House points and Dumbledore (long post , sorry)!

[lindseyharrisst <lindseyharrisst@hotmail.com>]

No: HPFGUIDX 51092

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Scott Northrup" <snorth at u...>
wrote:
> 
> Maria:
> > But all this makes me wonder what exactly House points are awarded
for. We
> know they're taken away for breaking rules (or just bothering Snape
<g>).
> >
> > When I first started reading PS, I assumed that the whole thing was
> academic. Instead of grades, they receive House points.
> >
> > But I am not sure it's wise to compare academic success to the
displays of
> courage, bravery, etc (you list 'em in full). 

Me:
I'm a Brit and know a little about the private school house system. At
Hogwarts, as at most, the children are boarding away from home and the
influence of their family on their behaviour. At school there are only
a limited number of teachers and so it is less easy for them to
physically check up on each pupil's behaviour. Therefore the house
points system was introduced to create a sense of "family ties", ie
loyalty and a desire not to give your house a bad name or embarress
those associated with you. This is a far easier method of "control"
and nicer for the pupils who are encouraged in healthy competiton not
shouted at. They are given, as far as I remember, exclusively for
social sorts of achievement (like Neville's), to avoid the idea of
socialising children that lies behind house points only being
something in which some take part. Points given for a question
answered in class are not for being clever, but for being confident or
helpful enough to raise your hand or diligent enough to have done the
reading.

In the case of DD awarding points to Gryffindor, I felt slightly
uncomofrtable with it (and I admit this is from a Slythierin
sympathiser POV, not because I like them, but because I think the fate
of Slytherin is a self-fulfilling prophecy to a great extent due to
the social isolation the individual child experiences when they join
it and the removal of calming and kind influences like Hufflepuff
friends).

What I object to is that Harry and Co. were the only people in a
position to defeat Voldemort because....
1 Harry has a special ability to know when he's around (his scar),
2 because they knew Hagrid who unwittingly gave the trio information
(Hagrid felt close to Harry because he had delivered him to the
Dursley's when he had been small)and
3 because Harry has the magical immunity given to him by his mother's
sacrifice.

This seems to go against the idea that house points are available to
all because everyone has the same potential to be good (diligent,
loyal, hard working, honest etc). It seems pointless to avoid awarding
house points for purely academic achievements for the sake of
inclusivity and then awarding them to Harry and the trio for something
only they could possibly do. I'm not saying they deserved no
recognition, because they were brave indeed, once they discovered it
fell to them to defeat Voldie, but that awarding points and giving
them the cup was not "playing by the rules".

No wonder the Slytherins felt hard done by and continue to be
reluctant to play fair, if they do not get to see it bear fruit and
the prize goes to someone else anyway, for being more "dashing,
handsome and bold", as it were. I'm sure I've heard this all
before.....oh yes, it was in the "why does Snape hate the Marauders"
posts was n't it? Do we really think it's worth it to demonstratively
reward the good guys if it leads to such powerful resentment as to
cause Slytherins to feel death-eating has bigger opportunities for
getting oneself noticed? Are Slytheirn petty? Sure. But for all the
damage a single new DE creates in the world, DD would do well to have
regard to the feelings of "borderline cases" ilke Draco possibly is
and I'm sure Severus one was. 
ANY FEEDBACK HUGLEY APPRECIATED :)

Snapesangel XXXX