My point is that comparing Harry to all other students (including all Ravenclaws whose grades we have no idea of but which are probably pretty high), it's not unreasonable to assume that Harry's grades are not within the top 15% of all Hogwarts students. And if they are not in the top 15%, they are within one standard deviation from arithmetic mean (="average"), even if they are better than the mean.

Harry is not an exceptional student as far as his grades and work in class is concerned (except in DADA). Harry is an exceptional wizard because of his extracurricular activities.

edit: I took a quick look at HBP, and I don't think Exceeds Expectations is nearly as good a grade as you think. For Transfiguration we know that you need an E to continue at NEWT level, and we see every (mentioned) Gryffindor from Harry's year bar Neville taking that class. And even Neville managed to match Harry in Charms -- with an unmatched wand.

 

And I think that it is unreasonable to assume that he's not within the top 15% of Hogwarts students. And I've given you reasons from canon and from Rowling's childhood why I think that it's unreasonable to think he isn't. You, on the other hand, have said, 'No he can't be because I don't think so.'

 

I'm a bit confused about why some people think both an E (Hogwarts) and a B (Real world) are average. I've always thought of an A (Hogwarts) and C (Real world) being the average/pass grade.

Is it different over in the states or elsewhere?

 

Your argument is that E must be a very hard grade to get because your aunt got A's in the 70's, and that was supposedly a superhuman feat. My argument is that E can't be all that hard to get because it's canon that 87,5% of Gryffindors in Harry's year got E or better in Transfiguration, which is supposed to be one of the hardest subject (though that's probably just Rowling being bad at maths -- but then so could Harry's grades be, too).

Harry's characterization (you know, the actual stuff that's important in the story, not a throwaway list of grades) is that he struggles with essays and isn't all that interested in schoolwork. In OotP we get actual confirmation of this, when McGonagall says that Harry has been averaging A's in Transfiguration, and his Charms grades have been A's and E's. Hell, he even falls asleep during an all important exam.

We don't have much information of his peers in the other houses, but we know that one part of them are supposedly smart, others hard working and the rest ambitious. I just can't see Harry as a top student with that kind of competition.

And now that I think of it, even defense is something Harry has unique "advantage" in because of his yearly near death experiences. He has unique motivation to learn something the others can honestly think as a totally useless class taught by sub-par teachers. I mean, why would a normal wizard be in the least interested in the patronus or the shield charm? In what situation are they likely to ever need them in their everyday life?

Again, grades are not what makes a wizard (as exemplified by Fred and George), and Harry rises above average not because he shows any particular talent in school, but because of who he is as a person.

 

From what I've gathered, pretty much. A 3.0 GPA - more or less a B IIRC - is considered good, but by no means great. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong, here.

The funny thing is, it's even a sentiment shared (though considerably less so) in the UK. You know, with the hubub over whether GCSEs have been dumbed down over the years.

In any case, I'm with LinguaManiac: the closest thing we have to an equivalent are the old O-Levels, and even then, it's just not Quidditch.

At no point do we see O.W.L or N.E.W.T grades assigned boundaries based on a 0 - 100 scale (again, 112% on a Charms exam). For all we know, an A could be anything from 40 - 70, for example. An O might go past 100. Making assumptions like these are pointless, though, because we aren't given a frame of reference other than the names of the grades themselves.

And the fact that at least two elite professions ask for Es rather than Os.

EDIT: For what it's worth, I do agree with arkkitehti and the assertion that grades don't make the wizard. That being said, I think that the question posed - whether Harry is a talented wizard or not, period - has been answered quite succinctly.

 

Three years older since Hermione's birthday is in September. She's nearly a year older than both Harry and Ron.

 

It might just be becuase I went to Public school, but to get ito the A Level equivalent of some subject (Maths, Science, Business and some others) you needed at least a B. So, from my point of view, Slughorn was asking for at least a B.

A bit off topic but I would like to point out that this is the kind of thing that you would see in tabloids and people looking to put down a kid who just got more than a couple of As on his results.

 

So, all I know is what people say and my own experience. Law Schools are generally viewed, in the US, as being very difficult and exclusive. When I went to Law School, a 3.0 (i.e. a B) was the average grade. That was also the average grade of my friend's Med School, which is even more difficult and even more exclusive.

Back in High School, if you had anything lower than a 3.0, you were considered dim. People joked about how stupid the guy who had a 2.5 was, like Neanderthal jokes. I did next to no work (think Ron Weasley, except less because I didn't have a Hermione to nag me) and got something like a 3.3 and people shrugged and said, 'well, what did you expect? Don't worry, you'll actually do well once you apply yourself.' The suggestion, of course, was that a 3.3 (a B+ average) was not doing well, just alright, average at best.


