Defending Trelawney (WAS Why so many unpopular teachers at Hogwarts? )
cindysphynx
cindysphynx at home.com
Tue Jan 8 00:07:42 UTC 2002
No: HPFGUIDX 32969
Elizabeth wrote:
> I rather hate to disagree wtih Cindy, but I'm afraid I will have
to, on three
> points out of four:
Wait! Wait! I can make you believe! :-)
It seems that a good teacher ought to be able to do two things --
master the subject matter being taught, and communicate it to assist
others in mastering it. If the subject matter depends heavily on
whether the student has natural talent, it doesn't seem fair to judge
the teacher's performance solely by whether the students master the
subject.
Here's the best case I can put together for Trelawney:
Elizabeth wrote:
> I think any success on her part was
> blind luck. She wanted to see a Grim -- it's a famous portent of
>death-- so she
> saw one. I think the resemblence to Sirius was accidental.
Using that yardstick, Trelawney will never get credit for a
prediction, will she? Correct predictions can always be dismissed as
mere coincidence because Divination is inherently subjective. The
objective facts, however, are that Trelawney saw the Grim in the
crystal ball and the tea leaves. We can dismiss it as a coincidence,
but the fact remains that the Grim is a big black dog, and she saw it
when there was exactly such a creature "stalking" Harry.
Also, she seemed disappointed when Harry did not see Buckbeak being
beheaded. I think that was because she had done her own Seeing and
seen the beheading. Buckbeak was in fact beheaded, so score one for
Trelawney. Perhaps she didn't also see Buckbeak's escape, but I
would think a Time Turner that changes events would foul up anyone's
Inner Eye. :-)
She was on target with Lavender's rabbit, and she predicted
Hermione's exit. She was right about Neville's cup breakage. Small
stuff, but correct nonetheless.
She made the following correct prediction in GoF: "Your worries are
not baseless. I see difficult times ahead for you . . . I fear the
thing you dread will indeed come to pass . . . and perhaps sooner
than you think." Voldemort did return, so score a big one for
Trelawney.
Now, I admit I was incorrect when I said Trelawney predicted Harry
would get stabbed in the back by a friend. Ron said that, which
shows that he's picking up a thing or two in Divination. :-)
Elizabeth again:
> *Who* learns to See?
>
> I'll grant you that Trelawney is better at faking teaching than
>Lockhart, and so
> possibly deserves to be on the next rung up (with Binns), but I
>don't see any
> evidence that anyone has actually learned to See.
Oh, poor Trelawney gets no respect. Trelawney and Moody do exactly
the same thing in their classrooms -- they put the kids through their
paces under real life circumstances, and they do hands-on practical
demonstrations. Moody puts kids under Imperius, and only one kid
learns to throw it off. Trelawney gives them various tools (crystal
balls, tea leaves), and they try to use these tools to See. I don't
see much of a difference there.
Indeed, in both cases, the students are largely unsuccessful, even
though the teachers' methods are similar. As a matter of fact, Harry
rarely reports the predictions other kids are making, so perhaps they
are all making correct predictions, which would make Trelawney even
more effective than Moody.
Elizabeth again:
>Trelawney can't even tell that Harry and Ron are making up their
>answers.
True, the students pull the wool over her eyes. Divination rests on
a foundation of trust, on the honor system, if you will. As an
analogy, suppose a physical education teacher assigns homework that
kids run a certain distance and record it in a log. Some kids decide
to lie and fabricate everything, and they don't get caught. That
doesn't make the teaching method ineffective, IMHO. It just means
these two kids aren't mature enough to be trusted, and as our parents
used to tell us, they're only hurting themselves when they cheat like
this.
Elizabeth again:
>And how much blame
> should a teacher bear for accepting a position to teach a subject
>which can't be
> taught?
How do we know that Divination cannot be taught? I figure it is akin
to music or voice lessons. Some people have talent and some people
do not. With enough study, the truly talented will master the
subject. I think the jury is still out on Trelawney and on whether,
upon graduation, a few kids are good at Divination.
That said, I don't mean to say I completely buy Trelawney's act. I
do think she is one of JKR's better bit players, though. Even after
two books, she is still shrouded in mystery. I can't wait to find
out what happens. My own prediction is that Trelawney will prove to
be a true Seer and much more impressive than our current impression
of her.
Cindy
More information about the HPforGrownups
archive