The good Slytherin (mild TBAY)

[horridporrid03]

No: HPFGUIDX 131487

>>Neri:
>It looks like head boy Tom was a lead singer in the evening sing 
alongs, and the words probably went along the lines of  "we cunning 
folks use any mean to achieve our ends" and "those whose ancestry is 
purest".< 

Betsy Hp:
Well, let's stop mucking about in speculation about what young Tom 
sang (I expect it was whatever folks wanted to hear at that point of 
his life) and turn to Hogwart's official singer, the Sorting Hat.

"Or perhaps in Slytherin
You'll make your real friends,
Those cunning folks use any means
To achieve their ends."  (SS scholastic paperback p.118)

(Harry misses the sorting in CoS and PoA.)

"Shrewd Slytherin from fen."
[...]
"And power-hungry Slytherin
Loved those of great ambition." (GoF scholastic hardback p.177)

"Said Slytherin, 'We'll teach just those
Whose ancestry is purest.'" 
[...]
"For instance, Slytherin
Took only pure-blood wizards
Of great cunning, just like him," (OotP scholastic hardback p.205)

So Slytherins should be cunning, ends over means thinkers, filled 
with ambition and pure of blood.  Though, since we do know Slytherin 
has taken students who aren't pure-bloods (Tom, almost Harry, the 
Weasley who wasn't) I'll say Slytherin wants those who've got strong 
ties and/or loyalties to the WW.

So, certainly not the fluffy bunny house.  But though those traits 
are formidable and could lead to horrible consequences if used for 
evil, they're not evil traits in and of themselves.  

>>Neri:
>Or at least, these are the official words that the Sorting Hat used, 
but within the warm and cozy safety of the Slytherin commons it 
probably went more along the lines of "so I bet it's a matter of time 
before a mudblood is killed this time
 I hope it's Granger".<
<snip>

Betsy Hp:
Ah, the old, "let's hold Draco Malfoy to a higher standard than 
Harry" argument.  Harry has day-dreamed about putting a teacher he 
disliked under a Cruciatus curse and bashing his head in with a 
cauldron.  In fact, Harry actually threw a cruciatus at someone.  So 
if we're expected to look at twelve year old Draco's idle day-dreams 
about the girl he hates getting conveniently killed as an example of 
evil, then I expect our next to discussion to be about what a horrid 
little boy Harry has turned out to be.

>>Neri:
>Umm, I guess you have a perfectly reasonable and innocent reason why 
old Sally sneaked a XXXXX classified monster into a school?<

Betsy Hp:
Protection?  The Sorting Hat did say that the discord that crept 
amongst the founders fed on their "faults and fears".  It seems 
fairly obvious to me, since the school was specifically built in a 
remote location to get away from muggle persecution, that Salazar did 
not trust those with muggle connections.  The fault and fear that 
would build inside of Salazar, I think, must have been his muggle 
paranoia.  If the other founders didn't share his fears and he felt 
he had to leave, wouldn't it make sense for him to leave behind a 
creature that might help protect them from their own folly?  

Or maybe there's something else hidden in Salazar's chamber, and the 
Basalisk was only supposed to serve as a guardian.  After all, the 
basilisk was locked up rather securely.

Remember, the founders *liked* Salazar, quite a bit.  They liked him 
after he created Slytherin house and laid out his vision of the 
perfect Hogwarts student.  And they liked him well enough after he 
left that they were sad to have lost him.  They did keep his house at 
Hogwarts, after all.  He can't have been *that* bad.

>>Neri: 
>And the only people in history I know who depicted themselves in 
monumental statues and the like were tyrants, usually of the worst 
kind. The basilisk coming right out of the mouth doesn't help much in 
alleviating this impression.<

Betsy Hp:
Did those tyrants tuck those statues away in the basement, locked 
away from human view?  Maybe there's something *inside* the statue, 
and the mouth is how to gain entrance.  Harry wasn't able to stick 
around and go exploring once the snake was dead, so maybe there's 
more to discover.  I also think the snake coming out of Salazar's 
mouth signals the parsel tongue connection.

>>Neri: 
>If old Salazar didn't *invent* the pureblood mania, then he is the 
one who made it ingrained into Hogwarts.<

Betsy Hp:
I thought that was Voldemort?

>>Neri:
>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?<

Betsy Hp:
Actually, *children* were the most vulnerable.  And if your town is 
under attack, do you get your children to safety first, or leave them 
to fend for themselves while you rescue some kids living further 
out?  In times of trouble the circle you draw around those you 
consider yours becomes smaller.  Yes, muggle-born wizards were in 
more danger than pure-bloods.  But muggle-born wizards also had the 
strongest ties to muggles.  They had their feet in two different 
worlds and therefore were more likely to become traitors.

>>Neri:
>Salazar was apparently ready to let them burn because they weren't 
pure enough.<

Betsy Hp:
They weren't *trustworthy* enough is how I'd see it.

>>Neri:
>Are Draco's own words above Gryffindor propaganda?<

Betsy Hp:
As I've said, many times before, Draco is spouting his *father's* 
philosophy.  We have absolutely no canon to tell us if this is what 
all Slytherins believe.

>>Neri:
>Well, I guess they are if you count JKR as a Gryffindor (which of 
course she is, which means the whole HP saga is Gryffindor 
propaganda).<

Betsy Hp:
I think that JKR definitely sees the Gryffindor traits as better for 
leadership, etc.  I don't think she sees Slytherin as evil.  
Actually, I think JKR's treatment of Slytherin has been very... 
Slytherin.  She's been very cunning in showing us very little of that 
house and allowing folks to come to their own conclusions.  I think 
Slytherin, much like Snape, is one of her favorite red herrings.  (So 
far Harry has been betrayed by a Gryffindor and a Ravenclaw.)

