Regarding DTCL's frequent attitude toward two certain HP characters

[star-dragon5.livejournal.com]

You're all familiar with the Draco in Leather Pants and Ron the Death Eater tropes, right?

After seeing the way some--not all--members of this comm treat Snape and Dumbledore, I'm seriously tempted to rename the tropes "Severus in Leather Pants" and "Albus the Death Eater."

I'm sorry if I've offended anyone, but I joined DTCL under the impression it was about analyzing the more problematic parts of the HP books, not about glorifying characters you like/bashing characters you don't like. It looks like I was wrong.

Comments

[merrymelody.livejournal.com]

If you don't like the poster's opinions, you can critique them on their own posts (based on their arguments, obviously, no personal attacks); or post your own recaps.

I personally have little interest in either Snape or Dumbledore, beyond thinking DH left Snape more 2D and Dumbledore even more of a dick than previously suggested; but then I just stay out of posts going into depth on them.

There is diversity of opinion between individual posters (look at Hermione discussions, you've got all the way from 'she's awesome and the only really well-written female character' to 'she's a junior Umbridge') but I think an introductory post in which you complain about 'bashing' (idk what the definition of this even is - who is the arbitrator of which interpretation is correct?), complain about the comm not offering what you wanted from it without contributing anything yourself, and then decide you're the decider on what is canon and what isn't; with this veering between these overly personal Watsonian approach (it's bashing to criticise characters, and fans are crushing the depth and complexity of the canon, which naturally you are the expert on interpreting correctly) to this Doyleist 'well, an excuse for this characterisation flaw is that the author hadn't thought out the plot properly!' bit...
I mean, this dramatic 'I thought I was wrong' bit seems like a flounce, so...flounce away.

[borg-princess.livejournal.com]

I was going to offer a rebuttal, but....

then decide you're the decider on what is canon and what isn't

yeah, there's no reasoning with that mindset. just a bit hypocritical to go from 'how do you know Snape and the other Death Eaters weren't bullying the Marauders' to 'people should stick to canon and not come up with their own theories on what happened'. okay, then...

[merrymelody.livejournal.com]

I really don't know where to start with someone defending Hagrid. Hagrid. I thought there was no consensus or hive mind, but tbh, I'm considering put that in the comm info. 'Everywhere there's Hagrid hate is our community.'

[star-dragon5.livejournal.com]

Who's defending Hagrid? And from what?

[madderbrad.livejournal.com]

Who's defending Hagrid? And from what?

You defended Hagrid in a previous comment you made:

- yes, Draco really WAS mauled by a Hippogryff and yes those 'lessons' by Hagrid are bloody dangerous

Which was his own fault for not listening to Hagrid. And I can't recall anyone else in Hagrid's class getting seriously injured like that, can you?

I'd like to take Hagrid's side, as Rowling intended her readers to do, but really, he's a bad teacher, plain and simple. I've read *fanfics* where he's displayed a depth of knowledge in his subject which made his position of educator tenable, but there's no evidence of that in Rowling's canon. Just a happy-go-lucky uneducated man who delights in raising dangerous creatures and who uses his students to facilitate same.

OotP is my favourite HP book for a couple of reasons, one of which is there are a number of scenes which highlight the friendship between Harry and Hermione (my favourite character). But there's one passage in the novel which makes me hang my head in shame on Hermione's behalf; their conversation right after Hagrid has revealed the existence of Grawp to the pair:

"Oh, come off it, Harry!" said Hermione angrily, stopping dead in her tracks so that the people behind had to swerve to avoid her. "Of course he's going to be chucked out and, to be perfectly honest, after what we've just seen, who can blame Umbridge?"

There was a pause in which Harry glared at her, and her eyes filled slowly with tears.

"You didn't mean that," said Harry quietly.

"No... well... all right... 1 didn't," she said, wiping her eyes angrily. "But why does he have to make life so difficult for himself for us?"

Hermione's answer is, I suppose:

* Because Dumbledore always coddled Hagrid;

* Because Hagrid's 'promotion' to a teaching position was a mistake and the result of favouritism;

* Because Hagrid just can't take the risk of danger to others seriously (the official reason being because he's so tough himself);

* Because he is a child at heart.

* Because he only thinks of himself?

But I'm ashamed of Hermione, who backs down on this point. Harry's blindness to Hagrid's recklessness is also due personal bias; as usual he's not thinking. That's Hermione's job. :-) It's perhaps a pity that she let herself be cowed by her best friend.

