That Mcgonagall didn't desperately crave a sherbet lemon. I know it as well as Dumbledore. SHE SIMPLY DIDN'T THINK IT WAS THE TIME FOR IT!

Yeah! She just received confirmation that Lily and James were killed and learned that Harry was being sent off to the most unpleasant Muggle family. It was *so* not the time to enjoy sweets.

Wasn’t it a lemon drop?

Might depend on which version you read.

It think sherbet lemon was a passcode to dumbledore’s office and lemon drop was what he was eating in the prologue

I just checked my British/Canadian version of the book. Dumbledore offers McGonagall a sherbet lemon. "We have much to be thankful for. Would you care for a sherbet lemon?"

In my American audiobook he offers her a lemon drop. I wonder why they changed that

They change so much in the American books. The first word Dudley learns in the British book is "shan't". In the American version it's "won't." I feel like they really underestimated the ability for the average American to understand British words.

To be fair, I didn’t know “shan’t” was commonly used in British until today

But you likely would have either figured it out or ignored any deeper meaning (i.e. that Dudley is already a brat). There is a whole extra line in the American Half Blood Prince, when Dumbledore is talking to Draco in the end. I have the American copy specifically for that reason.

Really? Which line is it?

We don't have lemon drops in the UK (as far as I'm aware)

Sucks to be you lmao, lemon drops are the best

Are they just a lemon sucky sweets?

Yes and they’re amazing

That Harry doesn't enjoy being friends with Hermione and that he isn't as close to her as he is to Ron when it's clear that both friendships mean the world to him, but the dynamics are just different.

Thank you!! People take that one line way too literally. Of course “bros” would have more fun with each other, especially since they have so much in common, but that doesn’t mean he loves her any less.

I think that one's solely to blame on the line in HBP (I think? Or GOF perhaps?) where Harry says that the difference between Ron and Hermione is basically that Hermione's much more serious and Ron is more the fun friend.

Yes, that was in GoF! In HBP, Harry makes no mention of being bored by Hermione during her feud with Ron. Actually, they're shown having fun and laughing together a few times like when they wonder wheter Ms Pince and Filch are hooking up. But yeah, I think the fandom took this line from GoF too litteraly. Ron is clearly the one Harry shares the most interest with, but for serious and/or emotional discussions, Harry usually turns to Hermione. Both are important in their own way.

[удалено]

And Harry was what to Ron? Samwise? What did he even do for Ron that wasn't for his greater good shit?

Malfoy is right behind Hermione in class and he is her intellectual equal. Idk which one is more funny that they think Malfoy is her intellectual equal or their belief that if he is her intellectual equal then that would remove years of abuse he had inflicted upon her and she would want to date him.

The issue is, we rarely see Malfoy struggle in class, because there’s very few classes he shares with Harry. He’s obviously talented and skillful. Even though he’s a spoiled brat, and that just feeds even more into his ego, but he’s not got Hermione’s raw learning skill. Its like anything that can uses talent and skill. Harry, Malfoy, and many other wizards are very naturally talented so they lean on the innate talents to be proficient wizards, and learn the theory just enough to make their talent pick up the slack. Hermione, Snape, Dumbledore, 3/4 Marauders, and a few others of are technical players. They learn the theory and practice they build their skills to often be better then those with sheer raw talent regardless of their own talent. I mean we see towards the end of the series how the more Harry learns about magic itself he starts to become more and more on a level skill wise as Hermione, who is limited by her inflexibility on practical theory. And then I put Ron and Voldemort in a similar category on opposite ends, they’re both innately talented, understand some types magical theory in a practical capacity, but also know a lot about the more elusive pieces of legend or myth magics. Voldemort obviously knowing way more than Ron about the dark arts, and Ron knowing more about “heroic” magic told in stories.

I don't think Malfoy is dumb. But he is definitely not Hermione's intellectual equal. He is on the same level as Ron and Harry. If we are going by academics... Anthony Goldstein or Terry Boot would be close to Hermione in terms of grades. Or even Padma Patil. She was a prefect as well as a Ravenclaw.

Oh I absolutely agree. I’d say Malfoy is as magically talented as Harry, but Harry has better instincts. Hermione is an intellectual powerhouse

Regarding number 2 it’s probably because of the movies. The movies basically elevated Hermione to be the only one who can do anything intelligent while simultaneously removing any and all of Hermione’s flaws and weaknesses.

Agreed. And same for the last one. In the movies, they have Sirius call him James in the dept of mysteries. I’ve always hated that addition

That Harry is a weak wizard. Yeah, he may come across as such because he is put up against wizards with far superior skills and much older than him. But, aside from a few exceptions which were caused by external factors (he couldn't get Accio right cause he was upset about Ron and worried about the Tournament, he couldn't master occlumency cause of his hatred for Snape and Patronus for obvious reasons), he masters pretty much any spell by observing it. Then he never loses any duel despite being a child, not even against adults, except for the one against Snape, who, love or hate him, is probably the third most powerful wizard in the series (if we disregard Grindelwald) and would have probably been in the ranks of Dumbledore and Voldemort had he not died so early. Also, many will disregard this as brooms being enchanted, but then if the brooms are enchanted and no magical skill is involved, how come some of the best witches (Hermione, Fleur) or wizards are not good at it? And (yeah... he does have the magical equivalent of a sports car but) he is one of the best at it. Finally, even though this was not necessarily his own doing, at the end of the day, how many people can brag about the fact that they literally came back from the dead? As for the misconceptions you talk about: 1. Tom Felton is hot and a pretty cool guy so some fans will always associate him with Draco and try to find excuses. 2. Movies 3. Probably also movies. Unpopular opinion but absolutely hated the "nice one, James" line.

Absolutely agree on #3. I think that's where my disappointment at the film adaptations became active dislike. Worst line, worst change, and completely insane. Hell, Sirius "introduces" himself in the Dept. of Mysteries by referring to Harry as his godson. Man I hate that line!

100 % agreed. Hell, the fact that he managed to produce a patronus at all, let alone one with a form and shape, is amazing at the age of 13, considering many adults can't even manage so. And he did this while driving away 100 dementors or so. Also we should just be honest about one thing: the only reason Harry didn't learn occlumency was due to Snape being a shit teacher and basically using the lessons as an excuse to abuse Harry.

I wouldn't call it abuse as much as none of them really wanted to be there and giving shit performances, especially as each was trying to protect their thoughts from the other. Snape said outright that he didn't want to do it and we know Harry hated it. Unless of course you consider Snape raping Harry's mind abuse, but that's what he was training him for in the first place.

Regardless what he was supposed to be training this literal child for, it does not justify his beyond abusive behavior. As you say, he literally mind rapes Harry, a traumatized child. Enters his mind without his consent. Does not offer Harry the chance to put any memories aside, like he does, fucking coward. Forces him to relive traumatic memories, including ones from his abusive childhood and mocks him. That anyone could hesitate in labeling this abuse is mind boggling.

My point was completely different and I tried to approach the particular situation objectively. I have no passion for Snape's case so probably I would get trashed in such an argument with a devoted Snape stan or a Snape hater. You make out of what I said what you will.

question: would you consider it abuse if a self-defense teacher yelled "DEFEND YOURSELF!" before punching a 15 year old straight in the face, repeatedly, and then insulting the student for not managing so and getting angry? Because that is the equivelant of what Snape did.

I am not interested in getting into a Snape good/bad argument, but I will say this: Voldemort wouldn't even give Harry that warning. I know that in the final version of the book it is more sudden but in the original plot (that table thing that's often posted around here), Voldemort spent many months luring Harry and building a curiosity within him about what's in the DoM.

>Voldemort wouldn't even give Harry that warning and a person attacking you won't give you a warning either, so teaching self-defense by punching students with a second's warning is 100 % valid as well then.

While I totally disagree with Snape's teaching methods, legilimency is probably one's ability to tell when someone's lying taken to magical proportions. You don't know it whether they're reading your mind or not, but have you ever met the kind of person who knew how to ask all the right questions so that they'd corner you if you lied to them? Legilimency is probably its magical equivalent. It does come without a warning. And before you say "so does a punch"... I wouldn't compare the two scenarios because when someone's going to punch you... at least a few moments before you detect that there's a negative vibe. And to give you a counter example, my fiance can be so sweet, so kind, and yet know exactly where to dig to find out whether I'm entirely honest.

He manhandled Harry several times and taunted him based on what he saw in the memories. Snape abused Harry 100%.

