do with the actual wishes of the 'helpees'?

Comments

[mary-j-59.livejournal.com]

Brad, I don't honestly see how you can say that Hermione improves over time. Permanently scarring another girl whose only crime was to put *her own mother* ahead of her peer group? Deliberately using the centaurs to neutralize Umbridge? (The point here is not that she tried to neutralize Umbridge - that was arguably justified, though even Umbridge didn't deserve what the centaurs did to her. No one would. No, the point is that she was using other sentient creatures, without their consent or permission, for her own ends.) But, to me, the way she treats Ron in HBP and DH. Evil enchanted canaries? BEATING him? Think how you would feel about Ron if you read of him treating Hermione this way. Abuse is abuse, even when a woman (or girl) is abusing a man (or boy).

No, I don't really like Hermione any more in the last two books. It's a pity, because she was really a pretty great character in the beginning.

And I see the Wizarding World as entirely corrupting. There is nothing I like about it after DH

[condwiramurs.livejournal.com]

I think RE the Marietta instance, it actually confuses the issue to focus on what happened to Marietta as Marietta. Rather, think of it as permanently scarring anyone who mentioned the meetings to an outside party for any reason, without informing them beforehand that this would happen. After all, we see no evidence for any mechanism for the magic to distinguish between justified telling and not-justified telling - it seems to simply kick in when the secret is revealed. Suppose, for an extreme instance, one of the students set off a blasting-type curse wrong, or got overly confident and tried Fiendfyre, or any one of a number of other things that could potentially trap DA members in the room and harm them. Should someone who managed to wriggle out and go for help be scarred for life on the face for blurting out to the nearest teacher that their friends were trapped in the room of requirement and needed help because something they did during their defense club went wrong?

Hermione's whole set of implicit assumptions, not just about the morality of permanently scarring someone or the spell being secret, but also about when, how and why someone might tell, is fundamentally flawed and ill-thought out. (Not to mention the utter pointlessness of the 'secret' aspect from a practical standpoint. THIS is the brightest witch of her era? Doesn't say much for her peers, then does it?)

[mary-j-59.livejournal.com]

That's a very good point. Not only is the scarring cruel and vindictive, it's also useless as an alarm system, AND potentially damaging to innocent parties. I hadn't thought of that last point before. Which means that it's actually stupid on Hermione's part, as well as vengeful.

[madderbrad.livejournal.com]

Sure she improves over time. In book #1 Ron says that 'no-one can stand her'. That's not the case by the end. (Not only an absence of such, but also Krum, McLaggen, Ron, Harry, Ginny et al all like her.)

In book #4 she's trying to force the elves into freedom. In book #7 she's living with Kreacher for months and doesn't, not once, force clothing on him.

But sure, in other respects she's idiotic or 'bad'. Not as bad as you make out with Marietta; those pimples weren't *permanent scarring* (that's only Rowling Interview-canon).

I also don't see too much harm in 'using' the centaurs. 'Using' them? Yes. But it was more like tricking a criminal (Umbridge) into a precinct full of cops (the centaurs). Is it 'using' someone - to the HORRIBLE TERRIBLE DIE HERMIONE DIE degree that some here seem to postulate - to simply have them exercise their self-imposed duties of law enforcement?

(Summary on the centaurs - 'using', yes. As bad as some people here make out? No. DIE HERMIONE DIE - humorous exaggeration. :-))

The Killer Canaries? Bad Hermione. Rowling was responsible for writing her as a hormonal nincompoop in HBP, but that still makes her a hormonal nincompoop who attacked Ron with no warning.

'Beating' Ron? Are you talking about ... his return from the silver doe? Wow. That's an exaggeration, don't you think? Pummelling him, kicking him ... with little to no effect on the bumbling boy. A few OWs and that's it. In fact it's Hermione that's knocked down to the floor, not Ron. He comes out of it largely unscathed. 'Beating', yes, but with a small 'b'.

Hermione's not perfect, but in the big things - restraining her ego, imposing her will on others, she improves over time. Her backward steps are there - per my agreements above - but aren't nearly as bad as what some people here make out. And then when you add in all of her sterling qualities she comes out streets ahead.

