Snapedom

read this.

Additionally, I will be (and am not actually comfortable about) indulging in stereotyping to write this. I do not mean to offend anyone by this. It's my attempt to make a point, and if it fails, I'm sure I'll hear about it.

Almost three years ago, in response to a post about why Draco was such an unsatisfying foil for Harry, I had this epiphany-type moment where I saw the Slytherins fulfilling the role of scapegoats in the Harry Potter books. At the time, my inkling was batted about on HPfGU but generally dismissed as not where the author was going with the themes of the book, presumed at the time to be House unity and not all Slytherins are bad/Draco or Snape will surprise us and save the day. Now that Deathly Hallows has been published, however, the bothersome suspicion about the role of Slytherin as a scapegoat has stayed with me.

Scapegoats are those individuals or groups on whom society projects its worst behavior and flaws so that society can punish these victims and not have to recognize its own unsavory or evil behavior. The scapegoat ritual was described in the Old Testament: "And Aaron shall lay both his hands upon the head of the live goat and confess over him all the iniquities of the children of Israel, and all their transgressions in all their sins, putting them upon the head of the goat, and shall send him away by the hand of a fit man into the wilderness: And the goat shall bear upon him all their iniquities unto land not inhabited." (Leviticus 16:21-2) The ancient Greeks performed a ritual similar to the Hebrews, but used people as scapegoats, especially those who were "poor, [of] low origin and useless, common and maltreated by nature, criminals, and those considered ugly." Scapegoats have varied throughout history, but are often from marginalized or powerless groups.

There have been many scapegoated groups in our societies, but the group with the longest and most persistent history of stereotyping and persecution in Western society is the Jews. England has a long history of anti-Semitism, from the outright expulsion of Jews in 1290 to continuing prejudice today. Orwell's observations on anti-Semitism in Britain found its existence at many levels, including literature, but the sterereotypes he found have shifted to fit the needs of the times. For example, a recent observation of English literature found a portrayal of Jews as effeminate sissies, a departure from previous portrayals where they were openly and threateningly sensual, if not demonic. Because of their history as scapegoats, the Jews in England will serve as my metaphor for the position of the Slytherins as a scapegoated group in the Wizarding World. The Gryffindors fall into the role of the self-designated protectors of the Wizarding World, those who take on the job of identifying and dealing with the scapegoats to preserve a peaceful society.

I am not saying J.K. Rowling is anti-Semitic, only that she has used stereotypes in the Harry Potter books as shorthand to emphasize the evil of the Slytherins, and these stereotypes happen to fit those applied to Jews as well as other stigmatized groups. I do not know whether or not she did this consciously. English literature, as noted above, has a discernible history of anti-Semitic scapegoating. Moreover, children's literature is often written with exaggerated characters. Rowling certainly wouldn't be the first English author to employ stereotypes to make a point. If she is doing this, she would be doing so entirely indirectly, and relying on her audience's encoded understanding of what makes a person bad when she uses the stereotypes.

Slytherins according to the Sorting Hat:

Those cunning folk use any means
To achieve their ends.

And power-hungry Slytherin
Loved those of great ambition.

. . . Slytherin
Took only pure-blood wizards
Of great cunning, just like him

Here is a group of people who are cunning, power-hungry, ambitious, and concerned with identity as determined by blood. The stereotypes applied to Jews have been broad and mutable, but generally included ambition, cunning, scheming, and behind-the-scenes maneuvering to control others. Other prejudiced beliefs are a concern with obtaining wealth and power; covetousness of greater society's respectability and beauty; exotic and even foreign appearance; strange, perhaps unknowable, but certainly alarming beliefs and practices; a tendency to prefer their own company (believed to be voluntary) and to network amongst themselves to the disadvantage of others; and moral worldliness if not outright lasciviousness or depravity. Wikipedia notes the following regarding anti-Semitism stereotypes:

"Jews were seen as hostile, cunning, and vindictive, but nevertheless weak and ineffectual. Cowardice was the quality most frequently attributed to Jews. Another stereotype associated with the Jews was their alleged propensity to trickery and deceit."

"Jews are not only partially but totally bad by nature, that is, their bad traits are incorrigible. Because of this bad nature: (1) Jews have to be seen not as individuals but as a collective. (2) Jews remain essentially alien in the surrounding societies. (3) Jews bring disaster on their 'host societies' or on the whole world, they are doing it secretly, therefore the anti-Semites feel obliged to unmask the conspiratorial, bad Jewish character."


The Slytherins - Tricksy Practitioners of "Dark Magic"

Who are these Slytherins?