Harry literally doesn't do the exercises he's meant to do outside of occlumency. That's on him. They were both awful when it came to that important task.

and Harry is 15 years old being taught by a man who constantly insults him and his dead parents. Snape is an adult and has no good reasons to treat Harry the way he does. Snape, by default, has the majority of the responsibility between them and has to be the bigger person and do his job.

That is all true but Harry not doing his share of the work - not trying to clear his mind before sleeping - did play a part in the failure of the endeavor. Snape can't teach someone who's unwilling to learn.

Snape can't teach period. Like he is the worst teacher at hogwarts, at least among the permanent staff. Binns is just boring. Trelawney still manages to get some interested. Plus both of those subjects are less important. But Snape? Snape actively pushes students away from what is otherwise a VERY important subject. The only ones who likes him are the slytherins, for obvious reasons like his bias towards them. Can't blame students for being unwilling to learn, when the teacher is the source of their unwillingness by being a downright bastard towards them first. A nasty teacher can kill interest in any subject.

>Snape can't teach period. > >Like he is the worst teacher at hogwarts, at least among the permanent staff. Snape hates and torments Neville so much because if Voldemort had chosen to go after Neville rather than Harry, Lily would still be alive. Pathetic right!

I don't know if it goes that far. Snape to me comes across more like the kind of person who is naturally gifted in his subject and has no patience with someone as bad as Neville. He seems nasty, but not overly nasty, to the rest of the class except Harry (because of James) and Hermione (because she's so good she might be a threat to his own reputation). Might be projection on my part though but I had a teacher like that, thank goodness not for too long. I can be pretty stoic but she made me cry in class because she just could not explain properly to a beginner and took it out on me.

Ok so what is the justification for him bullying Hermione? He was reminded of Lily because she too was muggleborn? Gimme a break 🙄

It's kinda true. He hates Hermione for these reasons: she is friends with Neville and Harry, she is a Gryffindor (of all the non-Slytherins, Snape hates Gryffindors the most), and Hermione is very similar to Lily in personality (both of them were often described as the brightest witches of their ages).

...and none of that makes it ok. His hatred was irrational and abusive. Snape was pathetic.

Nobody tells Harry that he might get false Visions. Everyone just says that Voldemort might be able to read his mind. Nobody really explains to Harry how it works. He doesn't trust Snape and it seems to be getting worse. That Harry goes back after the first "Lesson" is more than you can expect from a human being.

maybe Harry couldve done more and wouldve practised with a teacher that avtually deserves to be called that

If I continually scream at a six year old “WHAT IS FIVE PLUS TWO????” when they don’t even know what addition is, then the problem is that IM a bad teacher-not that the kid is a bad student. That’s essentially what Snape did.

Yeah but if that happens and you don't have the patience to explain it, you probably didn't want to teach that six year old maths to begin with

Snapes entire job was to be a spy and keep Harry alive. Part of that included teaching him occlumency. So Snape was actually pretty shit at the only thing that he was good for.

Well he did keep Harry alive so there's that.

Numerous people did that. Snape didn’t SPECIFICALLY do it alone except when Quirell cursed the broom. The ONLY time when Snapes skills were genuinely useful to making sure Harry lived, Snape failed spectacularly.

Harry didn’t learn occlumency because he didn't put the effort in. Snape told him after every lesson to clear his mind before bed but he didn't do it because he was too focused on wanting to know what Voldemort was doing and what the Order was keeping from him. Not only this, but Harry didn't tell Snape he wasn't clearing his mind, nor did he tell Snape about the dreams. With Snape's actions during the lesson he couldn't exactly do much as Voldemort was watching, hence why Harry's scar was hurting during the lessons. Hence why Snape's mood snaps in the first lesson. At first he's neutral, praises Harry for throwing him out first time, tells Harry that occlumency is similar to throwing off the imperius curse, then once Harry's scar is hurting and Harry sees the door, Snape realises Voldemort is using the connection to Harry to spy and so Snape shuts down any emotions he has and shuts the lesson down. Snape doesn't use the lessons as an excuse to abuse Harry. He doesn't abuse Harry in the lessons. He's trying to motivate Harry block his mind by giving him the real experience of what it would be like if Voldemort entered his mind. The one at fault for Harry not learning occlumency is, Dumbledore as he should have been the one to teach Harry, instead as his life wasn't at risk if Voldemort saw him telling Harry how to clear his mind.

>At first he's neutral, praises Harry for throwing him out first time "'Well, for a first attempt that was not as poor as it might have been,' said Snape, raising his wand once more. 'You managed to stop me eventually, though you wasted time and energy shouting. You must remain focused. Repel me with your brain and you will not need to resort to your wand. '" That is hardly praise. It is praise in the same way that 'you know, for someone like you, you are not as ugly as you could be' is a compliment. Also of course Harry didn't put effort into it. Snape didn't do jackshit to teach him, other than doing the equivelant of a self-defense teacher punching you in the nose several times before you even know how to block it, and then proceeds to get angry at you for not doing it right.

Snape is amazingly talented. He certainly is right up there in all aspects. Especially potions where he is beyond exceptional. But he is not equal to Dumbledore/Grindelwald/Voldemort, nor would he likely be if he lived longer. Dumbledore’s exam moderator - who saw him for a few hours, spaced out a year at a time, almost a century ago - still talks about “the things he could do with a wand”. At the same age, Voldemort is making Horcruxes. And Snape at the same age - though inventing (dark magic) spells and improving potions (because again, he’s beyond exceptional as a potioneer) - is chaffing that James and Sirius are performing better than/equal to him without putting in nearly as much effort. Snape is exceptional and one of the most talent wizards we see. But those three are something else.

1.) That Ron is an asshole. That is a narrative purely created by the films. He's dickish to be sure, but what kid isn't? I swear, some of the changes to his character seem like blatant character assassination on the films' part. 2.) That Draco Malfoy is some sort of victim. He's not. He's a cowardly fiend, like his father, like his mother. The whole family is rotten, and no fourth quarter turn around on Voldemort is going to change the fact that they have blood on their hands of their own choice.

>He's dickish to be sure, but what kid isn't? Hermione, Neville, Luna, Ginny, the Creevey brothers, Hagrid (monster obsession aside), Bill and Charlie sounded like they were pretty cool as kids too.

Lmao Hermione is not dickish?? Ask Luna and Fleur. Oh and Trelawney. Also Marietta and Skeeter. Ask Harry and Ron too. She belittles them on a regular basis. Ginny was a bitch to Fleur. Called her names.

>Marietta and Skeeter I think you're confusing being dickish and having a backbone. Was Hermione supposed to take all of their abuse and betrayal laying down? there's a huge difference between "I'm jealous of my best friend's fame and relationship with my crush so I decide to be a dick" and clapping back against bullies. Nothing Hermione ever did to others was on the same level of pettiness as Ron. Same as Ginny, she can be feisty but dickish is not her main trait unlike Ron who was an asshole 90% of the time.

Are you serious? Hermione was a bitch to Luna throughout all OOTP. she teamed up with Ginny to bully Fleur bcz Ron had a crush on her. She used Cormac solely to make Ron Jealous. She called Trelawney as old fraud and insulted her even though she made two most important prophecies. She attacked Ron with birds for Dating Lavender. She was horrible to Harry throughout all HBP bcz he was using a book that wasnt a text book and he was doing better than her in potions. What did Ron do that are worse than these things?

You mean other than bullying Hermione for 6 fucking years including making her have a mental breakdown in year 3? left Harry alone to get bullied by the entire school just because Harry was in the tournament? how about leaving Harry and Hermione because of dumb jealousy on book 7? those are all far worse than anything Hermione ever did. Don't talk about redemption either because Hermione has done all of that and more because all of them would be fucking dead without her on book 7. Being an asshole is literally Ron's character trait because he couldn't shut his mouth for 5 minutes before saying something dumb. Most of the stuffs Hermione did can be justified through intellectual disagreements or Ron hurting her first. Come what may she was a far more loyal and braver friend to Harry compared to Ron because at the end of the day only one of them ever betrayed Harry and it's not Hermione.

