[HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Hogwarts in the Context of the British Public School

[Shaun Hately]

On 21 Jul 2004 at 0:51, justcarol67 wrote:

> Carol responds:
> I've noted the same problem, a number of (mostly youngish?) posters
> assuming that their assumptions about education are the only valid
> assumptions. Without getting into my own views on the subject, which
> no doubt would be attacked by younger posters indoctrinated in
> postmodernism, I think it might be a really good idea to present your
> ideas in simplified form, minus footnotes and academic language, on
> the main list. Long posts, as I know from my own experience, deter
> many readers, particularly the one who would benefit most from such
> information. I've argued repeatedly that the WW's standards are not
> those of the modern world and have been repeatedly resisted by those
> who see Dumbledore's policies as "wrong" and Snape's teaching methods
> as "abusive." (If they knew the disciplinary practices at Eton in the
> early nineteenth century, they might have a clearer idea of what abuse
> really is.)

I might produced a 'simplified' version - but the problem is, it 
wouldn't really be any simpler. The language I used in the post was 
pretty much my normal English - it wasn't intended to be overly 
academic - so all I'd really be doing is taking out the footnotes.

And they were included for a reason - to demonstrate that I wasn't 
positing just based on my own perceptions, or experiences - that 
it's not just my assertion that Hogwarts is like these schools, but 
I can provide specific sources that back up that assertion.

I'm not sure how to get that across - except to quote large 
sections of the books I cited, and that would greatly increase the 
size of the essay.

(I was thinking of a web version with the quotes hidden behind 
hyperlinks from the references, though - but before I can do that, 
I need to get hold a couple of the more obscure references again).

But the language itself would be basically the same.
 
> Your previous post, IIRC, was based on your experiences in an
> Australian boarding school. I think that a historical perspective is
> better for this particular purpose.

So do I - which is why I went for the historical approach. My 
experiences are, I think, very relevant, because of the type of 
school I attended, but most people aren't in a position to judge 
that (-8

> Carol, who hopes you'll follow up on this idea and not be discouraged
> by the lack of response to the more scholarly post
> 
> P.S. I looked up "meta-analysis" in my 1988 "Glossary of Literary
> Terms" and it wasn't there. I can't find a more recent glossary at the
> moment. Maybe the term came in with cultural criticism or
> deconstructionism? Those schools of thought (neither of which appeals
> to me) came in just as I was working on my dissertation, so I never
> mastered their terminology.

I couldn't say - I was taught literary criticism by a Jesuit who 
had a habit of stealing terms from any school of thought that took 
his fancy at the time (-8







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