Have any Slytherins ever been trustworthy?

I was wondering...Do you think there have ever been any trustworthy Slytherins (excluding Snape who I'm not sure about yet)? I can't imagine that one-fourth of the British wizarding world is sympathetic to Voldemort. It seems there has to be some trustworthy, anti-Voldemort Slytherins.

What do you think about this?

I personally think Blaise Zabini's going to be. :D

Who knows? I bet that there has been some. For all we know, Andromeda Black could have been a Slytherin, I'm pretty sure it's just a stereotype. There are some nice Slytherins. I say this, even though I'm a Hufflepuff. :)

I don't think all Slytherins are Voldemort supporters. It's not exactly a requirement to get into Slytherin. From the description of the houses, it actually sounds like Slytherin really wouldn't be all that bad a house to get into, it just so happens that there are people like Malfoy that give them their stero-typical image. It says that people in Slytherin are very determined and usually reach their goal when their mind is set on it, usually be any means necessary. I think it's this trait that usually associates Slytherins with Voldemort because it's the one that take the "bad" routes that make them turn to the dark side, but I never really thought of it as a bad thing to be determined. I'm sure there are plently of anti-Voldemort Slytherins, but do we, as readers, really want to read about them? It's not very exciting for Harry to have Slytherins on his side, so it just adds to the confrontation in the books if only the Slytherins on the same side as Voldemort are mentioned. If there really are thousands of students at Hogwarts (as JKR says, but a lot of us are still trying to figure out how that works!), then we have hardly seen any of the Slytherins. I actually found it a little dissapointing that the people Harry named as being in the cemetery were the fathers of all the Slytherins we've seen, there really weren't too many others, I thought that was a little too predictable. I'm sure there are other Slytherins fighting on the side of good, but, as I said, they aren't really the ones that add to the books.

I think there are definitely some trustworthy Slytherins. You have to admit, though, that it makes for a more interesting story when JKR shows them in a negative light. Also, you have to realize that Slytherins will do what it takes to achieve their personal goals. Slytherins are realists. We don't expect any one else to take care of us, and we understand that If you don't fend for yourself, you'll get screwed. Taking this into consideration, you can see that it is a lack of faith and trust in others that bolsters our self-reliance. This is often misconstrued as selfish or even cruel, but there is a certain morality in this. As I said before, your own self SHOULD be the most important thing to you. This doesn't mean that someone with these beliefs would never help anyone, because that is not true. Slytherins aren't cold-hearted or incapable or caring for another person. On the contrary, when we care for someone so much, their interests become tied into our own. That is, I believe, how the pureblood families have remained so close-knitted. Slytherins don't let many people past their outer shell, but when we really care for someone, like a family member, we don't want to see them go away, so it is important to keep them close.

not all slytherins are bound to be dark wizards,right?

although they're in the house where most of the dark wizards were in that house when they were in hogwarts,it doesn't mean that all of them are bad people..it's very unfair to say that..

There surely must be some good ones, not all the baddies were Slytherins after all. I'm betting its a ver small amount though.

Well I'd like to think that Severus Snape is trustworthy and I dunno if its about trust. Im sure alot of them are trustworthy- its all about the cause

I think there are definitely some trustworthy Slytherins. You have to admit, though, that it makes for a more interesting story when JKR shows them in a negative light. Also, you have to realize that Slytherins will do what it takes to achieve their personal goals. Slytherins are realists. We don't expect any one else to take care of us, and we understand that If you don't fend for yourself, you'll get screwed. Taking this into consideration, you can see that it is a lack of faith and trust in others that bolsters our self-reliance. This is often misconstrued as selfish or even cruel, but there is a certain morality in this. As I said before, your own self SHOULD be the most important thing to you. This doesn't mean that someone with these beliefs would never help anyone, because that is not true. Slytherins aren't cold-hearted or incapable or caring for another person. On the contrary, when we care for someone so much, their interests become tied into our own. That is, I believe, how the pureblood families have remained so close-knitted. Slytherins don't let many people past their outer shell, but when we really care for someone, like a family member, we don't want to see them go away, so it is important to keep them close.

My fellow Slytherin! A pleasure it is to see you speak up on this subject. :cool: You are absolutely correct. True, us Slytherins tend to be very ambitious individuals and we will normally do whatever it takes to achieve our goals. However, it is definitely NOT true that we will resort to evil measures to get what we want. A good handful of us are that way and the only reason that there is a large following behind such people is because of peer pressure and influence of some degree. They follow because they can and maybe because they feel afraid for their own safety if they don't. In this case, they would fear Voldemort and the Death Eaters. Then again, you can also counter this very question with, How come there aren't any BAD Gryffindors, Ravenclaws or Hufflepuffs? Who said that ALL of them were good, loyal, well-intentioned wizards. That can not true. The majority of say, the Hufflepuffs, are kind and tend to avoid violence of any kind, yet there HAS to be a few wizards that are not, well, puffs.

In Gryffindor, for example, look at what happened to Percy Weasley. Brave and courageous the Gryffindors are, but ambitious and arrogant he is. Sounds more like a Slytherin than anything else. Then again, he could be under Imperius working as a spy for Voldemort or something, but that's just speculation. But, though I am reiterating what mattbufford said, there is always going to be those who aren't exactly what they seem. Since we are talking about Slytherin here, I'll be more specific. Draco Malfoy is a spineless twit and loves nothing more than hurting "inferiors" and possessing power. All Slytherins are sympathetic to having power, because I believe it's more prominent in us than it is in other houses. However, the majority of Slytherin isn't willing to go to such lengths as being a Death Eater to attain that power. There are other, less sadistic ways to get it. :evil:

Being in Slytherin should NEVER constitute an automatic portrayal of EVIL or TREACHERY. Many, like myself, have our own goals that have nothing at all to do with killing Muggles or Mud-Bloods or viciously stepping on others to get where we want. I will lay money that there are those in Slytherin who wish for nothing other than to make it big in the world in some way or another. Folks like the Malfoys have a twisted perception of what they deem is RIGHT and JUSTIFIABLE. I would guess that most Slytherins have a strong distaste for that kind of behavior because of how juvenile it ends up being in most cases. Sure, we can sympathize with them on a very minor level, but they go WAY too far. Besides, when it comes to those of our own house getting in a jam or failing in some area, we are just as prone to help out as any other house, but we usually do it only because it's the right thing to do and not because we particularly care for that person. Not all Slytherins are necessarily self-reliant and independent, but the vast majority are. Also, when it comes to Quidditch, you still cheer for your house whether or not you see them having a chance in the first place. But that's off topic.

The bottom line: Slytherin ain't all that bad and the rest of the houses ain't all that good, either. Period.

Cheers mates. ;)

If all of them became Dark Wizards, why don't they "chuck all the Slytherins out" as Ron says in CoS? Why don't they abolish the house if they all turn out evil?

A similar thing was discussed in the thread below, if not the same. But there was quite a lot of discussion, and i think you would be interested

Prejudice and the Slytherin (http://www.cosforums.com/showthread.php?t=10518&highlight=slytherins)

That's an impossible question to answer, because we don't know all the Slytherins. But it's a bit unfair to just disregard one house because of a few bad people. The traits are supposed to be cunning and ambitiousnous (that even a word?), with most of the members being purebloods. Having said that it was Slytherin himself and Voldemort that originally acted on these "pure-blooded" beliefs and got a bad reputation for themselves.

