First lesson WAS: Re: Marietta, was Slytherin's Reputation

[montavilla47]

No: HPFGUIDX 185797

> Montavilla47:
> > Well, didn't Harry actually do his (potentially) best work when 
> > Snape was angriest with him? The one time Harry thought he really 
> > got a potion right was after the SWM incident. Of course, any 
> > teaching value that had was erased by Snape's so unprofessional 
> > behavior when the vial was broken (whether he broke it or whether 
> > it was broken accidentally).
> 
> SSSusan:
> And this is kind of my point.  Let's go with that example and see 
> where it gets us.  For once Harry determined he'd better really focus 
> and get the potion right.  He buckled down and he did so.  Even if 
> Snape was incapable of praising or acknowledging the effort, he could 
> have just accepted the potion and gone on without comment.  
> 
> Perhaps a corner would have been turned and Harry would've learned 
> that, if he tried hard enough and shut up, they could tolerate one 
> another.  But no, the vial "slips," Snape issues that "oops," and in 
> an instant, additional damage has been done to their already damaged 
> relationship.  

Montavilla47:
Of course I agree that what Snape did was petty, childish, and completely
unprofessional.  See above.  But your point (or Jkoney's) was that Snape's 
"style" did not work with Harry as a student and so Snape should have 
adapted his style.  My point was that, personal relationship aside,
Harry responded as well to Snape's harsh methods of teaching as well
as he did to teachers that he considered friendlier, more fair, and
plain old nicer.  The proof was in the test results on his O.W.L.s.

If Snape's style as a teacher was that damaging, then Harry would
not have gotten an E on his test--it wasn't like he was secretly 
leading a Potions study group that year.

> SSSusan:
> I've heard the arguments, but I'll never be convinced Snape did not 
> intentionally drop the vial, and I believe JKR wrote it the way she 
> did for us to receive the implication that he did so.  That was 
> exceptionally childish and, as you said, it was unprofessional.  It 
> wiped out any chance of turning things around.  So, see, Harry tried 
> something different (heh – actually concentrating, working hard, not 
> arguing), but Snape couldn't rise to the same level and, imo, made 
> the chasm even greater by how he treated Harry.  WORSE than square 
> one, then.

Montavilla47:
I'd like to think that Snape didn't--and he was only being somewhat
petty, instead of completely petty at that moment.  But I agree that
it can go either way and I'm not even going to try to argue that it
doesn't.  

But I'm not sure why Snape would have any interest in a relationship 
with Harry at that point.  The Occlumency lessons were over.  He had 
only to endure a few more weeks and Harry would be out of his life 
forever--except for that part about protecting Harry.  And I'm sure
Snape thought he could do that whether they were friendly or not--
since he'd been doing it for four years without them ever being
friendly.  It wasn't like Harry was ever going to thank him or anything.


> Montavilla47:
> > I'm not sure we can blame Snape entirely for Harrys failure to
> > learn Occlumency. He's definitely not patient with Harry, but
> > it's clear to me that Snape is trying very hard in the lessons. He
> > does acknowledge when Harry makes progress, and he answers
> > Harrry's questions.
> 
> SSSusan:
> I *don't* blame Snape entirely.  In fact, imo, the *first* Occlumency 
> lesson was Snape's shining moment as a teacher of Harry.  While not 
> patient by many people's standards, that was the most patient I think 
> we'd seen him; and while not totally forthcoming (especially with 
> explicit hints & suggestions), he did manage to provide some answers 
> to Harry.  I was hopeful at the start of that lesson!  But, alas, due 
> to a combination of Snape's & Harry's behaviors, and, I'd allege, 
> their history, it went downhill from there.

Montavilla47:
I apologize for attributing that to you.  I think I might have been
responding as much to others on the list as to your point.  I agree
that the first Occlumency lesson was Snape's shining moment.


> Montavilla47:
> > And you are right to put the higher burden on the teacher. But if 
> > you are going to condemn Snape not teaching Harry enough, I think 
> > it's only fair to point out that Snape actually taught Harry quite 
> > a bit.
> <snip>
> 
> SSSusan:
> But I *did* point out Snape taught Harry some things and I *didn't* 
> blame Snape entirely!  It's right there in the quote above – "This is 
> not at all to downplay the important things he did teach, the 
> important things Harry learned from *or* because of Snape."  To me, I 
> did acknowledge what Snape did.