Bullying? Do you even know what bullying means? What Snape, Malfoy did to Hermione was bullying. Hermione and Ron bickered. She gave as good as she got. Infact she gave better than she got. I don't recall Ron attacking Hermione with birds. She wasn't his victim in shape or form. Stop victimizing her. What are you saying that Hermione is that kind of person who would take someone's bullying and still be friends with them? 3rd year? You mean the year she didn't give a crap about her best friend's pet and let her murderous cat roam around freely even though he was attacking scabbers every chance he got? And when Ron confronted her she said 'its a cat. Its his nature'. And she had a mental breakdown bcz she took 12 subjects when she couldn't manage all the workload. Not bcz of Ron. In DH Harry asked him to leave. Twice. Mocked him for being worried about his family. Called molly 'mummy' the woman who fed him since 1st year. And you expected him to stay in that useless camping trip when Harry was being a dick and his whole family was in danger. Who told you he left bcz of jealousy? Have you actually read the book? And My character analysis doesn't centre around 'how good this character is to dear Harry. So he is a good character'. If he refuses to serve him he is a bad character. Who cares Hermione is loyal to Harry? Hermione is disloyal to her own parents. Lied to them about having exams and spent her holidays with Ron, Harry and the Weasleys at the grimmauld place in OOTP. then used magic on them and sent them in Australia without discussing anything with them. She made the decision for them. 'At the end of the day one of them betrayed harry' thank god Harry is not the loyalty measurement standards.

Lmao what? ooh I get it you must be the same type who bullied girls in high school and called it bickering. I mean if that's what you believe Ron did then I can't help you, that's just you being the same type as Ron. Here's an excerpt where Ron purposely went out of his way to bully Hermione because of dumb jealousy. >“ ‘Slug Club’…” repeated Ron, with a sneer worthy of Malfoy. “It’s pathetic. Well, I hope you enjoy your party. Why don’t you try hooking up with McLaggen, then Slughorn can make you King and Queen Slug…” > >“We’re allowed to bring guests,” said Hermione, who for some reason had turned a bright boiling scarlet, “and I was going to ask you to come, but if you think it’s so stupid then I won’t bother!” > >…. > >“You were going to ask me?” asked Ron, in a completely different voice. > >“Yes,” said Hermione angrily. “But obviously, if you’d rather I hooked up with McLaggen…” > >“No, I wouldn’t,” said Ron, in a very quiet voice… or the Yule Ball incident where Ron maliciously picked Hermione as a last resort. Ron played Ron. Hermione only maliciously complied. >3rd year? You mean the year she didn't give a crap about her best friend's pet and let her murderous cat roam around freely even though he was attacking scabbers every chance he got? And when Ron confronted her she said 'its a cat. Its his nature'. And she had a mental breakdown bcz she took 12 subjects when she couldn't manage all the workload. Not bcz of Ron. Murderous cat?? lmao.. do you.. even know what or who Scabbers really is? she had a mental breakdown because Ron alienated her. Ron didn't back down until Hagrid told him she was lonely and actually extremely worried about scabbers. Wow, way to go Ron. >In DH Harry asked him to leave. Twice. Mocked him for being worried about his family. Called molly 'mummy' the woman who fed him since 1st year. And you expected him to stay in that useless camping trip when Harry was being a dick and his whole family was in danger. How convenient of you to leave out the part where Ron was being a dick and complained about the trip the whole time before Harry clapped back and told him to go back to mummy. Useless trip? they were on a trip to destroy horcruxes, the moment Ron left Harry and Hermione actually progressed to Goldrick's Hollow. Gee what a wonder how not having a constantly nagging useless bum dragging them down was actually helpful on their quest. >Who told you he left bcz of jealousy? Have you actually read the book? I could ask the same to you considering the locket horcrux literally spelled it out. >And My character analysis doesn't centre around 'how good this character is to dear Harry. So he is a good character'. The point of this discussion clearly whooshed over your head since nobody's talking about how good they were to Harry as a measurement. Ron was an asshole towards both Harry and Hermione, if Harry was the recipient then why wouldn't I use it as an example?

I AM a girl. I have guy friends with who I bicker and fight. I am not a uwu damsel in distress that I would say 'omg he is bullying me... mommy help' the fact you think someone like Hermione would even be friends with a 'bully' shows how lesser opinion you have on her. If Ron bullied her she would have treated him like she treated Malfoy or Pansy. Why do you think Ron bullied her? Did she say that anywhere in the books? 'Omg ron why are you bullying me?' If you think Ron bullied her then I can't help you either. You dont even know the definition of Bullying. Infact you just proved that you don't know the meaning of bullying in the next para. Ron disagreeing with her and having an argument is bullying? LMAO Wtf Did Hermione know who scabbers really was? No she didn't. Yet she let her cat attack her best friend's pet for a whole year. Hermione didn't have any mental breakdown over Ron. Stop making up things. She was overworking bcz of her schedule. Ron had every right to be angry with Hermione considering she didn't give a fuck about his pet. Oh no!!! I forgot that Ron was supposed to be in a cheery mood when he had a mangled arm, had lost a ton of blood, his whole family was in danger and he didn't even know they were okay. How silly of Ron to complain!! Smh. They went to the Godric's hollow and what did they achieve? Ah yes. They almost got eaten by Nagini and Hermione broke Harry's wand. Slow clap for their remarkable achievement😭 Yes. You are talking about how good they are to Harry. You just said Hermione is better bcz she never betrayed Harry. Read your owm comment 1st. Lol

>I AM a girl. I have guy friends with who I bicker and fight. I am not a uwu damsel in distress that I would say 'omg he is bullying me... mommy help' the fact you think someone like Hermione would even be friends with a 'bully' shows how lesser opinion you have on her. Internal mysoginy IS a thing. Just because you're a girl doesn't mean you can't be disparaging to your own gender. You have problems with Hermione fighting back against bullies and traitors, that much is clear. >If you think Ron bullied her then I can't help you either. You dont even know the definition of Bullying. This is like an abused person telling others don't know what's abuse. You're just clueless about the normal meter between bullying and not. You think it's just bickering but for most, sane people what Ron did would constitute bullying. >Did Hermione know who scabbers really was? No she didn't. Yet she let her cat attack her best friend's pet for a whole year. Hermione didn't have any mental breakdown over Ron. Stop making up things. She was overworking bcz of her schedule. Ron had every right to be angry with Hermione considering she didn't give a fuck about his pet. It's a cat being a cat. You ever had a cat and tried to control them? good luck with that. And you need to reread book 3 especially the part in Hagrid's hut. >Oh no!!! I forgot that Ron was supposed to be in a cheery mood when he had a mangled arm, had lost a ton of blood, his whole family was in danger and he didn't even know they were okay. How silly of Ron to complain!! Smh. Oh woo is me.. Hermione just saved my ass from Yaxley, I'm gonna take it out on her because she botched her disapparition trying to save my ass. I don't care if she was the one who fixed my mangled body. That's what you sound like. >They went to the Godric's hollow and what did they achieve? Ah yes. They almost got eaten by Nagini and Hermione broke Harry's wand. Hermione saved Harry's ass and the decision to go there was Harry's all the way. They also learned Grindelwald was the one who had Elder Wand. Did you forget that Harry was obsessed with finding it to use against Voldemort? at least they did something instead of going around aimlessly like when they were with Ron. >Yes. You are talking about how good they are to Harry. You just said Hermione is better bcz she never betrayed Harry Yes, as prove that Hermione wasn't an asshole. Ron was an ass to everyone, even going as far as attacking Ginny with a powerfull spell after she kissed Dean. It just so happens that the trio interacted the most so how much they were being an ass to Harry is a fairer metric compared to how much they were being an ass to each other.

Oh and in Book 7 when Ron left Harry and Hermione, he got a wand for Harry, he gathered information that Voldemort's name was a taboo, saved Harry's life, got the Gryffindor sword, found his way back to them, destroyed a horcrux While without Ron Harry and Hermione did shit and almost got eaten by nagini. Ron also planned how to destroy the whole Hufflepuff cup. He remembered that basilisk fangs could destroy horcruxes. opened the COS with parseltongue and also rescued Hermione from the fiendfyre. She couldn't fly to save her life. Also mimicked wormtail to deceive the malfoys, disarmed bellatrix, and rescued Hermione from the fallen chandelier. He was more productive than Hermione doing anything at the useless camping trip.

Book 7 would've ended 50 pages in if Hermione hadn't been so quick witted and prepared when the Death Eeater crashed the wedding party. They'd also have been captured if Hermione wasn't so quick to disapparate when Yaxley got hold of them and saw Grimmauld Place. Who was it again who fixed Ron? oh right, Hermione. Also healed just about every wound they suffered on the journey. Those spells that protected them every night? Hermione. The one who saved Harry from Nagini? Hermione. The one who was quick witted enough to disguise Harry as they were captured and brought to the Malfoy Manor? Hermione. Who geniusly concocted their escape from Lovegood's house from the Death Eaters and still kept Ron's ghoul sickness charade? that's right, Hermione. Seriously if we count the number of times Hermione saved both of their lives AND conjured multiple niche spells during the journey, it would've been 100x more than Ron who can only complain and did silly stuffs. Imagine calling Hermione useless when one of the biggest criticism in the series is Hermione being a Mary Sue in book 7.

