Slytherins come back WAS: Re: My Most Annoying Character

[juli17 at aol.com]

No: HPFGUIDX 180204

 
Steve wrote:

Now, I  propose that any student against Voldemort was against
him for very  Slytherinish reason. I don't expect altruistic
Gryffindorish motivations. I  have speculated in the past
that the anti-Voldemort Good Slytherin logic  would go 
something like this. Good Slytherin speaks, 'I plan to be  
rich. What is good for business, is good for Slytherin. But
Voldemort  absolutely will NOT be good for business, and 
therefore will not be good  for me. If I want to be rich
anytime soon, then I have to oppose  Voldemort'. 



Julie:
Most probably know by now that I am not a fan of sorting into  Houses, where
IMO these 11 year old kids are very thoroughly conditioned by the  school,
its teachers, the rival students of other Houses, and by society at large  how
to think and act within set House constraints. Yes, students  arrive with 
certain
personality traits and leanings, but I have no doubt that seven years of  
this sort
of constant conditioning plays a strong part in shaping their final  persons. 
We are
all a product of nature + nurture (environment) and to me the single most  
damaging
aspect of WW society is this sorting of students and the resultant absence  
of any
attemtped balance in influencing and mentoring of young minds by the  
teachers and
Headmaster. The way it is presented in HP it is a horrifying system, and  the 
WW gets
exactly the contentious and divided society it deserves.
 
Your response above, Steve, is to me a case in point. Gryffindors act for  
the good
out of altruism, as presumably do Hufflepuffs and Ravenclaws, but  Slytherins 
act 
for purely self-serving reasons. A perfect example of how easily it is for  
we fans 
(let alone Wizarding society) to single out Slytherins as having less noble  
motives
than the supposedly morally superior people from all the other Houses. And  
as if you
can clearly divide motivation into shades of black (self-serving) and white  
(altruistic).
 
Altruism is always partly self-serving, as is everything we do. We act  
altruistically
because it makes us feel good, gives us a sense of accomplishment,  feeds our
self-esteem. We help others to help ourselves--to connect with others, be  
they
family, friends or society in general, who we can expect to lend the same  
helping
hand to us in our time of need. Is Draco's desire to protect his family by  
killing 
(or trying to kill) Dumbledore really so different from Harry's desire to  
protect those
he loves by killing Voldemort (his stated goal, though he realizes late in  
the game
he must also die to protect them)? Is Narcissa's motive to save her  son by 
saying
Harry was dead really that different from Molly's motive to save her  
remaining children 
(and avenge her son's death) by killing Bellatrix? 
 
Altruism and self-interest, like giving and receiving, exist entwined  
together rather than
as two completely separate concepts, IMO. (And altruism at its most pure is  
rather cold.
Dumbledore acted out of what many would perceive as pure  altruism, to save 
the greater
WW society from the terror of a Voldemort takeover, even when it meant  
sacrificing a
number of individuals, some of whom he considered friends and even  loved, as 
well as
himself. There was a decided lack of self-interest on Dumbledore's part,  yet 
at the same
time many of his actions are not seen by most as morally unimpeachable. 
 
So to call Gryffindors altruistic and Slytherins self-serving is drawing a  
false line, IMO.
Same with concepts like courage and loyalty. These traits  are not the 
province of one 
set of people under a particular House banner, as *every*  person displays 
elements of both
in varying manner and degree (as evidenced by some efforts to  shoehorn 
Pettigrew into
Gryffindor by saying he has some sort of courage, even if it's merely to  
face Voldemort
while quaking in his shoes--it's a correct assertion,even if courage isn't  
what I would 
remotely consider a defining trait of Pettigrew's.) 
 
Julie 



**************************************See AOL's top rated recipes 
(http://food.aol.com/top-rated-recipes?NCID=aoltop00030000000004)


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]