[HPforGrownups] expulsion (was Snape and the Prank)

[Indigo]

No: HPFGUIDX 47078


On 11/24/2002 at 5:10 AM corinthum wrote:

>I would just like to add a quick (well, not so quick) note about 
>expulsion.  I don't particularly understand why people seek an reason 
>for Sirius not to be expelled for the Prank other than the fact that 
>his actions did not merit such a punishment.  
>
>Did Sirius do something that deserved punishment?  Certainly.  I 
>personally hold the opinion that Sirius was simply being a thoughtless 
>16 year old boy when he pulled the Prank.  However, even if he 
>actually had malign intentions (wanted Snape to be injured or even 
>killed), the fact is he was unsuccessful.  
>
>Expulsion is an extremely harsh punishment.  In schools today, it 
>takes quite a bit to be expelled (ridiculous instances of 6-year olds 
>being expelled for making obviously unreal threats notwithstanding).  
>Now consider the magic world.  Hogwarts isn't just the best school in 
>England.  It's the only one.  Yes, I know some people don't think 
>this, but to this point we have absolutely no evidence to the 
>contrary.  I would assume that if there were other schools, Hagrid 
>would have transferred to one of these once he was expelled.  So 
>getting expelled basically means the end of one's wizarding future.  
>Sure, you can remain in the Wizarding World and hold a "minimum wage" 
>sort of job, but you will never be a true witch or wizard and practice 
>magic.  
>
>So being expelled from Hogwarts is a much more serious punishment than 
>being expelled from an ordinary muggle school.  In fact, the only 
>person we've ever heard of getting expelled is Hagrid.  Yes, Snape 
>threatens it constantly, and various students taunt each other with 
>it.  But the only actual crime we know of that has prompted expulsion 
>has been murder.  And even if it was proved that Sirius wanted Snape 
>injured, or even killed (the latter I find hard to believe), he didn't 
>force Snape to pass the Whomping Willow.
>
>What we have is a 16-year old boy who indirectly put a fellow student 
>at risk, possibly without truly meaning to do so.  Hardly enough to 
>expel someone. 
>
>
>-Corinth, who just finished a thesis (seems to be a trend here, huh?), 
>and finally can think about pointless things again 
>
I'm inclined to agree with Corinth in that it takes a _major_ transgression to get one expelled from Hogwarts [though the same may not be true of Beaubaxtons or  Durmstrang].  

Has anyone compiled a full list of stuff that's expulsionable from Hogwarts?  I don't seem to recall one but some of my lurking may as well have been obliviated when muggle-mundanity dragged me away from the computer.  Please forgive if I'm being redundant. 

So -- 

Non-Expulsionable Offenses
Going into the Forbidden Forest against orders seems  not only non-expulsionable, but it has been used as a form of detention.

Damaging the Whomping Willow.  Though this came from Snape who has an obvious anti-Harry bias, and would probably have been shouting "Expell him!" if Harry had sneezed during a Potions class or otherwise done something small wrong.

Scampering around Hogwarts and/or its grounds after "lights out" or out of bounds areas at any time.  McGonnagall is at least fair to go with her strictness.  She is equally harsh on Malfoy as she was on her own Gryffindors.

Being a werewolf.  Though we don't know if anyone else in Hogwarts has ever suffered lycanthropy.  I'm Presuming Remus is the only one to date. 

Magical ineptitude:  Seamus and Neville would've been sent home long before book 4. 

Any and all of the 473 things that Filch has listed in his file cabinet,  especially the Sirius Black and Fred/George Weasley files.  

The Sirius Prank, which was not meant as an actual attempted murder. Snape just sees it that way; and okay, he has a right to the bias to a degree.

Expulsionable Offenses
Underage wizardry in front of muggles [excepting cased of it being an accident, like the inflation of Aunt Marge].  Oddly, the Flying Ford Anglia incident was not accidental, but all it got Harry and Ron was detention. 

Killing anyone.  Hagrid and Aragog are innocent of this crime but the expulsion was never reversed when his name was cleared, even though Riddle and the Basilisk were proven the real culprits. 

Most people I have discussed this with say it's the half-giant prejudice against Hagrid that resulted in nobody doing anything to reinstate his wand since he didn't do the thing that he was expelled for. 

The second argument against reinstating Hagrid was because of his monsters-as-cute-pets tendency.  But  I disagree, because  Fluffy was apparently useful to Hogwarts as a guardian, and Hagrid wasn't fired for having Fluffy and Fang; nor was he fired for the Norbert incident.   

The third argument I hear against reinstating him is that he's too old to catch up now.  It's pretty much considered common knowledge among readership, anyway, that his wand-halves are in his pink umbrella.   But is there no provision for Hagrid or anyone else taking the equivalent of an American GED -- something he could study for and get up to speed magically?   I'm guessing this means the wizarding world's that good about predicting or divining new wizards by age 11.

Offenses that may be Expulsionable
Being an unregistered Animagus.   Sirius, James, Pettigrew, and Rita Skeeter are all unregistered Animagi, and according to Hermione, this is a serious offense.  


Indigo, who is thinking a lot for a Sunday afternoon.