Scapegoating Slytherin - Snobbery or Bigotry

[Steve]

No: HPFGUIDX 144242

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "a_svirn" <a_svirn at y...> wrote:
> ...edited...
> 
>  > Pippin
> > But is it really the central conflict in the books? Suppose 
> > Slytherin hadn't been a racist, do you think Harry, Snape 
> > and Voldie would be best pals? 
> > 
> 
> a_svirn:
> I didn't say a single word about it's being central conflict in
> the books. I only pointed out that bigotry is considered a virtue
> in Slytherin House.
>

bboyminn:

That bring up the question whether Slytherins are uniformly engaged in
Bigotry, or whether, as a whole, they are merely engaged in Snobbery.

The Aristocracy still exists in Europe. They don't believe in marrying
outside their 'own kind'. They believe they are superior to Commoners.
We could extent that to say they are Bigots. But Europe generally
doesn't regard them that way.

In a sense, I think we have to make a distinction between passive
snobbery and active snobbery. To see yourself as better than the rest
and only associate with your preceived equals, in a sense, is passive
snobbery. But to take that sense of superiority and use it to suppress
and oppress those you view as lessers becomes active snobbery, and
yes, that falls then into the catagory of bigotry.

Part of my central point is that while MOST of Sltherins might engage
in a passively snobbish attitude, only a few of the cross the line
into actively working against their preceived lessers. 

We can't really make a blanket statement about MOST Slytherins
because, as I have pointed out more than once before, we haven't seen
MOST Slytherins. Really, that active sample we have consists of Draco
and his associated. Far more Slytherins choose not to get in Harry's
face. Far more Slytherins choose to keep their heads down and mind
their own business. At least, in any significant way, we never see
them getting into Harry's business. 

I readily admit that SOME Slytherins are bigots, and further that they
are probably powerful and influential Slytherins. But I can't accept
any blanket statements that ALL or MOST Slytherins are anything, when
we indeed have not seen /most Slytherins/. 

In the end, it may prove out that all or most Slytherins are one thing
or another, but I don't think we have seen the evidence yet. I do
believe, that we have been lead by the author to believe that all or
most Slytherins are this or that, but I think that is an intentional
illustion on the part of the author. She has created an appearance or
preception, but her own evidence doesn't support the assumed conclusion.

Not sure what that's worth, but there it is.

Steve/bboyminn