On Children and the "Other" (was:Re: On the perfection of moral virtues)

[dumbledore11214]

No: HPFGUIDX 169783

Lizzyben04:
<SNIP>
> Second, I don't accept the contention that Slytherin=evil. I think
> that's Harry's stereotype, which readers have adopted as well.
> Go with me here, though I know this is a subversive reading.

Alla:

I am giving myself more credit as a reader, I am afraid than just to 
follow Harry stereotypes. I do not believe that Slytherin house is 
evil, but I absolutely believe that ideology they follow are. I am 
not sure if this reading you are talking about is subversive, but it 
is not new :)

JKR calls Salasar Slytherin on her site:

"One of the four celebrated Founders of Hogwarts School of Witchcraft 
and Wizardry, Salazar Slytherin was one of the first recorded 
Parselmouths, an accomplished Legilimens, and a notorious champion of 
pureblood supremacy."

Pureblood supremacy sounds as a very loaded, very deliberate choice 
of words to me to draw associations with RW.

I was very pleased when I saw this. I participated in many arguments 
where it was stated that Voldemort corrupted Slytherin house and 
Slytherin was just badly misunderstood. It seems to me that JKR does 
not think he was.

Slytherin thought that in the darkest hours of witchhunt the 
muggleborn kids do not deserve to be in Hogwarts, not just in his 
house, but in Hogwarts. I think those kids needed the most 
protection, the most training. To me he sounded like bigot.

Oh, and this guy as we all know left a tiny snakey in Hogwarts to 
kill Muggleborns.

Sorry, I do not think I am adopting any sterotypes when I say I 
believe that this is evil.

Lizzyben04:
 Harry
> *is* bigoted & prejudiced against Slytherins. With Harry, we're
> basically placed in the mind of a bigot - he truly believes that
> none of "them" have any worth, that "they" are all evil, immoral,
> less worthy, even less human. He would have no problem, say, denying
> a job to a Slytherin, excluding them, or treating them badly because
> of their House. Heck, Harry & co. might not have a problem expelling
> or rounding up all Slytherins, cause they're all bad, right? Harry
> doesn't look at people as individuals, but judges them, instantly,
> based on a label. That's what bigotry is all about. Now, you can
> argue that Slytherins deserve it, etc. but Harry is bigoted against
> them in that he can't see them as "actual people".
> 
> He's assumed that Slytherins all share the exact same beliefs, etc.
> w/o seeing them as individual human beings. For example, Harry
> thinks that all Slytherins believe in pure-bloodism, but that's not
> necesarilly the case. Snape, for example, is a half-blood & doesn't
> seem to show any prejudice as an adult. Slughorn accepts "Muggle"
> students into his class & his club. He's based that on his
> interactions w/only 3 Slytherins: Draco, Crape & Goyle, who are all
> the sons of DE, so
> presumably share the extreme DE view. However, even Draco seems to
> waver from those beliefs & warns Hermione of danger. As for the
> other Slytherins, well, Harry doesn't talk to them, so who knows
> what they think? He's never bothered to find out, but went to the
> snap judgment instead, based on a stereotype.
> <SNIP>



Alla:

Sure, JKR said that they are not all bad, I doubt all kids in 
Slytherin are. But why would Harry NOT think that they all share same 
beliefs, which I think he will outgrow if the only ones he interacts 
with are Malfoy and his goons?

If Slytherins who are not evil exist, and they certainly should be, 
maybe JKR had a reason to not show them?

Because even episodic Slytherin who substitutes for Draco in HBP is 
shown to be a bigot. I think there is a reason for that.

Oh, and no I do not see Draco **wavering** from those beliefs at all. 
What you read as a warning to Hermione, I read as gleeful issuing of 
the death threats to Trio.


Lizzyben04: 
<SNIP>
> I assume that we'd all agree that nobody, even a "bad person",
> should be tortured or murdered. That we should act to save someone,
> even someone we dislike, who is being physically harmed or is in
> danger of death. 

Alla:

Person, yes, fictional character - absolutely not, I do not agree. I 
am awaiting with delight whatever torture awaits Umbridge and depends 
on how Snape does in book 7, I am looking forward to his torture as 
well.




lizzyben:
> And I'm hoping against hope that JKR isn't promoting the message
> that Slytherin = evil, because that goes against everything she's
> said about the importance of choices. So, it's all about
> your choices - unless, when you're eleven years old, a singing hat
> chooses *for you* & slots you into a house where you are destined to
> be EEEVVVILL. So much for free will. So much for individuality.
> Sytherin= evil & that's that. Why should anyone try to reach out to,
> or understand a Slytherin?

Alla:

Reach out to, yes, heal, yes, but no, sorry till the purebloodism is 
abandoned, I do not think healing can happen. IMO of course.


 
> > Alla:
> >
> > Um, another intepretation of Harry's **attack, almost murder of
> > Draco** is Harry defending himself from Draco.
> >

Lizzyben04: 
> Nah, even Harry himself doesn't try this argument. He's shocked &
> horrified by what he did, and doesn't even try to claim it was
> justified self-defense (though Ginny does, another reason I don't
> like her very much). He realizes that his hate has led him almost to
> murder. This moment, IMO, is one that gives Harry a moment of
> clarity. He does see, for a while, that extreme measures aren't
> justified, even against someone you hate. For a moment, he can see
> Draco, and Snape, as human beings rather than stereotypes. But the
> fog takes over again, & he dismisses the evil of his actions to
> whine about the detentions instead. This scene gives me hope, cause
> I do think that JKR is pointing to the dangers of where stereotypes
> & dehumanization can lead.

Alla:
I do not care whether Harry tries this argument or not, honestly.

To me as a reader  it is an undisputed fact that what Harry was doing 
in that scene was defending himself from one of the most horrible 
curses in the WW.  Draco was the one who fired first – NOT Harry, so 
no I do not see anywhere in the book the almost murder 
interpretation. I accept your right to see it of course, but will 
never figure out where people see it.

He defended himself **twice** with relatively harmless hexes and only 
wet and on the floor, I would say quite desperate, he tries 
Sectusemptra. The only responsibility I hold Harry to is to defend 
himself with the curse he does not know anything about, I certainly 
do not hold him to try to murder Draco with the curse he knows about. 
IMO of course.


JMO,

Alla