Slytherins: selfish, not evil + Ariana raped?

[sistermagpie]

No: HPFGUIDX 172777

> >Magpie:
> >Exactly. Though I don't think Snape's quite so much a success 
story
> >as you say. He's not the only Slytherin to sacrifice himself--they
> >just sacrifice for reasons that mean something to them even when
> >they're doing the sacrificing. So even Snape's redemptive 
sacrifice
> >was, imo, a personal one that didn't go beyond himself as it could
> >have. He sacrificed himself and saved himself. I don't happen to
> >find the "it takes all kinds so learn to live with the assholes" 
all
> >that inspiring myself, but that definitely seems to be the message
> >of JKR's Christ-figure.
> >
> >Julie:
> >I think this is an unfair assessment though. In reality there is 
some
> >measure of self-interest in *everything* we do. We give to a cause
> >or help build a house with Habitat-For-Humanity partly because 
the act
> >makes us feel good about ourselves. Snape's sacrifices were in 
part
> >motivated by selfishness (assuaging his guilt over Lily's death) 
but
> >especially as time went by, he acted selflessly on numerous 
occasions.
> >It didn't benefit him in any way whatsoever to keep helping 
Dumbledore
> >defeat Voldemort once he knew Harry would be sacrificed--*saving* 
Harry
> >to honor Lily was his original "selfish" motive. It didn't 
benefit him
> >to save a man he truly despised (Lupin). Too many things Snape 
did were
> >not motivated by pure self-interest, as supposedly befits a 
Slytherin,
> >IMO.
> >
> >Julie, who thinks the whole concept of Sorting is directly 
opposed to
> >Dumbledore's belief that it is our choices which define us.
> 
> Lenore:
> Exactly!  Thank you Julie for bringing a bit more balance into the 
discussion.
> The qualities of the four houses *must* be in all of us; the 
problem is how do
> we harmonize and integrate them. 

Magpie:
I'm not sure if I'm one of the ones considered to be imbalancing the 
conversation--I agree with you here, but I'm calling it the way I 
see it in canon. I don't think anything was integrated, the personal 
redemption of brave Snape notwithstanding. I was just agreeing with 
you (before you actually said it) that I didn't think this was 
resolved. I guess to me, as soon as Slytherin was introduced the way 
it was, that was obviously the problem that needed to be solved, the 
one Voldemort was just a symptom of. I felt the book did it 
backwards, getting rid of the metaphor without ever much considering 
the way I expected them to handle it. And looking at interviews 
after the fact, JKR never seemed to expect them to.  I don't have a 
problem with self-interest, myself, but I wasn't on the same page 
about Slytherin either.

-m