Danger in designating an "Other" / Slytherins / DH as Christian Allegory

[horridporrid03]

No: HPFGUIDX 174023

> >>Neri:
> <snip>
> I certainly agree with both of you that it wasn't just a matter of
> choice of 11 yrs old kids... <snip> 
> My question (upthread) was why wouldn't the *parents*
> renounce it after they saw where it brought them and the WW in two
> Voldy wars. Why wouldn't them educate their children to choose
> differently? Or can't they renounce it because it's "traditional"?
> That would be equivalent to hypothetical Germans refusing to       
> renounce racism after WWII on account of it being a family         
> tradition. 
> 
> Instead, the solution that JKR came up with was to "dilute"        
> Slytherin. This strikes me as roughly analogous to the Allies      
> keeping the Nazi party in Germany after the war, but trying to     
> soften its ideology.
> <snip>

Betsy Hp:
Yes, I see your point here.  And actually, I *agree* that it's odd 
that JKR doesn't destroy Slytherin.  Exactly for the same reasons 
Germany has totally repudiated Nazism.  And I think it's because 
she's tripped up on her message.

Because Slytherin is more than just the house of a certain founder.  
It's also the Water house, balancing out the Fire, Earth and Air 
houses.  So there's a symbolism there that this is four sides of 
human nature.  In which case they should, all of them, be fairly 
neutral, capable of both good and evil.

So the story I *thought* was being told (I think this is what Magpie 
and others have called the Jungian version? which makes sense because 
I tend to love those sorts of tales) was of how an imbalance entered 
Hogwarts, through the Founders' fight (which we were told by the Hat 
was a four founder thing).  The blame for the fight focused on 
Slytherin.  Slytherin became the scapegoat house and so it became 
dark.  Only its dark side showed.  But that Harry, by uniting the 
Houses to defeat Voldemort, would help cleanse Slytherin and Hogwarts 
would be whole again.  Which would bring the promise of a more 
balanced WW.

Instead we're left with this weird ending where Slytherins *are* 
evil, but we're going to have them stick around anyway because... 
it's nice to have people to pound when you're in a bad mood?  
Honestly, I don't know what JKR was thinking with this one.

Which is why I equate (knowing this is absolutely *not* what JKR had 
in mind) DH with the end of WWI, where Germany kept its sovereignty 
(not broken up between other countries) but was still designated 
the "evil" country.  Which lead to bad things.  Does that make sense?

I know in actuality Slytherins are just bad.  It's just, why keep 
them around then?  Why not shut the House down?

> >>Magpie:
> <snip>
> That sort of reflects how I feel about the way racism was handled  
> in general--it's clearly bad in the book, but more like an entity. 
> It's what the enemy does, or something horrible that exists in the 
> world outside us, not something in ourselves.

Betsy Hp:
Another reason I thought JKR took the easy, dangerous way out.  It's 
so much more comfortable to think racism is someone elses problem.  
Sort of like saying Nazism happened in Germany because Germans are 
just "that way".  It discourages understanding and therefore 
prevention, IMO.

> >>SSSusan:
> <snip>
> So I can see why this is a frustration, if you were expecting Draco
> to have taken his own reservations & hesitations to heart, DD's
> words on the tower to heart... because it didn't come to fruition.
> <snip>

Betsy Hp:
A shoe that didn't drop. <g>  And I'll admit, the person I most 
related to in the series was Draco.  He was just so spazzy and needy 
and trying so incredibly hard to live up to his father's ideal.  And 
it turned out he wasn't those things after all.  Just a racist.  Made 
me sad. (So did Zach being reduced to a coward.)

Betsy Hp