Salazar & Slytherin(was Re: Draco and Slytherin House (was: Harsh Morality)

[horridporrid03]

No: HPFGUIDX 121476


>>Betsy:
<snip>
>I've come to believe that Voldemort's pureblood schtick is just 
that, schtick.  He hates and despises Muggles, so those wizards big 
on Muggle-baiting would have attracted him.<

>>Nora:
>I don't buy that, for various and sundry reasons.  Unfortunately, my 
connection is slow and Yahoo!Mort is rude, so I don't have post 
numbers for you (but I've written a lot about this).  Dumbledore, at 
least, thinks that part of the reason he attacked Harry instead of 
Neville was the perception that Harry was 'like' him--similarly 
tainted.  This speaks to Voldemort believing in the ontological 
reality of the distinction.  (Oh, if I could find the "Why Voldemort 
is a fascist" post, there's more in that...).  It's partly power, but 
I also think signs and the virulence of his opinion point to him 
actually believing that half-bloods are tainted and inferior.  To 
invoke interview (hehehe), that *is* how the DEs think, in 
essentialist terms--I would not be so quick to discount Voldemort as 
a solid believer in his own ideology.  Up to a point.<

Betsy:
Oh, I don't doubt that the DEs are all over the pureblood stuff, 
hence Bellatrix's shock and horror at Harry's big reveal.  But I 
wonder if it's seriously Voldemort's big thing.  I do think he sees 
anyone not him as tainted and inferior.  And with his virulent hatred 
of anything Muggle, it makes sense that he'd see something even more 
tainted in those with Muggle blood.  But I do wonder if he has any 
extra respect for those who are pureblooded themselves.  Maybe we're 
coming at this from different angles?  Voldemort does have it in for 
anything tainted by Muggles, but is he enamored of everything 
pureblood?

<snip>

>>Betsy:
>Of course, the IS was being perfectly Slytherin. 
<snip>
>I can't see Slytherin House actually liking Umbridge after she cuts 
down their head in his own classroom.  They'll suck up to her to get 
what they want, but I don't think she had their loyalty.<
 
>>Nora:
>Really?  I can see them liking her just fine, as much as they like 
anyone--she's their route to power.  That subplot, IMO, really 
torpedoed the idea (prevalent in fanfic and other outre realms) that 
the Slytherins were oh-so-deeply loyal to Snape.  Nope, little 
opportunists they are, and have you noticed how the opportunistic and 
self-interested seem to be at the very, very bottom of the moral 
slagheap in JKR's world? :) <

Betsy:
Maybe not deeply loyal, but it's human nature to dislike outsiders 
attacking your own.  Plus, I doubt the Slytherins were any more 
thrilled with their DADA non-teacher than any of the other Houses.  
And Snape was going along with Umbridge himself, keeping her in 
Veritaserum and all.  He may well have encouraged his students to 
join the IS.  Joining the IS was certainly the cunning route.  And 
they protected their House - which shows a loyalty to Slytherin at 
least.
     
>>Nora: 
>They may well have thought it their right.  In doing it, they sold 
out the rest of the school to a malevolent power, the incarnation of 
the banality of evil.  I humbly suggest that from an internal 
perspective of the moral rules of the Potterverse, that is Not A Good 
Thing.  From my perspective, it is also deeply crappy.  If the other 
three houses didn't care for them before (and it's carefully but 
often noted that the Slytherins do not play nice--the Quidditch team 
is brutal, and they're the sort to smirk and gloat over their benefit 
at the misfortunes of others, instead of playing fair), what's going 
to happen now?  Without some sort of mea culpa, the other Houses have 
absolutely no reason to like, let alone trust, the Slytherins.<

Betsy:
That's the crux isn't it?  No matter the motives behind joining the 
IS, the other Houses (understandably) don't trust Slytherin.  It's 
interesting that there were inter-House friendships that allowed 
Hufflepuff and Ravenclaw to join the DA, but not a single Slytherin 
was mentioned.  Though I don't think the other Houses had the 
strength of feeling towards Slytherin that Gryffindor has. (I'm under 
the impresson that it was the G/S quidditch matches that were 
something to see.)  But there's a link now, through the DA, with 
three Houses.  Something needs to bring Slytherin in.  I don't know - 
maybe it *will* take a Slytherin mea culpa - or more excitingly some 
major action.  But I also think there needs to be a realization by 
Harry and Co. that Slytherin does not equal evil.

>>Nora:
<big snip>
> Voldemort is in part a lot of things that are twisted in wizarding 
society (the general way that they view other creatures, the ethic of 
force).  The Dark Arts are connected to this idea of natural 
superiority, as they are fundamentally the arts of taking what you 
want regardless of consent, depriving another person of their 
subjectivity.  And Slytherin House is the ideological locus of this 
behavior, although it's not the only place we find it.<

Betsy:
Slytherin is the ideological locus of all this behavior to *Harry*.  
It's the home of all of his enemies (Voldemort, Snape, and the 
annoying buzz that is Draco).  But Dumbledore, on the other hand, has 
a Slytherin (Head of House no less) as one of his chief assistants 
and he listed *positive* traits of Slytherins to Harry.  It'd be nice 
if we knew what House Quirrell was in (he always struck me as a 
Ravenclaw - but I don't think we've got cannon on that) but we do 
have Peter Pettigrew and Percy (possibly) to illustrate that 
opportunistic self-interest is not the sole property of Slytherin.

Voldemort and his DEs do stand for everything dark in WW.  But do 
they stand for Slytherin?  Not to the WW anyway, or Slytherin would 
have been shut down a long time ago.  (I think Crouch Sr., could have 
swung it.)  

<snip>

>>Nora:
>The positive traits do not ameliorate the sine qua non.  That's why, 
on this very list, so many people felt gobsmacked by the SH song in 
OotP--they'd focused so strongly on the characteristics as defining 
Slytherin House and the search for a positive image thereof, and then 
find out that "no, it's blood, it is".<

Betsy:
The Sorting Hat giveth, and the Sorting Hat taketh away. :) I think 
that, for me, the fact that magical folk were being persecuted at the 
time of Hogwart's founding, the fact that Salazar was so open about 
wanting to teach only purebloods and none of his friends forswore 
him, the fact that the Sorting Hat says that the fight, when it came, 
took place between all four of the founders, and the fact that the 
remaining three founders didn't just do away with Slytherin House 
when Salazar left, means that there *must* be something good in 
Salazar's original vision for Slytherin, though it may have been 
twisted by Voldemort and the Malfoy and Black types that came before 
him.

So I also feel that that positive image must be found and seen and 
used by Harry (the whole "unity" thing) in order to defeat 
Voldemort.  I'm fairly sure that Harry is heading for a drastic sea-
change of his view of Snape.  For one because the bases for his anger 
is so illogical.  And that's a start, but I think there needs to be a 
Slytherin student as well.  If it is Draco, it will mean that Draco 
will have to have a sea-change of his own.  (Not become saintly good 
mind you - but he will have to get over his blood bias.)  And while I 
*hope* that it is Draco, I'm not prepared to put money on it.  Though 
this essay makes me happy: 
http://www.livejournal.com/community/hp_essays/20412.html
 
>-Nora ponders going to look for "Draco Malfoy is Ever So Lame", a 
classic work of analysis, but more for where she misplaced her own 
(*&*%$%$* post<

Betsy:
I think I found the Lame!Draco message.  Try message # 39083.  I also 
discovered why there's a "Mort" put after Yahoo!.  I tried to find 
your post but my head exploded.  I'll dive back in when I've gathered 
the brain bits back together.

Betsy