There are other people in Slytherin, people like Blaise? Other "black sheep" of pure blooded families that just went into Slytherin so it would mean less trouble. I seem to recall someone called Daphne Greengrass and it never mentions her or her family being dark. Are the first years who have just been sorted there evil? Just because they have ambition and are less "fool-hardy" than the Gryffindors.

There is also the fact of whether or not Snape should be trusted, which we can't really decide untill we know why he switched sides. And what about the other houses? We know the Pettigrew turned traitor when he was a Gryffindor, and i'm sure he's not the only one. Personally i'm feeling that DD might have been a Slytherin considering how manipulative he is - but that's just speculation.

What about Harry? The sorting hat wanted to put him in Slytherin so does that make him evil? He's the "saviour" of the light and could easilly have been a Slytherin if he agreed with the hat.

Saying that the Slytherins are evil and untrustworthy because the more outspoken members tend to be is like saying everyone in the ministry is corrupt because the minister and a few members are - it's untrue and unfair.

The answer to this question would depend who you ask because in the Order of the Phoenix Professor Umbridge considers the Slytherin students the MOST trustworthy students. If you judged the Sytherins by there Quidditch tactics one would have to say they do not seem very trust worthy since they are so sneaky and back handed and like to bend the rules when they think no one is looking. Though it seems to be the concensus with the posters in this thread that not all the Slytherins can be labeled untrustworthy.

As Dumbledore keeps requesting ALL the students to remain together as a group and stand as a whole against Voldemort, Dumbledore must have hope for the Slytherins.

Sarah

Well Snape was in Slytherin wasen't he. And although he may not be nice to Harry, he is not really a bad guy. He does work for the Order, so I'm sure there are some slytherins that aren't that bad and are trustworthy.

If all of them became Dark Wizards, why don't they "chuck all the Slytherins out" as Ron says in CoS? Why don't they abolish the house if they all turn out evil?

Did you not read anything that was posted in mine and cajunfry's previous posts?

This question comes from the assumption that most Slytherins are supporters of Voldemort, and I see no reason why we should assume this.

I think the main reason people think all Slytherins are evil is because of the "There's not a single witch or wizard who went bad who wasn't in Slytherin" line from SS. Now, just because Slytherin produces more dark wizards than the other houses, that doesn't mean that each and every one of them are bad. There is only a handful of Slytherins mentioned in the books, those Slytherins are what have lead to this stereotypical veiw. J.K.R. has highlighted this behavior but has yet to say that each and every Slytherin are evil Voldemort supporters... we just assume they are.

Some qualities of the Slytherin house are: wit, high goals, and ambition; I would hardly call any of those bad... Slytherin doesn't seem like such a terrible house to be in. The Harry Potter books have a big "choices" theme, just because someone is sorted into Slytherin that doesn't mean they are automaticaly evil. Gryffindor is brave, Hufflepuff is loyal, Ravenclaw is smart, and Slytherins are high achievers, and frankly I see nothing wrong with that.

Yes. JK has told us that there is 'one good Slytherin'.

This question comes from the assumption that most Slytherins are supporters of Voldemort, and I see no reason why we should assume this.

I think the main reason people think all Slytherins are evil is because of the "There's not a single witch or wizard who went bad who wasn't in Slytherin" line from SS. Now, just because Slytherin produces more dark wizards than the other houses, that doesn't mean that each and every one of them are bad. There is only a handful of Slytherins mentioned in the books, those Slytherins are what have lead to this stereotypical veiw. J.K.R. has highlighted this behavior but has yet to say that each and every Slytherin are evil Voldemort supporters... we just assume they are.

Some qualities of the Slytherin house are: wit, high goals, and ambition; I would hardly call any of those bad... Slytherin doesn't seem like such a terrible house to be in. The Harry Potter books have a big "choices" theme, just because someone is sorted into Slytherin that doesn't mean they are automaticaly evil. Gryffindor is brave, Hufflepuff is loyal, Ravenclaw is smart, and Slytherins are high achievers, and frankly I see nothing wrong with that.
You made a really good point, and it's something many people don't understand. It is very true that just because someone is sorted into Slytherin House, doesn't mean that they're necessarily going to become a dark wizard. The statement made by Hagrid in the first novel is a statement like the classic "every square is a rectangle, but not every rectangle is a square. Just because every dark wizard might have come from Slytherin house, that doesn't mean everyone from Slytherin House is a dark wizard. It is a logical fallacy.

Yes. JK has told us that there is 'one good Slytherin'.

Is that so? Then it answers the question. There would have been more earlier. Another thing is that no school would make a division between good and evil. Slytherins were never meant to be evil. anyway, we have not been told much about other slytherins to discuss much about it. A school is supposed to inculcate good into the children. Perhaps this not what is happening, but this is what is supposed to happen :).

crystal_joy is right, we only see the Slytherin quidditch team, Pansy Parkinson and Millicent Bullstrode. It is highly unfair, bias and stereotypical to say that to be Slytherin means to be untrustworthy. I think the whole Slytherin thing has been blown out of proportion - OK, there be may be one or two 'bad/evil' Slytherins, but they are bad because of the way they were brought up. If Draco had never been exposed to Lucius I doubt that he would be so much of a git. JK does not think that anyone is born 'evil', as she has said on her website, therefor I doubt she wants her characters to be completely evil (other than Voldemort). Human beings are too complex to be labelled, whether they are labelled good, bad or toad-like ;).
I'm sure there are some Gryffindors, Hufflepuffs and Ravenclaws who are just as mean as some Slytherins - it just doesn't make sense for all the other houses to be little-angel-:angel:-miracle-workers.

I'm sure there are some Gryffindors, Hufflepuffs and Ravenclaws who are just as mean as some Slytherins - it just doesn't make sense for all the other houses to be little-angel--miracle-workers.

Don't say that! :(. In sorting-hat.com i was alloted ravenclaw! Griffindor is harry's, ravenclaw, mine and hufflepuff qualities are not even close to evil! I guess there can be odd people but I hope not!

As Hagrid said "there wasn't a wizard who went bad that didn't start in Slytherin". He didn't say "All Slytherins are bad".

(Although it's interesting that when he said it Sirius was considered a "wizard who went bad").

Some slytherins are trustworthy but then again can you honesty say you can trust anyone? If you can't trust anyone who says if they are sltherin or not. I don't trust any of you because I don't know you and you can't honestly tell me your all slytherins.

But it depends on what you call bad,also. I mean not every slytherin goes about like malfoy or like tom riddle. If you take people with lower profile, you would need to define what bad qualities are. I mean, for example, if crabbe and goyle were not with malfoy, would you have considered them to be evil? Bad? I mean, we would think of them as fools, but not evil, probably because they are not intelligent enough to be evil. :).

Are all griffindors good? That too depends on what you consider goodness as. look at it from padma's point of view. She would be thinking of ron as a jerk. Is what she thinking wrong? We would say yes, ron is good, but if anyone comes and behaves like that to me, i would feel like her. I do not mean to say he is bad, but each person thinks of things differently. Perhaps if we were never told ron's character or emotions or his family much, we would be agreeing with padma.

What i mean to say is that good and bad qualities are not claerly defined, we define them ourselves, so what seems to be good from one person's point of vew may be bad from another person's point of view.

dumbledore seems to think snape's pretty trustworthy.

dumbledore seems to think snape's pretty trustworthy.

