Actually, I do understand the interpretation, of course. It's all about pretending that JKR didn't totally write the Slytherins as baddies and cowards through and through, that she was being "complex" and anybody who actually believes what she flat out wrote on the page isn't reading deeply enough.
I can't quite remember why it was so important to try and convince us that she wasn't writing off the Slytherins. I just remember people pushing that interpretation. Maybe it was because of Phineas Nigellus's statement later on that Slytherin played its part?
But I recall there was a lot of discussion about this. Some (like me) were saying, "Hey! Where was that Unity stuff that the Hat said was so important? What about that stuff Dumbledore said about welcoming foreign students? What about the stuff where wizards were endangering themselves by treating over magical races badly?"
None of it seemed to make a bit of difference in the end. None of the "badly treated" races, cultures, or Houses fought for Hogwarts and the Death Eaters were still trounced in the end, because Neville killed a snake and Harry grabbed a wand.
no subject
Date: 2009-12-15 11:30 pm (UTC)I can't quite remember why it was so important to try and convince us that she wasn't writing off the Slytherins. I just remember people pushing that interpretation. Maybe it was because of Phineas Nigellus's statement later on that Slytherin played its part?
But I recall there was a lot of discussion about this. Some (like me) were saying, "Hey! Where was that Unity stuff that the Hat said was so important? What about that stuff Dumbledore said about welcoming foreign students? What about the stuff where wizards were endangering themselves by treating over magical races badly?"
None of it seemed to make a bit of difference in the end. None of the "badly treated" races, cultures, or Houses fought for Hogwarts and the Death Eaters were still trounced in the end, because Neville killed a snake and Harry grabbed a wand.