Hermione Granger, overall, in summation, is a positive character.

No, I don't really like Hermione any more in the last two books. It's a pity -

I certainly agree with you on this sentiment, if not to the same degree; I do believe you are amplifying the negatives excessively. If you (and others here) similarly treated Hermione's positive achievements with the same microscope you'd think she's awesome!

But, my goodness, I would have loved to have seen a Hermione who was fostered by the last two books, encouraged to flower. Luckily I have, in fan fiction. Thank goodness for fan fiction! Rowling was a terrible author who just didn't know how to highlight the ... goodness ... the *depths*? ... of her characters. Instead it was all jealousy and petty games and wave-the-hands luck and a boy raised to be a sacrifice and his love interest raised to hero-worship him and a superficial plot that tears apart at the closest inspection and so forth. Rowling was a mean, miserable author with little depth and toilet jokes. Her bad guys were laughable Keystone Cop villains and her good guys won via accidents and luck.

But Hermione was still a 'good guy' in Rowling's simple little world.

[oryx_leucoryx]

those pimples weren't *permanent scarring* (that's only Rowling Interview-canon).

Those pimples lasted at least to September of HBP, some 5 months later, and more significantly, they lasted after a summer vacation, during which time Marietta had access to adult wizards outside of Hogwarts, including her mother, who could have taken her to see a professional healer. We know Marietta didn't choose to remain scarred to make some kind of point because she is trying to hide the pimples with scarves and makeup. So she must have asked for help - at least of her mother. And if her mother couldn't undo the curse herself she'd have taken Marietta to St Mungo's for help - that's what they are for. That Marietta was still scarred in September means that either the healers couldn't or wouldn't undo the spell. The former attests to Hermione's cruelty. The latter to Albus' politics.

[madderbrad.livejournal.com]

There's too much wishful thinking in your Marietta deductions.

... who could have taken her to see a professional healer.

COULD have. Not MUST have. Yes. We'll use this below.

So she must have asked for help - at least of her mother.

No. Matietta could have applied the make-up herself. Shucks, she might have only covered it up on the day she returned to Hogwarts.

That Marietta was still scarred in September means that either the healers couldn't or wouldn't undo the spell.

Only if she went to St. Mungos. Which is just the COULD HAVE possibility neither confirmed nor denied by the canon.

If I have a pimple I don't see the doctor; I eat less chocolate. :-)

If I had pimples lasting months I might see the doctor. Or if I was ashamed or feeling guilty about having the pimples (she may have lost her memory but good friend Cho would have told her what happened, right?) I might not. Particularly if they were - slowly - fading.

Marietta's pimples - permanent or slowly fading? We don't know from the books.

[oryx_leucoryx]

She certainly may have applied the makeup herself. I'm saying the makeup indicates she wanted the scarring to not be visible. And that she was incapable of removing it herself. Your comparison to non-magical pimples is irrelevant, this isn't anything equivalent. The problem with Marietta's scarring isn't simply an aesthetic problem or a skin problem. Nor is there a remedy equivalent to 'not eating chocolate' (is the connection between chocolate and pimples even established?). Marietta was cursed, and the remedy is to attempt to counter or remove the curse. St Mungo's has specialists in dealing with assorted curses, and we see people arriving there with the results of magical mishaps. The fact that she arrived still scarred in September means that she did not receive any effective help beyond what she could do on her own. Since the scarring was on her face I doubt her mother wasn't aware of it. I seriously doubt her mother refused to help her. But she wasn't capable, nor could she enlist the help of anyone capable and willing.

[madderbrad.livejournal.com]

I'm saying the makeup indicates she wanted the scarring to not be visible. And that she was incapable of removing it herself.

Yes, I get that. That's why I didn't refute that part of your previous comment. That makes perfect sense/logic.

is the connection between chocolate and pimples even established?

Well, I don't, as a rule, have pimples. I gorged on a packet of chocolate biscuits last week and I got a big one on my face. That's happened before. For me, personally, that rule seems pretty solid. FYI. :-)

Marietta was cursed, and the remedy is to attempt to counter or remove the curse.

