And another thing...

[angelophile]

On the Harry Potter again.

Question!

If every bugger that gets put in Slytherin house turns out to be an evil little git, why do they teach them anything in the first place?

I mean, if it was me, the minute the Leslie Phillips hat had announced "SLYTHERIN!" I'd be packing the little blighters back home to mummy and daddy with a note stating "Sorry, your kid's a douche."

Instead it's "Hi Slytherins! Today's first lesson! How to curse people and turn your enemies into a radish!"

Comments

[parsimonia.livejournal.com]

But Slytherins aren't automatically evil. They just value some things which contain the possibility of leading to evil. Ambition and resourcefulness, for instance. Not evil traits, unless your ambition is to rule the world and you're willing to kill people to do it.

The other aspect is that Salazar Slytherin kind of left the seeds for a culture of bigotry in the Wizarding World, and a part of that has lived on in Slytherin House. But not every student in that house is going to buy into it or follow that kind of thinking.

[angelophile.livejournal.com]

Well, yes, that point of view's certainly what was intending, but so far it's kinda been nullified by the fact that not one single Slytherin's appeared in the books who isn't a complete and utter little shit.

I could buy that if there was actually a good one or two in the bunch.

[argaud.livejournal.com]

The animosity between Slytherin and Gryffindor makes interactions between students of both houses pretty antagonistic, and them being kids, also petty.

Slytherin are picked because they are ambitious, cunning and willing to break the rules when they need. Notice Harry was almost put in the house. Keep reading, not all is what it seems :)