Now. :)

Matt - You did a great job summarizing what I said. I was so tired when I made that post, I wasn't sure if it made any sense. :blush:

Fawkesified - as always, I just loved your post. You really summed up the way people automatically label the Slytherins as bad and every other house good. And you're right, people are too complex to label as good or bad, there is always a gray area.

asrivathsan - I couldn't agree more... good and bad are abstract words that will be defined by everyone in different ways.

Now. :)

Who says the Snape wasen't trustworthy in the past. Maybe he joined DE for the sole purpose of spying for the Order. Who knows. Actually when I think about we don't know much about Snape do we...?

Who says the Snape wasen't trustworthy in the past. Maybe he joined DE for the sole purpose of spying for the Order. Who knows. Actually when I think about we don't know much about Snape do we...?
Dumbledore said he 'came back' to our side - indicating that he left it.

Dumbledore said he 'came back' to our side - indicating that he left it.

Um...interesting. I can see that still Dumbledore trust him fullheartedly. But Why? What has happened between them to give him such hope and trust in Snape. I don't know though, I still can't see Snape being evil. He is not nice by any means, but killing people? That just seems to much for him. THere is so much we don't know about Snape, hopefully we will learn more in the next book.

Or perhaps in Slytherin
You'll make your real friends,
Those cunning folks use any means
To achieve their ends.According to the sorting hat a Slytherin will do anything to achieve there goals, so if being trustworthy gets what they want then I guess they would be exactly that.

Um...interesting. I can see that still Dumbledore trust him fullheartedly. But Why? What has happened between them to give him such hope and trust in Snape. I don't know though, I still can't see Snape being evil. He is not nice by any means, but killing people? That just seems to much for him. THere is so much we don't know about Snape, hopefully we will learn more in the next book.
I'm sure we will have learnt more about the circumstances by the time the series is at an end ( :upset: ).

I think that we only get to know the "evil" Slytherins. there are more people in the house than we know, we cannot say if they are evil or not.

I think that we only get to know the "evil" Slytherins. there are more people in the house than we know, we cannot say if they are evil or not.
Yes, exactly as I was saying.

Yes, exactly as I was saying.

It makes sense though. We don't hear too much about the good Slytherins because the bad ones make them such a horrible reputation. I'm sure they are normal people that are nice. But of course aren't there a few instances where the whole Slytherin table is...nevermind, forgot where I was going. just kidding.

It makes sense though. We don't hear too much about the good Slytherins because the bad ones make them such a horrible reputation. I'm sure they are normal people that are nice. But of course aren't there a few instances where the whole Slytherin table is...nevermind, forgot where I was going. just kidding.
Then again, JKR has said there is one 'good' Slytherin, which makes it sound like there is only one. I hope this is not the case though.

Again, depends on your definition of "good". It could be an instance where standing up for what's right is what's considered "good", as opposed to sitting still and letting something go on. That doesn't mean that the others were "bad", just that that particular person, in that instance, was "good". Who knows? Could be that Draco has a change of heart and realizes his dad's a bigger git than he is, and turns on him.

Not likely, I'll admit, but possible. :)

I don't think there's enough information yet.

As Dumbledore keeps requesting ALL the students to remain together as a group and stand as a whole against Voldemort, Dumbledore must have hope for the Slytherins.
I think you're on to something. Just like the sorting hat. You don't really need to trust someone to work together, either. Its really about getting the job done, the job being survive Voldemort, and the students need the qualities of all the houses together to make that happen.

Again, depends on your definition of "good". It could be an instance where standing up for what's right is what's considered "good", as opposed to sitting still and letting something go on. That doesn't mean that the others were "bad", just that that particular person, in that instance, was "good". Who knows? Could be that Draco has a change of heart and realizes his dad's a bigger git than he is, and turns on him.

Not likely, I'll admit, but possible. :)
Agreed.

I would say I am sure that some have been trustworthy. To say that no one for 1000 years, like 40 new students a year(or whatever), and all of them have been untrustworthy??? I think that that idea is ludicrous. Actually Dumbly trust Snape, so in Dumbly's eyes, Snape is trustworthy, so I guess that answers your question, dont know if anyone said that before-

Then again, JKR has said there is one 'good' Slytherin, which makes it sound like there is only one. I hope this is not the case though.

I think that it is possible that there are many good slytherins who turn bad becuase they are followers and follow Malfoys lead. Think about it, they have been told they will turn bad, why fight the tide. So good people end up bad because they have no hope and can't aspire to anything else. I think that they just give up and only the strong of will can pretend they are evil and then leave and be nice people and keep their old school friends. Whoa! Just rambling away. But you get the picture.

I think that it is possible that there are many good slytherins who turn bad becuase they are followers and follow Malfoys lead. Think about it, they have been told they will turn bad, why fight the tide. So good people end up bad because they have no hope and can't aspire to anything else. I think that they just give up and only the strong of will can pretend they are evil and then leave and be nice people and keep their old school friends. Whoa! Just rambling away. But you get the picture.
Yeah that's probably right.

Yeah that's probably right.

But if there were ever any good slytherin's we would have heard about it. They would have done something and would have got credit for it. So I'm not so sure if there is good Slytherins or just all bad Slytherins I can see it both ways.

But if there were ever any good slytherin's we would have heard about it. They would have done something and would have got credit for it. So I'm not so sure if there is good Slytherins or just all bad Slytherins I can see it both ways.
It certainly is a confusing topic.

I don't think we would have necessarily seen the slyhterins get credit for good actions. Afterall, the books are in the viewpoint of Harry and the other Gryffindors around him. It's pretty obvious that they don't go out of their way to get to know Slytherins. They group them all togethoer (unfairly), and assume that they're all wicked. I think JKR will be showing us the good Slytherins as the books come to a close.

It certainly is a confusing topic.

:rotfl: lol! It is so true! :rotfl:

Well, there's active bad, and there's sitting by and not doing anything, which I think of as "inactive bad", but is more accurately termed neutral. Neutral by definition is neither good nor bad, so that could be what the other Slytherins are. And I think it likely, given that we know Slytherins will do anything to further their own aims... by reverse inference, we can conclude that they therefore will NOT do anything that doesn't further their own aims, which would include standing up for people they don't know or don't care about.

Well, there's active bad, and there's sitting by and not doing anything, which I think of as "inactive bad", but is more accurately termed neutral. Neutral by definition is neither good nor bad, so that could be what the other Slytherins are. And I think it likely, given that we know Slytherins will do anything to further their own aims... by reverse inference, we can conclude that they therefore will NOT do anything that doesn't further their own aims, which would include standing up for people they don't know or don't care about.

So are u saying that some slytherins are bad, others are just quietly good and therefore not really bad, but don't stand up just cause its not in their favor. Well that makes sense. I can see that.

No, I'm saying that they make the choice to be whatever. And in some cases, that choice is to be neutral and not take any action at all. Depending on your point of view, that could be considered bad.

I've been thinking and maybe JKR is stressing all of the bad Slytherins so she can surprise us when a Slytherin saves the day. I mean, every little thing a Slytherin does is mentioned...Is that really necessary?

I've been thinking and maybe JKR is stressing all of the bad Slytherins so she can surprise us when a Slytherin saves the day. I mean, every little thing a Slytherin does is mentioned...Is that really necessary?
Good point.

They've been set up to be the "enemy", so yeah, I'd say she thinks it's necessary for some reason.

I've been thinking and maybe JKR is stressing all of the bad Slytherins so she can surprise us when a Slytherin saves the day. I mean, every little thing a Slytherin does is mentioned...Is that really necessary?
I don't think it would be much of a surprise if a Slytherin 'saves the day' as you put it to anyone who has put thought into it.