No. The curse may fade. The effects of the one-shot curse may fade. Or the curse may have been designed to create pimples which slowly fade. Say, over a year - a natural period of time that might have appealed to Hermione, everything in the HP world being tied to a yearly cycle as it is.

The fact that she arrived still scarred in September means that she did not receive any effective help beyond what she could do on her own.

Yes. But she may not have sought that help.

Or, even, maybe Hermione Granger is so clever the magical physicans couldn't reverse it anyway (which is your actual point? Hermione cast a curse whose effects couldn't be countered?). But maybe the pimples would fade over time.

I don't think there's enough to go either way decidedly with this one, Oryx. What you're saying is possible - Hermione Granger is such a brilliant witch she created/cast a Jinx which caused permanent scarring which couldn't be removed by the most powerful Healers in the land she is just that awesomely powerful (and terrifically cruel).

Or my possibilities are also credible. The curse couldn't be reversed but the effects would fade over time (due to Granger genius or limits in magic; you've got to admit, a lot of the results of spells in the HP world are ephemeral). Or the curse can be reversed but Marietta simply didn't ask for help (because, optionally, the pimples were fading anyway and she felt guilty/ashamed). Or she did go for help and the Healers wouldn't help her (your 'Albus politics' theory).

Three possibilities that gets Hermione off the rap of PERMANENTLY SCARRING the DA traitor. I don't see anything that puts your worst-case one in front.

[oneandthetruth.livejournal.com]

The fact that she arrived still scarred in September means that she did not receive any effective help beyond what she could do on her own.

Yes. But she may not have sought that help.

As Bill Maher says, "What color is the sky in your world?" What planet do you live on, where teenagers--particularly girls, to whom physical appearance is more important than boys--with a humiliatingly ugly skin condition do not try to get it treated? Speaking as someone from a family that has crappy skin from childhood to old age, I can assure you, you never give up trying to have clear skin. NEVER! To suggest otherwise shows how far you're willing to go to "prove" Hermione is a paragon.

Which she's not. Everybody in the Potterverse is an asshole. Some are just bigger assholes than others.

[mary-j-59.livejournal.com]

Alas, your last two sentences are pretty accurate. Certainly, everyone in the Potterverse is flawed, some more deeply than others. And I still say Terri's right and the Wizarding World itself has a corrupting effect on the young.

As to the acne and the scarring, you're right about that, too. It's not something that can be fixed with a little change in diet; it's actually painful and the emotional scars can last a long time.

I wonder if JKR ever had cystic acne?

Oh - and something to remember about Marietta's condition: it wasn't just acne. She had the word "sneak" spelled out across her face. Why on earth wouldn't she and her parents move heaven and earth to try and get that fixed?

[sunnyskywalker]

Not just emotional scarring - I still have physical scarring from cystic acne. Large, obvious keloids. Fortunately on my shoulders, not my face, but I was lucky. And as you pointed out, that kind of acne is also deeply, physically painful even when it is temporary and doesn't scar. If Marietta's pimples are as severe as described - worse than the notoriously pimply Eloise Midgin's, as Hermione said, and recall that Eloise nearly blasted her nose off trying to cure the pimples off - then these pimples hurt, are prone to opening up and bleeding, and may scar even if they do eventually stop being active pimples. That's significant.

And as for any speculation that they "may" fade over a year or so... well, we have no evidence of that. But more importantly, neither does Marietta. Hermione didn't tell anyone exactly how she performed this jinx, so none of them know the possible long-term effects.

In fact, even if it appears similar to a known (to everyone but Harry?) jinx, Marietta would know - via Cho even if she forgot - that Hermione can adapt spells, as she did for the coins, and so this one may not behave exactly as expected. (Let's just hope word that her inspiration for the coins was the Dark Mark didn't get around or people might really worry about those very long-lasting skin disfigurements.)

Either way, this is the kind of thing even a halfway prudent person would want to get checked out, to make sure there aren't any more medical developments in store. Even regular, non-magically-induced cystic acne would rate a check-up and possibly a prescription before the time she went back to school. (Seriously, those hurt like hell.) Especially for teenage girls, at a school where one girl already put herself in the hospital wing trying to cure her completely natural acne.