- Spoiler Alert!
Harry took down Voldemort. A massive defeat against the Dark Lord was won. But what of the other issues raised by Rowling throughout the series? What of the social evils she addressed? Some will be disturbed that house-elves are still enslaved at the end of Book 7. What of the unity of the four houses of which the Sorting Hat sang? And has their been any healing whatsoever in the Pureblood-Muggleborn divide?
It would seem that Rowling has raised many issues that she did not resolve, issues which have very, very serious parallels in our world (slavery, racism, prejudice). Why did Rowling not directly address these issues and bring them to happy resolutions? Does she really mean us to think that slavery is an acceptable state for house-elves, or that racism and prejudice will continue to be perpetuated, even by the “good guys,” in the Wizarding World?
I don’t think so, and I think our answer lies, once again, in Rowling’s belief in gradualism, following the Fabian Society. We did get two more references to Fabian Prewett (Molly’s cousin) in Deathly Hallows, by the way. Whatever you might think of this connection, whether you agree with Fabian politics or not, I’m glad Rowling didn’t nicely wrap these issues up by the end of Book 7. The depth and complexity of the problems are far too great to have simple, one-year answers. From an interview, post Goblet release:
JK: Exactly. Well, she’s fun to write because Hermione, with the best of intentions, becomes quite self-righteous. My heart is entirely with her as she goes through this. She develops her political conscience. My heart is completely with her. But my brain tells me, which is a growing-up thing, that in fact she blunders towards the very people she’s trying to help. She offends them. She’s not very sensitive to their…
E: She’s somewhat condescending to the elves who don’t have rights.
JK: She thinks it’s so easy. It’s part of what I was saying before about the growing process, of realizing you don’t have quite as much power as you think you might have and having to accept that. Then you learn that it’s hard work to change things and that it doesn’t happen overnight. Hermione thinks she’s going to lead them to glorious rebellion in one afternoon and then finds out the reality is very different, but that was fun to write. (emphasis added)
As I’ve argued previously, we were never going to see a sudden shift in house-elf rights or a radical transformation in centuries-old prejudice. Rowling knows that when injustice is so deeply rooted in society that it’s considered a positive moral norm (even the “good guys” reinforce the injustice for supposedly good reasons) that one revolution isn’t going to change everything. So instead of revolution, we get little victories:
- Kreacher’s Transformation - Dumbledore was correct. Kreacher needed to be shown kindness. Even I was skeptical of Dumbledore’s advice here (and you all know what I think of Dumbledore). I figured kindness towards Kreacher would keep his evil at bay, hold him off from doing anything too rash or detrimental to the Order. Instead, kindness to Kreacher caused a change in his entire person. Harry, Ron, and Hermione actually acted towards Kreacher in a way that valued validated his own desires, and Kreacher responded with an amazing turnaround. Still a slave? Yes. And that is tragic. But his will was changed from bitterness to a willingness to help the side of good, and that’s a huge step. It will be ages before house-elves want the kind of freedom Hermione was trying to crusade for with S.P.E.W. But perhaps with the trio employed at the Ministry (according to Rowling in a recent interview) change will come even quicker than expected.
- “Albus Severus” – The key to the healing of house division is the healing of the Gryffindor-Slytherin rift. Again, this is centuries old, and it will not heal overnight. But because of the bravery of Severus Snape and the forgiveness of Albus Dumbledore (and later, Harry Potter), a change has begun, a little victory won. When Harry was in school, he would have been appalled at any idea that Slytherin was not altogether evil, and he would have bought the lie that all dark wizards have come from Slytherin. “19 years later,” however, Harry is willing to say that Albus Severus would have no need to be ashamed of being in Slytherin whatsoever. Instead of disparaging the house, he spoke of Severus Snape, “the bravest man” he ever knew. This is a monumental change in Harry’s thinking (perhaps also affected by the fact that he was part Voldemort for 16 years of his life!).
- The Victory Feast – After the defeat of Voldemort, Rowling makes it a point to note that no one sat according to houses at the four tables McGonagall had replaced in the Great Hall. It was a victory to be celebrated by unity, not division. Yes, I would have liked specific mention that Slytherins had joined the fight. I loved that Slughorn was one of the three battling Voldemort! But this is yet another little victory that will hopefully result in greater unity down the road.
There may be others that I’m not remembering at the moment, but the point is this: Rowling believes change happens not by force, but by the changing of hearts over time. I want to revisit the conclusion of The People of the Lie one more time and consider it in light of Deathly Hallows:
The healing of evil – scientifically or otherwise – can be accomplished only by the love of individuals. A willing sacrifice is required. The individual healer must allow his or her own soul to become the battleground. He or she must sacrificially absorb the evil.
The what prevents the destruction of that soul? If one take’s evil itself into one’s heart, like a spear, how can one’s goodness still survive? Even if the evil is vanquished thereby, will not the good be also? What will have been achieved beyond some meaningless trade-off?