The Malfoys are a wealthy family who influence the Ministry through bribes and flattery. They are the wealthy Jews who allegedly bribe and conspire to rule the world through influence. Purebloodedness is important to them; they are exclusive. They will lie about their beliefs, however, if cornered. They are slippery, secretive, unscrupulous, and untrustworthy. They spoil and overprotect their child, yet expect much of him. They are Jewish mothers, "sending strudel in the post to children at university." Draco bears the weight of his parent's decisions. He is the princely but put-upon Jewish son, trying to please his parents.

The Blacks are a similarly arrogant, self-contained family, fancying themselves aristocracy in a society that has no such thing. They are the Rothschilds. The pride of the Blacks, dead Headmaster Phineas Nigellus Black, who name reaffirms how black he is, is distinguished by being, "the least popular headmaster Hogwarts ever had."

The Gaunts show what happens when Slytherin exclusiveness is allowed its logical conclusion. They are the purest Slytherins, and thus the most debased: animal-like degenerates, echoing the most bigoted stereotypes people can apply to others. But while the men in the family are hostile towards civilization, the woman, Merope, actively covets the life of others. She goes about capturing that life through guile, but is too weak to maintain the deceit and, later, too weak to remain alive for her son (doesn't have Lily's courage). Her Slytherin child, heir to two inferior cultural traditions, is doomed from birth.

Horace Slughorn is worldly and pleasure-seeking. He is the disingenuous Jew who uses connections to succeed in life, the deal-maker, except he's not good at it -- everyone knows what he's doing. He does not discriminate among contacts on the basis of origin, but he is an elitist. When Voldemort first came to power, Slughorn fled to save his skin, a typical Slytherin coward. His greed leads him back to Hogwarts. He is barely competent as a teacher and openly chooses favorites, especially the son of the "cheeky" Lily Evans, with whom Slughorn was infatuated. Slughorn became a toady when it came to star Gryffindors. Slughorn hides a shameful secret in a pitiful manner. His greed leads him to unburden his secret to Harry Potter and Lily's eyes. Under the direction of brave Gryffindor McGonagal, he eventually fights the Slytherins. He shares characteristics with the barely acceptable face of a modern stereotype, the corrupt and effeminate, and ineffectual, Jew.

Severus Snape has the large, hooked nose found in Jewish stereotypes. For good measure, he is ugly, has greasy hair, and has crooked, yellow teeth... and doesn't seem to care. He is not like us, wholesome and strong! As a child, he is ill-clothed and exotic, yet knowledgeable, a budding geek. As a teen, he is an arrogant math and science nerd, socially awkward, disdainful of athletics, allegedly steeped in the arcane and dangerous knowledge of the Dark Arts. He is identified as a problem and targeted by the Gryffindor Marauders (more about this later). His feelings, described as greedy, for Ultimate Shiksa! Lily should lead him away from Slytherinism, but he is spared that choice as Gryffindor Lily judges and passionately rejects him. In reaction perhaps, or trying to find a place where he is valued, as a young man he is up to his ears in a Slytherin purist movement set to remake the Wizarding World, until a threat to Lily causes him to change course. He risks his life and throws himself on the mercy of the mighty Dumbledore, who delivers his resounding judgment, "You disgust me," then enslaves the emotional Snape with a promise. Snape remains Dumbledore's flunky for the rest of his life, risking his life as a double agent to spy on Voldemort's Death Eaters, without receiving truth or respect from Dumbledore beyond the condescending and useless, "Sometimes I think we sort too soon." Not to worry, though: Snape could not help continuing with his dark interests, or being unpleasant and superior, or being weak enough to hate the spitting image of the favored Gryffindor to whom he lost Lily, or being jealous enough to demand that Dumbledore share with him the information he shares with Harry Potter, the Chosen One, or being covetous enough to steal a photograph of Lily from Grimmauld Place. Snape eventually kills Dumbledore. Many readers thought Snape was a Judas figure when he did that, Judas being probably the most reviled Jew in the Christian world. But that wasn't enough: Snape has to tell Harry Potter that Potter must allow himself to be killed by Voldemort in order to save the world (but doesn't tell him Harry can choose to be resurrected). Snape is the Jew who kills the Christian god not once, but twice. Snape is mistrusted and betrayed by everyone, of course. As Rowling said in an interview about the hated teacher on whom she based Snape's character, "He deserved it!"

