Dumbledore on the Dursleys in OotP (LONG)

[justcarol67]

No: HPFGUIDX 151496

Alla wrote:
> <snip>
> I think it denigrates Kreacher to say that wizards 
> made him who he is and that is why and only why he chose what he did.
> 
> I view him as an intelligent human being (well, human being of 
> another race, but human being nevertheless), or intelligent being 
> would be the better way to say it? I am not sure.
> 
> I have very little sympathy for Kreacher on pure emotional level , 
> but on the intellectual level I sympathize with his situation 
> of course. Nevertheless I refuse to say that he is a robot incapable 
> to choose for himself because he is enslaved.
> 
> As I said, I think Kreacher truly loved Sirius' parents and that is 
> what determined his actions towards Sirius.

Carol responds:
I actually agree with most of what you say here, except that Kreacher
is not human: he's a Being as opposed to a Beast according to the MoM
classification. But house-elves in general seem to be neither more nor
less intelligent than humans and don't require a wand to perform
magic. It's only their size and appearance and their apparently inborn
desire to serve humans that makes Wizards in general judge them as
inferior.

Leaving emotions out of it, to what extent is Kreacher "what Wizards
have made him"? First, there's his name. Kreacher = Creature. Surely
no house-elf mother would give her child that name, especially given
the family resemblance among the heads on the wall: he probably looked
just like her. And there's no reason why a house-elf wouldn't love her
child like any other mother. I'm guessing that Walpurga Black or at
least *a* Black who lived in 12 GP named him. But a name like that
would help to shape his self-image as something inferior to humans,
even contemptible. So would his servitude and whatever punishment he
received from them, along with constant exposure to pureblood
doctrines in which "creatures with near-human intelligence" (as
Umbridge would say) are regarded with contempt, perhaps even beneath
Muggles. I'm guessing, too, that whatever happened to his mind to make
him mutter to himself and live in filth, wearing only a loincloth
rather than a togalike towel, was the fault of wizards or witches, too
(my theory, as you may know, is that he drank the poisoned memory
potion on Regulus's orders).

Still, as you say, Dobby was also brought up, and probably born into,
a household of Dark wizards who spouted the same pureblood doctrines,
yet Dobby chose to support the "Light" side, or whatever we should
call the forces opposing Voldemort. Dobby hated and feared the "bad
Dark Wizards" he was forced by the code of house-elves to obey;
Kreacher loved them, especially Walpurga and her niece, "Miss
Bellatrix." Why? Was Kreacher never made to iron his hands for failure
to obey them? That seems unlikely. He shows up with bandaged hands
after attacking Buckbeak, and while Buckbeak could have attacked him,
I think it's more likely that he ironed his hands after doing
something to thwart his hated master, Sirius. Walpurga at some point
seems to have gone mad, judging from her portrait, but Kreacher, mad
himself, seems devoted to her. And Sirius, who hates his mother and
his house, treats Kreacher with supreme contempt because of that
devotion and Kreacher's general attitude and appearance. (Oddly, he
never orders him to change to a clean loincloth or put on a tea
towel.) So while Sirius didn't drive Kreacher insane, surely his
attitude doesn't help matters.

How much of what Kreacher is is the result of how he has been treated
(indoctrination from birth, if not outright abuse, and neglect and
contempt from Sirius), how much is inborn (the house-elf mentality
shared by Dobby and Winky?) and how much is his own choice? Certainly
we have three very different house-elves, all apparently deviations
from the norm represented by the house-elves of Hogwarts (though Winky
was also a "normal" house-elf until she was sacked), but are they all
*only* what wizards have made them? How much responsibility does
Kreacher bear for his own decisions and attitudes?

I would argue, and here I think we agree, that Kreacher is responsible
for his own decision to interpret Sirius's order "Out!" as an order to
leave the house and for his choice to go to Narcissa (his dear
Bellatrix being in Azkaban and not accessible). It was also his own
decision to obey her, providing whatever information about Sirius and
Harry that he could give without violating a direct order, injuring
Buckbeak, and lying to Harry when Harry's head appeared in the
fireplace. (Yes, of course, Narcissa and probably Lucius bear a large
share of the blame for giving him those orders.) Kreacher *chooses* to
obey those orders, gleefully thwarting his rightful master (who holds
all the "wrong" views and hates Kreacher's dear dead mistress).

