Living In A Cupboard

[Dimcairien]

It is, though I will admit not all of the next-gen names for my story are entirely made up. I figured a few characters would name their children after various heroes who died in the wizarding worlds. For example, Neville's children are named Frank and Alice. There are a few other next-gen named after people, but not a ton.

I know there was that entire argument on naming people after dead relatives, but I do think it is a nice way to honour people.

[viralic1]

It's a nice way to honor people, but JK took the lazy way out IMO. Not a single one of Harry's children had an original name.

[RandomPasserby]

I know this is bringing back a dead thread for a post on page 1 but I wanted to address something

I know for a fact that British teachers are taught to recognise signs of abuse and bulling (As a side note, why didn't they do anything about Dudley's treatment of Harry at school? They may have had no way of preventing it at home, but at school, surely...), so how on Earth did they miss it - especially if it had been going on Harry's entire life?
They could have - should have - contacted Child Services or whatever and got him out of Privet Drive. My only theory is that whenever they got close to doing so, in came Dumbledore with his Obliviates. Gotta keep Harry protected by his precious blood wards, after all...

As much as I dislike Dumbledore I think this is going a little far and  I want to talk about it.

Yes, British teachers are taught to recognise abuse and bullying. I've been to the sort of seminars they use to train adults who look after children in how to recognise/respond to children who are being abused and bullied.

However.

Much of the anti-bullying stuff is more recent and much of it still pushes against the notion that bullying is somehow 'character building', 'it's just kids being kids', 'just don't respond and they'll get over it', 'it was just a joke, you're being too sensitive'.

They were likely told by Vernon and Petunia that Harry was a liar, a bad kid and from bad parents. Harry knew what would happen if he told a teacher about the bullying. The teachers just saw two cousins rough-housing or they dragged Harry out of the teacher's sight line or said it was a game or the thousands of things bullies do which let them get away with bullying right up to present day.

Now, abuse.

Lemme tell you something about British schools in the 80's. They had corporal punishment. That wasn't banned in state schools until 1987. The sort of corporal punishment which wasn't opt-in, which wasn't write-home-to-your-parents-first, which in many cases wasn't even private, it was just 'bend over right now'.

I'm going to point you to the bit in PS where Harry questions whether 'Wood was a type of cane'. Harry's primary school probably did have a cane, they also likely had a slipper (which is slang for an old-school plimsoll with a sole of like half-inch rubber) and individual teachers might have used a ruler or their bare hand to discipline a child. While it's true that corporal punishment was winding down in the run up to 1987, especially in primary schools, it was not dead and would likely have depending on the county or even on the headmaster. Clearly, Harry knows what a cane is in the context of being punished, even that there are different types of cane (the sort for secondary school students was worse than the one for primary schoolers for obvious reasons), and Harry may himself have been caned or slippered before the ban came in. Smaller things like being rapped over the knuckles with a ruler may have continued past it.

On the other hand, Dudley was definitely caned at some point. Caning in private schools (like Smeltings) was legal until 1999. Being a first year in a private school like that, with an attitude like Dudley's but without the prestige to back it up (a la Draco Malfoy, for example), he would have undoubtedly pissed off the Prefects who (unlike Hogwarts) had the power to dole out physical punishment. I don't doubt he was disruptive in classes as well.

That was just in school. Corporal punishment at home was common and accepted. It's still legal now, but it's probably not as acceptable. So if a child walks in with bruises the shape of somebody grabbing them and, when asked, the parent went 'child did *thing that required punishment* but tried to run away' that would likely be an acceptable answer. Now, not so much. So long as the abuse was mostly confined to underneath Harry's clothes (bruises outside of them occasionally could have been excused by Harry being a kid) it's understandable that they got away with it. Or if Harry had marks from being beaten that could be 'excused' with 'well he did *thing which required punishment*', which just reinforces that he is a bad kid. After all, he does so many bad things.

Petunia swinging at him with the frying pan always confused me a little. It's obviously the action of somebody used to hitting but it's also far more serious than we see anywhere else, apart from Vernon strangling him. And I have to wonder how many times Harry went to school with a concussion.