I've come across as somewhat anti-Hagrid here, which surprises me, because really I almost never think of the character. But the evidence is there that he's a lousy teacher, and dangerous. I'm not too impressed by the presentation of the occasion when Draco was 'mauled' by the hippogriff as evidence of this - because Hagrid *did* warn the students first, and Draco *wasn't* really 'mauled', only slightly hurt - but I would assume modern educational standards would/should provide for students' safety even if they are careless or don't obey the rules? I don't really know, I'm not a teacher.

But when I think 'Hagrid' I think of other silly or dangerous lessons - like a year of doing nothing but conducting useless experiments with the dangerous blast-ended skrewts in GoF - how *even Harry*, I think, has to admit that the substitute teacher brought in while Hagrid is away does a much better job of teaching useful material, and so forth.

Hagrid doesn't mean any harm, but he doesn't invest any real effort that we can see in protecting his students either, or teaching them useful material. Maybe 'Care of Magical Creatures' isn't supposed to be a serious subject, so Hagrid can be let off the hook for the latter. But the kids' nervousness around his creatures is still warranted. As is the charge that hanging around Hagrid is dangerous, and that he's a bad teacher.

[borg-princess.livejournal.com]

the blast-ended skrewts was definitely my main example - it was SUCH a waste of the school year, the kids learned nothing and they all had bruises, burns and scrapes from looking after those things. that Hagrid shouldn't have even created because I'm pretty sure it was prohibited to create new species...

[madderbrad.livejournal.com]

The 'illegal to cross-breed magical creatures' things rings a bell for me too but I don't remember where it's mentioned in the books.

But yes, GoF year was an entire waste of time, with the entire class just dedicated to assisting Hagrid in his (illegal) experiment. And clearly dangerous.

[for-diddled.livejournal.com]

I think one of Rita Skeeter's hit pieces in GOF mentions that breeding new kinds of dangerous animal is illegal.

[madderbrad.livejournal.com]

Not quite illegal:

Hagrid has no intention of ceasing his campaign of intimidation, however. In conversation with a Daily Prophet reporter last month, he admitted breeding creatures he has dubbed "Blast-Ended Skrewts," highly dangerous crosses between manti-cores and fire-crabs. The creation of new breeds of magical creature is, of course, an activity usually closely observed by the Department for the Regulation and Control of Magical Creatures. Hagrid, however, considers himself to be above such petty restrictions.

"I was just having some fun," he says, before hastily changing the subject.

Thanks for pointing me at the place.

Given Rita's penchant for hyperbole and her negative attitude towards Hagrid I think we can assume from this that breeding magical creatures *isn't* illegal. Not from this quote anyway. 'Usually closely observed' doesn't equate to 'against the law'.

Although nx74defiant in another comment right after yours says there's a piece in 'Care of Magical Creatures' - maybe she means 'Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them? - which says it's outright illegal?

[nx74defiant.livejournal.com]

illegal to cross-breed magical creatures' things rings a bell for me too but I don't remember where it's mentioned in the books.

It is in Care of Magical creatures with a "handwritten" note: did any tell Hagrid?

[jana-ch.livejournal.com]

If Hagrid were an actual expert on all that goes into caring for magical creatures, he surely would know without needing a handwritten note in an elementary-level text. The legal requirements of animal-keeping and breeding are a part of the knowledge a teacher would be expected to have.

[madderbrad.livejournal.com]

It is in Care of Magical creatures with a "handwritten" note: did any tell Hagrid?

Do you mean the 'charity' book 'Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them'? I never read that book, or 'Quidditch Through the Ages'.

for_diddled thought that Rita's article in GoF stated that cross-breeding was illegal but it didn't quite go that far IMO.

[oryx_leucoryx]

Fantastic Beasts is an old book. Maybe crossbreeding was illegal when it was published, and then someone created a loophole.

[nx74defiant.livejournal.com]

Sorry it was 'Fantastical Beasts and Where to Find them'.

I had it in a boxed set with 'Quidditch Through the Ages'.

The gimmick was that the Beast book was Harry's "actual book". So you had the text book with notes written by Harry and Ron. I think it was Ron (or it could have been Harry) wrote the note about did Hagrid know.

Hagrid, however, considers himself to be above such petty restrictions

After all Hagrid is a Gryffindor. And it is ok if a Gryffindor does it.