Slytherin's probably were trustworthy at some time. They are not truly trustworthy to even their own kind. When it came right down to it they would do anything to help. Yes, Slytherins ... help. No Slytherin has ever or ever will be truly "evil" Not even Lord Voldemort.

You have an odd definition of "evil", then.

Slytherin's probably were trustworthy at some time. They are not truly trustworthy to even their own kind. When it came right down to it they would do anything to help. Yes, Slytherins ... help. No Slytherin has ever or ever will be truly "evil" Not even Lord Voldemort.
So....what would you say is evil then? Obviously we are to believe that Lord Voldemort is, but you say that he isn't. How exactly would you define evil?

Slytherin's probably were trustworthy at some time. They are not truly trustworthy to even their own kind. When it came right down to it they would do anything to help. Yes, Slytherins ... help. No Slytherin has ever or ever will be truly "evil" Not even Lord Voldemort.
JKR has said that Voldemort is evil.

there has to be SOME or else as soon as someone would be sorted into slytherin they would (if fudge was in charge and the malfoys were out of the way) just be gotten rid of, obliterated, if you will. and there have to be some gryffindors/ravenclaws/hufflepuffs who were voldermort supporters. and not everyone is good.

i mean, pettigrew was in gryffindor for some unknown reason. maybe he will come through for harry in the end....

I think that Slytherins like to be among other Slytherins so much that they always seem suspicious

It's also possible that people change over 7 years in ways the Sorting Hat cannot foresee. I know I've changed in the past 7 years, and I bet you all have too, and in ways you wouldn't think you'd have changed. So Pettigrew could have "grown out" of Gryffindor (for lack of a better term), and some Slytherins could either have "grown into" or "out of" Slytherin.

Wasn't Phineas Nigellus a Slytherin and also a former Headmaster. He was probably trustworthy.


It's also possible that people change over 7 years in ways the Sorting Hat cannot foresee. I know I've changed in the past 7 years, and I bet you all have too, and in ways you wouldn't think you'd have changed. So Pettigrew could have "grown out" of Gryffindor (for lack of a better term), and some Slytherins could either have "grown into" or "out of" Slytherin.


I guess I can see that but I really think that the sorting hat knows people better than they may even know themselves.

Tirza -

The Gryffindor traits are loyalty, bravery, chivalry - the Slytherin traits are witt and ambition... I may be wrong but I really don't see any of these traits as something people "grow out of".

Tirza -

The Gryffindor traits are loyalty, bravery, chivalry - the Slytherin traits are witt and ambition... I may be wrong but I really don't see any of these traits as something people "grow out of".
Exactly. You're not brave one day and cowardly the next.

Well, there can be changes in your life showing you that you'd better change... it has happened

Exactly. You're not brave one day and cowardly the next.
And anyway, all those traits are good. Why would you want to grow out of them?

Well, there can be changes in your life showing you that you'd better change... it has happened

Yeah, people change, but the characteristics of Gryffindor and Slytherin are very strong - and I don't think many people change that much in a 7 year time-span. We see that from the beginning Petigrew clung to people that could protect him, and it's only natural that he would turn to Voldemort during the war since Voldemort was in power - he was the big bad on the playground. Even in his Hogwarts days Petigrew didn't seem to have the Gryffindor traits, so this leads me to believe that he does have them, but they have yet to surface.

The quote I remember from the book is that There wasnt an evil wizzard(back when Vol ruled) that didnt come from Slytherin, that does not mean that no good wizzards came from Slytherin, I think that is just the perception. Now about the quote, thinking about it, that might have come from the movie, but I cant remember.

The quote I remember from the book is that There wasnt an evil wizzard(back when Vol ruled) that didnt come from Slytherin, that does not mean that no good wizzards came from Slytherin, I think that is just the perception. Now about the quote, thinking about it, that might have come from the movie, but I cant remember.
Yes and that quote was an exaggeration anyway.

Well, if EVERYONE from Slytherin was evil they could just put them all into azkaban after the sorting...

And anyway, all those traits are good. Why would you want to grow out of them?

I think a better question would be - if he did grow out the Gryffindor traits, what caused him to? There would have to be a reason - you can't be brave ond day and coward the next just because you feel like it.

I think a better question would be - if he did grow out the Gryffindor traits, what caused him to? There would have to be a reason - you can't be brave ond day and coward the next just because you feel like it.
Exactly. You do not grow out of bravery.

I think it's pretty brave to defy your very powerful friends and take over secret keeper and approach Lord Voldemort. Twisted, yes, but brave none the less.

I think it's pretty brave to defy your very powerful friends and take over secret keeper and approach Lord Voldemort. Twisted, yes, but brave none the less.
Skewed way of looking at it but I suppose you're right :tu: !

I think it's pretty brave to defy your very powerful friends and take over secret keeper and approach Lord Voldemort. Twisted, yes, but brave none the less.

I think it would be an act of bravery if Petigrew betrayed James and Lily because he honestly believed in what Voldemort was doing... but he didn't, he was just a weak person that was trying to save his own skin.

that's true, bravery doesn't necessarily mean you are good

I think it would be an act of bravery if Petigrew betrayed James and Lily because he honestly believed in what Voldemort was doing... but he didn't, he was just a weak person that was trying to save his own skin.
First, we don't know that, at the time, Peter didn't agree with Voldemort. It's possible that Voldemort, like Hitler, had convinced ordinary, albeit vulnerable, people to follow him. Pettigrew might have actually believed he was doing something for a good cause. Also, I can't remember, but does it ACTUALLY ever say that Peter was a Gryffindor?

I think it would be an act of bravery if Petigrew betrayed James and Lily because he honestly believed in what Voldemort was doing... but he didn't, he was just a weak person that was trying to save his own skin.
But bravery does not have to be for good. For example, one could argue that suicide bombers are brave.

First, we don't know that, at the time, Peter didn't agree with Voldemort. It's possible that Voldemort, like Hitler, had convinced ordinary, albeit vulnerable, people to follow him. Pettigrew might have actually believed he was doing something for a good cause. Also, I can't remember, but does it ACTUALLY ever say that Peter was a Gryffindor?
Actually we don't know. In an interview, JK was asked about James, Lupin and Sirius but the questioner duffed up and said Lupin twice instead of Pettigrew.

Besides... maybe Peter didn't really fit in but wanted to be a Gryffindor... Harry is halfway in Slythering too.. if he hadn'T chosen Gryffindor

Besides... maybe Peter didn't really fit in but wanted to be a Gryffindor... Harry is halfway in Slythering too.. if he hadn'T chosen Gryffindor
'It's our choices that are important' - not the way we were born or the family we were born into.

we don't really know that much about him...

First, we don't know that, at the time, Peter didn't agree with Voldemort. It's possible that Voldemort, like Hitler, had convinced ordinary, albeit vulnerable, people to follow him. Pettigrew might have actually believed he was doing something for a good cause.

I don't think he thought he was really doing good, but since neither of us have any cannon to back up our opinion - it could go either way. And you're right, it would be brave, in a strange way, for Petigrew to go to Voldemort with information.

Also, I can't remember, but does it ACTUALLY ever say that Peter was a Gryffindor?

You're right, we don't know for sure if Petigrew was in Gryffindor - but what is the likelihood of a three Gryffindors being friends with a Slytherin - maybe he was in Hufflepuff :)

Snape is trustworthy isn't he?

