House elves and some spoilers for Swordspoint WAS: realistic solutions

[dumbledore11214]

No: HPFGUIDX 180770

> Alla:
> > 
> > Well, actually I challenge the idea that wizards have the same 
> > understanding of the human construct of slavery that we do. Oh, 
it 
> > looks like slavery all right, but the very same actions and 
events 
> > in the different society can be something totally different by 
the 
> > way.
> 
> Magpie:
> I see no indication that's the case in the WW. The WW is in many 
ways 
> based on our world with a lot of recognizable things in it--often 
> things that are idealized versions of stuff that used to be true 
in 
> the Muggle world--for instance, they use trains because trains 
have a 
> certain romanticism and nostalgic quality.


Alla:

Society can be similar to another society in something and 
completely different in another. Yes, they use trains; no we do not 
use wands for example.

But as I said before I DO think that Potterverse is in many ways 
reflection of our world. The trouble is I got this from interviews 
only, so should it count?



Magpie:
> But where does anyone ever suggest that they understand slavery in 
a 
> different way than humans do? They differ from modern British 
people 
> in that they think it's okay, and they have certain races they see 
as 
> their natural servants, but that doesn't make it something other 
than 
> slavery.

Alla:

I think it does. I think it does if society considers it to be so. 
And I just do not see indication that they understand slavery in the 
same way we do, so making an opposite assumption to me is just an 
assumption.


Magpie:
 > Seems, actually, that if we're going to try to break that down we 
> ought to also breakdown this idea that certain Purebloods are 
bigoted 
> towards Muggle-borns. Who says they're really prejudiced or 
racists, 
> after all? Maybe they're understanding of things is just different 
> than ours. Just because it completely mirrors what we would call 
> bigotry doesn't mean it is. (Trouble is, if it isn't bigotry what 
is 
> it and what point is it?)

Alla:

Oh yeah, absolutely. I do not subscribe to this argument, but I 
think it is a very valid one. But let's take something we all know 
and love - Snape ;).

For years I argued that he is a stinking child abuser and still 
think so. The trouble is I think I AM imposing very much the values 
of my own society when I think this. I think I can do it because 
again I think that Potterverse is envisioned as reflection of our 
society first and foremost, but those who do not think so, can 
certainly tell me - child abuse, what child abuse?

Kids in our society ( I am talking about american society right now) 
do not have to prepare themselves for the war with evil wizard, 
don't they?

Kids in our society do not have to be ready to face trolls, dracons, 
centaurs, etc. For all I know they may need a harsher task master 
and certainly WW seems to have no trouble with Snape's teaching, 
don't they?

Do I like it? OF COURSE NOT. I would do whatever it takes to make 
sure that teacher like Snape ever been remotely close to any child 
of mine, but WW does and I think they are having very very different 
values in that aspect.

Which again, let me say, I do not LIKE and again let me say the 
interviews let me think that JKR does not like either thank 
goodness, but for all I know WW does like them very much and 
teachers like Snape are just fine and dandy?

You do not think that the case with "slavery" can be similar deal? 
To us it looks like slavery, just as to me what Snape did looked and 
smell like disgusting child abuse, but WW thinks it is totally okay 
and who are we to say otherwise?

The actions are the same, they just evaluate them differently IMO.


Magpie:
> The books themselves and the Wizards make all the same 
distinctions 
> we humans do every time--how are they doing that if their 
> understanding is actually different than orus?<SNIP>


Alla:

See above - WW seems to have VERY different understanding from what 
kind of teachers are allowed to be near kids than I do. To me it is 
a strong indicator of the society with the different values in some 
aspects of life if not all.

> Magpie:
> I see no indication that the WW *doesn't* consider themselves 
slave 
> owners. Slavery being accepted and seen as natural doesn't make it 
> not slavery--it's not even that unusual. I think the idea that 
they 
> don't see it this way is the more extravagant claim, so the burden 
of 
> proof is on it.

Alla:

I have to prove something that is not spelled in canon once as far 
as I know? No word slavery, but assumption is made that it is 
slavery? I really do not think so. IMO of course.

And again, I am not arguing that it does not LOOK like slavery, I am 
arguing that it is being accepted as normal in society as long as 
there are no abuses.


I believe it is slavery, but this is again from what interview you 
quote. So they call wizards masters, so what?  Does it mean that it 
is the same thing as in our society? Why?


 
> Magpie:
<SNIP>
> The book has everyone make the same distinctions we humans do, 
> particularly between free and not free, paid and unpaid, master 
> and...gleebil. House elves are treated as property. 
<SNIP>


Alla:

House elves are treated as somebody who wants to serve don't they? 
and there is unspoken rule that they should be treated well, just as 
swordsman should have a guy who hired him, then it is not murder. As 
long as something is done by the rule, it is totally fine for those 
societies it seems.


Magpie:
<SNIP>
 How is it that you think they understand 
> them that make it not like a slave owner describing his 
relationship 
> to his slave?


Alla:

If we are talking about good wizards per canon, I think as long as 
they are not abused, it is a normal custom of the society, but again 
it is funny since I do think they are slaves, I just see plenty of 
evidence for other side interpretation.


a_svirn:
Not determine, or judge, Alla, describe! We are talking about
description. I describe wizards in terms of my own culture, and in
terms of my culture they are slaves-owners. Perhaps they are so
different from us, ordinary folks, that they wouldn't recognize
themselves in this description. But I doubt it. If they were so
different we wouldn't be so fascinated with the series. One of its
major attractions is the idea that they are "just like us" – only
magical.


Alla:

OOOOO, I see. Then I would say that yes, it is possible that they 
will not recognize themselves in this description. But sure in many 
aspects they are just like us, just not in all of them IMO.