She meant to honor their sacrifice. Both Dumbledore and Snape sacrificed themselfes for Love and were thereby instrumental to Voldemorts end.

And Harrys logic was 'I die, then Voldemort can die'. It would be more efficient to kill Nagini beforehand, or take out a Deatheater, or something, but Harry Potter isn't about scientific efficiency or optimization. What I dislike is.

For Harry Potter, there are worse things then death.
Harry Potter never aimed to kill, even in front of Voldemort.
Harry Potter did the ultimate sacrifice, he sacrificed his life so his friends could live.
Harry Potter killed Voldemort with a disarming charm.

If there are worse things then death, why is is killing the ultimate sin? Harry cruciod one of the Carrows, he imperiused a bystander goblin, but he never used any curse that could be lethal. If death and by extending killing is just the next great adventure, then why does he never aim to kill Voldemort, who has surely done these things worse then death.

Maybe death isn't that bad, but killing harms your soul. So, even though Harry was willing to die for his friends, he wasn't willing to kill for them. Which goes against the idea of self sacrifice. And having Voldemort die from a disarming charm so Harry conveniently never had to ask himself what to do with Voldemort was just cheap.

The underlying morals don't stand up to logic.

 

It might just be me, but I have no clue what RC is meant to stand for, nor what DAaYOD is meant to mean.

 

DAaYOD = Dumbledore's Army and the Year of Darkness and I think RC = Renegade Cause. He's using some fanfics as examples.

 

Definitely. But logic has no place to maneuver against love. One of the most wonderful emotions of humankind and at the same time the one which made, through history, the worst actions of any society. The one emotion which can transform the most intelligent of men into a babbling idiot.

That's one of the few things I can't nitpick JKR about, because she started preaching about love in the first book, when she described Lily's sacrifice. She was congruent with that plot device through the 7 books.

 

OWLs were at the end of 5th year. Harry scored Exceeds Expectations on them, before ever laying eyes on Snape's old textbook.

His stellar performance in 6th year potions was a combination of four factors.

1. His already (by definition) above average skill. "Excel." "Exceeds Expectations." They even start with the same letters. I barely even have to connect the dots, here; handy, that.
2. Snape not being around to loom over him and outright sabotage the work he turned in.
3. Slughorn not letting any of the few people left in NEWT potions (Slytherin or otherwise) sabotage other people's (notably Harry's) work.
4. His willingness to use another student's old notes, rather than cling to old textbooks that were approved by a Ministry that has repeatedly proven itself to be old-fashioned and out of step.

Hermione's utter hypocrisy over the "Prince's" book would be amusing if it weren't so infuriating. Umbridge shows up and restricts what texts the students are allowed to read, handing them the new, "Ministry Approved" texts, and Hermione blows a gasket over it. Limiting the students' pursuit of knowledge, especially Hermione's, is obviously sacrilege to Miss Granger.

Then, the next year, Harry starts using the improved notes of a former student, and Hermione throws a shit-fit because the notes aren't "Ministry approved."


Ministry approved... actual quote from Hermione.


Hurrrrrrr.

 

Eh. I actually agree with Hermione about the HBP textbook. Following alternative instructions might produce better potions, but Harry isn't in Potions class to make potions. The potions produced in class aren't going to be used - they're just for practice. He's there to learn about potions, and to understand the reasons behind why they work.

Had Harry taken the Half-Blood Prince's recipes and then figured out why it was that the changes made better potions, then Hermione would have had nothing to complain about. As it is, he didn't learn anything, as evidenced by the lesson about antidotes. The moment he didn't have someone holding his hand he had no idea what he was doing.

And yes, it is cheating. Yes, they're just a different, better set of instructions. But notice that even with the same instructions, people in Potions class produce potions of different qualities: those different qualities display the individual's skill in potion making. It's a fair assessment method because they all have the same recipe, so the differences in quality are entirely down to the individual's skill.

Again, the purpose of a potion's test is not to produce potions. It's to show your skill and understanding so that you may be assigned an appropriate grade. By using a different recipe Harry produces a potion of higher quality than his peers of the same skill. He cheats.

So, if Harry, out-of-class, wants to make a potion for use in life, sure, he should use the best recipe he can find. But in class, the point is to learn about potions, to understand them, and then be assessed on that understanding. By using a superior recipe Harry scores higher than he should given his level of skill.

Fair testing rests upon standardisation: everyone must face the same test. Thus the "Ministry-approved" complaint from Hermione. She's not saying it can't be used in general, just that it can't be used in class because it breaks the testing system (a testing system administered by the Ministry of Magic).

 

It really just shows how bad Snape is at teaching that even Hermione couldn't see the method in the "improved" instructions. If there is a "scientific" approach to potions (which there pretty much has to be for them to make any sense), Hermione should have been able to almost immediately notice that right, this Half-Blood Prince guy was onto something.

The worst thing is that in the end Hermione is proven "right" because HBP is Snape, Snape is a Bad Guy, and Bad Guys are by definition Wrong, even when they are not. I honestly can't see what JKR's "lesson" was with the potions book.

 

Its funny Hermione complains about cheating. Didn't she confounded McLaggen for no other reason other than she wants Ron's dick.

 

That's Quidditch tryouts, not school. To her Quidditch isn't nearly as important as School.

 

Ever heard of hypocrites?

 

Pfft. Potions class, at least as run by Snape, consisted solely of reading instructions off the board and withstanding mental torture - and that was from day one. It's not like Slughorn went back and taught the class the way they should have been since first year, either.