Yes, if Harry had said 'I live in a cupboard and am starved' they would certainly have responded by calling Child Services (I'm not discounting the physical or verbal abuse, but Harry would be less likely to be able to distinguish them from normal behaviour) but he doesn't. If Vernon and Petunia had gone overboard the way I've seen it in some fics they would certainly have noticed. But with canon or reasonable canon-extrapolation levels of abuse, it's understandable that they didn't.

Tl;dr - cultural normalisation of being hit, Harry went to school in the 1980's, teachers can be a bit crap at noticing stuff.

[Kitty279]

First, no one complains if you bring some supposedly dead thread back to life. It's way too quiet here lately.

Second, that was interesting. When my Mum went to school, corporeal punishment was completely normal, too, but by the time I went to school (70's), that was already forbidden. I didn't know that Britain was so much later in forbidding it. In that context, it makes more sense that no one acted.

Ahem ... it may not be nice of me, but what I like most about your explanation is that Dudley very likely got his backside tanned a bit at school, as he really deserved it, and his parents would never punish him for anything.

[RandomPasserby]

Same with my mum, and she got in trouble for being too smart. It's the reason I didn't go to a private school on scholarship because it was pre-1999, I was just as intelligent as she was, the school still had CP and she knew I'd end up getting caned. Since I'd already had one abusive teacher, I was pretty wary of adults at that point.

Yeah, Britain was pretty late in getting rid of it, in that at least the magical world seems to have been more progressive. The cane was around when Arthur Weasley was in school (as of GoF) but had probably been banned by the time the Marauders were which would have been 1971 (or so we can infer from Sirius not mentioning it, it would be something he would have bragged about) until 1995. Frankly, given some of the dispositions of the teachers it makes sense that they banned it. Giving Snape a cane would have been the stupidest thing since giving him a wand. Also I suppose JKR had to in order for him to not look totally abusive.

Oh Dudley certainly got a rude awakening in his first year at Smeltings. If it's like Eton and Harrow, it may still have had a fagging system (whereby younger boys were expected to run errands for older ones). It was probably pretty unofficial, but that's usually worse, or just a relic. There's likely a reason they still had those sticks (and it's probably quite similar to what Dudley used it for). Still, he would have been expected to follow the prefects orders and throwing a tantrum wouldn't have done anything to soften the hearts of the prefects or masters. Fighting them would have brought worse punishment and crying would have just made him a target. It would actually be quite interesting to see something written about it.

[Kitty279]

Good that your mum made sure you didn't have to go through that.

That has to be about the only thing where the magical world was further ahead than the nonmagical one. Maybe because the purebloods didn't like anyone doing that to their children. Can you imagine Lucius after his little 'wait until my father hears of that' brat got caned by McGonagall?

Ha! You should see the smirk on my face now. Totally like the image you are painting. That would be quite a rude awakening for Diddykins who's used to be waited on and getting his every wish.

[RandomPasserby]

My mum is an amazing person.

I'm not sure why it ended. Although I do have a funny image of Hogwarts Prefect Lucius Malfoy, oh so high and mighty punishing some poor Muggleborn firsty who doesn't have their magic under total control and whose accidental magic ends up putting Lucius in the Hospital Wing. After that the governors realise that maybe hitting children who have magic is not the brightest idea ever.

I'm fairly sure Dudley improves, at least a little bit, by the start of CS (punishment for getting caught bullying at public school could be nasty) and doesn't really start being horrible again until the start of OOTP (when he'd be too big to be picked on).

Then again, JKR's reasoning for why Snape was allowed to be such a dick infuriates the hell out of me (someone linked to it on Tumblr and I had a ragefit)

'asks: Why does Professor Dumbledore allow Professor Snape to be so nasty to the students (especially to Harry, Hermione, and Neville)?
jkrowling_bn: Dumbledore believes there are all sorts of lessons in life...
jkrowling_bn: horrible teachers like Snape are one of them!'

I hate the idea that abusive teachers are a life lessons, like bullying.

