God for Harry, England, and a Sandwich

[sistermagpie]

No: HPFGUIDX 178845

Steve:
> People seemed up in arms over the idea that after a long night,
> great stress and strife, little sleep and little food, Harry
> is tired and hungry. Well,(he says sarcastically) if that
> isn't a surprise.

Magpie:
No they aren't. They're just commenting on the last line calling 
attention to Harry owning a slave. Whether or not he actually asked 
him for the sandwich or not isn't really an issue--it's highlighting 
Harry's situation and what he might do in it. Nobody's said Harry's 
bad for being tired and hungry. 

Steve:
> As to the whole concept of Kreacher, Harry, and slavery, I
> think people are taking an unrealistically simplistic view
> of the situation. Harry does not like owning a slave, but
> a slave was forced upon him, and he has to deal with it.

Magpie:
I think it is simplistic and you and others are describing why: 
Harry does want to own a slave at all. Oh no, he doesn't want to in 
the least. He'd let him go if only Kreacher didn't need him to be 
his master, because House Elves really are born slaves. Harry's just 
taking on his responsibility and perks as one of the masters of his 
world. He's totally not like a slave owner in the real world, 
because Kreacher needs and wants to be a slave. (Sure many slave 
owners made these arguments about their own slaves in the past but 
in Harry's case it's true so he's not them.) The benefits aren't 
really anything he can do anything about.

Steve:
> It seems completely unrealistic to think that the house
> elf problem could be completely resolved by the end of 
> the books. JKR said in an interview that Hermoine went
> to work in Dept. of Magical Law, and greatly expanded 
> the right of House Elves and other magical creatures. 
> What more could one person do in a society that is so 
> resistant to change? What more could we expect? 

Magpie:
Nothing. Who needs change, after all? The House Elves don't, so 
Wizards like Harry will just have to go on kindly being their 
masters. 

However, I would say that being "unrealistic" doesn't matter because 
none of it is unrealistic. JKR could have had somebody discover the 
secret behind the enchantment and lift it by DH and it would be no 
less realistic than Harry having a magical imp waiting on him.

Steve: 
> As to Harry and Kreacher, Kreacher is only a slave if
> Harry treats him like property. If Harry is willing to
> allow Kreacher to come and go as he pleases, and Kreacher
> chooses to stay, how is that slavery? If Harry treats
> Kreacher with kindness and respect, how is that slavery?

Magpie:
It's slavery because Harry owns him as property and for all the 
reasons House Elf slavery works. You can treat your slave with 
kindness and respect and still have him be your slave. House Elves 
*want* to be slaves as long as they accept you as their master. Once 
that happens you don't have to worry about letting them come and go 
as they please, because they please to serve you. 

Steve:
> 
> As I've said many times before in House Elf/Slavery
> discussions, we don't know the nature of what holds House
> Elves to their Masters. We assume it is by brute force and
> coercion of that Masters, but it could just as likely be 
> Elfin Honor. 

Magpie:
I don't assume it's brute force of their Masters. It seems canonical 
that it is Elf Honor. And an enchantment, the origin of which we 
don't know. That's why elves are so awesome as slaves. You don't 
have to use brute force, you just have to be worthy in the slave's 
eyes. It's like they love you.

Steve:

> In this case, it is not wizards who are holding Elves in
> slavery, it is Elfin Honor that holds them. 

Magpie:
Exactly. So the only Wizards doing anything wrong are those 
that "exploit" the honor by being mean to the Elf (though I'm sure 
they would explain they're not doing wrong either). If you're just 
letting them cook and clean for you and stuff you're not doing 
anything wrong. 

Steve:
> My point is, that I think playing the Human Slavery card,
> when discussing elves is misguided. 

Magpie:
JKR did it. But yes, real humans are not House Elves so it's 
inaccurate to project the feelings and thoughts enslaved humans 
would have onto House Elves. House Elves do, as it happens, conform 
to the idea of slaves that plenty of slave owners have had--the sort 
of cozy, everyone happy in their role and they can't take care of 
themselves as free agents sort of thing--only it's real for them. 
Harry is a 20th century boy from the suburbs who ends up living that 
particular dream while remaining somebody who doesn't support 
slavery (he'd totally free Kreacher if it wouldn't be far far worse 
for him). He's a sympathetic, p.c. slave-owner. It's a great fantasy-
-something like...I dunno...like creating a guy who is totally 
respectful of women and wants nothing more than to be faithful to 
his wife only then there's this race of big-breasted babes who will 
be miserable if he doesn't sleep with them all (and he's really 
awesome at it). Darn it!


Steve:
> So, knowing Harry, I see no problem with him 'owning'
> Kreacher, because I assume at some point he will deal with
> the situation is the best possible way. 

Magpie:
If there's no problem to his owning (He does own him. He inherited 
him.) Kreacher what does he have to deal with at some point in the 
best possible way? Isn't he already doing that? What's missing that 
people think Harry and Hermione ought to do in the future that we're 
not told they're doing or do?

-m