Other Slytherins include the dark Bellatrix Lestrange (who has towards Voldemort "a sexual attraction, she’s madly in love with this man and obsessed by him") and Barty Crouch Jr. They are some of the few remotely effective Death Eaters we see -- but they are Zealots. Andromeda Black may be a Slytherin. She marries a Muggleborn wizard and produces the spectacular emotional screw-up, Nymphadora Tonks. What we know of Regulus Black we hear from biased, third-party Slytherin dependents, so this information may or may not be trustworthy. Crabbe and Goyle are stock heavies, who nevertheless get the thrill of turning into girls, making them feminized and laughing stocks at the same time. Bad-girl Pansy Parkinson shows the sexual precociousness that is part of a Jewish stereotype, and the willingness to sacrifice the hero if it will benefit her group. Montague deserves to be disappeared into the Vanishing Cabinet, as he was taking points from the Gryffindor Twins. There are the comically inept miscellaneous Death Eaters, showing us that although evil exists, its followers are so rotten at base that us good folks can just push them out of our way, no problem.

Finally, there is Voldemort, who is a generic villain, not particularly well-depicted. Aside from an expressed ideology about blood and a desire to turn everyone into Slytherins, which surprised me since there was no hint of that before Deathly Hallows, and in spite of a great deal of background trajectory, Voldemort seems to be a flat-out sociopath. He seems to be covetous, but he's really just picking up souvenirs of his evil escapades like a good psychopath. He seems to be power-hungry, but he's mostly just scatterbrained and distracted by whatever new, shiny plan he seizes on. What offends me about Voldemort is that the author has him create a Pureblood movement modeled on Hitler's Nazis. This is perversely blaming the victim.

For the Slytherins are victims. No matter what they do, their mere existence places them under suspicion and causes them to be isolated within the Wizarding World, where distance perpetuates the negative stereotypes. Self-appointed guardians of society like the Gryffindors will always make targets of Slytherins, ostensibly to protect the norm. Slytherins will internalize this hatred, and in order to survive, be forced to find legitimate expression in the Dark Arts, much as stigmatized groups in our societies express themselves in the arts, or if seeking power, engage in political manipulation in order to be recognized, or simply try to withstand the hateful barrage-- as Snape had to do with the Marauders. In a world where Slytherins remain undesirables, you will always have conversations like the one between Harry Potter and Al at the end of the book. Imagine if, instead of being Slytherin, son James had teased his brother about being a homosexual (another stigmatized group). Imagine Harry saying to Al that he could choose not to be homosexual. How many in the Wizarding world would believe that? How many would believe that Al sorted into Slytherin would not automatically be either a crybaby cheater or a scheming power-seeker or a dangerous necromancer?

Slytherins were driven into the wilderness like the original scapegoats, although Gryffindor's Hat tells us Salazar Slytherin chose to leave Hogwarts, leaving his poisoned legacy behind for unsuspecting future generations not only in the Chamber, but in his House. Slytherin students persisted in the school, but by the time of the books, Slytherin seemed to exist in complete separation from other Houses. A Gryffindor like Harry might have believed Slytherins preferred this, but they may have been forced to band together against the hostility of others. In any event, at the end of Deathly Hallows, the Slytherins were certainly exiled as a whole by the Gryffindor McGonagall. They could not be trusted to fight against their own kind. By the Epilogue, the House is "diluted," whatever that means. It is "no longer the pureblood bastion it once was. Nevertheless, its dark reputation lingers." You don't say.


The Gryffindors - Self-Appointed Protectors of Society

If Slytherins are the scapegoats of the Wizarding world, painted with a shorthand brush similar to that which stereotyped Jews in previous English literature, suited to be schemers, infiltrators, and fanatics, then Gryffindors are the "real English," the uncomplicated, courageous, and conservative middle class. While Salazar Slytherin may have thought he was protecting Wizarding society by insisting on Pureblood students, Godric had a sword made to protect his English culture. Gryffindors are modeled on the fealty and masculinity of Christian knights. Like those knights, they have to be ready to prove themselves in battle, loyal to their leader and country, protective of women and the weak (House-elves, for example), and so imbued with faith they are unafraid of death.

The Sorting Hat:

...Gryffindor,
Where dwell the brave at heart,
Their daring, nerve and chivalry

the bravest were
Prized far beyond the rest

the bravest and the boldest
Went to daring Gryffindor,

We see many Gryffindors thanks to Harry being in the House. We are shown them warts and all. This includes Neville Longbottom with his forgetfulness and lack of self-confidence, Cormac McLaggen with his boastfulness, Dean Thomas and Seamus Finnigan, skeptics at first but later followers, and Lavender Brown, Ron's silly love interest. As far as we know, these Gryffindors prove to be brave and loyal, if not to Harry, then to the school when it counts. Their human frailties are revealed and forgiven. (For the Slytherins, the picture is much more two-dimensional. Slytherins use sneak tricks, belittling and ridicule (words not actions), extortion, and sometimes hard work, itself suspicious, to achieve their ends, and always show more of a negative than positive side.)

