My own work is almost 100% non-fiction essays addressing these issues. But my site does have some fiction in .pdf format written by others. These were design projects. The Prefect's Portrait is one of these, and yes, it is a very good example of a literary response to what appear to be the failings of the society presented in Rowling's series. There are about a dozen bits of fiction posted, but Portrait is probably the one with the most overtly political outlook. And is a ripping good story as well. The author does not let the politics overwhelm the plotline.
The site is: Red Hen Publications [http://www.redhen-publications.com] add /Publications.html to get to the fiction posted, or /Potterverse.html to get to the essay collection.
My own take is that yes, we *are* supposed to regard Harry as an unreliable narriator. The Harry filter has done us all (including himself) a considerable diservice to this point in the series, and with Phoenix it has begun to be evident even to the young reader that he is not seeing the whole picture. Looking back over the last three novels, it becomes evident that Rowling is pulling very few punches regarding the inadequacies of the adtuls that Harry is expected to look to for guidance or role models. And this trend has only accelerated. Where in PoA the adults on Harry's "side" were helpless, in GoF they were either absent or imposters and in OotP they are actively obstructionist and their feet of clay are on prominent display. This is unlikely to be a piece of unconsious authorial bias. She is clearly doing it deliberately.
What I think that Rowling attempting (and we will all know whether I was right in a couple more months) is to gradually move Harry's viewpoint beyond the easy black/white, Gryffindor=good/Slytherin=bad viewpoint which he has been encouraged in by the Weasleys. By now he has no excuse to believe that the people on his "own" side are perfect or faultless. And as of the end of Phoenix it seems that Dumbledore is no longer his unblemished "hero". It remains to see whether he is yet ready to take the step of noticing of the fact that Malfoy (and his hangers on) can not and do not speak for all of Slytherin House.
She could insert a wedge in that regard in one easy step by revealing that Tonks, or Mad-Eye Moody, Shaklebolt or any of the other Order members were ex-Slytherins. Opening the door for a re-examination of the current Slyths - that we know exist, but who Harry has somehow never noticed *simply because they don't hang out with Malfoy*. (Harry only noticed Theodore Nott in OotP because Malfoy was trying to rope him into his own circle - which he had never been a part of before. Harry still hasn't noticed Blaise Zabini.)
In any case there is no shortage of material out there. (Particularly in Snapefics.) The Gryff vs. Slyth biases of canon are so out of balance that Slytherin alologists were cropping up by the time PoA was released. Many of them highly articulate. And frankly, unless Rowling addresses the imbalance herself, her moral view of the Potterverse becomes insupportable. You cannot slap a label of "irredeemably evil" on a quarter of the population, particularly not as imature 11-year-olds, merely for being sorted into a particular House. And with her treatment of this issue in canon (The "good guys" have become less than heroic, and Draco Malfoy is becomming irrelevant) over the past three books I suspect that she fully does intend to address it.
It remains to see whether he is yet ready to take the step of noticing of the fact that Malfoy (and his hangers on) can not and do not speak for all of Slytherin House.
Oh, I don't know. I haven't seen much evidence that they don't speak for the rest of the House.
They laugh at his jokes. Yes. But some of his jokes pass for wit among teenagers, and the Slyths have never been given any reason to stand up for Potter.
I suspect that in most cases it is more a matter of not wanting to go up against "the Malfoy". When you really stop and think about it, Malfoy does not come across as very popular among his peers. The girls hang around with him (Pansy has quite a following, apparantly, and they all tag along) but the only male students ever mentioned in his proximity are consistently Crabbe and Goyle. He doesn't even hang out with the rest of the Quidditch team.
Until the day that Harry noticed him trying to reel in Nott. And that was almost certainly because of their fathers' association.
I suspect that in most cases it is more a matter of not wanting to go up against "the Malfoy"...trying to reel in Nott...almost certainly because of their fathers' association...He doesn't even hang out with the rest of the Quidditch team.
Perhaps. But that's all speculation at present, since we don't get a perspective into Slytherin and who regularly associates with who, or why. (For instance, Nott may have approached the Slytherin trio. We really have no canon on the subject.) There just doesn't appear to be any evidence that Slytherin as a whole disagree with its most vocal members, or fear/dislike them in any way. Your theory could totally be proved right in HBP, for example - at least four childrens' parents are acknowledged Death Eaters, so if the rest are as politic and cunning as they're cracked up to be, they may turn against Malfoy/Crabbe/Goyle/Nott. But at present, there appears to be an exceptionally strong sense of unity within that house in particular, with Malfoy and his gang as 'figureheads' so it's my opinion that the focus will be on them with regards to any further development of Slytherin/lack thereof (and Snape, of course, but I'm speaking specifically of the whole 'houses uniting' theme, which appears to be centred around this generation) as indeed, Harry's reaction to the Sorting Hat song suggests.
