Oh, come now. What being a seeker has to do with anything? Harry is an exceptional seeker (really, Krum's league), and he is right in the middle of it. And he STILL denies H/Hr, more, most people here consider him uncommonly dense on the issue. Seeker is just another player, with only ability to notice and catch small yellow flying objects. How does this improve one's understanding of human heart?

As to Rita, I have real problems with what you said here. If we are to trust her journalistic instincts, we should also doubt Hermione's honesty and respectability, as well as Harry's sanity. So no, it is not likely that she saw deeper truth (even if it was there). Besides, she said that Hermione completely betrayed Harry for Victor. And that Harry cried because of that. Are you considering THIS a truth, too? It was an outright lie on both counts. Some "journalist above all else".

Harry's sanity on the topic of relationship, and a bit deeper looking, love, is something that is quite inadequate.

And, to be honest, the whole 'Seeker' thing may just be an analogy. Harry is seeking after something he has never had (someone to love and be loved from, even if subconsciously/etc, see Krum), Cho has been seeking I dunno..., Victor has been seeking someone to see past his fame/fortune for who he is (aka, finding the anti-Ginny person in his life).

Although, on the other side of the coin, the Keeper could be represented the same way if we wanted to be literal about the subject, but we only have one case on which to base this upon, and that is Ron (and only that is from what he sees in the Mirror of Erised, and tells Harry).

I honestly believe Rita was only exaggerating her story to what she saw as H/Hr and V/Hr closeness as a love triangle. It's a very short hop from what H/Hr have right now to being lovers, though.


To be very honest, we have no idea about how Hermione feels about the whole subject of a H/Hr pairing, and Harry himself has never even thought about it due to several obstacles and "distractions" - as JKR has so eloquently put it herself in her books.

I will also be honest when I say that Ginny should not be considered a rival for Harry's love interest in DH. She's almost too loyal to the hero figure he represents, and that is both good and bad. She may support him through thick and thin, but she's also there to stroke his ego and make him 'do no wrong', so to speak. Once again, I claim the Perfect!Ginny on this case, as she is not perfect in any means. We don't know her enough as a character to establish this. Really, all we have to establish from the book writings is that she goes through boyfriends more often than any other female character we're aware of. The fact they lasted barely a month isn't enough time for anything to develop, as relationships are still in the 'honeymoon' phase then.


We Harmonians fall back on alchemical situations a lot to prove our point. What do Herons fall back on, COPS reruns involving domestic abuse? Please.

Not all of us do. I personally do not subscribe to it at all. Both Moonlighters and Chocolaters have equally convincing alchemical essays (that to say not convincing to me in all cases, because alchemical evidence is all too easy to bent any way you like). Also, the claim that Rowling supported the importance of alchemy in her interviews is simply not true. She never did. In fact, she never mentioned alchemy at all. She did mention elements, but that has no more to do with alchemy than "do not kill" has to do with Christianity.

Actually that is a misunderstanding. Molly wasn't upset over R/Hr and isn't invested in R/Hr. She was upset because she bought that Rita article that claimed that Hermione was playing with both Harry and Krum.

I have been reading these forums for some time, but never really got round to registering. Well, finally I'm here.

I don't think that numbers really matter here, just the actions of the characters. Hermione and Ron, even though Harry was the only once talking and thinking about them, were clearly jealous of each other's bf/gf. Other reasons for Hermione's tears are too incomplete and inconsistent to be accounted for.

As for Harry>>Hermione, he does nothing that indicates a love interest, just good friends. I think Cho was just jealous that Harry hangs out with Hermione more-which is understandable, given that they are best friends-and also, she was angry at the moment and probably screamed out the first thing that came to mind. Also, I think JK Rowling used it to confirm a platonic relationship, as Harry shows no reaction whatsoever to Hermione beng his girlfriend, like he doesn't even consider it a possibility.

As for Hermione talking all the time about Harry to Krum, I would consider it shippy, and it might indicate a slight crush. However, this was not followed up on in the subsequent books, so we can only conclude that it was again a tool to confirm Harry's platonic viewing of Hermione-ie, the 'only friends' talk with Krum.

