Slytherin's Reputation was Re: CHAPDISC: DH, EPILOGUE

[pippin_999]

No: HPFGUIDX 185604

 
> Alla:

> Harry certainly formed an opinion of the whole house based on the
few  representatives of it and in real life I would say that he should
 check out other people before judging  whole house, except, where are
 those people exactly?
> 
> Where are the students who do not think and  do like Draco Malfoy 
> does?

Pippin:
They stood up to honor Harry in GoF. They were willing to defy Draco
(and Voldemort) and trust Dumbledore.  The narrator remarks that
Dumbledore doesn't see the Slytherins who aren't standing -- which is
ironic, since Harry sees, but ignores, the ones who are. Like Snape,
he sees what he wants to see. 

> Alla:
> 
> Totally totally agreed. And when JKR wanted us to see that really
not  all Gryffindors are brave and lovely, she showed Pettigrew to us,
 loud and clear.
> 
> I did not see anybody like that in the current Slytherin generation,
 I am sure they exist if it was real world and we saw heroic Slyths in
 DH. But even they initially ALL followed it, no?

Pippin:
But it *is* a real world for Harry. And it is  not a world where there
are no Slytherins who supported Harry. We saw them. They are part of
the story just like the wizarding families who could have raised Harry
if Dumbledore hadn't placed him with the Dursleys. Dumbledore did not
follow that path, and so we don't know what might have happened, but
it's  important that he could have. 

You know, even with lottery tickets, where we can say for a fact that
most of them are losers, knowing that fact does not give us any
information, none at all, about a particular ticket. If we decide to
treat a ticket as a loser without checking to see whether it is or
not, that's prejudice. Certainly it  would be prudent not to risk very
much on the possibility that it's a winner. But Harry won't even speak
to Zabini , and what risk would there have been in that?

 Pettigrew was loyal to the Order until he realized what was expected
of him. Draco was loyal to the DE's the same way. Draco shows us that
people get sorted into Slytherin who are not capable of murder.
Slughorn never betrayed anyone. So why should Slytherins all be
treated as potential killers and traitors when Peter was not?

 Pettigrew betrayed his dearest friends and killed thirteen people.
Next to Voldemort, he's the deadliest and most treacherous wizard we
hear of. The Marauders exposed who knows how many people to a
werewolf, all in the name of the greater good of course. 

And Dumbledore...well! 

My point is, the Gryffindors  aren't any safer to be around just
because they're a bit nicer to Muggleborns. So the argument that it's
prudent to shun the Slytherins because they might be dangerous doesn't
hold a lot of water to me. Besides, Harry is suppose to be *brave*.

Alla:
> If I do not see anybody in Slytherin house who not follows pureblood
 supremacy ideology, I assume they all do.

Pippin:

Believing in the ideology or being influenced by it does not make them
killers. We saw that. So tell me again why it is so important that
they not be trusted? Blaise Zabini does not want to date a blood
traitor. Slughorn has diminished expectations for Muggleborns. Shame
on them. But does that make them scary? Does it mean they would betray
Hogwarts to a snake monster? 

Is it so much worse for Zabini to say he would never date Ginny
Weasley than for Hermione to say she's not going to date anyone with
four legs? Or that Harry shouldn't trust a werewolf? Or that
House-elves don't know what's good for them? Should she have had to
prove she's free of human supremacist ideology before she was allowed
to join the DA? 

I'm afraid if we won't trust people who are prejudiced, then we can't
trust anyone at all.  According to the Museum of Tolerance, we're all
prejudiced. Perhaps things are different in the Potterverse. But I
don't think so. 

Pippin