House elves (WAS: realistic resolutions)

[a_svirn]

No: HPFGUIDX 180889

> Mike:
> I'm sorry, but it seems to me to be a disconnect to say you don't 
> equate house elf slavery to human slavery but it's bad for wizards to 
> participate in house elf slavery. Why? If it's not human slavery 
> where's the conflict in morality? Unless you're going to tell me you 
> would be opposed to humans owning ANY animals, how can you say it's 
> abominable for humans to own these non-human animals? 

a_svirn:
Because, of course in the WW morality is not exclusively human domain.
Elves have morality too. Together with many other things that in real
life are regarded as exclusively human attributes. Otherwise how come
you say that Kreacher *betrayed* Sirius? 

It is inaccurate to equate elves to humans? Fine. Would you mind
explaining how come it is accurate to liken them to animals? It is
about as accurate as liken merpeople to fish. They aren't animals,
they are sentient beings, they have language, culture, ethics,
personality, identity. All those things that animals do not have. 
They are persons, in other words. And owning persons is different than
owning cattle. Or should be, at any rate. 

Moreover, when you take the stance that they are no better than
animals you effectively throw away your own argument that we have to
take elves' own *values* and inclinations into account. We do not own
sheep and cows because they want to be owned by us. We do it because
we can and it suits us, and as for their nature, why, we have been
tampering with it in for millenniums without asking their permission. 

> 
> Mike:
> You've always been a pretty objective reader of canon, Magpie, where 
> do you think the house elf sub-plot went? I read Hermione indignant 
> about the slavery existing. She tries to start SPEW, seemingly with 
> the freedom of the house elves in mind. But the house elves make it 
> clear that they don't want her help, they don't want to be free. 

a_svirn:
That looks a bit too selective for objectivity. SPEW's only one of
many elves subplots. You dismiss Dobby as an oddity, but SPEW is an
oddity too. Hermione is quite comically wrongheaded in her approach to
the problem, on many levels: practical, theoretical, ethical. SPEW on
the whole can be more easily dismissed, than the existence of a free
elf. How about OotP? Kreacher's subplot was crucial there, and
Kreacher did not want to be owned by his master, he even rebelled
against him. 

> Mike:
> Then Hermione shifts to concern over treatment of the elves. Here 
> there is no rebuff from the elves. 

a_svirn:
But she did not address elves. Or even one elf. She addressed her
concerns to a wizard, and one, moreover, who just happens to be the
best of the good guys. Why should he rebuff her, when all she has to
say, is that self-punishment is awful thing to behold. Since she did
not appeal to elves, they could not rebuff or accept her ideas. They
wasn't her audience this time around. 

> Mike:
> A quick point on this society. When I'm talking about how wizards 
> treat other species and what is their norm, I'm talking in terms of 
> the average run of the mill wizard, like Arthur and Molly. I'm not 
> going to explain or justify what Umbridge and her ilk do in that 
> corrupt Ministry with their ridiculous laws. 

a_svirn:
The ministry has been perhaps corrupt ever since it came into being.
And has been persecuting other species for the approximately same
length of time. 

> Mike:
> When it comes to whether wizards accept other species' cultures (btw, 
> I don't consider werewolves a different species), I look for that 
> average wizard and what they do. As far as I can tell, wizards accept 
> centaurs, merpeople, and house elves cultures as they are. 

a_svirn:
Except that there was a bit anti-centaurs legislation in OotP, as far
as I remember. As for merpeople, wizards do not seem to have any
interaction with them (perhaps because they aren't fish, and can'd
live underwater). Whenever they do interact, they strive to impose
their culture. 

> Mike:
The only 
> exception (which is a law from the Ministry) is goblins wanting to 
> have wands. Combining that with the goblin's right of ownership 
> position and goblins seem to be saying, "What we make is ours and 
> what you make should be ours too." It's no wonder wizards couldn't 
> abide that philosophy. But they seem to have come to a compromise to 
> co-exist.

a_svirn:
Yet the compromise seems to be entirely on goblins' part. 

a_svirn