Gryffindor & Slytherin roles (was Villain!Dumbledore)

[Carol]

No: HPFGUIDX 177750

Magpie wrote:
<snip>

> This series doesn't teach that people of different ethnicities are 
> just as good. I think Wizards, particularly British ones, come out 
> above plenty of other ethnicities in canon (though again it's a bit 
> like with the Slytherins--they really are superior so it's not a 
> lie). Harry's last line of the story proper to to think about asking 
> his slave (who also just fought in the battle) to make him a 
> sandwich. Everyone in their proper place.

Carol responds:

I tend to think of the Centaurs, Goblins, and House-Elves as separate
species ("races," they would call themselves) rather than
"ethnicities," which implies that they are merely ethnically (racially
or culturally) different from Wizards (Muggles not even being
considered in their thinking any more than they were considered by the
sculptor of the original golden fountain). As Hermione points out when
she notes that Firenze has four legs, these beings are not human They
have different values, different sensibilitites from humans. (Centaurs
consider themselves superior but are, IMO, just as bigoted as the
humans they criticize.) The Centaurs (three or four of them, anyway)
end up fighting against Voldemort alongside the Wizards. So do the
House-Elves of Hogwarts--not for freedom, which it's been made clear
throughout the series that they don't want, but because they know that
they will be abused if Voldemort wins. "Master Regulus, champion of
House-Elves," would never have broken Kreacher's heart by freeing him.
He was just avenging the horrible abuse that Kreacher had suffered at
Voldemort's hands. The Goblins don't join in the fight. They remain
interested only in themselves--and receive their comeuppance when the
Sword of Gryffindor is magically taken from them and returned to its
rightful owners.

The statue was inaccurate primarily in the slavish adoration depicted
on the faces of the Centaur and the Goblin. Centaurs chiefly want to
be left alone to rule themselves: "Our laws are not your laws, Human."
What Goblins want (aside from renting rather than selling their works)
is not clear, and even Bill, who knows them and likes some of them, 
realizes that they are self-interested and vindictive. House-elves, in
contrast, *want* to serve. It's their nature. They're not human;
they're essentially the brownies of fairy tales altered as JKR altered
many creatures of myth and legend for the purpose of her story. 

If Kreacher were an enslaved Muggle, we would be right to be appalled
by Harry's request for a sandwich. But he's a House-Elf, happily and
willingly serving Harry because Harry has shown respect for his true
(but dead) master, Regulus, and his cause (destroying the locket). If
Harry were to go down to the kitchens to make himself a sandwich, I
doubt that he would be allowed to do so. The House-Elves would make it
for him, and perhaps be offended by his request. And Kreacher would
probably be hurt, thinking that Master Harry undervalued his services.
"Kreacher would be most happy to serve you, Master Harry. Do you wish
a treacle tart and some pumpkin juice as well?"

Hermione may still be under the delusion that House-Elves want
freedom, but clearly, all they really want is safety and employment
and appreciation. Kreacher would be as hurt, perhaps as distraught, as
Winky if Harry were to offer him his freedom now. He wants work (now
that he considers his master worthy of his service). He does not want
to be paid. And he does not want to be paid. That's not what Regulus
stood for, and it's not what he was fighting for.

Carol, who sees no RW analogy for the House-Elves and thinks that both
Hermione and the reader should listen to what they themselves say that
they want