The typical Wizarding family, not at all like the dubious Malfoys, is represented by the all-Gryffindor Weasleys, a modest middle class group enjoying undistinguished domesticity. They endure a corrupt and unfair government, find themselves beset with foreigners, and are generally denied their due. Still, they muddle through with roistering humor, familial love, and the knowledge that they really are second-to-none where it counts, in decency. Arthur Weasley and Lucius Malfoy have an actual rivalry, in which it seems at first that Malfoy has the upper hand because of money, but in the end, Malfoy is emasculated. The Weasleys are not perfect or brilliant, but they are generally lovable, capable when it counts, and willing to put their lives on the line to fight evil. When they are inventive, it is supposed to be all in good fun, not to any sinister end. The eldest sons have very masculine jobs, Bill a cursebreaker, working with the treacherous goblins, another stereotyped group in the story, and Charlie, a dragon wrangler. The Weasley women are fierce yet nurturing, not sophisticated or deferential. The hero becomes a Weasley in the end.

The exception to the Weasley model is Percy, who appears to choose ambition and worldliness over family, but he comes to his senses, asks for forgiveness, and falls in line before the final battle. The Weasleys are the very model of Little Englanders, as depicted by G. K. Chesterton in, among other writings, The Flying Inn. Chesterton supplemented this with his view of the Englishman's true heroism, and soon-to-end silence about society's worsening condition under foreign influence, in his poem, "The Secret People." Patrick Wright has discussed Chesterton here and elsewhere. (Chesterton's writing can be enjoyable -- I've read all the Father Brown books and liked them -- but his prejudice is often quite jarring.)

Minerva McGonagal serves as the Gryffindor teaching counterpoint to Severus Snape. McGonagal is strict but fair, with a warm heart for trouble-makers, and ready to break rules where Quidditch is concerned. She gives wise and helpful advice to Harry, but treats Neville Longbottom with less than stellar concern until Neville bucks up and becomes a man. McGonagal rushed in to do battle on behalf of Hagrid against much greater numbers, and suffered for her courage, but was resilient enough to bounce back. She falls into the role of strong woman supporting her men, the primary purpose of Gryffindor women.

Hagrid, like McGonagal, is relentlessly loyal to Dumbledore. He serves as the incompetent teacher counterpoint to Horace Slughorn. He plays favorites, indulges in shady dealings, makes stupid mistakes, lets emotion rule his actions, and slanders Slytherin House. Even so, his heart is good and he is loved by the hero.

Opposed to the Slytheriness of Severus Snape as a student were James Potter and Lily Evans, the alpha Gryffindors of their day. The Marauders followed James' lead and were subservient to him. Sirius Black descended from Slytherins. No matter how he tried to repudiate this legacy through actions, his family background contributed to the willingness of others to believe him guilty of murdering his best friend and wanting to murder his godson, of deserving to rot in jail for twelve years without benefit of trial, and perhaps of being unfit to raise Harry. Remus Lupin was a conflicted individual, part-animal, an outsider who wanted to be accepted in normal society. We know so little about Peter Pettigrew and his motivations that it is pointless to comment on him as a character, except to say he was apparently a coward and thus not a real Gryffindor by definition. He may have been sorted into Gryffindor by choosing to follow James, as Sirius Black may have done.

James Potter and Lily Evans, however, achieved what it seemed Slytherin Severus coveted: recognition for achievement (Head Boy and Head Girl) and perfect, blameless, true love. The Marauders also felt Snape was jealous of Potter's athletic prowess and popularity, but that was probably ignorance -- after all, in their view, who wouldn't want to be James Potter?

Lily must have known Snape better, but it seems she "tolerated" the girly-emotional Snape until he showed his true colors, then she righteously dumped him on account of his Slytherin friends. She showed the same feisty Gryffindor fieriness and certainty that she was right that Gryffindor women do. And she was right -- morally questionable Snape inadvertently put her in danger, which led to her sacrificing her life for her son.