Well, can we really trust Snape? I would say yes, but there would be people saying no

I don't think he thought he was really doing good, but since neither of us have any cannon to back up our opinion - it could go either way. And you're right, it would be brave, in a strange way, for Petigrew to go to Voldemort with information.



You're right, we don't know for sure if Petigrew was in Gryffindor - but what is the likelihood of a three Gryffindors being friends with a Slytherin - maybe he was in Hufflepuff :)
Actually, Crystal, I believe that there is canon that Peter was not acting for what he thought was the best. In the Shrieking Shack seen in PoA, Peter says 'he [Voldemort] would have killed me' - nothing saying that he thought he was acting for the best. Anyway, I agree with you. :tu::D

I guess I can see that but I really think that the sorting hat knows people better than they may even know themselves.

At that moment and for the foreseeable future, you could be right.

But people change in very unexpected ways in 7 years. I never imagined I'd be married to who I'm married to, with all the other details that comprise my life right now. These are teenagers, so they're changing and developing far more rapidly than I have in the past 7 years (since I was 19), so it's possible that once or twice the Sorting Hat didn't see what was going to happen.

I think we need more information as to the nature of this Sorting Hat. :)

At that moment and for the foreseeable future, you could be right.

But people change in very unexpected ways in 7 years. I never imagined I'd be married to who I'm married to, with all the other details that comprise my life right now. These are teenagers, so they're changing and developing far more rapidly than I have in the past 7 years (since I was 19), so it's possible that once or twice the Sorting Hat didn't see what was going to happen.

I think we need more information as to the nature of this Sorting Hat. :)
I just don't think the Sorting Hat could have lasted so long if there was the possibility of it being wrong!

I just don't think the Sorting Hat could have lasted so long if there was the possibility of it being wrong!


Well, maybe just noone complains...

Well, maybe just noone complains...
In 1000 years :huh:?

Well, why would you complain once you are sorted, have your friends there and got used to it?

Along the same line, in a thousand years it's NEVER been wrong?

What about Wormtail?

well, anyways there have to be trustworthy Slytherins... or noone would ever like to be in the house... everyone would be like: "I'll never get a job being i Slytherin!"

Along the same line, in a thousand years it's NEVER been wrong?

What about Wormtail?
Why would Tom be wrong? And Dumbledore? If you mean the Sorting Hat, I don't think that it could have been wrong. It sees things about you that you yourself can't see.

well, anyways there have to be trustworthy Slytherins... or noone would ever like to be in the house... everyone would be like: "I'll never get a job being i Slytherin!"

Sure they would. The connections from Slythern. :)

I agree, though, the house would probably be much smaller if they were ALL like Draco, if for no other reason than that they all killed each other off earlier in life. ;)

Why would Tom be wrong? And Dumbledore? If you mean the Sorting Hat, I don't think that it could have been wrong. It sees things about you that you yourself can't see.

Yes, that you yourself can't see... CURRENTLY. But can it see into the future, and all the choices you have to make, and how you'll make them and how they'll affect you?

Seems like a lot for a hat to do.

Sure they would. The connections from Slythern. :)

I agree, though, the house would probably be much smaller if they were ALL like Draco, if for no other reason than that they all killed each other off earlier in life. ;)



Yes, that you yourself can't see... CURRENTLY. But can it see into the future, and all the choices you have to make, and how you'll make them and how they'll affect you?

Seems like a lot for a hat to do.
No, it can't see the future :huh:, but it can see your blood. Or in Harry's case you're transferred powers.

No, it can't see the future :huh:, but it can see your blood. Or in Harry's case you're transferred powers.

But blood doesn't always tell. Take Sirius Black, for instance. He was related to DEs, but he fought for The Other Side (TM). ;)

In most cases, that'd probably work. I still don't think it could be right 100% of the time, though.

But blood doesn't always tell. Take Sirius Black, for instance. He was related to DEs, but he fought for The Other Side (TM). ;)

In most cases, that'd probably work. I still don't think it could be right 100% of the time, though.
Yes but that can't work for Voldemort having Slytherin's blood. It would just think 'oh you have Slytherin's blood - into Slytherin you go'.

Yes but that can't work for Voldemort having Slytherin's blood. It would just think 'oh you have Slytherin's blood - into Slytherin you go'.

Wait... huh? *furrowed brow, scratching head*
Can you rephrase that for me? I'm not getting what you're saying.

Wait... huh? *furrowed brow, scratching head*
Can you rephrase that for me? I'm not getting what you're saying.
Don't worry, I'm just as confused! :no:

Don't worry, I'm just as confused! :no:

*laughs* Oh, good. It's not just me.

no they have always been rotten, just like the time malfoy said "i have a broken arm". yeah right. if he has ever had a broken arm then i am a flubber worm.

no they have always been rotten, just like the time malfoy said "i have a broken arm". yeah right. if he has ever had a broken arm then i am a flubber worm.

Who in the... wha? *is confused again*

What does Draco having or not having a broken arm have to do with anything? *is perplexed and puzzled and kerflummoxed*

Well, Draco might have been lieing about that... but wouldn'T Madame Pomfrey notice? :huh:

no they have always been rotten, just like the time malfoy said "i have a broken arm". yeah right. if he has ever had a broken arm then i am a flubber worm.

Basing your view of Slytherins on Draco Malfoy is like saying that all Americans are murderers because Jeffrey Dahmer was.

Basing your view of Slytherins on Draco Malfoy is like saying that all Americans are murderers because Jeffrey Dahmer was.

i never said that all americans are merdurars

i never said that all americans are merdurars

I know... I said it was like saying all americans are murderers just because some are.

I know... I said it was like saying all americans are murderers just because some are.


well i should have not said all of them but most of them do come out to be dark wizards. i guess milicent bulstrode could not be that bad though so i guess that all slytherines can not be that bad mate.

Noone has said anything about my Phineas Nigellus post. You all don't think that he was a trustworthy Slytherin?

Noone has said anything about my Phineas Nigellus post. You all don't think that he was a trustworthy Slytherin?


i think that he was probally trustworthy, but heck i did not even know that he was a slytherine.

Noone has said anything about my Phineas Nigellus post. You all don't think that he was a trustworthy Slytherin?

I didn't even see your post about Phineas... sorry. I agree, to be Headmaster at Hogwarts he must have been somewhat trustworthy. Who appoints the Headmaster anyway... the Minister of Magic or the School Govenors?

I've been thinking and maybe JKR is stressing all of the bad Slytherins so she can surprise us when a Slytherin saves the day. I mean, every little thing a Slytherin does is mentioned...Is that really necessary?

I think that's a really good point. Setting us all up for a nice twist! But of course, not EVERY little thing a Slytherin does is mentioned. How do you think they get as many house points as they do?? (Without Snape's assistance) They must do things right and they must do things well to get their points. There very well could be acts of generosity or kindness that gets them points, but we don't know that for sure.



I think it's pretty brave to defy your very powerful friends and take over secret keeper and approach Lord Voldemort. Twisted, yes, but brave none the less.

Twisted, my friend?? I think not. It's realist thinking and logical reasoning. If they can't grasp our sense of reality in conversation, then they are fluffy conformists with no backbone. You make good points and I don't think that you should ever lower the confidence of your arguments. True, this is only speculation. However, we have no evidence that is really conclusive to support your opinion. Nevertheless, it was well said.



But bravery does not have to be for good. For example, one could argue that suicide bombers are brave.