[Kitty279]

That's a nice image

Yeah, Dudley got a bit better. Sure, he did learn from his father that it was okay, but for me that's not an excuse for attacking Harry with his whole gang. And we know he did it again in OotP. Four or more against a much younger boy? Disgusting.

Completely agree on that. Life lessons or not, Snape wasn't just nasty (I think we all had a teacher or two who was not nice), he went way overboard. Not to mention that Snape destroyed careers deliberately. Besides, the one life lesson every one of his students learned was that you can never, ever trust adults, as they are all right with abuse. All they achieved was a vicious circle of prejudices, hate and bullying.

One can only wonder how Hogwarts would be with a less biased teacher and head of house for Slytherin. If they didn't get away with everything, then they might be seen as less evil, and that in turn might stop the belief that they are all Death Eaters - which often enough pushes them to be just that. Dumbledore really has a lot to answer for in that regard. Look at how he insisted on protecting Malfoy even after he nearly killed two other students. That way way beyond the pale.

[RandomPasserby]

This is relevant again to me because I've just been rewatching a series from my childhood. It's called The Worst Witch (and all the episodes are available on Youtube if you're interested). It features a young witch from a non-witch background (Mildred Hubble) going to a magic school (Cackle's Academy) with a bully from a magical family (Ethel Hallow), a mean potions teacher and a kindly Head (Miss Cackle)

Except that it was started about twenty years before HP (first book published 1974) and the TV series ran 1998-2001. There was also a TV movie with a young Fairuza Baulk and Tim Curry in 1986. The TV show ran for three seasons and, while it integrated the books, had more plotlines because it quickly outstripped the books.

Now, because The Worst Witch was targeted at younger children (and so doesn't have the popularity of HP) and HP is so ingrained in popular culture nowadays, I see a lot of comparisons between the two potions teachers from people who know of The Worst Witch.

 - This is Constance Hardbroom. Potions mistress and deputy head.

Superficially, the similarities are many. They both wear black, are potion's teachers, are mean to the main character and have a favourite in the bully character.

Looking deeper, though, the differences are far bigger and the reason why I consider Snape to be abusive but adore Miss Hardbroom (or HB, as is her canon nickname).

For one thing, HB has actual reason to dislike Mildred. Snape hates Harry before he even meets him because of who his father is, Harry is given no chance to prove or condemn himself on his own merits. Snape hates every house apart from Slytherin because...reasons. Snape bullies a child who's never done anything to him (Neville) until Neville considers Snape his worst fear. Snape mocks a student who really just wants to learn (Hermione) because of her house.  

Mildred, no matter how hard she tries, is not a very good student and messes up many, many times as well a constantly getting into trouble (and then usually getting away with it). This, rather understandably, frustrates HB. But there are also points where she recognises Mildred's capabilities and throws her a bone (making an exam that Mildred was terrified of about a potion that she knows Mildred can make) or actually protects her (in the finale, Mildred saves HB's life and she returns the favour with stopping Mildred from being expelled for a previous incident). Outside of Mildred, she actually seems to be a reasonably fair teacher who genuinely wants her students to learn potions and to just obey the rules.

Their relationships with the bully character. Snape never, ever punishes Draco for anything and will blame whatever Draco does on the nearest convenient target. HB clearly favours Ethel over the other characters but at several points over the series, when she finds out that Ethel has done something wrong in order to frame Mildred, she is clearly angry with Ethel and supports her being punished. There's also a reasonably good reason for her favouring Ethel, who is genuinely very smart and good at potions.

Their vulnerable side. Over both series' we see both character's vulnerable sides and HB's is significantly less creepy. Yes Snape was bullied but that doesn't excuse his use of a racial slur, joining a terrorist group, attempting to trade the life of an 15 month old child for a woman's life, the fact that he's basically trying to get back at a dead man by bullying his son and his creepy obsession over a dead woman. HB was taught one way of teaching, one way of being a witch, and she doesn't know how to change. Also, while we don't know exactly what happened to her, the first (and only) time you see her scared is when her former mentor shows up.

