Slytherin as villains / Ender vs. Harry SPOILERS for Ender's Game

[Zara]

No: HPFGUIDX 179099

> Betsy Hp:
> No Zara, they can't.  In fanfic?  Sure.  But to argue that *within* 
> the text there's an unremarked Slytherin who comes back and fights 
> for Hogwarts is insupportable because there is no text supporting 
it.

zgirnius:
There is a statement by the portrait of Phineas Nigellus Black that 
people must not forget, Slytherin played its part too (paraphrase). 
I'm certain he meant those students! <bg>

I am not suggesting Slytherins did come back. I am merely stating 
that your position seems about as reasonable to me. There is a total 
absence in the relevant parts of the text, which are the battle 
scenes, of any Slytherin students fighting for either side. Nor does 
anyone report having seen Slytherin students fighting on either side, 
or having knowledge that Slytherin students were fighting for either 
side. Which is why I believe, da da dum, no Slytherin students were 
fighting for either side. 

I also believe that any other position is fanficcy in a way mine is 
not. I saw no Slytherins, therefore there were none. Not, I saw none, 
but they could have been wearing masks for some reason we could 
imagine for ourselves, or Rowling could have not mentioned them for 
some reason we could imagine for ourselves, or they could have all 
been wearing invisibility cloaks, if that strikes our fancy. It all 
requires an step beyond the text, a leap of imagination, which simply 
supposing they were not there in the text because...*they weren't 
there* does not.

Betsy Hp:
> I'm saying that by having people fight for 
> Voldemort who go unnamed and even undescribed lessens the argument 
> that we can tell who was actually fighting for Voldemort via a roll 
> call.  We simply don't know.

zgirnius:
People described as 'masked and unmasked Death Eaters' ARE described, 
and in a way which makes me think they are not current students of 
Slytherin House. Draco, all of HBP suggests to me, was the unique 
student DE. 

> Betsy Hp:
> Honestly, the Slytherins who joined Voldemort may have been patted 
on 
> the head for choosing the right side and sent home for all I know.

zgirnius:
As long as you don't insist I must accept that they fought, I'm 
happy. Heck, according to Aberforth, the ones that did come, if any 
did, may have wanted to see Mommy or Daddy.

> > >>zgirnius:
> > <snip>
> > I don't think any Slytherin student openly took up arms 
for         
> > Voldemort.

> Betsy Hp:
> Actually, Crabbe, Goyle and Draco did.  (Bit ironic, really. <g>)  
> Ooh, but while I'm at this point...

zgirnius:
"Openly". <g> And Draco managed to misplace his arms before he had 
any opportunity to take them up.

> Betsy Hp:
> Draco wasn't trying to *join* the Death Eater, he was trying to 
make 
> clear he'd *already* done so:
> 
> "I'm Draco Malfoy, I'm Draco, I'm on your side!" [DH scholastic 
p.645]
> 
> Or are we supposed to think Draco was lying? <eg>

zgirnius:
I sure do, depending, of course, on exactly what that means. In a 
formal sense, it was a statement of fact. On the other hand, he was 
certainly not, that we saw, *fighting* on that side.

> Betsy Hp:
> She may not have meant for the Slytherins students to fight.  That 
> would have shown a certain perverse bravery after all. <g>  But in 
> the same token, I find it hard to believe that JKR meant to redeem 
> Slytherin house and then failed to mention it. <RBG> 

zgirnius:
Her hero, her golden boy, can honestly say to his son when it is all 
over, that it will not matter to him in the slightest if his son 
winds up in that house. To me, this is a statement that the house is 
one good people can come out of. Is that redemption for Slytherin 
House? I have no idea. Redepemtion is a notion I ascribe to 
individuals, not dormitories.

I always expected that statements like "There's not a single witch or 
wizard who went bad who wasn't in Slytherin" to be proved wrongheaded 
(and I did not need to wait very long, as it proved). 

> Betsy Hp:
> In this case, I think JKR *meant* for the association to be reason
> of guilt.  

zgirnius:
I don't. If anything, I saw McGonagall's outburst as an extenuating 
circumstance.

And, what guilt? None of the students who left are shown doing 
anything objectionable thereafter. They left. Like assorted students 
from other houses.

> > >>zgirnius:
> > <snip> 
> > The Slytherins all left. None stayed to fight against their 
> > kin/the kin of their housemates, under the leadership of a woman
> > who demonstrated that she despises them. I did not find it 
> > surprising, or disturbing.

> Betsy Hp:
> And of *course* Snape had to be
> so abused and neglected he'd come to associate abuse to love and so 
> joined with those who despised him to the end.  It's an ugly brutal 
> world, and JKR's "heroes" are ugly, brutal people.

zgirnius:
Sorry, you may have lost me.

In case I am grasping some of what you are saying...Snape did not 
switch sides because he wanted to be on the side that despised him. 
He switched sides first because he wanted to be on the side that 
would protect Lily, and later because he wanted to be on the side 
that would protect her son. And at some point, having switched sides, 
I believe he came to appreciate being on the side that would not have 
killed her, if the situation were reversed. Both sides include 
characters who show themselves to be quite prejudiced, but cold-
blooded murder is exclusively the tool of the bad guys in this world, 
and Snape came to realize he wanted no part in that. "Only those I 
could not save" and all that.

That it was the side of those who despised Snape doubtless did not 
add any cheerfulness and amiability to his disposition. This was just 
another thing he bore.

> Besty Hp:
> But it *is* JKR's world, so as per her definition of things, the 
> Slytherins are the bad guys.  (They're bigots, don't you know.)

zgirnius:
If you are quoting an interview comment, I would like to see it, or 
at least get a paraphrase. It would make the discussion easier to 
follow.

As a generalization, "Slytherins are bigots" would reflect that more 
virulently bloodist people come out of that House than any other, 
from what we have seen. Though since she has said there are children 
of Death Eaters in other houses in another interview (the one post-
HBP with Sparts and Agnelli), it's not the only place bigots come 
from in her mental image of her world. She has also included in her 
books Slytherins who were not bigots. (Andromeda Black, who married 
Ted, and who is not the only member of the Ancient and Most Noble 
House to get blasted off the family tree for betrayal of her blood. 
Slytherins all, until Sirius came along).

So neither "All Slytherins are bigots" nor "All Slytherins are evil" 
is true. In the sense that the evil Harry was destined to defeat was 
Voldemort and his followers, adherents to the pureblood supremacist 
cause, yes, Slytherin House is the house of the bad ideology. But 
that's not something from which we can draw conclusions about 
individual Slytherins, any more than we may conclude that his daring, 
wit, and chivalry set Peter Pettigrew apart.