There is one point that seems quite amiss here –

Mr. Prinzi,

It seems that you have missed quite a large point here. In fantasy literature, that which has not been published in the books or on author websites or by statement of the author, etc. does not “exist”. Mr. Kab does not “assume” nothing happened outside of canon. Things outside of canon do not “exist”, yet. In fantasy literature nothing has happened until the author makes us aware of it. It is the author’s world and it does not “exist” except in the vapors of her mind until she brings it into the sun shine by publishing or “releasing it”. Until the moment of “release” it can change at her will, like the swirling of a turbulent sea. Mr. Kap takes what “exists” and examines it, incorrectly in my opinion, but none the less, his points are based on what “exists”. The counter points, which I feel are much more correct in general, are based upon assumptions of what might be in the author’s mind. These points are hypothesized. Mr. Kap’s points use, as a basis, what “exists” in a literary sense. I more agree with the hypothesized counter arguments in general. But it is best to realize the difference between hypothesizing what might occur, or what might have occurred, as compared with examining what actually “exists” in the story. Mr. Kap is only making a factual point when he says that one side of the debate is using assumptions and he is not, and that his analysis is being incorrectly cast into the area of hypothesis, as argued in counter point. It is clearly analysis of what “exists” while the counter arguments are conjecture, in general. You do not assume “nothing happened” in an area that does not “exist”. It actually didn’t happen until the author says it did, or sound logic can be used to deduce it from what has been published, and then you are always on shaky ground because a good author can always find a logical way to move the target. It is also hard to support your very good points when they “assume character consistency” when the point at issue is the question of the character’s consistency. When you assume you are correct, it is usually easy to prove your point.

Mr. Kab

I must tell you that you come on a little strong. You make good points about canon but might want to try harder to see the value of hypothesis in discussing what might be happening behind the scenes. Some of our best thoughts and insights come from conjecture. And it is quite enjoyable to try and guess back story and where the tale may be going in the next volume. It may even prove to be more correct as well, in the long term.

I really enjoy the sight and the PubCasts. Thanks for taking the time to do all this!!

I think, to press the issue further, though, we need to ask about motives. What is Dobby’s reason for wanting to work?

It’s evident that, while in status, practice, and even in psychological consideration, Dobby is freer than any other house-elf we’ve met, he still clearly suffers from psychological slavery. Two years after being freed, he still has trouble speaking ill of the Malfoys and is quite inclined to punish himself for doing so.

So the question I’d want to ask is, What motivates Dobby’s work ethic? I’m inclined to say he’s still motivated by the culture of slavery that tells Dobby what is place is as a house-elf.

What would really be impressive, and a sign of house-elf liberation, would be a house-elf willing to stand up and represent all of house-elf kind at the Ministry – a long-term goal of S.P.E.W.!

If Rowling wrote further books, I would love to see a trilogy that covered Harry’s three years of Auror training.

P.S. Star Wars isn’t entirely open in that sense that just anyone can write a book. Lucasfilm/Del Rey (formerly Bantam) would approach established authors about writing books. No one is allowed to take ideas to them.

My preferred answer would be that JKR liked the idea of the Brownies (helpful fairies) as another layer to the wizarding world, and wrote them in, ragged clothes, idiosyncratic grammer and all – scary, that, their tendency to speak of themselves in the third person – for extra colour and texture. But having created them, realized the many questions their existence raised, and started playing with some of those questions. I think she created Kreacher for plot reasons, and also because Dobby had been “domesticated” by OotP and was thus could no longer offer much menace or mystery.

However, if that answer is too obvious, I could offer an alternative to EK’s theory that they are ensalved for their own protection. They were enslaved for the protection of the wizarding world. How about this: a long time ago they were a threat against the wizarding community’ after a deadly struggle, they were defeated. The ones who would accept subjugation had some of thier powers taken away – thy were hobbled, as it were – and placed in lives of servitude. The ones who would not accept these terms were dealt with otherwise.

This explanation is consistent with how slaves are usually created: two cultures or nations clash; of the losing side, those who are strong enough to work, are put to work.

I think Rowling would cringe at your understanding of DD’s comments in your comment #60. Some responses:

DD “warns” Sirius. Is he warning him about the negative consequences to Kreacher? Is the warning about the negative consequences of slavery to those enslaved? Unfortunately, no. He is warning him about the negative consequences to the OoP if an unhappy captive is kept in their midst.

