Good Slytherin - Plus an old debate

[Steve]

No: HPFGUIDX 71254

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Kathryn Cawte" <kcawte at b...> wrote:
>  
> bboy_mn: 
>  
> ...how did the other houses feel when Slytherin held both the House
> Cup and the Quidditch Cup for SEVEN years ...
>  
> Gryffindor wasn't 'awarded' victory ..., they ACHIEVED (it) ...
>  
> Me -
> 
> ...this debate has been had before and I don't ... want to 
> get into it again because the two sides never get closer together 
> ...

bboy_mn:

First, a mild apology; I may have come across a little harsher than I
intended. I was going to send you an email directly and soften...
well, if not soften my position.. but at least, soften my attitude a
bit, but you've responded already, so here and now I will say...
'sorry, nothing personal'.

You are right this is an old debate that perpetually ends in a
deadlock. Despite countless hours for flame and fury, it remain
unresolved between the opposing sides.

Let me also add that I am in no way condemming all rules; I'm not an
anarchist. But history and OoP are full of rules that have nothing to
do with what is right, and are rooted in power and greed. So, I am all
for rule, I'm just not for all rules. 

Let me also add that Slythering held the House Cup for 7 years running
and the Quidditch cup for something like 9 years running. 



> Kathryn continues:
>
> But IMO Gryffindor was just 'awarded' victory at the end of PS.
> If any of the other houses had bee in the position of Slytherin 
> and Dumbledore had snatched the victory away by awarding points to 
> another house for blatently disregarding the rules then I would feel
> for them too.

bboy_mn responds:
See, this is the root of the problem between the opposing sides on
this issue. Slytherin hadn't won the House Cup, they were only in the
lead and expected to win. Dumbledore is well within his rights and
well with in the rules to award last minute points. So, if Snape can
dock 50 points (or 20 or 10) for minor infraction, then certainly
Dumbledore can award 50 points for extreme acts of selflessness and
courage, even if it wasn't tempered with the best of wisdom.

But... I guess that's pretty much the standard postion on my side of
the fence.


> Kathryn continues:
> 
> Frankly I'm not at all surprised so many Slytherins join the bad
> guys - after all if everyone's going to believe the worst of them 
> anyweay they have very little incentive to try and fight the dark. 
> 
> The school spends 7 years tryiong to alienate 1/4 of its students
> and then wonders why a lot of them join a group which makes them 
> feel important and powerful. I see parallels here between the 
> Slytherin children and American street gangs. 
>  

bboy_mn now responds:

Yeh, I see the house system creating lifelong hositilities and
rivalries that really don't need to exist. But the same thing happens
with school and home team allegiance. You could be given job hiring
preference (unofficially) in the real world because you went to Yale
instead of Harward, or because you suport the Cubs instead of the
Yankees, or just as easily looked upon with distain for those same
allegiances.

But by sorting the house by personality types, you only amplify those
hostilities and create greater isolation between the houses. Across
the span of a lifetime, I don't see that as productive. 

To some extent, I think that part of the intention of the house system
is to create that isolation. Because to some extent, it keeps the
student in nicely contained easily managable groups. Instead of a
group of 1,000 student running wild together, you have four groups of
250 students running wild separately. Somehow the inventor of the
house system saw this as an advantage.

The worst part of this is probably the isolation; a cunning ambitious
Slytherin-type may learn that hard work and wisely applied efforts can
help him achieve his ambition much more effectively that being
ruthless, if he were exposed to Hufflepuff types in a setting the
brought them together. They could all learn from each other. Certainly
a group of blended personalities and talents merged together to form a
business, can produce a much more effective business then one made
from common personality types and talents. 


>  
> bboy_mn continues: (original)
>  
> Then I would speculate that you completely missed the point. That
> point would be that for evil to flourish good men need do nothing. 
>  
> ...edited...
>  


> Kathryn responds:
> 
> I agree that following the rules is not always the right thing to do
> but it was entirely the right thing to do in PS. Yes Harry 
> successfully kept the stone from Voldemort *after* he'd put it in 
> danger in the first place. 
>
> ...edited...
> 
> K
> *hah take that you ... you ... Gryffindor!*


bboy_mn now responds:

The time to choose between what is right and what is easy is not in
the luxury of hindsight. The time to choose is when Harry/Ron/Hermione
are in the common room and they seem to have discovered that the
'thief' had found out how to get past all the obsticals and that
Dumbledore has left the school. 

In their eyes, at that time and place, given the knowledge they have,
the stone is completely vulnerable, and they were force to choose
their actions based on the information they had. The easy choice is to
say that for good men to bask in the illusion of safety, all they need
to do is take no action, to hide behind the safety of the rules. When
the world is destroy, then can then stand proudly and say, 'we didn't
break any rules', 'we were only following orders'. 

Or they can make the hard choice, they can '...imitate the action of
the tiger; stiffen the sinews, summon up the blood, and disguise fair
nature with hard-favour'd rage...'. They can choose to selflessly
disregard their own safety for something greater than themselves; for
the greater good of all. 

Knowing it was unnecessary after-the-fact is of no value, because it's
something that could not be weighed before the fact. You can only
judge their decision based on the knowledge they had at the time. And
at the time, they chose what is right over what is easy, and are
justifiably rewarded for that choice.

Peace out.

bboy_mn