Freedom for House-Elves (Was: Kreacher the Plot Device Elf)

[justcarol67]

No: HPFGUIDX 161947

a_svirn wrote:
<snip>
> So I think it is rather clever of Rowling to give us a perfect 
> excuse on a silver platter – slaves who aren't human. And how eager 
> are folks to leap to this excuse! Even Harry went from being 
> revolted to being noble and thinking of slave-holding in terms 
> of "responsibility" in a blink of an eye. <snip>

Carol responds:
But what choice does Harry have? He can't set Kreacher free. To do so
would be extremely *irresponsible* and dangerous. He's in a position
similar to that of Petunia when he was placed on her doorstep (except
that he doesn't have to feed and clothe his charge--I've already
expressed my wish that Harry would order him to at least wear a clean
loincloth!). Granted, Kreacher isn't an infant, but he can no more be
set loose to fend for himself than Baby!harry could, however different
the reasons. Under the circumstances, I wouldn't criticize him for
considering Kreacher as his responsibility. If anything, I'd criticize
him for not taking that responsibility seriously enough. Thank
goodness for Dobby, who has become in effect Kreacher's self-appointed
guardian.

Carol, respecting your view that house-elves are still slaves even
though they're not human but still sure that the desire to serve is
ingrained in their nature with or without spells compelling them to
serve a particular master