Ron Weasley is an actual knight in a chess game. He bravely chooses to be finished off so Harry can continue and win. Ron is the average teenage boy, trying to break away from his parents, concerned for the reputation of his sister, (probably because he is) eager to make time with girls, wanting to prove himself in sports. Complicating his life is his shame over not being rich and being second banana to Harry. He becomes a Prefect, then proceeds to push younger students around. In the final book, he is still insecure. He has to learn to overcome the anxieties making him weak, literally slaying the lying Slytherin artifact that seeks to prey on his fears. At the end of the story, Ron is "just folks," still cheating to get ahead, still prejudiced against Slytherins, but he is one of the heroes of the story, one who marries his high school sweetheart. He is not meant to be seen as bad, but rather as normal, one of us.

Hermione Granger was to be our Outsider guide to the Wizarding world, but she becomes an insider very quickly. She engages in some of the most egregious behavior towards others (Rita Skeeter, Marietta Edgecombe, even Ron Weasley) in the books, but it is lauded for it. In the last book, she spends all her capital to support Harry Potter in his quest, even mind-altering her parents. Nobody questions the justification for her actions in the books.

Harry is the archetypical Gryffindor knight. He does not waste time on intellect for its own sake or scheming for social position. He is not inappropriately emotional. He manfully holds back tears while giving vent to righteous anger. He does not pity himself for his deprived childhood. He is a boy of justice served and deeds done. He revels in athletic achievement and is at his best during acts of bravery. He treats women with respect, and holds a lady-in-waiting in his heart. He respects his Gryffindor elders, and is in awe of their leader. He takes command when needed. He is, moreover, a natural leader. He may lie, disobey school rules, sneak around, cheat, feel jealous, rise to a Slytherin's bait (only to repeatedly smash the instigator down), invade a Slytherin's privacy, slash a Slytherin in a bathroom, torture a Slytherin for spitting, sit on his hands while a Slytherin is killed, and taunt a Slytherin with a change he could not make, but through all this, although Harry is "not perfect," his hot temper shows his masculine nature and his heart is supposed to be good (and the Slytherins deserve it for being who they are). He is filled with love for the Wizarding world he sees in the Weasley household and the magic of Hogwarts. Harry's courage faces the ultimate test, the choice to die to save his world. He accepts his fate with dignity and overcomes it with resolution to return, to protect his world and make it once again normal. He becomes an Auror to this end.

He has to overcome Albus Dumbledore's patronage to do this. Dumbledore is presumably a Gryffindor, although that is not confirmed. Dumbledore is almost super-human in detached perception, without human concern for others. As a youth, in pursuit of a "greater good," he embraced the Slytherin values of ambition and ruthless power-seeking through his embrace of a foreign wizard. This resulted in tragedy. Dumbledore's thereafter abandons intimate relationships in favor of purifying his soul. This becomes a holy quest to defeat Voldemort, in a way to expiate his own youthful sins. Very little else gets in the way of that mission. Dumbledore lies, but it is in a playful way. He plays favorites, but it is in the name of rewarding the good. He manipulates others, but always to attain his lofty goal, to defend decent society as a whole, though he relied on one group to follow him with absolute loyalty. Dumbledore takes it as his right to manage the war, as opposed to Voldemort who works hard for that privilege. Dumbledore reaches out to other magical creatures, but Dumbledore rarely seems other than patronizing towards them and towards Muggles. Dumbledore boo-hoos the mistreatment of House-Elves by some, mostly those of Slytherin descent, but he is not against House-Elf slavery. He has a whole kitchen full of House-Elves at Hogwarts. He is laissez faire when it comes to justice for anyone. In the Potterverse, creatures find their own level predetermined at birth, which means the problematic ones are killed in the story. Who is Dumbledore to try to change fate? All he can do is pursue her.


The Slytherin Problem, Solved by the Gryffindors

Acceptance of predestination seems to be at odds with a Harry who offered mercy to Black and Pettigrew, and even Dumbledore himself, who seemed to offer mercy to Voldemort and told Draco, "It is my mercy, and not yours, that matters now" (jerk). Harry was a fool to offer mercy, though, as those offered the boon of forgiveness did not change their stripes. Dumbledore was merely taunting the evil-doers Tom and Lucius and Draco with their own weaknesses, and in Snape's case, offered blame and shame instead of mercy. McGonagall's throwing out the Slytherins and Dumbledore's telling Harry to ignore Voldemort's tattered soul reinforce the lesson that Slytherins cannot be saved. Character is determined at birth. Even shoving the wrath of the lord down their throats won't save them. (The exception to the no-salvation provision may have been Voldemort, who had a chance at redemption through the miracle of receiving Harry's blood, even if this special blood was donated against Harry's will. Because of this special blood, good Harry can offer redemption to Voldemort in their final battle. Voldemort is naturally too evil to repent. Just as any potential for good in Snape was killed by the Slytherin snake, Voldemort was killed by his own curse.)

