Slytherins/Krum are/are not Jews.../The Houses Again

[sistermagpie]

No: HPFGUIDX 173611

doddiemoemoe:
>
> Nor are they hindi's, Sikh's, or anything else besides somesort of 
> christian religion...seeing as they always take Christmas and 
Easter 
> holiday's...make appearances(aside from Draco) for holiday feasts...
> 
> Also during hogsmead weekends they never go to temple on 
> Saturday..nor are Saturday or Sundays mentioned for the most part 
in 
> the entire series...nor during Ramadon to we hear of fasting for 
any 
> members of staff(any Jew would probably notice)..

Magpie:
Dude, how often does it have to be explained that nobody is calling 
the Slytherins Jews? That's even been stated flat out: Nobody is 
suggesting that the Slytherins are supposed to be Jews or represent 
Jewish people in any way shape or form. The only character in all of 
canon I can think of that I ever remotely thought might be actually 
Jewish was Anthony Goldstein because of his name.

Marika:
Krum played that role to me. He reacted very stronlgy against the DH
symbol Mr. Lovegood wore. Krum said it was Grindelwalds symbol, and
that Grindelwald had killed relatives of his. Lovegood tells that this
symbol originally meant something else. Hard not to think of how
somebody who lost relatives during the Holocaust reacts when they see
a swastika (which before Hitler "stole" it stood for something else).

Magpie:
I think every time she makes an explicit connection bewteen bad guys 
and Nazis, pretty much everybody they persecute becomes an obvious 
parallel for Jews. (Though of course Nazis persecuted others as well, 
that's just the one people tend to think of first.) 

bboyminn:

The question is, which came first the chicken or the
egg? Do you really think Slytherins are sweet innocent
kids who have been wrongly put upon by the other houses,
or do you think Slytherin acted in a manner that made
them deserving of all the scorn they received?

Personally, I think Slytherin has created their own
alienation from the other houses. It is their own
actions repeated over time that has given them an
unsavory reputation. If they want to change their
reputation and the attitudes of others, they need to
change their own actions.

You reap what you sow. Slytherin has sown a lot of
contempt and self-proclaimed superiority, and now
they are reaping the scorn of the other Houses
because of it. The blame falls squarely on their
shoulders, not on the other Houses.

Slytherin House caused the problem, and if they
choose to, they can cause the solution. Simple
as that.

Magpie:
Exactly. There's nothing the other houses should or could do. Their 
behavior regarding Slytherins has been completely right and they 
aren't responsible for any badness in Slytherin at all. The best they 
can do is be magnanimous to this group of people in their school. 
It's nice to hope that one day they'll change, but until they do 
they're the flaw in the school. 

Renee:
You've really got a point there. And if the WWW takes its cue from
Harry - didn't JKR say something like this in her most recent
interview? - the prospects for Slytherin aren't as bleak as several
people here on the list suggest.

Magpie:
Actually, the WW has never been much shown to take it's cues from 
Harry--and while that's sometimes bad, in general I'd say it's a good 
thing. Because why would anyone want a society that followed one guy 
like they were a big clique in high school and he was the most 
popular girl?

Nor does Harry seem to be leading any sort of campaign of Slytherin-
appreciation. It's not like anybody that I've seen has suggested that 
Slytherins are now going to be hunted down and killed. We said that 
in the end Slytherin (as Steve said above) has proved itself to be a 
rather disgraceful house compared to other houses (but some of them 
even personally redeem themselves through bravery) and good guys just 
need to treat it magnanimously because they're good guys--which is 
pretty much what Harry's doing. 

Jen:
> Certainly some followed him zealously, but how many more were like
> Slughorn, giving up his life and freedom to hide in Muggle homes so
> he wouldn't be conscripted against his will? How many were like
> Narcissa, her home taken over, her son in jeopardy, her husband a
> shaking mess of a man? How many were like Regulus, doing the only
> thing he knew to do to stop Voldemort and being dragged down into 
the
> lake and turned into an Inferi for his troubles?

Renee:
Quite a few, I suppose, but having primarily their own interest in
mind and/or agreeing with the prejudices of their House, they would
have lacked the incentive to go against him until something happened
that shook them to the core. They weren't raised/predisposed do do so
in principle - and that had nothing to do with Voldemorts influence on
Slytherin House.

Magpie:
Basically that would make them cowards, which in this universe is one 
of the worst things you could be. Plenty of students in other houses 
also had reason to fear that kind of retribution, but they fought 
anyway. Being afraid wasn't really an excuse. Everybody's afraid.

Anders:
To me, Sirius continued to exhibit traits of Slytherin in his 
treatment of Kreacher, in his near-fatal trick on Snape, in his self-
serving recklessness, etc. I LOVE Sirius and I like to think he had 
good reason for those actions, but he definitely had Slytherin 
tendencies IMO.

Magpie:
I think having Slytherin tendencies is completely different from 
being a Slytherin. Sometimes what one might think of as Slytherin 
qualities are admirable when found in, for instance, Harry.

Daimauwr:
So for all the bleeding hearts out there who wanted a different
version to that which JK wrote - "get over it" - it's her story
not anyone elses.

Magpie;
Acutually Daimauwr, it's you who need to get over it. The list is for 
discussing canon, and if they *don't* agree with something in canon, 
they can say that too--and it's always good for a group to have at 
least a few bleeding hearts, imo, even if the WW has none. Yes, many 
fans have unreasonable specific expectations and want the story 
written to suit them, but they're allowed to say that. Especially 
because, imo, getting rid of them would also probably entail getting 
rid of perfectly valid criticism of the books. Why should people who 
think the story had an awesome message and that Harry was a brilliant 
hero who had a great moral development be allowed to say so without 
anyone who disagrees speaking up just because JKR wrote the book? We 
know she wrote the book. We're responding to what she wrote--as was 
that professional reviewer whose article was posted. I've never read 
a book in my life I thought couldn't be criticized harshly if 
somebody wanted to do that--even if I personally thought it was great.

And btw, I don't think your description of the Sorting based on your 
expeirences in boarding school, matches up with the canon I see in 
JKR's books. 

-m (who tends to respond to any post about how people are ruining the 
list by being negative or talking about stuff somebody else doesn't 
like by gleefully posting twice as much about whatever they don't 
like--I'm in ur list, criticizing ur books!!!!)