Disappointment Was: Deaths in DH WAS: Re: Dumbledore (but more Snape)

[prep0strus]

No: HPFGUIDX 177510


> >Lealess:
 
> Please show me the data.  What are the virtues of Slytherin House that
> were revealed in Deathly Hallows that would be more persuasive?  Is
> Harry's comment that Slytherin would gain an excellent student,
> immediately followed up by the suggestion that Al can still choose
> Gryffindor over Slytherin like his dad did, your data? because the
> added comment totally subverts the first part for me.
> 
> Suppose JKR is trying to reach people who are biased against
> Slytherins, or let's say, against non-white people, or against
> homosexuals, or little people, or just non-English people.  Do you
> think she's done a good job of reaching them and opening their minds?
>  Actually, I wonder if she was even aiming for an anti-prejudice
message.


Prep0strus:
I think she was, but perhaps not in the way we thought she was going
to.  I think one big problem is that she appeared to show that there
was a human side to Slytherin - that they're not all bad, in every
way.  And so, there were expectations that in this final book (or,
better, before the final book even) we would see some of that.  See a
sorting hat song that extolled something worthwhile about slytherin,
saw a character that managed to incorporate aspects of slytherin
without being disliked, saw the house achieve its place as a full
equal to the other houses.  

And some people, based on the small nuggets of potential we have been
given are able to see some of that.  To see Slytherins as real people.
 Then, it is possible to see a world in which she fulfilled what we
expected, or perhaps to see what a lot of people seem to see - a world
turned upside down.  one in which Slytherins are prejudiced against,
where every flaw shown by a non-slytherin is a mark against their
character and every small non-evil done by a slytherin is proof that
they are legitimate people.  And that the way other people treat
slytherin and are not punished for it is proof of gang mentality and
bigotry at its worst.

But, if you take the other side of it, and think that she did NOT
fulfill our expectations, it's a little different.  There is some
disappointment if you expected that of Slytherin, and confusion as to
why she included hints towards house unity and that slytherins aren't
bad.  There could I suppose be a delicious joy if you did NOT want
that to happen, and are happy to see that slytherins are as naughty as
ever.  however, I think that in the end, Slytherins aren't people.

My opinion is such that i'm disappointed in the hints we were given
about slytherin possibly being equals, but that I do not believe that
she achieved this goal.  However, I don't believe that they are
'prejudiced against' either.  And this is because they're WRONG.  And
that's the part that's frustrating, because we've been led to believe
that they are equals, so how could it be ok to look down on them?
Doesn't that make the other characters wrong?

I think, in this story, it doesn't.  I think Slytherin is not a house
full of actual fully formed people and characters.  I think it is a
representation of everything JKR thinks is bad: prejudice, bigotry,
racism, unchecked ambition, disregard for others, base meanness....
and when other characters look down on and spit on slytherin, that is
what they are spitting on.  they are not discriminating against a
group of people - they are discriminating against racism.  And since
racism is wrong, that's ok.

It's not very satisfying, and very frustrating considering what we've
been through with our expectations throughout the books... but it
makes more sense to me than pitying the slytherins and condemning
griffindors.  because the griffindors ARE right. the slytherins ARE
wrong.  there is good and bad, and slytherins represent one of those.
 jkr does make griffindors flawed - it is difficult to define them as
represented as perfect beings.  but even harder to represent
slytherins as equals who deserve equal treatment.  it might be wrong
to treat another group of people as less than you, which is how the
slytherins are treated.  but if slytherins simply represent cruel
dictators and petty bigots, then it's not only ok to look down on
them, but a good thing to look down on them - because you are looking
down on evil.  i don't think slytherin is simply the racists, but
racism itself, which is why jkr has apparently made it ok to treat
them as less than people.

i'm kind of meandering around the point i'm trying to make. and i know
it doesn't change how anyone looks at the books, because we have our
own expectations and we put different importance of meaning on
different parts.  but, primarily, i don't think that prejudice against
slytherin is real prejudice in jkr's mind, because i think that
slytherins are the idea of prejudidice itself.  so, yes, i think she
was aiming for an 'anti-prejudice' message, but it just doesn't count
to be prejudiced against slytherin, because that is prejudice against
prejudice - and that's always a good thing, right?

~Adam (Prep0strus)