Teaching Styles / Sorting Hat

[justcarol67]

No: HPFGUIDX 157918

Alla wrote:
<snip>
> As to Mike Smith, somebody recently mentioned him to me. I take your 
> word for it that he is funny, but honestly I could never understand 
> if person dislikes the books that much, why bother writing so much 
> about it.
> 
> No, I have not read him yet, if he is truly funny I may or if he is 
> just trashing the books, I probably won't.

Carol responds:
I just read about half of Mike Smith's HBP review (the chapters I'm
most interested in). What's fun about it is that, even though we find
out at the end that he's a Christian, he's not reading it from a
fundamentalist perspective and in fact argues that the fundamentalists
have nothing to object to. And the conclusions he arrives at regarding
Dumbledore are quite surprising (and, IMO, astute) considering that
his chapter-by-chapter analysis doesn't seem to lead that way at all.
What I like is his complete outsider's perspective--imagine reading
HBP without having read the earlier books (I think he's seen the first
three movies, but that's all). Also, he reacts to each chapter as he
reads it instead of writing about them in hindsight after he's
finished the book, and if you skip the silly stuff comparing HBP with
science fiction and anime, he really seems to have no agenda. He
certainly doesn't have a favorite character who shapes his
perceptions: he seems to dislike them all equally. Obviously, a real
HP fan who knows all the books will arrive at different conclusions
(and will note his frequent mistakes), but I think you might enjoy
skimming it, seeing how he reacts to particular chapters and
contrasting that humorous, skeptical take with his conclusions about
DD in the end. I won't say any more because anyone who's mildly
interested should check out the link themselves. (Thanks, Betsy. I
didn't receive any enlightenment, but it was fun.)
> 
> Alla:
><snip>
> Yes, I am one of the people who thinks that "end the sorting" is the 
> most likely answer and the most logical answer to house rivalry and 
> especially to ending the poisonous Slytherin mmentality (pureblood 
> mentality, I mean, but again, so far I had been given nothing to 
> show that it does not equal Slytherin mentality, therefore in my 
> mind they are pretty much the same).
> 
> The solution you just gave I find very cool, in a sense that indeed 
> random sorting would not put students of the same personalities 
> together, and they will have a chance to socialise with those whose 
> values are truly different from theirs, learn the best, get rid of 
> the worst, etc.
> 
> To make a long story short, I love it, but the question to you is 
> why would you want it? I mean, you seem to like House system, but 
> wouldn't the Houses be truly houses anymore?
> 
> Would you just prefer for the names to be there? What if the 
> students be just sorting in four different dormitories with no 
> names? What is the significance left in House system?
> 
> Just Quidditch? But then couldn't the teams be randomly formed?

Carol responds:
The one advantage I see in having Houses (besides delegating authority
to four teachers, who can interact more directly with the students in
their particular House than Dumbledore can with anyone except Harry,
who's a special case) is that the point system seems to provide a
better incentive for doing well in school than the rare awards for
individual achievement, which no one seems to be striving for, and a
better system of punishment than detention, which doesn't seem to
deter rule-breaking and disrespect for teachers at all. And it isn't
just Snape's detentions that seem to have no effect on Harry.
McGonagall's don't affect him, either. In fact, even when he's done
something wrong and knows it, like using Sectumsempra on Draco, he
seems to concentrate on the unfairness of the detention. At least the
loss of house points seems to cause him some regret.

Carol, unable to think of an alternative to house points and detention
that serves as a deterrent and isn't corporal punishment or suspension