Good Slytherin (Was: Re: Thestrals and Slytherins)

[darrin_burnett]

No: HPFGUIDX 71287

Kathryn: 

> 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. 

How exactly did Slytherin win the House cup for so many years in a 
row if everyone was against them? 

McGonagall had taken away 150 points in one fell swoop for 
Gryffindor, which turned out to be nearly one-third of the entire 
point total for the year. A third of the work an entire house had 
done wiped out by three first years?

That's a touch of an overreaction, I'd say, and if that's her modus 
operandi, it's no wonder Gryffindor wasn't winning the cup more. And 
considering we've never seen Snape take away a single point from his 
own house, it makes me wonder how much fairness the scoring system 
used.

And again, in Fudge's world, the Slytherin values are prized. Disdain 
for Muggles is something he encourages, but squelching those with 
concern for them like Arthur Weasley. Fudge places value on the "so-
called" purity of the blood, D-Dore tells us.

And Draco is not exactly a hardscrabble kid who has had to overcome 
anything in his life. He's a child of influential parents. Other 
Slyths, though we don't know their monetary situation, espouse 
Draco's philosophies.

And lastly, since the Hat took about .05 seconds to choose Draco, I 
have to think that at least on some level, Draco is the Poster Boy 
for House Slytherin.

And let us remember that Slytherin had racked up 472 points before D-
Dore lifted a finger -- which as Steve pointed out, he had every 
single right to do based on recent events -- which means that someone 
was earning points.

>Being a DE makes them feel as if they belong, it gives them (in 
>their eyes) power over thiose who shun them. Now I'm not saying that 
>they're all misunderstood and just need a hug anymore than I think 
that a gang member who commits a crime should be let off because of 
their background, but the WW has to take some responsibility for the 
problem. 

Again, the Slytherins, being the jocks, the children of influence, 
having enough brains to win academic points and the ones most likley 
to succeed because of the purity of their blood, are closer to the 
Ruling Clique of Hogwarts than any other, before poor Harry the 
Orphan and his dirt-poor friend Ron and his mudblood friend Hermione 
show up.
  
It's hard for me to buy the "shunned gang member" argument when these 
kids get start with so many breaks.


K: 
 
> 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. The mirror would only give the stone up if 
the person wanted to find it but not use it. If Harry hadn't been 
there then Quirrelmort would never have got it out of the mirror in 
the first place. The only reason the stone was in any
 danger was because Harry managed to remove it from the mirror and 
have it end up in his pocket. 

Considering that Quirrell couldn't touch Harry, literally, couldn't 
touch Harry, I'd say Harry's pocket was safer than the mirror. We 
don't know that V-Mort - the cleverest student Hogwarts has ever 
produced -- wouldn't have, given enough time, figured out a way 
around the mirror.

We do know that Quirrell couldn't touch Harry, though. That stone 
wasn't going anywhere.


>He and his friends arrogantly decided that the only thing that could 
save the stone from Snape (so wrong on two counts there,> since not 
only was the stone safe but it wasn't Snape who was after it anyway) 
>was three 11 year old student witches and wizards. 

They tried to go to McGonagall twice. So, they tried to follow the 
rules. And while we're on the subject, they tried to go to Lockhart 
in CoS. They also attempted to reason with Snape in the Shrieking 
Shack. 

So, I think arrogance might be a bit harsh. They tried to warn people 
and were told, essentially, "You're just an 11-year-old. Shut up and 
go away."

But Hagrid had given up the secret of Fluffy. Snape had failed in 
whatever he was attempting to do because Quirrell didn't heed his 
warnings and D-Dore was lured away. It's possible the adults DIDN'T 
know everything that was going on. When Harry and the gang tried to 
tell the nearest adult, they were rebuffed.

>Because of their actions two of them ended up in the hospital wing 
>(at least I assume Ron was hospitalized at least briefly), Neville 
was hexed and Quirrel died (now I'm not saying that Quirrel could 
have been saved by this point but I guess we ll never know). 

Well, there you go. Because of Harry's actions, Quirrell died. How 
about V-Mort's actions in taking possession of him in the first 
place? Or Snape's actions in not turning him right in, but trying to 
play some "are you loyal?" game with him? Or D-Dore's actions for 
letting the game go on so long?


>And what was their punishment for disregarding the rules and
> endangering the stone? A stunning victory over Slytherin house and 
>the humiliation of their enemies. 

For disregarding the bull-headedness and failures of the adults 
around them and putting the Stone where it would be safer, not to 
mention pure skill in getting through obstacles, they win. Sounds 
about right to me :)

>But to be fair I wouldn't have >expected anything else after all 
>when they endangered themselves to >rescue Herrmione (instead of 
>telling a prefect where she was) they >got rewarded - they were very 
>lucky that the three of them survived. 

They didn't intend to take on a troll. They intended to get Hermione 
out of the bathroom and up to the safety of Gryffindor tower. Now, 
should they have told a prefect? Yeah, but then the prefect would 
have left the students to get one. Or, Percy would have gotten the 
students up safely, THEN gone back for Hermione, by which time she 
would have been dead.



>Of course Harry learnt that rules don't apply to him when he 
disobeyed Professor Hooch and was >given a broom for his trouble. (I 
have no problem with him being given a place on the quidditch team 
since while the difference is merely a technicality that would have 
been because of his talent not because of his rulebreaking - and> 
that talent would surely have been discovered later in the lesson if 
he hadn t  taken off after Draco, but they should both have been 
given detention as> well). 
> 

I'm glad you mentioned Draco. Not only did he break the flying rules, 
but was stealing Neville's property besides. He didn't get a 
detention, NOR was the threat of "You'll be expelled" followed 
through. 

And I have a hard time seeing how Harry wouldn't grasp that the rules 
don't apply to him when he and his friends lose 150 points for trying 
to help Hagrid. That seems to have driven it home quite nicely. 

Darrin
-- And where is Draco? In Stinkin' Slytherin!