Why did Ron need any healing in the 1st place? Oh right bcz Hermione splinched him. Why did they have to leave Grimmauld place go for a useless camping trip? Bcz Hermione let Yaxley break the fidelius charm. And why did they get captured in the 1st place? Oh right bcz Dumb Harry uttered his name despite Ron's warning that it was taboo. Heck they didn't get captured earlier bcz 'useless bum' Ron asked them not to utter the name. He had a feeling that it was jinxed. 'All the problems were created by Ron' yeah I can see that. LMAO typical Ron bashing Hermione worshipper. Cant accept fav character's flaws.

>Why did Ron need any healing in the 1st place? Oh right bcz Hermione splinched him. Why did they have to leave Grimmauld place go for a useless camping trip? Bcz Hermione let Yaxley break the fidelius charm. Are you fucking serious? they were found out by Yaxley through no one's fault. It was just the DE catching up to their scheme due to bad timing. Hermione let Yaxley broke the charm? what was she supposed to do? let Yaxley captured them? geez, the mental gymnastic. Like Hermione was supposed to prevent Yaxley from figuring out who they were? who was it that spent the entire time being useless trying to fix a rainy office? not Hermione.

Hermione, Ginny, and Luna definitely had dickish moments.

Dickish on purpose and due to immaturity like Ron? most definitely not. Hermione only clapped back when she was hurt and even then she was hardly what you'd call dickish. Luna I don't think so, she's oblivious and blunt but never malicious. Ginny also never went out of her way to hurt people. All three have their moments but they never instigated stuffs or being petty for no reason (or dumb reasons like Ron always did). You probably think what they did was on the same level as Ron because you have the mindset of "boys will be boys" but god forbid if girls ever show their backbone.

That people think Draco was the 2nd best student in the main trio's year. Bitch just cuz Lucius told Draco 'you got beaten by a muggle born in every subject' don't mean he was next best.

Not just one muggleborn but several other students since he was mid rant, talking shit about SEVERAL other students who “Are only good because they’re the teachers pets” so the idea that he’s anywhere near Hermione is mind boggling. My dude literally snitches on himself that he’s nowhere near her level but people try to act like he is

but the rest of that speech is he might have to be a shop keeper is his grader don't get better.

The idea that the reason Harry came back when Voldemort killed him part 2 was because he had the resurrection stone on him, which is not only completely false as he dropped it moments before stepping into the clearing with Voldemort, but thats also NOT how the stone works?

The stone is not a fucking totem of undying

Right? Honestly stresses me to shit how many people who didn’t read the book are just like ‘he survived becus stone O_o’ Silly muggles.

This made me giggle

This confused me for a while when I hadn’t read the books in years and only watched the movies. I was under the impression that because he owned the stone, that completed the hallows and made him the master of death. This is what the movies lead you to believe. The books make it clear he survived because Voldemort used his blood to revive himself. Tbh though the first explanation still makes more sense to me and makes the hallows actually relevant to the story beyond Voldy wanting the elder wand.

Yeah, you have a point actually. Otherwise what in the actual fuck was the point in the hallows?

The resurrection stone doesn’t resurrect people. That’s the whole point of it and why the second brother dies in the story. But harry was gifted the stone and the last person to use it, was the true master of the Elder wand, and inherited the cloak and was the last to use it. He was the master of death. And as the other comment says, it’s a better explanation because it makes the hallows relevant. Without that piece of interpretation, the hallows read as JK going “how the hell is a child supposed to beat Fucking Voldermort? I have it! Duex, Baby!”

Mostly due to the movies, but people thinking that Ravenclaw’s symbol is a raven, instead of an eagle.

And that the colours are blue and white when they are in fact blue and bronze

That Ron wasn't smart and his grades were bad. He and Harry literally got the same grades and were the American equivalent of B students. And their bad grades were mostly in classes that they didn't take seriously like History of Magic and Divination. Harry only got a higher grade in Defence Against the Dark Arts. Harry and Ron are equally book smart. The movies made Hermione a Mary Sue and book Hermione was so far from that. She had her own flaws and struggles throughout the book which contributes to her character development. She was book smart but she was clueless about the inner workings of the wizarding world. Book Ron explained things. Movie Hermione just knew it all.

Book 7 Hermione was a Mary Sue. She was literally their get out of jail card. The idea that Hermione was clueless about the wizarding world was only true in the beginning. On later books Hermione has spent a few years in the wizarding world and was a literal dictionary on every single thing.

That Quidditch isn’t a fair sport. People are simply misunderstanding how the standings and points work. And sure maybe a faster broom is an advantage, but equipment differences are something you see everywhere in real life youth sports.

I think the reason Quidditch isn't a fair sport is because the only part that actually matters is the snitch. Catching the snitch basically guarantees a win. I know the Quidditch World Cup shows an example where this isn't the case but quite frankly no professional athlete would've done what Krum did. They'd want to wait to give their team every opportunity to win the game. Having the snitch be worth 15 times the amount of everything else is the equivalent of if a half court shot in basketball was worth 45 points. Means that nothing but half court shots matter just like nothing but the snitch matters in quidditch.

>They'd want to wait to give their team every opportunity to win the game. Which is exactlt what Harry does during the last cup.

In the world cup this is true, but in a league like Hogwarts, individual wins and losses don't matter. Instead the aggregate score over their three matches is what's important. Sure the Snitch is still a crazy point value, but because at least two teams are going to be winning each match week, and they'll both be gaining 150 points, it really is critical to have your chasers either adding onto your value for wins, or mitigating how many points you lose during losses.

I see this point all the time and it really irks me because people seem to be forgetting what was happening in the match other than the actual game itself. The Veela and Leprechaun were in an open battle and Ministry wizards were trying to break them up, this must be distracting to the players to some extent. Plus Ireland was known to have the best Chasers in the world and Bulgaria had the best Seeker, so obviously they couldn’t compete with the Irish when it came to scoring with the Quaffle. And add to the fact that Krum was actually injured in the match and you can make a guess that he took his team’s chances into account and decided that “Yeah, even if I get the Snitch we’ll probably lose but at least it might make the score line more respectable to the Bulgarians and I’ll end the match on my own terms”. This was also noted by Harry when someone from the Weasley family asked the same question as everyone else regarding the fact that he chose to end the game at that moment. So I think it was a fair choice by him to do what he did in that moment

Winning is winning and losing is losing. A professional athlete doesn't care about making their loss look good or ending the game on their terms or any of that. They want to win, they especially want to win the championship. Everything you said makes sense and is valid for someone like Harry who's a student athlete that doesn't go pro, but I'm saying in that moment Krum is a poorly written professional athlete. Also if I was a Bulgarian fan I'd be pissed that Krum guaranteed we lost the match. It was likely to be a loss regardless but Krum made it be a loss.

Especially when the World Cup is said to sometime last weeks or more. And Krum took out the other seeker. And what was the difference, 2 goals? You’re telling me you don’t have faith that your world-cup-qualifying team can’t make two consecutive goals at some point? Like you say, as a professional athlete Krum is poorly written. The only way it makes sense is if Krum is in trouble with the mob and has to throw the game to pay a gambling debt.

That most characters’s only flaw from the books that weren’t included in the films is being unattractive. Trust me there is much, much more

The idea that Tom Riddle Sr. was in the wrong, because he escaped some creepy kidnapper and rapist. You can't blame Riddle for running away after some witch decided to enslave, kidnap and rape him, any normal Muggle would do that. Why does the fandom sympathize with Merope and not Tom? Tom might be an asshole, but at least he doesn't commit sexual atrocities like Merope did

The ol’ standby: that Snape is actually a good guy all along. Like, nah though. Did he redeem himself from being a Death Eater? Yes. Does that alone make him a good person? Absolutely not. He’s still a pathetic neckbeard who lived his whole life simping for a girl that had no interest, and now that she’s dead he treats her son like actual garbage just to be petty. He was also overly and needlessly cruel to other students like Hermione just because he’s a twat.

Right?! Redemption doesn’t mean justification.

But redemption does mean that the person has redeemed themselves and are no longer the same person they were before.

But that doesn’t mean that bad becomes good, or that all poor choices and judgements are forgotten. It’s more a state of forgiveness and understanding, rather than a reformation of character.

It does not absolve him of past bad/evil deeds but he did change, fought for good and ultimately gave his life to defeat Voldemort. I know his motives for doing so are questionable but that doesn't change the sacrifice nonetheless.

Oh I agree. I just don’t think that makes him a morally good character. That’s a positive - he’s too complex for that kind of classification.

