I'm hoping i put this in the right forum
But i was just wondering
How did Percy Docked 5 Points from Griffindor in CoS
When ron was spotted going into Myrtle's bathroom?
When in OOTP Erinie MacMillan says "It's only Teachers who can Dock Points from Houses, Malfoy"
Was Percy Bluffing or was this a mistake in Joanne's Editing?

Actually, Jo said it was an editing error in OotP. I think it was to be corrected in later editions to read "Prefects can't dock points from other prefects." Jo said that prefects do have the power to dock points from students, just not other prefects. She also mentioned that Ron never docked anyone.

This issue has technically been addressed perfectly by harrydavid so a Mod will probably shut it down but i was wondering, could it be used to discuss the ethics of allowing students to dock points from one another?

Personally I disagree with hierarchical systems being established within student bodies. I think it creates an unreasonable balance of power which is often undeserved by those upon which it is bestowed. Malfoy is a prime example, he abused his position of power and so do many students within schools today. I also feel it undermines the concept of all students being equal if a certain number are given power over others, these posts are not usually established democratically(by the students) and is often poorly monitored (If it was Malfoy would have been removed from his post before he even stepped off the hogwarts express)

Opinions anyone???

That sounds like a good idea. And I've tweaked the title a little to reflect the shift in the topic.

Pleione
LL Moderator

Well this may be the American in me but I agree that schooling systems should be democratic to allow for differences and to promote tolerance.

However, Hogwarts was established before the American Revolution, and before Thomas Paine's "Common Sense". It is also modeled off of centuries old boarding school system. So there is an element of "classism" in its design, so it would make sense that there would be certain students singled out and given leadership positions. Not to far from modern American "Hall Monitors". The prefect system would establish a chain of command and a heirarchy of power delegated to each level, starting from Dumbledore, to McGonagall, etc. It's just an effective way of making sure that there is supervision over hundreds of students in a big everchanging castle.

What I don't understand is why would anyone over 2nd year would care about how many points their House has. As if there were any real consequences to winning that House Cup. And indeed, we see how the significance of the House Cup declines from POA on. Of course for Harry it is overshadowed by the Voldemort situation, but I'd think even without Voldemort, why care?

Well that sorta relfects personal opinion of "silly school rituals". In my own experience, I hated going to pep rallies and homecoming stuff, but I knew plenty of people who loved it. They would get dressed up and be very excited to show up and would become screaming fools in our collective gymnasium.

I think there would be plenty of students at Hogwarts, who wouldn't give a a flying snitch about house points or the House cup, but conversly there would be plenty of kids who would be gaga over the competition and would do their best to help their house win the Cup. I think in particular Gryffindors and Slytherins would be the two houses overly concerned with the possesion of the Cup considering two house aspects. Gryffindors value courage and bravery, so being courageous and brave on the Quidditch pitch and winning the Cup would suit their house. Likewise, Slytherins would want the cup because they value cunning ambition, and what's more ambitious than winning the coveted and historic House Cup.

Not to short Hufflepuff or Ravenclaw, I believe there would be plenty of students in all houses that want the cup, but also plenty who could care less. I think in this instance the Ravenclaws would be the least concerned, since the Cup doesn't give any intellectual advantage.

Docking and awarding points, to me, is a way for the students to realize that their personal actions not only affect themselves , but the overall community. It builds a sense of responsibility and consequence in working together as a unified group, towards a common goal.

It is no wonder that before Harry showed up, that Slytherin was the standing House Cup winner. Slytherin, for all of that house's pureblood ambition, wanted to make a point that their house was the best and elite force within Hogwarts. That the dining hall was draped in Slytherin's colors intensified this attitude of the ruling class, as dining halls were traditionally draped in tapestries which celebrated the ruling lord's (or monarch's) triumphs in battle. (OT A novel which examines a famous and historic set of tapestries that doesn't fit this traditional mold is Tracy Chevalier's The Lady and the Unicorn.)

The main competition between Gryffindor and Slytherin might be have some roots in this type of masculine rivalry. Godric Gryffindor and Salazar Slytherin were at one time, friends, yet had a falling out as to what is more important. Slytherin felt that only pure blood spelled the quality of a person, while Gryffindor felt that a person should hold courage and honor above all else - and that these qualities could be found in the "lowliest" peasant to the highest placed official, irregardless of origin.

As for Ravenclaw and Hufflepuff, my guess is that because they were female, the competitive streak wasn't as pronounced. We see with Helga Hufflepuff, friendship and loyalty were the highest placed qualities, so that cameraderie didn't need to be further developed. Rowena Ravenclaw's priority is intelligence, which interestingly enough is more of a solitary endeavor, not necessarily contingent upon working together. On the other hand, knowledge and intelligence don't automatically spark Wisdom. The way that I see the purpose of the password to Ravenclaw Tower is to subtlely plant the seeds of wisdom, in that when we don't have the answer to find our way in, we recognize that others may have the answers which we don't, which fosters community: ie. a dependence upon each other. We then learn to see the bigger picture.

