Dark Book

[lizzyben04]

No: HPFGUIDX 176969

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jen Reese" <stevejjen at ...> wrote:
>
> lizzyben:
> > I know a little bit about the psychology of mass violence, and while
> > reading this story, I could tick off each of the stages of genocide
> > in my head. (Separation, symbolization, dehumanization, 
> > demonization...).
> 
> Jen: That is part of the story - for Muggleborns.  'Mudlbloods'; the 
> Muggle-born registration committee and the taking away of rights and 
> wands; kids not being allowed in Hogwarts unless they register, etc. 
> How is this same process happening at Hogwarts during the year for 
> Slytherin students?  There's no evidence of Slytherin students being 
> forcibly segregated or separated out to experience specific 
> punishments, having slurs assigned to their group, having rights or 
> wands taken away.  Taking the end scene and working backwards to say 
> this is occurring doesn't work unless there's actual evidence that 
> the steps of the process were taken.


lizzyben:

Well, the weirdness is that it works both ways. Yes, on the surface it
is about the dehumanization of Muggle-borns, but the subtext is about
dehumanization of Slytherins (and contrasting glorification of
Gryffindor). 

Probably one of the best classes I ever had was on "Mass Violence,
Genocide, & Humanitarian Law". In that class, we had to read a ton of
eyewitness accounts from people who lived in these types of madness,
in order to understand the underlying patterns & dynamics that these
societies share. And I'm sorry, I'm not expressing it well, but I
*did* see it occurring from HBP at least, and just waited to see if
that message would be subverted or endorsed. It was endorsed, in the end.

I don't know how it happened, I'm almost positive it wasn't
intentional on JKR's part - but it happened. Maybe that's just human
nature, that even when trying to express how awful bigotry is, we
can't help but blame "the other" for it.


In this novel, the surface waves seem to be moving one direction, but
there are powerful undercurrents & riptides pulling you in the exact
opposite direction.

Surface/subtext

- Choices are what matter/predestination removes choices
- World not divided between good & DE/world totally divided between
good & evil, us & them
- Good is something you do/ good is something you *are*, & good people
can do bad things if they want to.
- "Blood status" doesn't matter/ blood is all that matters - bad
Slytherin blood will out, pure Gryffindor blood will save.
- Bigotry is bad/ bigotry against Slytherins is totally justified.
- Violence & bullying are bad/ unless we're doing it.
- Women are equals/ women are worthless
- The power of love/ the power of force - might makes right, magic
makes might.
- Equality of all/ superiority of the Elect
- Loyalty to family/ loyalty to Harry above all
- Redemption & forgiveness/ Condemnation & vengeance
- Diversity is a good thing / Homogeneousness is a good thing - reject
other cultures & POV's. 
- Compassion is important/ compassion is useless
- Love gives you strength/ love makes you weak, obsessive, pathetic
- It's OK to have flaws/ it's NOT OK to have flaws, stuff it out of sight.
- Embrace differences/ reject "the other" as evil
- House Unity is good/ House Segregation is good
- Slavery is bad/ slavery is the natural order
- Labels & stereotypes are bad/ labels & stereotypes are accurate &
valuable
- Other races, cultures & classes deserve rights/ other races,
cultures, & classes deserve subjugation by the upper-class Elect.  
- Muggle-born dehumanization is bad/ Slytherin dehumanization is good.
- Expelling muggle-born students is bad/ Expelling Slytherin students
is good. 

It's truly one of the most schizophrenic works I've ever read.

> lizzyben:
> > When McGonegal threatens to kill the Slytherin students, & the
> > entire school aims their wands at the Slytherin table, Hogwarts
> > teeters dangerously on the brink of the last stage - extermination.
> 
> Jen: First of all, McGonagall made it very clear to Slughorn that he 
> and his students could evacuate if they chose to do so but now was 
> the time to decide upon loyalties.  Then the entire house shows up in 
> the Great Hall!  What's McGonagall supposed to think happened there 
> except that Slytherin has decided they want to take part in securing 
> the castle against Voldemort?  They haven't evacuated, they arrive 
> with the other students.  You don't offer evacuation to victims 
> you're on the brink of exterminating, btw.  

lizzyben: 

Oh yeah you do. That was a threat, pure & simple. You've bought into
the Slytherins=Death Eaters mindset. Why wouldn't she think that
Slytherin students wanted to fight too? Or that they hadn't evacuated
yet, or didn't know what to do, or were looking for safety? Why assume
that the Slytherin students' presence in their own school, their own
home, was part of some insidious plan to let in Voldemort? Because
Slytherins have *already* been rejected from Hogwarts society &
are now totally classed as an "Other" that doesn't belong there, anymore.

