CHAPDISC: DH10, Kreacher's Tale

[a_svirn]

No: HPFGUIDX 180102

> Mike:
> Let me flesh this out a little bit. Dobby is the oddball elf. He 
not 
> only refuses to follow his master's way of thinking, he wants to be 
> free. No other elf is shown to think the way Dobby does. So when 
> Dobby discovers a plot that he thinks will harm Harry Potter, his 
> most noble hero, he tries to do something about it. He's still 
bound 
> by his enchantment to punish himself for speaking ill of his 
master, 
> but he thinks it's worth it.
> 
> Kreacher is bound to the Black family, he does not have allegiences 
> outside of the family. Kreacher is mostly beholden to Walburga, who 
> we learn was heartbroken when Sirius leaves. In OotP, Sirius has 
> moved back into the house. If Kreacher is so loyal to the Black 
> family, why does he hold Sirius in such contempt to the point of 
> betraying him? 

a_svirn:
Because Walburga and the rest of the family did. Sirius had rebelled 
against his family. I think it is only fair that his family paid him 
back by disowning him (even though they couldn't actually disinherit 
him). I am sure even Sirius himself would agree that it's fair. 
Sirius rebelled against the family, and Kreacher rebelled against 
Sirius. Seems logical to me. 

> Mike: 
> Compare Kreacher to Winky. The enmity between Crouch Senior and 
> Junior is a chasm compared to the ditch between Sirius and his 
> mother. Yet Winky is loyal to both. 

a_svirn:
Oh, no. She isn't. She is loyal solely to Mr. Crouch Sr. Honestly, 
Mike, she has been acting as a *jailer* to young Barty – how loyal is 
it? She used her not inconsiderable magic to compel Barty to do all 
the things he didn't want. Granted, "for his own good". But most 
certainly against his will. It is anything but loyalty. 

If you say that she loved both, I would agree. She loved Barty, 
perhaps even more that she did his father, but she was loyal 
exclusively to the latter. And it was because she failed Crouch Sr. 
while performing this most important task she got fired. 

Kreacher, on the contrary, was loyal to both Regulus and Walburga and 
had to balance his divided loyalties when Regulus disappeared. But in 
any case I don't really see what it proves. Yes, their situations 
were somewhat different. Yet, both Winky and Kreacher did their best 
to serve their true masters' interests as they understood them. 

> Mike: 
Which elf am I supposed to 
> believe Kreacher is more like, Dobby or Winky? Before DH, I would 
> have said Dobby. But after DH, I see that Kreacher has the simple 
> mindedness of Winky, able to act the role of a proper elf after 
> Harry's simple act of treating him with kindness. And despite 
Sirius 
> never showing Kreacher kindness, he wasn't mistreated in the way 
> Dobby was by the Malfoys. 

a_svirn:
I think you do both Dobby and Kreacher injustice. Dobby did not rebel 
against the Malfoys only because he'd been mistreated. First and 
foremost, he did so because he was an "oddball" as you say – he 
wanted to be free. He would want it in any case, even if he weren't 
badly treated. And second, he did so because he was Harry's fan and 
was concerned about Harry's safety. 

Kreacher, on the other hand, wasn't really concerned about himself. 
He wanted to avenge his true mistress, Walburga. He wanted to punish 
Sirius who had caused so much grief to his parents in the past and 
proceeded to wage a war on his dead relatives (not exactly noble 
endeavour, by the way, since they couldn't respond). Kreacher did not 
really care how he was treated by Sirius; in fact, he did everything 
to provoke him. Just like Sirius himself had done as a boy, when he 
had gone out of his way to provoke his parents. 

> Mike: 
> Shouldn't Kreacher have had more of a reason to betray Sirius than 
he 
> broke his mother's heart by leaving? Shouldn't his returning have 
> been an occasion for celebration for Kreacher? 

a_svirn:
Was it a cause for celebration for Walburga? 

> Mike:
There's a cognitive 
> dissonance in Kreacher's love for the Blacks and his hatred of the 
> last Black. Especially since this hatred seemed to be there from 
the 
> moment Sirius returned to 12 GP.

a_svirn:
I really don't see it. It was the last Black who hated his family. 
Whereas Kreacher loved it. How could Kreacher get round that one? How 
could anyone? 

> Mike:
> Finally, Dobby's simple minded goal was to protect Harry Potter. 
> Kreacher's simple minded goal was to get revenge on Sirius by 
helping 
> his enemies. Get revenge on Sirius for whom? The mother that 
grieved 
> when he left? 

a_svirn:
For the family Sirius had denounced. Or, as Kreacher undoubtedly saw 
it, had betrayed. After all it wasn't merely Sirius's absence that 
caused Walburga grief. It was his betrayal of his noble blood. 

