[HPforGrownups] Slytherin's Reputation was Re: CHAPDISC: DH, EPILOGUE

[k12listmomma]

No: HPFGUIDX 185606


> 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, I hate to say this, but I see you arguing "ideology"- ie, we should 
not hate all Slytherins, we should not be prejudiced- BUT, we have to read 
the books as they were written. Like it or not, I think Alla's point is a 
valid one- I do not see one Slytherin (except Slughorn, who was not of 
Harry's generation) who was worth anything to brag about. Rowling painted a 
picture of that House- time and time again she sets us up as the reader to 
not trust the Syltherins, and through Harry's eyes, we don't trust them. 
Don't start to blame us for it if that is the message the books send, and 
that is the message that we recieve. It's not a matter of right or wrong 
(should prejudice exist or not), the fact that it does on both sides all 
throughout this story: (Syltherins hating Mudbloods and backing Voldemort to 
hunt down those who aren't pure; and the resulting prejudice toward the 
Slytherins from backing Voldemort from the first war). It is part of the 
story and the conflict that Rowling sets up for us to read. Granted, I think 
the story would have been more interesting if she had shown us a Syltherin 
or two whom Harry might like to have over for dinner some time, but she 
doesn't, and so that is the post-Voldemort world that Harry is saddled with: 
one filled with mistrust and for the Voldemort-backing Syltherins, 
acceptance of any kind is going to take a lot of time to achieve. I would 
have a hard time forgiving any Syltherin who backed Voldemort if any one of 
my family had been killed by them, a hard time forgiving anyone who wasn't 
fighting against Voldemort if that bloodshed had taken someone precious from 
me.  When Harry starts school, people were still mistrustful of the 
Syltherins from the first time around, and by the time he had finished 
school (or should have finished school), the Syltherins had backed Voldemort 
yet again to commit murder with their blessing. I really wish Rowling had 
given us just ONE Syltherin whom we could point to that fought against 
Voldemort, who spoke up for the Mudbloods and the oppressed, as an example 
that not all were like that, but Rowling doesn't, and because she doesn't, 
we simply have to assume that there wasn't one.

> Pippin:
>
> Believing in the ideology or being influenced by it does not make them 
> killers.

I know a lot has been said comparing this book to WW2 and Hilter, and I will 
do it again. Hilter murdered millions of Jews. There were Germans who backed 
his ideology, and by doing so, they also had Jew blood on their hands. You 
do not have to do the physical act of killing to be responsible for the 
deaths of millions. You just have give power or aid to the killer. By 
backing Hilter at all, the German people gave Hitler the power to murder. 
There is no doubt that if more of his own people spoke up against what he 
was doing, lives would have been spared. Yet, history does show us many 
Germans who did speak up, and try and do something about it- Germans who 
went to the concentration camps with the Jews for trying to protect them, 
Germans who tried in vain to assissinate Hitler to put a stop to the 
bloodshed and ideology gone wrong. Because we see Germans who tried to stop 
what went wrong, we do not blame all Germans for Hitler's mistakes. The 
history of Harry Potter, though, does not show Syltherins attempting to help 
murder Voldemort to end the bloodshed; we do not witness Syltherins hiding 
Mudbloods to spare their lives. So, by extention, we do blame all 
Syltherins, not having an example to see that this "one" or "two" were 
different. That's the story Rowling wrote, like it or not. As I said, I 
really wish she had given us that one or two special Syltherins who bravely 
fought Voldemort at great expense to their own safety- maybe that's what she 
tried to do with Snape, but failed.

Shelley