God for Harry, England, and a Sandwich

[Jen Reese]

No: HPFGUIDX 178895

> Magpie:
> Maybe, maybe not. We don't know anything about the true origins of 
> House Elves. Maybe thinking they're not natural slaves and just 
> victims of learned helplessness--although I don't know if that's
> the right term for elves embracing their role as slaves--is 
> incorrect. Perhaps they're like women who think their place is in
> the home with no rights and think women who think otherwise are 
> shameful--or maybe they're not like people at all and the attitude
> goes deeper than culture. It gets into the same trouble Hermione
> originally had--we project our own ideas about their behavior onto
> them. We don't know that Wizards put the enchantment on them. So
> who's to say we shouldn't accept them as natural slaves? 

Jen:  I think you're saying here that the burden of proof is on 
someone to prove the house elves aren't natural slaves rather than 
the other way around.  And yet, the idea that house elves are natural 
slaves and embracing slavery isn't presented as an overt part of the 
storyline, or at least it's been referred to as an unintended message 
on this list.  Which means there is an intended storyline that can be 
explored and discussed, one of which is the role of self-punishment 
in the house elves enslavement. I see an emphasis in the story on 
this particular subject; others see an emphasis on Harry and the 
sandwich - it doesn't look that different to me.

> Jen:
> I thought Hermione got to the point where the tide could turn when
> recognizing that stopping the self-abuse was the first step in the
> process of changing the lot of the house elves. 

> Magpie:
> Could be, but I don't see it presented that way in canon myself.
> All JKR would have to do is show it and she didn't. She showed 
> Hermione's plans about SPEW all the time in books 4 and 5. Then 
> suddenly in 6 SPEW completely disappears and Hermione's just all 
> about treating them okay when it comes up.  

Jen: SPEW as a literal organization that Hermione talked about 
disappeared.  We don't hear about her goal to free the house elves 
past a few pushes for the idea with Kreacher in OOTP.  Those are the 
types of things that I wouldn't argue with.  But the last point, that 
Hermione is only about treating them okay when it comes up, I 
obviously read more emphasis in the story on the importance of that 
than you do.  The reason why I do goes back to the idea of projecting 
human qualities.  House elves are presented with some higher-level 
reasoning ability and feelings that are human-like, so it doesn't 
seem like much of a projection to me:  Dobby can't stop self-
punishing even after he's free.  Harry says 'you just need a bit of 
practice' when Dobby starts to punish himself in GOF.  That indicates 
the enchantment is only the beginning, that self-punishment is a 
learned behavior that a house elf is capable of unlearning by 
practice, a cognitive skill that requires self-awareness to carry 
out.  Winky is convinced her mother, grandmother etc. would be 
ashamed of her being free, so they are susceptible to family 
conditioning telling them freedom is shameful, a feeling someone of 
lower-level intelligence wouldn't have. Dumbledore says flat out that 
house elves have 'feelings acute as humans' so there's a comparison 
to human qualities and expectations for how to interact with house 
elves in that statement imo.  Kreacher is seen rubbing his eyes 'like 
a small child.'  Those types of references run throughout the story.


Jen:
> I thought Hermione got to the point where the tide could turn when
> recognizing that stopping the self-abuse was the first step in the
> process of changing the lot of the house elves.

Magpie:
> This, too, is a perfectly realistic evolution for a social 
activist. You can be very liberal in your youth and very conservative
>  in your adulthood or anywhere in between. You can go through a 
> fad. It's possible Hermione decided on a new plan for freeing House
>  Elves via good treatment (most of the elves we see in canon are
> well-treated already), 

Jen: Eek, how can a house elf be well-treated if they're allowed to 
punish themselves whenever they deem themselves unworthy of their 
masters?  Besides self-punishment, Hermione said in DH: "He's a 
slave; house elves are used to bad, even brutal treatment; what 
Voldemort did to Kreacher wasn't that far out of the common way." So 
the common way is bad or brutal treatment.  I didn't need to see 
every house elf suffer a grievous fate to believe this was true.

Magpie:
....but she doesn't say this is what she's decided (and it's IC for
> Hermione to do so), she isn't shown talking to Kreacher in such a
> way that shows it, she no longer says anything about trying to do
> stuff with the House Elf situation in general (and yes, I know 
> she's got Voldemort to worry about so I wouldn't expect it to be
> her main concern during DH...though god knows she had enough time
> to talk about it when she was sitting in a tent doing nothing for 
> months--we could have heard a throwaway line about Harry having to 
> hear all about it), she's not researching their history to find out 
> where that compulsion comes from so she can lift it. 

Jen: I was talking about the fact that she is still focused on the 
plight of house elves in DH when she talks to Harry about why 
Kreacher acts the way he does, the state of affairs of house elves as 
she understands it.  She's progressed in her knowledge and 
understanding of their situation to the point that she can explain 
their psychology, history and feelings to someone else in a way that 
shows she's no longer forcing her own agenda on them but meeting the 
elves where they are in that moment of their history imo.  Others 
read that as Hermione training to become a coach for Happy Slaves 
Inc.  I see both but give more weight to one because of everything 
that's come before.