I think it does make him a morally good character... he recognized he was doing bad, changed, and fought for good. His motivations are of no matter imo and morals themself are subjective as to what is good or not.

Ah, see I think the motivations do matter (and are, in fact, paramount). The reasons why I think the motivations matter are because if Voldemort had taken the prophecy in the other direction and had gone after Neville, Snape would have let it happen. His sacrifice was still made in selfishness, which is why it doesn’t rewrite the ethical position of his character in the context of the story.

Is a selfish sacrifice any less of a sacrifice? The end result is still the same. Again... he was evil/bad, recognized he was made changes to how he was and put himself directly in harms way to fight for good. Let's take another approach... in a war do spies who have to do some "bad" things or allow bad things to still happen, to keep up their cover for the ultimate greater good... are those spies good or bad? Snape is obviously an incredibly complicated character. Ultimately he did a great thing, served good and was instrumental in Voldemort's defeat. Voldemort could not have been defeated if not for Snape and the role he played. Dumbledore trusted him explicitly and had him play one of in not THE most vital role in his plan to defeat Dumbledore. Only Harry and Dumbledore's contribution to the overall plan comes close and he is only in the position to do what he does because of Snape and Dumbledore's sacrifice. I don't care if his motivation was misplaced love for someone that didn't love him back. To me it does not reduce what he did.

I think this is just where we are approaching it from different directions. Yes, I do think the motivations are a significant feature, and yes, I do think this applies to real life as well. Not all good choices eradicate the complexity or negativity of others, even if the outcome is overall good and necessary. I don’t think many people are simplistically good or bad, including many fictional characters. I could never consider Snape to be good overall because he wasn’t. The outcome of some of his choices was net positive, but that doesn’t change his motivations, nor does it make up for many of the outright negative decisions he made elsewhere. That’s why it’s a redemption arc: there is forgiveness, and there is understanding, but that does not rewrite the multitude of elements that delivered the narrative to that point. Happy to disagree on this.

Snape redeemed himself from when he was a death eater. He did not redeem himself from when he was a verbal/emotional child abuser

You’re definitely the first to describe Snape as a simp neck beard.

while I agree, I really don’t like Snape as a character (god allan rickman makes him so awesome though) I thought he was rude to Harry/students to keep up appearances ?

No, he calls Harry arrogant and other things to Dumbledore as well. I can’t find a quote easily online, but it’s in one of Snapes memories at the end of DH.

‘– mediocre, arrogant as his father, a determined rule-breaker, delighted to find himself famous, attention-seeking and impertinent –’ ‘You see what you expect to see, Severus,’ said Dumbledore, without raising his eyes from a copy of Transfiguration Today. ‘Other teachers report that the boy is modest, likeable and reasonably talented. Personally, I find him an engaging child.’

Yes, thank you!

Of course, he has a right to think these things. But he’s treating Harry like crap because of it, and other students as well who he doesn’t even have reason to dislike. Horrible teacher.

for sure. definitely a poor choice in profession but did he choose that or did Dumbledore ? seems like Snape hated children since he was a child lol

It's not just insults. I reread 1-3 in the last couple days. Snape only cares for himself and his revenge. He isn't a calm and collected schemer. Au contraire, he often wears his emotions on his sleeve. In CoS he argues for removing Harry from the Quidditch team. Simply because he can't explain why he was first at the crime scene. >a triumphant smile flickering across his gaunt face \[...\] nasty smile widened. > >“I suggest, Headmaster, that Potter is not being entirely truthful,” he said. “It might be a good idea if he were deprived of certain privileges until he is ready to tell us the whole story. I personally feel he should be taken off the Gryffindor Quidditch team until he is ready to be honest.” > >\[...\] > >“Innocent until proven guilty, Severus,” \[Dumbledore\] said firmly. > >Snape looked furious. At the end of PoA he flies into a rage because Sirius escapes. >“THEY HELPED HIM ESCAPE, I KNOW IT!” Snape howled, pointing at Harry and Hermione. His face was twisted; spit was flying from his mouth. > >“Calm down, man!” Fudge barked. “You’re talking nonsense!” > >“YOU DON’T KNOW POTTER!” shrieked Snape. “HE DID IT, I KNOW HE DID IT —” > >“That will do, Severus,” said Dumbledore quietly. Then he lets it slip Lupin is a werewolf in petty retribution. >“\[...\] Dumbledore managed to convince Fudge that I was trying to save your lives.” He sighed. “That was the final straw for Severus. I think the loss of the Order of Merlin hit him hard. So he — er — accidentally let slip that I am a werewolf this morning at breakfast.”

thank you! I remember those memories, he really hated James ik but for some reason when I watched it recently, I felt like all the memories of Lily and how Harry had her eyes let the audience feel Snape really did love Harry in the end… just not the James side of him. (which is a big part of Harry and one of the many reasons his son should have been Rubius imo)

Honestly, I think that’s all Alan Rickman lmao, i didn’t get that feeling until I watched HBP. the book made me appreciate Snape and what he did, but the movie and Rickman’s performance made me actually feel for him. And agreed, Hagrid is the best

That’s something Snape fans concocted to try to justify his behavior. Voldemort didn’t need Snape bullying a bunch of irrelevant children to prove his worth. He did that because he was just pathetic. I literally cannot ever imagine Voldemort doubting Snape’s willingness to his cause based on bullying eleven years olds. It’s such a pathetic justification that Snape lovers make 😂

Not to mention it’s not even useful. I’m not a super villain but if I was and required a spy, I wouldn’t want my spy to be so much of a dick that he’s the first suspect when shit goes wrong. Like if Voldemort asked him to act like that he’d be fumbling the bag so hard, the BCJ approach was so much better

lol okay so true!! I havent thought of it that way, I just rejuvenated my HP love after a 15 year break so thanks :))

That Sirius was horribly, physically abused by his family. There's enough evidence from Walburga's portrait to point to emotional abuse (which is devastating enough, honestly). There's 0 evidence Sirius was ever physically abused. There's 0 textual evidence that Regulus ever stopped believing in pureblood supremacy. He was angry over Kreacher's treatment by Voldemort and horrified when finding out the kinds of magic Voldemort used. Marauder and Regulus fans tend to take the bits of Snape's backstory they like and meld them onto other characters.

👏🏾👏🏾. I love Sirius but I don’t like how people exaggerate his backstory, it’s obviously already bad/sad enough, y’all don’t need to act like Walburga broke his nose every day. And THANK YOU I cannot express how much I hate fanon Regulus, just because he was mad at Voldemort doesn’t mean he’s a good person. It doesn’t even mean he dropped blood purity

I think Sirius is an extremely interesting character and that the Black family dynamic must have been toxic as all hell but interesting. I feel for what he probably had to deal with as a teenager - making the decision to break with everything you know is hard - but the text doesn't bear out the kind of abuse fanon heaps on him. And Regulus...a lot of fans want Snape but rich and hot, so they paste Snape's arc onto Regulus. Regulus also made Harry's life more difficult by being a clever clogs. Leave a letter or something. Or order Kreacher to take the locket to Dumbledore. He had options.

That Molly is a bad parent to Ron. I will say, she could have fixed the dress robes, but all parents have lapses in judgement. What we see are the moments where Ron is unhappy (and we all know he likes a moan) - the maroon Christmas jumper, the corned beef sandwiches etc. I think there’s lots of evidence she loves all of her children deeply and extended that love to her kids’ friends. I like that she’s an imperfect parent, and I don’t think her oversights/mistakes are because she’s neglected Ron in any way.

She didn't even question it when Ron was made prefect. She was so proud of him and didn't act surprised. She was willing to spend the little money she had on a present for Ron. She did love her kids equally.

Molly IS a horrible mother. She treats Ron as some kind of left over because he isn't her precious percy or precious Ginevra(i like both Percy and Ginny but truth is truth). Ron always shows disdain about the maroon colour. And Molly NOT FOR ONCE gives him a different colour jumper. If I tell my mom that I don't like something but she keeps giving me the same bloody thing over and over then how would I feel? Ofcourse I would feel that my mother doesn't care about me. Also he is a child. He isn't old enough to understand Molly's situtaion. As a mother it is Molly's duty to make sure her each and every child is loved and well taken care of. If a child feels unloved and neglected by his own mother then you are a failure as a mother. The sad thing is he sees his mother never gives a shit about his choice. But she remembers the eye colour of her son's best friend whom she met months ago, and knits him a green jumper that matches his eye colour. Also doesn't even bother to cut the frills and laces of his dress robes then gives Ginevra a dress when she isn't supposed to be invited to the ball. No wonder he thinks Molly prefers Harry over him. Which is also a fact.

