The good Slytherin - Shades of Grey/ Sirius and his family /

[dumbledore11214]

No: HPFGUIDX 131486


Alla earlier:
> > 
> > I am assuming based on Slytherins I met  in the books so far.
> 
Magda: 
> But you've just proved my point: JKR has carefully made sure we 
meet
> few Slyths aside from Draco and his entourage.  If there are 250 
kids
> per House (JKR's figures, roughly, not mine), then we've "met" 
only a
> fraction who've made an impression on Harry.

Alla:

You can be right, OR there is another possibility that we are not 
going to meet any Slytherins who think differently than this 
fraction does.

Even better, what if we are not going to meet ANY new Slytherins at 
all?

Are we supposed to think that Slytherin house is not all Evil simply 
because there is a possibility that we have not met some of its 
members yet?



Magda:

> Alla, Alla, Alla - please read my above comment again.  I NEVER 
said
> he was PROUD of being a Black.  I SAID that he retained a lot of 
the
> attitudes of the Black Family even though he rejected their 
beliefs. 
> Attitudes such as his nasty harping on Snape's physical traits 
during
> the pensieve scene, his lack of appreciation of Kreacher's 
feelings<SNIP>
> and probably most obvious to me - his willingness to toss aside 
other
> concerns if they conflicted with what he wanted to do (attitude to
> the potential danger from Kreacher, attitude to Harry's fears for 
his
> safety).


Alla:

Well, actually I see no proof that any of those attitudes ARE Blacks 
family attitudes.

Unless you can show me that any other member of Black family 
disliked Snape of course. I speculate that if Snape is indeed a 
pureblood and fancied Dark Arts , then Blacks would love him .

Do I even have to address Kreacher here? Sirius' dislike of Kreacher 
shows that he did not treat him as his family did ( Kreacher loved 
Sirius' parents, didn't he?)

So, it seems to me that those attitudes of Sirius ( whether you 
agree with them or not) were just those - HIS and do not prove (to 
me at least) that  he retained his family attitudes.


> Neri:
<SNIP>
> > If old Salazar didn't *invent* the pureblood mania, then he is 
the one
> who made it ingrained into Hogwarts. And the whole mistrust 
argument
> doesn't really hold water, IMO. Wouldn't it be the Muggle-born 
wizards
> who were the most vulnerable to muggle persecution, not having 
magical
> teaching in how to control their magic and how to hide or protect
> themselves? Salazar was apparently ready to let them burn because 
they
> weren't pure enough.


Alla:

Yes, yes, Neri, absolutely. I raised the very same argument in one 
of the older rounds of Good Slytherin/Bad Slytherin debate.

The most benefit of the doubt I am willing to give  Salasar is some 
kind of personal tragedy ( you know, loved one burned  or something 
like that) after which he started "only purebloods" are deserved to 
be taught in Hogwarts "song".

I am willing to come up with some excuse NOT for Salasar's ideas, 
because I don't find them to be very excusable, but  with the reason 
why he , IMO went crazy. I am willing to entertain such thought 
simply because of initial friendship between founders. I mean the 
other founders  must have liked something in him, if they were 
willing to be friends with him?

But again, it may not mean anything. The fact that one is friend 
with the good people may not stop such person from becoming Evil.

And so far, in my book Salazar's ideas are evil.
Let's also not forget that Salazar wanted all Hogwarts to be closed 
for muggleborns witches and wizards, not just his house.

And as you absolutely correctly stated , IMO, he did not want to 
educate fellow wizards and witches, NOT outsiders. He did not want 
to educate those most vulnerable to  the persecution.

Bad Salazar, very bad Salazar. :-)


Just my opinion,

Alla.