I cannot answer this in language other than mystical. I can say only that there is a mysterious alchemy whereby the victim becomes the victor. As C.S. Lewis wrote: “When a willing victim who had committed no treachery was killed in a traitor’s stead, the Table would crack and Death itself would start working backwards†[LWW].
I do not know how this occurs. But I know that it does. I know that good people can deliberately allow themselves to be pierced by the evil of others – to be broken thereby yet somehow not broken – to even be killed in some sense and yet still survive and not succumb. Whenever this happens there is a slight shift in the balance of power in the world.
That’s what happened with Harry’s willing sacrifice. The defeat of the evil of Voldemort was monumental. The effect of the sacrifice was “a slight shift in the balance of power in the world.” Not immediate, revolutionary healing, but a slight shift, a turn towards the good, a catalyst for little victories that will lead to lasting change.
revgeorge on 
Arabella Figg on 
Fricka on 
Lynn on 
Steve Morrison on 
Ally on 
Joivre on 
Loading ...
{ 44 comments… read them below or add one }
I too was happy that she didn’t wrap everything up Travis. She said it herself when discussing the epilogue that she didn’t want to wrap everything up with a nice little bow, it would come off as too corny. And the same goes with the issues such as slavery, prejudices, etc.
I have to say, I was a bit disturbed in the epilogue that Ron sort of told his kids that their grandfather would hate them if they got sorted into Slytherin. It seems like prejudice is still quite ingrained in the Wizard Culture after all, which is a bit dissapointing, since the theme of house unity at Hogwarts was pushed by the sorting hat for most of the series.
Well, of course prejudice hasn’t completely dissapeared, and I doubt I’d be satisfied with an ending in which Rowling revealed that it had. I was rather annoyed at Ron’s comments about Draco’s son, however. I’d like to think he’s saying those things in a playful tone to Harry and Hermione, not really his daughter, but it is disturbing. Of course, of the three Ron has always been the last to release his prejudices. He’ll get around to it. I would hope that Rosie and Scorpius would become best friends and torment Ron until he approves.
Great points, Travis. If JKR had wrapped everything up like that at the end of DH, it would have seemed forced & unrealistic. DH has a happy ending but it’s not a fairy tale ending, where everyone lives happily ever after & the sun always shines, etc.
People remain people, after all, & so problems will always exist. Which isn’t to say, don’t do anything about them. Nor is it fatalistic, saying you can’t do anything about them. Jesus says, “The poor you will always have with you,” but He’s not saying then, “So, don’t worry about them.”
Prejudice, slavery of some sorts, & evil all continue to exist, in JKR’s world & ours. But one continues to work against them, mostly by persuasion if it can be done, but sometimes by force, if necessary. If someone’s in the process of murdering someone, you don’t, after all, sit down & patiently explain why that’s wrong! You stop them & then when they’re safely locked up, you start to work on their heart & mind.
If, as JKR says Post-DH, that Harry & Ron are working as aurors, then that shows that there are still dark wizards out there & always will be. Maybe never anyone as great as LV or Grindelwald, but still dark wizards. And Hermione working in Magical Law Enforcement. While laws cannot change anyone’s mind or heart, just their behavior, I can see Hermione using her position to work for the emancipation of house elves & better treatment of other magical races.
Sorry for the long post. For someone who just started posting yesterday, I seem to go on a bit. Comes of being a minister, I guess. Thanks.
Shadowquill, I like your point about perhaps Rose & Scorpius becoming friends & thus causing Ron discomfort. It’d be even better if Rose Weasley & Scorpius Malfoy ended up getting married. Somehow, I don’t Ron would react like the Black family & disown his daughter. But at least fanfic writers would have a field day writing about the Potter’s, Weasley’s, & the Malfoy’s at family reunions.:)
Starting off, I’d like to thank Mr. Prinzi for this wonderful resource. Having just become a part of Potter fandom a couple of months ago (it was a rather large rock I was living under), this site has helped me understand more of the stories and opened up new avenues of thought. Kudos!
Back on topic, it seems that some were looking for a more apocolyptic ending in the Potter universe, like Tolkein’s ending of LOTR. (not apocotyptic in the sense of everything going bad, including fiction like Left Behind. Sorry, couldn’t resist. But in the sense of “all things made new”). Middle Earth is ‘remade’ is a sense after the destruction of the ring. The Wizarding world is not in DH. And that’s not a criticism, I think. Just a point. It would have been interesting to see what a ‘remade’ Potter world would look like, but I was very satisfied with the ending Rowling chose.
Jobrill, I don’t have the book in front of me, but I think Ron said Graddad Weasley would never forgive them if they married a pureblood, not if they got sorted into Slytherin. And the pureblood thing is just a joke about Arthur’s love of Muggles, not a prejudiced remark.
