Andromeda as good Slytherin WAS: Disappointment

[starview316]

No: HPFGUIDX 177622



> Prep0strus:
> My original point was to try to postulate what I thought Slytherin
> meant to JKR.  It is undeniable that there are several Slytherin
> characters with a certain amount of depth and complexity.  However, 
I
> still believe that SLYTHERIN, as a whole represents all that JKR
> thinks is wrong with the world. <SNIP>

Amy:

I didn't see your first post on the subject, so that's why I was 
asking; thank you. I do agree with your overall view on how JKR sees 
Slytherin traits...you seem to agree that JKR doesn't seem to believe 
that they should be damned as a whole, which is probably my strongest 
dis-belief after DH, I'll explain why in a second.


> Amy:
> Probably best to ask this from Adam himself, but since you did say
> you agree, what's meant by admirable and likable -- someone who was
> admirable and likable by Harry etc.'s standards, or by fandom? If
> we're getting to fandom, I love Harry, but he's not always that
> likable or admirable -- by the same reasoning, I suppose, Snape has
> bajillions of fans who both like and admire him.
> 
> <SNIP> So why should
> being admirable and likable put a Slytherin any farther above the
> Slytherins we do have, who all seem to play into JKR's larger 
message?
> 
> Prep0strus:
> 
> I hope above I answered most of your first question (I was writing
> whilst you posted).  As for admirable and likable... i don't know, I
> guess. By me?  Because anything else, I guess i'd argue. Perhaps by
> general consensus?  I don't agree with everything the 'good'
> characters too. but i think that overall, most of them are likable
> and/or admirable.  More importantly, we can find members of the 3
> 'good' houses who fit these qualities with ease.  and it is 
difficult
> to find members of those houses who would be defined as 'equal'.  On
> the other hand, with slytherin, almost every evil act performed is
> performed by them, and i think it is difficult to find anything
> likable or admirable about them.  I know the Snape lovers might jump
> down my throat for that - he shows admirable courage, they like his
> quips, but few deny that he is an unpleasant personality. And for 
me,
> that's how I see the other Slytherin characters as well.  The 
original
> posts, as I said above, were not so much about individuals as about
> slytherin as a whole. <SNIP>

> To return a question to you - what do you think JKR's larger message
> is, that you refer to in your posting?


Amy:

Despite how many of JKR's messages got skewed in the actual story, I 
think every reader can safely agree that the overriding message of 
the HP books is supposed to be about love's all-conquering power; 
it's the message we're constantly beaten over the head with 
throughout the series, and steamrollered with in DH. Which is why I 
personally can't accept that JKR meant the only House whose (main) 
members we consistently see allowing love to hold them back from evil 
or whatnot, is meant to be the House of the damned (I realize you 
didn't call them "the damned", I'm talking more about the large 
outcry of JKR's painting Slytherin as unredeemed and Bad as a whole).

I guess this is why I couldn't see why admirable/likable was being 
linked to who JKR meant us to see as Good. I agree that we don't know 
anything about Andromeda; all canon seems to indicate is that she got 
along fine with her family till she married Tonks, and for all we 
know, love held her back from being truly bad, like the others. That 
doesn't change the fact that, from canon perspective and (considering 
how many people here try to put her forth as an example of a Good 
Slytherin) fanon perspective, she's conclusively on the good side. 
Her personal beliefs don't seem to come into play, nor do anything 
else. For all we know, she's worse than Snape personality-wise. 

Slytherin as a whole is portrayed as nasty, unlikeable, and even 
evil, yet all the main Slytherins we've seen (except Voldemort) have 
allowed love to hold them back from villainy, etc: even Lucius is 
portrayed as contemptible and evil throughout the series, yet readers 
are still going to walk away from this series with the image of him 
broken at Voldemort's side, and running through the final Battle 
looking for Draco, rather than helping Voldemort out. Narcissa, 
Draco, Snape, Regulus -- I can't speak for people who try to put them 
forward as examples of people with pleasant personalities, but I can 
sort of see why they would constantly be put forth as examples of 
Good Slytherins, even though we never really get a sense of where 
they stand on things like Muggleborn-persecution and whatnot. A lot 
of people seem to see it as negligible that they're only motivated by 
love to act against (or NOT act for) Voldemort, as opposed to making 
a personal moral choice; considering the messages about love in HP 
were far more concise than ANY message about personal moral choice 
JKR may have made, I can't see it as so insignificant. 

Yeah, I think JKR condemns certain Slytherin personality traits, 
which is probably why the House members are all so unlikeable. I 
really don't think she condemns Slytherin House in itself, though, so 
in the larger picture, I can't see why it matters that they ARE 
unlikeable, given how subjective "likability" really is. Slughorn, 
for example, is probably the only Slytherin who was meant to be 
likeable (if not admirable -- I think it was Snape, who was meant to 
be admirable -- Harry at least admires him at the end of the series); 
most of fandom hates him, and why is this? His networking tendencies? 
(Networking, which is actually something Hermione apparently excels 
at, considering how she started the DA.) 

I can't argue that Slytherin aren't on a more unequal level than the 
other three Houses, but neither can I believe that this unequalness 
is as damning to all other future members of Slytherin House as 
others seem to think it is. 

Amy