Cute and relevant bit of Harry Potter media

[sweettalkeress.livejournal.com]

While I was perusing Facebook, I found a link to a video which I thought was really cute and totally appropriate to this comm.

It's right here, if you want to watch:

I would say it's fairly on-target. The scene of the little kid with the fire extinguisher in particular.

Comments

[spongebending.livejournal.com]

That employee of the month thing really shows how remarkably douchey the whole the "Slytherin wins the House Cup- LOL NO! Gryffindor!" thing really was.

[dungeonwriter.livejournal.com]

I know. Seriously, we're supposed to cheer 25% of the school being publicly humiliated? Including little 11 and 12 year olds?

The opening scene is also amazing. Yeah, always found Dumbledore being endearingly eccentric...annoying. He's the headmaster, I'd like to see him administering policy in the school. You know, rampant bullying, incompetent teachers (cough Binns), all that nice stuff.

[jana-ch.livejournal.com]

Binns, Trelawney, Hagrid...

Two-thirds of whom were targeted by Umbridge. And she was supposed to be ruining the school? Yes, her disciplinary methods were a few decades out of date, and when it comes to actual teaching she needed to put herself on probation with the others, but she did try to correct some of Dumbledore's worst hiring errors.

[dungeonwriter.livejournal.com]

Let's see, Dumbledore.

Year 1: Your teacher was Voldemort, who was setting trolls off in school and your unbreakable tests are broken by 11 year olds.

Year 2: You hire a fraud and there's a monster running around the school, who by near perfect coincidences doesn't kill anyone.

Year 3: You hire a werewolf and a known convict escapes from captivity after sneaking onto the ground.

Year 4: Tri-Wizard tournament. 4th year gets chosen against all rules. One champion mysteriously dies.

An investigation and overhaul after that would be warranted.

[attilathepbnun.livejournal.com]

*That* was an accident. She didn't target them because they were bad/careless/inefficient teachers, she targeted them because she didn't *like* them.

And I'm uncertain how bad a teacher Trelawney actually was. Granted, she padded her classes with far too much ... personal bias? (I'm uncertain of the best way to put it) but when it came to the mechanics(such as they are) of divination, she doesn't seem to have been that bad. That those mechanics wouldn't actually *work* unless you had the talent(a talent she herself only sporadically possessed) wasn't her fault.

[jana-ch.livejournal.com]

We don't know why Umbridge targeted Trelawney and Hagrid. We're never inside her head. We know only why Harry *thinks* she targeted them. Harry's motives are always in terms of who he likes and dislikes, and who likes and dislikes him, so he naturally assumes everyone else, including Umbridge, thinks the same way. Umbridge is a political appointee, so it seems more likely to me that she thinks in terms of politics rather than "disliking." She's targeting Dumbledore's political appointees:

1) Hagrid, whose place in the wizarding world, after he had his wand snapped in the Forties, is due to Dumbledore, and whose loyalty to his employer is absolute.

2) Trelawney, who was hired for a job Dumbledore had been considering leaving vacant until she delivered a politically important prophesy.

3) Snape, who might be unemployable or even in Azkaban due to his rumored Death Eater connections, if not for Dumbledore's patronage.

Of those three, the only one she doesn't try to fire is Snape, who is clearly an effective teacher. Not warm and supportive, but he sees to it that the kids jolly well learn, whether they like it or not. Being a political hire is enough to draw Umbridge's attention, but for her to try to fire you, you have to be incompetent as well.

[hwyla.livejournal.com]

Snape also had a powerful 'friend' in Lucius. Umbridge specifically mentioned how well Lucius spoke of Snape. And Lucius (at the time) had Fudge's 'ear'.

I'd say it wasn't just Dumbledore's appointees, but his presumed supporters. It isn't as if she was particularly nice to Minerva. However, Minerva would have been considerably more difficult to fire, so just make her working life more difficult ans attempt to marginalize her.

It isn't just that Snape was effective - Umbridge disliked that he was. She felt he was teaching more than the kids needed to know (and presumably more than the Ministry wanted them to learn) - at least that was my impression of her comments during his review

[vermouth1991.livejournal.com]

Something I've always wanted to ask native speakers:

“You are on probation!” shrieked Professor Umbridge, and Snape
looked back at her, his eyebrows slightly raised. “You are being deliberately unhelpful! I expected better, Lucius Malfoy always speaks most
highly of you! Now get out of my office!”