Well, my own reading is that having identified him as "the enemy" (at least inside the schoool) Harry *pays attention* to what Malfoy is doing/up to and keeps an eye on him and his contacts. And if Harry hasn't noticed Malfoy hanging out with anyone apart from his goons and Pansy and her gang, then he probably *doesn't* hang out with anyone else.
The rest of the Quidditch team may just be in different years, but if it's five to a dorm then Malfoy has a couple of roommates that don't stick around once they all leave the common room.
Doubt that Rowling intends to examine this in depth. Malfoy is already becomming irrelevant to the big picture. But he could still do some damage.
but if it's five to a dorm then Malfoy has a couple of roommates that don't stick around once they all leave the common room.
If you think about it, it's only five to the boys dorm in Harry's year in Gryff. All of the same gender of the same year are put together. So, let's look at they Slys. We KNOW that there are at least Malfoy, Crabbe, Goyle and Zabini, and most likely Nott (but I'm not sure on that one). So at least those four would be in a room together. But Zabini seems to be rather neutral when it comes to the infamous 'Malfoy/Potter enmity', so he wouldn't be mentioned.
the Slyths have never been given any reason to stand up for Potter.
Very true, that. Have they ever been shown any reason to believe that the beliefs they grew up with (if they did grow up the same as Draco) are wrong? And Slytherins are out for themselves, if what I've understood is correct. They will go with the winning side. They aren't cunning and ambitious for no reason. If they go to the losing side, won't that ruin their chances for getting where they want to be?
But at present, there appears to be an exceptionally strong sense of unity within that house in particular
Of course. That house is the most biased against in all of Hogwarts, so it stands to reason that they would unite from within, just to be able to handle all seven years of biasness and bigotry. Of course, they have their own fair share of bigotry, if Draco is anything to go by.
Also, what do we really know of Salazar Slytherin? The winning side always writes the history. What if Salazar had a thing against Muggles because someone in his family was killed because he/she was magical? There are a lot of stories that explore this issue, but I'll post them later. Just wanted to add my two cents to your conversation.
Up to this point ALL the kids in ALL the Houses seem to be running on autopilot, acording to their early "programing" But at 16-17 some of them ought to start questioning things like that.
And if you recall the excepts that we got from Bagshott's History of Magic all the way back in book 1, it's clear that they've been fed a steady diet of lies as to how history took place and what everyone thought they were doing.
And a lot of this Glorious Gryffindor vs. Sinister Slytherin nonsense that we've been getting hit over te head with is due for a re-examination. The Hat called it into question by pointing out that the two of them were the best of friends. We've been invited throughout the series to consider that Salazar Slytherin was a Dark wizard, end of story. Just what exactly does it say about Godric that this *Dark wizard* is his best friend?
Nope. No fanfic (or almost none). I specialize in theories. Red Hen Publications is my site. There's a link from my Lj account. add /Potterverse.html to get to the essay collection, or /Publications.html to get to the fanfic. *Other* people's fanfic that is. I just designed the publications (with the authors' permission).
The site is: Red Hen Publications [http://www.redhen-publications.com] add /Publications.html to get to the fiction posted, or /Potterverse.html to get to the essay collection.
My own take is that yes, we *are* supposed to regard Harry as an unreliable narriator. The Harry filter has done us all (including himself) a considerable diservice to this point in the series, and with Phoenix it has begun to be evident even to the young reader that he is not seeing the whole picture. Looking back over the last three novels, it becomes evident that Rowling is pulling very few punches regarding the inadequacies of the adtuls that Harry is expected to look to for guidance or role models. And this trend has only accelerated. Where in PoA the adults on Harry's "side" were helpless, in GoF they were either absent or imposters and in OotP they are actively obstructionist and their feet of clay are on prominent display. This is unlikely to be a piece of unconsious authorial bias. She is clearly doing it deliberately.
What I think that Rowling attempting (and we will all know whether I was right in a couple more months) is to gradually move Harry's viewpoint beyond the easy black/white, Gryffindor=good/Slytherin=bad viewpoint which he has been encouraged in by the Weasleys. By now he has no excuse to believe that the people on his "own" side are perfect or faultless. And as of the end of Phoenix it seems that Dumbledore is no longer his unblemished "hero". It remains to see whether he is yet ready to take the step of noticing of the fact that Malfoy (and his hangers on) can not and do not speak for all of Slytherin House.