Travis – you’re right. Ron jokingly tells his son that if he’s not in Gryffindor, he’ll be disowned.
And when Hermione admonishes Ron not to turn Rose against Draco’s son from the start, Ron admits she’s right, but then tells Rose not to get too close to Scorpio, because Grandad Weasley wouldn’t want her to marry a pureblood.
And he’s definitely joking throughout.
I’m disappointed, but not at all surprised, by this whole line of discussion and by the parts of the books that have led to it.
In my view, the primary, defining difference between fairy-tale fantasy and more realistic sorts of fiction is not the magic or even the presence of spirits or god(s), but the fact that in fairy-tale fantasy, being truly good is always ultimately rewarded, and being bad punished; while in the real world, bad guys not only often win, but often wind up in control of the very institutions that ought to be protecting us from them.
The “lessons” of the Harry Potter series are false lessons — misleading, Pollyanna-ish ideas such as “love conquers all” that will lead to at least disappointment, and maybe worse, for any young reader who follows them.
Love does not conquer all. Turning the other cheek will only get you hurt more. Because the real world has lots of truly evil people, and they cannot be shamed into changing their ways. Especially when they get hold of the institutions of family, religion, school, and government, and use them to shame their good opponents in the eyes of the public. Winners write history.
I apologize for raining on your parade, but I felt it was necessary.
John David Galt, I’m really baffled by this comment, and I don’t think I’m sure of what you’re trying to say.
The whole point of this thread is that Harry’s victory over Voldemort does not conquer all the evil in the world, but only won one small battle.
And moreoever, if you think that love does not conquer all and that Harry Potter misleads us on this point, at least consider that the good guys engage in WAR and in KILLING in order to defeat the bad guys. There’s no “be nice and bad guys will be nice to you” lesson in Harry Potter at all. Harry kills Voldemort. Molly kills Bellatrix. The most evil witch and evil wizard of the series are killed in acts of war. I don’t get what you’re attempting to criticize.
They do so out of love, of course, but if you think that there’s something overly sentimental about love, that there isn’t life-altering and world-changing power in it, then I’m not entirely sure what to say to you (nor do I know how you’re defining “love”).
John,
If you’re only looking at this temporal, materialistic world, then no, love does not seem to conquer all. We live, we die, that’s it. Eat, drink, & be merry for tomorrow we really die. I don’t mean to be too harsh in this comment, but the view you espouse leads only to fatalism or libertinism.
But if you come from a Christian view, then love does conquer all. The love of God the Father poured out in the death of His Son on the cross. In the cross, all human suffering is redeemed, encompassed in the suffering of the Son of God, who took it to the tomb with Him, & then left it behind on Easter, Him being the firstfruits of the resurrection. And if the firstfruits come, then the other fruit, our resurrection, follows.
Of course, if one doesn’t come from a Christian viewpoint, then none of this matters. All suffering is pointless, everything just happens, randomness is all there is & at the end there’s is nothing. Eventually you just have a burnt out planet orbiting a dead star. No hope, no future, no nothing. As I said, fatalism (why bother, it doesn’t matter anyway) or libertinism (squeeze the most you can out of life & anyone who gets in the way be dam***)is all that’s left.
Love, kindness and mercy are important
values and I don’t see anything misleading
in emphasising them.
Like revgeorge has written, from a Christian point of view, in the end love will conquer all. Of course, in this world the good people don’t always win and it often looks as if evil was stronger. Rowling hasn’t presented us with a perfect world. But one can still believe in love and goodness, there’s nothing wrong with it.
Looking back at the epilogue, I suppose you’re right than Ron was mostly taking a joking tone. Still, I would still like to see what, exactly, is going on with Centaurs, House Elves, and the like. The warning that the Wizards would pay for their mistreatment of non-human magical races never QUITE seemed to come to full fruition in the books other than a giant or two being on Voldemort’s side in the final battle, and I would have liked to see at least a bit about what type of reforms might have come about in the post-Voldemort world. Maybe not an end to prejudice, but at least some sign that there was valid work going on to reconcile the Slytherins with other houses, reform treatment of house elves, and etc.
Certainly, we had a hint in the book itself that things wouldn’t be peachy, when Bill explained a bit about the cultural differences between Goblins and Wizards vis-a-vis ownership. But there was enough teaching about wizard mistreatment of those races that I think that subject could have used a bit more closure.
When I read Chapter 31, I was shocked that not even one single Slytherin student was willing to protect his school against Voldemort, but all joined him instead (if he didn’t lie about that). So, also those who were not the children of Death Eaters were at least sympathizing with him. I always thought there was a lot of prejudice between the Gryffindor and Slytherin students, and that they were not all black or white. But they were. (Well, Cormac McLaggen actually wasn’t that white.)
