Miss Granger’s Intelligence

[terri_testing]

“When to her lute Corinna sings

Comments

[madderbrad]

I agree that Hermione can be read as the author’s failed attempt to write a character substantially brighter than herself.

I think that's most of the problem. Rowling's "oh, maths!" temperament just isn't suited to writing characters who *are* gifted in fields of precision and logic.

But Hermione can also be read convincingly as a subconscious sexist’s classic caricature of a bright “girl”-good memory, but intrinsically second-rate-a wholly derivative thinker!I'm having problems seeing how that's much different from your first observation, that Hermione is much brighter than - or, rather, different from - her author. It all goes back to the writer. Rowling might be capable of throwing away a sentence or two of fuzzy summary, like she does with your male examples, but with Hermione any brilliance had to be shown in detail, because Hermione was placed in the here-and-now. And Rowling failed at that because Rowling herself - her intelligence, her personality, her 'Oh, maths!' lack of precision, her lack of understanding of '

[harpsi_fizz]

The "Books and cleverness" admission comes to mind.

Sinister thought taken from previous comment regarding Hermione's actual brilliance: Is it assumed that Harry is the only one the Sorting Hat ever listened to about placement? 'Cause I'm imagining the hat telling Hermione that she had the mind for Raveclaw, but Hermione realized that her ego couldn't take being around people who weren't impressed by her, so when she asked the hat for Gryffindor it complied.

[oryx_leucoryx]

Hermione claims the Hat attempted to place her in Ravenclaw.

[harpsi_fizz]

I remember, which is why I'm wondering if she didn't protest. As I recall, she said that it decided on Gryffindor. I just wonder.

Hermione's sorting

[terri_testing]

Hermione, like Harry and Draco, put on the Hat with strong preconceptions about the Houses. Hermione's was, as she told us herself, that Gryffindor was "the best house."

Fob Hermione off with anything less? I'd like to see a mere Hat try! Even if her personality and attributes better fitted her to success elsewhere....

[oryx_leucoryx]

Didn't Rowena Ravenclaw create her intelligence-amplifying diadem?

Diadem

[terri_testing]

So, indeed, it is said. A thousand years ago. Any examples since?

Re: Diadem

[oryx_leucoryx]

The only other examples I can find are on chocolate frog cards and the like. The invention of floo powder and the lunascope is attributed to women (I think), as is the discovery of the properties of gillyweed, a cure for dragon pox and the relevance of lunar phases to potions. There may be more, I'm not sure about the gender of some names.

[charlottehywd]

You know, I was just thinking- I might be totally off, but does it seem to anybody else that Hermione enjoys learning less for itself and more because she is insecure and needs something to make other people respect her. In this way, I think it's really no wonder that she is in Gryffindor rather than Ravenclaw. I never got the impression that she actually enjoys studying, so much as she has to put on a facade of being "the smart girl" because perhaps she is afraid of being disliked without it. Not that she isn't actually smart, but it seems like the use of her intelligence is more forced than natural

[majorjune]

You know, I was just thinking- I might be totally off, but does it seem to anybody else that Hermione enjoys learning less for itself and more because she is insecure and needs something to make other people respect her. I may have told this story before, but this reminds me of a girl I went to school with

[oryx_leucoryx]

And Virginia explained that she and Sue often were paired up as partners in various classes, and that Sue breezed thru math and science because those subjects required set facts as answers. But apparantly Sue had quite a problem with the "soft" subjects, and Virginia revealed that Sue actually not only hated English, Literature, History, and anything to do with the arts, she strongly disparaged them. Because, according to Virginia, those subjects required Sue to actually THINK, rather than memorize and regurgitate facts.

As a scientist I must protest this. A system where one succeeds in math and science because one isn't required to *think* is messed up. Science is an immensely creative endeavor. Math too, but not necessarily at the secondary level (though even there proofs, constructions, integrations the moment you go beyond the trivial there is some serious thinking). If at the highest level that science is taught in US high schools one isn't expected to design methods to study a new problem the system is in worse trouble than I

[sunnyskywalker]

I'll second that. Anyone who tries to solve Descartes's four-line locus problem with no ability to think creatively is screwed. Hell, all I had to do was follow his proof well enough to demonstrate it without notes and that took creativity, because when you are blanking out because you're standing in front of a room full of people and have social anxiety, the ability to look at all the lines and get your memory back by figuring out what the next step must be is crucial. And there are a bunch of lines, so it isn't obvious; it's kind of like a magic eye picture where you have to look at just the right parts the right way to see where you're going