House Elves' enslavement (long)

[elfundeb2]

No: HPFGUIDX 114632


I've been wanting to respond to Susana's insightful analysis of the 
house elves  (and comments on Demetra's and SSSusan's responses).  
This is a bit later than I'd planned, however.

Susana:
> I wish to offer an analysis of House Elves' enslavement based on 
Dobby's, Kretcher's and Winky's behaviour. I didn't search more than 
two months of posts and even so I can tell most of my theory has 
been hinted here and there. I hope this compilation is helpful in 
any way.

Debbie:
It has been discussed periodically over the years.  In 2002 the 
group held structured discussions based on questions raised in Dr. 
Philip Nel's book on HP, which highlighted earlier threads on the 
same subject.  One of them related to the role of house elves in the 
series:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/39094

which sparked some discussion as well (some of which did not thread 
properly, so look at the indext for the next hundred or so posts). 

Susana:
> 3 - We don't know if wizards enslaved elves or if elves enslaved 
themselves.
> 
> This is an important issue but I think we'll never know. To me, 
the elf/wizard relation appears to be a 'before time' thing going 
back to cave men. A kind of symbiosis between two magical creatures: 
the wizards grant elves safety and food while the elves grant 
wizards comfort. My point bringing this up is that the magical bound 
between an elf and its master is not something that can be preformed 
on Dobby while he's shopping for socks. It's a magic binding of the 
species - something not comparable to anything we see wizards do in 
poterverse (thus my consideration that elves might have done it to 
themselves).
>

Debbie:
I think we may learn more about this.  Hermione states in GoF that 
their enslavement goes back "centuries" suggesting that it doesn't 
go back to the dawn of time.  Like the other marginalized and/or 
disaffected beings in the Potterverse, I expect the elves' history 
will be important, especially if the fallacies of the Statue of the 
Magical Brethren are going to be corrected by the end of the series. 

Siriusly Snapey Susan wrote:
> - JKR said "He's a house-elf, they've got powers wizards haven't 
got 
> (but wizards have also got powers that house-elves haven't) -- and 
> perhaps she wanted us to take that as "There are lots of things 
they 
> can't do."  But perhaps that's not so true; perhaps it's actually 
a 
> very powerful form of magic that's been, in large part, kept in 
check 
> by the lives most HEs lead.

Debbie:
The simultaneous possession of powerful magic and an innate desire 
to be of service (they seem to *need* to work) made the elves very 
vulnerable to enslavement.  And even if the enchantment that 
enslaved them was mutual at first, they're an easy target for 
exploitation.  It keeps their powers in check while they are offered 
the right to do what they love best.

I believe that the house elves' enslavement is the result of a 
magical "contract" symbolized by the clothes.  No doubt in the 
beginning the elves expected that the relationship would be mutually 
beneficial -- the elves received protection and an outlet for their 
apparently innate need to provide service, and the masters received 
the services.  And in a way it still is mutually beneficial, despite 
the masters' abuse of the power.  We may cringe at the notion that 
Winky's self-worth is derived entirely from providing good service 
to the Crouch family, but Dobby, though free and proud of it, 
derives his self-worth from providing good service to others as well.

Susana:
My solution would be that elves can only be bought and sold in their 
childhood, before the magical bound is created - a terrible thought, 
I know. But we also don't know what type of relationship elves have 
with their offspring (they're not human - don't be Hermione on this).

Debbie:
My own take is that elves cannot be sold.  Winky was dismissed, not 
sold, when she disobeyed.  Surely Crouch would have tried to get a 
return for her if he could.  Also, there's the House-Elf Relocation 
Office at the MoM, which implies that elves are not sold.  I suspect 
it's more likely that elves are inherited by those who inherit the 
master's real property.


Susana:
> 3 - Winky disobeyed a direct order from her master (stay in the 
tent) but acting - she thought - in her master's best interest.
> 
[snip]
> 4 - Dobby took action against the will of a person he regarded, 
but acting - he thought - in that person's best interest. Dobby 
punished himself (ironed his hands!) for acting - he thought - in 
that person's best interest.
> 
> This is the most interesting point. Kretcher felt no need to 
punish him for lying to Harry, yet Dobby ironed his hands for 
harming Harry. There could be several reasons for Dobby's behaviour:

> a) He could be punishing himself for acting against his official 
master's interest. But it doesn't sound at all like that if we 
follow the sequence of the conversation: he *had* to iron his hands 
after he blocked the barrier but he *didn't mind* because he thought 
*Harry* was safe.

Debbie:
I think it's a).  Dumbledore says that Kreacher "was bound by the 
enchantments of his kind, which is to say that he could not disobey 
a direct order from his master, Sirius."  I take this to mean he was 
*incapable* of disobeying (otherwise the Order was doomed, as 
Kreacher would have liked nothing better than to reveal the location 
of headquarters to Narcissa).  

If Winky could not disobey a direct order, she must not have been 
ordered to keep Barty Jr. in the tent.  Barty Crouch Jr states in 
his veritaserum confession that Winky's transgression was allowing 
him to obtain a wand.  He obtained the wand by himself (while Winky 
was hiding her face in the Top Box due to her fear of heights), so 
Winky did not disobey a direct order.

