A sandwich

[montavilla47]

No: HPFGUIDX 178736

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" <gbannister10 at ...> wrote:
> Geoff: 
> If people feel that they wish to read into this statement that Harry, 
> by expressing a feeling that he would welcome someone - like, say, 
> Molly or Kreacher or, if he had lived, Dobby - offering to make a cup 
> of tea and cut a slice of cake for him is undermining the structure of 
> the Wizarding world, then that is *their* privilege and choice.

Montavilla47:
Actually, it's the opposite.  Harry isn't undermining the structure
of the Wizarding World, he's sliding into his proper place within it--
as a student at Hogwarts, and as a slave-owner.

It tells us that Harry is a decent bloke, who, after saving the world
wants nothing more than a good sleep and a bit to eat.  Not glory,
not riches, not nookie.  Just simple, modest desires.

Odysseus, returning from his twenty-year journey would be as
modest.  He'd have a slave bring him his slippers and a cup
of wine.  And think no more about the issue of slavery than 
Harry does.

Nor would we, knowing that slavery was the prevalent system in
Ancient Greece, and that the Odyssey is not an anti-slavery 
tract.

Where it's problematic is when we're given House-Elf slavery 
as an issue through *two* books in a seven book series.  When
we're not only encouraged to question the House-Elf system, but
forced to confront it through several arguments and scenes
based on Hermione and Ron's conflict.

And, it's just plain weird, as Magpie points out, that Hermione's
original position (House-Elf slavery is bad!) switches to Ron's
original position (House-Elf slavery is okay, it's only bad to if 
you abuse your Master position) without anyone noticing that
it's changed and with Hermione rewarding Ron for "switching"
to a position that he held all along.

By presenting the argument as something readers are forced
to consider from both sides--with Hermione's original 
position (House-Elf Slavery=bad!) undermined by what we 
what we are shown (freeing Winky only destroys her; Kreacher
goes from bitter and crazy under a "bad" master to happy, 
helpful, and downright kickass under a "good" master), the 
most obvious message from the text is that slavery is fine
as long as the masters understand their position and act
properly.

I can see this being a good message--particularly for those
young readers who are born into a slave society (as masters).
I could see this being a wholesome message for a young boy
who lived in the Edwardian period, when he was expected 
by right of birth, to have servants and hopefully not 
abuse the privilege.

Montavilla47