Again: Would Kreacher have left? I don’t think so. I don’t think Kreacher would have deliberately gone if offered the opportunity. And again: what is freedom if it denies a person’s free will? Neither of us have in front of us the circumstances surrounding the Order’s moving into 12GP. We don’t know what conversations took place other than the few snippets DD gave us. We don’t know what Kreacher was offered. Once again, I think it best to assume character consistency on the part of DD, and that Kreacher wanted to stay no matter what.

He doesn’t tell Sirius to free him. This would protect the Order, and give Kreacher the right to decide is own future.

We don’t know that for sure. DD isn’t exactly telling Harry every single detail. But even if you’re right (and you very well might be), I think the point about Kreacher’s wanting to remain at the house wins out here. Kreacher’s own free will choice would be to stay at the Ancient and Most Noble House of Black, waiting for Sirius to die and another Black to take over.

That leaves us with the matter of DD’s choice of 12GP still, but I do tend to think the “plot” reasons won the day for Rowling on that one.

DD makes no mention of a change to Kreacher’s status as a slave, just making his life as a slave easier (a la the slaves of Hogwarts). DD’s tacit acceptance of his position as a slave is evident. It’s ok to have slaves if you treat them well.

But this is the whole point I’m trying to make. It would be mass chaos for the house-elves themselves to simply be set free en-masse, as evidenced by Winky! The majority of house-elves, meaning something like 99.98% of them, would respond like Winky. How is that helpful? How is that freedom? To turn an entire race of people to depression, drinking, and destruction? I’ve addressed the point above that, given DD’s lack of rules and enforcement of typical house-elf slavery standards, and his complete willingness to respect the free will decisions of the elves in his employ, DD does not have slaves at Hogwarts, even if they don’t know it yet. Remember, house-elves, at this point in history, do not have an acute awareness that they are oppressed. Psychological slavery takes time to break.

Does he see a servant and a slave as close to the same (as was stated in pubcast 19 and comments)? Does he not see the enormous difference and the absolute injustice of slavery?

I’d argue he was using the term synonymously with “slave” here. I don’t think DD has your distinctions in mind when using the term.

As asked many times previously – Is there any canon evidence that DD ever initiated affirmative action or spoke out specifically on the injustice of House Elf enslavement? Any where? EVER?

Where exactly in “canon” would we find such evidence anyway? We know little to nothing of DD’s political involved or efforts. We only know his status. I’ve argued already that we’re both speculating here on stuff we do not and can not know for sure, because canon just doesn’t cover these parts of DD’s life. Again, I think I’m assuming character consistency here, and you’re assuming a break in DD’s position on injustice.

Why? Because it is right and just? Because lack of respect is detrimental to those disrespected? Because of the consequences to those mistreated? These things are, of course, implied. But what is explicitly stated is that there are consequences to be suffered by the privileged who demonstrate the lack of respect to others and build up their ire.

I think that this is what is “explicitly stated” because there is one primary thing on DD’s mind, as has been argued by myself and Matthew: Voldemort. Voldemort is the consequence of the Ministry’s prejudice and racism. And they had just got back from a battle with Voldemort.

I don’t think that if DD was just treating other magical brethren nicely for the sake of maintaining Wizarding privilege that he’d have had so darn many of them at his funeral, respecting him for all he had done.

I was simply stating that I think you’re assuming scenarios which run contrary to DD’s character. Plainly put, I’m not saying it’s not OK to make conjectures about DD and the WW where Rowling has not given us details. I’m just disagreeing with your conclusions, arguing that, as I read DD, I wouldn’t assume that he hasn’t been doing what he could for the cause of house-elves. You see it the opposite way.

Please let me know if I’ve not been clear, or if I’m misunderstanding you.

Now, with that hopefully out of the way, let’s get back to our speculations! I don’t think that “almost any other structure would have been better” that 12GP. I don’t think a building in the woods near Hogwarts would have been anything close to safe – DD would never have risked their HQ being found so close to Hogwarts.

Perhaps the Black House is not the best place, but quite frankly, it serves the plot, and it may be that here, plot won out for Rowling. I can imagine that with all that goes into the stories, there are points here and there that Rowling does not even realize all the implications of.

That said, I still have a hard time faulting DD for choosing the place. It was an already-secured, invisible building that was owned by Sirius himself, and it was the last place anyone would expect (right in the middle of London?!).

I’ll give some more thought to the Black house choice.

Matthew

DD could have shown respect for Kreacher by not chosing an HQ in which he was forced to reside and given info that puts him at risk. As perviously covered almost any otherother structure would have been better (see comments 23, 29, 31 and 42)