Therefore, I believe that Dobby was not violating a direct order 
when he took action to keep Harry away from Hogwarts.  However, 
because his actions breached his duty of loyalty to his master, he 
felt compelled to punish himself.  Guilt, and nothing more.  He 
still felt punished himself for saying bad things about Lucius 
Malfoy even after he was freed (GoF ch. 21).   Kreacher felt such 
contempt for Sirius, however, that he didn't find punishments 
necessary, ever.

Susana:
> Another cause of unhappiness for elves would be the death of their 
hart-master. Kretcher is the ultimate example: not only he lost his 
mistress, he came into service for a wizard he totally despises. 
IMO, this are the main subjects that SPEW should be dealing with. 
SPEW should be trying to call wizards to the responsibility of 
having a house elf: they take care of you and YOU TAKE CARE OF THEM!


Debbie:
If house-elves belong to a "family" it may be that that is where 
their loyalty lies.  In the case of the Black family, Sirius' own 
family regarded him as a traitor, so Kreacher's inability to 
transfer his loyalty from Mrs. Black to Sirius is not surprising.  

In Dobby's case, I do not believe he was raised in the Malfoys' 
service.  There is a seldom-used House-Elf Relocation Office 
(mentioned in FBAWTFT).  Because house elves are, in Dobby's words, 
bound to serve one house or family forever" (Winky mentions that her 
mother and grandmother before her worked for the Crouches), this 
office seems to have no function unless the house or the family 
ceases to exist.

It's my theory that Dobby was formerly the Potters' elf and that he 
was "relocated" to the Malfoys after the Potters' home at Godric's 
Hollow was destroyed and his masters killed.  Dobby's devotion to 
Harry is extraordinary and doesn't seem fully explainable by the 
explanation Dobby gives --  that house elves were miserably treated 
while Voldemort was out and about, and that Harry's triumph was 
a "beacon of hope" for house elves.  Dobby shows Harry the loyalty 
of a "heart master" although Harry is unrelated to Dobby's legal 
masters.  If the Potters are *his* family, though, that would 
explain his loyalty to Harry, even though he is bound to obey the 
Malfoys and keep their secrets.   

I've even found some canon to support it.  When Marietta rats on the 
DA and Dobby comes to warn everyone, he says "Dobby has come to warn 
you . . . but the house-elves have been warned not to tell . . ."  
Dobby doesn't want to provide the details -- house-elf guilt must 
run deep -- but he finally confirms that Umbridge is coming.  This 
confirmation implies that either Umbridge's warning was not a direct 
order or that, as a free elf with an employment contract, he was 
free to disobey.  However, he still feels guilt about disobeying 
anyone with authority at Hogwarts, and attempts to punish himself.

The interesting thing is what happens next.  As Dobby attempts to do 
injury to himself, Harry says "Dobby -- this is an *order* -- get 
back down to the kitchen with the other elves and , if she asks you 
whether you warned me, lie and say no! . . . And I forbid you to 
hurt yourself!" Dobby's reaction?  A big "Thank you, Harry 
Potter!"   

It almost seems as though Dobby was waiting for Harry to order him 
not to obey Umbridge.  As a free elf employed at Hogwarts, I don't 
think he was magically compelled to obey Umbridge.  However, Dobby 
felt that he needed to punish himself *until* Harry gave him an 
express *order* which he hastens to obey.  It may be simply 
the "heart-master" syndrome kicking in.  But it might be more.

Demetra:
> I wonder if we are being lulled into a false sense of security 
about 
> the HE's.  Despite Hermione's bull in a china shop approach with 
> SPEW, most probably believe that the HE's will naturally line up 
on 
> the side of good.  But maybe it's not as clear-cut as that.  Dobby 
> has warned Harry that Hermione has "insulted" the Hogwarts HE's.  
Her 
> actions and attitude are patronizing in the extreme.  She doesn't 
> realize that, despite her best intentions, she is forcing her will 
on 
> them, thereby doing to them exactly what she criticizes 
> their "masters" of doing. 
   
Debbie:
Dobby's comments in CoS ("The Rogue Bludger") that house elves were 
treated live vermin while Voldemort was on the loose imply that it 
is very unlikely that the house elves would support Voldemort.  
Moreover, there are a huge number of house elves at Hogwarts and 
their cleanliness stands in marked contrast to their appearance 
under the Blacks and Malfoys.  I would expect them to have very 
strong loyalties to Dumbledore, notwithstanding Hermione's attempt 
to offer them their freedom.   The house elves, like the goblins and 
giants, may have critical roles in the next books. And I think 
that's why Dumbledore would see socks in the Mirror of Erised.  

I don't think we need to fear the centaurs, either; they are too 
aloof to want anything to do with the squabbles of witches and 
wizards.  The difficulty there is that they have much to lose if 
Voldemort and his ilk were to take over.  I doubt the centaurs could 
be harnessed and made to serve Voldemort, and if Voldemort has no 
use for them, neutrality may be a perilous choice.

It's the goblins, with half a foot in Voldemort's camp and a long 
history of repression by wizards (yes, those goblin rebellions are 
important!), that I'm worried about.

Debbie
whose thoughts about the elves as metaphor for slavery, etc. are here
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/39176