I am not a RHr shipper, or a HG (which I think was a soap opera pairing, a dead soap opera). I love HHr very much, just that I do not believe it was happen.

I don't believe in that stuff neither. The only time I've ever seen JK mention alchemy was when she was speaking of the Elixir of Life. I have no idea how that suggests that she's been mapping out the romances in her story with alchemy at all. I honestly think that people put way too much faith in this idea that JK is a robot who has planned her entire series down to the last 't'. Sure, she knows what's going to happen very well and she's got a good plan, but honestly, to say that she sat down and researched all that junk to write good romances sounds simply ridiculous to me. I'm 100% positive that if anybody were to go up to JK and ask her if she used alchemy to plan any ship, she would raise and eyebrow and look utterly bewildered.

I agree on the relationship business, but when I talk about Alchemy, I am talking about the inner logic of the series, which she has admitted to having done:




Casting a spell over young minds.
By Anne Simpson FACE TO FACE with J K Rowling.
1,688 words
7 December 1998
The Herald
28
English
© 1998 SMG Newspapers Ltd Not Available for Re-dissemination.

Now, while she admits it to doing it for "world building" she also goes on to say that alchemy is the story's internal logic. AKA the interior sense of the story, or how the story works. Thus it should follow an alchemical pattern. She also admits that she believes at the time of the interview that much of her knowledge probably won't be worked into the books, aka it could be a simplified version of Alchemy. However even if its simplified its still connected to the more detailed outline through those simple basic principles put in there. This quote is after/during writing Book 3 and before Book 4.

As to whether alchemy points to one ship or in favor of another, that is niether here nor there.

Alchemy is about attaining enlightenment in some manner. It's the combination of thinking and feeling, and does not have to have any romantic sentiments at all. In fact its only some modern new age people who confuse the "combination of the male and female principle" aka "combination of thinking and feeling" who think that alchemy has to have romance in it. (Coming from the graphic Hindu pictures of the combination of the male and female principle.

Professor Lupin teaching Harry how to use Expecto Patronum is a combination of thinking and feeling. Lupin being tied to the moon via being a werewolf. He constantly is forcing Harry to try and focus and think to control his feelings in order to produce the Patronus. Harry is learning to control his emotions to produce his patronus. This has no romantic sentiment at all, and yet it is a perfect example of a chemical wedding between thinking and feeling.

Another would be when Snape tries to teach Harry Occlumancy. Here Harry fails to gain any control over his emotions, and lets them rule him and it leads to his demise in the book.

Heck, even Myrtle and Harry have an alchemical match up with the Golden Egg scene in the Prefect's bathroom. Myrtle is another term for Periwinkle AKA Philosophic Mercury. In this scene she is leading Harry to the conclusion and forcing him to think about the clues the egg gives him.

That hardly has any romantic overtone to it (except I'll concede Myrtle's peeping tom tendency, but that is hardly romantic and more satire than anything else).

Dumbledore and Harry in the cave. Harry has to control his emotions as Dumbledore tells him to force him to drink the mysterious liquid (which resembles Mercury from its description). Dumbledore has half-moon glasses.

I've given you the author's own admission that alchemy is the "inner logic" of the story and four instances where alchemy has no romantic overtones at all.

Again romance is not the intended pursuit of the alchemical reasonings that House_Elf, Kaskit, The Obsidian Warlock, or myself give. Yes it does help in showing who will be the most influential "partner" and it does help when JKR admits that part of the reason Dumbledore isn't complete is because he never had a partner. However in terms of plotting out how a romance will come about and such, unless you're a New Age person, it's worth diddly squat.

We're focusing on figuring out the interal logic which JKR has admited to having put there. You don't like that, or don't want to do it, or you think it's too tough/complicated for you? Fine. Different strokes for different folks.

~Salamon2

That color looks a bit familiar.

Oh, for goodness sake. She talked about alchemy before that sentence. And she did not say that it is alchemy that is needed for inner logic, but knowing what MAGIC one can and can not do. Which is a big difference.
No, it does not mean it at all. It only means that she did not want to be inconsistant with her description of magic. That's it. Everything else is a mere invention based on nothing.

No, she simply said that she learned more than she would need for the books.

Then why base elaborate theories on it? Especially if the simpliest application points on Luna, not Hermione as Harry's mate?