Montavilla47:
I apologize again.  I worded that wrong.  I should have said "if WE are
going to condemn" rather than "If YOU are going to condemn," because
that wasn't actually directed at you.  I was trying to explain why I 
think it's important to balance Snape's obvious faults as a teacher
with the things he actually managed to accomplish.

> SSSusan:
> It would seem to me quite reasonable to say that the *initial* 
> problems here began with Snape, that he failed in the bearing of more 
> of the burden, that he was largely to blame for establishing a 
> pattern with Harry that Harry would then do his own part to 
> exacerbate and continue.  Snape behaved poorly and did not give the 
> kid a chance.  

Montavilla47:
I agree that Snape initiated the antagonism.  But I'm not sure he
didn't give Harry a chance.  I think the questions he asked may
have been (in his mind) a chance for Harry to show him... something.
I'm not at all sure what he was looking for.  Maybe an enthusiasm
like Lily had, maybe an eagerness to learn.  But it certainly wasn't
Harry's fault that he didn't get it.  

And, of course, any child deserves more than one chance to make
a good impression.


> jkoney:
> > I do blame Snape for not being able to adjust his teaching style. If
> > a student isn't progressing with the first way you are teaching 
> > there must be another way to get the point across so they can learn.
> >
> > Harry's learning style seems completely opposite to the way Snape
> > teaches. He eventually learns to block Voldemort out doing the exact
> > opposite of what Snape tells him. His way of handling dementors also
> > is different.
> 
> Montavilla47:
> > You're mixing up two different things here. Learning styles vs. 
> > teaching style is different from Harry's way of blocking Voldemort 
> > vs. Snape's method. Also, Snape didn't insist on Harry using on 
> > method to block Voldemort's mind-probes. In fact, Harry was annoyed 
> > because Snape didn't tell him exactly how to block Legilimency at 
> > first--which argues that Snape was aware that there were different 
> > ways to Occlude and was willing to let Harry find the method that 
> > worked best *for Harry.*
> > Now, maybe Snape should have tried using Lupin's trick. Instead
> > of continuing to tutor the unwilling Harry, he should have suggested
> > that it was too difficult, given Harry some chocolate, and told him
> > to give it up.
> >
> > That would be employing a different teaching style. But, as your
> > point that Harry's learning style is unsuited to Snape's style, I'm
> > not so sure about that.
> 
> SSSusan:
> I think there is something to what jkoney wrote.  It's of course true 
> that teaching styles and learning styles are two different things, 
> but I agree that a teacher *can* find alternate means of working with 
> students when it's discovered that a student's not getting 
> something.  Now, that does NOT sound like anything Snape would ever 
> have been interested in doing for very many of his students!  Still, 
> while I understand what's been presented about Snape not fully 
> knowing how vital it was that Harry learn how to defend himself 
> against Voldemort, I still maintain that by 2nd or 3rd year, he knew 
> the kids WAS in danger and would likely continue to be in danger, 
> that he *was* tied up with Voldemort and a prophecy and all of that 
> stuff in such a way that it really would be important for the White 
> Hat Cause to help ensure this kid learned everything he could, in the 
> classroom and in life.  (That should NOT have Snape's burden alone, 
> but let's face it, Snape was gifted, talented, and in a unique 
> position as an ex-DE and a person in Voldy's inner circle to be 
> especially useful this way.)

Montavilla47:
You may have hit upon something that has remained a puzzle for
me for years--why Snape kept applying for that D.A.D.A. position.
Snape was quite successful at teaching potions (based on the number
of students who received Os on their O.W.L.s).  Why would he keep
applying for the D.A.D.A. job when Dumbledore continued to turn 
him down for it?  

As a Potions teacher, Snape was charged with preparing Harry to
make potions.  How this was going to help Harry fulfill that prophecy,
I don't know.  Unless he and Voldemort decided to compete in a 
Potion-Off.

But honestly, I don't think Snape was thinking about Harry actually
fighting Voldemort until it became obvious (from GoF onwards), that
Voldemort was back.  I think (and it's just my opinion) that Snape
would have preferred to keep Harry in a little box, if he could.  

