No, because Ravenclaws aren't just clever. They are also broad-minded, creative and good at thinking outside the box. Hermione is extremely clever, but to be honest she is quite narrow-minded and limited. I'm sorry if this offends anyone, I'm not trying to run Hermione down (she is awesome after all) I'm just saying that she doesn't have all the ideal qualities for a Ravenclaw. However I think she makes an excellent Gryffindor - she's a credit to the house! :)
posted over a year ago
Fair enough answer. I agree...i do think hermione rocks but sometimes i get frustated with her close mindness when it comes to a few things like Luna's Beliefs (ok some of it is well founded but in luna's case well she explores things thats outside the box and thats good, and of course the deathly hallows until hermione saw herself, proof of its existence before she even said "ok i believe it now"
When I think about it, this is true. Hermione strove to learn all that she could learn, but only what was already known. As the OP puts it, to Hermione, if it wasn’t in the books, then it mustn’t be real.
This is very true, I always thought she was kind of narrow minded, to be honest. This is why Luna is in Ravenclaw, not Hufflepuff like some people debate she should be in. Luna is imaginative, creative, sociable, and actually very smart. Hermione just isn't like that, although she is smart. I saw someone post something (might've been on another website) that said "Ravenclaw house is so useless since the smartest girl in school is a Gryffindor." But that is sooo not true!
I totally agree with you, but I think she wouldn´t be so baad in Ravenclaw after all, she smart she would´ve find a way, Anyway she was sorted where she belongs, where she would´ve been better. :D You Are the kind of people that should be in Ravenclaw in Pottermore like me. You are smart XD
I think there's more than one way of being clever, so Hermione could have been Ravenclaw; but she values bravery over cleverness, which clinches it, I think. Logical can be clever.
Where do you get the idea that all Ravenclaws need to be broad-minded, creative and out-of-the-box-thinkers? I thought that was just Luna (or maybe Luna and some others but not all). I thought the Ravenclaw traits were intelligence and a love of/respect for knowledge.
yeah, Hermione would probably have done better in Ravenclaw, but she wouldn't have made out with Ron or even have been friends with Harry if she hadn't been in Gryffindor. Also, Harry wouldn't even have got past Snape's ( <3 ) riddle in the philosopher's stone. (Harry would have died)
She'd have definitely done well there, but the story would have suffered unless J K Rowling found a way to create a strong interhouse friendship in the first year.
pfft, realisticly? she could've been twice as powerful of awitch and she would be even smarter she could've been the prime minister f the ministry of magic
she could have gone to ravenclaw,but it would kinda mess the story up like hermione is not with ron or harry so yeah and she fits in well with gryffindor
posted over a year ago
Totally, the story would be messed up. She kinda needs to be a Gryffindor for the story to make any sense.
It depends. I mean, yes, she REALLY clever, which fits in with Ravenclaw; but she's also brave at heart, which fits in with Gryffindor. But Cho and Luna are brave as well. So, I think she's a better Gryffindor because, I mean, Gryffindors aren't known for their stupidity.
But, if she was Sorted into Ravenclaw, it'd be fine. (Except she wouldn't know Harry and Ron as well:D)