Hence it was surprising to me when Harry assured little Albus Severus that it would be no problem at all if he were sorted into Slytherin. I don’t suppose that Harry wouldn’t mind if his son ended up in a gang of future Death Eaters. Something must have changed during these 19 years after Voldermort was defeated.
Some of our well known Slytherins may have laid the foundations for that change:
Severus Snape, of course – not as good as I wanted him to be, but still a brave man who helped to defeat Voldemort because he was capable of at least one great love.
Slughorn, who finally turned out to be a hero.
Narcissa Malfoy, who proved to have a feeling heart. Not only for her son. Once Harry had given her the information that Draco was in the castle alive, she could have told Voldemort that Harry was alive, too. But she didn’t. Narcissa, I apologize. I have called you an “icy nightmare, without any warmth or compassion for others†before. I was wrong. Your tears were authentic.
Even Lucius has got it at last that there might be some drawbacks when you decide to follow a Dark Lord.
And Draco owes two life debts to Harry.
There is a light at the end of the tunnel.
About the “Magical Brethrenâ€: We saw Kreacher’s transformation (which I liked very much), Centaurs fighting (in spite of Mars and Grawp), Griphook helping Harry (well written). What happened next? Did another house-elf feel the need to come free? Did the Centaurs ever forgive Firenze? Were the Goblins angry because Gryffindor’s Sword decided to join Neville? Did the Ents ever retrieve the Entwives? Oops, sorry, that’s another story.
Many, many questions. JKR said she loved the theories. She has done her job (and a great one!). Maybe it’s our turn, now, to imagine what might have happened or not.
P.S. Jobrill, I agree with you.
A lovely essay, Travis. Thank you for starting this discussion…
I’m going to rain on the parade.
The systemic prejudices of the wizarding world are still in place, although perhaps thawing a little bit. BTW, I don’t consider the fact that the Hogwarts elves, three centaurs and one giant fought on Harry’s side a step in itself. In any war, slaves and serfs and the disenfranchised take sides. The actual thaw so far consists of the freeing of Dobby, the hiring of Hagrid and Firenze and the befriending of Kreacher. Oh yeah, and people throwing food at Grawp.It’s not a lot. It’s certainly not systemic.
The four houses are still in place too, although Harry himself is less hostile towards Slytherin. I don’t think any Slytherin students fought against Voldemort.
We don’t know how the situation stands with respect to feelings about Muggles and Muggle-born. Sure the trio could bring about change from within the system if they’re employed at the Ministry, and I accept that that seems to be the direction the author wishes to go – now – but that’s not binding canon.
I agree with you Travis, that a slight shift, a little bit of change, a few people doing good, can lead to bigger and lasting changes. But we never know, at the moment, whether what we are seeing is going to continue, or end, or how it will all turn out. Only history will tell us that.
Also, things can change very quickly, for the better or the worse. Remember the dissolution of the Soviet Empire and the fall of the Berlin Wall and how quickly that happened? (for those of you born in the 80s or after, there once used to be an evil empire in the north, which caused a lot of harm and used a lot of torture and divided families, but which came down in the early 80s). And for the worse as well: remember the murder of millions of people by Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot and others over the course of a just a few years? And remember how quickly Muggle-borns lost their rights and status under the reign of the Voldemort controlled Ministry of Magic?
And assuming she decides to write again, JKR may rethink things, and the Wizarding Spring may turn into a deepfreeze.
And even if the tend were to continue, we know that megalomaniacal tyrants spring up anew, and that the masses are easily swayed by demogogues, and evil never goes away. Dumbledore told us that one.
My point: we can’t really make any conclusions over the victory of good over evil based on what we’ve seen.
I think we can say that Voldemort has been defeated, and hasn’t come back for 19 years. But even that is conditional. For me the last two sentences in the Epilogue are chilling. Harry is on his guard. And will be for the rest of his life. And remember, the wand is in the tomb, which can be broken open again.
Which is exactly how we want things to be.
Voldemort has been defeated – all the Horcruxes were destroyed before the final confrontation. So, Voldemort can’t come back. However, that doesn’t mean that some other won’t attempt to take his place.
As for the Elder Wand, since it was returned to Dumbledore’s tomb, even if someone were to take it again, they would still not be it’s master. Also, who knows where the Elder Wand is going, besides Harry, Ron, Hermione and the portraits in the Headmaster’s office. I can’t see Ron or Hermione seeking to “defeat” Harry in order to gain control of it. And, what would those in the portraits get out of divulging what had become of it? I make an assumption that the Trio would be able to, magically, repair whatever damage had been done to Dumbledore’s tomb, placing the Elder Wand within while doing so, without any other assistance from additional parties. And, again, anyone who they would seek for help (Mr. & Mrs. Weasley, Professor McGonagal) aren’t the sort to want to take it from Harry, or give up that sort of intelligence to some potential Dark Wizard…
I also don’t feel the last two sentences in the Epilogue are “chilling”. I’m not a parent, but sometimes parents have a bit of separation anxiety when they send their child off to school for the very first time. This is Albus Severus’ first year at Hogwarts. The discussion Harry has with young Albus about Slytherin House can’t help but bring to mind all that Harry went through in his youth, but, thankfully, ended 19 years before. Indeed, “All was well.”
