Punishing Draco (was:Re: Snape, Hagrid and Animals)

[lealess]

No: HPFGUIDX 143808

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "nrenka" <nrenka at y...> wrote:
>
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "horridporrid03" 
> <horridporrid03 at y...> wrote:
> 
> > Betsy Hp:
> > See, this is the thing I *really* don't get.  Draco is the series' 
> > punching bag in, I believe, each and every book. <SNIP>
> 
> So, why does Rowling *make* him the punching bag, the object of a 
> kind of Schadenfreude that gets a good degree of overt authorial 
> approval?  [And it's even more overt when she disapproves (albeit 
> jokingly) of certain attitudes fans take towards this character.]
> 
> I think the answer is that she cares a great deal about intention
> and character.
> <BIG SNIP, even though it illustrates my point, somewhat.>
> 

I came to a disturbing conclusion this afternoon, one which I would
like to be wrong about, so ... bring it on!

It seems to me that the Slytherins in the HP series fill the role of
certain traditionally scapegoated groups in our real life society.
Slytherins are portrayed as cunning and materialistic.  They hold
themselves separate, not always voluntarily, from the innocent and the
respectable wizards who are "just like us" (brave, loyal,
intelligent).  Slytherins are often presumed to have ulterior
motives, and will deal in dark ways and slanted means.  They stick
together against others.  Finally, their combined actions result in
the death of the god-like Dumbledore.  So, they deserve everything
they get, don't they?  They commit the ultimate sins.

That the Slytherins murder Muggles and non-Purebloods shows to me (1)
how deeply the author abhors them or (2) -- I just don't know --
they've internalized the dominant society's view of Slytherins as
power-hungry?  They are defined this way, and shown to be
untrustworthy, slippery, opportunistic, unable to promote achievement
without self-interest, preferring connnections to hard work,
calculating in personal relationships, generally unpleasant in
personality when interacting with non-Slytherins ... and then you have
the base animal characteristics of the Gaunts, the very heirs of
Slytherin.

Suddenly, this really disturbs me.  It is the "deserve what they get"
hatred that disturbs me the most, I guess.  Honestly – is there a good
Slytherin?  And if there isn't, what does this really mean?

I am hoping that, in the end, JKR will show that bravery can lead to
injustice as easily as to nobility.  I am hoping that, in the end,
ambition will be shown to not exclude making choices based on
morality.  Hooray house unity!  But I wonder if the Slytherins will
have to discard part of themselves to make it happen.

I want to see faith, hope and charity prevail, but perhaps only
retribution will rule the day.

Throw bricks now,

lealess