[HPforGrownups] Re: Lupin & Snape as teachers

[Amanda Lewanski]

No: HPFGUIDX 11961

mohuebner0 at lycos.de wrote:

> I can see your point here. But I would still think that if Albus
> Dumbledore hired him as a teacher, he is safe. Dumbledore is no fool.
> Of course he doesn't know everything and isn't allmighty, but he
> wouldn't deliberately endanger his students.

Albus Dumbledore has a very hands-off teaching style, which has been
discussed on the group before. And regardless, I stand by what I said
before, as a wizard parent you probably wouldn't want your child around
a teacher with lycanthropy. Making the choice to run a risk oneself is
entirely different than making the choice for someone else whose welfare
is your responsibility. Like I don't mind seeing people on motorcycles
without helmets--it's their head--but I don't like seeing kids behind
them with no helmets. Are you willing to make the choice to let your
child run a life-endangering risk, on the basis of someone else's
evaluation? Even a most puissant wizard?

> Snape on the other hand doesn't endanger his students physically, but
> the psychological damage he causes is worse IMHO than what Lupin *may*
> do to my kids. While Lupin might be dangerous once a month if he
> forgets to take his potion, Snape doesn't have any "special" days
> where he is mean. I am still astonished about the fact that so many
> people seem to accept Snape's teaching style without objection.

Snape's a very unpleasant, mean teacher. I'd probably be sending owls in
Dumbledore's direction if my child were harassed in his class. But
still--Snape may cause some psychological echoes down the line. But most
of those can be overcome, or understood, or dealt with, without
effectively making the affected person a pariah. Lycanthropy is a
serious disease that removes a person from any normal existence (normal
is a relative term, you all understand; I'm talking wizarding normal).
There is no comparison between Lupin's actual, if small, severe danger,
and Snape's snottiness.

It is part of the tragedy of Lupin's character that he is such a
wonderful teacher, and cannot teach. However, I'm betting that the
burden of the lycanthropy is part of what has tempered him to be such a
wonderful personality (I think one of those Greek drama terms covers
this kind of irony).

> I agree. But what Snape does to Neville certainly won't help to make
> him gain more self-regard. Neville's life is miserable because he is
> terrified all the time, mainly because of Snape when he is at
> Hogwarts. How do you justify that?

Well, for one, I'm not prepared to say Neville is *terrified* all the
time. He certainly is in Snape's classes, but while he is uncertain of
himself and insecure, I think terrified is a bit of a reach. I think if
Neville's life is miserable, it's more because of a domineering
grandmother, well-intentioned though she be, and the condition of his
parents, rather than due to one very, very nasty teacher. But I won't
even say he's miserable. Terminally insecure is close to miserable, but
no cigar.

And I don't justify what Snape does to Neville. I don't justify his
behavior to any of the students. I attempt to explain and understand it,
but I don't by any means justify it. His teaching style is far from the
sympathetic style of Lupin, but I think Snape does manage to convey the
intricacies of his craft adequately, which is probably the sum, in his
mind, that he is called upon to do. He isn't paid to be nice. It is
probably part of the tragedy of Snape's character--and I sense there is
some tragedy there, although Snape's the sort to snarl about it and gets
less empathy--that he, for whatever reason, must teach and doesn't like
it, while Lupin loves it and can't.

--Amanda


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]