Does this mean that Snape had just been put on probation by Umbridge after everything he did regarding not giving Veritaserum to use on Harry, or was it "You're already on orobation, Snape, how dare you continue to passive-aggressively defy me?"

[jana-ch.livejournal.com]

It's ambiguous. It could mean either one. Since I don't recall anything being said earlier in the book about Snape being on probation, I have always taken it to mean, "I am placing you on probation this very moment."

[oryx_leucoryx]

If Severus had been on probation previously Harry would have mentioned Dolores supervising his classes.

[attilathepbnun.livejournal.com]

Hmn. You are correct in that we only have Harry's opinion as to Umbridge's motives. And I would be *very* surprised to discover that politics *didn't* play a large part in her targeting scheme.
However, her described actions and expressions certainly give me the impression that she *likes* doing such things in the cruelest way possible. She *likes* having the power to be as cruel as her whim directs

[jana-ch.livejournal.com]

Yes, Umbridge obviously likes exercising power, but when she chooses someone as a target, does she do it for political considerations (“Who is supporting Dumbledore and defying Fudge?”), racial considerations (“Who has non-human blood?”), educational considerations (“Who is an ineffective teacher and/or is teaching the wrong things?”), or personal considerations (“Whom do I personally dislike?”)

It seems to me that the first three questions enter into it, but not so much the fourth. She opposes people for specific political and racial reasons and because they interfere with her power, but she dislikes them because she opposes them, rather than opposing them because she dislikes them.

This is an important distinction in the Potterverse because Harry, who is our guide to proper values, so often bases his support or opposition on whether or not he likes someone or someone likes him. A big part of Harry’s political opposition to Scrimgeour is over Stan Shunpike, about whom Harry knows nothing except that he once met him and liked him.

[sweettalkeress.livejournal.com]

You bring up a really good point, actually--is Rowling possibly trying to present standing by those you personally like as the morally righteous thing regardless of how good those people are? I guess that feeds into the schoolyard morality of the series.

[jana-ch.livejournal.com]

And yet Severus is morally deficient because he cares first about the girl he loves and only secondarily about the boy who bullied him and a baby he's never met.

Inconsistency, thy name is Rowling!

half-breed

[hwyla.livejournal.com]

One thing I find rather surprising is that we never hear of Umbridge attempting to fire Firenze. At least not that I remember. True, he isn't a half- centaur, but I would have expected her to dislike him anyways.

It's obvious during her run in with the centaurs in the forest, that she doesn't see them as human (but then, they also insist that they are not), so why do we not hear her complaining about an animal teaching in regards to Hagrid? Is it possible that she doesn't automatically disapprove of non-humans, but on;y the offspring of a mixed-mating? And why Hagrid, but not Flitwick? Isn't he supposed to be part goblin? Or is that not known by Dolores?

Of course, according to JKR on the Flitwick's Lexicon entry, she had not expected movieFlitwick to look so goblin/elf like - she saw him as more just a tiny old man - so presumably, his goblin heritage is pretty far back on the family tree.

[hwyla.livejournal.com]

I'm not sure I would say Umbridge specifically disliked Sybil, unlike with 'half-breed' Hagrid. I think it was more that Sybil was a good starting place to throw her new power around.

It's pretty difficult to prove you're teaching well in that subject unless you happen to have a student with talent. And since many of Sybil's students were in the class for an easy grade and not even trying - well then it's even more difficult to justify your position. Not being able to produce a REAL prophecy 'on demand' when Umbridge was rating her class, gave Umbridge an excuse to fire her that was easily defended (IF it was questioned by the Ministry or parents).

I would say that she was just a good starting point to flex her power. Note that since Albus interfered, Umbridge didn't risk going for Hagrid until after Albus left Hogwarts.

[mary-j-59.livejournal.com]

Thanks for this! It made me laugh. And yes, the satire is dead-on accurate. I, too, love the little boy with the fire extinguisher.

[madderbrad.livejournal.com]

Heh, funny. And yes, the bit with the kid with the fire extinguisher is the funniest / most cringeworthy.

Thanks!