A sandwich

[horridporrid03]

No: HPFGUIDX 178653

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/178606
> >>Magpie:
> > That's exactly what I said. Harry's only duty lies in noblesse
> > oblige, to accept that it is his rightful place to be served by   
> > House Elves and to treat his inferiors well. He's a "good slave   
> > owner." <snip>

> >>Carol:
> And within the context of the WW, there's nothing wrong with that. 
> <snip>

Betsy Hp:
But the reader isn't coming to the series as a blank slate.  JKR 
*has* to realize the kind of loaded word "slave" is.  And she's no 
stranger to using our RW context to add depth to story (ie Nazis = 
Death Eaters).

I think it's like the movie "Goldfinger" where there's a scene where 
James Bond smacks a woman on the ass to send her on her way because 
he and another male character are about to have "man talk".  At the 
time the movie was made, this made Bond seem manly and cool.  But if 
a movie director *today* chose to have his hero do the same thing, 
even if it took place in that earlier era, he or she would recognize 
that they were having their hero do something that would cause him to 
be judged a lot more harshly.  Because RW context would be brought to 
bare.

And then of course, there's the added difficulty of Dobby.

> >>Carol:
> You can't free a House-Elf without disgracing him and making him    
> miserable.
> <snip>

Betsy Hp:
And yet, our first introduction to House Elves was an elf that 
yearned for his freedom and adored Harry for arranging it for him.  
So even within the context of the books, JKR set up slavery as a not 
very good word.

> >>Lealess:
> > <snip>
> > Perhaps nobody would be having this discussion were it not for   
> > Dobby and the story his life seemed to be telling, along with    
> > Hermione's premature efforts on behalf of house-elves.  So tell 
> > me, why oh why did JKR even include this storyline at all?  It 
> > seemed to be an anti-slavery story at one time.  It ended up     
> > being anything but.
 
> >>lizzyben:
> I don't know, but it does seem like JKR originally intended to show 
> that the house-elf slavery was a bad thing & then changed her mind 
> later on.
> <snip of very interesting quotes>
> She calls the house elves "slaves", and states that the house-elves 
> represent the issue of slavery in the real world.
> <snip> 
> Now Harry doesn't want to free elves, he wants them to serve him. 
> And all was well. 
> 
> I can't figure out if she was being dishonest about her message in 
> the earlier quotes, if she totally changed her mind about the 
> direction of the series, or is she honestly doesn't see the 
> disconnect between her statements and the ultimate messages 
> contained in the novel.

Betsy Hp:
I think JKR was working through some various issues through her 
writing of this series.  And I think she got... maybe tired, maybe 
scared?  Anyway, I've never seen a book sweep its shadow characters 
under the carpet so firmly and so quickly.  I think the House Elf 
slavery issue was an innocent by-stander in some ways.  Since JKR 
decided to embrace the close-minded, protectionism of the WW, all of 
its traditions had to be upheld.  Therefore the House Elves remained 
slaves, the Centaurs remained in the forest, the Giants remained 
banned, and the Slytherins remained in the dungeons.  Harry changed 
nothing; he just took his place amongst the elite.

Betsy Hp