Indeed. So what can be possibly concluded on this foundation about shipping?

With application, I can find as many alchemical connotations in a phone book or train schedule. And there is a very good reason for it: because the very idea of alchemy was to create an all-embracing theory. In fact, you make me feel uncomfortable to point it to you - if you ever studied alchemy, you should be aware of it. EVERY object, EVERY event, and EVERY substance can be interpreted in terms of alchemy, because alchemy was CREATED for that purpose. There is absolutely no way or form in which Rowling (or anyone else) could have possibly written a book, or a grocery list, or a leasing contract, that can not be interpreted in terms of alchemy. How is it possible that you miss that studying alchemy? It is the very first thing there is to understand. Well, on the other hand, I've seen you confidently refer to Plato without even knowing entire paragraph you were quoting, perhaps I should no longer be surprised.

And that was spoposed to convince me that alchemy proves H/Hr? By the way, "inner logic" can, with enough desperation, be understood as "deeply hidden construction". However, most common understanding of it is simply "the one that is within the story". Also, as we saw already, she said that it was MAGIC, not alchemy itself, that was used for inner logic. So she made sure that she is consistant about it. And, lastly, by your own admission, alchemy in itself has nothing to do with romance.

Also, would you mind explaining me, how this SINGLE mention of alchemy during an obscure interview, that was instantly forgotten and the attention switched to magic in general as the inner logic of the story, should be a key to the entire series?

Again, then, in what way can it be considered an argument for shipping?

Do you really think that hinting at my stupidity gives you any brownie points in argument? Sorry to disappoint you. It is not too tough or too complicated, it is simply too inconsistant and too much about replacing rigorous thinking with wishfull thinking. And too little critical reasoning.

@ stan:

Seriously, I'm shocked to see you of all people take a shot at Salamon2. The alchemical theory that he, House Elf 44, Kaskit, and to a lesser extent, myself have been working on utilizes more than 3/4 of the symbolism found on the series. While I agree that the analogies require a little "faith" in the alchemical system to work with, it's there, and it's been consistently living up to expectations. Six books in a row with accurate alchemy makes it hard to believe that the seventh won't follow suit.

I hear you about alchemical analysis reaching into most of our everyday life; it's just a natural cycle, and you see it in play in society, and every form of fantasy, fiction, entertainment, and to some extent industry that we have. That doesn't cheapen the symbology, that's what grounds the Harry Potter series in reality so deeply that we're willing to devote hours of our time to it.

However, in recent history, it really is only myself or Salamon2 that spouts alchemical references on the H/Hr boards, so I can't really come to grips with the idea that we're over-dependent on the theory. I just assume that most of you read our posts, and smile in our general direction. I don't want anyone to take just our analysis as the basis for H/Hr; there are a ton of non-alchemical essays that are just as convincing. I'm happy just to add to the ammo pile.

I'm in Salamon's court with things, but I fully admit to originally being brought on board by Caina's essays, which are alchemy-free.

Anyways, I'd appreciate seeing two of my favorites on this forum not taking shots at each other.

I agree.

Except that it's inconsistent.

[size=2]
Uh... I realize I may be a little late on this one (what with the whole alchemy trend that the topic's gone into), but I just recently reread all the books and I thought I'd put out my list in the Numbers Game.

Harry/Hermione:

Cho: This one is one of our favorites, because girls, however emotional, tend to have a gut instinct when it comes to romance. And let's not forget that Cho didn't actually like Harry all that much, so it's not merely paranoia that you're going to lose the man you love to his best friend. She saw something (and if you think about it, some of her reactions weren't all that unreasonable!)

Krum: Older guy, reasonably experienced (we assume), very good at Quidditch... and yet he sees a rival in young Harry? So much so that he actually needs to talk to said young Harry about it? He did say "Herm-own-ninny talks about you very often". Now come on! Every girl out there must know that when we like a guy, we talk about him (however innocently, to whoever'll listen!)

Rita: Perhaps she doesn't necessarily think they're together (certainly she was tipped off by Colin Creevey, if the quote is accurate), but she certainly has no trouble believing it's true. Now if Hermione is really as ordinary-looking as people claim (not noticeably pretty, anyway) and if Rita has no opportunity to note anything about her personality, why would she find it easy to believe Harry and Hermione are together? What about Ron, the other best friend? What's he, a toad?

