Harry's remark about Kreacher WAS: Re: JKR messed up........ no.

[Carol]

No: HPFGUIDX 178636

Dana wrote:
<snip>
> 
> Brownies are literally elves of the house and they serve the 
inhabitants of that house as long as they find these inhabitants 
agreeable enough to serve, if not well the inhabitants will do better
to move. <snip>

> What I was trying to say with pointing out the mythological 
background the house-elves are based on is that I do not think that 
JKR probably ever thought about the comparison people would make to 
slavery because house-elf servitude is part of almost all elf-like 
creatures in mythology and this part is not what she made up herself,
she just personified the concept. <snip>

Carol responds:
I agree with you regarding House-elves as brownies, creatures from
folklore that JKR borrowed and altered for her own purposes. (I think
there's a touch of Gollum in the House-Elves, too, but that's neither
here not there.)
> 
Dana:
> I do not look at what Harry wants but what Kreacher would have liked. 

Carol:

Exactly what I think, tooo, only it's Hermione, not Harry, who's
trying to impose unwanted freedom on the House-Elves. It seems to me
that Harry has finally figured out how to treat a House-Elf other than
Dobby, and both he and Kreacher are happy as a result (or would be if
Yaxley's glimpse of 12 GP hadn't made it impossible to continue using
the house as a hideout). That relationship is resumed at the end of
the book with the sandwich thought (which is not a remark, despite the
title of this thread, since Harry isn't speaking aloud).

Dana:
> And it is not even because I like Kreacher's story arc because
Kreacher's tale totally put me off; give the creature some bling bling
and he will kiss your 
 insert whatever comes to mind
 forever. <snip>

Carol responds:
Interesting that you and I would react so differently here when we
seem to share a similar view of House-Elves. For me, what mattered was
not the worthless fake locket (which Kreacher values because it
belonged to Master Regulus) but Harry's changed view of both Regulus
(whom he now recognizes as a hero and an ally, though dead) and of
Kreacher himself (who only wants to serve his dead master). Once
Kreacher realizes that Harry, like Regulus, wants the stolen locket
destroyed (so Mater Regulus will not have died in vain, as Harry
rather disingenuously phrases it), Kreacher wants to help him. The
fake locket, which Harry no longer needs and gives to Kreacher as a
keepsake, a memento of Master Regulus, is "overkill, mate." The gift
reduces Kreacher to hysterical tears, not because of its beauty or
glitter or monetary value (I'm not quite sure what "bling" means), but
because of its connection with the master who sacrificed his life for
a House-Elf. I found the whole Kreacher/Regulus story extremely
moving, myself, and I loved Kreacher's rallying cry, fighting in the
name of "brave Regulus, champion of House-Elves"--Kreacher's true
master, as I read it, with "Master Harry" being an acceptable
substitute because he acknowledged and respected Regulus's sacrifice
(and understood, thanks to Hermione, that House-Elves don't think like
human beings--now if Hermione would just realize that they don't want
freedom. . .).

Dana:
> Maybe it is just me imagining that the difference was predominantly
in their personality that gives me the feel that Kreacher actually 
would not want to be set free in the way Dobby did but sure that
should not be a reason for Harry to not even offer it to Kreacher. <snip>

Carol:
I agree with you here. Dobby was an anomaly. Kreacher was proud to
serve the Black family and had excellent reason to love, almost
worship, Regulus. The last thing he wants is to be set free now that
"Master Harry" understands him and has helped him to destroy the
locket as Regulus ordered him to do. Kreacher will stay at Hogwarts if
he has to in order to escape DEs or if he's ordered to do so, but I'm
sure he'd much rather return to the Black family home, which is the
only home he has ever known. The last thing he wants is to be
freed--disgraced, unemployed and unemployable, given clothes but no
home and no protection. Harry has the moral obligation of noblesse
oblige, as Magpie said, though she apparently doesn't approve of the
concept--the duty of those in power (in this case wizards who own
House-Elves) to behave responsibly, honorably, and generously to those
who are below them in rank or power, including servants. It would be
cruel to deprive the aged and eccentric Kreacher of kind treatment, a
home, and the opportunity to serve wizards that gives House-Elves so
much pleasure (as we see with the reformed Kreacher after Harry gives
him the locket).
>
Dana: 
> If house-elves want to serve wizards then I see no objection to
Harry having a house-elf as long as Kreacher wants to be Harry's elf. 
>
Carol:
Neither do I. There's all the difference in the world between ordering
Kreacher to follow Draco, which he didn't want to do, and requesting a
sandwich that he would be more than happy to provide (and which would
require very little effort on a House-Elf's part).

Carol, who sees nothing in canon to support the idea that House-Elves
want to be free and everything to indicate their pleasure in serving a
kind master (as even the "free" Dobby does--he simply chooses whom he
wants to serve)