A Headmaster other than Albus

[oryx_leucoryx]

So here is an idea for an AU scenario. Anyone is free to develop it into a fic, but we can just discuss the what-if:

Sometime between November 2nd 1981 and July 1991 Albus Dumbledore died suddenly. Maybe in some magical mishap, maybe a sudden heart attack, whatever. The important bit is he didn't expect this to happen and had no time to do any ad-hoc cover-ups nor did he have a chance to influence the choice of his replacement or to incorporate his death into some plot. The permanent replacement is chosen by the Board of Governors. If this happens early enough Lucius isn't yet on the board, if later he is on, but probably still trying to earn a reputation as an outstanding member of society who would have never joined forces with Voldemort willingly so I don't think he'd support anyone blatantly against the inclusion of Muggleborns. Anyway, the replacement turns out to be someone not as outwardly impressive as Dumbles - not so showy, with perhaps average or slightly above average magical performance, but a capable administrator with good organizational and interpersonal skills, but most importantly someone who cares about the students' well-being and education. It can be someone from Slughorn's network or even someone who thought well of Albus as long as s/he didn't have a chance to look too closely at how Hogwarts was run, but definitely not an Order member or any other close associate of Dumbles. Maybe an older, more experienced and less idealistic version of Percy.

The members of the Hogwarts staff are as we know them in PS (Care of Magical Creatures is taught by Kettleburn, Hagrid is still a groundskeeper), except for DADA. Depending on timing, Quirrell might be the Muggle Studies teacher. I think the DADA curse should still be active, so the teachers are still being replaced annually (we don't want the new school Head to have it too easy).

So I think this new person shows up and tries to run Hogwarts like a normal school. Some teachers object because that's not the way it was always done, some are relieved to have a professional in charge for a change. The handling of disciplinary matters changes. The inter-House politics change.

And then in the summer of 1991 Quirrell comes back from a sabbatical with a personally transplant. And one Harry Potter oddly doesn't reply to his acceptance letter to Hogwarts. (I doubt the new Head had a reason to look into Harry's situation of hir own initiative earlier, but maybe someone can make a convincing argument for that?) So what now?

Comments

[madderbrad.livejournal.com]

I didn't know that about US private schools. Mind you, I'm thrown off by the daily US sitcoms which have the school kids wearing normal clothing - THEY SHOULD ALL BE IN SCHOOL UNIFORMS DANG IT - and those bright yellow buses. And the (free?) school lunches.

If you look at the differences between those series and HP, you can see what makes HP so popular--and it isn't pretty.

Do tell ...

(Okay, I'll wait for your article.)

[oneandthetruth.livejournal.com]

Again, US public (i.e., publicly funded, open to everyone) schools don't have uniforms (although they do have dress codes), unless the students are out of control, and that's a way of getting them back under control. Uniforms are therefore considered a form of punishment: "If you kids behaved yourselves, you could dress the way you wanted." For example, where I live, there is only one school--a middle school--that has uniforms because it had such horrendous behavior problems, and such low academic achievement, that the state took it over because the county couldn't handle it. And yes, many schools have free lunches, and even free breakfasts, for poor students. Where I live, the breakfasts are limited to elementary and middle schools, but the lunches go all the way through high school. And we do indeed have bright yellow buses.

[sunnyskywalker]

Just to note, there are also school lunches you have to pay for,* in the less-poor districts, which seems wrong given that "lunch" seems an awfully optimistic descriptor. I think they seriously consider ketchup a vegetable for government purposes, so they can claim the food is healthy.

*Which is where you get the trope of the kid who's always getting beaten up for his lunch money.

[oryx_leucoryx]

There's a level of income under which a student qualifies for free lunch, a still poor but not that much student can get lunch at a reduced price and over that level a student can buy lunch for its full price or bring lunch from home.

I'm not so sure how breakfast works, but in my district it seems only those schools that have a high percent of students from low income families even serve breakfast (kids who qualify for free lunch also qualify for free breakfast, others can buy it, I'm not sure what happens to low-income kids in schools where the number of low-income students is under the cut-off).

[sunnyskywalker]

They probably go hungry, do more poorly as a result, and get tagged as "not good students" :( I don't remember my elementary school serving breakfast, but it's possibly they did and I was just oblivious. Given the demographics they might not have, though.

[oneandthetruth.livejournal.com]

Yeah, that's the way it works where I live, also. I sub at both upscale and poor schools, and the free breakfasts are only offered at the poor schools. At the upscale schools, kids just go hungry until lunch if they don't get fed at home.

[oneandthetruth.livejournal.com]

Yes, I know, I work as a substitute teacher, so I know all the permutations of school food services. I don't know if ketchup is a vegetable, but recently the right wing nuts (wingnuts?) won a battle to keep pizza listed as a vegetable because of the tomato sauce. They also use a lot of potatoes, canned fruit (peaches, mixed fruit, and mandarin oranges), salads made from iceberg lettuce, and what vegetables they have tend to be overcooked and soggy. Then there's the white bread and government surplus cheese. Yuck!

I don't really blame the schools, though. They're cooking for hundreds of people at each school, trying to find something reasonably nutritious and economical that the kids will eat. It's a very hard job, particularly when you consider most Americans don't eat that well to begin with, so even if the schools do offer better foods, the kids may not eat it because they're used to having junk at home.

[oryx_leucoryx]

Yes. There are occasionally local initiatives in assorted districts to make school food healthier and often the kids don't eat it, so what's the point? And there are strict limits on how much the production of a school meal can cost.

[sunnyskywalker]

Part of the problem is which foods the government subsidizes to begin with to make them cheaper (like corn and all its derivatives), but the schools can't help that. (There are a few tricks they could use to make the "junk" foods a little healthier, at least, like using part wheat flour instead of only white, but probably there are massive political lobbies involved somewhere, because there always are.) And I don't begrudge them serving tater tots as a general principle; it just makes me sad that that's about all they can serve.