Dissin' the Slyths (was: Midnight in the Garden of Good and Evil)

[dicentra63]

No: HPFGUIDX 38382

--- In HPforGrownups at y..., "marinafrants" <rusalka at i...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "dicentra63" <dicentra at x> wrote:
> > --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "marinafrants" <rusalka at i...> wrote:
> >   The Slytherins deserved to 
> > > lose the House Cup because of Draco's actions.  They did *not* 
> > > deserve to have their faces rubbed in it in front of the whole 
> > > school.  And Snape, in particular, did not deserve to be jerked 
> > > around by his boss in front of all his colleagues.
> > > 
> > Hmmm.  I don't think that Snape or the Slytherins or Dumbledore
> would
> > take this position.
> 
> Well, we know Dumbledore didn't take this position, because if he did
> he wouldn't have done it.  But do you really think Snape and the
> Slytherins all just nodded their heads and said, "Gosh, that's fair,
> we really had it coming?"

Heavens no!  They sulked and scowled and grumbled and probably didn't
learn a thing from it, except that sometimes cheating doesn't get you
ahead. (All because of that muggle-loving Dumbledore, too!)

> So give Gryffindor the Cup, announce it in the usual way -- before the
> Leaving Feast -- and let everybody gloat in the usual way.  Pulling a
> bait-and-switch in the middle of the Feast was unnecessary and
> uncalled for.

As Pippin says in her answer to your post, Snape probably wasn't
surprised, just the Slyths. And doing it the way you suggest wouldn't
have made a very good STORY, either.  Shift 'er into WARPDRIVE! (See
Inish Alley.) 
 
> I think this was a rare case of Dumbledore failing to see the whole
> picture.  He saw the part that said, "Gryffindor deserves to win," and
> the part that said, "Neville and HRH could use a public pat on the
> back," but not the part that said, "Don't alienate the Slytherins any
> more than they already are."
 
> 
> I never said that the Slytherins should've been allowed to win. Why do
> people keep responding as if I'd said that? 

Sorry. I did get your meaning as far as that goes. I just didn't make
it clear. 
> 
> > the Slyths probably took it the way Slyths do: plotting how to get
> even.
> > 
> 
> Of course they're plotting to get even.  That's the problem.  You've
> got a whole House full of kids who are already at increased risk for
> turning to the Dark Side.  The last thing you want is to leave them
> feeling that the school has done them a wrong that must be avenged. 
> Slytherin House needs to learn a lot of lessons.  "Don't get mad, get
> even" is *not* one of them.

Which means that what you object to is NOT that the poor ickle Slyths
got their feelings hurt but that Dumbledore was pouring gasoline on
the flames.  And that's an interesting point.  To what extent is
Dumbledore trying to prevent those at-risk kids from turning out like
many of their parents?  I don't think I've seen him do anything to
that effect.

Should Dumbledore have tempered his presentation to prevent alienating
the Slyths?  Imagine if before the banquet McGonagall brought up the
very same point you've brought up. (She's very well might have.)  What
would Dumbledore's answer have been?  I have to imagine that he'd
refuse to alter his plans on the grounds that some DE's-in-training
might get pissed off.  I don't know that he sees these kids as
redeemable, or that it's his job to intervene.  He seems more
interested in training folks for his own team than preventing kids
from becoming Voldemort's minions.

Judy said to Pippin, while I was writing this (slow down you guys!):
"Reaching the Slytherins is a difficult task. I think everyone here
would pretty much agree that the Slyths need to learn that Muggles and
Muggle-borns deserve as much respect as Purebloods. But I don't think
that can happen unless they also learn that respect is not a zero-sum
game where you have to take it away from one group in order to give it
to another. Until they get that, it will do no good to demonstrate
how wonderful Muggle-borns are -- it'll only make the Slytherins
switch from "Mudbloods don't deserve respect" to "I don't care if
Mudbloods deserve respect, they're not taking any of mine."

Is it possible that they really can't learn this from Dumbledore? 
Does he recognize that their upbringing far outweighs anything he can
do?  We certainly aren't looking at an educational model like the one
in the U.S., which expects teachers to be responsible for their
students' psychological health.

Lilahp said:
>>>it would be quite interesting if, in one of the future books,
JKR does point out the discrimination against the Slytherins,
which is quite unfair at times. <<<<<

Pippin replied:
I think JKR is setting this up. I don't think it's subversive to see
Hagrid's "there's not a single witch or wizard who went bad who
wasn't in Slytherin" as slander, and Lee Jordan's "why don't they
just chuck all the Slytherins out?" as prejudice. And Harry
wonders whether his first impression of the Slytherins is not
colored by what he's heard about them.

Dicentra counters:
I can't see this as prejudice or discrimination. Slytherins have fully
earned their reputations: the other houses don't dislike them because
of their heritage or any other arbitrary quality for which the Slyths
aren't responsible. They're disliked for the way in which they treat
other houses.  Granted, maybe not all Slyths are as bad as Harry
thinks they are, but many of them really are that bad.  And worse.  I
can't see "house bigotry" becoming an issue and then having speech
codes imposed on the students so as to make sure the Slyths don't have
to live in a "threatening" or "oppressive" environment.  The authority
figures in the Potterverse don't tend to intervene in such
touchy-feely, quintiscentially American concerns.

--Dicentra, who would dis a Slyth on sight