I think that's the main source of confusion for Americans when we talk about Hogwarts grades. As I said, I don't think grade inflation is quite so severe outside the U.S. But I know people who back in High School earned a 4.8 on a 4.0 scale.

 

Suppose I'll share my thoughts. To be honest, not necessarily fair, I had always perceived Harry as academically average. Time and again we see academics and intelligence linked with ability, power, and magical skill. However Rakkety Tam's post certainly gave me a lot to chew over, however the issue here is that I see evidence on both sides. I do not agree with brad, but I'd say it is arguably fair to say that Rowling does muddy things.

For example what we are told of Voldemort vs what we are shown. Similarly Harry is normal we are told. We are shown that he is normal. Then we are shown the exceptional. Only for the unexceptional to be reinforced (a major issue for many of us in later books). She wants him to be normal- average, and yet to be special- exceptional.

Looking at canon we know that Barty Crouch Jr. got twelve O.W.Ls, as did Bill Weasley, and that Percy got O.W.Ls (and N.E.W.Ts) for every exam he took. Hermione got ten. Harry and Ron got seven. As noted a seemingly unusual amount of Gryffindors made it through with at least E's into advanced Transfiguration. In first year Goyle, the peak of stupidity, "had passed too" (Acceptable). This is notable because Harry is talking about across the whole curriculum (Neville's grades balancing out). This seems to point to their yearly exams as having the expectation of at least "Acceptable". Exceeds Expectations then is just that, exceeding the standard expectation, but not remarkable. In OotP Snape marks homework as if it were O.W.Ls and he threatens those who get "D"readful with detention. Malfoy mocks/shocked to hear people got "D"s. "T" for troll is not even mentioned. Since higher grades appear more common, the lowest never heard of, and the thick headed still getting Acceptables I would say that the average for any half decent witch or wizard is somewhere between Acceptable and Exceptional.

We know 12 (out of 40) got through with E or O on their Potions O.W.L (again with Snape as a teacher, not doing grading). In Transfiguration at least 6-8 in Gryffindor got E or O (and at least one more with an A. Neville at that, up to a possible 90% pass rate), we can readily assume then that the other 3 houses succeeded enough for as many getting through. 1/3 (13-14 or more) of their year getting E or O as an estimate. I am not saying Charms is easy but those are presented as the hardest classes. It makes sense for closer to half their year (maybe 15-20+) would move on with a E or O. DADA, despite the professors, has quite a few since "Harry had taught at least half the class (everyone who had been a member of the DA)". Being generous and assuming he didn't mean all 15 or so DA members in his year still means looking at hypothetical numbers of 15-25 or roughly 1/2 their year. I am not sure if Exceeds Expectations can really be notable when at least 1/3 of students in each class are achieving it (and several or more students in a few different classes).

Harry getting an A on the partial Astronomy may point as much to the lack of its difficulty as much as Harry's smarts. Also I will say that I think it was in Harry Potter and the Boy Who Lived where Harry topped Grindelwalds record for the most classes with the top marks. Given the pass through rates from the above, O's I would say don't carry quite that kind of weight. O's then are not astounding results, but they are the unusually good or, as the name says, Outstanding. In other words O's are exceptional, but E's are not.

Perhaps notable also is "To their great surprise, both he and Ron passed with good marks; Hermione, of course, came top of the year." Personally I would take this as Harry and Ron did not perform remarkably throughout the year (as with matchsticks and the feather), but did pick up on things and did better than they thought they would (better than average, but not truly exceptional). I will say that I can't agree, to the frustration of myself and other fans, that Harry ever was or will grow into the league of Albus "did things with a wand I'd never seen before" Dumbledore, Gellert "shade less skillful" Grindelwald, Tom "probably the most brilliant student Hogwarts has ever seen" Riddle. The greats are skilled in many different areas. Those on the second tier, such as Snape, are there for their noted skill in a few areas. Harry achieves this in one area (which has overlap), but only one (applicable) area. He has achieved exceptional things, whether with specific understood or applied magic, or simply guts. However nothing I can remember reading in the books says he will go on to learn, or seek out without necessity, a great deal more. Yes he will learn more, but not excel or master magics. Think of it this way: he is not notably better at most magic than 10 others in his year. Lets quarter that to be generous (assuming his E was better than theirs, and that he continues to grow and others don't, over a century lifespan) and you still have something like 250 witches and wizards alive (in Britain and Ireland) who are as capable in each of the various fields. Harry is above average, but not in the sense of expertise, or at least mastery, in most of them. As a fan I would like to think he would go on and face new threats and master new magics, but as written the feeling I get is that he wants most is to spend time with family and friends and enjoy life.

