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

[Dana]

No: HPFGUIDX 178675

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). 
<snip>

Dana:
No, I actually read it the same way you did and I agree with you on 
what this tale was supposed to represent.
I also know that it sometimes only takes a gesture of kindness to 
bring people, or in this case elf and wizard, closer together. 

I just would have like to have seen it take a little more effort on 
Harry's part to persuade Kreacher and address that what caused the 
animosity in the first place and not bypass it with Kreacher's 
connection to Regulus. It means a lot for Kreacher but it is seems 
just to easy for Harry.
Of course I am still having some sour grapes with Kreacher in 
relation to Sirius but not because I do not understand what JKR was 
going for. I just dislike the storyline altogether because although I 
understand Kreacher's betrayal and what let up to it, to me there 
were a lot more factors at play that led to the events in OotP as 
they did, which got totally bypassed in the message JKR wanted to 
make out of the Kreacher, Sirius and Harry dynamic.  

So when Hermione starts explaining of Kreacher's behavior, which 
contradicts DD's explanation (which wasn't any better but alas), it 
just rubbed me wrong especially because it took a lot of assumptions 
that where presented as facts. For instance Hermione's would have no 
way of knowing how Bella and Narcissa treated Kreacher that was just 
assuming on part of Hermione. There was a lot of animosity from 
Kreacher towards Sirius that had nothing to do with the way of how 
Sirius treated Kreacher, especially in relation to what happened 
between Sirius and predominantly his mother. It was pretty obvious 
that Kreacher did not have the same animosity towards either Bella or 
Narcissa and therefore I do not think being nice really had so much 
to do with it. To me, it was to easily explained away and just didn't 
fit my personal perceptions of what really happened. Which I of 
course can only blame myself for but it would have been nice if that 
part would have been addressed. 

I am not saying that Sirius reasons for treating Kreacher as he did 
is in any way okay but to suggest that Kreacher's behavior had no 
influence at all on breaking open old wounds is ignoring Kreacher as 
a real part of what was once the Black household. Well let me stop 
ranting here because it is just a personal feeling of disgruntle I 
have with this story line. Turning away from your own family is just 
not as easy as it is made out to be in canon. It is not just about 
rebelling against your family values. I just am not sure where JKR 
was going with that and it leaves me a bad taste. 

Carol:
> 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:
Well I think part of the slavery idea, as Lizzyben pointed out JKR 
suggested herself, is in how wizards treated house-elves and not so 
much in the servitude house-elves have naturally. 
It is the misuse by wizards of what makes the elves magically bound 
to serve wizards which makes an analogy with slavery work. Barty Sr. 
punished Winky by imposing freedom on her and disgracing her among 
her own kind. Dobby was treated as dirt by the Malfoys and would take 
freedom over having to serve them any day. Kreacher loved his family 
but didn't want to serve those he did not see as part of that family 
but could not do anything more about it then just betray his master. 
That is why the house-elves at Hogwarts were happy because they could 
be just house-elves without much human interference. I do not doubt 
that if a house-elf wanted to be set free all he needed to do is ask. 

The end of the mistreatment of house-elves was in my opinion still 
not about changing the house-elf but about changing the wizard's 
attitude towards house-elves (as you have pointed out too). It is not 
the servitude that makes the house-elf a slave but the misuse of the 
house-elf nature. 
I think that is true for all types of slavery it is not like the 
black people working on American plantations needed to stop being who 
they were to impose their freedom, slave owners needed to stop taking 
advantage of the lack of civil rights these people had in this 
country. There was nothing wrong with their being it was wrong in the 
way they were treated. 

I think the natural servitude house-elves have is what made things 
confusing within the books. Don't change the house-elf change the 
wizard was in my opinion supposed to be the message. 

JMHO

Dana