YES!



no they have always been rotten, just like the time malfoy said "i have a broken arm". yeah right. if he has ever had a broken arm then i am a flubber worm.

What the hell are you talking about man? I assume you are answering the topic question of this thread 'Have any Slytherins ever been trustworthy?' Since I figure that you were, I have a question for you. You stated that they have 'always' been rotten and then follow up with an irrelevant example that really doesn't support your opening argument. How, may I ask, does this constitute for EVERYONE in Slytherin being rotten? I would hope to see some insight and supporting arguments on this, otherwise, it's unnecessary to even waste forum space on this. Thanks.



I didn't even see your post about Phineas... sorry. I agree, to be Headmaster at Hogwarts he must have been somewhat trustworthy. Who appoints the Headmaster anyway... the Minister of Magic or the School Govenors?

I would think both, since Hogwarts IS the only wizarding school in Britain (that we know of) and therefore, the Ministry of Magic would obviously have a say in how their only school is to be run. Also, the School Governors would have larger say in the matter because, after all, they are the highest officials of the school. I think that both the Governors and the Ministry collaborate to appoint who they deem best for the job of Headmaster. It's my educated guess.

And regarding Phineas Nigellus.....well, I would have to say that he would be trustworthy enough to win the blessings of the Ministry and the Governors, Slytherin or not.

I would say yes!!! Not every slytherin is going to be a liar just like others houses arent always going to have the exact house characteristics. There are proabably some slytherins that are really good people but possess some other quality of slytherin. Do we really know what the all of slytherin is like we see a lot of draco and his buddies and his girlf riend but beyound that we dont see a whole lot of what others are like. Obviously their are still going to be rivalriers in the house cup and quidditch cup but how do we know there arent any slytherin loyal to harry but out of fear for draco and his family they remain nutrual or act as if they are the same. Some slytherins had to do good things just like wizards/witches fromt he other houses.

Twisted, my friend?? I think not. It's realist thinking and logical reasoning. If they can't grasp our sense of reality in conversation, then they are fluffy conformists with no backbone. You make good points and I don't think that you should ever lower the confidence of your arguments. True, this is only speculation. However, we have no evidence that is really conclusive to support your opinion. Nevertheless, it was well said.
Very flattering, thank you, but I can't say I fully agree. I'm not sure how logical or realist it is to betray James and Lily Potter, Sirius Black, Remus Lupin, and Albus Dumbledore. Also, we don't know if Peter was in Slytherin or not. We really have no clue. Anyway, there's nothing wimpy about being a caring person sometimes. I definitely exhibit most of the attributes of a Slytherin: I'm witty, very ambitious, set high goals, and I use logical reasoning to accomplish what I want. However, that doesn't mean that I would necessarily back-stab someone just for the heck of it. There had to have been another motive behind Peter's betrayal, and I really hope we learn what it is in future books.

:slyth: How about Snape he was a Slytherin and is the teacher that heads their house. Appearantly dumbledore trust him.

I'm sure there is going to be a trustworthy Slytherin. The houses need to unite somehow. I would guess that one of the "trustworthy" Slytherin's will be of help in uniting the four houses. I have no idea who it could be, but Blaise Z. would probably be a good guess. Since we don't here too much about descent Slytherins, I think it will be a nice change to see one who isn't such a pain.
I do wonder why this person hasn't come out by now though. All of the Slytherin students seem to keep to themselves. I suppose that they could just be scarred to find friends outside of thier own house (perhaps Malfoy and others like him have told them that they will get hexed or cursed, it isn't a far stretch seeing as his father as pulled out that line before). Now that they have heard what the hat has had to say maybe one of them or even a few will grow some courage and go against the bullies of Slytherin.

Of course there are trustworthy Slytherins. I'm sure most of them have been quite ordinary, if a little more self-perserving and self-serving than their classmates in the other houses.

Very flattering, thank you, but I can't say I fully agree. I'm not sure how logical or realist it is to betray James and Lily Potter, Sirius Black, Remus Lupin, and Albus Dumbledore. Also, we don't know if Peter was in Slytherin or not. We really have no clue. Anyway, there's nothing wimpy about being a caring person sometimes. I definitely exhibit most of the attributes of a Slytherin: I'm witty, very ambitious, set high goals, and I use logical reasoning to accomplish what I want. However, that doesn't mean that I would necessarily back-stab someone just for the heck of it. There had to have been another motive behind Peter's betrayal, and I really hope we learn what it is in future books.

When I said logical and realist, I was actually referring to just your train of thought, and not so much as the actual details in which it consisted of. I understand how my words could be seen in the way you did, and I do apologize.

I'm thinking that we will definitely find out more about Peter Pettigrew in the last two books. I think it's kind of necessary, really. I mean, we know so much about the other three Marauders that it would feel a bit unfair to just skip good 'ol Wormtail (sarcasm....). Besides, he is now Voldemort's personal puppet and lap dog, so we should know more about him anyway.

When I said logical and realist, I was actually referring to just your train of thought, and not so much as the actual details in which it consisted of. I understand how my words could be seen in the way you did, and I do apologize.

I'm thinking that we will definitely find out more about Peter Pettigrew in the last two books. I think it's kind of necessary, really. I mean, we know so much about the other three Marauders that it would feel a bit unfair to just skip good 'ol Wormtail (sarcasm....). Besides, he is now Voldemort's personal puppet and lap dog, so we should know more about him anyway.
That's very true, and there's no need to apologize. You did nothing wrong. :)

I'm sure there is going to be a trustworthy Slytherin. The houses need to unite somehow. I would guess that one of the "trustworthy" Slytherin's will be of help in uniting the four houses. I have no idea who it could be, but Blaise Z. would probably be a good guess. Since we don't here too much about descent Slytherins, I think it will be a nice change to see one who isn't such a pain.
I do wonder why this person hasn't come out by now though. All of the Slytherin students seem to keep to themselves. I suppose that they could just be scarred to find friends outside of thier own house (perhaps Malfoy and others like him have told them that they will get hexed or cursed, it isn't a far stretch seeing as his father as pulled out that line before). Now that they have heard what the hat has had to say maybe one of them or even a few will grow some courage and go against the bullies of Slytherin.

I agree. You make very good points.

I find the idea of ALL of the Slytherins being evil or for Voldemort (or just not good people in general) absolutely LUDICROUS!! For some people to actually think this is really narrow-minded and retarded. True, not a whole lot of Slytherins are good people, but cmon. The whole lot??? Bloody RIDIKULUS!!!!!

I think that's a really good point. Setting us all up for a nice twist! But of course, not EVERY little thing a Slytherin does is mentioned. How do you think they get as many house points as they do?? (Without Snape's assistance) They must do things right and they must do things well to get their points. There very well could be acts of generosity or kindness that gets them points, but we don't know that for sure.
I know...I was obviously exaggerating. What I was referring to was the parts where the Slytherins "glared at Harry" and did other unfriendly things in the hallway. I mean, what do you think they would do? Smile and pat Harry on the back?

But thanks for the compliment. :tu::lol:

no they have always been rotten, just like the time malfoy said "i have a broken arm". yeah right. if he has ever had a broken arm then i am a flubber worm.
I must disagree. Not all Slytherins can be 'rotten'. It would be a) a terrible moral lesson and b) imposible. Impossible because if they were all 'bad' then no-one would want to be in Slytherin, employ a Slytherin or trust a Slytherin. There is also the fact that they would just be rounded up and jailed and that would be very George Bush.

