Special treatment - yes or no

[sistermagpie]

No: HPFGUIDX 146030

> bboyminn:
> 
> Even though you have somewhat established it in other posts, I 
think this is the flaw in your assumption. The game was not over; 
Slytherin  has NOT won. The game isn't over until the final buzzer 
sounds, and  the final buzzer hadn't sounded yet. School was still 
in session, points could still be awared for good behavior and taken 
for bad > behavior. 

Magpie:

Yes, the game wasn't *truly* won because Dumbledore gave out more 
points.  I agree.  But the house is decorated in Slytherin colors to 
make it LOOK like it was over and they won so that they'd have more 
egg on their face.  The *assumption* is the whole point of the bait 
and switch.  As I said in other posts, I don't challenge 
Dumbledore's right to award points to Gryffindor or for Gryffindor 
to win.  I am saying that Dumbledore intentionally psyched everyone 
out to make more of a surprise for Harry and that involved Slytherin 
in a way which was unnecessary.  

Steve:
> Was Slytherin VERY disappointed? They certainly were, and 
justifiably
> so. But did you, or they, really expect to live their lives without
> disappointment? 

Magpie:

Err...this is coming way out of left field for me. Of course they 
should expect to live their lives with disappointment--and will 
throughout the series.  (Just like Harry has to suffer a run-of-the-
mill case of getting passed over for distinction with his Prefect 
badge...though he's got a bunch of adults telling him he should have 
gotten it or that it's cooler to be passed over, and then at the end 
of the year Dumbledore apologizes to him about it and assures him he 
really was the best anyway.) 

The whole angle of Slytherins, me and disappointment is pretty much 
a strawman ably knocked down with a bracing lecture about how 
disappointment builds character.  I have not only never suggested 
that Slytherin should get the cup back, I have said more than once 
that I consider Gryffindor the winner.  I already agree that 
everyone needs to learn to live with disappointment and would hardly 
argue otherwise.  They can be disappointed without the banner 
switch.  

Magpie:
> I have come to the conclusion now that perhaps the reason for this
> is that JKR sees it as important for people to always make choices
> based on what they want to do, right or wrong, and never based on
> something outside of themselves.

kchuplis: 
Can you expound on this theory? To me what you said is that JKR is
advising people just always do whatever they want (which intimates
that it doesn't matter to her if it causes hurt or not) but I don't
*think* that is really what you mean to say.

Magpie:
Sorry, I didn't make it very clear.  I didn't mean that people 
should do whatever they want in terms of just making choices based 
on their personal pleasure.  I meant more to suggest that they know 
they are making choices based on what *they* think is right and 
wrong, or what they are comfortable doing rather than following what 
someone else says to do.  (I didn't say "based on what's right and 
wrong" because sometimes characters choose something that's not 
exactly right but something they can live with.)

It's true Voldemort does not really seem to offer any sort of ethics 
at all.  What I meant was more that the DEs fight amongst themselves 
to see who's most in his favor--that's what he offers (as you 
said).  It's a very childish way to go through life where "good" is 
stuff that makes Voldemort (or anyone else) pleased with you or 
reward you.  He seems to be at the center of most of the stuff they 
do because he is the great and powerful one who's going to fix 
things or make others pay or elevate them.  You're right with how 
you described it, imo, that right and wrong don't matter, what 
matters is what Voldemort thinks because that leads to praise and 
favor.

The one DE who seems to mostly avoid being described in a childlike 
way (Snape and Peter have their moments) is Lucius Malfoy, and I 
think that's because he's needed to stand as a father figure to 
Draco (who does struggle with childishness, especially in the 
Tower).  

So I get the feeling that JKR may associate independence and not 
being a follower with virtue in itself.  James was a good man, but 
he was no goody-two-shoes.  That, perhaps, makes it more clear that 
he's good because he believes in what he's doing, if that makes 
sense.  Characters who long for an authority figure to validate them 
always seem to be in more danger morally in the series, imo, whether 
it's Percy with "Mr. Crouch says..." or Draco with, "My father 
says..."  In a way they separate themselves from their own actions 
because they're just leaving it up to the smarter person.  (That's 
why I think that while we don't know if it will result in anything, 
it is a good thing for Draco's character that he is cut off from, 
betrayed by or rejects all his former authorities.)

There are times when the characters choose what they want to do 
rather than what is right--James with Snape, for instance.  But I 
think those times when they make the wrong decision maybe are meant 
to show that when they choose to do the right thing it's all their 
decision too.  So I feel like maybe she's saying it's good to be 
independent and decide for yourself what's right and wrong, but that 
doesn't always mean you'll make the correct decision.

-m