Bearing that in mind, Harry adequately proved he could read instructions, even if they were alternate ones, which is what the class had been about up to that point.

Come on, Taure...

She's saying, "You didn't do it exactly the way I did." not, "These are standardized tests." I think we both know that. Hermione is that uptight about following the rules (and coming off as the best in the class)... unless she sees fit to break them, herself.

That scene at the end of HBP, where she stretches logic to the breaking point in order to claim she was right about the book, before Dumbledore's body is even cold, has always burned me up.

It's just about the most heartlessly petty thing she does in the books.

Except that she DOES bitch when she thinks Harry used a potion to give Ron the edge in the next match.

So, that 'quidditch isn't important' argument kind of falls apart, and you get right back to Hermione being a massive hypocrite and a hardheaded bitch for the course of HBP. Rules are for other people, smaller people, not Hermione.

Edit: Not to mention that Harry's potion (which he didn't even really use) would have changed the outcome of a single match, whereas Hermione sabotaging the Keeper tryouts affected every single Gryffindor match that year. So, if you're looking at who made the larger, more grievous transgression, it easily would have been Hermione if Harry had, in fact, actually cheated... which he didn't.

It's also notable that Harry's method of helping Ron was to cleverly use the placebo effect to boost his confidence. Then, when Ron discovers it was actually all him and there never was a potion involved, it actually causes a second, more permanent, boost in confidence in the long run. It was a move that was in no way unfair to other players, and wasn't against the rules.

On the other hand, Hermione's method of 'helping' Ron was to hamfistedly bludgeon another player into submission so Ron could unfairly make the team. It didn't really do much for Ron's confidence in the long run (which is why Harry had to step in with his placebo in the first place), it wasn't fair to the person she hexed, it wasn't fair to the teammates that would have to rely on Ron for the entirety of the season, and it was most certainly against the rules.

 

Hermione's stodgy bitchiness, Harry's propensity for taking action, Ron's vulnerability to emotional impulses. It all makes sense if you realize that the trio are really just one person separated into chunks. Harry is the Ego, Hermione is the Superego, Ron is the Id.

More on topic, I don't agree with people who are throwing around the word "average" to describe Harry Potter. It's being used in a very coarse way, e.g. everyone from the 5th-percentile to the 95th percentile counting as average.

Harry Potter is not prodigal, it is true. We only know of three of these from the canon: Dumbledore, Grindelwald, and Voldemort. HP prodigies seem to have transcendent talent over a broad variety of subjects.

But given Harry's reasonable level of competence in magical combat situations, and his good grasp of the material related to that (his O in DADA), I think we have enough evidence to consider him above average. I disagree with calling him average just because he doesn't have outstanding academic performance across the board. School is only important while you're in school; after that you specialize. Harry has specialized in DADA, and according to Word of God has made a good career of his specialization.

There is no evidence that he hasn't gone on to be highly competent by auror standards - could you honestly see Rowling being asked about it and replying, "Oh, he's actually not great at his job - he's only been promoted because of his fame!" Nor is there any evidence that what we see of him in his 5th through 7th years of school represents the apex of his magical dueling ability.

---

As for Hermione? Obviously she's more intelligent than Harry, and more magically well-rounded. But she's obviously not prodigal either, and showed limited inclination to thinking outside the box, as Fred and George did. IMO, Hermione applies her intellect in much the same way as a Muggle doctor or lawyer. There is no scientist in her, and no artist. Dumbledore is both.

 

On the topic of the Confundus vs. Felix Felicis, it's worth noting that the Confundus is something against school rules whereas the use of Felix Felicis in competitions is illegal.

 

I was having a hard time putting this thought to words but basically this. I feel that Hermione would see the hexing as just something that is a minor infraction of school rules not the law whilst Felix is actually extremely illegal and I also feel that she would worry that the Felix is harmful while the Hex is not. To her it's a matter of simple spell versus serious harm, (good luck not withstanding).

Edit: Plus she might have been hoping something similar would happen for Ron in the end, with the confidence boost, without the need to resort to manufactured results.

 

Unrelated to your point, but "prodigal" and "prodigy" mean very different things.

 

All the issues I have with Harry as a character aside; I always thought (and Taure tell me if I'm wrong here) he had a good physical and mental condition to go toe to toe with Lord Voldemort in a fight. Because I don't count it as coincidence how he could trade spells with the dark wizard at the same time. Perhaps Voldemort wasn't taking him seriously in the graveyard fight, but in their last confrontation? He (LV) was fighting to win, and nonetheless Harry was up with Voldemort’s speed with a wand.

Certainly, that’s an above average skill to have.


EDIT

Guys... Hermione did confound McLaggen, Harry didn't drug Ron.

 

Well, he seems to be in good enough physical shape, but I'm not sure how relevant that is to a duel. Dumbledore and Voldemort barely moved in their duel and when they did it was by apparition.

Mentally, though, Harry definitely seems rather apt at coping with stressful situations.

 

If Harry learns 'Apparition', 'AK' perfectly, he and Voldemort can have an endless duel apparating out of the way of an AK and throwing back the same, provided Harry is as fast as Voldemort.

If Voldemort pulls a Dumbledore and starts using transfiguration, then Harry will die a gruesome death if he doesn't fling countless AK's at Voldemort without break.

 

It's worth noting Bellatrix in book five as well as Snape and McGonagall in book seven had great reaction time. Drew their wands and fired their spells faster then Harry thought possible. Theoretically, Voldemort was even faster since he duelled Kingsley, McGonagall and Slughorn at once. Harry must have been fast to get a spell of at the same time as Voldemort.

Or he might have just been lucky.