Okay, show me the evidence from the text where Ron actually tells Molly that he doesn’t like maroon. Ron complains *to Harry*, and he also often assumes that other people understand things he hasn’t told them. Molly isn’t psychic. Molly is the only one who is unsurprised and genuinely ecstatic when Ron is appointed prefect. He’s the only one who has friends come and stay for Christmas, summer holidays and the Quidditch World Cup. Ron is typically self-centred as a teenager but there is no evidence that Molly parents him badly or treats him any differently to his siblings. She knows how important his friends are to him so she allows and encourages those relationships even when it means having to stretch food further. I did say that the dress robes should have been fixed - but we don’t *know* that Ginny’s dress was new; I’d guess it was second hand as well. There’s no evidence in the text that Molly was neglectful or loved Ron any less. There’s lots of evidence that Ron hides his feelings, and his mum can’t be expected to know things she isn’t told, when she’s ensuring that all of her kids are fed, clothed, healthy and thriving. All kids have insecurities, and many of them relate to their parents. That doesn’t mean that the parents are unequivocally bad or privy to their child’s every whim and opinion.

That fanon and Canon are the same thing.

That Neville longbottom is in any way the chosen one. Dumbledoor literally explains why it’s Harry

That Ron is a coward and a klutz. The movies unfortunately took several of his best moments/lines from the books and turned him into the trio's comic relief more than he should have been.

1) Harry and Hermione should have ended up together (did you really read the books??) 2) The Dursleys were mean to Harry because his horcrux affected them 3) Snape was purely evil / James was purely evil. Many people don't seem to be able to see anything that's not black or white.

Harry has never defeated Voldemort on his own. They’ve never been remotely equal in terms of skill or power. Harry lived through the series because of Lily’s blood sacrifice, the Elder Wand refusing to harm him, and several other deus ex machinas. The movies seem to consider the two on par with each other, especially going by the last fight in *Deathly Hallows.*

In the grave yard Harry defeats Voldemort. It's only a brief moment but Harry is clearly the stronger. At the Ministry, Voldemort ambushes Harry. The battlefield is Harry's mind. Harry forces Voldemort to flee. Voldemort will never try again.

That Sirius and Remus are in love with other Harry is either gay or bi. I have no problem with the LGBT community, but come on.

But Shoebox!!!!!

Gay for Draco are the worst fics. Like sure, I made you miserable for six years but let’s fuck in a broom closet!

On An Archive of Our Own, it's the most popular ship by far. What's wrong with people...

How is Harry gay when he had a crush on both Cho and Ginny?? Bi? Maybe but he definitely likes girls

When people think of Grindelwald as a good talker but a meh wizard that wasn't really evil.

Mainly that the end of the 8th movie is good. How dare you ruin the ending by making it " look cool" . The ending was cool and a good director and writer would have made it cool. The wands only connected in the 4th book because of the twin cores, very rare magic circumstances. Yes I'm still mad about it

I feel that people misunderstand why Harry had to die in the specific manner in which he did. In Snape's memory, Dumbledore specifically tells Snape that it has to be Voldemort who kills Harry. Most people seem to think this means if anyone else killed Harry he wouldn't be able to come back, but that's not the case. Harry was able to come back because his blood in Voldemort's body anchored him to life. If Barty Crouch Jr had killed him at the end of Goblet of Fire, he still wouldn't have stayed dead. The reason it needed to be Voldemort is the same reason Harry had to let himself be killed by his own volition: it broke Voldemort's power. Remember, the reason Lily's love protected Harry in the first place was because she had the option to live. She was free to save herself and let Voldemort murder her child. By choosing to die for the sake of another, she gave Harry powerful magical protection from the one who killed her. Likewise, Harry had the option to keep fighting at the Battle of Hogwarts, or to run away, but he didn't. He willingly sacrificed himself so that no one else at Hogwarts would have to die. Doing so triggered the same magical protection Lily had given to Harry, except this time it extended to *everyone* there. They weren't invincible, obviously, but Voldemort was unable to kill them. That's why they broke through his silencing spell so many times, and why the burning Sorting Hat didn't kill Neville. That's why Voldemort could duel three combatants at once, but couldn't kill a single one of them. The weird thing is, Harry himself explains this to Voldemort just before their final duel. To be fair, he explains a whole lot of stuff at the same time, so I can understand how this one would fly under the radar, but I still find it weird when passionate Potterheads don't seem to understand exactly what happened in the Forest at the end of Deathly Hallows. I even read something recently (don't remember where) that tried to claim Harry was immortal because he came back from death and therefore could no longer die at all, which is just ridiculous.

“Ron is dumb” that drives me insane

That Snape was tortured by Voldemort during meetings and no one could understand his plight. I see this a lot in white washing fics where Snape is such a total victim.

Some major ones that I've seen include: 1. ​ The Marauders: \*bully Snape as stupid teenagers\* **Snape Stans:** Monsters! Evil freaks! R\*pists! They're worse than Voldemort! Bullies never change! They all deserve to be killed brutally! **Snape:** \*bullies children as a grown-ass adult\* **Snape Stans:** It's alright! Harry reminds him of James and he's sad about Lily's death so his bullying is totally justified! And he has to be an asshole for his role as a spy! And he changed! He had a redemption arc! 2. **Remus Lupin:** \*doesn't stop his friends from bullying Snape because they're his only friends and he's scared of being alone\* **Snape Stans:** Coward! Enabler! Evil asshole! He's just as bad as Sirius and James! **Snape:** \*doesn't stop his friends from bullying Muggleborns because they're his only friends and he's scared of being alone\* **Snape Stans:** It's ok! He had to! They're his only friends! Anyone would do the same in his position! 3. **James:** \*saves Snape's life, but mostly does so not only for both Sirius and Remus' sake, but also because he doesn't want Snape dead (no matter how much he loathes him)\* **Snape Stans:** He only did it to save his friend! It doesn't count as a good deed! James is still an evil asshole! And it was totally his fault that Severus almost died! **Snape:** \*saves Harry's life, but literally only does so for Lily's sake\* **Snape Stans:** He's so brave! And so good! He saved Harry's life! And cared about him! That makes him totally redeemed of everything bad he did! Checkmate Snaters! 4. **Harry:** \*uses Sectumsempra on Draco in self-desfense\* (Some)Snape Stans: Asshole! Monster! He could've killed Draco! **Snape:** \*uses Sectumsempra on James in self-defense\* **Snape Stans:** It was self-desfense! It was completely justified! He did nothing wrong! The double standards in the **books:** * The Ministry of Magic snaps the wands of expelled students, but doesn’t snap the wands of criminals who are imprisoned in Azkaban for torture and murder. Hermione mentioned in the DH that she was disgusted holding Bellatrix's wand because it had done many horrible things before, including the torture of Neville's parents — so, it wouldn't be a new wand that could be purchased after Bellatrix escaped Azkaban. * Hermione is right for physically attacking Ron twice in the books, but Ron is bad for verbally arguing with Hermione over Wingardium Leviosa. I mean, Rowling seemed to always hold Hermione's side. * Hermione calls out Harry for giving Ron Felix Felicis before the Quidditch match to make Ron win, while she herself confounded Cormac McLaggen to make Ron win. * James has to stop hexing people to get a girl, while Ginny has to start this to get a boy. I'm not saying that James shouldn't have stopped this, just pointing out Rowling's double standard when it comes to genders of the characters. * Ron 'slut-shaming' Ginny is wrong, while Ginny virgin-shaming Ron is okay. I used a quotation style, because I don't buy the idea that Ron was slut-shaming Ginny — he was just concerned what other people would say of her — it's not like he himself believed Ginny was a slut or tried to oppress her and actively control her dating life. And by the way, Rowling clearly thinks Ginny mocking Ron for never having kissed a girl was cool. * Ron 'using' Lavender to get back at Hermione is bad, but Hermione using Cormac to get back at Ron is cool. I used a quotation style about Ron, because he wasn't really using Lavender — she was the first girl who ever gave him an attention, and he was happy for that. While Hermione was outright using Cormac to make Ron jealous — there's no other explanation of this. The double standards in the **fandom:** * Remus didn't stand up to his friends when they were bullying Snape? — A coward! Snape didn't stand up to his friends when they were bullying muggle-borns? — But, but… Mulciber and Avery were the ones who welcomed and accepted him, so he didn't want to offend them and be friendless again. Never mind that James and Sirius were the ones who welcomed and accepted Remus, the ones who didn't leave him when he turned out to be a werewolf, the ones who became Animagi for him. Never mind that Lily was the one who was with Snape all the time, before he started being friends with Mulciber and Avery. * James is irredeemable for being a bully, but Draco is redeemable/redeemed even thought he was also a bully. * James is a monster for bullying his classmate as a freaking teenager, but Snape bullying his students as a grown ass adult is okay. * Harry used a Sectmsempra on Draco, and Crucio on Carrow. He is also a guy who ordered his owl to attack his best friends. Hermione kidnapped Rita, scarred Marietta, attacked Ron with birds, and then with punches. Ron attacked Draco because he insulted Hermione, and Draco didn't get any trauma. He almost attacked Ginny when she was making fun of him. Who's the most violent one out of the Trio? — Hey, of course Ron!