As for prefects docking points from other students/houses? I think it is a lesson in restraint for those who might have needed it most. If Draco Malfoy was going to dock points from Gryffindor students, Ron might (although he didn't) find a way to dock them right back from Slytherin - which would eventually make the whole award system pointless - no one wins. Perhaps that is why they are given prefect duties beginning their fifth year, to realize this lesson in that even as prefects, power must be handled with care and deliberation, or else the entire community suffers, and your cause fizzles out in a puff of smoke, without the blaze of glory.

I always assumed that Slytherin always won the house cup because Snape saw to it that they won. He seems to take points from other houses randomly and capriciously. I don't see any other teacher docking points at that kind of rate. The only exception was McGonagall docking Harry, Hermione and Neville massively in book one. But that was her own house.

But we never see Snape awarding points to anyone, not even Draco. The Slytherins had to get points somewhere, and they did so by being good in classes of other teachers and by winning Quidditch matches (don't forget their long-lasting domination there too). And no, I don't think Snape gave Slytherin huge numbers of points when nobody was looking or he would have found a way to make Slytherin win in COS, when Harry and Ron got their huge number of points sometime in May. So though we see Snape docking points frequently enough he never does so without some kind of justification.

I think that what harrydavid wanted to say was that Snape was docking points from every house but his. So if he is docking points from every house his house will winning.And I agree with you about the quiditch, that points are also house points so Slytherin was alays winning because of that.

Can it be that Snape was just exercising his stingy nature? He gave very little at any rate in being complimentary, but he was highly critical in all instances. I thought that it was one of the Twins that said that Snape saw to it that Slytherin won, which would have been a dubious source in itself.

Undoubtedly there were many great wizards that came from Slytherin, as the Hat tells Harry during the Sorting Ceremony, so I don't think that Slytherin won simply by cheating. That Dumbledore didn't eliminate the competition upon grounds of cheating, indicates somewhat that he either approved of the process, or at least felt that there was nothing far reaching with the validity of Slytherin's wins. He was obviously more aware of what was going on behind the scenes, because he didn't seem to award last minute points on a regular basis - it was a privilege he exercised with an explanation only at the end of the PS/SS, in recognition of behavior that exemplified the highest standards of their particular house's "code", that deserved notation and brought the entire Gryffindor House over the top.

Somehow, I don't think you can justify the number of points he took from Harry on several occasions. One example that stands out is the points he took when Harry was late from the train in HBP. He didn't even ask why he was late and hadn't changed, he just docked an inordinate number of points, memory tells me it was 70, but I'm not positive.

The twins said Snape favored the Slytherins in class. In COS and POA he had plenty of opportunities to tip the scores if he was so inclined, yet Gryffindor won.


50 points, the same number McGonagall docked from each of 3 Gryffindors she caught out at night in PS. (And otherwise I do not recall him docking more than 10 per offence.) My point is Harry was indeed late, Snape didn't just dock points for no reason. It is not uncommon for teachers, commanders and bosses to decide they don't want to listen to reasons/excuses, they just hand out consequences as they become aware that something was not as they expected. Nobody guarantees fairness in life.

Actually, it was 70, 50 for lateness and 20 for not changing into his school robes. This is more points than McGonagall took (from each student in her own house) for a much more serious offense. To compare being on the astronomy tower at midnight to being late, when you don't even know why he was late, is moral equivalence. There is no comparison. And I would think the reason he was late would be important before assessing punishment. I disagree about not listening to reasons/excuses. A real leader needs this information to assess punishment equitably. Of course, equitable and Snape don't fit in the same sentence.

Being out on the astronomy tower in dangerous times (ie when someone obsessed with immortality is roaming the grounds and castle) vs being late when Voldemort was on the loose, dementors were around and the castle had extra protections making it impossible for someone arriving late to enter the castle unaided? Not that different. In both cases the end result is exposure to unnecessary danger. And let's say Snape listened to Harry. Harry might have told about being hexed by Draco and placed under his own invisibility cloak. But why was he with Draco with the cloak? Well, he was spying on Draco. So I don't think Harry could have said in clear conscience that it wasn't his fault that he was late.

It doesn't matter why Harry was late. Snape never bothered to find out. That is my problem with him. He acts capriciously and with obvious malice.

But even if he did ask the result would have been the same. Except Harry would have also gotten a lecture about spying on other people. Anyway, never met a capricious teacher/boss/other figure of authority? They are all over the place, wishing them away won't help.