Gryffindor & Slytherin roles (was Villain!Dumbledore)

[Ceridwen]

No: HPFGUIDX 177743

Alla:
> But how does it not say things about bigotry? I mean, assuming that
> you buy the idea that Slytherins are really bad ( or Slytherins are
> Natsis thing), isn't what the book saying for the middle class
> british kid that saying bad words and thinking that people of
> different ethnicity is BAD? What Slytherins did are bad, horrible,
> etc.
> Isn't it much more than the bullying level?

Magpie:
> Then it says something so incredibly obvious about bigotry that I
> expect a book trying to say something about bigotry to be beyond it.
> If bigotry was as easy as "don't call people racial slurs unless
> they've done something to deserve it" bigotry isn't much of an
> issue.  It certainly doesn't say much about the why's of bigotry at 
> the root level.

Alla:
> I am also not sure why to be challenging the good guys should
> discover in themselves the same bigotry as Slytherins had and deal
> with it?

Ceridwen:
The thing is, bigotry, racism or any other -ism, isn't always so 
obvious.  If it was, it would be much easier to identify and deal 
with, given that people actually want to deal with it.  Calling 
someone a name based on ethnicity or culture or looks or social 
status or class or birth or disability is a clear signal that 
something isn't right.  It's those little things, the ones we 
wouldn't notice unless they were called to our attention, that is 
bigotry at its deepest and most stubborn level.  Something obvious 
can be cut out like deadheading flowers from a plant.  Finding out 
why the stems are rotting and the leaves are going bad is harder and 
takes some expertise, both to identify the cause and to fix it.

Several years ago, Oprah Winfrey tried a discrimination experiment, 
using her audience as lab rats.  Instead of using the obvious sign of 
color/ethnicity, she designated brown-eyed people as "better".  This 
was based on historic examples: more brown eyed people have 
contributed to humanity than blue eyed people.  She backed that up 
with examples.

The minute people showed up for the taping of her next show, they 
were subtly segregated based on eye color.  Blue eyed people weren't 
treated badly, but brown eyed people were treated with uniform 
courtesy.  Brown eyed people were given choice places in line.  Brown 
eyed people were directed to the coffee stand while blue eyed people 
had to find it on their own.  Brown eyed people were let into the 
studio first, and got the best seats.  No one obviously discriminated 
against the blue eyed patrons, but it became obvious soon enough to 
the blue eyed people what was going on.

Another example from real life of people not noticing prejudice until 
someone points it out: handicapped access.  A person who doesn't need 
a ramp or braile signs won't notice their lack, but for people who 
need them, the lack is no less than annoying and sometimes it makes 
the difference in having access to certain places or things that can 
benefit, and not having that access.  Think books, think buildings, 
think parking areas.  Nice people, good people, didn't notice the 
lack because it didn't affect them.  The only way people began 
thinking about this access was because someone pointed it out.

This is where I thought Rowling was going with the Slytherin thread.  
Sure, Slytherins are outright bigots more than we were shown of the 
other houses.  But it's bigotry as well to see someone sorted into 
Slytherin and think, yeah, they're bad.  That's a subtler form of 
bigotry, but it can be just as devastating to the Slytherins if 
someone with that attitude was in a position to affect their lives.  
Slytherins aren't uniformly rich, Snape proved that.  A Gryffindor 
personnel director in a position to hire people with an anti-
Slytherin bias would perhaps prefer "anyone but a Slytherin."  It 
isn't based on race, or on class, or on birth status, just on 
Hogwarts house.  It's still a prejudiced -ism.

Ceridwen.