Did the Slytherins come back?

[sistermagpie]

No: HPFGUIDX 181805

> > Betsy Hp:
> > The other thing is, IMO, the *only* place JKR tells us not all 
> > Slytherins are bad is in her interviews.  It's really hard to 
find 
> > places in the text that support her theory.  The Gryffindors 
> > certainly hate all Slytherins on sight, and they're never put in 
a 
> > position to learn anything different.  Neither is their behavior 
> > towards Slytherins ever questioned.  Whereas Slytherins behaving 
> > badly is clearly seen as such.
> 
> Pippin:
> Only if the reader is applying a ridiculous double standard, IMO. 
Theo
> Nott never so much as hexes someone for fun, never mind Unforgivable
> Curses, and yet he doesn't qualify as a decent person? Gimme  a 
break!

Magpie:
I think she means that in canon the Slytherins, when they are shown 
at all, are mostly shown being generally either something either 
nasty or suspicious. After all the information we have there's really 
no reason for a reader to be trying to prove to themselves that Theo 
Nott is decent because after all we never saw him specifically doing 
anything worse than conferring with three nasty students. 

Pippin:> 
> We have exactly the same basis for disbelieving Voldemort's claim 
that
> Hagrid was raising werewolf cubs as we do for disbelieving his claim
> that the Slytherins joined him -- an interview never backed up by 
the
> text. And yet no one ever insisted that they were going to go on 
believing
> Hagrid  kept werewolves until JKR made it clear in the books that 
he never
> did. Why is this being treated differently? 

Magpie:
Because Voldemort's statement about Hagrid is a throwaway slam at 
Hagrid that's referring to his penchant for having stupid pets. Where 
as Voldemort is just talking to Lucius about their situation after we 
saw them leave the school as Voldemort asked. 

Pippin:> 
>  I submit that JKR is more interested in getting the reader to 
notice and 
> question unconscious assumptions than in "correcting" our 
impression of 
> Hagrid or Slytherin House. It's not as if there are real half-
giants or
> Slytherins who will suffer if the readers don't catch on.

Magpie:
What are these "unconscious" assumptions you keep talking about that 
JKR is so subtly getting us to notice or question? She created 
Slytherin, she shows them in a bad light all the time en masse or 
individually. I don't have any unconscious assumptions about them--
she's the one who made them up and showed them this way. What's the 
big trick here, that JKR cleverly gave me all this information that 
Slytherins are bad and I fell for it by drawing the obvious 
conclusion that Slytherins are fairly rotten? As you say, there are 
no "real" Slytherins to suffer if I don't catch on. Therefore it's 
very reasonable to draw generalizations from what I actually see. I'm 
not sure what you mean about falling for anything about Hagrid. 
Hagrid is shown to be good.

Pippin: 
  So why should Harry note that Slytherins came back or sat at
> the House Tables with the other students? It wouldn't matter to him.
> JKR runs into the same difficulty with her treatment of women's 
status:
> in a society where it's taken for granted that witches and wizards 
are
> equals, no one is likely to remark on the fact. 

Magpie:
Why should Harry notice anything? Because that's how we know what's 
going on. The line says shopkeepers and family of non-Slytherins 
returned with Slughorn and there's no reason for Harry to notice that 
any more than he should notice there being Slytherins there. Of 
course Harry would remark on that fact if it happened. It would be 
downright remarkable.

-m