CHAPDISC: DH26, Gringotts

[Carol]

No: HPFGUIDX 184108

Mike wrote:
> <snip> I've no doubt wizards treat goblins poorly. They treat all
non-humans poorly. Hell, they treat wizards that don't have the right
blood  poorly. But goblins don't have the moral high ground over
wizards here. They have the same disdain for all non-goblin creatures
that wizards have for non-humans.

Carol responds:
You forgot Wizard contempt for Muggles, who are human but not magical.
However, it's interesting to me that, except for House-Elves and
Merpeople, the nonhuman creatures tend to be just as intolerant of
Wizards as Wizards are of them. Even Firenze regards himself and his
species (who have just kicked him in the chest and expelled him from
the herd) as superior to humans, at least with regard to divination
and lack of concern for mundane, everyday matters. The others use
"Human" as if it were an insult, sneering at the Wizards as beings
whose intelligence is inferior to their own. And we don't need to talk
about the Goblins' delight in tricking Wizards, chuckling over the
supposed gullibility of Severus Snape in not knowing that the Sword he
sent to the Lestranges' vault is fake or leaving HRH to die painfully
amid red-hot, magically reproducing treasure, do we? Giants may be
stupid and afraid of Wizards' magic, but they're just as brutal and
dangerous (Grawp excepted) as they're reputed to be.

In short, I agree with Mike about Goblins, and I think that Centaurs
are nearly as bad in their "speciesist" attitude. How can Wizards
negotiate with beings who regard themselves as the Wizards' superiors
(or with subhuman brutes like Giants and Trolls)? I'm not talking
about Muggles here. I'm just trying to say that the Wizard attitude
toward all these other species is perfectly understandable. Even the
Merpeople probably *appear* ferocious to those who don't speak Mermish
and accidentally encounter them (underwater, where the Wizaard would
in any case be at a distinct disadvantage). Fortunately, Wizards and
Merpeople live in different worlds and can safely pursue a
live-and-let-live policy. 

Mike: 
> I do think Dobby and Firenze were the exceptions. They also happened 
> to be leaders, that eventually got others in their species to follow 
> their example. Griphook seems to be the opposite. He looks like a 
> follower to me. He may be more like Bella than Lucius in his zeal, 
> but he's not a trail-blazer in my eyes. YMMV

Carol responds:
I agree about Griphook, whose a treacherous and murderous little
zealot, and about Firenae (but, as I said, even he thinks his
sometimes brutal species is superior to humans). But I'm not sure that
he can be considered a leader, only, possibly, a pioneer. IIRC.
Magorian and Bane, of all peo--er, Centaurs, followed his example only
after he was injured and Harry Potter was "dead." And I don't think
that the Elves followed or were persuaded by Dobby at all. He died as
he lived, an eccentric Elf devoted to Harry Potter but divided from
his fellow House-Elves in his devotion to "freedom" and his fondness
for clothing. It was Kreacher, whose values they understood (once he
cleaned himself and started behaving respectfully toward his master,
that the House Elves followed into battle. And his rallying cry was
not freedom for House-Elves but "Fight! Fight! Fight for my master,
defender of House-Elves. Fight the Dark Lord in the name of brave
Regulus! Fight!" (DH am. ed. 734). That is, fight in the name of a
Wizard master (Regulus, not Harry) who cared enough about House-Elves
to die for one. Of course, they're also fighting to avoid being
enslaved to the cruel DEs, but (IMO) it's Kreacher, still loyal to a
dead master, not Dobby, the "Fee Elf," who's the trailblazer here. No
one is following or even remembering Dobby, whose ideal of freedom is
not what the Hogwarts House-Elves are fighting for.

Carol, who otherwise agrees with Mike's post