Colin: Does he think there's something going on between Harry and Hermione? Maybe he meant the comment about their spending a lot of time together quite innocently. We can never be sure, but it will always be quite suggestive. Besides, he's past the age (he's thirteen here) where kids think that any boy and girl who are friends must like each other!

Molly: Dear Molly! For someone who spends an awful lot of time with Harry and Hermione during holidays (intimate settings), she sure had no problem believing they were together, did she? Now I don't know whether she approves or not - she could have been angry that Hermione was with Harry, or perhaps she was just angry that Hermione 'cheated' on Harry. That isn't the point. The point is that here is someone who knows Harry and Hermione very well (unlike the previous four) and she still thinks they have something there!

Professor McGonagall: There is a point at which you simply cannot deny a few facts, no matter how you may want to interpret or twist them around. Professor McGonagall shows blatant approval for Harry and Hermione's friendship (her comment about Harry listening to Hermione in OOTP says this). This needn't imply anything romantic. Technically, the fact that McG asks Harry to wait while showing her the Time-Turner (thus sending them to dinner together instead of separately) needn't mean anything either. But what about when Hermione is petrified, and McG goes straight to Harry to tell him and doesn't even think of Ron until Ron comes right up to them. What, the teachers don't notice Ron hanging around with Harry and Hermione as well? Or did wise old McG perhaps pick up on something more intense between the Hero and Heroine
(Harry = Hero; Hermione = Heroine)

Ron: Is it my imagination, or is Ron just a tad suspicious of Harry and Hermione throughout the latter half of OOTP and pre-Ginny in HBP?? No one's denying that Ron has a bit of a thing for Hermione. But if we assume that this 'thing' came about in POA/GOF, why did Ron's jealousy suddenly appear only in OOTP and pre-Ginny HBP?? Could he have noticed a subtle change and sudden increase in H/Hr associations? (If you notice, this corresponds with the sudden increase in H/Hr shippy moments).
Incidentally, could Ron also have indirectly supported Harry/Ginny (seems odd that he would be okay with his best friend kissing his sister, but not any of his other friends or other boys) just because it got Harry out of Hermione's life?

Crookshanks: I think it's been said that Kneazles (Crookshanks is half) have a great instinct about trusting people and a great instinct about relationships between people. Is it coincidence that Crookshanks seems to dislike Ron intensely? I'm not saying this means Ron's bad guy, but contrast this to his affection for Harry. If Crookshanks could speak, he would be goading Harry and Hermione together. There are only three people in the entire series to whom he shows affection: Sirius, Harry and Hermione herself. Sirius is not a contender for Hermione's affections, but please note, he is an integral part of the H/Hr relationship on his own (like Buckbeak). Crookshanks cannot be ignored.



And now for Ron/Hermione or Harry/Ginny:

Lavender: Now why wouldn't Lavender be suspicious of Ron and Hermione? We've already established that Ron has a thing for Hermione? And let's face it: the two of them coming down alone from the boys' dormitories (Harry invisible) is pretty suspicious. But who said anything about Hermione feeling the same way? Yes, she's smug when they break up and HBP indicates Ron/Hermione. But just like Harry/Ginny, this is not going to last. Hermione just needs to get Ron out of her system by discovering what life with him would be like.
I like Ron, but he isn't right for Hermione. What kind of conversations would they have (or indeed, do have right now) that don't include Harry or arguments about house-elves?

Um... I'm drawing a blank here for anyone else. So that's, what? 8 for Harry and Hermione and 1 for Ron and Hermione?

Let's also look at what people are NOT saying. Why don't any of the Weasleys, including Ginny, tease Ron about Hermione? If this relationship is just waiting to happen, how come not one of them (even the twins) have ever given Ron a push in that direction? Could it be that they just don't see it as something serious (or at all)? How come Molly and Arthur have never indicated a preference for Ginny/Harry or Ron/Hermione?

I don't know...this Numbers Game seems to be in our (Harmonian) favour...

ME! ME! I'm denying it But you're new here, so you wouldn't know.