Reyhan, I’m not entirely sure which parade you’re raining on
That’s sort of the point (except that, no, Voldemort can’t come back). There will always be evil, and some of the little victories that occurred in DH were steps in the right direction that will hopefully bring healing. They won’t necessarily. More Harrys, Rons, and Hermiones will have to rise up to continue to fight for justice. But DH includes some first steps that will hopefully lead to some lasting changes (and if we’re to take Rowling’s word about the future of the Wizarding World, which she’ll probably document when she does the encyclopedia, the Trio does begin to put some lasting change into effect).
Miss Ladybug, I agree with you that I can’t see Hermione trying to defeat Harry to gain control of the Elder Wand. She’s just too balanced. But Ron?
I don’t know. Twice now Ron has turned away from Harry, motivated both times by jealousy. That’s a pretty strong emotion.
Anyways, this sounds like I think JKR is going to write more Harry Potter stories. I’m guessing she will.
It wouldn’t be that difficult to bring Voldemort back. It’s possible that a part of him (the flayed, whimpering child) still remains in Harry. It’s up to the author to say.
The crucial point in any conjectures about the future is the Epilogue. JKR has committed herself to a future, 19 years from when Voldemort was defeated, when all is well. So nothing really awful can happen to Harry or his friends or their families until year 20.
Reyhan–
Ron Weasley as Voldemort redux? Are you serious?
Ron has indeed turned away from Harry twice, motivated by jealousy, but he’s not a megalomaniac. All he ever wanted was a little love, a little recognition, and maybe one or two possessions that weren’t “rubbish”. I can’t see him going for power now that he actually has what he wanted.
I also don’t think that Voldemort can come back. The child at King’s Cross didn’t remain in Harry, it was the part of Voldemort that has been killed by his own AK. There aren’t any Horcruxes left, so Voldemort’s gone forever. I don’t believe that there will be a sequel.
I don’t think that it’s indicative at all that the Hogwarts houses are still operating. I think that, being part of the magical founding, the houses are as much part of Hogwarts as the winged boars at the gate. Wasn’t the sorting hat’s exhortation for the houses to pull together rather than to delete them from Hogwarts?
Ron’s comments are surely more than half joking. At worst, they show that old predjudices die hard. He comes from a line of old blood Gryffindors.
Matthew
Reyhan, Rowling has said though there’s a long shot she’ll write about the wizarding world again, she’s not ever going to write with Harry as the main character again.
Re: The Ron Discussion – I really do think Ron’s comments are all joking. All Weasleys have always been in Gryffindor, hence the first joke, and the second is obvious his picking on his own dad.
I can’t see Ron as a Voldemort redux – he doesn’t have the ambition, ability or focus. Not to mention the fact that he’s a pretty decent chap. He will definitely not be the next Dark Wizard. However, that streak of jealousy, combined with his knowledge of the whereabouts of the Elder Wand, could lead to a situation where someone manipulates him into pursuing the wand in order to gain more status or power than he has. It’s human nature.
Anyways, all this is speculation. All I’m really saying is that although JKR has hamstrung herself by showing “all was well” at the 19 year mark, she did not close all the doors.
I had a second thought about Ron’s comment, knowing what a joker he is. Maybe he’s really saying, “Won’t it be a good laugh on Dad if my daughter marries Draco Malfoy’s son!”
It seems to me that when things are going well, the job of the aurors is to prevent the rise of a dark wizard. In other words, to look for people who are just starting to get into the dark arts, and prevent them form getting too powerful.
I too was puzzled that Slytherins, with a few rare exceptions, either took Voldemort’s side or were passive. The fact that Draco named his son Scorpius sounds rather ominous too, but could be totally misleading. Draco did, at least, seem to be polite to Harry. But maybe that was because Harry was in a pretty powerful position? Of course, Draco also owes Harry a life debt, twice over. But we really won’t know anything about these circumstances, unless JKR chooses to fill us in later.
I was also surprised that there was not any participation from Durmstrang or Beauxbatons – Dumbledore seemed to emphasize how important cooperation was in dark times, but nothing seemed to come of it – at least nothing that made it into the book.
I don’t have any particular problem with these developments, I was just surprised. It was a great book and a great series.
Reyhan, you are right, things can change very quickly. But real changes take a lot of time.