I would argue, however, that Kreacher can't be blamed for Sirius
Black's death. He was trying to help the Malfoys and Voldemort get
*Harry* to the MoM (hardly a commendable aim, and if Harry had died,
he would have a share of the blame). But when Kreacher informed Harry
that "Master will not return from the Ministry of Magic," "Master" was
safe at home tending Buckbeak. Sirius's later decision to go with the
Order members, despite Snape's request that he stay and wait for
Dumbledore, was his own. And that, I think, is what Dumbledore was
saying. Yes, Sirius would not have died if it weren't for Kreacher's
treachery, but Kreacher did not plot to kill him. Nor could he have
known that Sirius would die if he went with the other Order members to
the MoM. He didn't even know that Snape would send them to save Harry
and his friends.

So I agree that despite his slavery and the miserable conditions he
lives in and even his mental degeneration, Kreacher is capable of
making his own decisions in certain circumstances. He chose to provide
information to the Malfoys and to act on their orders. And yet
perhaps, in another household, with a different name and a clean tea
towel, he might have had some modicum of self-respect instead of
giving his devotion to people who didn't deserve it and would not have
become an agent of the Dark side. I doubt that he would have been a
rebel like Dobby, but he might have been more like Winky before she
was sacked. And perhaps, if Sirius had treated him as Dumbledore
treated the Hogwarts house-elves, giving him duties and a clean tea
towel and respecting his desire to serve the Black family, Kreacher
would not have betrayed him. Tragically for both of them, however, it
was probably too late. Each was blind to the other's views and
feelings, and Sirius had too much contempt for Kreacher to realize
that he was dangerous.

IMO, Kreacher does bear some responsibility for his actions and
decisions, yet paradoxically, like Gollum, he is more to be pitied
than hated. Setting aside his mental state, he is both a slave and to
some degree a free agent, interpreting Sirius's orders as he chooses
and deciding for himself where his loyalties lie; both a victim of
circumstances and what he has chosen to become.

Perhaps Dumbledore understood, as he talked to Harry at the end of
OoP, that Harry was likely to be Kreacher's new master and that it
would be extremely dangerous to treat Kreacher as Sirius had done. So
without overtly criticizing Sirius or blaming him exclusively for what
Kreacher had become, Dumbledore had no choice but to indicate that
Kreacher could not be blamed for Sirius's death and that he must not
be dismissed as beneath contempt as Sirius had done, with dire
consequences for himself (Sirius) and potentially dire consequences
for Harry and the WW. It was more important to keep Harry from
repeating Sirius's mistake than to falsely exonerate the dead man.
Harry's life, as ever, was more important than his feelings of the
moment. This was a matter that he *must* understand, and Dumbledore
could not pass up the opportunity. Nor could he deny that Sirius's own
decision to go to the MoM was no fault of Kreacher's or Harry's or
anyone else. Anger and hatred on Harry's part, blaming Kreacher for
Sirius's death, cannot mend matters and might make them even worse,
and that, IMO, is what Dumbledore wanted Harry to understand.

For DD to say, "Poor Sirius. It's all that wretched house-elf's fault
that he died" would have been both false comfort and a lie. There is
no comfort for the loss of a loved one, and whatever temptation we
feel to blame others (or ourselves) cannot "make it better."
Ultimately, the only healing we have is acceptance. The loss itself is
irreparable, but blame and anger make the suffering worse. I know.
I've been there. In some ways, I'm still there. But Harry can't remain
there. He must move on to acceptance, not only of Sirius's death but
of Dumbledore's, if he's going to save the WW through Love.

Carol, aware that her conclusions regarding Kreacher are inconclusive
but at least sure that she doesn't hate him for who he is or what he's
done