Slytherins are a diverse group, as are the Gryffindors. In spite of similar behavior or similar expressed motivations, however, the Gryffindors are presented as having intrinsically good values while the Slytherins are presented as essentially corrupt. It's not as if Gryffindors are not jealous, ambitious, preferential to their friends, physically abusive to others, prone to cheat, power-seeking, or arrogant -- far from it, probably more-so than the Slytherins. It's just that when a Gryffindor is these things, it's supposed to be jolly good fun, or just a phase, or justified. If they step over the line, as Percy did, they get ostracized like the Slytherins. The best a Gryffindor can do for a Slytherin is to call them on their heinous behavior, as both Lily and Dumbledore did to Snape in no uncertain terms. The best a Slytherin can ask for is to be in thrall to a Gryffindor such that he might have been mis-sorted, an insult to his entire life. A Slytherin can risk his life repeatedly and still be judged as selfish and weak and corrupt. It's a profound double-standard, based on character.

Once a Slytherin, always a Slytherin. Look at Draco, who son Harry and Ron have never seen, but have heard of, of course. Does this mean that Draco has hidden his child away from the Wizarding World, teaching little Scorpius heathen Dark Arts and Pureblood ideology, while the regular people live their lives in the sunlight of a happy society? Draco acknowledges Harry on the platform, but the gesture is not returned. Why bother? Harry, the Gryffindor cop with three kids, is obviously superior to whatever Draco is, or is doing. Draco owes Harry big time. Why pretend otherwise?

While many benefit from taking the focus off Wizarding society's flaws and directing disapproval at the Slytherins, only a few step forward to actively defend the status quo. These are the Gryffindors, the chess master with his own Blackwater-type army, the Order/Crusaders, and later, the Aurors/police. No matter what they do, Gryffindors never have to apologize for their behavior, because they undertake dangerous deeds and are the righteous. If they happen to shed a little blood in a bathroom or expose someone in front of the school or serially harm Muggles and disappear one of their classmates in a broken portal, it doesn't matter, because they have god on their side. Their steadfast Gryffindor women will stand behind them all the way; they were not using Dark Magic, or if they were, they really had to because the Slytherin started it, or just because the Slytherins exist, if you know what I mean.

Scapegoating, or blaming the victim, is accomplished, among other means, by what Pierre Bourdieu called symbolic violence, the use of symbols to define the inferior group, supported by the construction of society using those symbols, where the group defined as inferior can only present itself using the symbols of the dominant group. (I was introduced to this concept through McPherson's post in COS Forums, no 396.). For Bourdieu, symbols are not only the conceptual means to understand and structural means to form the world (through language, myth, art, religion, science), but are the means by which a dominant group can retain its power. Power is reinforced through symbols integrated into society's political structure, such that they form the only legitimate means of expression and belief. What is taken for granted in a society is linked to the symbols of power. So, if we take for granted in Western societies that the adults we meet will be Christian in background, heterosexual, and working, then those who fall out of this expectation have less power and might even be seen by some as inferior or dangerous to society. (Is anyone voting on heterosexuals' right to marry? Does Obama have to clarify that he is not a Muslim? Was OJ Simpson's houseguest's testimony taken less seriously because the guest was a freeloader?)

A victim of symbolic violence is embedded in the same symbolic system as the dominant group, and thus has no separate, credible means of voicing opposition. Thus, proponents of same-sex marriage will present themselves as stable and reliable members of society. Obama presents as a reasonable and responsible Christian. The prosecution tried to portray OJ Simpson's houseguest as someone perceptive, not a flake.

Nevertheless, in internalizing the symbolic view of the dominant group, a person labeled as inferior often aligns with the stereotypes to become a self-fulfilled prophecy, an own worst enemy. When cultural misunderstandings exist and there is little opportunity to associate with people outside the stigmatized group, many embrace the values that reputedly define them and profess no desire to integrate with larger society on its terms.

This is the dynamic I see with Snape and the Gryffindors. The Marauders, guardians of the dominant group, reinforce Snape's inferiority through language, escalating immediately to bullying once they perceive that he is not willing to accept the stigma Potter attached to Slytherin. Dumbledore and Lily engaged in this symbolic violence, as well. Snape tries to express his condition with the language he has at his disposal, but given this was the dominant culture's playground, he may have felt the only viable way for him to overcome the symbolic violence of the Gryffindors was to not only learn their tools (language, magic), but assume the labels they placed on him and become a Dark Magic-loving Death Eater.