TL;DR - Harry is and will be far above average in Defence, naturally far better at flying, and I am now inclined to believe a far greater insight into life and death, and their magic. However for me he is a only somewhat above average in Charms, Potions, Herbology, Transfiguration(?), Astronomy, and bad to abysmal/ignorant in Divination (wooly but the centaurs show there is something too it), History, Ancient Runes, Arithmancy, Alchemy, spell invention, creating magical foods or objects and so on. Harry is not an average wizard. He is above average. However Harry for the next century of his life does not have the breadth of skills to put him notably above others as to be considered, in those magical terms, exceptional.


PS. I do not intend to take away Harry's amazing abilities. If I had or knew how I would have given a thumb up to the comment showing how awesome Harry is. However I don't think it is fair to only consider Harry's accomplishments. He is the hero of his story. But to take a Dresden outlook on things I would like to think everyone else is a hero in theirs as well. (This isn't really shown in canon, but that's neither fun nor realistic to me) That doesn't mean combat bad assery. How many students other than Malfoy know how to fix a vanishing cabinet? Answer zero. Or Non-canon. What about Su Li mastering a very difficult to learn body transfiguration in sixth year to get into the mediwitch program early. What about Bob Ogden Jr. who struggled all third year to learn the necessary charms to help make his families fire whiskey. What about in fifth year how Milicent Bulstrode invented a little charm to spellcheck for her younger sister with magical dyslexia/learning disorder. Just like our own lives with different problems, schooling, interests, chances, and experiences. Someone might know how to fix an obscure computer problem and be completely ignorant of how to fix a simple mechanical issue with their car or vice versa. Lawyers and Doctors were mentioned, different fields of expertise. I remember Penn Gillette giving the anecdote that some smart successful guy in whatever field was frustrated when he couldn't catch the magic trick. But that wasn't his expertise, it's theirs. Harry learned incredible things under incredible circumstances, but that doesn't mean he was the only one learning something outside the curriculum.

Well that reply was long. Cheers if you were bored enough to read.

 

Fake Moody always used to say "Constant vigilance," and Harry always knew when the eye was on him.

 

Lol, Most Powerful Characters? I don't know about that...

But there is little doubt that Mrs. Molly Weasley is indeed the sexiest character in the books.
Anyone who says otherwise is a creep and a degenerate.

This is why I say Harry/Ginny in canon was the second best possible pairing that could have happened.


I thought this thread needed my input seeing as it is as useless as the rest of the threads on the same vein we've had over the years.
Might as well derail this thread into a pairing discussion.
And Yes, Harry/Molly OTP. Harry/Tonks is a close second.

 

Tonks by far is the greatest pairing. She's like a swiss army knife, do I want Fleur, Daphne or Angelina, why not all three? Also she's definitely down for it, you can't tell me Lupin wasn't getting some McGonagall action from Tonks.

 

Whilst Harry is more powerful than the average wizard, he's nowhere near Voldemort or Dumbledore's level. They outclass him easily.

It's not just power levels though, because despite Harry's seeming rapture and awe with the wizarding world and magic itself, he does nothing to understand it. Dumbledore and Voldemort pushed the boundaries of magic, that's why they were so powerful, because they didn't just take what was given at face value, they ventured further than many wizards thought possible simply by using logic and intellect.

Harry, whilst living with the Dursleys, was of course mentally and emotionally scarred, as we see throughout canon. Faced with his relatives constant belittling he started to believe them, which is perfectly natural given the situation. However, despite this he still questioned them and their opinions, whilst learning to survive, in essence becoming a Slytherin in the rough. So, I'd like to know where this smart, intuitive boy went, because clearly he didn't accompany Hagrid to Diagon Alley.

Seriously though, I can understand why Hagrid had Harry's Gringotts key, (Dumbledore's Harry's magical guardian) but Harry didn't. I don't know about you, but if I grew up in my hateful cousins hand-me-downs and I suddenly had a whole vault of gold, I'd like to know why someone had my key!

So, due to any of Harry's logic making an abrupt departure after the first couple of chapters in the series, he was already severely behind others. Mainly because other pure/halfbloods had at least a basic knowledge of magic, just like you'd expect any 11 year old to have of the world around them, and muggleborns (or their parents) had the common sense to pickup books needed to survive in the everyday life of an average wizard or witch.

This severely damages, his already limited options, but there were more available to him (like I don't know, STUDYING!!). Come on, but if an evil wizard who murdered you're parents and you apparently killed, suddenly came back to life, hell-bent on converting or killing you, you'd try and find some spells to defend yourself.

The only reason Harry won the war was a lot of support, carefully manoeuvred situations courtesy of Dumbledore (I'm not much for manipulative!Dumbles myself, but you've got to admit, he knows what he's doing), Hermione's smarts and a hell of a lot of luck.