I saw the Wall fall in Berlin in 1989, because that is where I live. I saw people cheering and hugging each other with tears in their eyes, no matter if they came from the eastern or western part of the city. I actually was one of them. It was simply great and brought out the best in everyone. A huge change for the better, quick, peaceful and completely unexpected.
Most of us get along well. But even now, almost 18 years later, the Wall hasn’t yet been overcome in everybody’s minds. It takes time, much time, at least one more generation, I think. In everyday life, there are still a lot of reservations and prejudices in many minds. Some people from the eastern part of Germany still feel like victims of a hostile takeover, bemoaning the loss of a better world. And some from the western part act like a smart know-it-all and look down on their stupid and dowdy fellows. Either of them believing to be the Gryffindors and the others to be the Slytherins.
If you equate the Soviet Union with Voldemort and his Death Eaters, fortunately, the people of Eastern Germany are not like the Slytherin students. Many of them resisted the regime and it was them who finally brought about the change.
Oh, how I would have loved to see at least one Theodore Nott or Millicent Bulstrode making up their mind and choosing what is right instead of what is easy! I like the idea of Rosie Weasley, Albus Severus Potter and Scorpius Malfoy becoming friends. But I doubt that we will ever know.
Good points, all. JKR did perhaps miss some very simple, very great opportunities to get to the unity issue. I think it would have been really difficult to add international cooperation to the whole mix of Book 7 without it seeming really forced. At the same time, it appears that Voldemort was still primarily a British issue, and he was taken down before it spread further.
Perhaps her inclusion of Krum’s anger at Grindelwald was her attempt to at least demonstrate that in every nation, there are those who will rise up against dark wizards.
But I do wish she had been more clear about the Slytherins. Given how quickly she gave us a Kreacher transformation, it probably wouldn’t have been too difficult to include some Slytherins – even some who had changed their mind about Voldemort – in the final battle.
In regard to the Slytherins, I think it would’ve felt forced to have any significant portion come over to the good side. They have just been painted too negatively by JKR, even despite her claims that not all Slytherins are bad. Slughorn did fight for the right side, even dueling with his former student, LV. So, that’s a start.
I think change will have to come gradually to Slytherin House. But I think it will come. After all, their high days of glory are over. The last direct descendant of Slytherin is dead. LV & his goals have been thoroughly discredited. And you can bet that Harry & Ron will be keeping a close eye out to make sure dark wizards are no longer what Slytherin is famous for turning out.
And after 19 years Harry “The Slytherin Hater” Potter has absolutely no hesitation in telling his son that if he were in Slytherin, he would be extremely proud of him. I think that is a powerful commentary by JKR that Slytherin House is not what it used to be.
Maybe unity was never a major issue for the author. Maybe she never needed to see the Slytherins rehabilitated, but was content to leave them muttering under their breath in the sidelines as the rest of the wizarding world fought evil. And maybe she never needed to see the elves, centaurs, giants, goblins and all the other magical non-wizard creatures enfranchised. Maybe she’s content to leave them in their marginal state because it makes for a more textured, if darker, world.
For me, the biggest question about the defeat of evil, which only a few people have mentioned, is the Dementors. Where did they come from? Why are they tolerated? What will happen to them now that Voldemort has been defeated?
I think that they – and the counterspell, the Patronus – two of JKRs most original creations. Their continuing presence shows that JKR knows evil is for ever, as is good, and as is the struggle between them.
According to revgeorge, “Of course, if one doesn’t come from a Christian viewpoint, then none of this matters. All suffering is pointless, everything just happens, randomness is all there is & at the end there’s is nothing.”
To me, this is a breathtakingly arrogant statement. While “love conquers all” is an overarching theme particularly in Christianity, people who belong to other religions do not necessarily think that “all suffering is pointless, everything just happens, randomness is all there is & at the end there’s is nothing.” Maybe not even all atheists or agnostics, but at least “a religious viewpoint” would have been a better choice of words.
On the topic itself, I think that it would have been completely unbelievable if all the problems that had been in place for centuries had “magically” disappeared. Voldemort certainly did not invent prejudice or dissension between the houses (although he certainly did exploit them), so there is no reason to believe that his defeat would eliminate them.
Leslie wrote, “According to revgeorge, “Of course, if one doesn’t come from a Christian viewpoint, then none of this matters. All suffering is pointless, everything just happens, randomness is all there is & at the end there’s is nothing.â€
To me, this is a breathtakingly arrogant statement.”
Well, yes, that is why Christianity has always been accused of being arrogant & intolerant. To say that Jesus Christ is the only way to salvation is not pc in our day & age. In fact, it wasn’t pc in its earliest history either. The early Christians were accused by the Romans of being arrogant & antisocial for refusing to acknowledge the cult of the emperor.
The Romans didn’t want the Christians to stop worshiping Christ but to simply make a civic statement of loyalty by saying Caesar is Lord. But those arrogant Christians wouldn’t even do that.