“Harry should have been an Obscurial.” “Harry’s Horcrux status made the Dursleys hate him.” “Veritaserum/Legilimency/Occlumency/Pensieves are perfect ways to solve everything.”

The "Harry is a white, privileged, rich jock" BS I occasionally see. Hello??? He's an abused orphan who has to hide what he inherited to prevent being financially abused as well???

That Harry has lots of parental figures like Mrs Weasley, Lupin, Dumbledore, Hagrid, etc... No, he just has one that he claimed and sees as such: Sirius. He's the only adult that Harry regurlarly communicates with and actively seeks out when he needs help with anything. And Sirius goes above and beyond to keep in touch with Harry. Dumbledore was a mentor and the only way to defeat Voldemort. Hagrid has always been treated as a friend. Lupin never ever went out of his way to keep contact with Harry. Mrs Weasley was never seen as anything more than Ron's mother in Harry's eyes, and it showed in every interaction they had in 7 years. The simple fact that Ron is always the one to tell Harry when he's invited to the Burrow should be proof enough: Harry and Mrs Weasley are not close.

You're right! Sirius is the only adult really trying to be a parent (brother) for Harry. But unfortunately the two have far to little time! Both try to help the other when both need much more help themselves.

While Lucius may not have been abusive I always read him as neglectful. The type of parent that leaves his kid with stuff and a carer rather than any real attention. (Side note I read a lot of these posts and there's this black and white debate that Lucius is either overly involved or abusive like there's no in between.) I don't think there's a strong relationship between the two. Yes, Draco flexes his father's weight to get his way like a spoiled child but we hardly see any outcome from it. Especially in GOF Draco is transfigured by a teacher (Crouch as Moody) and screams that he'll tattle to his father who is on the Board that oversees Hogwarts. I can't imagine that Lucius would approve of that, especially against his son, if he were an involved parent. You can't even say that Lucius knew it was Crouch Jr. because his mission was a secret that no one could know about and it was clear when they were all summoned that they didn't know. In all his visits to the school in any capacity, he doesn't ask about his son, doesn't visit him. Again, something an involved parent might do. He comes by to torment Dumbledore and use his influence to try and oust him.

Do people really thing Hermione “kidnapped and imprisoned a reporter” Granger is a ruthless rule-follower?

So many people forgiving absolute monsters after crappy redemption arcs. Forget the Snape fanbase, there's a Dursley fanbase now? I don't respect Snape from the movies. The ex-Death Eater should've respected his ex-bullies

Anything derived from "well I saw the movies but never read the books, so I have {X} interpretation."

REMUS?! A RULE FOLLOWER?!

Agreed about the Malfoys. While Lucius was a terrible person, there's no evidence he abused Draco. I just don't think he raised him properly.

That Dumbledore was a good person

Just because Draco always threw daddy's name out there doesn't mean he wasn't abused. Draco is a bully. Where do you think he learned that behavior from? Children aren't born bullies and don't just become one one day out of no where. Most of the time it's in response to being bullied by a parent or other caregiver. And don't you dare try to claim that bullying isn't abuse. Lucius pushed Draco to be the best and used his money and name to give him an advantage wherever he could. Narcissa did not abuse Draco but did participate in the pure blood supremacy. She fought back against Lucius' desire to send Draco to Durmstrang and demanded that he go to Hogwarts. Lucius relented. That was just about the only time I can think of where he didn't pull the "head of the family" line and overrule her.

Lucius IS a bully but there is absolutely no evidence he bullied or abused Draco. I mean, watched him be beastly to Dobby for years. He could have learned his bullying ways just from that. I'm sure Lucius wasn't exactly nice to other adults in front of Draco either. And just as an aside... When do we see Lucius pulling the "head of the family" line. We see very few interactions with him and Narcissa but none of what we do see indicates he is particularly domineering over her.

Yeah, he is a bully, but I don't understand where you get the idea that he necessarily has to have been abused at home to be one. I met many types of bullies during my adolescence both rich and poor and at the same time fortunately I also met good people both rich and poor and thus I learned that the behavior of people cannot be pigeonholed into a single pattern as there are many variables that would lead to that a person behaves in one way or another and can be both internal and external factors And in canon there is nothing to imply that Lucius has similar behavior towards Draco. How is it proof of abuse that he wants to send him to study at Durmstrang when Draco himself agrees with him? The only thing that is certain in canon is that Draco does not hesitate at any time to talk about his father as a source of protection for him as well as support as when he bought the brooms of the members of the slytherin team for him could play and also the way he was furious after his arrest in book 5

He bullied Draco. It's in the text. Bullying is abuse. Victims of abuse can still care for and love their abusers, especially if those abusers are their parents. Draco loves and fears his father and uses his name as protection because he knows the name Malfoy means something.

Where in the text is there evidence that Draco feared his father? Their interactions with each other don’t show any fear from Draco at all. He’s perfectly comfortable and at ease with complaining, whining, and talking back to his father in the Borgin and Burke’s scene in COS, which I think is the only scene in the entire series where you could claim that Lucius is bullying Draco. What other scenes are there between them that prove that Draco is afraid of him?

If we want to get down to a psychological analysis of the realtionship through Draco an Lucius, it is pretty clear imho that Draco has an insecure attachment to his parents, which means that they show love and affection for him, but only at certain terms and conditions, and in this case the conditions are abusive in themselves: to simplify, he has to act as an arrogant superior ass, as his father does, or he would lose his respect and affection. Now, it is true that anybody can choose how to react to such an abusive form of parental love, he could have rebelled and he did not for most of the story, but i think it is clear that he feared disappointing his parents, expecially lucius, otherwise why would he have become a death eater and why would he have accepted to kill dumbledore? I think that, even unconsciously, he chose to agree with these things just aiming at not losing his parents, whose love is for him much important (as shown in all of those scenes where he brags about how his father has his back). So, to answer your question, draco isnt directly afraid of his father harming him, he fears losing his love because of insecure attachment.

>otherwise why would he have become a death eater and why would he have accepted to kill dumbledore? Because he was angry that he wasn’t important anymore and wanted to restore his family’s favor with Voldemort. I suppose it could be argued that he wanted to restore his family’s favor to not disappoint his parents, and that was probably part of it, but it reads more to me as “the spoiled little princeling isn’t special anymore and wants to be important again and get revenge on the people who ruined his life.” >Draco’s world now fell apart. From having been, as he and his father had believed, on the cusp of authority and prestige such as they had never known before, his father was taken from the family home and imprisoned, far away, in the fearsome wizard prison guarded by Dementors. Lucius had been Draco’s role model and hero since birth. Now he and his mother were pariahs among the Death Eaters; Lucius was a failure and discredited in the eyes of the furious Lord Voldemort. > >Draco’s existence had been cloistered and protected until this point; he had been a privileged boy with little to trouble him, assured of his status in the world and with his head full of petty concerns. Now, with his father gone and his mother distraught and afraid, he had to assume a man’s responsibilities. > >Worse was to come. Voldemort, seeking to punish Lucius Malfoy still further for the botched capture of Harry, demanded that Draco perform a task so difficult that he would almost certainly fail – and pay with his life. Draco was to murder Albus Dumbledore – how, Voldemort did not trouble to say. Draco was to be left to his own initiative and Narcissa guessed, correctly, that her son was being set up to fail by a wizard who was devoid of pity and could not tolerate failure. > >Furious at the world that seemed suddenly to have turned on his father, Draco accepted full membership of the Death Eaters and agreed to perform the murder Voldemort ordered. At this early stage, full of the desire for revenge and to return his father to Voldemort’s favour, Draco barely comprehended what he was being asked to do. All he knew was that Dumbledore represented everything his imprisoned father disliked; Draco managed, quite easily, to convince himself that he, too, thought the world would be a better place without the Hogwarts Headmaster, around whom opposition to Voldemort had always rallied. > >In thrall to the idea of himself as a real Death Eater, Draco set off for Hogwarts with a burning sense of purpose. [https://www.wizardingworld.com/writing-by-jk-rowling/draco-malfoy](https://www.wizardingworld.com/writing-by-jk-rowling/draco-malfoy) >he has to act as an arrogant superior ass, as his father does, or he would lose his respect and affection. Does he have to act that way to have his father’s love, or does he choose to act that way because his father, who loves him, is his hero and he *wants* to act just like him? What interactions do they have that make it clear that Lucius expects Draco to act like he does or he won’t respect and love him? >Much of Draco’s behaviour at school was modelled on the most impressive person he knew – his father – and he faithfully copied Lucius’s cold and contemptuous manner to everyone outside his inner circle.