I"m probably wrong about this, but my suspicion is that Snape
kept pushing the "expell Harry" idea because he thought Harry
would be safer at the Dursleys--and he didn't give a darn whether
or not Harry was *happy* there.  He never promised to ensure
Harry's happiness--only his safety.

Of course, in OotP, it became evident that the protections 
placed on the Dursley house could not protect Harry and he
was better off at Hogwarts.  And, oddly, Snape never suggests
once in OotP that Harry ought to be expelled.

> SSSusan:
> Still, back to Snape vs. Lupin and the Occlumency thing.  I know you 
> were joking about taking Lupin's trick as his own, but the key to me 
> was in the bit about different ways to Occlude and "letting Harry 
> find his own way."  I don't see anything wrong, in principle, with 
> letting Harry discover his own way
 but only *once* he's heard what 
> those possible ways are!  Harry's told how very important this is, 
> but then there was a lack of specifics from Snape, along with his 
> quick annoyance & frustration with Harry, when he hadn't provided him 
> with much background at *all* on this very complex and difficult 
> Legilimency/Occlumency duo.  

Montavilla47:
I understand what you are saying.  Lupin certainly explained 
things better in terms of what Dementors are, how they work,
and what a Patronus would do.

But I'm not sure it's really fair to compare the two situations. 
Lupin didn't have the same constraints on him that Snape did.
It wasn't like the Dementors could be spying in on the session
in order to pick up information that Dumbledore wanted kept
secret.

Also, let's face it.  If you are going to compare Lupin and Snape 
as teachers, then Snape is always going to end up looking worse.  
He's just not as good a teacher as Lupin. I think that goes without 
saying.  


> SSSusan:
> That's where I would have liked to have seen, not Lupin's 
> chocolate ;), but Lupin's relative calmness, patience & encouragement 
> with his pupil.  
> 
> So in *that* sense I would argue that Snape's teaching style wasn't a 
> good match for Harry's learning style.  If that makes sense.


Montavilla47:
I agree that it wasn't as good a match as Lupin's.  Of course, my
point wasn't that it was.  My point was that *how* you learn is
separate from *what* you learn.  That Harry used different 
methods to block Dementors and Legilimency than Snape advised
using doesn't mean that Snape's style was substandard.  It simply
meant that Harry preferred alternate methods.

> Carol:
> > Those things aside, I think that natural ability and enjoyment of a
> > subject are as important with regard to Harry's performance in at
> > least some classes as the teacher. Madam Hooch's teaching abilities
> > are irrelevant to his learning to fly. He excels at it
.He learns 
> > DADA, not because he has good teachers (with the exception of Lupin 
> > and Snape,the DADA teachers range from mediocre to abysmal) but 
> > because he's highly motivated
. He's also motivated by the Prince's 
> > book. He likes doing well in Potions thanks to the improved 
> > instructions (and getting credit where credit is not due), and he 
> > also learns the spells almost effortlessly, motivated, it seems, by 
> > curiosity and enjoyment (and, ironically, by affection for his 
> > friend, the Prince). 
> 
> SSSusan:
> I tend to agree with Carol, although I still think that, while 
> *liking* the teacher wasn't necessarily going to be the big factor in 
> whether Harry learned well, big-time *disliking* turned out to be a 
> big factor.  The only professor he hated was Snape, and I believe we 
> saw that seriously interfere with his interest in learning, and 
> Snape's reciprocal hatred was a significant cause for that as well.

Montavilla47:
Harry also hated Umbridge.  He disliked Trelawney intensely and
disliked Binns in a lukewarm fashion.  He also disliked Lockhart.

I don't think Harry dislike of Snape interfered at all in his interest
in learning Potions.  He never had an interest in learning Potions.
It wasn't like Harry was eagerly drinking in his Potions textbook
before his first class--because if he had, he might have been 
able to answer at least one of the questions Snape posed.  

Moreover, when Harry has a different teacher (Slughorn, who
is only somewhat disliked by Harry), and the funny, inventive
Prince, Harry *still* isn't interested in Potions.  He's interested
in getting praise and treats.  Once he loses the book that gives
him the answers, he's back to doing mediocre work with no
sign that he desires to do better.