Snape is an example of someone subjected to symbolic violence all his life, literally being prevented from speaking over and over again, primarily by the dominant Gryffindors. In childhood, he experiences powerlessness in the face of indifferent (non-Gryffindor) parents who defined him as not worthy of care. His friendship with Lily, where he attempts to present himself as a special and competent person, contains accusations of his deliberate badness and Petunia's insinuations about his unsuitable family. On the train to Hogwarts, his attempt to define Slytherin as the House of brains is immediately countered by James Potter's anti-Slytherin prejudice. As a student, the Marauders try to physically suppress Snape's attempts to assert his legitimacy. Snape also endures the lack of support from Dumbledore and anyone else who knew about the so-called Prank. Meanwhile, Lily, who tried to maintain an inter-House friendship and felt she had to make excuses for Snape to do so, informs Snape (who was there) that the Pranks wasn't serious and he is becoming evil. Snape has no effective way of legitimately countering her assertions, formed through interaction with Gryffindor and reinforced through the segregated House system. Snape has been thoroughly deprived of speech regarding the Prank, and even remains so during Prisoner of Azkaban. There is just no way for him to express himself, short of Slytherin sneaking behind Dumbledore's back.

Snape's Worst Memory, as noted in the COS posting, marks the point where Snape evidences that he has internalized the messages society sends him about himself. While fighting the Gryffindors, he in fact confirms their beliefs about him. In SWM, he literally cannot use language to defend his existence. He is shown as powerless... and Lily notices.

Quoting McPherson:

And now on to the SWM! James and Sirius are here the members of the higher class, they are seniors. They label Snape as a 'dark arts lover' from the day one and this view cannot be shaken by the vassal, Severus. The infamous bullying scene begins with James's words "How'd the exam go, Snivelly?". Snivelly is the label here, renamed for the use when the rest of the society--the students are there. It is a diminutive that shows that Snape is a vassal, someone below the level of the Marauders and covers most of the 'oddball's' characteristic. It is a weapon of symbolic violence. From my second example we know that there is no good way for a vassal to respond, as everything will be used against him. So what can Severus do? He can stay silent, or try to fight back, to retort in a way that would free him, but he fails: he repeats just "you - wait", "you - wait...". This is the moment of linguistic and psychological victory of James and Sirius, because as Bourdieu says (from the same source as the quote above):

Quote:
Linguistic violence is never so manifest as in all the corrections, momentary or long-lasting, to which dominated speakers, in a desperate effort towards correction, consciously or unconsciously subject the stigmatized aspects of their pronunciation, their vocabulary (with all the forms of euphemism) and their syntax; or in the confusion which makes them `lose their means', rendering them incapable of `finding their words', as if they had been suddenly dispossessed of their own language.
(bolding mine)

This is exactly what happens to Snape. But poor Severus tries to fight back at all costs not knowing that his actions will lead him into state of total subordination to the Marauders... When Lily tries to help him, he desperately tries to show that he still is capable of doing things by his own and says "I don't need help from filthy little Mudbloods like her!"(p.648 Amhb)--it is a desperate cry to defend the last scrap of his honour. But what Snape doesn't realise is that by saying such words he accepts his role as an 'oddball' and 'dark arts lover'--this is the moment of definite victory for James and Sirius. According to Bourdieu (from the same source as the quote above):

Quote:
Symbolic domination really begins when the misrecognition (méconnaissance) implied by recognition (reconnaissance) leads those who are dominated to apply the dominant criteria of evaluation to their own practices
(bolding mine)

Snape succumbs.

In SWM, we see Severus having his mouth washed out with soap and being hoisted in the air by his own spell. Snape is not allowed to speak and when he tries, his words turn against him. Gryffindor dominance is reinforced. Gryffindors are the only ones allowed to define who a Slytherin is. How many more ways of pounding it into Snape's Slytherin head that he is illegitimate could there be? Even Lily, his supposed best friend, smiles at the demonstration of his inferiority. And after SWM, Lily finally turns her back on Snape, shutting out for good his youthful attempt to speak for himself and find a place of belonging in the dominant society.

