Danger in designating an "Other" / Bad magic (wasRe: Deathly Hallows Reactio...)

[horridporrid03]

No: HPFGUIDX 173887

> >>Betsy Hp:
> > I disagree.  I'll admit to being a bit of an optimist, but I     
> > really prefer to think that on the whole, most people are        
> > basically good. That there's a fixable reason societies descend   
> > into madness, and that a prime function of civilization is       
> > limiting or fixing those reasons.  And that's something DH does   
> > not do.
> > <SNIP>

> >>Alla:
> I don't know. I snipped out the most of your message, because the 
> mention of Anne Frank just made me realise how much I respect JKR's 
> world view. I mean, yeah, she remained optimistic and where did it 
> get her?
> Woudn't that be better if she was fully aware that just as there 
> people in the world who will save jews, there are people who will 
> betray them in the blink of an eye?
> I mean, whether it would save her, probably not, but one would      
> never know.

Betsy Hp:
It would not have saved Anne Frank, no.  She'd have just spent her 
time in hiding bitter and angry.  From what I've read Anne Frank was 
pretty beaten down once she was at the camps (IIRC the fate of the 
young Gypsy children affected her deeply).  But the hope contained in 
her diary is, IMO, part of the reason her words are read so widely 
today.  And why it resonates with so many people.

> >>Alla:
> I am reminded of half of my grandmother's family who was killed by 
> Natzis in Belorussia because they did not want to **run**, they     
> were thinking that Natsi are really **good** people who would do    
> them no harm.
> <snip>

Betsy Hp:
That's a familiar story actually.  Not that people thought Nazis were 
*good*. (Germany was invading countries that they'd invaded before, 
after all.)  It was just hard to believe the level of atrocity they 
had sunk too. 

*However* what I'm referring to is the incredibly civilized way the 
Allies delt with defeated Germany.  It would have been so easy to 
just massacre entire cities and towns.  I'm sure some of the rescuers 
wanted to after releasing people from the death camps.  But they 
didn't.  They held the Nuremberg trials instead.  They made sure the 
guilty were punished but they also enabled Germany to atone and move 
on.  They allowed Germany to seperate itself from Nazism.  *And* 
there were examples of Germans who did protest, who did rescue.

(The same is true of Japan, actually.)

Which is in contrast to DH in which Death Eaters and Slytherins were 
pretty much synonymous and Slytherin remains the "bad" house.  Rather 
than say the house that builds really great cars. <g>

Oh, and no thought is given to *why* Voldemort rose up out of 
Slytherin.  That maybe all of this shame piled onto Slytherin has 
given rise to a monster.  Much as the shame piled on Germany after 
WWI gave rise to Hitler.

> >>Alla:
> I love stories about redemption as much as any other people, but no 
> matter how much I love "crime and punishment" for example, from     
> what I observe in RL ( from the newspapers and TV of course) people 
> who kill once, often enough go back to kill again, again, again    
> instead of showing remorse for what they did.
> <snip>
> I for once take my hat off to JKR for recognising that not         
> everybody is redeemable (IMO of course) and yes, putting it in     
> children's book (is it a children's book now, I am not sure) - or   
> this is how I think of it in any event.
> <snip>

Betsy Hp:
Yes, and I wasn't expecting Voldemort or say, Bellatrix, to be 
redeemed.  What I didn't like, what I found a rather dangerous 
message, is that *all* people of a certain group (water folk) are 
*all* incapable of being redeemed.  That the best they can hope for 
is "not totally offensive".  There's no such thing in real life.  And 
it's odd that JKR decided to create such a thing in her grand finale.

> >>bboyminn:
> This is my appeal for perspective on the matter of
> Houses, especially with regard to Slytherin. JKR
> said herself that all Slytherins are not bad; that
> we are seeing the worst of them. A view that I have
> also held for a long time.

Betsy Hp:
Frankly, I don't care what JKR says outside her books.  She could 
come up with all sorts of stories about "good" Slytherins.  None of 
them appear in the books, ergo there are no good Slytherins.  Which 
means an entire quarter of the school is designated no good.  At age 
eleven they're able to be completely written off.

[Just an aside to any who don't my little "interview" philosophy:  
While interviews can be interesting, if JKR says something that 
either isn't in or is contradicted by the books, it doesn't count, 
IMO.  If she didn't get it in there, she didn't get it in there.  No 
after-interviews can change that.  I'm um, not sure how I'd feel 
about any encyclopedias that might occur. <g>]

> >>bboyminn:
> There is nothing wrong or inherently evil about any
> of the Slytherin personality characteristics. But,
> those characteristics are likely to contain a
> group of people who seek power, and who are corrupted
> by it.

Betsy Hp:
Yes, just as there's something inherently untrustworthy about Germans 
and you've got to keep an eye on them or else...  Or does that sound 
a tiny bit bigoted to you? <g>  (And actually, profoundly dangerous.  
If we don't understand why Nazism rose up in Germany, if we write it 
off as something inherent to that country, we won't recognize the 
warning signals when they arise elsewhere.)

Seriously though, an *entire* *quarter* of the school are more easily 
corrupted?!?  And we figure that out at age eleven?  I'm sorry, but 
it's an ugly viewpoint, IMO.  No one should be able to right off a 
quarter of the human race like that.

> >>bboyminn:
> <snip>
> So, my point is, that we are assuming that all Slytherins
> are evil, and that JKR, by extension, assumes that
> one fourth of all people are evil. But that is simply
> not true. There is not reason to believe that the average
> Slytherin is evil.
> <snip> 

Betsy Hp:
If that were true a few Slytherins would have stayed for the big 
battle at the end of DH.  They didn't.  They are less worthy than all 
the other houses.  Souls just a tiny bit meaner, hearts just a tiny 
bit smaller.  They probably don't even feel pain to the same extent 
as other houses.  (Which is why dropping a Slytherin against a stone 
floor is good times.  Any other house and it'd be horrifying.)

> >>bboyminn:
> JKR already said, not all Slytherins are bad.
> <snip>

Betsy Hp:
I get the sense (from the DH) that it's more some Slytherins realize 
their mean and nasty natures.  And they're duly subservient to the 
nearest blessed and golden Gryffindor. 

As I've said: not my personal view of the world. 

Betsy Hp