Coming from a “religious viewpoint” does not necessarily do anyone any good. You’ve got to take things to their natural conclusion. And in all other religions, you either, one, cannot have any certainty as to whether or not you have done enough to please God & be in His good graces, or, two, you’re simply trying to achieve nothingness or oneness with the spiritual whole. You’re trying to lose your individuality & personality & essentially cease to exist. But in either case, it’s up to you to get things done. Which means you’d have to be breathtakingly arrogant to think that you can do so.
This isn’t to say that people of other religious faiths have no concept of love or justice or eternity, etc, but these can all be discerned to some extent from God’s natural law. Example, creation tells us there’s a God; it just doesn’t tell us how He is disposed toward us.
As one theologian put it, all religions, except Christianity, are religions of the law, i.e. it’s up to you in the end to get things done. Which leads to two responses, the belief that you can get it done or that you cannot get it done. One leads to arrogance in one’s own abilities & the other leads to despair in one’s own abilities.
In light of those situations, suffering is random & pointless, or perhaps worse, suffering I experience is my fault. I’ve angered the gods; what must I do to get back in their good graces? And can that ever be achieved?
Sorry if my post offended you, but I don’t plan on retracting it. As a pastor, I’ve been called much worse things than “breathtakingly arrogant.”
All: There are forums for religious debate. This is not it. Stick to analysis of Potter, please. Thanks!
Reyhan–
I’m sorry, I just don’t read Ron’s character that way.
There actually is one good reason for continued House rivalries to some degree–Quiddich.
Trish, you may well be right. But I think JKR gives herself some “wriggle room” with Ron.
Actually a lot of people seem to have a “dark side”: the implication that Hagrid is less than discreet when he’s been drinking; McGonagall approval of the Cruciatus used against Amycus (as did I, btw, so there’s my dark side); Sirius’ unthinking cruelty to Kreacher and coldness to Harry when he fails to live up to his expectations; Lupin’s preference for adventure and derring do vs. taking on his responsibilities as a husband and father; Mrs. Weasley’s undercontrolled temper and tendency to harrass those she loves; Percy’s pompous self-importance; Dumbledore’s impatience with taking care of his damaged sister, etc, etc, etc.
Their flaws for the most part fall within the range of normal human weaknesses. But some of these flaws also present an opening for evil. A good example is Dumbledore’s yearning to use the Resurrection Stone to see his loved ones again, a mistake which almost costs him his life. He has other flaws as well, but I don’t have the time to list them and their consequences.
Ron is a good person and he fights on the side of good. But he has his weaknesses which make him vulnerable.
Travis Prinzi wrote,
“All: There are forums for religious debate. This is not it. Stick to analysis of Potter, please. Thanks!”
Travis, I figured that was the case & I was not originally trying to start a religious debate. Simply responding to what I considered to be an overwhelmingly pessimistic view of the end of Harry Potter.
Being new to the forum here I didn’t know how far to go in analyzing the religious themes in Potter. I apologize for it & will try to restrain myself in the future. Thank you.
revgeorge, thanks! The simple rule is that when we get to the point where the conversation has moved away from Harry Potter and into religious debate divorced from the analysis of the series – while it is probably a very worthy conversation to have! – we should move back to Potter itself.
While I think it’s a fair point that things generally DON’T change overnight, I’m still just a bit disappointed. Between SPEW and all the different warnings in OoTP, especially the destruction of the statue in the Ministry of Magic, it seemed to me that JKR was setting up the idea of strife within factions in the wizarding world, especially Wizards vs. Non-human sentient creatures, and Slytherins vs. everyone else (via the Sorting Hat’s repeated warnings), as being issues that would need to be faced head on before Voldemort was defeated, at least if there was to be any real, lasting peace after he was gone.
And as much as I liked Deathly Hallows overall, I still think I’ll have to say that that’s one aspect of the story where Rowling dropped the ball in the end. We really didn’t get that sense of a beginning to unity, and Harry comforting little Albus Severus doesn’t really count, especially since he practically turned around and nullified it by stating, Oh, but you can get into Gryffindor anyway if you tell the hat that’s what you want.
I’d been thinking we’d see a seige of Hogwarts ever since book five really, but I was expecting Voldemort would be bringing quite a few more giants, and at least a few goblins, centaurs, grindylows, and assorted other creatures, as Wizard mistreatment of non-humans came home to roost. And, certainly, I was very disappointed that we didn’t see a Nott, a Bullstrode, or even a Parkinson stay behind to help Harry. Slughorn really shouldn’t have been the only Slytherin staying behind, it would have been a much more powerful indication that Slytherin’s not simply a dark wizard clearinghouse than Harry’s comments to his son 19 years later.