I'm one of the people who believes that Ron-->Hermione is a total red herring, that this is merely Harry's perception of what is going on, since Harry has never bothered to ask Ron how he really feels about Hermione I think Ron's actions AND words in HBP showed that he does NOT have a thing for Hermione, because if he did, he would have jumped at the chance to go AS HER DATE to Slughorn's party.



IMO, no, and I'll tell you why. The one thing we've learned about Ron through 6 books is that he is a very WYSIWYG character - what you see is what you get. Ron almost always says what he's actually thinking. He's not devious. And he showed in HBP that if he's actually attracted to a girl (like Lavender) he has no hesitation getting involved with her. I don't think Ron has a thing for Hermione at all; I think he believes that Hermione has a thing for Harry, and that Harry MIGHT have a thing for Hermione (which makes him very confused when Harry kisses Ginny) and that he's afraid of being left out, which is a continuing theme that we had beaten over our heads in GOF.



Actually I believe R/Hr AS HARRY PERCEIVES IT at the end of HBP is a red herring. They're together by default, because H/G are together and R/Hr have finally become good friends on their own.



I dont't believe any of the Weasleys see R/Hr at all -- not even Ginny who, IMO, would have the most to gain (obviously) if Ron and Hermione would pair up. But Ginny never teases Ron about his supposed thing for Hermione. SHe only teases him about never being kissed. IMO the failure of Ron's own family to see his supposed "interest" in Hermione is a big clue. They can't see it because it's not there

@ annearchy:

Nicely said. It's indeed a view of Ron that encompasses most if not all of his behavior, and so is very likely to be correct.

People who don't actually count: Colin (please, the comment was clearly not meant that way and I doubt her gives two straws about Hermione or what Harry thinks of her), Crookshanks (a cat?) Prof. McGonnagal (already talked about this, and I've never seen her make any comments about Harry and Hermione's friendship. at all), Rita (explained already; why would she have any trouble believing that H/Hr would be together? she's clueless either way. if you met two strangers and they told you they were together, why would you have a hard time believing it? you don't know them. you have no previous observation of their relationship), and Molly (really, I doubt she knew anything or that she would even approve of their relationship). All those arguments can be turned into R/Hr. Go to veritaserum and you'll see that Herons also think that Molly and half those other characters (adding Draco) support R/Hr.

Herons think of Draco??? Besides that, I actually cannot see how Molly, Colin, etc can be twisted into Ron/Hermione. Maybe Molly would approve of Ron/Hermione, but that doesn't mean she thinks it will happen. As for Crookshanks, yes he's a cat, but a cat with great instincts for people and relationships. If we're going to go with Molly-wants-R/Hr-so-its-going-to-happen, then why not Crookshanks-wants-H/Hr-so-that's-going-to-happen?

Oh, and as for Ron's feelings... I personally think R/Hr is a massive red herring as well, but... I don't know... sometimes a few of those things ("Is Hermione really going out with McClaggen?") is just a tad suspicious!

Hmmm, can someone explain a bit about how Draco actually SEES R/Hr coz I really don't get that....

I don't get it either because I think I see Draco probably thinking Hermione has a thing for Harry. But just so you know, I hate debate because people tend to want to be right and point out why others are wrong and then feelings get hurt, and I hate to get my feelings hurt or to hurt other people's feelings... So if anybody disagree with my point, please be nice.

I remember a scene, in OOTP, in the train to Hogwarts, when Draco came to taunt Harry about not being made a prefect and ask how it feels to be second best to Ron [something like that].

Hermione jumped up defending Harry and asked Draco to shut up. And Draco asked if he'd touch a nerve.

I think, Draco must realise the connection between Hermione and Harry by the way Hermione was behaving. Well, maybe this is not shippy at all. I just think that Draco would see HHr rather than R/Hr.

my warmest regards,
myforeverharry

MyForeverHarry:

Exactly! I totally agree with you. Although Draco's comment on the train can be interpreted in many ways, I've always thought that if anything, he's more likely to see H/Hr than R/Hr. As far as I can see, apart from poor inexperienced dear Harry, no one thinks R/Hr are going on (unless you count Lavender, who would probably be jealous of anyone!)

