Now that I think about it, I'm not sure the Basilisk was such a good idea...

[darrin_burnett]

No: HPFGUIDX 57943

Andrea wrote:


> But anyway, aside from that, the only solution seems for the basilisk to
> charmed somehow to only affect Muggle-borns.  Yet Riddle sets it on Harry
> in the Chamber, fully expecting it to kill him.  Yes, it could poison him
> (like it *did*), but Riddle still seemed quite perturbed at Fawkes
> blinding it.  I'd think Riddle might have mentioned that in all his Evil
> Exposition to Harry.  ("And so I'll carry on the work great Salazar
> Slytherin started -- to cleanse the school from Muggle-borns!  The
> basilisk's stare, you see, will only kill Muggle-borns, leaving the
> *purebloods* safe. [evil cackling]") 


I don't know if it only has to kill Muggle-borns. There have been plenty of slurs 
thrown around against "Muggle-Lovers" to make me think that just being a 
pureblood isn't necessarily protection enough. Protecting a mudblood could 
be sin enough in the eyes of a madman like V-Mort or Slythering.

Second, the definition of Muggle-born seems to be different for some people. 
In some eyes, a wizard like Hermione is Muggle-born, with a Muggle mother 
and father.

In other eyes, such as Riddle and the Malfoys, just having the line broken with 
Muggles is taint enough.

Now, Salazar would most likely have wanted Slytherins to be protected. 
Perhaps he was counting on the Heir to be able to direct the basilisk away 
from Slyths?
 
> Ah, but in this case, there WAS a hidden Chamber with a terrible monster
> inside it.  That obviously means the entire legend was true, right?
> 
<snip>
 
> Perhaps because the basilisk was never intended as a weapon against
> Muggle-borns in the first place?

Let us assume for the moment that whatever the reason Salazar left behind 
the basilisk, it was not a benevolent or harmless act. 

He did have a secret area that could only be found by a Parselmouth and he 
did leave a giant snake in there that could only be controlled by one.

I am willing to concede that, although I believe Salazar to be a genocidal 
loony for even leaving the damn thing behind, V-Mort has perhaps twisted 
Slytherins wishes. 

But still, it was Salazar who left the thing.

> There are a dozen reasons I can think of off the top of my head why
> Salazar Slytherin would have kept a basilisk.  He *was* a Parselmouth, so
> it wouldn't be *that* strange of a pet, as long as he found a way to keep
> it from killing him on sight. *g*  

Then why not take it with him when he left? Didn't he miss his wittle Fido?

And we have canon from "Fantastic Beasts" that Parselmouths studied 
Runespoors, so why not another magical serpent?  For that matter, it seems 
like a pretty good defense if the castle is ever breached.  Lock all the students 
in their dormitories (like they *should* be in an attack) and send a serpent that 
can kill you three or four ways but can only be *controlled* by your side 
charging down the hallways.  Let me tell you, *I'd* think twice about invading 
again!! ;)
> 

A defense that can only be unleashed and controlled via a Parselmouth? 
When there -- apparently -- have been only two such gifted people in the last 
1,000 years? 

I would agree it would have been a defense... for Salazar. I could see him 
thinking: Let the other three nitwits fight the invaders brought on by their 
Muggle-loving foolish ways, while I -- and perhaps the other Slyths, though 
that is not a requirement --  retire to my hideout and wait for the dust to settle.

Cunning, indeed. 

Darrin
-- Fido the Basilisk would be a great name for a band.