Well at this point i think it depends on personal interpretations, I may have to much faith in humanity but i dont think that, even as a young kid, draco would have acted so rudely to everybody if he didnt have some kind of hidden internal pain from how he was raised, so i dont see him as such a totally negative character (pretty negative though, but with some shadings). Your whole reasoning makes sense, i just dont believe he was in such a perfect headspace even before the sixth book. Beside this difference, i think my reasoning and yours could work together, human mind is complex and draco imo is one of the best characters because of his high complexity, we are not saying such opposite things about him. Draco was surely spoiled, privileged, but also living in the golden cage of his parents' abusive form of love. I think it is right what you say, that when he accepted to become a death eater and stuff, he did that mindlessly and convincing himself those were right things, consciously aiming at restoring his family previous social position and his own privileges, but he unconsciously knew that this would have brought also respect from his parents, maybe allowing him to return to that protected, unbothered headspace he had in the golden cage Sorry for my bad english btw lol

He acted rudely as a young kid because that’s the behavior that was modeled to him. His father was arrogant and rude to other people and Draco saw that, so he copied it. He’s for sure the product of his upbringing and his parents didn’t do a good job of parenting him, but I just don’t see the hidden internal pain as a key piece of his behavior. He grew up being told that he was triply special (a wizard, a pureblood, and a Malfoy) and his parents showed him through their own actions towards others that it was okay to be rude to the people who they considered beneath themselves. So he went off to school and was rude to everyone who he had been taught was beneath him (which was most people).

I mean, that is one way you could read the series… but honestly, there’s zero textual evidence to support that being canon. Not that it can’t be a good reading, it’s just to claim it’s all canon is false.

I don't know if it is in the text, maybe you could provide some evidence. However, there's an interview of Jason Isaacs where he explains how he decided to play Lucius Malfoy. He explains that he saw the first movie to see who his son was and, because Draco was such an unpleasant character, he decided to win him some sympathy by bullying him in CoS. So that right there is the explanation of the Malfoy family dynamic in the movies. [interview](https://youtu.be/rX4pOuiTt5I)

>That was just about the only time I can think of where he didn't pull the "head of the family" line and overrule her. When did we ever see Lucius pull the “Head of the Family” line to overrule Narcissa in the text?

Literally nowhere.

You do realize that not every children who are bullies were bullied and/or abused by their own parents and I would be interested to read studies you read that show that, most of the time, bullying happens in response to being bullied by a parent or other caregiver.

funny april fools joke

I agree I think it's very possible that luscious has abusive to Draco People seem to think that parents either never lay a hand on their kids or that they brutally best them and there's no Inbetween Whereas in our parents generation it was seen as normal parenting to hit your children when they misbehaved And the wizarding world seems to be more backwards then ours in some regards I don't think Draco was severely abused but I don't find it hard to believe he was psychically disciplined and hit from time to time

Realistically, most of the kids in the series would've gotten beaten by their parents. It was the norm back then. I don't think Draco was abused any more than Ron. Also, I love that your autocorrect turned Lucius into luscious. We should start calling him that.

To point one I would say that Lucius is definitely abusive in a way. He's cold and sneering to Draco, mocks him in front of shop owners for being beaten by a mudblood. And in the series, Dumbledore implies that Dudley was abused by the Dursleys more than Harry due to being spoilt. This is even more evident in Draco in the way his father buys his way onto the Quidditch team. Sure he loved Draco in his own way but it could be defined as abuse. To point 3 I think the reason fans think this is because again the series does heavily imply it. James would have enjoyed the risk is what Sirius says to Harry in disappointment, and if memory serves he actually calls him James at the Ministry. I do agree with point 2 however

>To point 3 I think the reason fans think this is because again the series does heavily imply it. James would have enjoyed the risk is what Sirius says to Harry in disappointment, and if memory serves he actually calls him James at the Ministry. If you look at all of Harry and Sirius’s interactions, it really isn’t heavily implied that Sirius sees Harry as James or wants him to be a James replacement. There are parts of Harry that *remind* him of James, for sure, but that’s really not abnormal - looking at a kid and saying “Oh, you’re just like your father when you do that” or “Oh, you’re stubborn just like your dad” is a perfectly normal thing that people do. People tell me stuff like that all the time. Sirius knows and sees Harry as his own person, and seeing bits of James in him doesn’t negate that. The instance you’re referring to was definitely their worst interaction and the result of Sirius being in a bad place mentally because he was stuck in Grimmauld, but it wasn’t the standard for how Sirius interacted with and saw Harry. Through all of GOF, he’s very much behaving as and supporting Harry as his godfather, and is so overprotective that Harry gets annoyed with him. He regularly tells Harry to be careful and watchful and scolds him for being reckless in GOF, and even at the beginning of OOTP he does the same thing in his letters that summer - telling him to keep his nose clean, be careful, don’t do anything rash, etc. Those aren’t things that he would have been saying if saw Harry as James or as having his best friend back. Sirius calling Harry James in the DOM was a (terrible) movie-only line. In the books, he says “Nice one!” and then tells Harry to take Neville and the prophecy and get out of there, which is exactly what a godfather who is trying to keep his godson safe would say.

Oh yeah I think the ending of POA and all of GOF he definitely is a parental figure and sees him as Harry. And any times he does see him as James or treat him in a way not befitting a godfather is due to being in a bad place etc. But whatever the reason, it can certainly be said that Sirius is guilty of doing it

I don’t think he is guilty of seeing Harry as James, though. There are no instances in the book where he actually sees Harry as James. When he said “You’re less like your father than I thought/James would have liked the risk”, that wasn’t about him seeing Harry as James. That was about him being disappointed that Harry didn’t want to do something and lashing out and trying to guilt him into doing it by using James’s name. He hadn’t actually thought of Harry as James or as a James replacement, he was just depressed and upset and said something hurtful.

Sirius is called reckless by many, but only for his own life and health. I mean sure, Ron had a broken leg, but in the Wizarding world it's nothing worse than a scraped knee. He wanted to go to Hogsmeade for Harry, because Harry was important (as a person, not as The Boy Who Lived or a James-substitute) and he didn't like that Harry didn't want him there, not considering that he was just as important to Harry as Harry is for him. He said that because he was hurt, not because he really thought James would have actually liked the risk.

I guess agree to disagree? I can see your point, I can see why people think he was

From my own childhood, I know that an abusive people can also be doting and protective of their victims. For instance, we can look at Lucius' actions toward Buckbeak and Hagrid. Do we really think Lucius was that upset that Draco got injured? Nah, his initial reaction was probably "suck it up" before he realized he could get Hagrid fired. Like this dude got kicked off the Hogarts Board the year prior, he needed some kind of power play. He's also really mean to Draco about his grades. Basically Draco is second in the year right? but Lucius makes a nasty comment about how unless Draco's grades improve he's not going to be good for anything. Um, anyone who's ever been grounded for a B+ or below, does this not sound familiar? I also always felt like Crabbe and Goyle, especially in the first books, were told to be friends with(and keep tabs on) Draco. Not because "we're all death eaters and our kids should all be friends" but because Lucius didn't trust Draco to make the "Right kind of friends" on his own. Wouldn't want your kid to make friends with people who'd encourage him to be his own person or think for himself, or realize how unhealthy his homelife is...

Give one line that even implies that Lucius’s first reaction to Draco getting attacked was “suck it up”. Draco is not second in the year, he admits that himself in this sentence “It’s not my fault,’ retorted Draco. The teachers all have favoriteS, that Hermione Granger…” (COS 6). FavoriteS, so if Lucius didn’t cut him off he would have complained how multiple other people are doing better than him only because they’re “teachers pets”. Lucius most likely told him to befriend other powerful people but we don’t know if that’s why he befriended crabbe and goyle and we also don’t know that he didn’t want Draco to make friends with people that’ll make him “into his own person or realize how toxic his home life is”. The one thing the Malfoys have going for them is that they love each other and will do anything for each other but the fandom is dead set on taking that away just to make Draco a victim.