And by the way, McGonegal actually *ordered* the Slytherins to go to
the Great Hall - she tells Slughorn: "I shall expect you and the
Slytherins in the Great Hall in twenty minutes." Yet when the
Slytherin students do as they're told, that's a sign of their
disloyalty, evilness & Death Eater loyalties? What would make you come
to that (IMO irrational) conclusion? Because they have been so
successfully demonized, that we're able to just ignore contradictory
evidence & twist the reality to fit the preconceived "evil" vision.
So, the Slytherin children showing up in the Great Hall for safety, as
told, can suddenly be interpreted as a sign that they're planning to
turn on us all & let in Voldemort!! That's the kind of rampant
paranoia & delusion that exists in a genocidal society, and we as
readers actually start to THINK that way. Because we, like Harry, have
been successfully indoctrinated in the propaganda & dehumanization of
the designated other.  

Jen:
> Then Pansy speaks out, not acting like a dehumanized, helpless victim 
> in this scene to my eyes, and sides with the leader of the oppressive 
> regime.  That *is* a declaration of loyalty, fightin' words in a 
> war.  There's no way to know if she speaks for herself only, a couple 
> of students, the entire house, etc. but she makes it improbable for 
> her house to remain after a declaration of loyalty like that.

lizzyben:

Them's fightin' words - and they just about fought. The Slytherins had
already been dehumanized, demonized, segregated & polarized - it would
have been *easy* to go to the last stage w/extermination. In real
life, mass violence almost takes on a life of its own as the society
descends through the stages, & that's what seemed to be happening in
the Great Hall. 

Pansy has a personal grudge against Harry, who almost killed her
boyfriend; she's not going to try to protect him. But it's the other
houses' reactions that are chilling - they don't raise wands against
Pansy (which would be bad enough) but against the entire table of
Slytherin students, ickle firsties and all. They're *all* responsible,
they're *all* guilty by association, because Slytherins have become a
dehumanized, anonymous group of "them".

McGonegal clearly holds the entire House responsible. She allows the
rest of the school to raise their wands against the Slytherin
students, and doesn't tell them to put their wands away. Instead, she
then *orders* the Slytherins to leave - basically at gun-point. The
Slytherin students obediently evacuate. And, just like we could blame
the Slytherins for showing up in the Great Hall on McGonegal's orders,
we can also blame them for leaving Hogwarts on McGonegal's orders.
Those evil Slytherins! How dare they listen to McGonegal?! That just
*proves* they were disloyal to McGonegal; unlike the Gryfindors who
wouldn't follow her directions. And hey, there's that cognitive
dissonance again! 

The ritual exiling of the scapegoat has occurred.

> Jen:  I'm sure McGonagall has plenty of feelings about what occurred 
> over the year; however, she's presented consistent with her 
> characterization as in control of the situation and herself.  The 
> moment Harry tells McGonagall he's acting on Dumbledore's orders, the 
> situation changes, as noted here:  "You're acting on *Dumbledore's* 
> orders?" she repeated with a look of dawning wonder.  Then she drew 
> herself up to her fullest height.  "We shall secure the school 
> against He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named while you search for this - object."

lizzyben:

McGonegal wasn't acting like herself when she called the torture
Cruciatus Curse "gallant" or used Imperio Curse for no reason. This
was a different McGonegal than the strict, fair, *just* person we saw
in HBP. She wasn't in control of herself anymore, IMHO. I don't really
blame her. 

(And was that the best plan, really? She's risking the lives of all
her students so that Harry can go search for some unknown item -
simply because her Leader said so. Not a whole lot of critical
thinking there).

Jen:
> When Snape appears on the scene shortly after, he is the enemy in her 
> eyes and she's become the head of a resistance movement rather than 
> simply an acting headmistress anymore.  

lizzyben:

And she goes for the kill. Good thing Snape is quick w/a Protego
spell. I will always love Snape for this scene - the good guys are
casting Unforgiveable Curses left & right, but Snape refuses to cast a
spell that will hurt someone. 
 
