Dissin' the Slyths

[pippin_999]

No: HPFGUIDX 38415


I said the public humiliation was "poetic justice" because of 
> how the Slytherins came to be 150 points ahead of Gryffindor 
in the first place...it was because of Draco Malfoy 's underhanded 
plot to  catch them with Norbert. 

Judy accused me of being corrupted by the celluloid thingy:

>>>I disagree.  That is not how it happened in the book.  In the 
book (unlike the movie), Draco fails to get Harry and Hermione in 
trouble; he is caught by McGonagall long before Filch catches 
Harry and Hermione. McGonagall takes 20 points from Slytherin 
because Draco was out of bed and trying to get Harry & 
Hermione in trouble, and then takes 150 points from Gryffindor 
because she *thought* Harry and Hermione were plotting to get 
Draco in trouble. In other words, McGonagall misjudged Harry 
and Hermione, and took an excessive number of points from 
Gryffindor.  This is hardly Slytherin House's fault.  Why should 
Slytherin be punished, and Gryffindor rewarded, for an 
injustice committed by the head of *Gryffindor*?<<<<

I'll have you know I re-read the passage before I posted that. <g> 
The way I saw  it, Filch was lurking because Draco had tipped 
him off,  and Draco was lurking  because, in typical evil-overlord 
fashion, he just had to be in on the kill.  Harry and Hermione 
were up to no good, they did get Neville in trouble, and they were 
punished, justly if not precisely. You could be right that Draco 
had nothing to do with it...but in that case Slytherin was gloating 
and swaggering over a victory that they had done nothing at all to 
earn even by Slytherin standards.  I still say they needed to be 
taken down.

But that's not why Dumbledore did it.

Dumbledore rewards Gryffindor in front of the whole school 
because Harry, Hermione and Ron risked their lives for the sake 
of the whole school, Slytherins included. As for Neville, if there is 
one thing the Slytherins need to know, it's that it's okay to stand 
against your housemates. The lesson gets across: many of the 
Slytherins defy Dumbledore and refuse to toast Harry at the end 
of GoF, but not all. 

Marina:
>>>  But he could just as easily have announced the winning 
house before the feast and still given credit during the feast.  A 
quick "congrats to Gryffindor, and let me explain why they won" 
speech would've done the job just fine without the handwaving 
and changing banner colors half-way through.  <<<<

::scratches head::  Are you perchance thinking of That Which 
Shall Not Be Named? It wasn't half-way through, it was right at 
the start, before the food is served. There was a quick congrats 
to Slytherin and let me explain why they lost.  There was no hand 
waving, it was a clap. 

 Consider: if  Gryffindor won fairly,  as Snape acknowledges with 
that hand shake, then what Dumbledore gave Slytherin  was a 
moment of recognition and an acknowledgement that they came 
closer to winning than the final point totals would indicate. The 
*only*  reason the Slytherins have to feel humiliated is that they 
had been gloating. That's hardly Dumbledore's fault.

Any sort of tactful behind the scenes maneuver to spare their 
feelings would only have come across as weakness. Do you 
really think the Slytherins would have said, "How nice of 
Dumbledore to be so considerate?" No way! They'd have said, 
"Ha! What is he hiding? He knows we should have won, and 
he's afraid to admit it." 


Marina again:
>>Reaching the Slytherins is a difficult task. <<

Switching the banners is a show of force, and that is the way to 
reach Slytherins. Dumbledore doesn't attempt to wean them 
from their desire for power, or ban them from the school, 
because power in the Potterverse is not evil. It's morally neutral: 
the wands made from Fawkes' feathers can be used for good or 
ill. What puts the Slytherins in moral danger is that having a 
chosen a House that  exalts power over virtue in particular, they 
may never realize that virtue itself is a source of power, or that 
love is the greatest power of all. The only chance  Dumbledore 
has is to show them virtue can be a great deal more than its own 
reward.


Heidi asked:
>>>But that sort of flips right back to one of my initial questions in 
this thread: was Draco's reporting of
Harry in PoA a good act, an evil act, or something else?<<<

If Slytherins believe they can get power by doing good, they'll turn 
in their caches of poison, contribute to worthy causes and 
behave like responsible citizens. This is what Draco does in 
turning in Harry. Viewed in isolation, it's a good deed, but we 
don't know if it's an indicator of moral development because we 
don't know if Draco had any motive besides wanting to get Harry 
in trouble. 

Though Harry would have found Slytherin the road to perdition, I 
don't think we can assume that is so for every student. There 
must be those, like Snape, who discover virtue in seeking power. 
Suppose Snape had been a Ravenclaw; would he ever have 
acted against Voldemort, or would he just have held above the 
fray?

Pippin