I would also like the Heron argument for this explained, because try as I might, I really don't see it.

Thank you I actually love Ron *waits for arrows to be shot at me* despite thinking he and Hermione are totally wrong for each other. I see Ron as the "id" in the trio, Harry being the Ego and Hermione the SuperEgo, if you will. Ron has always been open about his physical wants, starting with his seemingly bottomless appetite, then extending to all the girls he's ogled over the years. NONE OF THOSE GIRLS has ever included Hermione - including at the Yule Ball when she was the prettiest she had ever been! Yes, Lavender was the first girl who openly flirted with him -- but given Ron's opinions about undateable girls (starting with Eloise Midgen AND Hermione in GOF), IMO Ron would not have started snogging Lavender, IN PUBLIC no less, if he wasn't attracted to her. He would have just ignored her, IMO. So in Ron's eyes Lavender was not only desirable but also a girl who other boys would find desirable. She was a catch, and that was what he wanted at the moment. In a way, she was like Ginny, except I don't think Ron spent much time fantasizing about Lavender -- she was pretty, offered what he wanted, and he went for it. Now, he did find out after awhile that she was clingy and was reading a lot more into the relationship than he did. Eventually it seems he realised that he didn't want to be involved with someone only for the snogging. Once he reached that point he began to be more open to Luna's brand of humor and her general outlook. Luna is the only girl I can recall who Ron has ever complimented without wanting something from her (like homework help) or without owing her something. IMO that's the opening for R/L -- because Ron honestly enjoys her.

whoa, this got long. Sorry about that. I play Ron in a post-Voldemort RPG and I spend a lot of time thinking about his character and motivations

I'm still a bit of the opinion that Draco wouldn't care either way, that for him, it's just a convenient way to annoy Harry, Hermione, and Ron. I also still maintain that Draco doesn't go around thinking, "Hmm, I think Harry's in love with Hermione but wouldn't say so because Ron is in love with her, too." That would be just... :eyepoke:

I think Draco was just exploiting a situation that was open to mockery. It's practically a given when there are two boys and one girl in a friendship--it's human nature to ask, "So who's doing who?" In this case, Draco acts on that instinct, but it's instantaneous, and it's meant to hurt. To him, it could've gone either way. It could've been in reverse, where Hermione jumps to Ron's defense, and Draco would've said the same thing and it wouldn't have made a difference. It would annoy/hurt just as much. So I don't think Draco SEES anything. He just thinks it makes a perfectly insidious intrigue.

Granted, in the real world you and I live in, this would indeed be absurd, but in the HP world...a literary world where every word on the page has value to both character and plot development this is a very creditable account. JKR has already established that Crookshanks' judge of character is reliable, matters to the plot, and is reflective of the individual characters merits. Crookshanks approval acts as a barometer of sorts as to who is trustworthy or who is not.

I won't go so far as to say that Crookshanks is anti-R/Hr as his apparent "disapproval" of Ron has been firmly linked to Scabbers/Wormtail. However, his distinct approval of Harry cannot be ignored. The real question, IMO, is how far do you take his approval to mean? Does his approval go so far as to symbolize Hermione's affections? I think so personally, but that's only because it's given in the presence of Hermione's own behavior. If you don't think so based on this or a similarly logical line of reasoning, that's an individual decision and a position I can respect. However, to dismiss his very clear singling out of Harry based on the fact that he is a half-cat, is a position I don't find very credible. Again, in the real world...certainly. In the literary world, a device such as Crookshanks is oft used (and frequently abused). It's not like JKR is breaking new ground here. Crookshanks acts like subtext or perhaps an objective correlative...a means of communicating an impression to the reader without speaking to it directly. To top it all off, this is a magical, literary world where the sentient creatures are not limited to humans presented on the page.

