The House Elf storyline in the HP Series

[Zara]

No: HPFGUIDX 178720

> Prep0strus:
> I don't think the
> message that 'slavery is ok as long as you treat them nice' makes
> sense in the context of the story.  She gave too much sympathy to
> Dobby, to the idea of freeing slaves, and talked about how slavery 
is
> bad in her interviews. 

zgirnius:
I agree, it makes little sense to me as well. And we really don't, 
IMO, need to appeal to her interviews, or biographical facts like her 
involvement with Amnesty International (which opposes, among other 
things, human trafficking), to see an anti-slavery message in the 
House Elf story arc in the series.

> Prep0strus:
>Now, she did not follow up on that storyline
> appropriately, but she also didn't go AGAINST it enough to make a
> strong point that slavery is ok.  Dobby's death and the lack of any
> forward momentum on the issue lean that way, but I don't think that
> it's enough to support the idea that the books actually support 
slavery.

zgirnius:
I don't agree that the death of Dobby is some sort of step back in 
the House Elf story line that somehow detracts from the weight of the 
statements within the books about the evils of House Elf slavery 
(which are numerous). On the contrary, I found it to be a positive, 
showing again (and in a very emotionally impactful way, at least for 
me) that freeing the House Elves is the right thing to do in the long 
run.

Dobby, after being freed, is shown to be almost comical in his 
devotion to Harry, willing to fulfill his every order and go without 
sleep even when Harry does not actually want him to. Almost as if he 
were, again, Harry's slave, though we know he is technically free. 
Then he dies as a result of disobeying a standing order by Harry. 
("Just promise never to try and save my life again," CoS). Dobby's 
life *and* death show what is possible for a House Elf – to be 
independent and brave and loving, just the way a human can be. Dobby, 
of course, is a lot more – from his courageous secret interference 
with his Master's plan and desire for freedom in CoS, to his death in 
the defense of others' lives and his cause, he is a heroic figure.

Most House Elves alive at the time of the story find his condition 
(being free, and happy about it) shocking and unnatural. But the text 
offers us an explanation for this other than "it is the natural 
order": They are "what wizards have made them". And what wizards have 
done, wizards can set right (not overnight, by freeing the elves 
wholesale and causing them great distress, but over time). 

Nor is Dobby the only Elf we see changing over the course of the 
books. We see changes that tend in the same direction as Dobby. In my 
understanding of the books, Dobby is the desired end point for all of 
the House Elves, one we do not see achieved fully except by Dobby 
himself within the series. He is free, happy that way, and finds an 
accommodation with humans that permits him to enjoy freedom while 
still engaging in the traditional activities of his kind. Most 
particularly, Kreacher is such an example, and I don't refer to his 
acquisition of a more pleasant manner, his better grooming, or his 
desire to serve Harry rather than call it a nasty Half-blood.

Kreacher wanted to destroy the locket, because it is what Regulus 
died doing. He also, of course, *had* to destroy the locket, because 
the House Elf enchantment bound him to obey the order of his master, 
so how can I know he actually, independently, wanted this done? 
Because Regulus is dead these eighteen years, and yet Kreacher tells 
the other Elves of Hogwarts his story, and inspires them to 
participate in the final battle against Voldemort and his forces.

Regulus did not order Kreacher to work for the downfall of Voldemort. 
On the contrary, he left Kreacher in ignorance of his change of 
heart, so that years later, Kreacher was still parroting the 
pureblood philosophy. Harry set Kreacher straight on what had 
happened, and Kreacher, on his very own, with no orders from Harry, 
decided that the thing to do at the end of the book, was convince his 
fellows to fight Voldemort. And even if we buy that this is still 
some sort of slavish devotion to Regulus (which I do not for a 
moment, but I see the argument coming), it does not explain why the 
*other* Elves would go along. Unless, of course, *they* find 
something inspiring in the story of "Regulus, defender of House 
Elves", and something to oppose in the Dark Lord who would torture 
and kill a House Elf without compunction. 

Hermione finally kisses Ron when Ron expresses a concern that House 
Elves should not fight and die for humans. And then a few chapters 
later, House Elves make a decision to fight and die for themselves. 
They may be bound to do the laundry, but they can look at both sides 
in a war, see the one they belong on, and fight for it all by 
themselves.

Kreacher and his fellow fighting Elves go right back into the 
kitchens and make food for the humans alongside whom they fought (and 
presumably, have a well-earned snack themselves). I would point out, 
that even if they were free, this would be their (paid) job to do, so 
in and of itself it is no more demeaning to them than going about 
healing the wounded right after the battle would be for Madam 
Pomfrey. But we have been shown they can (and therefore should) be 
more, and we also know that Harry, Ron, and Hermione all believe 
this.