In the end, Harry's really just above average on the power scale, what one would expect with his parents, who were about the same, and a bloke who had luck and a prophecy which, frankly, seemed to favour him, on his side. Not powerful at all really, but he had the potential, politically, (Boy-who-lived's got to have some perks, right?) and logically.

Really it all comes down to the fact that J.K focused on his ability to love and I can respect that, because he was definitively powerful in that respect, especially for someone who could of turned out worse than Voldemort.

Now whether you believe any of that is nobody's guess, but do try and keep an open mind, otherwise the already clichéd super!Harry will just be getting another fan, and isn't that a disturbing thought?

 

First, I think you've been influenced by fanon. I don't think there is any canon evidence of a magical guardian or books that help out muggleborns.

Second, the prophecy, according to Dumbledore, was pure bullshit. In the end, Harry won the war because the wand chooses the wizard. Not to mention how Voldemort deserved to lose far more than Harry did.

Third, you're not the first to say this, but I, personally, don't see how Hermione's smarts did all that much...in any part of the series. She certainly did a lot and planned ahead, which made things easier, but Harry was the one that figured out the big stuff. That kid never gets his credit, but gets all the blame.

As for studying, I've never understood why anyone thinks that this would somehow change things. Going by canon, the Order wasn't kickin ass and takin names. Witches and wizards with a greater repertoire than Harry were dead at end. Hermione knew more spells than Harry in OOTP, but that didn't stop her from turning her back on Dolohov. And Percy Weasley was a studier. I would never in a million years think that Percy would end up being a better wizard than Harry.

 

I can agree with you on the fanon part, I probably have but oh well.
And with the books for helping muggleborns I don't mean anything specific like "Gilderoy Lockhart's 'A-Z for young mudbloods'", but surely they must have something, like we have books based on our cultures, so maybe ones meant for foreign wizards and witches, like the Patil's, who wouldn't be used to Britain's culture. Although, it wouldn't surprise me if they didn't because some pureblood sycophant thought outsiders should stay outside or something ridiculously prejudiced.

I think with Hermione it's not that she's smart, as such, more like trying to prove herself, maybe? She was seen in the beginning of first year as the know-it-all with no friends, who used mainly book knowledge, there's a quote somewhere that alludes to her sounding like that, but I can't be bothered to find it.

I was thinking more along the lines as maybe if he'd looked into a book once in a while, just to get ahead, instead of just when it's necessary, that he probably could of been more efficient against Voldemort. I definitely see where you're going with her being less of a practical person, especially compared to Harry, but I don't think it's fair to compare them.

There's a reason Harry's a seeker, he's fast and nimble with good reflexes, due to years of "Harry Hunting" (?) which would help a lot with duelling, whereas Hermione lacks this. Although Harry does have his moments that can definitely count as smart, for someone who had the potential to be a Slytherin (not that all of them are like this *coughMalfoycough*), they're few and far between. I feel that for him to be construed as "powerful" he would need to use his brain just a bit more instead of always relying on instinct, you know? Although, this could be me romanticising Slytherins and coming off really defensive due to my stubborn and often over the top house pride.

 

Voldemort single-handedly dueled three of the most capable people in all of magical Britain. No amount of reflexes honed through years of Harry hunting or Quidditch is going to make him capable of fighting Voldemort on even footing, even if he were trained from a young age.

His instincts are the only reasons he's alive. Most of the predicaments that Harry finds himself in don't allow for time to think a perfect plan to get himself out of trouble. He either reacts or dies. Most people in Harry's place would freeze up and shit their pants. You're definitely romanticizing Slytherins. They're just a bunch of kids who are probably a little more ambitious than their peers.

 

The only Slytherin of renown we know of who was able, I think, to really capitalize upon and embody the characteristics of the House in a positive way was Slughorn.

Voldemort is arguably the purest Slytherin there is, and even he was painfully stupid at times. Sure, Harry used his instincts a lot, but he also didn't try to touch the same hot stove three times like an utter imbecile (as Voldemort did).

 

If there is one thing I dislike more than equating skill with magic with grades, it's equating it with fighting prowess. McGonagall and Flitwick were teachers, not fighters. If you put some black ops ninja against three teachers he's going to kick their ass, no matter how knowledgeable they are in the theory of ninjutsu. Yet that doesn't make the ninja a better or even more skilled in anything else than fighting.

There's so much more to magic than just fighting, even though it's understandable why Rowling decided to focus more on that.

 

Flitwick was a dueling champion.

 

They survived a duel against Voldemort so I'm gona go ahead and assume that they're skilled fighters. Also, as ashland pointed out, Flitwick was a dueling champion and McGonagall fought in the first war.