Loose Ends, (was Epilogue (was Re: Ron and Parseltongue)

[sistermagpie]

No: HPFGUIDX 183324

> Pippin:
> Trouble is, a reversed negative stereotype is still a stereotype. 
It's
> still a preconceived image, and it's demeaning. It's  a message 
about
> how members of a certain group should behave which other groups are
> presumed not to need. Nobody thinks JKR let us down by not showing 
us
> a Good Ravenclaw or a Good Hufflepuff, right? 

Magpie:
I'm glad we didn't get A good Slytherin, though I don't see what 
would be demeaning about us judging Slytherins on whether they're 
good or bad rather than assuming Slytherin=bad like it does now. Of 
course Slytherin needs improvements in their behavior that other 
houses don't need. That's made clear in every book.

However, I'm not sure what you mean about the Good Hufflepuff and 
Ravenclaw. Those two houses, like Gryffindor, are made up of normal 
people. They can produce bad people (Marietta or Peter) but on the 
whole they're fairly good people and many actively join with Harry in 
the fight against Voldemort. 

Pippin: 
If all the
> Slytherins (or the Muggles) are bad in a certain way, it's because 
all
> humanity is bad in that way -- all of us are prejudiced, all of us
> look dumb to Insiders, and all of us are cowards when we've lost 
faith.

Magpie:
I don't see at all where JKR is making the point about "all of us"--
certainly not all of her heroes--being like Slytherins. The heroes 
aren't cowards when they lose faith that I remember.

Pippin:
> 
>  Honestly, if the whole of canon doesn't convey the idea that
> stereotypes  are an obstacle to understanding, I don't know what 
would.

Magpie:
I can think of plenty of things that would convey it more, given that 
this particular story uses stereotypes all the time that wind up 
being true and handy ways of understanding how people are going to 
act. There are some times where people are judged wrongly based on 
who they are, but I would never say that the theme of these books is 
about steroetypes being obstacles of understanding. Understanding in 
general was one of those red herrings.

> Pippin:
> 
>  What Hermione said in OOP was  "I think it's a pity we're not 
trying
> for a bit of inter-House unity" and by the epilogue Harry, Ron and
> Ginny seem to agree with her.  *Forced* unity, as Voldemort would 
have
> had it, is wrong. Unity that comes from peaceful cooperation by 
choice
> is worth  trying for. 

Magpie:
They have the same inter-House unity they had before. Ravenclaw, 
Hufflepuff and Gryffindor are unified in ways Slytherin is not 
unified with them.

Pippin: 
> Our mistake was in assuming that Harry would have to solve all the
> problems of the wizarding world to get rid of Voldemort. But he
> didn't.
 He had to work with things as they were, with a House-elf who
> wanted to be a slave and with Slytherins who never stopped believing
> that pure blood makes you superior.

Magpie:
I'd say my mistake was thinking that getting rid of Voldemort would 
require trying to solve any of the problems in the WW. It wasn't that 
Harry had to work with the way things were so much that there was no 
need to do otherwise and he never particularly had the desire to do 
so either. It really was just about getting rid of Voldemort.
 
-m