House elves and some spoilers for Swordspoint WAS: realistic solutions

[Carol]

No: HPFGUIDX 180806

Magpie wrote:
> <snip> Kreacher, however, is happy with Harry--he has "chosen" his
master. 

Carol responds:

Exactly. and many House-Elves, for example, those at Hogwarts, appear
to be happy without having chosen their masters. Just how freed Elves
would choose their masters is beyond me. Are they supposed to wander
the WW until they find a family that they like, meantime living
without work or shelter and somehow grubbing for food? I'm pretty sure
that the House-Elves of Hogwarts would remain where they were if they
were freed and continue to work without wages (or health insurance
since they have magic)--unless "freed" meant looking for a job
elsewhere, which would be a hardship. What added benefit would freedom
bring? They don't need or want money. Only Dobby wants to buy socks
and an occasional hat. If they were freed, they'd have clothes rather
than tea towels (marking them in the eyes of other House-Elves as
fired and disgraced). Freedom would just make them dependent on money,
like us.

Magpie:
> The fact that they can't be unhappy without punishing themselves is
unpleasant but as far as we know there's nothing Master Harry can do
about it. 

Carol:
Except order Kreacher not to punish himself, which, I agree is
ineffectual. But we know that Hermione is concerned about this
particular problem and has stated that she wants to do something good
for the world (her words to Scrimgeour in "The Will of Albus
Dumbledore" badly paraphrased from memory), so it's at least in
character for Little Miss SPEW to try to find a solution to this
problem once she is out of school and working for the Ministry. (I
know that last part is from an interview, but it's pretty obvious that
she's heading in that direction from canon.(

Magpie:
And I don't see how all this leads up to "until they are free" they
are a danger to the society since it just runs you right into the same
problem as before, which is that they don't want to be free. 

Carol:
I don't know about "danger to society," but having a bunch of
homeless, jobless House-Elves running around would be a social problem
of some sort. Unscrupulous wizards might kidnap them or they might
starve, and they would certainly be unhappy. There's a reason why they
don't want to be freed, and it goes beyond the disgrace of having
failed their masters. What does a House-Elf do? Can he make wands? No.
Can he make swords and armor? No. Can he teach school? Not unless it's
a House-Elf school of domestic servitude, and they seem to have those
skills already. Can they make potions? Probably not, if you need a
wand. Let them do what they're good at and want to do--take care of
wizards and wizard families.

Suppose that Harry "freed" Kreacher after Kreacher has transferred his
loyalty to him (still reserving his love and hero worship for the dead
Regulus, to judge from his locket and rallying cry). How would that
benefit Kreacher? Home, to him, is 12 GP. Harry could order him to
stay at Hogwarts, where he could choose to work or not, but if he
didn't work, he'd be an outcast and not earning his keep. He can't
say, stay at Hogwarts and be paid because it would be the headmaster's
decision, not Harry's, whether to pay him. And he can't just give
Kreacher to the headmaster, which would not be freeing Kreacher at
all, just switching masters. Nor does Kreacher want Harry to pay him.
If he just sets him free (fires him), he'll break old Kreacher's heart. 

"Here, Kreacher. Now don't take this wrong, but I'm giving you clothes
so you can be free."

"Master, no! Not clotes, pleas, master."

"It's okay, Kreacher. I'm not punishing you or letting you go. You
haven't done anything wrong. I'm rewarding you for your bravery and
good service."

"Master, no, please. This is Kreacher's home. . . ."

"You don't have to leave. And you won't have to obey me. You can wear
clothes, like Dobby--" "Kreacher doesn't want to be like Dobby!"

"Okay. Well, you can choose your own clothes and I'll pay you for your
work. And if you don't like working for me, you can find another
master--" 

"Kreacher doesn't want another master. This is Kreacher's home.
Kreacher doesn't want clothes. Would master like a nice treacle tart?"

"Okay, Kreacher. You win. I won't free you."

"Thank you, master. Thank you. Dinner is ready, but master must wash
his hands and comb his hair."

"Okay, Kreacher. And I'll want some butterbeer to go with the treacle
tart."

"Of course, master. Kreacher lives to serve."

House-Elves are not people, as Hermione makes clear when she explains
their psychology to Harry.

Magpie:
Harry and Kreacher have solved all these problems in their 
relationship--Kreacher is happy with his master and so is not unhappy
 and may never have to punish himself again. So what's the problem? 

Carol:

Exactly. The only problem is in the minds of readers who insist on a
parallel between the natural desire of House-Elves to serve wizards
and human slavery, which involves one human being forcing his will on
another. As long as House-Elves want to serve Wizards without pay
because they like work, especially housework, and as long as their
treated well, the only problem is the enchantment that makes them
punish themselves. Harry can work to be sure that his own House-Elf
never suffers from it, and Hermione, the House-Elf crusader, can
research a more lasting solution. But as long as there are
House-Elves, they will work for Wizards because that's what they want
to do. The humane thing for Wizards to do is to respect that desire
and let them continue to be what they want to be.

Magpie:
> Harry would no doubt let Kreacher free if he wanted to be free. But
since he's really better off as a slave given his psychology Harry
will make the best of it and be waited on. 

Carol:

Ex-act-ly. So where's the problem? Harry sees none. Kreacher sees
none. Hermione see none except the self-punishment enchantment. The
problem exists only if we bring in interviews that contradict the
canon or impose our own enlightened human values on House-Elves. (I
say "enlightened" because not all human cultures value freedom and a
few still practice slavery. Even members of certain African tribes
used to sell members of other tribes into slavery. We should not
assume that our values are universal or "human" when they're the
result of our education and training. The Hogwarts curriculum, as we
know, includes no indoctrination in natural or civil rights (unless,
perhaps, Charity Burbage put in a word for the acceptance of Muggles
as people, in which case she was probably preaching to the choir).

House-Elves don't want freedom, which, for them, is "just another word
for nothin' left to lose."

Carol, now imagining House-Elves wandering the WW with "harpoons"
(harmonicas) wrapped in dirty old bandanas