I like the use of a level/tier system, but I was getting at who was the better 15 year old in my post. Your list isn't bad though, my only thing is some of the level 2/3 characters could be swapped. Though Hermione level 2? I don't hate Hermione or anything, I just think she ranks toward the top of level 3 on my list.

 

Just because people at Zonko's were also able to create joke items doesn't disqualify what the twins managed to do, which is design and create a wide number of magical items themselves. Yes, other people are capable of it, but there is nothing which suggests that it's something the average wizard could achieve. And so what if it's a joke item? They've still shown greater skill in creating magical items than most of the characters are shown to, and IIRC, even Hermione comments on remarkable their products are in HBP. Then there's there non-joke items, such as the Shield Hats.

As for what they'd have done if Harry had never given the money, it should be noted that the Weasleys were already chasing Bagman for money he owed them, and had several products already made that they could sell. The twins already had methods of building up the money they needed.

As for their testing on schoolchildren - so? The magical world can be a dangerous place, and magic removes most of that danger anyway. Compared to the kind of magical accidents we hear about, the twins pranks and goods were innocuous and fairly safe. In addition, they tested things on themselves before they did on test subjects (who were, it should be noted, paid and fully aware of the danger they were putting themselves in), and so were able to stop things that had to averse effects from reaching the general public. Human testing is an invaluable part of any good meant for human consumption, because you can never quite be sure how it'll react - so yeah, I don't really see what's so stupid about what they were doing.

 

Hermione was just as creative in her use of magic as the other level 2s were at her age. At 15 she created a cursed scroll that put what put what seemed to be an irreversible curse on Marietta Edgecombe. She also learned a NEWT level spell (the Protean charm) the same year. She consistently and constantly learned spells that were years ahead of her actual age and taught them to her friends.

The only areas she was really lacking in were duelling and creating entirely original spells, both of which can be explained by her preference for research and planning over trusting her instincts. The first is also entirely a character flaw, rather than one of ability.

 

Right, but the Marauders became animagus and created the Marauder's Map while in school which I would consider greater than any of Hermione's other non-academic achievements. I never pictured Hermione as a witch gifted at magic, but rather as someone who worked harder than anyone else to get the grades she had. Not to say she's not exceptional, just that she feels more like a 3 to me especially if Ollivander or Snape is a 2.

 

Actually I don't see why everyone say Hermione is so fucking smart. She's hard working, that's for sure, but genius? Hardly.

If she was that smart, she wouldn't have to spend all of her time studying. Her success in most of her classes can be easily explained. She simply reads all the material for lesson beforehand and then shows off to the professor, hoping for a pat on the back. Of course she'll be the first one to get every spell right, she already knows all the instructions by heart. The other kids have to learn the instructions first and then get them to work. She simply always has a head start, thanks to her diligence.

So, Hermione is definitly NOT a genius, judging by the amount of time she spends studying and the results she achieves, which are better than average, but not stellar in any way.

 

I don't even know how to respond to Alexx. He just seems to misunderstand things on some basic level that I can't comprehend.

 

Albus is a Genius. Tom Riddle is a Genius. Hermione is just a girl who studies frequently like Alexx said.

 

Hermione is one of my least favourite characters, due in part to the sheer amount of times her supposed intelligence is praised (especially that time by Lupin). As many have said before, she's determined and has a good memory. Does that make her a genius? Hardly. You could give the same attributes to people like Dumbledore, Voldemort, Snape, James, Sirius, and Remus. Hermione's accomplishments don't really compare to any of them.

Dumbledore was doing things with a wand that people had never seen before. Voldemort created a Horcrux when he was a teenager. Snape created multiple spells, and it's outright stated he gave as good as he got against James and Sirius (and possibly implied that he was better than them in a one-on-one situation). James and Sirius (also Pettigrew) became Animagi as teenagers, and with Remus helping them they made the Marauder's Map.

Hermione, on the other hand, at the age of sixteen was doing things a year or two above her level, was getting top marks on her exams (doesn't seem all that special, considering how many characters have done the same), and she hexed a piece of parchment and didn't tell anybody who signed it (a real bitch move in my opinion, especially when she's not apologetic at all).

We never see her do anything amazing, unlike some other "genius" teenagers in the story have done. The Protean Charm is still Hogwarts stuff, after all. She needed a Time-Turner to get to all those classes, but we hear about characters like Percy and Crouch Jr. who got more perfect O.W.L. scores than her. Did they use a Time-Turner, or were they just better at managing their time?

Fred and George (I despise them, by the way) did more impressive stuff than Hermione, and it's made very clear that they're not academically inclined. They even dedicated a lot of their time to Quidditch, so how impressive would they be if they spent that time studying like Hermione does?

If Harry and Ron are basically average (they're underachievers, anyway), then Hermione would pretty much be above average.

 

Smart doesn't equal being a prodigy comparable to Tom Riddle and Albus Dumbledore at her age. If she actually were comparable to them, I can see Dumbledore training her to fight Voldemort.

I actually feel Hermione can be characterized in the same level as Lily, James, Remus and Sirius, for they achieved similar feats of magic at the ages of 15-16.

And Alex, don't let your hate of Hermione Granger cloud the way you argue the topic. Emotions aren't to be worn on the sleeves, for only the weak and people who ultimately lose an argument or win by Deux Ex Machina usually do that.

