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

[a_svirn]

No: HPFGUIDX 162042

> Ceridwen:
> I thought it was odd that Harry inherited a slave/house elf, too.  
I 
> really didn't see JKR going there.
> 
> But, the situation exists.  Harry, without asking for it, got 
> Kreacher willed to him.  He now has one of two options: give 
Kreacher 
> clothes, or not give him clothes.

a_svirn:
That's not the issue under the discussion. Naturally, Harry can't set 
Kreacher free just yet. But must he use his power over him to force 
him spy for someone he'd rather serve? Must he treat him like a 
slave, rather than like a prisoner?

> Ceridwen:
> If Harry doesn't give Kreacher clothes, he does have a 
responsibility 
> to him.  Kreacher is dependent on his owner for basic needs like 
> housing and food.  Whether it is a legal obligation or just a moral 
> one, Harry has a duty toward Kreacher as his dependent.

a_svirn:
Well, we don't see him fulfilling that moral responsibility. Nor, in 
all honesty, is he called for to fulfill it. House-elves seem to have 
their own ways of finding food. Housing, yes, that's a really 
sensitive issue. But since Harry himself is housed in Hogwarts the 
point is moot. And by the time Harry has his own household (if he 
lives long enough) he'll be able to set Kreacher free. 

> Ceridwen: 
> House elves bring another layer of responsibility to their owners.  
> Elves' natures, whether charmed or inborn, mean they want to serve 
> wizards and witches.  

a_svirn:
That's rather crucial distinction, though. If it is charmed, and we 
know it is – we've been told so, the fist responsibility of a decent 
wizard is to free them from those charms. 

> Ceridwen: 
They fear freedom, from what I get from the 
> books.  

a_svirn:
So what? Human slaves are also known to fear freedom. That's what 
slavery does to a person – cripple them mentally. Especially if the 
said person was born in slavery and doesn't know the difference. 

> Ceridwen:
They wouldn't know how to manage for themselves, particularly 
> with some compelling force making them want to work, work, work. 

a_svirn:
Dobby can manage for himself. So does Kreacher. And I didn't notice 
how Kreacher is being compelled to "work, work, work". Rather the 
opposite. In fact, even Winky doesn't seem to be compelled to "work, 
work, work". 

> Ceridwen:
 The 
> nature of elves, and the fact that there doesn't seem to be an 
> employment agency renting them out for catered affairs and 
temporary 
> work - I don't count the relocation office, that seems to just send 
> elves to a new master's household - means that the owners are more 
> than just owners, they are the responsible parties for all of their 
> elves' needs.  

a_svirn:
On the contrary, it means that owners are exactly what they are – 
owners. They sell and by elves as if they were livestock, or used 
cars. And what's wrong with their nature? They seem to have all the 
emotions humans have. You don't think that Wooster has a right to 
*own* Jeeves just because Jeeves wants to serve Wooster? 

> Ceridwen:
If wizards really want to do something constructive 
> for the future of elves, they will have to address the fear of 
> freedom, and the lack of some sort of employment that will not send 
> elves from one place of slavery to another.

a_svirn:
Which means they have to set them free. How does one address fear of 
freedom? The only way to fight fear, any fear is to offer security. 
If wizards replaced the elves relocation office with the elves social 
well-fair office, I think elves would fear freedom less.