[HPforGrownups] Re: Why SPEW will never work

[Erika L.]

No: HPFGUIDX 90220

Tigerqueen wrote: 

>With Dobby's example this becomes a bit >more clear in my mind. Dobby 
>wanted freedom from the Malfoys which >he could only get by getting 
>his freedom.

<snip>

>I'm not condoning slavery in any way, >but I think that it will never 
>happen as long as the house-elf >themselves are not demanding their 
>own freedom. Hermione would be better off helping goblins or 
>werewolves gain more rights because at least they show some desire to 
>gain more freedoms.

Now me (Erika Wolfraven):

First of all, I agree that Hermione is going about things the wrong way; you can't force freedom on people. What Hermione ought to be doing really is trying to campaign for elf rights rather than freedom. She should focus on improving their working conditions, making sure that the kind of abuse Dobby suffered is made illegal, that house-elves have the right to personal safety and the right to find another master if they so choose. Choice after all is supposed to be one of the central themes of the books, right?

Nuri added:

>Personally, it annoys me a little this house-elf/slavery >connection. 
>I don't see them as slaves, but as domestic helpers. 

<snip>

>I don't think people like the Malfoys would treat a <human maid or butler any better than 
>they treated Dobby - the differences between people >and house-elves 
>at choosing to stay with that people and their level of >endurance to 
>mistrteatment being obvious. 

me again (Erika Wolfraven):

But you see, that's the difference between a house-elf and a servant: a servant can leave; a house-elf cannot. I think that's the crucial distinction. It's fine for the house-elves to serve as long as it's something they've chosen. But what choice are they given? They work from generation to generation for the same family. They never choose whether to do so or not. Loyalty to the family becomes ingrained in them. If we go with what Dumbledore says in CoS that it is our choices that make us who we are, well then where does that leave the house-elves?

When I read about house-elves I often think of a quote from John Stuart Mill's _The Subjugation of Women_. I apologise in advance if anyone is offended by the quote. To put it in context it's from 1869 (according to my Norton Anthology of Eng Lit 6th ed) at the height of Victorian England, and is not meant as a criticism of more enlightened modern day men.

  "All men, except the most brutish, desire to have, in the woman most nearly connected with them, not a forced slave but a willing one, not a slave merely, but a favourite. They have therefore put everything in practice to enslave their minds."

A willing slave. Isn't that what wizards want in a house-elf? A servant who asks for nothing and is owed nothing, who desires to serve, who feels that his very purpose in life is to serve and that his loyalty to the master comes above all else? And don't wizards expect this mentality in a house-elf? Couldn't we say then that it's their minds that are enslaved, and that they become _willing_ slaves?

I realize of course that the Rowling's house-elves are likely derived from "brownies", benevolent elves who do housework, and that one can argue that it's in the house-elves' very nature to be servile. However, as I understand brownies, the difference once again is that they can leave a household if they choose to. So once again it comes down to the simple matter of choices. Do the house-elves have any? No. Therefore they are slaves not servants. Again, I agree that Hermione is proceeding the wrong way. In forcibly trying to free them, she, too, is depriving them of choice. What she does not seem to recognise is that it's the ingrained mind set of the house-elves that is the problem and that she is doing them a disservice by trying to force freedom upon them. The problem is the societal system which creates and perpetuates their servility.

Best

Erika (Wolfraven)


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]