What Hermione thinks of Snape as a teacher (LONG)/ a bit of Hermione andTrel

[sistermagpie]

No: HPFGUIDX 148081


> Finwitch:
> About the rabbit: During their first class, Trelawney tells 
Lavender 
> that the thing she dreads will happen -- (I forget the date, but 
she 
> gave it, and that was the date Lavender recieved news her rabbit 
had 
> been eaten by a fox). When Lavender mentions that, Hermione turns 
> the subject into Lavender having 'dreaded' this event of Binky 
dying 
> and then goes on saying that the event happened earlier and 
Lavender 
> only found out about it on that day.
> 
> However -- you know -- *what* do you think Lavender was dreading 
as 
> Trelawney gave that prediction? Not about her rabbit specifically, 
> no. She was dreading recieving bad news, which *did* happen on 
> preset date. It's Hermione who got things confused over the 
rabbit, 
> twisting things to "prove" the wrongness of Divination. As much of 
> psychological trickery as any to me.

Magpie:
Going on your description since I can't remember what happened 
exactly, "the thing you dread" is a standard fake-out for a 
psychic.  She didn't tell Lavender anything.  She let Lavender 
herself fill in the blanks after the fact and decide she was 
dreading bad news.  Anything bad that happened Lavender would have 
claimed was the prediction.  Lavender is a particularly willing 
assistant in Trelawney's charade.

Unfortunately, Hermione, for all she's supposed to be smart, is 
really very bad at explaining why things don't work--I'm not sure 
we're supposed to see this or whether JKR actually thinks Hermione's 
being smart in these kinds of scenes.  She's going at this all wrong 
by making any reference to when Binky died or not, missing the fact 
that Trelawney didn't make any prediction so of course whatever 
happened will do.  Sort of like how Hermione challenges Slinkhard's 
textbook with a total non-sequitor that doesn't prove Slinkhard 
wrong at all.  (Luckily Umbridge isn't any better at defending his 
views so just tells Hermione to shut up, making it seem like 
Hermione's argument actually had some merit.)

Finwitch:
 
> As for Trelawney not spotting fake homework -- well, there's a few 
> things to consider:
> 
> Ron "predicted" what sort of essay would get full marks from 
> Trelawney, and he and Harry acted on it.
> 
> Trelawney praised their acceptance of upcoming misery, 
particularly 
> death, which I believe is the red thread in her teachings. More 
> importantly, if someone sees nothing but misery in the foreseeable 
> future for themselves, they might well be on the verge of suicide. 
> Snapping about 'fake' homework when someone writes about miserable 
> future -- could have serious consequences.

Magpie:
I don't see the point in trying to prove that scenes of Ron and 
Harry making stuff up knowing the teacher will fall for it because 
the whole thing's a joke are actually examples of true divination.  
Or in making Trelawney a Muggle teacher following modern ideas about 
teenagers and therefore worried they might be suicidal.  If she was 
one of those, then I think these sorts of predictions would get Ron 
and Harry a trip to a therapist, not encouragement.  If a 13-year-
old is suicidal, why would it be a good idea to praise him for 
accepting his impending death?  The very fact that Trelawney praises 
their fortitude without, you know, having any practical response 
about avoiding the impending accidents suggests she's not taking 
this seriously.

Finwitch: 
> Also, I think that Trelawney's prediction-practice - as much as it 
> may seem like nonsense, to make up as miserable future as 
possible - 
> doesn't thinking of that sort of thing in advance also mentally 
> prepare you for it? I actually think that it might have - in a 
very 
> roundabout way - helped Harry to cast his patronus in the face of 
> Dementors. You know - prepare for the worst and hope for the best.

Magpie:
No, I don't think it did Harry much good, and if it did it still 
doesn't make Trelawney any more of a Seer or make her class any less 
of a waste of time.  Harry's got enough real reasons to think he's 
going to be in danger without someone telling him to look out for 
falling pianos or whatever.  

catherine higgins:
But only 3 Ravenclaws (the most intellectual) and 1
Hufflepuff (the hardest working) managed an Owl in the subject, or
decided to continue with Potions thinking that Snape would be
teaching.

Magpie:
We don't know how many people managed an OWL.  Getting an OWL only 
takes an A.  Snape only accepted people with O's, which is a much 
higher grade.  I get the impression O's are supposed to be pretty 
rare and impressive.  It seems as if Slughorn's class is made up of 
all students who got O's, plus two E students (Ron and Harry, the 
only two who hadn't bought their textbooks beforehand).  So that's 
one O Hufflepuff (hard-working, but also apparently 
considered "duffers"), four Slytherins and four (not three) 
Ravenclaws.  That's half of Slytherin and half of Ravenclaw getting 
O's, which are not easy to get.  (And yes, I say half because 
there's 40 kids in the class because that's all the ones that 
actually exist, imo.) Slughorn's class seems like a pretty normal-
sized NEWT class to me, given the high requirements for getting in, 
and Harry doesn't seem to think it's particularly small.  Ron and 
Harry seem to be the only kids in the class for whom the change of 
teacher was a factor.  If Snape required O's in his DADA class, even 
Hermione wouldn't have gotten in--it might have been just Snape and 
Harry, for all we know.

-m