Well, Draco might have been lieing about that... but wouldn'T Madame Pomfrey notice? :huh:
He admitted he was lying. How could Madam Pomfrey have proved that his arm wasn't sore.

Basing your view of Slytherins on Draco Malfoy is like saying that all Americans are murderers because Jeffrey Dahmer was.
Exactly! Excellent example!

i never said that all americans are merdurars
It was a figure of speech.

well i should have not said all of them but most of them do come out to be dark wizards. i guess milicent bulstrode could not be that bad though so i guess that all slytherines can not be that bad mate.
How do you know that most Slytherins become Dark wizards? We have seen what... four Slytherins in Harry's year? And vaguely we have seen the Slytherin quidditch team. We have also seen Snape, Malfoy senior and Phineas Nigellus, so we can't judge.

Noone has said anything about my Phineas Nigellus post. You all don't think that he was a trustworthy Slytherin?
He seems to be trustworthy, although he looks out for himself.

:slyth: How about Snape he was a Slytherin and is the teacher that heads their house. Appearantly dumbledore trust him.
We don't know about him though.

I have no idea who it could be, but Blaise Z. would probably be a good guess.
How can you say that - we know absolutely nothing about him!

I agree. You make very good points.

I find the idea of ALL of the Slytherins being evil or for Voldemort (or just not good people in general) absolutely LUDICROUS!! For some people to actually think this is really narrow-minded and retarded. True, not a whole lot of Slytherins are good people, but cmon. The whole lot??? Bloody RIDIKULUS!!!!!
Well said!

I know...I was obviously exaggerating. What I was referring to was the parts where the Slytherins "glared at Harry" and did other unfriendly things in the hallway. I mean, what do you think they would do? Smile and pat Harry on the back?

Well even if one or two tripped Harry up, he would not have thought 'Most Slytherins are not tripping me up, but one or two are'. I don't think all of them would have!

I also think that people are wasting their time thinking about who the 'decent' Slytherin could be. It is absolutely ridiculus to think that there is 'one good Slytherin'. There is not a set number, it changes all the time as students come and leave. That is like saying 15 Gryffindors are brave :huh:.

As I decided yesterday this topic is very confusing, but I've thought about it over the night and decided that there is different levels of evil. And so some of the Slytherins are just pure evil. Others are sort of evil and there are some Slytherins who are just a little evil. And maybe we get to see one of those slytherins that are just a little evil and maybe that is the one of the good slytherins. who knows.

As I decided yesterday this topic is very confusing, but I've thought about it over the night and decided that there is different levels of evil. And so some of the Slytherins are just pure evil. Others are sort of evil and there are some Slytherins who are just a little evil. And maybe we get to see one of those slytherins that are just a little evil and maybe that is the one of the good slytherins. who knows.
It really depends on your definition of evil, doesn't it? Would you say that Malfoy junior was evil? Probably yes. I would not - I don't think bullying other pupils is 'bad' enough to be refered to as 'evil'!

It really depends on your definition of evil, doesn't it? Would you say that Malfoy junior was evil? Probably yes. I would not - I don't think bullying other pupils is 'bad' enough to be reffered to as 'evil'!
Draco has been influenced by his parents his whole entire life. I'd say Lucius Malfoy is evil because he made his choices by himself but Draco? I don't think Draco is old enough to be considered "evil."l Dumbledore said that it is our choices that make us who we are and I don't think Draco has made enough truly independent choices to be deemed evil.

Draco has been influenced by his parents his whole entire life. I'd say Lucius Malfoy is evil because he made his choices by himself but Draco? I don't think Draco is old enough to be considered "evil."l Dumbledore said that it is our choices that make us who we are and I don't think Draco has made enough truly independent choices to be deemed evil.
Exactly.

Draco has been influenced by his parents his whole entire life. I'd say Lucius Malfoy is evil because he made his choices by himself but Draco? I don't think Draco is old enough to be considered "evil."l Dumbledore said that it is our choices that make us who we are and I don't think Draco has made enough truly independent choices to be deemed evil.

So wait are you saying that Draco could have to power to become good?

So wait are you saying that Draco could have to power to become good?
No, we are saying he is not evil.

No, we are saying he is not evil.

lol! I guess I didn't mean to say evil, maybe just levels of Bad and evil in Slytherin. I think that some of Malfoys choices are bad. He wants to Help umbridge do mean things, and this path leads him to evil. So I think that in a way he is heading the same place as his father.

Yes. JK has told us that there is 'one good Slytherin'.

i think mabe in Dracos detour that draco ma become good *hopeful face*

i think mabe in Dracos detour that draco ma become good *hopeful face*

Anything's possible. Probable? That's a little different.

I do hope that something happens to show Draco that he's an insufferable little snot and he has no reason to be. His father got where he was by bribery and blackmail, and that's not anything to be proud of.

I have hope for the little snot to improve. But turning "good"? I'm not holding my breath.

lol! I guess I didn't mean to say evil, maybe just levels of Bad and evil in Slytherin. I think that some of Malfoys choices are bad. He wants to Help umbridge do mean things, and this path leads him to evil. So I think that in a way he is heading the same place as his father.
I do agree that some of Malfoy's choices are bad but then again, so are some of Harry's. We have to remember that we are restricted by the "Harry filter," meaning everything we see is how Harry perceives it. If the stories were called "Draco Malfoy and the _______" I'm sure we would see everything totally in a different light, perhaps even agree with some of Draco's choices. Knowing his background, I doubt anyone could be that different from what Draco is now. "Pure-Blood Supremacy" is all he has heard in his entire life and I know in his place, it would be hard to believe anything on the contrary. If your father was a DE, wouldn't you think that was a respectable job, at least until you were a lot older and recognized the faults of it?

I'm not saying Draco is an angel but that it isn't really his fault for a lot of the things that he has done.

I do agree that some of Malfoy's choices are bad but then again, so are some of Harry's. We have to remember that we are restricted by the "Harry filter," meaning everything we see is how Harry perceives it. If the stories were called "Draco Malfoy and the _______" I'm sure we would see everything totally in a different light, perhaps even agree with some of Draco's choices. Knowing his background, I doubt anyone could be that different from what Draco is now. "Pure-Blood Supremacy" is all he has heard in his entire life and I know in his place, it would be hard to believe anything on the contrary. If your father was a DE, wouldn't you think that was a respectable job, at least until you were a lot older and recognized the faults of it?

I'm not saying Draco is an angel but that it isn't really his fault for a lot of the things that he has done.

Beautifully said my Ravenclaw friend! The fact that we do indeed see everything from Harry's POV is monumentous in determining what exactly it is that we are being led to believe about the Slytherins. I wholeheartedly believe that Draco isn't as much of an evil git as he is made out to be (in Potter's POV). Sure, he may be a jerk in the first place, but when you add the likely possibility of him being brainwashed and made to do certain things, then it just compounds the situation and therefore you end up with an supposedly evil little twit. I believe this to be so, and, in thinking such, I don't really agree with people who say that Draco as well as the rest of the Slytherin house are evil, untrustworthy, etc. The majority of the house of Slytherin are like Draco anyway, I would imagine. For that matter, the entire school!

People turn out the way they do because of the kind of childhood (or lack thereof) they have and the types of influence their parents have on them. You can't always blame the parents for EVERYTHING, mind you, because it isn't always their fault. As you called it, the "Harry Filter" (bloody brilliant term!!) really limits our perception of the goings on at Hogwarts because we don't always get the other side's opinion. Anyway, great post! Cheers mate!