I think this illustrates the difference between a strict (and occasionally) mean teacher and an outright abusive one. The girls in The Worst Witch respect Miss Hardbroom and are wary of her but I doubt she scares any of them so much that she would be their worst fear. Frankly, I think HB has far more in common with Minerva McGonagall than she ever has with Snape (apart from the very superficial elements).

Besides, the one life lesson every one of his students learned was that you can never, ever trust adults, as they are all right with abuse.

And that nobody, not their head of house, their deputy headmistress (if the two are different) or headmaster can or will do anything. Not to mention Potions is compulsory up to 5th year and you cannot get away from Snape because you live in the same castle.

One can only wonder how Hogwarts would be with a less biased teacher and head of house for Slytherin. If they didn't get away with everything, then they might be seen as less evil, and that in turn might stop the belief that they are all Death Eaters - which often enough pushes them to be just that. Dumbledore really has a lot to answer for in that regard. Look at how he insisted on protecting Malfoy even after he nearly killed two other students. That way way beyond the pale.

And once the students realised that the Slytherins were being treated like the rest of them then they might start seeing them like real human beings. Who knows, they might even start making friends who have friends who are muggleborn. They might actually have to interact with muggleborn students in a positive way and might realise that actually, they're just human beings as well.

I think it would end up being like homophobes who have relatives who come out. Once you realise that a specific type of people (Slytherin, Muggleborn or LGBTA) aren't just a monolith of stereotypes it's much harder to hate them quite so virulently.

Sure there would still be some holdouts but I think the school would be better for it.

[Kitty279]

Never heard of that other series, but you explained it well enough. Yes, that HB character is way better in that regard. I guess it's inevitable that teachers have favourite students or dislike others; they are only human, after all. It's how you handle it that is the main problem. HB was reasonable about it, Snape went completely over the line. She certainly sounds in that regard more like McGonagall. At least she punishes her favourites, too, if they do something wrong, while Draco literally gets away with murder.

Exactly. The fact that the animosities are allowed to continue unchecked and the teachers are no help whatsoever and in parts even fire the hate is in my eyes the main reason that things got so bad. Dumbledore can preach unity all he wants, as long as he doesn't stomp down on the bullying nothing is going to change. And his forgiveness allows the bad guys to get away too many times. But he obviously doesn't understand that giving Death Eaters umpteenth chances to realise that they have been bad boys and need to behave will not do anything to protect the innocents.

I's something that happens on a wider scale, too. Look at all the Death Eaters who paid for their Imperius excuse to be believed ... it doesn't look like Fudge was punished for taking bribes and refusing to see reason, either. Or Umbitch for what she did at Hogwarts. How can a teacher get away with torture? That world is seriously messed up.

But then, Hogwards is supposedly such a great school, but look at the teachers. DADA is cursed (why does no one bring in a curse breaker?), so the quality is mostly falling. History is a joke, with a ghost stuck on Goblin rebellions as a teacher that talks pretty much anyone to sleep. Potions - nuff said. A Divination teacher that keeps predicting student's deaths all the time. All in all, at least three core subjects are taught substandardly, to put it mildly, and all of them count for the OWLs.

Then I keep wondering why Muggle Studies isn't mandatory for all purebloods and wizard-raised children. (Provided they have a teacher that does know their subject!) They are supposed to behave unconspicious around Muggles to protect the Statue of Secrecy, but most wizards couldn't do that to save their lives and stand out like a sore thumb. This lack of knowledge is going to reveal the mone day.
On the other hand, a Wizard's Studies class for Muggleborn and muggle-raised children would be a good idea, too. They'd learn more about laws and customs, and this in turn would help not to aggravate the purebloods so much. Having these two classes would help them to understand each other better, which again could reduce arguments and stop the endless circle of hate and enmity.

Oh, and while I am at it, what use is Filch, if I may ask? Cleaning? Why do you need a squib to do what the elves can do with a snap of their fingers? There's no way in hell he can clean the whole castle all by himself. And who in their right mind leaves such a hateful person around schoolchildren? The man wants to whip and torture them, for heavens sake!