They have these threads in Veritaserum in the shipping section called "Venom: X/X" and the entire thread would be dedicated to explaining why said couple would not work. I clicked on the thread for H/Hr and they have loads of pages (I didn't read all of it, but I skimmed) and I found it really funny that all the Herons and Chocos were naming all the characters on this thread to either disprove H/Hr or to approve of R/Hr. I don't remember their reasons, but you can check out the thread yourself if you want. . .although I don't recommend it. It's bad for those who get irritated easily by R/Hrs. . . like me.

http://www.veritaserum.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=11680

Ugh! You're right... I could hardly get through the first page...Its amazing how a few posts like that could start a major headache. Typically Herons and Chocos..saying exactly the opposite thing we are talking about in this thread.
To those who haven't read the thread or don't want to read it, its about how everyone is anti H/Hr. (Harry,Hermione, RON, MRS.WEASLEY, RITA etc.)
They say Draco saw H/G in Book 2 and R/Hr in Book 4.
And about that Slughorn party, they said Hermione was focusing only on getting back at RON because she lurves him, not Harry
Hmm...yeah, you guys try to make sense out of it, coz I certainly can't...

I only bothered reading the first page, but I actually enjoyed that thread. Because if that's the best they can come up with...

The idea of characters in the book being "anti H/Hr" doesn't make sense. They seemed to be saying that because characters in the book don't like H/Hr together, they shouldn't be. I think what we're discussing (characters in the book suspecting that Harry and Hermione have a special relationship) is much more meaningful.

"1. Harry is anti H/Hr and he let the whole world know about that in Book 4."

As far as I remember, he just denied the fact that he had feelings for her or that they were in a relationship. Are any of us arguing that as of now Harry is aware of feelings for Hermione?

I won't go into the rest, they are all about as equally convincing as this one.

And they just go on for pages and pages. I skimmed and like, what ten pages were dedicated to just trying to prove how everyone's anti H/Hr.

Don't forget lack of support. She has no problem helping Harry or going to his games, but with Ron, it's a completely different matter.



Viktor and Cho are pretty obvious, so I won't focus on them. Rita Skeeter may tell lies in her stories, but they're not completely filled with lies. If you look closely, there is some truth in her stories. Nobody at Hogwrats would believe Rita's story about H/Hr being together if R/Hr was as obvious as Herons say it is. Colin is Harry's paprazzi at Hogwarts. If somebody's got the scoop on Harry other than R/Hr, it's him. Mrs. Weasley is another interesting case. If she was rooting for R/Hr as Herons would argue, then she would habe words for Hermione after the article before the task that linked H/Hr together. But she didn't. I think he is a lot more credible than some people might believe. I don't think Professor Mcgonagall sees H/Hr as a couple for sure. I think she realises Hermione is Harry's greatest asset, but I don't think she minds them getting together, as long as she doesn't have to deal with their kids. Ron is an interesting case. If he truly was after Hermione in that way, Ron would definitely be checking up on Harry. Harry's a chick magnet, especialy to Hermione, and I think Ron on some level knows this. Crookshanks, other than a brilliant Half Kneazle, is also Hermione's familar. He is her alter ego. Whenever you see Crookshanks, imagine that it's Hermione and you start to see things in a new light.



I thought Lavendar thought Hermione liked Ron because of his newfound fame? Not to mention she also saw H/Hr.



Ron was challenged by Hermione to ask first and not as a last resort, so why doesn't he take heed at the first mention of SlugHorn's parties? Because he never had any intention to. There are many missed oppurtuntities to make R/Hr that Rowling didn't use.



I think people tend to make Ron more complex tha he is. He's a fairly straightforward character, and I think the desire to "read between the lines"
has given him traits that he does not have.



Absolutely. Ginny's crush is a wonderful exampe of what obvious romantic feelings are. Family members comment on it, and Rowling even breaks out of the third person limited viewpoint to remind us that Ginny has a crush on Harry.



Those are based off the "can't stand" threads at FAP. Those are specifically made to bash the ship in question, not argue against it. Don't use them as ironclad evidence, as they are highly unreliable.

Thanks. Recently I tried to say something similar here. I tried to point out that Rita, as a journalist, and Cho and Viktor, as Seekers, couldn't have gotten very far in their areas without being observant (and once again, Viktor was the Seeker for Bulgaria's national Quidditch team). Therefore, I suggested that for all her bad intentions, Rita might indeed have actually seen what Cho and Viktor saw between Harry and Hermione. It had nothing to do with impugning "Hermione's honesty and respectability, as well as Harry's sanity" -- why would I want to do that to our favorite couple? Thank you again.