To kill or not to kill and resolutions of the storylineWAS :Re: Disarming spell

[sistermagpie]

No: HPFGUIDX 185574

> Carol responds:
> Sorry to waste a post, but I was addressing Pippin. She's the one 
who
> said (IIRC) that Harry doesn't recognize people from other Houses or
> even his own unless they're classmates or on the Quidditch team, a
> point that jkoney and I have also made.

Magpie:
D'oh! So sorry about that. I think I cut and pasted several posts 
first and then started answering and mixed up where one ended and 
another began or something. Sorry!

Julie:
True, that. What it really boils down to is that some readers are 
comfortable
with the ambiguity about Slytherin House, and some would have 
preferred to
have had the moral stand against Voldemort spelled out for them ;-)

Magpie:
Actually--and I know I keep harping on this thread but sometimes I do 
get a bone in my teeth and won't let go--I *don't* think that's the 
argument. I think that's a separate argument that sometimes overlaps. 

What I'm talking about is a single sentence which I don't think is 
ambiguous on the point of Slytherins (since it doesn't mention them 
at all) is ambiguous. It's more about "what does this sentence say?" 
then a question of how exactly one sees Slytherin in the books (as 
unredeemably evil or as having the potential for good in them 
somewhere--to me they remind of the unsaved in other stories who 
could therefore one day be saved and redeemed--this story is just not 
about that. Until then they are not like the others, but that does 
not make them evil or without redeeming qualities or any potential to 
do good. But it does seem like they either need to reject Slytherin 
House or convert the entirety of the House to be redeemed).

I just feel like the idea that the Slytherins returned with Slughorn 
there is separate from the idea that the author wrote the Slytherins 
returning with him using words on the page, either implied or 
otherwise. 

Alla:

OOOOO. You know what? I think you are right. Alla shakes her head.
You are basically just saying that regardless of how important the
Slytherins' return is to the story and to Harry, if their exit was
written clearly, there is no reason to not write their return clearly.

Magpie:
Hurray!:-)

There are plenty of things that are not mentioned in the story that 
can still be said to have happened--the author can't mention 
everything (bathing, going to the bathroom being the most obvious 
examples). But having a character or a group leave the room, and then 
later be there without being said to return is just a mistake. In 
this case the Slytherins aren't just not written as returning, 
theyr'e never mentioned as being there later either. So the idea that 
it's ambiguous whether or not they were there is just confusing to 
me. It just seems as simple as, "No, they left, remember? Here's the 
scene where they left and there's no mention of them after that." If 
there was a mention of them after that I would say JKR forgot to 
write them returning but clearly they did, at least. Reasons why the 
narrator didn't tell us this fact are still reasons it's admittedly 
not written or told to us anywhere.

Shelley:
> Wait, who in Slytherin was "hated on sight"? Seems to me that 
Syltherin
> members, as Laura said, EARNS their reputation. Draco, as the 
bully, earns
> his own name. The kids being the sons and daughters of death eaters,
> scowling at the Mudbloods, earns them the reputation. Sorry, but 
Rowling
> doesn't show us one Syltherin who doesn't earn the reputation as a 
whole,
> any single individual who defies the group to be a good person. I 
don't see
> where even oneSyltherin was "hated on sight"- Rowling is clear to 
introduce
> each of them "joining the gang" as it were, to earn the reputation.

Magpie:
I think it's clear that after a while Slytherin=bad even before you 
know the person. Kids getting Sorted into Slytherin are boo'd by the 
Twins (though one could suggest that was House Rivalry rather than 
them saying the boy was evil--though I think it's clear with 
Slytherin the two are bound up together). Slughorn also has to 
say "don't hold that against me" when Harry seems ready to react 
badly to him because he's in Slytherin.

I do think people are shown disliking Slytherins before they have a 
reason to, however I also think the Slytherins are as a whole shown 
to be nasty people. Is it a chicken/egg thing? I'm not so sure it is, 
considering we're told Salazar was a Pureblood supremist who started 
his house on those same ideals. Plus the Sorting does seem based on 
personality, and while there are Slytherins who do do things that are 
good in canon, or choose against the Pureblood ideology, even they 
are shown to start out with the familiar negative qualities.

-m