Jen:
> When Slughorn arrives, he is *not* the enemy, McGonagall doesn't take 
> up her wand against him. 


lizzyben:

YET. I do believe McGonagall considers him the enemy as well, which
explains why she treats him differently from all the other Heads of
House. All the House Heads arrive together - she orders Flitwick &
Sprout to begin battle preparations; she informs Slughorn that they
will kill any Slytherin who opposes or sabotages the battle.
Because Slytherins *are* the enemy, in her mind.

Jen:
 He expresses hesitation about participating 
> in the resistance, "I'm not at all sure whether this is wise, 
> Minerva.  He is bound to find a way in, you know, and anyone who has 
> tried to delay him will be in most grievous peril - "  McGonagall 
> does what any resistance leader would do - leave if you don't want to 
> fight but don't take steps to undermine us or you will become part of 
> the enemy fighting against us.  


lizzyben:


Yes, you're either with us or you're against us. But the more I think
about it, Harry & McGonegal's plan was incredibly stupid - Harry
really had no idea where the Horcrux was, or how to find it. It
could've taken him *years*. But McGonegal doesn't ask questions, and
if you do ask questions, it proves that you are a traitor who is
attempting to undermine the cause. Slughorn is now classified as a
Voldemort supporter for expressing doubt about the plan, just like
Smith was classed as a traitor for expressing doubt. Never question a
Gryffindor! 

Jen:
She then gives him the chance to make 
> his own decision: "The time has come for Slytherin house to decide 
> upon its loyalties..."  
> 
> Jen
> 
> (All quotes from DH, chap. 30, pgs. 598-601, US ed.)


lizzyben: 

Is McGonagall really a "resistance leader" in that moment? Not at
Hogwarts - she's in charge, she's the boss, the general, the new
President. (NEVILLE was a resistance leader against the prior
Headmaster). Actually, what has occurred is a coup - the prior leader
has flown the coup after an assassination attempt, & the opposing
party has taken over power. It's a revolution, baby. She's the
accepted leader of Hogwarts, and is defending the "country" from an
imminent invasion & attack at its borders. Who is she "resisting" in
Hogwarts? Nobody, now. Unless Slytherins are the enemy. Unless we've
already begun to consider the Slytherin students as snakes in the
grass, traitors in the midst, the enemy within our own borders. As
McGonegal clearly does. As the reader does. 

We, as readers, have been led down the primrose path. We've been
indoctrinated into thinking that that specific group of people truly
are evil, barely human, totally lacking in worth. The labels &
stereotypes are right, and we *are* superior. We *are* good, and they
are Dark & bad. We are pure of heart, they are tainted. We've laughed
& cheered when the White Hats inflict some payback on the Black Hats -
because it's funny when violence happens to "the other" (train stomps,
toffees, bullying). Just a laugh, really, and they deserved it for
being so horrible & bad. Now, our hero has just tortured a Black Hat
for an insult. Our trusted authority figure has just approved the use
of torture against Black Hats, calling it gallant. This authority
figure has threatened to kill student Black Hats, has used
Unforgiveable Curses, and has tried to kill the Black Hat Headmaster.
Her actions are presented as justified & admirable. 

And now we're in the Great Hall - the good White Hats are seated at
three tables of the room, and the evil Black Hats are seated at the
one other table. And one of the traitorous evil group just tried to
betray our hero to the Death Eaters. And the White Hats draw out their
wands and aim them at the evil, Dark, traitorous, subhuman
table of scum in righteous anger. It is time for some payback. Here's
my question - if the White Hats had shot curses at the table of Black
Hats at that moment, would we have cheered? If they had killed Pansy,
would we have cheered? If they'd taken out the whole evil House, would
we have approved? MAYBE! It is the logical continuation of the
dehumanization & violence that has occurred throughout the series, and
throughout the novel. It would also later be considered an atrocity
and a massacre. But in that moment, the good guys might've done it,
and good readers might've cheered. 

It's downright *easy* to justify violence against the other, most
especially when you are positive of your own goodness & of their own
irredeemable evil. And that's where the novel reaches it's final
paradox - a novel that supposedly endorses labeling "good" & "evil"
people actually shows the danger of exactly that philosophy. A world
in which bigotry & evil are only something the "other" group does
shows how easy it is for all of us to fall into the same faults. 


lizzyben