>>Neri:
>We have a pretty good canon picture of house Slytherin in 
the "Riddle's shadow" era, and we have a pretty good picture of the 
house founder. Now, if *between* Salazar and Tom the house was 
actually quite nice, well, I suspect you might have a problem finding 
canon for that, but if you do then I'll just have to modify my claim 
to the slightly less catchy "the house of Slytherin *in the period of 
Voldemort* is Evil, Evil, Evil".<
<snip>

Betsy Hp:
Let's review our canon knowledge of Salazar.  We know Salazar comes 
from a swampy area of England, and IIRC those from swamps and marshes 
are often painted as sneaky and cunning in fairy-tales and the like.  
We know he was, power-hungry, shrewd and a pure-blood.  We also know 
he was very good friends with the other founders, especially 
Gryffindor, and we know that he left the school when the fighting 
between the four reached its height.  We know that when Salazar did 
leave, the other three founders were sad to have lost him.  And we 
know that they kept his house intact. 

Why didn't the founders destroy Slytherin?  If Salazar was so evil, 
why'd they leave his house in their school? Maybe Salazar *wasn't* 
all that evil in the first place.  Maybe his cunning and shrewdness 
served the founders well and they realized that Hogwarts would be 
weaker without some of his philosophies balancing out their own.

As to Voldemort, we know that when he was at the height of his power 
his Death Eaters outnumbered the Order members *twenty* to one.  Are 
you seriously implying that Slytherin was *that* much larger a house 
than the three others combined?

We also know that at least one Slytherin family (the Blacks) 
disapproved of Voldemort's methods and lost a child to him.  And we 
know that one of Voldemort's top spies was a Gryffindor.  We also 
know that when Lucius Malfoy joined up with Voldemort he brought his 
people along.  That they were all Slytherin is hardly surprising.  
But were they *all* of the Slytherins?  And were all the Death Eaters 
Slytherin?  We know that those Death Eaters who managed to slink away 
when Voldemort fell were, for the most part, Slytherin.  But they 
were also all, IIRC, Lucius's people.

Again, our information is dodgy, so I think sweeping generalizations 
are not safe to make.
 
>>Neri:
>Contrary to some opinions, JKR is *not* all-powerful. She can't 
completely overturn a wide and detailed picture she's been painting 
for five books, or she'll lose her credibility as an author. She 
*can* reveal that a single bad person is actually good, or that a 
single good person is actually evil. She *can* introduce 
additional "good Slytherins" just to make a point about prejudice or 
school unity or second chances. But changing the whole role that 
Slytherin house, with its dogma and values, has been playing in the 
series would be lousy writing.<

Betsy Hp:
More lousy than carefully painting a nuanced world where affiliations 
and family lines don't automatically funnel a character into a good 
or evil camp and then suddenly throwing in the biggest black hat 
since the Lone Ranger appeared on the silver screen?  Worse than 
that?  So you're seriously saying that if JKR *doesn't* show us that 
Slytherin is a house dedicated to future tyrants and psychopaths then 
suddenly it'll be a bad series to you?

That just doesn't make any kind of sense to me.  Usually I prefer my 
stories with a bit of a third demension thrown in there and some 
shades of gray.  Which is why I was drawn into this particular series.

But if you'd prefer for Dumbledore to suddenly turn into the world's 
biggest idiot, for the founders to all turn out to be insane child 
abusers, for the moral of the story to be "Prejudice is *great* 
kids!", then I'm hoping you end up thinking JKR did herself some 
*really* lousy writing.
  
>>Neri: 
>But perhaps the worst news for the House-Slytherin-Isn't-Evil fans 
are that JKR (like Voldemort) is now in dire need of evil recruits. 
She's writing a series about a war, and this war is now starting to 
really gather momentum. The good guys must have somebody to fight. 
JKR requires enemies, and they have to be numerous and convincing and 
Evil, and to have a proper background in the previous books. Hordes 
of dementors and Giants can help, but they won't be enough. JKR has 
been showing us that the roots of evil start at home and at school, 
and that evil is created by people and their values, not by demons 
and monsters. Surely this is what Slytherin house was invented for? 
So we can have a pureblood mania and school rivalry and evil enemies 
and a convincing war. And if that doesn't seem fair, well that's 
fiction.
>Invented characters don't get human rights.<

Betsy Hp:
Erm... *bad* fiction, maybe.  Evil at eleven, huh?  Absolutely no 
hope for any child sorted into Slytherin.  Kinda of stupid of the 
founders to keep Slytherin.  Stupid of the many headmasters Hogwarts 
has had over the years to not just gas those despicable little brats 
as soon as the Sorting Hat sang out "Slytherin"!  Honestly, the 
Weasley twins shouldn't have held back at just hissing the newly 
sorted Slytherins.  Maybe they should have force fed them some of 
their candy experiments, watched the little tikes bleed out. Score 
some for the good guys?

It would make poor Snape and Niguellus feel fairly useless.  A 
Headmaster and a Head of House, obviously freakishly different from 
any Slytherin before or since, totally unable to cast the evil out of 
their house.  And of course one of the biggest fools would be the 
Sorting Hat and its naive, and in the end rather pointless, song in 
OotP.  Screw school unity, obviously the Slytherins need to die.

(Because no Gryffindor or Ravenclaw would ever even *think* about 
going against dear, sweet, fluffly, little Harry.)

Betsy Hp