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

[horridporrid03]

No: HPFGUIDX 121643


>>Nora:
>Since it has been found for me, I point to me own post at 108762.
<snip> 
>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.<

Betsy:
Agreed!  And I loved your post on Voldemort as a fascist - very 
clearly set out.  I was leery about Voldemort buying into the frevor 
of the whole pureblood movement since Tom Riddle struck me as fairly 
cynical and quite willing to adopt any belief system that gave him a 
shot at power.  But I do agree that the pureblood view of Muggles fit 
so well with his own hatred and provided such a convenient rallying 
cry that of course he took it as his own and twisted it to its 
ugliest end.  (Not that it had far to go, I think.  There is 
definitely something rotten in the WW.)

>>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.<

>>Nora:
>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:
But Snape's contempt (that I'm not sure Umbridge herself picked up 
on, or if she did, she seemed pretty sure that Snape was under her 
thumb, even if he was unhappy about it) wouldn't preclude the 
possibility that he encouraged his House to *appear* to support her.  
I don't think he'd encourage them to actually be loyal to her - just 
*appear* to be - as he did with the fake Veritaserum. (Sends a wink 
in khinterberg's direction. <g>)

McGonagall encouraged Harry to keep his head down when it came to 
Umbridge, though she herself was less than polite to Umbridge 
whenever they crossed paths.  Snape was in a stronger position than 
his students - he could allow a little acid into his tone. 

<big snip in the interest of not being repetitive>
 
>>Nora:
>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.<

Betsy:
In some ways this is an unfair example though.  We have two teams 
that are almost fanatically competetive with each other.  We have an 
exchange of insults that quickly spiral into personal attacks (and 
it's Hermione, interestingly enough, who gets in a particularly cruel 
dig) and then a truly nasty name is used.  Immediately words are 
exchanged for wands and fists (and it's the Gryffindors who have two 
burly beaters leaping onto a small boy two years their junior), Flint 
protects his Seeker, Ron curses Malfoy, it backfires, Ron spits up 
slugs, and the Slytherins laugh.  When exactly were the Slytherins 
supposed to stand aside and scold Draco for using a bad word?

And I would be shocked, remembering my own school days, if there 
aren't a slew of Muggle jokes that are shared where teachers and 
Muggleborns aren't listening, and in every single house.

The use of 'mudblood' *is* shorthand for a set of attitudes.  But do 
you really think Slytherin is the only House with such attitudes?  
(Out of curiosity - has any Slytherin other than Draco been heard to 
use that word?)   

>>Betsy:
>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.)<

>>Nora:  
>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.<

Betsy:
That's what I'm saying.  There is something rotton in WW.  I just 
don't think it hangs its hat in Slytherin.  Too many wizards and 
witches think the way Fudge and Umbridge and even Mrs. Black do.  
Heck, Voldemort did really, really well in the last war.  Didn't 
Lupin say something about how many folks were fighting for him and 
how much they outnumbered the good guys?  I think it would be 
impossible for all of them to come from Slytherin.  But, I think in 
Harry's mind they all did, because he can so clearly see the negative 
aspects to that particular House. (And I don't deny that some of 
those negative aspects are there.)  But even the Weasleys, such a 
Gryffindor family, have a gentle kind of condescension towards 
Muggles that could get jacked up into something ugly with the proper 
pressure.

>>Nora:
>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.<

Betsy:
Of course something could go wrong.  Anything based on fear has huge 
potential to go wrong.  And something did.  Salazar's own heir has 
twisted his protectiveness into something that could well destroy the 
WW if he's not stopped.  (And isn't it interesting that a boy Salazar 
himself would have admired is the one chosen to defeat the threat?)

>>Nora:  
>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).  

Betsy:
Oh, I hope so! (On the learning more of the history bit - not the 
HBP.  Not as emotionally invested in the HBP. =D )

>>Nora:
>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.<

Betsy:
And so, we wait with eager hearts for HBP!  It's the very lack of 
positive traits that have me skeptical of our view of Slytherin.  Our 
stereotypes of the other Houses have been broken (or my stereotypes 
anyway) through the introduction of characters like Luna Lovegood and 
Zacharias Smith.  A similar thing must be done for Slytherin if the 
Sorting Hat's advice will ever be followed.  But the thing is, we 
know much more about Slytherin than we ever knew about Ravenclaw or 
Hufflepuff.  So it will take more than just a jolly reluctant-
Slytherin turning up.  There needs to be someone who is a Slytherin 
to his or her core that can demonstrate to Harry et al that Slytherin 
ain't that bad.  Or at least that there's hope for that House, anway. 

Betsy, who wonders if she's the only one eager to see Draco 
interacting with Luna and Zacharias.