> Mike:
Where would Kreacher get the idea that Walburga would 
> want to see her estranged son hurt?

a_svirn:
>From Walburga's portrait? 

> Mike:
<snip> Harry started out with the premise 
> that Dobby is just another creature deserving of as much respect as 
> any human. In GoF, Harry's friends give him two new views to 
> consider. 
> 
> Harry is already confused by Dobby and his desires when he 
encounters 
> the other elves. Ron (originally) sees elves as no more than 
slaves, 
> not worthy of consideration. Hermione (originally) sees elves as 
> equals to humans, needing to be released from their bondage. After 
> bouncing around somewhere between Ron and Hermione, Harry 
eventually 
> learns that they aren't elves (collective), they are individuals. 

a_svirn:
I still don't think Harry has ever seen elves as group. From the get 
go he treated Dobby as an individual. I'd say there has been some ups 
and downs in their relationships (I think HBP counts as a "down"), 
but it simply not in Harry's nature to treat people as group 
representatives. It is more of Hermione's thing. He liked Dobby from 
the start and wanted to help him. He disliked Kreacher – who was 
being obnoxious – from the start, then he hated him, then he pitied 
him. He also accepted in HBP the fact that Kreacher was his property 
and has made use of him ever since. That's all there is to it.

> Mike:
> He "unlearns" treating them as a group and reverts back to treating 
> them as if they each have their own motivations, no matter how 
simple-
> minded they be. Even if he treats Kreacher as his slave, he treats 
> him as an individual worthy of respectful treatment within the 
> confines of his individual motivations. 

a_svirn:
No, he doesn't. He treats Kreacher with kindness, yes. But it is 
impossible to treat your own slave with respect. The fact that you 
own him or her is already somewhat disrespectful, wouldn't you say? 

> Mike:
That is, Kreacher is a house 
> elf and takes pride in his house elfness as long as he's treated as 
a 
> being with feelings.

a_svirn:
But Harry always treated Kreacher as a being with feelings. He didn't 
always understand his motivations, yes, but that has nothing to do 
with not seeing Kreacher as an individual and seeing him as a group 
representative instead. If anything, Harry lacked this generalised 
vision at first, and it was only because of Hermione's newfound 
insight in general elfish psychology that he achieved a greater 
degree of understanding. 
 
 
> Mike:
> I really don't think Harry thought of Slytherins as individuals. 
> Notice the reaction Slughorn gets when he reveals himself as the 
> former Slytherin HoH. Until DH, which Slytherin stood out for Harry 
> as different from his/her brethren? None, unless you want to count 
> Riddle as standing out as exceptionally psychotic. 

a_svirn:
That's because they were all jerks both individually and as a group. 
Or did we really see any decent Slytherins before DH? How could Harry 
see what simply wasn't there? 

> Mike:
> I definitely see the parallel between House Elves and Slytherins 
from 
> Harry's perspective with regard to their individuality. In DH, 
Harry 
> learns of the individuality of several Slytherins, not all revealed 
> as better than he thought either. 
> 
> He learns Crabbe is more than just one of Draco's cronies, he's 
even 
> more cruel than he thought. He learned that Draco had got himself 
in 
> over his head, and probably regretted it. He learned Sirius' 
brother 
> had more depth to him than just another mind numbed robot DE, even 
at 
> such an early age. He learned Slughorn had more backbone than he 
had 
> originally given him credit. He learned that Pansy was willing to 
> stand up and be counted, though not favorably towards Harry. He 
> learned Narcissa loved her son so much that she was willing to defy 
> Voldemort to protect him. And most of all, he learned that Severus 
> Snape would risk his life, and lose it, to protect the son of the 
> woman he loved. (Lucius Malfoy and Bellatrix Lestrange had already 
> revealed their detestable individualities, imo)
> 
> That about covers the list of significant Slytherins in this 
series, 
> wouldn't you say?

a_svirn:
Out of all of the above only three count as decent, though. 
Definitely not enough to redeem the House. I mean, Sodom and Gomorrah 
could probably boast a couple of righteous people between them. But 
it simply wasn't enough. (And I am not sure that Slughorn Snape and 
Regulus Black could count as righteous. Repentant sinners, more 
like.) All in all I'd say Harry could be pardoned if he saw all 
Slytherins as a group, and an unpleasant one at that. But in fact his 
attitude towards them was always personal: he disliked Draco even 
before he learned about Slytherin, he hated Snape, because Snape had 
bullied him from the first lesson, and he was wary of Slughorn 
because of Dumbledore's warning. For the very same reason he was wary 
of Scrimgeour, in fact. Dumbledore warned him off both men on the 
same occasion. In all those cases Harry's attitude was personal from 
the start. 

a_svirn