She could insert a wedge in that regard in one easy step by revealing that Tonks, or Mad-Eye Moody, Shaklebolt or any of the other Order members were ex-Slytherins. Opening the door for a re-examination of the current Slyths - that we know exist, but who Harry has somehow never noticed *simply because they don't hang out with Malfoy*. (Harry only noticed Theodore Nott in OotP because Malfoy was trying to rope him into his own circle - which he had never been a part of before. Harry still hasn't noticed Blaise Zabini.)
In any case there is no shortage of material out there. (Particularly in Snapefics.) The Gryff vs. Slyth biases of canon are so out of balance that Slytherin alologists were cropping up by the time PoA was released. Many of them highly articulate. And frankly, unless Rowling addresses the imbalance herself, her moral view of the Potterverse becomes insupportable. You cannot slap a label of "irredeemably evil" on a quarter of the population, particularly not as imature 11-year-olds, merely for being sorted into a particular House. And with her treatment of this issue in canon (The "good guys" have become less than heroic, and Draco Malfoy is becomming irrelevant) over the past three books I suspect that she fully does intend to address it.
Reply
Oh, I don't know. I haven't seen much evidence that they don't speak for the rest of the House.
Reply
I suspect that in most cases it is more a matter of not wanting to go up against "the Malfoy". When you really stop and think about it, Malfoy does not come across as very popular among his peers. The girls hang around with him (Pansy has quite a following, apparantly, and they all tag along) but the only male students ever mentioned in his proximity are consistently Crabbe and Goyle. He doesn't even hang out with the rest of the Quidditch team.
Until the day that Harry noticed him trying to reel in Nott. And that was almost certainly because of their fathers' association.
Reply
Perhaps. But that's all speculation at present, since we don't get a perspective into Slytherin and who regularly associates with who, or why. (For instance, Nott may have approached the Slytherin trio. We really have no canon on the subject.) There just doesn't appear to be any evidence that Slytherin as a whole disagree with its most vocal members, or fear/dislike them in any way.
Your theory could totally be proved right in HBP, for example - at least four childrens' parents are acknowledged Death Eaters, so if the rest are as politic and cunning as they're cracked up to be, they may turn against Malfoy/Crabbe/Goyle/Nott. But at present, there appears to be an exceptionally strong sense of unity within that house in particular, with Malfoy and his gang as 'figureheads' so it's my opinion that the focus will be on them with regards to any further development of Slytherin/lack thereof (and Snape, of course, but I'm speaking specifically of the whole 'houses uniting' theme, which appears to be centred around this generation) as indeed, Harry's reaction to the Sorting Hat song suggests.
Reply
The rest of the Quidditch team may just be in different years, but if it's five to a dorm then Malfoy has a couple of roommates that don't stick around once they all leave the common room.
Doubt that Rowling intends to examine this in depth. Malfoy is already becomming irrelevant to the big picture. But he could still do some damage.
Reply
If you think about it, it's only five to the boys dorm in Harry's year in Gryff. All of the same gender of the same year are put together. So, let's look at they Slys. We KNOW that there are at least Malfoy, Crabbe, Goyle and Zabini, and most likely Nott (but I'm not sure on that one). So at least those four would be in a room together. But Zabini seems to be rather neutral when it comes to the infamous 'Malfoy/Potter enmity', so he wouldn't be mentioned.
the Slyths have never been given any reason to stand up for Potter.
Very true, that. Have they ever been shown any reason to believe that the beliefs they grew up with (if they did grow up the same as Draco) are wrong? And Slytherins are out for themselves, if what I've understood is correct. They will go with the winning side. They aren't cunning and ambitious for no reason. If they go to the losing side, won't that ruin their chances for getting where they want to be?
But at present, there appears to be an exceptionally strong sense of unity within that house in particular
Of course. That house is the most biased against in all of Hogwarts, so it stands to reason that they would unite from within, just to be able to handle all seven years of biasness and bigotry. Of course, they have their own fair share of bigotry, if Draco is anything to go by.
Also, what do we really know of Salazar Slytherin? The winning side always writes the history. What if Salazar had a thing against Muggles because someone in his family was killed because he/she was magical? There are a lot of stories that explore this issue, but I'll post them later. Just wanted to add my two cents to your conversation.
JA.
Reply
And if you recall the excepts that we got from Bagshott's History of Magic all the way back in book 1, it's clear that they've been fed a steady diet of lies as to how history took place and what everyone thought they were doing.
And a lot of this Glorious Gryffindor vs. Sinister Slytherin nonsense that we've been getting hit over te head with is due for a re-examination. The Hat called it into question by pointing out that the two of them were the best of friends. We've been invited throughout the series to consider that Salazar Slytherin was a Dark wizard, end of story. Just what exactly does it say about Godric that this *Dark wizard* is his best friend?
Kids don't *like* to be lied to.
Reply
JA.
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment