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

[nrenka]

No: HPFGUIDX 121482


--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "horridporrid03" 
<horridporrid03 at y...> wrote:

> 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?

Since it has been found for me, I point to me own post at 108762.

Not to repeat it, but I suggest taking a look at Voldemort's 
rhetoric in the graveyard scene, especially how he talks about 
Dumbledore.  There are also JKR's comments about the Muggleborn and 
DEs.  No, I don't think Voldie necessarily likes and/or esteems 
purebloods in and of themselves, but he does consider them better 
than anything else--but he's still at the top.

<snip>

> Betsy:
> 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.

I thought it was fairly transparent to everyone (not just to us and 
our priviledged perspective) that Snape was being fairly openly 
contemptuous of Umbridge.  It wasn't only Harry who saw Snape being 
rude to her in Potions Class, after all.  And (in part from my own 
experiences), we tend to underrate how perceptive children are about 
teacher attitudes towards administrators. :)

> 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.)

I think it tells us something that it is Slytherin House where we 
note some who will stand for Harry and some who will not, and that 
both other Houses cheer for Gryffindor and against Slytherin.  
Probable/possible that there is some unfair bias going on in there.  
Also supported that, well, maybe the Slytherins are generally 
unpleasant, do not play nicely with others, and the others enjoy 
seeing their comeuppance?

> 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.

This is true, but first the Slytherins need to prove that they 
should be trusted. :)

> Betsy:
> Slytherin is the ideological locus of all this behavior to 
> *Harry*.  

I'd say it's more than just that--yes, it has Harry's enemies, but 
it has also produced a good number of DEs, and it is the place where 
thinking like a DE is generally acceptable.  We didn't see any hints 
of outrage amongst the Slytherin team when Draco uses 'Mudblood', 
while the Gryffindor reaction is BOTH "don't say that about our 
house member" and "dude, that's just not right"--it's categorically 
unacceptable.  I think noting who will say that word and who won't 
is a shorthand for a whole big set'o'attitudes.

<snip--Alla's post addresses some issues here>

> 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.)  

I'm not sure anyone could have swung it, but the other point made is 
that for an appreciable portion of the WW, what Slytherin stands for 
is *okay*.  Take Mrs. Black, who didn't approve of killing people, 
but was all about the inferiority of Mudbloods.  Or Umbridge's 
attitude towards creatures.  Fudge's belief in the importance of 
blood.  The attitude towards Muggleborns and the greater WW problems 
towards treating other creatures well (stated by Dumbledore such 
that I think it's being given to us as *reality* in the Potterverse) 
are knotted together.

<snip>

Salazar's vision may well have been primarily defense oriented, 
although it's notable that the presentation we have of Muggle 
persecution of witches so far has it all played for comedy.  But 
that doesn't change that there is something almost destined to go 
wrong in his solution, well-intentioned or not.

I think we are going to find out more about the historical bases of 
all of this next book (hence I bet that the HBP is a historical 
figure, although I will end speculation there).  We still have 
precious little of the positive shown us about Slytherin.  We have a 
portrait of a dead Headmaster, and a man who might be spying, might 
be not, but absolutely none of us know him to any appreciable extent-
-so it could go anywhere.  Not that much to hang your hat on, at the 
end of the day, and a lot to be skeptical of.

-Nora prepares for traveling fun with a copy of _Infinite Jest_