House elves WAS: realistic resolutions

[horridporrid03]

No: HPFGUIDX 180970

> >>Betsy Hp:
> > IOWs, in scifi and fantasy, fantasy slavery *always* informs on   
> > RW slavery.  Just as the blood bigotry of the WW was meant to     
> > inform on RW bigotry.  (I'm not going to get into how well JKR   
> > did on either point. *eg*)

> >>zgirnius:
> I do read a lot of these genres. What you say is true, but it does 
> not have to inform on RW slavery in the particular way you insist   
> it does/ought to/must.

Betsy Hp:
Ooh!  Loaded words! *bg*  It's not really me "insisting" that house-
elf slavery "must" inform on RW slavery.  It's JKR in introducing us 
to the concept through a slave aching to be free, and then 
introducing us to two other slaves in moments when their owners are 
subjecting them to a great deal of anguish.  IOWs, it's really hard 
for me to work with the idea that all house-elves are happy with 
their lot when the three we get to know are so obviously miserable.

> >>zgirnius:
> It could also be in there on the RL need to understand other       
> cultures before messing with them, as Hermione in GoF did not.
> <snip>

Betsy Hp:
Oh sure.  And, honestly it is.  But then, there's nothing to say JKR 
couldn't (and was probably attempting) to do both.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/180962
> >>Betsy:
> > This trying to come up with a less loaded word strikes me as     
> > ducking the question. It's philisophically lazy, IMO.

> >>SSSusan:
> Wow. And I don't see it as philosophically lazy at all! I see *any*
> attempt to delve into an issue and struggle with its nature and
> definition as a respectable endeavor. I see it as a willingness to
> work at it; I don't at all see it as walking away or refusing to
> look. In fact, quite the opposite for me – grappling with this makes
> me think hard and struggle, NOT avoid those things, so I don't find
> philosophically lazy in the slightest.

Betsy Hp:
I see the reluctance to call a slave a slave as avoiding the 
delving.  We are talking about creatures who are in a position where 
their owners can do *anything* to them. ANYTHING. Kreacher was forced 
to kill himself for his owner.  He was forced to betray a family he 
loved for his owner.  Dobby was forced to torture himself for his 
owner.  And Winky was brutally reminded that she was property, not 
family, by a man she obviously loved, her owner.

It's a horror, imo.  And to try and back away from it by calling it 
something *other* than slavery seems an attempt to candy-coat it.

> >>SSSusan:
> For one reason, because we have seen house elves who have been
> offered freedom and DID NOT WANT IT. I seriously doubt the human
> slaves *themselves* said they were different from white folks, were
> happy as slaves or didn't want change.

Betsy Hp:
Actually, I think you're wrong.  Slaves were offered freedom during 
the Revolutionary War and didn't take it.  And slaves refused to 
leave their "families" and refused to join uprisings.  (I think 
that's why the term "house slave" is used in a derogatory manner 
within the black community.)  Also, there was a study that discovered 
little black children labeled black dolls as ugly and white dolls as 
beautiful, showing that they did see a difference, saw white people 
as better.  (I believe that study was part of what brought about the 
end of "seperate but equal".)

Of course, House-elves *are* different. The parallels aren't exact. 
Because while JKR wanted us to hate the Malfoys for owning a slave, 
she wanted us to still love slave-owning Harry.  (Why she wanted 
Harry to have a slave, I have no idea.)  For whatever reason, JKR 
took a u-turn.  But, IMO, it wasn't enough of one to undo everything 
else she'd written.

> >>SSSusan:
> I am decidedly NOT using the arguments used in 1700-1800s America
> *the way those arguments were used* then. Of course those were
> excuses, and the slaves weren't speaking for themselves. We have a
> mixture of wizard ("master class") comments and elf comments and
> actions to go on in HP.
> <snip>

Betsy Hp:
There were those who quite earnestly believed blacks were that 
different from whites.  And they made their arguments in good faith.  

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/180966
> >>Betsy Hp:
> > <snip>
> > A house-elf *cannot* say no to their master. It doesn't matter   
> > what they're asked to do, it doesn't matter what their personal   
> > feelings are on the matter, a house-elf CANNOT SAY NO.
> > <snip>

> >>Carol:
> Then what's this enchantment that makes them iron their hands if    
> they disobey their masters?

Betsy Hp:
That would be the enchantment that makes a house-elf unable to say 
no.  What makes a house-elf a slave. *bg*

> >>Carol, who thinks ending *that* enchantment (if possible) would
> resolve the problem

Betsy Hp:
I agree.  Because at that point, the house-elf would no longer be 
owned.  They'd have choice.

> >>Carol:
> P.S. In RL, slavery means working without wages, which House-Elves
> don't want, so either they're not slaves as we know slavery or      
> they're choosing to be slaves, which makes the term meaningless

Betsy Hp:
Ah, but that's ascribing your personal cultural bias as to what 
constitutes "wages". *bg*  If a house-elf could leave a family they 
no longer wished to work for, if wizards and witches had to take care 
of keeping their house-elves content or no more house-elf, I think 
that would remove house-elves from being slaves.  Even if "wages" 
came down to... I don't know, shiny copper pots in the kitchen to 
polish and crisp linens to iron.

Betsy Hp