The good Slytherin - More Shades of Grey

[saraquel_omphale]

No: HPFGUIDX 131430

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" <bboyminn at y...> wrote:
>My appeal was to try and get people to view Slytherins, good
> and bad, as a spectum that is more a model of real life, in which 
>even the best of us still has his shades of grey.
> 
But in real life, people do their very best to remove the shades of 
grey, as they make life much more difficult.  Childhood conditioning 
is really /helpful/ (ironic!!) in this respect, and when you are up 
against the wall, as the whole WW world is at the moment, then 
prejudices are usually confirmed in the individual rather than 
diluted. When threatened, the individual tries to eliminate 
vulnerablility.  I can't see there ever being real trust between 
Slytherin and the rest of the school.  Most will give an uneasy 
truce to some Slytherins, but they are less, not more likely, to 
embrace those who have previously been enemies.  

I do agree, however, that human beings are always shades of grey and 
this is because I believe that each of us has infinite 
potential/capability for self expression in ALL directions. I'm also 
of the more controversial opinion, that good and bad is actually 
relative to your perspective, not an absolute thing in itself.  (eg 
A world wide natural catastrophe, which wipes out 75% of the world's 
population and destroys our technological ability,  could be viewed 
as just what nature needs to ensure that life survives on this 
planet for the next few million years. Is this a good or bad thing?) 
However, I stand by my point that human beings polarise in times of 
threat and invest 'whiteness' in their beliefs and their actions in 
order to survive.

I don't believe, as you do Steve, that in adulthood we 
necessarily 'put away childish things'...
> The conflicts between house can easily be understood in the 
>childish
> confines of the schoolyard.  (cut text) But later on in life, in 
order for society to function,
> the pettyness of the rivalries has to be dropped.
> 
> I'm reminded of the on-going/always was/never ending rivalry be
> between Harvard and Yale Universities. Each thoroughly convinced 
>that
> /their/ university is the best, and that the other is nothing but a
> bunch of ego-inflated over-rated hacks. And that's fine for
> schoolboys, but once you are out in the business world, these 
>things
> can't be allowed. True the jibs, glib cutting remarks, and teasing
> still continue, but when a Harvard man needs a new employee, and a
> Yale man is obviously the best man for the job, he doesn't quibble
> over schoolboy taunts, he takes a much more practical approach.

The guy from Harvard may employ the man from Yale, but that doesn't 
mean that he has changed his attitude.  IMO Capitalist society is 
based on Slytherin principles. What does the Sorting Hat say about 
Slytherin qualities:

PS p88 
Or perhaps in Slytherin
You'll make your real friends,
Those cunning folk use any means
To achieve their ends.

Is this not business creed? Is this perhaps why the Harvard woman 
employs the Yale woman?  

GoF p 157
And power hungry Slytherin
Loved those of great ambition.

Is this not politics? What drives those who wish to become rich and 
famous?

Most readers don't like Slytherins, they are manipulated to do so.  
Yet the society we live in glories in Slytherin principles, and 
rates very highly what Slytherin principles achieve.  That is NOT  
to say that everyone in our society agrees with this, I'm not too 
much interested in it myself.  Those who create wealth, rate 
wealth.  Those who wield power, rate power.  They then set about 
convincing everyone that money and power are the things to have, and 
I reckon that nearly everyone living in western capitalist society, 
including me, would concede that they have had dreams at some point, 
that either money or power would in some way make them more free and 
solve some of their problems.  We have been educated as children to 
believe that the solution to our problems has to lie in this 
direction. JKR noted that one of things she loved about having lots 
of money was not having to worry about paying bills. Our society is 
set up in this way - having money is a /good thing/ and within 
reason, the more we have the better. So it could be argued that 
Slytherins will make the best movers and shakers in both our and WW 
society - do we condemn the twins for wanting a successful 
business?  Hermione is the only one to object to their using 
unprincipled means of getting it (using first years as guinea pigs).

So, aware that I'm rambling on and should state my case succinctly, 
or realise that I don't know what I'm talking about ...

If what's happening in the world of the books reflects what happens 
outside it, then good and bad will be manipulated to fit into 
viewpoints.  Slytherin strengths - end justifies means - use/abuse 
of power - will be percieved (and presented) as necessarily evil, 
but Gryffindors will use exactly the same tactics and call it good. 

I'll be interested to see what DD is working towards as a solution. 
He calls LV Tom, yet says death is too good for him. Hmmm. I hope 
JKR doesn't take the easy way out, I'm sure she's inventive enough 
not to.

Saraquel