[HPforGrownups] Re: Wizard Persecution (was: The Falling-Out of the Hogwarts Four)

[Lindsay]

No: HPFGUIDX 126116

Valky:
> Without assuming that Binnsy has read it cover to cover and nitpicked
> the fine detail, personally (he certainly has had plenty of time on
> his hands for doing so..) we can yet find that some creedence to it's
> authority or author would rather likely be paid by Professor Binns or
> else why would he choose it.
> 
Lindsay:
I haven't met a teacher to date who had any direct control over the
books they taught out of.  Perhaps it is different in the UK, but most
books over here are chosen by either the board or district or the
principal (I think it differs by county or state), or at the
university level, by the department.

Twice in my life I have worked with my teachers to get the books
changed.  One finally got the district to change after a year of
complaining to them and getting enough of the other teachers to sign a
petition.  The other, after three years, is still trying to get the
department to change the book, but to no avail, even though he has
been teaching that class for years and he is a senior member on staff.

So it may not even be a matter under Binns's control.  Umbridge
excluded - she had a bit more control over these things than Binns
does.  Dumbledore, the Board of Governors, even the Ministry may be
the ones controlling the student book list.  And while Binns may have
changed the book during his life, I doubt Binns is going to make the
effort in death.  He may have understood the need to cover it up,
there may have not *been* a better book out there, etc.

While, yes, if the book was false, the correct information could
probably very easily be had through asking Binns or the Library, how
many students are going to actually sit down, ask questions, and then
research?  But the book isn't false - it does tell the truth regarding
the matter.  It just doesn't tell the *entire* story, I think.  It
omits a great deal of information, and in a manner as to dismiss that
there IS any further information.

And I don't doubt for a second that Slytherin was a Dark wizard.  I
agree completely with you, Valky, that the Chamber probably held a
great deal of knowledge about such things, and that is where Tom
learned it all.

And yes, we do not really have a true canon backup for any of this, I
think currently we do have enough canon to support that Salazar wasn't
entirely malicious, if we assume that the basilisk was more of a
defensive measure than an offensive one.  Even if it is offensive,
whether or not Salazar's mistrust was just that - mistrust - is the
key.  We have received no canon evidence that Salazar *hated* Muggles
and Muggleborns.  No primary or secondary source has said that at all.
 He just did not want Muggleborns in the school because he thought
they were untrustworthy.  And whether that is right or wrong doesn't
matter, but whether the position is justifiable - or even,
understandable.

I think it is.

JKR has, time and time again, fooled us into thinking one thing about
something, only to reveal that it is something else entirely.  Things
are not always what they seem, or what people make them out to be. 
While Snape is still a bastard, now we feel pity for his childhood. 
We learned that James wasn't the greatest kid out there.  We learned
that Dumbledore is indeed infalliable.  We learned, books 1-4, that
the current DADA person wasn't who we thought they were.  There has
been incidences, time and time again, of mistaken indentity, or
mistaken assessment of a person.

I think JKR has given us more than enough hints that Salazar Slytherin
wasn't exactly the maniac Dark Wizard who hated Muggles that Voldie
and the Death Eaters (that sounds like a band, huh?) make him out to
be.  That everyone else makes him out to be, too.  Except Dumbledore. 
Dumbledore has yet to say anything negative about Salazar Slytherin,
and in fact, when he did talk to Harry about him (concerning Harry's
placement in Gryffindor), there was something respectful and *good*
about what Dumbledore said.  Dumbledore, who should have plenty of bad
things to say about Slytherin concerning their clashing views on
Muggleborns, doesn't take the oppurtunity to say negative things about
the Founder, but good things.  Things that Harry, he pointed out, had
in common with Slytherin.

I think that speaks volumes, and while I do not doubt for a second
that Slytherin practised Dark magic, that doesn't exactly make him a
maniacally murderer who set out to eradicate all Muggleborns.

I'm not saying that Slytherin was a good person.  Far from it.  But I
am trying to justify his position as we know it, and I think there is
a lot to be said from what we know.


Alla:
Again, I do wonder what happened that made Salasar distrust of
Muggleborns increase so drastically that he started insisting that
Muggleborns should not be allowed into Hogwarts AT ALL?

Lindsay:
It makes me wonder, too.  :)