Jinxed Jobs /Teachers in the WW/ What standards are we using... LONG

[pippin_999]

No: HPFGUIDX 144342

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" <dumbledore11214 at y...> 
wrote:

> Alla:
> 
> Trelawney's example is a PERFECT example IMO of how Dumbledore's 
> several hats get confused. No, I don't think that Divination is a 
> joke to WW, far from it. And Dumbledore himself calls Cassandra 
> Trelawney extremely gifted Seer, so he acknowledges the truth of the 
> subject, right?

Pippin:
That the talent is real doesn't mean it can be taught -- not to most 
people anyway. If there are really gifted seer students at Hogwarts,
they may be able to learn something from Firenze, but as McGonagall
says, it's a very rare talent. Those who have it aren't necessarily lining
up to teach at Hogwarts.

Meanwhile, the second half of the prophet's job is getting people to believe the 
predictions. You have to admit that Trelawney's rather good at that, and  
she teaches it pretty well. 

Ron and Harry got  pretty good at getting *her* to believe that their 
bogus predictions were genuine products of the soothsayer's art.

> Alla:
> 
> Nope, sorry Pippin, but putting aside the possession of the wands of 
> course, I don't see wizardlings assuming emotional independence any 
> earlier than your usual muggle child. Or, at least when I was growing 
> up.<snip>
> 
> But them going places by themselves are really NOT what I was talking 
> about.
> 
> I was talking about their responses to childhood traumas and I 
> believe that nothing in canon shows that they are more resilient to 
> that.
> 

Pippin:
They are routinely placed in situations, such as possessing wands
that can maim and kill people, which  we try would keep them out of
not least because the emotional fallout if anything went wrong 
would be devastating.  Look at all the things Fred and George
managed to do to Ron. They killed his pet, and they nearly got him
to take an Unbreakable Vow. 

 A lot of readers would be upset if Hermione had gone off to Bulgaria 
with Krum, or married him as soon as she turned seventeen, but there 
was nothing in canon that any adult was prepared to 
stop her. 

 So, either the WW doesn't care very much about emotional
fallout, or it doesn't happen as easily as we'd expect. I was postulating
the latter because, as I said, the wizards of Arthur and Molly's generation
and older seem to be doing okay. JKR plays this down, because it
would make the characters cartoonish to dwell on it. But it's there, IMO.)



> Pippin:
> There is nothing Snape can do
> > (aside from magic) to reach inside Harry and *make* him
> > feel humiliated, any more than Harry can reach inside Snape
> > and *make* him feel sadistic (although I'm sure that Snape
> > feels that's exactly what Harry does. )
> 
> Alla:
> 
> Sorry, I completely disagree with that. Snape cannot to make Harry 
> feel humiliated and the solution is very easy IMO. I am sure you know 
> where I am going with it - Snape can LEAVE Harry ALONE, you know NOT 
> to insult him.

Pippin:
::shrug:: Right. And if Snape had wings, he'd be a hippogriff. Snape
*can't* leave Harry alone, that's what Dumbledore was saying. Snape's
broken, Harry isn't. Or not so much. Thanks to Voldemort, the wizarding
world is full of broken people.  Stick 'em all in St. Mungo's and there'll
be nobody left to fight LV.

Alla:
> Besides, since I am convinced that Snape killing Dumbledore is just 
> the part of who Snape is and it just shows his character flaws on the 
> larger scale, I think it is practically impossible for Harry to laugh 
> at Snape now.
> 

Pippin:
Yes, exactly. That's what Harry thinks. But I believe he's wrong.
The interest for me is in seeing how Harry will overcome
his prejudice against Snape and recognize the truth. I think he will. 
( I am not so sure about some of the readers, though <veg>).

You mentioned the Jewish laws of forgiveness. But under Jewish
law no one is ever punished for who they are, but only for what
they do. L'shon hara, evil speech, is very difficult to atone for.
Some say it's wrong to ever forgive it, because evil words can
never be called back, and so full restitution cannot be made.

But both Snape and Harry would be in trouble with that one. 
At thirteen, a Jewish Harry would be just as culpable as Snape.


> Alla:
> 
> Sure, some thirteen year olds can figure it out or not, but whether 
> they do it or not, does it really matter to show that Snape is 
> culpable?
> 
> I think it is demanding way too much from thirteen year old, but that 
> is IMO obviously.

Pippin:
They don't have to go to Hogwarts or live in the WW  if they'd rather 
be mollycoddled. It's a choice. We don't give choices like that to our
young people, but wizards do.

Like Hagrid said, when Draco protested being sent into a wood full
of werewolves, that's the way it is at Hogwarts. Draco was really
scared, wasn't he? Did he deserve to be frightened so badly just
for being out of bounds? After all, McGonagall thought that Draco
was the *victim* of the joke, and look what she did to him!

Neville didn't have to work so hard to fix his potion. He could have
tipped the cauldron over, or told Trevor to get lost, or picked up his
toad and walked out.  The worst he would have gotten is detention.
loss of House Points and a zero for the day. If Snape did do anything
worse than that, then he would be in violation of Hogwarts rules, 
and we've not seen that Dumbledore tolerated that from Snape, have
we? 

Pippin