What are House Elves (was: CHAPDISC: DH10, Kreacher's Tale)

[Mike]

No: HPFGUIDX 180146

> Carol responds:
> I don't understand the bit about Kreacher's "betraying" Sirius 
> Black.

Mike:
I'm not sure what else to call it, so I used the term that was used 
in canon.
"You see, Kreacher was not able to betray us totally..." ^1
"He knew that Kreacher . . . but the idea of owning him, of having 
responsibility of the creature that had betrayed Sirius . . ."^2

That's DD in OotP and Harry in HBP. I'll try another way. See below.


> 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 – <snip>
> 
> 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. <snip>

Mike:
OK, Winky "loved" both of the Crouches, that works for me. But can I 
add to that with, "Winky keeps her master's secrets..."^3  Maybe 
that's what I was looking for. Kreacher's "betrayal" was a matter of 
revealing his master's secrets. Say Winky had known that Barty Jr was 
disguised as Moody, would Winky have told anyone that? She actually 
remarks that "we is getting in trouble" when Barty Jr is revealing 
secrets under veritaserum.

Even Dobby didn't reveal the Malfoy's secrets, he never came out and 
told Harry of the Diary that Lucius had. He never actually 
participated in a plot that ran counter to his master's objectives. 
Dobby just wanted Harry to be safe, he did nothing that would thwart 
Lucius from getting his revenge on the Weasleys. Kreacher not only 
revealed things about Sirius to Narcissa, he actively took part in 
the plot to get Harry to the MoM.

How should we interpret the House Elf condition? They speak in 
simplistic terms and for the most part adopt their master's positions 
towards others. They keep their master's secrets and aren't supposed 
to speak ill of them. Only Dobby called this condition "enslavement", 
the rest of them and DD, if I'm remembering correctly, called it 
their "enchantment". Their reason d'etre is to serve.

So, are house elves cognizant of their master's political leanings, 
or are they simply reiterating what they've heard their masters say 
about a particular subject? Does their internalizing of their 
master's positions mean they understand the ramifications of those 
positions, or are they reacting instinctively with just a little more 
intelligence than a dog?

To my way of thinking, house elves as a group may be magical beings, 
but they have only the intelligence needed to perform their duties 
according to their enchantment. Kreacher doesn't understand Harry's 
question about escaping the Cave's Inferi. He doesn't comprehend the 
meaning behind the question, because he only knows he did as he was 
told by his master. The esoterics of the question eludes Kreacher, 
even though he too is a magical being.

Dobby's simplistic approach to thwart Harry's return to Hogwarts, and 
his follow up effort to get him to leave doesn't show significant 
depth of thought. I'll take the approach that House Elves are simple 
minded automatons, for the most part, unless someone wants to 
convince me otherwise.


> a_svirn:
> Sirius had rebelled against his family. I think it is only  
> fair that his family paid him back by disowning him 
> <snip> 
> Sirius rebelled against the family, and Kreacher rebelled 
> against Sirius. Seems logical to me.

Mike:
The family disowned Sirius, sure, I've no problem with that. Kreacher 
taking it upon himself to rebel against Sirius on behalf of the rest 
of the deceased Black family is what I'm not buying. 

If Kreacher was shown as inable to move off the dime towards 
transferring his allegiences, as seen in OotP and HBP, I'd have 
bought it. But in DH, Kreacher comes to think of Harry as his master. 
So it should have been easy for him to transfer his allegience to 
Sirius, an actual Black. Because Kreacher was ultimately just a 
normal house elf, he wasn't possessed of strange ideas like Dobby.

Kreacher's desires, if one can call them that, were no different than 
your standard, run-of-the-mill elf, like Winky. He should have 
welcomed Sirius back, been pleased to have a master to serve again. 
He should never have gone to Narcissa and for sure never taken part 
in a plot that ran counter to his master's desires, something even 
Dobby doesn't do.




> > 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:
If it broke her heart when Sirius left, as Kreacher seems to believe, 
then wouldn't it have been joyful if he were to return? Shouldn't 
that be the thinking of Kreacher if he is just mimicking his dead 
mistress' attitudes?

I'm not counting the portrait of Walburga, mind you. She was little 
more than than a raving banshee, screaming at everything and 
everyone. I'm talking of the live Walburga and the way Kreacher would 
have interpreted her reaction to Sirius moving out and abandoning all 
things Black.




> a_svirn:
> I still don't think Harry has ever seen elves as group. From the 
> get go he treated Dobby as an individual. <snip>
> It is more of Hermione's thing. 

Mike:
That's what I was unsuccessfully trying to say. Harry looks upon 
every being as an individual until he learns to see differently from 
his friends (Ron) or how the rest of the WW treats them as a whole.
When The Trio meet Winky, Ron says "So that's a house-elf".^4 Harry 
then meets a whole lot more of them at Hogwarts. He soon lumps Winky 
in with the rest, albeit as a dismissed house elf. He starts to look 
at them as a species, not as individuals. Dobby was a special case 
from the beginning and stayed a special case because of his oddball 
leanings.

Kreacher is a repeat of Winky, for Harry. He sees an elf still 
beholden to his ex-master, not accepting his new master. He breaks 
the code when he empathizes with Kreacher's feelings for Regulus. He 
stops thinking of Kreacher as another house elf in the generic sense, 
and treats him as a separate entity who has feelings that count.



> 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?

> Pippin:
I can't answer for Mike, obviously, but...
Disrespectful of what? <

Mike:
Sure you can, Pippin. ;) But, a_svirn, I think you're doing what 
Hermione did, assigning human values to house elves. What is respect 
as far as Kreacher is concerned? Serving the noble house of Black is 
my answer. That's what Harry gives back to Kreacher and suddenly 
Harry is his new master. Sirius never gave that back to Kreacher 
because Sirius couldn't get over his hatred for everything Black. 
Still, I don't get why Kreacher shouldn't be pleased to have a Black 
to serve again. Maybe something happened off page that we're not 
aware of?



> a_svirn:
> Out of all of the above only three count as decent, though. 
> Definitely not enough to redeem the House. <snip>

Mike:
I wasn't talking about redeeming Slytherin. I was pointing out how 
most of these people exhibited an individuality that caused Harry to 
re-assess thinking of them as just another Slytherin.

> a_svirn:
>  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 <snip>

Mike:
I disagree. I think Harry started out thinking of individuals, but 
during his time in the WW came to think of all Slytherins as 
belonging to that hated class of people that align themselves with 
Voldemort. He's not simple minded, like the elves, so he understands 
there are degrees of Slytheriness. It's not until DH when he becomes 
aware of Slytherins that actually fought against Voldemort that he 
modifies his view of *all* Slytherins. 

Mike
*****************
^1 OotP, p. 831
^2 HBP, p. 52
^3 GoF, p. 382
^4 GoF, p. 99