Another sign of Hagrid's improvement as a teacher

[marinafrants]

No: HPFGUIDX 41334

--- In HPforGrownups at y..., "jenny_ravenclaw" <meboriqua at a...> wrote:
> > In GoF, he starts off with the Skrewts.  Maybe I'm odd, but I 
see 
> nothing wrong with this.  They're experimental beasts that Hagrid 
is 
> developing at the Ministry's request, and he gets the students to 
help 
> with the experiment.> 
> 
>  Are we sure Hagrid was using the skrewts because the Ministry 
advised 
> him to raise them?  Hagrid's reaction to Rita Skeeter's questions 
> about the skrewts could be taken in two ways (that I can think 
of).  
> He might have been vague and uncomfortable answering her because 
he 
> was playing around with something illegal there or because he was 
> raising the skrewts simply for the purpose of the third task and 
> didn't want to give away the information.  What do others think?

You're right, we're never told for sure that Hagrid was breeding the 
skrewts for the Ministry.  I kind of assumed that since they were 
used for the Tournament, that they had been intended for that 
purpose all along.  Either way, I think it was legitimate for Hagrid 
to use the skrewts in class, but I agree that he spent too much time 
on them.  That would be my own biggest criticism of Hagrid's 
teaching -- not enough variety.  Still, he presents more creatures 
in GoF than he did in PoA, so it appears he's making some progress 
there, too.
> 
> >Hagrid has never shown signs of competetiveness, jealousy of 
other 
> people's success, exessive vanity, or any other qualities that 
lead to 
> one-upmanship.  Nor do I remember him expressing any annoyance 
with 
> Grubbly-Plank.>
> 
> You're right; I was definitely making a sweeping generalization 
here, 
> but here is where I got my thinking from (GoF, chapter 26): 
> "maybe...because he was trying to prove he could do anything that 
> Professor Grubbly-Plank could...but Hagrid had been continuing the 
> lessons on unicorns ever since he returned to work".  It does go 
on to 
> say that he knew quite a lot about unicorns, but that only makes 
me 
> wonder why he never thought to teach his students about them 
before.
> 

I think that's explained by the observation that Hagrid was 
disappointed by the unicorns' lack of poison fangs.  He just doesn't 
find them very interesting, and he wants to teach his students the 
interesting beasts.  Grubbly-Plank's lesson shows him that just 
because he doesn't find something interesting doesn't mean that 
other people won't.

> I think my real problem here is simply that I do not like Hagrid 
as a 
> character.  I think he has done enough things at this point both 
in 
> and out of the classroom that I tend to not trust him and to 
> disapprove of him even when he is in the right.  Because of this 
and 
> because I am a teacher, it is hard for me to be objective about 
him as 
> a teacher.  

Well, I'm fairly indifferent to Hagrid, so I suppose it's easy for 
me to objective about him.  I think it's perfectly legitimate to 
dislike Hagrid.  It's certainly no more odd than loving Snape, so 
I'm not going to knock it. <g>  But I think that ideally, we should 
strive to recognize both the bad points of the characters we love 
and the good points of the characters we hate.  If I can say, "Yeah, 
I love Snape, but his treatment of Neville and Hermione is 
despicable," then surely the Hagrid-haters can manage "Yeah, I hate 
him, but the unicorn and niffler lessons show that he's trying to 
improve."

Marina
rusalka at ix.netcom.com