She instead chooses James Potter, the leader of the Marauders. Potter is a Pureblood, rich, spoiled student, secure in his talent and popularity, given to hexing other students and showing off just because he can. He believes he had the right to judge others. As he ages and the outside world becomes more dangerous, he drapes a flag of crusading nobility over his pranks and judgment of others, but he still feels he can roam the countryside with a fully-transformed werewolf, endangering villagers, for fun. He is the face of Wizarding privilege, entitlement and dominance. A true Gryffindor knight, he covers his naked application of power and status with a banner of good. His actions reinforce the demonization and isolation of Slytherin in the Wizarding world.

James Potter and Sirius Black, perhaps in an attempt to disavow his own Slytherin heritage, target Severus Snape as the embodiment of Slytherin values. "Slimy, oily, greasy-haired kid, he was ... Snape knew more curses when he arrived at school than half the kids in seventh year, and he was part of a gang of Slytherins who nearly all turned out to be Death Eaters." (Sirius Black in GOF) By telling themselves they operate out of a higher purpose, the Marauders are able to make Snape an object and justify their animosity and attacks. The fact that they do this as a group lessens their inhibitions towards violence, and makes opposition to them risky and therefore unlikely. The fact that Snape stands up to them is a credit to his strength of character. Lily Evans stands up to them once, as well, but SWM was, in fact, as much a mating ritual between her and Potter as aid to a student she is charged to care for or a friend she already mistrusts. After SWM, he is still targeted by the Marauders. Pouring salt into the wound, he supposedly has a life debt to Potter, according to Dumbledore.

We see Dumbledore further cutting down Snape as a person throughout Snape's life. Dumbledore refuses to listen to Snape's objections or observations repeatedly throughout multiple books, openly undercuts Snape's authority, and makes Snape a figure of fun, notably in front of Harry Potter. This is the same Dumbledore who tells Harry Potter repeatedly to call Snape "Professor," yet Deathly Hallows brings us Dumbledore's expressed revulsion at Snape and disregard for his soul and finally, I still maintain, his life. What does Severus do to deserve this treatment? Was it "more the fact that he exists, if you know what I mean ...?"

Yes. Severus was a Slytherin, and an uppity one, at that. He never fully comprehended that he was inferior, that he couldn't succeed or that any success he had would be tainted. He didn't lay down and play nice with Gryffindors, or treat them as special. He didn't accept that Harry Potter was anything special until the very end of his life, when he had no other choice. As much as possible, he didn't compromise his values, even when he mastered the language and skills of the dominant society. He dared to incorporate other values into his personality, such as intelligence, loyalty, and bravery. He demanded respect. In spite of years of Gryffindors attempting to teach Slytherins they were sullied, inferior creatures, Snape headed Slytherin House with pride, judging by the House's standing before Harry Potter arrived at Hogwarts. Snape deported himself with pride as well, at least in public.

Yet, through public reprimands and in private meetings, Dumbledore tried to reinforce the message that Snape was lesser. Snape had no right to enter into Heaven. He killed Mary and Joseph through his words, words meant to betray the son. He was a god killer, whether or not he was the one who actually did the killing. So, when the savior, Harry Potter, arrived at Hogwarts, Dumbledore placed Potter and his friends above the Slytherin interlopers and awarded the House Cup to Gryffindor. The symbolism embodied in Dumbledore's treatment of Snape and the Slytherins is that of the superior condescending to judge the inferior.

Quoting Bourdieu: "Every power to exert symbolic violence, i.e., every power which manages to impose meanings and to impose them as legitimate by concealing the power relations which are the basis of its force, adds its own specifically symbolic force to those power relations." In other words, every Gryffindor who engaged in Slytherin scapegoating reinforced the justification for such hateful behavior in Wizarding society, and reinforced the inferiority of Slytherin. To quote the original post that got me off on this line of thought, talking about the Harry-Draco dynamic: "It's funny because Draco is often painted, within the fandom, as a popular boy with all the money and power lording over Harry. In short, he's supposed to be the bullying cool kid our nerdy hero has to eventually overcome. But from the very first book it's established that Harry is more popular, and has more money and connection than Draco. Whenever Harry and Draco conflict, Harry not only wins, he pounds Draco into the ground." This is because Slytherins are the scapegoats of the Wizarding world, the villains painted with traits easily recognizable to readers of most societies as belonging to stigmatized groups, the ones who are blamed for everything, yet are still too weak and cowardly to win.

For a short story or short book, this kind of stereotyping might be overlooked or explained as indulging in stereotypes that children would understand. For a series of seven books that develop this theme in detail, however, I feel it goes beyond entertainment for children into truly hateful attitudes that support lazy thinking, and even justify the suppression and "dilution" of whole segments of societies.