Prejudice/House Elves/Failed Messages in the Books

[Mike]

No: HPFGUIDX 177884

> Katie
> 
> First of all, let me tackle the question of whether or not there is 
> an intended and definite message about racism and prejudice in the 
> books. In my opinion, there is no question that JKR put in a very 
> pervasive and pointed theme about racism in these books. 

Mike:
Sorry this might not be very helpful. I've called what we see in the 
books more like ethnic bigotry, at least that's what I'd call the 
pervasive theme of blood purity. Muggleborns don't look different 
than pure-bloods and they don't hail from a different land. OTOH, 
there are witches and wizards of the different races but they aren't 
discrimated against based on their race. I realize I'm splitting 
hairs here. It's just that JKR bothered to include the different 
races and didn't show discrimination based on that. That's why I 
point out that racism doesn't work for me.


> Katie
> From the very first book, she has associated the "good" side 
> with the acceptance of half-wizards, werewolves, giants, and 
> other WW outcasts. <snip>

Mike:
This is where it gets difficult for me, because clearly we are 
dealing with different *species* here. (except werewolves which I 
suppose are just afflicted wizards) Most especially, when we start 
talking about House Elves, Goblins, Centaurs, Merpeople, Trolls, and 
maybe Hags, we've crossed over into talking about "other" sentient 
beings. (I guess Trolls are sentient <g>) This puts us beyond 
ethnicity, but I would still treat transgressions as bigotry when it 
involves discrimination against these "other" sentients.



> Katie
> 
> I believe the waters started to get muddy when JKR introduced the 
> House Elf issue, and later on, discussed goblins and centaurs. 

< ginormous snip of House Elf enslavement analysis>

Mike:
Katie, I don't disagree with your House Elf analysis at all. But I'd 
like to explore a possible alternate reading/explanation for the way 
JKR treated the "Servant Problem" (borrowed from Red Hen).

Let me start by saying that this reading would go down much easier if 
JKR had used the term "enchantment" instead of "enslavement" to 
describe the House Elf binding condition. Enslavement has a clear 
connotation of being imposed by one group onto another. Enchantment 
could and probably would be read as a natural order of things, not an 
imposition but a condition of being. (kinda like Snape to James <eg>)

What if the House Elf situation was meant to be looked upon as a 
native peoples motif? By this I mean, seeing House Elves as having 
their own perspective on life and the way they view their place on 
earth. 

Then Hermione's SPEW was an example of interlopers coming in and 
telling them the way they should think. Drawing a parallel to the way 
the missionaries that spread the "word" throughout the Pacific 
Islands. Possibly the English treatment of the aboriginal peoples of 
Australia, or the European treatment of Native Americans, though 
these don't ring quite so true for me.

IOW, because House Elves are a different species, not human, maybe we 
were suppose to understand that it is arrogant of humans to think 
they know best how others should think. If this were the case, we do 
get somewhat of a resolution to this situation in DH. It happens in 
CH. 10 when Hermione says, "Kreacher doesn't think like that,..." She 
has finally come around to understand that House Elves don't think 
like humans do.

As I said above, the problem with this reading is that 
word: "enslavement". If they were just different creatures with 
different perspectives on life and different life forces, this 
reading might have been stronger than it is. 

Just throwing it out there.
Mike