Give Harry a peaceful Hogwarts life and he will be a bigger slacker than he already was. He would gradually turn his mindset towards a direction where he feels that he had a bad life as it is with the Dursleys and he had a right to enjoy and sail through his life with the minimum effort. Add to that a fortune he inherits, well you get it.

Percy Weasley got 12 owls, straight O's and he is nothing more than a paper pusher.

Right. She can't really badmouth him in the Hogs Head and what friend says 'Harry, you are a pathetic wizard, go inside the flames and you'll get yourself killed'.

And 'most skilled in his era'? Don't make me laugh. If he actually were, his OWL grades would reflect it going by your weak argument.

Now you are killing me. I am dying out of laughter.

Oh and you need to get back to the books, for you are confusing fanon with canon.

 

How I feel about canon-Harry?

Hmm...

Good set-up; lot of character development potential, given his history and circumstances.

JKR flubbed it, especially by the end of the series.

 

So these grades aren't very good, are they?

That's essentially 9 A grades and a B. I don't know what school you went to, but if 9 A's and a B aren't stellar, you've got a warped view of the world.

EDIT: Fuck it, this is like arguing with my kid cousin. I was going to post more, but I really can't be bothered.

 

First year out of school, he was personal assistant to the MoM's equivalent of the Foreign Minister, and ended up essentially running the department for a good portion of the year. Year after that, he was the Minister of Magic's - and even Scrimgeour decided to keep him on.

His association with Arthur likely helped him achieve all of this, but even so - Percy was a fairly important paper pusher.

 

You seem confused, my friend. Is she a genius? Maybe. Couldn't really say. But hard work alone usually isn't enough to attain the sheer perfection she does in almost every academic pursuit she has ever attempted.

 

And the idea that geniuses don't have to work is absurd.

 

Lol!

This quote remind me of your tattoo. You're something else, man. Keep the up good work.

 

I still think that JKR fucked up with the whole OWLs thing, but that's just my opinion.

Also, in regards to OWL counts, Hermione dropped Divination which would have put her class count at 11 and if she had taken Muggle Studies that would put her at 12. Assuming Percy took all of those classes and was a Prefect, it's plausible that he too got a Time Turner. I'm inclined to think that in the end it doesn't really show that Percy's smarter so much that he's a bigger nerd than Hermione, I honestly feel Hermione was smarter due to her using her brain to realize she didn't need Muggle studies as a Muggle Born and also realizing that she didn't need Divination to continue her career.

Also, how the hell did Percy get an O in his Divination if he doesn't have the Mystic Eye? If he had the gift of prophecy, why didn't we see it? If he didn't than what kind of standards are there for the Divination OWL that anyone can pass if they study hard enough?

Edit: I suppose I should answer the original question, but well, Jorm said it best so I'll just quote him

 

It's simple. All you have to do is make shit up. Divination is just a bunch of nonsense. Sure, you get an occasional Prophecy, but for all we know, it's mostly guesswork.

 

The whole comparison thing doesn't make any sense. All characters are there simply for the plot, and nothing they do has anything to do with how "good" they actually are.

E.g. Lucius Malfoy has to be pretty damn good to be able to get where he is, but still he is beaten by a house-elf and later by a bunch of kids. Harry does all sorts of awesome stuff (patronus in year 3, fighting Voldemort in year 4, teaching DA in year 5...) but his characterization is that of an average guy. Fred and George are told to be slackers, but they are needed to provide tools that are used by Harry so they seem like geniuses. Same applies to the Marauders: they look like super awesome people because the plot needed there to be the Marauder's map and animagi. Hermione is repeatedly said and showed to be super smart, but still her achievements pale in comparison to what Snape and the Marauders (or even Fred and George) did in school, simply because her role is to give just enough support for Harry to get him through, not to provide clever instant victory solutions for everything.

It's a story and everything that happens happens just to further the plot. It's not a simulation based on given attributes of the characters. If your plot needs Harry to beat Snape in duel, don't worry, he will.

 

I wouldn't count the History of Magic, Astronomy, or Divination O.W.L.s if we're going to (fairly) calculate Harry's GPA . . .

During the Astronomy exam, Hagrid, one of his first and best friends, gets unfairly attacked right in the middle of his test. In History, Voldemort sends him a vision of his godfather dying, and Divination was always going to be a joke since it was taught by a fraud.

That leaves him with an A and four Bs in the primary subjects, which makes him the above-average slacker that he is. His extra-academic qualities and their utility has already been mentioned.

As far as his duel with Snape at the end of HBP . . . I wouldn't use that as an indicator of their relative skills. Snape is the more talented wizard, sure, but Harry had just watched his mentor die. He was completely out of his mind with rage and grief, and entirely unprepared on an intellectual or emotional level to face Snape. He wasn't at his best, or anywhere near it, so he was pwnt by the third strongest wizard in the books. But I don't think it's fair to disparage Harry's skills because he lost after being mind-fucked and seeing Dumbledore die the way he had that night.

 

Also I think JKR completely dropped the ball with how badly Snape trounced Harry in that occasion. The one thing that makes unfirgivable curses as bad as they are is that they are unblockable. "No unforgivable curses from you," my ass.