Deathly Hallows Reaction - Could do Better, Sorry/ Slytherins portrayal

[dumbledore11214]

No: HPFGUIDX 172779

> montims:
> Anne Frank wrote that, perforce, while she was still in hiding, 
hoping for
> an Allied victory and expecting to become a great writer and have a 
family
> of her own.  She was betrayed, and all the members of her family, 
except for
> her father, died in circumstances of misery and torture and 
brutality.  How
> many Annexe members survived?  And they wouldn't have been 
discovered if
> they hadn't been betrayed by somebody.  Some people still have a 
problem
> with Germans today, 63 years after WW2 ended.  And after WW2, 
nothing really
> changed, any more than it did after WW1.  People just got on with 
their same
> lives and opinions.  Why should the Potterverse be any different?  
THAT
> would have been unrealistic, IMO.
> 
> And look at the world around you now.  I mean the world, not just 
your own
> little part of it (that "your" directed generally at everybody now -
 not
> Betsy - I've opened this out).  People are being tortured and 
slaughtered in
> large numbers because they are different.  And this is condoned 
officially
> and enthusiastically carried out.  Look at JKR's affiliations.  
Look at what
> Amnesty International works against.  Look at the caged children 
she drew
> attention to a couple of years ago.
> 
> I like JKR's cleareyed picture of the world.  I don't want to read
> that everybody really is nice deepdown, because that isn't true - 
life is
> not as written by Disney.  The point, surely, is to face it, 
acknowledge it,
> and then battle it.


Alla:

Let me put it this way. I am not and had NEVER been the fan of what 
Slytherin house stands for. I argued for years on this list that in 
JKR' story Slytherin house stands for evil, for very real evil and 
when many good people take a stand against what Slytherin stands for, 
they are not prejudicing Slytherins, but fight against very real, 
very chilling evil.

Am I pleased to be right? Sure I do, but at the same time while 
within the story I have no  major problems with Slytherin being a 
house of evil ideology, I do have some disappointments, minor ones to 
be sure.

I mean, sure there are bad kids  in RL at eleven, very bad, kids who 
commit very real crimes, etc. But that many? I mean, really *** 
that** many?

Quarter of WW every year basically gets marked, does it not?

I mean, they are kiddos after all; they are little ones who want to 
enjoy Hogwarts just as much as every other boy or girl who gets 
sorted to another house wants to, no?


Again, let me be clear, I have no problem with House of Slytherin 
being judged by what values it stands for.

The chapter about muggle borns registration gave me very real chills 
of registrating jews in WWII. I am guessing those associations were 
very deliberate.

I have zero problem with House who approves of this being put down as 
House of Evil.

What I do have some sort of problem with is the fact that there is 
still a Slytherin house at the end, and Hogwarts continues to supply 
new kids to be swallowed in this evil ideology every year.

That to me is just **bizarre**. Okay, House is evil, so be done with 
it if you do not want to redeem it (and again, I am fine with likes 
of  Malfoy, Crabbe and Goyle not being redeemed, oh and can please 
somebody strangle Pansy?), BUT to let new eleven year olds be gone 
there as it there is no hope for them?

I mean, had we even been told that Slytherin consists only of DE 
kids? Because if we are, then okay, I can buy that they are 
conditioned to follow the steps of their fathers from the early 
years, but what if somebody whose parents are not DE gets in 
Slytherin?

I mean, what if some little one is just very ambitious? That is it? 
All hope is gone for him or her? We had not been told that all kids 
who are in Slytherins get sorted for blood and ambition, right? It 
could be one or another, no?

And even if they are sons and daughters of DE, why not to try to make 
them see that ideology is evil?

All hope is gone for them? For all of them? At eleven years of age?

I mean do not get me wrong, all of this does not take me from major 
enjoyment of the story. My heart had always been with Harry and his 
friends and I enjoyed their triumphs.

But I am scratching my head over it, not as much as people who were 
hoping for full blown redemption of Slytherin house, since I always 
despised those Slytherins we had been shown for the most part, but it 
makes me wonder why JKR made the choice she did.


I mean she showed us **some** good Slytherins of the sort, but isn't 
that more in line with DD remark of "we sort too early"? Since they 
turn out to have courage that their house not supposed to?






Erin:
> Ah, precisely. Ulterior motives are the hallmark of a Slytherin.
We sometimes forget that students aren't Sorted based upon their
family background, or what they're wearing that day, or whatever.
They're Sorted based upon what is at the core of their
personalities. The criteria for being Sorted into Slytherin (as best
I can remember, not having my books on hand at work) is to put self
first. To look out for number one. And given what we know now, we
can see that selfishness is the greatest sin in JKR's world.



Alla:

Well, yeah and I have no problem with selfishness being a greatest 
sin in her world. I  like that.  I adore and cried over Harry 
agonizing over his death and still doing it. But that just takes us 
back to the discussion of predetermination in Potterverse. And I 
think Nora was so right  when she was stressing that at first JKR's 
quote said " our choices **show**, not **determine** who we are.

I mean, on the other hand, can't you be taught something differently 
at eleven? Again all hope is gone?

Why should you if you are candidate for evil path to hang out with 
others? Shouldn't they spread out in good houses then?