House elves and some spoilers for Swordspoint WAS: realistic solutions

[dumbledore11214]

No: HPFGUIDX 180818


> > Alla:
> > 
> > That's amazing. You do not claim to have a practical solution, 
but 
> > you nevertheless castigating wizards for maintaining status quo? 
<SNIP>.
> 
> Magpie:
> I don't see why it's so amazing. It's a fictional world full of 
> holes. The author has created House Elves, creatures that conform 
to 
> a lot of common pro-slavery arguments. I don't see why I should 
have 
> to pretend that I see the freedom of House Elves as impossible 
when 
> canon doesn't really prove that--even though that's not something 
I 
> care about one way or the other.


Alla:

It is amazing to me because this way the other side can never score 
a single point in this argument. It is like saying IMO - Dumbledore 
is BAD for leaving Harry with Dursleys, very very bad. I have no 
better solution for what he should have done at all, BUT he is bad. 
I do not see what other side can offer when the argument is framed 
that way. It is predetermined already. And I am offering my own 
argument as an example by the way, so it is not like I had never 
done it myself, I just realized.

In my example I would think it automatically assumes that my 
position is weaker since I cannot offer any other solution for DD, 
that means that his decision holds at least some ground, no?

Just as here, if one cannot offer any solution other than status 
quo, doesn't it mean that status quo is better for all parties 
involved?




> Magpie:
> I'm describing the situation how I see it. I just said 
that 'slavery 
> is bad' is an opinion. House elves being slaves is not an opinion, 
> that's canon. They're owned. I don't think it's slavery because 
> it "looks like" human slavery, I think it's slavery because 
slavery 
> means being owned by another person and being subject to their 
will. 
> There's plenty of ways it *doesn't* look like human slavery, but 
that 
> doesn't make it not slavery.


Alla:

I really do not know what to say except to say again that to me 
being owned and being subject to their will is an incomplete 
definition of slavery.


Magpie:
 House Elf nature just makes people have 
> different reactions to the idea of them being enslaved. Slaves 
being 
> happy or wanting to be slaves has never had any bearing on their 
> being slaves.

Alla:

But it does in mine.

 
> Magpie:
> I'd have to make stuff up and speculate outside of canon to come 
up 
> with something so I don't know how helpful that would be. That's 
why 
> I don't accept the idea that canon has in any way proved that it's 
> just impossible and there's nothing to be done, or assume that all 
> the stuff people speculate about on that side is true. 

Alla:

How canon did not prove that it is not possible to free house elves 
if they do not want to be free?


Magpie: 
> The point is, I don't want to crawl inside of canon and come up 
with 
> a solution. I'm making a more meta argument. I agree that your 
> argument that it's not bad slavery or isn't slavery because they 
like 
> it and Carol's argument that it's more humane to keep them owned 
> because they can't live any other way are perfectly logical 
> conclusions to draw from the series. I think that's what the 
series 
> seems to be saying too. I just don't think that's an anti-slavery 
> argument. It doesn't make it not slavery by any definition of 
slavery 
> I've ever heard. 


Alla:

Usually it takes me a few posts to slap my fingers, but I am going 
to try. Basically to me house elves not desire to be freed makes all 
the difference in the world.


> Magpie:
<SNIP>
> But you claimed that the reason House Elf slavery existed was 
because 
> Elves wanted it and so Wizards had to do it, and that goes beyond 
> noting that Herimone, Dumbledore, Harry, Ron and others have 
> canonically cared about the well-being of House Elves. <SNIP>


Alla:

No, I did not. I guess I was that unclear. We have no idea why House 
elves "slavery" ( yes, I cannot call it as such) come to exist of 
course, but I believe that it continues to exist because elves want 
it AND because wizards want it, mutually beneficial. Of course I do 
not claim that wizards started it because elves wanted it, I have no 
clue. Although I totally will not be surprised if we learn from 
encyclopedia that first house elf came to wizards and offered 
himself to serve them. Or there was that idea that house elves were 
magically created by wizards to serve them, sort of artificial race, 
but just speculation.





> Alla:
> > And I wonder how would you even free House elves? Are you 
> suggesting 
> > to force them to take clothes for example?
> 
> Magpie:
> Freeing a house elf isn't itself undoable--Winky is let go against 
> her wishes. The trouble isn't being unable to free them but the 
> problems that would result for them and the Wizards.


Alla:

Right, if it is done Winky's way, it is not undoable, of course.