And of course, afterwards, I really would have liked to see some type of indication or reform: Not setting House Elves free, but at least some sort of set of laws on proper treatment and rudimentary house elf rights, enforced rigorously by the Ministry’s star lawyer, Hermione Granger-Weasley, of course. Possible “peace talks” with Goblins regarding ownership issues vis-a-vis items crafted for Wizards. I also like the idea of perhaps using money seized from Death Eaters for building new first year dormitories at Hogwarts, where all students live until they are sorted into houses only at the second year, to give them a better chance to mingle and learn to respect and get to know each other before they go to their respective houses – in fact, Dumbledore all but told Snape this was the way it probably should have been done in his memories.
Certainly, we can’t expect the Wizarding World to come up sunshine and roses overnight, but since JKR bought the issues up in previous books, it seems like she should have made them a bit more prevalent in Deathly Hallows.
Jobrill, you make a lot of very good comments on how JKR set things up, or at least, indicating that such things like house unity & the treatment of non-wizards were important, & then she never paid them off, except in the most oblique ways.
I think the problem that JKR was perhaps confronted with was that to do all that, she simply had too much to do & not enough time. And to have put all that into the epilogue would’ve seemed forced. I don’t know. I think only JKR can explain it, & I’m sure there will be plenty of people asking her this over the coming months. It seems to be a very common question people have about the end of DH.
I would also have liked to see some of the Slytherins staying behind to defend Hogwarts. Rowling has spend a lot of time debunking prejudice, but in case of the Slytherins the prejudice ultimately seemed to be justified.
True, Snape was a Slytherin and Harry called him a brave man, who was on Dumbledores side. But Dumbledore suggested that because of his courage, Snape might have been in Gryffindor when he said “Sometimes I think we Sort too soonâ€. So he didn’t seem to be a typical Slytherin and the acknowledgement applied to Snape but not to the house.
One of Rowling’s strongest suits as a writer up to DH was allowing so much to unfold in the background of the story, or at the margins of the text. There are usually multiple significant plot threads running in these background domains.
But here, the focus in the background is almost entirely on the Death Eater takeover of the Minsitry and Hogwarts, with a handful of references to Neville, Luna, and Ginny running their own insurgency at the school. I guess my point is that Rowling could have certainly addressed these issues a bit more without allowing them to intrude on Harry’s “journey through the wilderness”. PotterWatch was a brilliant opportunity for such a thing.
I agree with everyone here that wrapping things up with a neat little bow would have been bad writing and would have made Rowling seem a bit more like Umbridge to me — shoehorning order into a place where it doesn’t exist. But, the issues are so central throughout the series that Rowling’s “nods” to them come up a bit short. The house-elves and the centaurs at the end of the books are written as a kind of 80s action movie cliche: the heroes are saved at the absolute last minute by unexpected allies.
Leaky Cauldron has just posted the transcript of a webchat with JKR in which she answers many of the questions we’ve been dealing with here over at Sword of Gryffindor.
She touches on the trio’s future, the ministry, what happened to some of the death eaters, who killed lupin & tonks, what happened to Umbridge, what happend to the dementors, how things stand with the house elves. Loads of stuff!
I’ve said on other threads that I found the epilogue lacking. Particularly the absense of any of the long hard road they needed to travel from Voldemort’s downfall and the 19 years later, “and they lived happily ever after,” epilogue. Maybe that was just my take on it, but I find it hard to believe that I’m the only one that saw it that way.
One thing I find curious is how many people, saying they found the epilogue wonderful, couldn’t seem to wait to see what Rowling said concerning the characters futures in the follow up interview mentioned by revgeorge. That would indicate a much higher level of disatisfaction with the brevity of they epilogue than most people are willing to admit.
I was one who was at first disappointed that the epilogue didn’t tell us more. On further reflection, I think Rowling was correct in her assessment that including all kinds of details would have turned it into an encyclopedia. I had all kinds of questions that would have been difficult to answer without making the epilogue an encylopedia. Rowling does speak about wanting to write such an encylopedia in the future, based in part on her copious (boxes & boxes) background notes.
Rowling has said a lot in interviews already to answer many of my questions. She did say that Hermione did help pass laws improving the status of elves. Keep in mind that the magic binding elves to wizards has been in operation for hundreds of years, maybe thousands. It is so thoroughly ingrained in elvish culture that they have absolutely no interest in being free. Changing something like that takes a very long time. Perhaps the first step has to be some laws humanizing their treatment.
What I did miss in the book was a closing chapter. It seemed like it ended very abruptly, with the finale coming almost at the very end. (Excluding the epilogue) There are only 5 pages after Voldemort’s defeat. I would have liked to see a chapter, just a brief one, showing some of the aftermath. How people dealt with the deaths (in Harry’s case, Fred, Remus & Tonks) & something of a Harry/Ginny reunion.
I also wish there had been at least a few Slytherin students shown willing to stay a fight against Voldemort.