Hagrid the animal abuser (was:Hagrid and Draco WAS:Re: Dumbledore...

[justcarol67]

No: HPFGUIDX 166173

Carol earlier:
><snip> 
> > Snape doesn't need a textbook because he has all the potions in
his head, but in Hagrid's case, a Ministry-approved textbook
comparable to the one Lupin uses for DADA (also focusing on magical
creatures, albeit mildly Dark ones) would have been a real boon. It
would at least provide a logical sequence of creatures that the
students would need to know about in real life and in their exams. It
might even provide lesson plans if there's a teacher's edition (not
likely, but possible). All Hagrid would then have to do is obtain the
creatures for the lessons, explain their characteristics, and let the
students actually care for them, which, after all, is what Care of
Magical Creatures is supposed to be about. <snip>

Lyra responded:
<snip>
> As for textbooks, aside from the year of the disasterous "Monster 
Book of Monsters," I think they use "Fantastic Beasts" (At least in 
OOTP, Harry carries Firenze's message "it's not working" to Hagrid by
pretending to have left his copy of "FB" after class.) But again, 
Hagrid simply ignores or understimates the MOM ratings of the animals
he chooses out of that book. <snip>

Carol again:
Thanks. I'd forgotten that. But FB doesn't solve the problem I was
pointing out because it doesn't present the animals in a
least-dangerous to most-dangerous sequence and therefore set up a
logical sequence of lessons for Hagrid to follow. It lists the
creatures alphabetically, starting with the extremely dangerous
Acromantula. 

Nor does it focus on animals that the students would actually be
caring for in later life or tested on in their exams (many of them are
Dark creatures more properly belonging to DADA or extremely dangerous
animals that only Hagrid would want to care for). I doubt, for
example, that any of them will want Manticores as pets or that the
care and handling of Lethifolds will be part of their OWLs or NEWTs.
Nor should Merpeople and Centaurs, IMO, be included in a COMC class
since both are intelligent near-humans capable of caring for themselves.

FB is an interesting bit of light reading, but it doesn't, in my view,
qualify as a useful textbook for COMC. It is, however, a step up from
"The Monster Book of Monsters."

BTW, and this point is completely OT but occurred to me as I was
glancing at the entry on Kneazles, I wonder if Crookshanks's lack of
reaction to Snape in both PoA and OoP is an indication that Snape is
*not* an "unsavoury or suspicious character" (FB 24).

Carol, who just realized that she's been misspelling "Crups" but is at
least pretty sure that she hasn't accidentally referred to Voldemort
as Dumbledore in this thread! <blush!>