sloppy school uniforms

[GulPlum]

Normally, I agree entirely with most things Shaun says, but I'm afraid that 
I can't say the same thing about several comments he's made on this subject.

>I don't think Cauron is familiar with these schools, or their traditions, 
>or the way they work (even JKR probably has a literary view of them - but 
>she certainly has that). He's from a quite different cultural background. 
>Without an understanding of the culture the school is based on, it's 
>rather difficult for someone to do justice to the books in my opinion.

Sorry, but he's got a British production designer and a costume designer 
who's done most of her work in the UK (she's Dutch), and the reason they 
are there is to have input on his ideas and to take them forward, not to 
blindly follow his instructions. To say (as you later did) that Columbus 
made use of their expertise whilst implying that Cuaron didn't is simply 
unfair. Columbus is from a different cultural background again, yet you 
don't seem to question his understanding of the culture of the books.

Besides, if anything gets my goat about the uniforms in the movie series, 
it's Columbus's (and his original costume designer's - an American's) 
decision to put the kids in shirts and ties in the first place.

We can argue until the cows come home about what the books' "robes" look 
like and what's worn underneath them (the books aren't entirely 
consistent), but there is no mention of modern shirts, ties or jumpers (or 
house crests or any other identifying marks). Most book illustrations from 
various countries have the kids (Harry in particular) wearing Muggle 
teenage clothes under their robes, so the illustrators must have got that 
notion from *somewhere* (and, presumably, independently of each other).

In any case, the Muggle uniforms in the movies (the only nod towards 
"non-ordinariness" being the cloaks and gowns - neither of which meet my 
personal view of what a "robe" should be) make a mockery of insisting that 
magical folk have no idea of Muggle dress codes. So in this respect, at 
least, the movies are being consistent, in not keeping JKR's running joke 
about their dress sense.

>The second issue is that Cauron was making the third film in a
>series - it wasn't a stand alone film. When something fairly major
>is changed between the second and third film of a series, it's
>quite jarring. And because Chris Columbus presented the clothing in
>a certain way, the change is quite noticeable.

There were already a few subtle changes in the kids' clothes in CoS (note, 
British costumier), and British schools do actually change their uniform 
codes more frequently than you are implying.

For instance, I went to a boarding school which had no dress code 
whatsoever; my brother, on the hand, attended one of the top local grammar 
schools (*VERY* traditional, and one step down for the public schools 
you're talking about) and in the seven years he was there, there were three 
subtle changes in the uniforms, to the ties, jumpers and blazers (i.e. 
jackets).

Furthermore, I had reason during 1997-1999 to make frequent visits to 
Harrow School (you don't get much more traditional British Public School 
than that!) and saw pupils during lessons, after lessons and at weekends. 
During school hours, they always wore their uniforms and I can tell you for 
a fact that it was fairly rare to see a the top shirt button fastened, and 
the ties were, like in all British schools (uniform codes are almost 
universal over here), the item which pupils took great pleasure in 
personalising by knotting them according to their preference. Outside 
school hours, they wore what they wanted. As I later learned, the only rule 
was that they were not allowed to wear tops emblazoned with huge logos. The 
only time they took care to abide by the letter of the uniform code was on 
public days or when there were photographers around (this is one reason why 
you're unlikely ever to see a photograph of an untidy Harrovian). When off 
the premises, they had to have specific permission not to wear their 
uniforms (which was fairly easily given); the main reason for this (as far 
as the school was concerned) was that Harrow boys should be identifiable as 
such (which mirrors your own experience).

Between 1998 and 2001, I was also a frequent visitor at Westminster School 
(during which time they had a significant uniform change, BTW), where 
exactly the same rules and behaviour applied.

In any event, uniform codes are enforced by the Headmaster, and Dumbledore 
is hardly a traditionalist!

There is also a whole separate issue which concerns the reasons why schools 
have uniform codes in the first place. This is a knotty subject which I 
don't have time to explore in detail (and certainly don't want to get into 
an argument over - it's a fairly emotive subject), but the two most 
important reasons generally given in favour of British schools having 
uniforms are the creation of a sense of identity for the pupils of a single 
school, and saving kids from different financial backgrounds from competing 
with each other to be fashionable.  (These reasons have their downside as 
well, but that's for another time and place.)

The thing is, Hogwarts has no other schools to compete with (the only 
rivalry is inter-House, which is - regrettably - encouraged) and pupils of 
the same House generally know each other, so there is no real reason for 
distinguishing features - the books certainly don't imply any.

