[HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: [HPforGrownups] Re: Coming of age in the WW

[Shaun Hately]

On 13 Dec 2003 at 15:52, Przemyslaw Plaskowicki wrote:

>  From Main list:
> 
> Shaun Hately wrote:
> 
> >On 11 Dec 2003 at 21:51, Geoff Bannister wrote:
> >
> >  
> >
> >>Geoff:
> >>This reminds me of something that has really annoyed me whenever I 
> >>read it.
> >>
> >>Umbridge told Harry and Co that they were banned from playing 
> >>Quidditch ever again. That, of course, could only apply to Hogwarts. 
> >>Presumably what she meant was ever again at the school.
> >>
> >>But my main irritation is the woman's arrogance in confiscating the 
> >>brooms. Harry's broom is a valuable possession and is his own 
> >>personal property; she has no right to remove it. Perhaps if he had 
> >>felt more secure, he might have remonstrated with her. Whenever I 
> >>read that section, I find myself echoing Hermione's words - "You hag, 
> >>you evil hag", "That foul, lying, twisting old gargoyle", (words she 
> >>used to describe the "truly delightful woman" after her inspection of 
> >>Hagrid if you've lost the quote).
> >>    
> >>
> >
> >I don't know.. I had my own personal valuable property confiscated while I was at 
> >school, on a couple of occasions - and it never even would have occurred to me 
> >to protest about it. As far as I was concerned, the teacher had absolutely every 
> >right to confiscate it, and I don't find it at all surprising that Harry would have a 
> >similar attitude.
> >
> >  
> >
> I disagree. Technically teacher by confiscating anything from pupil 
> commits a crime. Law specifically says what, when and by whom can be 
> confiscated, and as far as I know there is no such law that permits 
> teachers function as a law enforcement officers. Once, I successfully 
> opposed my teacher when she confiscated my newspaper which I was reading 
> under the table, saying that she has no authority to do so.
> 
> But then again, I live in Poland which does not have common law system 
> like UK and US ;-).

I think Polish law is very different (-8

First of all, I'm in Australia, just for the record - which also 
does to a great extent share the Common Law basis of British law.

Now - we know Wizarding Law is not identical to British Law 
(English or Scottish) though we don't know the precise differences.

But given that the Wizarding World was does seem to have had rather 
close contact with mainstream Britain prior to around 1692 - well, 
I think we can assume some similarities.

But there are important differences - for example, at Hogwarts, it 
seems to be *legal* for students to be beaten with horsewhips - 
while corporal punishment was still legal in British independent 
schools at the time the Harry Potter books are set, that would 
legally have gone too far.

But anyway - confiscation.

I *really* can't see any reason why teachers at Hogwarts wouldn't 
be allowed to confiscate things like broomsticks - either legally 
or socially.

In fact I would say that for most students at Hogwarts, this 
ability on the part of teachers would seem virtually like a fact of 
life - not something you question, even if you resented it.

I base that on two things.

(1) I do have some understanding of how laws work in this area.

(2) I experienced life in a British style boarding school in the 
late 1980s/early 1990s - so I think I have a reasonable grasp on 
the likely attitudes have in such schools.

A lot of people, I've noticed don't seem to understand that while 
Hogwarts is certainly a very unusual school in many ways, in a lot 
of ways, it's a fairly typical British boarding school with fairly 
typical British boarding school attitudes (in fact, if you want to 
get technical, JKR seems to have drawn on the British Boarding 
School story tradition - from the late 19th Century onwards, the 
'Boarding School Story' has been a staple in British children's 
literature. It is a *massive* genre of hundreds - probably 
thousands - of books, which millions of children have read over the 
years - and it has its own rules and conventions and the Harry 
Potter books follow these pretty well.)

I don't want to go into massive analysis of this point - but I 
quite often see threads in various Harry Potter forums from people 
who obviously have a limited understanding of the tradition the 
books are set within in. For example, Americans who can't 
understand why there are no cheerleaders at Hogwarts, or who refer 
to Graduation etc - just cultural differences.

I grew up reading British school stories - so I'm very familiar 
with those traditions. I also attended a very exclusive British-
style school which reinforced a lot of them. So when I look at the 
HP books, I think I see things some people don't.

And with regards to confiscation - while students might certainly 
resent it, I doubt many would think that the teacher really had no 
right to do it.

And purely legalistically, I would think she probably did.

Common Law is the key here - the doctrine of in loco parentis 
(where a teacher, or any other adult in authority, is actually able 
to act 'in place of the parent') is a Common Law principle and I 
would expect it is one that does apply at Hogwarts. In confiscating 
property for a student at Hogwarts, a teacher is not acting as a 
law enforcement officer - they are acting as a parent. A parent 
does have the right to take something off a child - so too does a 
teacher acting in loco parentis - and in a boarding school, where 
children seem to have fairly limited contact with their children 
(and that is true of Hogwarts), in loco parentis is likely to be a 
very real principle.

Taking a child's property and selling it - that would almost 
certainly be theft. Taking a child's property to temporarily (even 
for a fairly long period) deprive them of it as a punishment 
wouldn't even come close.

While bikes are almost certainly not as valuable as Harry's broom - 
well, at my school, if a bike owning boarder misbehaved, it wasn't 
that uncommon for their bike to be locked away for a few weeks or 
even a term. And while a particular case might be viewed with 
resentment, anger, or a perception that that particular case was 
unfair, I don't think the idea that the teacher didn't have the 
*right* to do it, would have occurred to most of us. Of course they 
had the right. They were a teacher. Some teachers abused their 
rights, sure - but the right was there and seemed almost like a 
force of nature.

I honestly think many Hogwarts students would see it precisely the 
same way.


Yours Without Wax, Dreadnought
Shaun Hately | www.alphalink.com.au/~drednort/thelab.html
(ISTJ)       | drednort at alphalink.com.au | ICQ: 6898200 
"You know the very powerful and the very stupid have one
thing in common. They don't alter their views to fit the 
facts. They alter the facts to fit the views. Which can be 
uncomfortable if you happen to be one of the facts that 
need altering." The Doctor - Doctor Who: The Face of Evil
Where am I: Frankston, Victoria, Australia