Slytherin Ideology, in context

[ericoppen]

No: HPFGUIDX 100264

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "ohneill_2001" 
<ohneill_2001 at y...> wrote:
> This isn't a howler; I understand your points.  I have to 
> respectfully disagree on a few counts, however...
> 
> "Eric Oppen" <technomad at i...> wrote:
> > reasons, forex.  The prejudice might be against those _raised 
> > outside the WW_...which would include one Harry James Potter, 
> > as well as our Hermione.
> 
> 
> The thing is, that's *not* what the prejudice is.  The canon is 
quite 
> clear that Slytherins' disdain is based on blood, not upbringing.  
Is 
> there an example in the text of any type of slur being directed at 
> Harry (or another Muggle-raised Wizard) based on where they were 
> raised, and not based on blood?

And _how_ often do you find the children of wizards and witches 
raised in the Muggle world? Considering how difficult wizards and 
witches are to kill, and how long-lived they are, I'd be willing to 
bet longish odds that Tom Riddle and Harry Potter are about the only 
examples of such a situation in centuries.  Muggle-born wizards and 
witches, OTOH, are apparently not that uncommon.

> 
> I don't necessarily agree that discrimination based on upbringing 
is 
> any more legitimate, in any event.  True, muggle-raised wizards 
have 
> some adapting to do when they arrive in the WW.  The same thing 
> happens in real life, when a person moves to a place that is 
> culturally different from where he/she grew up.  They arrive in 
their 
> new homes, and they do their best to adapt.  Some adapt better than 
> others, and those that adapt poorly will have problems in their new 
> home.  That doesn't justify bigotry, however, and not in the WW any 
> more than in RL.

Think of it as like religions.  _Back in the day,_ which is not all 
that long ago for the WW (remember that elderly Professor who 
reminisced about giving 150+-year-old Albus Dumbledore his NEWT 
exams?)you could convert from one religion to another, but once you 
had, you _would_ be watched by your new co-religionists, and would be 
well-advised to avoid any behavior that suggested that your 
conversion was less-than-sincere, particularly if there was advantage 
to be gained by it.  For example, Jews converting to Christianity 
were welcomed---but were well-advised to eat _lots_ of pork and other 
non-kosher foods, and to avoid even the appearance of falling back 
into Jewish customs.  Same-same would go for someone converting to 
Islam or Judaism, which are the religions that would be relevant to 
this case.

And, again, _we don't know_ how dodgy a rep Muggle-born or Muggle-
raised wizards and witches have.  All it would take would be a few 
really spectacular examples of such gone bad to give them all a bad 
reputation.  Add in the fact that until very, very recently 
(historically speaking) they would come from backgrounds where magic 
was regarded as, at best, sinful, and the fact that, under sufficient 
stress, people often _will_ revert to the things they were taught as 
young children (Does anybody else here remember the Jesuits' saying 
of "Give us a child until the age of six and he is ours forever?") 
and you have a recipe for Trouble In River City. Can you imagine the 
havoc a wizard could cause if, forex, he had had a breakdown and 
honestly thought that Magic Is Sinful And I Must Eradicate It?  

> 
> > If there ever comes a time when Wizard and Muggle values clash---
can
> > Hermione be trusted, even if the wizards are in the right?  She's 
> > gone on with her house-elves'-rights campaign in the face of 
repeated
> > evidence that the house elves, themselves, do not _want_ to be 
free.  
> > I'd think seeing how crushed Winky was would have gotten through 
to 
> > her, but our Hermione is not one to let a little thing like 
evidence 
> > get in the way. *snip*
> 
> But why do you see that as a Muggle trait?  Do you think there 
aren't 
> others in the Wizarding world who can be just as stubborn when they 
> believe they are right about something?

It isn't a Muggle trait, true enough.  However, someone who persists 
in mis-applying Muggle beliefs in the face of mounting evidence that 
they do not apply in the WW is about to run into serious 
difficulties.  _House-elves, giants and centaurs are NOT humans and 
do not react like humans, d*mn-it,_ and insisting on ignoring this 
fact is uncharacteristically stupid and shows the strong effects of 
Hermione's early Muggle upbringing, in which Slavery Is Wrong, 
Period. Come to it---could Grawp have been brought into the story as 
a clue-by-four for our favorite Muggleborn witch---to show her that

> 
> > What if, for example, the majority of would-be Dark Overlord 
types 
> > were Muggle-born?  (Heck, if you include "Muggle-raised" in this 
> > category, that would definitely include one Thomas Marvolo 
Riddle, 
> > aka Lord Voldemort, now wouldn't it?)
> 
> I find that to be unlikely.  If it were demonstrably true that 
Muggle-
> raised children were more likely to turn to the dark side, then why 
> would only one of the four houses have a problem with Muggle-borns?

Firstly, we don't know how Hufflepuffs and Ravenclaws feel about such 
things---we see very little of them, thanks to a _certain_ person who 
is less curious than I'd be in his shoes.  Secondly, we really know 
little of the Slytherins' POV other than via Draco Malfoy...who is 
someone I do not necessarily view as a bubbling fountain of truth and 
enlightenment.  The gods know that there are enough sub-groups in 
Gryffindor house, so why should the Slyths be different?  

 
> And furthermore, why would it be the Slytherin house that would 
have 
> the problem; after all, Slytherin is undeniably the most "pro-dark 
> side" of the four.  If Muggle-raised children were more likely to 
> become dark, Slytherins would presumably want *more* of them, right?
> 
It depends on what "going over to the Dark Side" really means, 
doesn't it?  Again, if we knew more of the history of the WW, we 
might have a better idea of what the "typical" dark wizard or would-
be Evil Overlord is like---and I could make a good case for some who 
might have gone on rampages against the "purebloods."  Or led goblin 
rebellions, or even helped out the giants "because they're not evil, 
just misunderstood."  

Again, what we lack, my learned friends, is _data_ about times in the 
WW prior to the rise of Lord Thingy.  Even Lord Thingy's first 
rampage is seen only dimly, as through a glass darkly.