The only uniform requirement in the books is a *plain* (my emphasis) black 
work robe (well, three of them), a winter cloak (am I the only one who 
finds it strange that the fastenings are specified to be silver but nothing 
else beyond the colour is?), and a black pointed hat (have the hats ever 
served any function in the books - have we ever had a description of anyone 
*wearing* them?).

The robes are *work* (again, my emphasis) robes, so they're hardly designed 
to perform any kind of ritual function (such as identifying Hogwarts pupils 
when at Hogsmeade). Clearly, the requirements are practical rather than 
"tribal".

The case can therefore be made that Hogwarts doesn't actually have a dress 
code as we'd understand a uniform to imply (like the school I attended), 
and the clothing rules which are laid down aren't there to serve the 
traditional purpose of a school uniform, but to serve the practical needs 
of the pupils.

The movie universe has introduced uniforms (for better or worse - IMO, 
definitely for the worse) and has to live with that. The rules for use of 
those uniforms and how (and when) they are worn are therefore at the 
director's discretion. Arguing the case with canon, or even, perhaps, 
real-world examples, is an exercise in futility. There are traditional 
boarding schools which don't have uniform codes, so if you want to compare 
Hogwarts with anything, compare it to *them*, not Eton, Harrow and the like.

>Harry's clothing [fitting him] is certainly an issue.

Personally, I've never had a problem with Harry having clothes which fit. 
Whilst this element has been excised from the book, he gets his own room at 
the Dursleys' at the beginning of PS/SS because Vernon and Petunia are 
scared that they're being spied upon. It would therefore make perfect sense 
(although it's not mentioned) that they would equip Harry with better 
clothes because if the "spies" can see into the Dursleys' house, it stands 
to reason that they can see Harry outside. As the whole thing is about 
keeping up appearances, if they improve Harry's conditions inside the 
house, then it only makes sense that they should improve his appearance 
outside it.

I'm prepared to be corrected on this point, but I don't think there's any 
mention of Harry's outsize clothes once he is given Dudley's second 
bedroom. I realise that we don't have a scene of them all going clothes 
shopping, but it would make sense. The kinds of clothes Movie!Harry wears 
can be acquired fairly cheaply - there are no visible labels or brands - so 
there's no reason for Harry to continue having Dudley's cast-offs.

[Hagrid's lesson]

>Actually, it's September 2nd (at least it is in the book, and there's no 
>real reason to think it's different in the film) and they are in Scotland.
>
>It is *not* likely that it's all that warm. The average daily high 
>temperature for Glasgow (nearest location I have data for) in September is 
>60F, or around 16C. Not warm at all.

Your dependance on statistics here is misleading. Making a guess about the 
weather of 2nd September based on September *averages* is not fair, given 
that the weather breaks around the middle of that month and, in any case, 
does not respect month boundaries. If the *average* for the month is 16C, 
then given the weather changes about the middle of the month and it's 
noticeably cooler in the second half, then it follows that the first half 
will be warmer - you may as well include 2nd September in August averages.

The one thing one can say with certainly about Scottish weather at any time 
of year (beginning of September or otherwise) is that is it utterly 
unpredictable. One cannot say that "it's *not* likely" any more than one 
can claim that it *is*. (Old stupid joke: The British summer lasts two days 
- the question is *which* two, and one of them might well fall in December!)

If the movie chooses to show a bright, warm, day, there is no reason to 
question that on the basis of statistical probability of September as a 
whole. If you can find some stats comparing temperatures in the first week 
of September year-on-year, we can talk about reasonable expectations for 
that day.

>But the kids are sloppy when they are in the Castle. The kids are sloppy 
>in Lupin's classes.

*Some* of the kids are sloppy, *some* of the time. As far as I'm concerned, 
that's the whole point. From memory, Ron's shirt-tails hung out fairly 
frequently during the first two movies already - that's part of who 
(Movie!)Ron is!

Incidentally, however, I do agree that Hermione with her shirt completely 
untucked during the COMC lesson is entirely out of character for her, 
although I can see a rationale for doing so within the movie, to indicate 
that she's "loosened up" somewhat since the last year. Nevertheless, it 
grates on me as well.

--
GulPlum AKA Richard, who's sure that he's made all of the above points 
*somewhere*, at *some time*, but not recently...