Beautifully said my Ravenclaw friend! The fact that we do indeed see everything from Harry's POV is monumentous in determining what exactly it is that we are being led to believe about the Slytherins. I wholeheartedly believe that Draco isn't as much of an evil git as he is made out to be (in Potter's POV). Sure, he may be a jerk in the first place, but when you add the likely possibility of him being brainwashed and made to do certain things, then it just compounds the situation and therefore you end up with an supposedly evil little twit. I believe this to be so, and, in thinking such, I don't really agree with people who say that Draco as well as the rest of the Slytherin house are evil, untrustworthy, etc. The majority of the house of Slytherin are like Draco anyway, I would imagine. For that matter, the entire school!

People turn out the way they do because of the kind of childhood (or lack thereof) they have and the types of influence their parents have on them. You can't always blame the parents for EVERYTHING, mind you, because it isn't always their fault. As you called it, the "Harry Filter" (bloody brilliant term!!) really limits our perception of the goings on at Hogwarts because we don't always get the other side's opinion. Anyway, great post! Cheers mate!

I don't believe Draco's evil. He's misguided, and yes, his upbringing is what I think is responsible for THAT. Lucius is evil. He's made a concious choice to do things that hurt other people, and he's twisted his son into a small copy of him. As I said earlier, I hope that Draco realizes what an amoral person his father is and decides that he's better than that, and that he knows what right and wrong are.

I will agree that there's a certain prejudice inherant in the books because Harry's the protagonist. But Draco isn't exactly a sympathetic character, with his own prejudices and attitudes. Still... it'd be interesting to see.

I don't believe Draco's evil. He's misguided, and yes, his upbringing is what I think is responsible for THAT. Lucius is evil. He's made a concious choice to do things that hurt other people, and he's twisted his son into a small copy of him. As I said earlier, I hope that Draco realizes what an amoral person his father is and decides that he's better than that, and that he knows what right and wrong are.

I will agree that there's a certain prejudice inherant in the books because Harry's the protagonist. But Draco isn't exactly a sympathetic character, with his own prejudices and attitudes. Still... it'd be interesting to see.
Very eloquently put! I agree that Draco isn't evil, but he has the potential to be. In many ways, he's one of the most interesting characters. With his connections and power, he'd be a formidable Death Eater, but he could also turn on his father and become unsympathetic to Voldemort's cause. I think it'll be interesting what Draco, and the other Slytherins, do in the next book when Voldie's cause will be public. They will be forced to choose a side, and it'll be intruguing to see what they do.....once again, it's all about choice. :cool:

Very eloquently put! I agree that Draco isn't evil, but he has the potential to be. In many ways, he's one of the most interesting characters. With his connections and power, he'd be a formidable Death Eater, but he could also turn on his father and become unsympathetic to Voldemort's cause. I think it'll be interesting what Draco, and the other Slytherins, do in the next book when Voldie's cause will be public. They will be forced to choose a side, and it'll be intruguing to see what they do.....once again, it's all about choice. :cool:

As a Slytherin, I am personally wishing to see some Slytherins turn on Voldemort as well as their Death Eater parents, just to make things interesting. As far as Draco is concerned, I agree that he may just choose to join the side of light, for whatever reason be it for himself or because he actually turns out to be good; the snotty little git that he is anyway.

As a Slytherin, I am personally wishing to see some Slytherins turn on Voldemort as well as their Death Eater parents, just to make things interesting. As far as Draco is concerned, I agree that he may just choose to join the side of light, for whatever reason be it for himself or because he actually turns out to be good; the snotty little git that he is anyway.

I really can't see the DE's turning on Voldemort. Maybe the kids but I don't think Draco will be one of them either. (Watch me be completely wrong:lol:) I just see Draco as too...nasty to suddenly become a stong anti-Voldemort kind of person. I think if Draco ends up deciding that he doesn't agree with Voldemort that he will probably just stay out of the fight. No, that doesn't sound right either. I don't want to say Draco is evil because I don't believe he is but I do think he is a nasty boy and I don't see him as a character we can look to for support.

I really can't see the DE's turning on Voldemort. Maybe the kids but I don't think Draco will be one of them either. (Watch me be completely wrong:lol:) I just see Draco as too...nasty to suddenly become a stong anti-Voldemort kind of person. I think if Draco ends up deciding that he doesn't agree with Voldemort that he will probably just stay out of the fight. No, that doesn't sound right either. I don't want to say Draco is evil because I don't believe he is but I do think he is a nasty boy and I don't see him as a character we can look to for support.

Well, I never said that the DE's would turn on Voldemort (unless some of them KNEW that they could actually defeat him) because that is unlikely at this point, at least to me. Regarding Draco, I don't think he would be completely good. He would have to have a good reason to turn on Voldie.

Well, I never said that the DE's would turn on Voldemort (unless some of them KNEW that they could actually defeat him) because that is unlikely at this point, at least to me. Regarding Draco, I don't think he would be completely good. He would have to have a good reason to turn on Voldie.

Sorry, I read this

As a Slytherin, I am personally wishing to see some Slytherins turn on Voldemort as well as their Death Eater parents, just to make things interesting


and somehow interpreted it as you saying some Slytherins and the DE's turning on Voldemort. Chalk it up to me being tired. I see what you were saying now.

I am very septical about Draco. I think it would be logical if he ended up as a Death Eaters, because he is more and more like his father, instead of becoming more and more different as some boys do in their teens, when they are old enough to have their own will;
I am certain that many Slytherins can be trustworthy. Of course, the DE almost always come from Slytherin, but it does not mean all the people sorted in that house are bad! It would be a quarter of the Hogwarts' students!

Sorry, I read this...and somehow interpreted it as you saying some Slytherins and the DE's turning on Voldemort. Chalk it up to me being tired. I see what you were saying now.

Nah, don't sweat it. No big deal. :p

Personally I don't think Draco will get a chance to be a proper death eater, unless something very drastic happens in HPB to push him over the proverbial edge he is still a student, and according to his father (who would probably whisper this in Voldie's ear) he is pretty much useless. I think if he is rejected by both the good and bad sides he will be at his most evil, he lives in constant fear of rejection (most bullies do) and so if he is rejected by Voldemort and his father as a DE he will explode with rage and be even more of a threat. At least that is what I'm hoping for, that would be good reading.

Quote:
Originally Posted by LexiBlack
I have no idea who it could be, but Blaise Z. would probably be a good guess.


How can you say that - we know absolutely nothing about him!
I think the fact that we don't know a lot about him says a lot. If he were close to Malfoy then I believe that we would hear him mentioned more often. I am also going off of stuff that others have said. I made a point to say that I did not know, it was just a guess. It's like someone saying that Harry and Luna (or any other pair) are going to get together. There is nothing saying that they will but people still think it. (and I don't want to get into a shippng debate over this with anyone, I'm just trying to make a point).
That was not the main point I was trying to get across in what I wrote anyway. :)

I'm sure, that we will see a trustworthy Slytherin - it wouldn't make much sense to show us that the world is not divided into good and evil by characters like Crouch sen. and at the same time divide Hogwarts into good or bad houses. And the students are sorted into Houses at their first year - they would be hopeless cases at the age of 11, if every Slytherin would turn out bad.

And I've just found a tiny piece of evidence: In the last chapter of GoF Dumbledore honored Harry in his speech and Harry saw "that Malfoy, Crabbe and Göyle and many of the other Slytherins had remained defiantly in their seats" So at least one or two Slytherins drank to Harry, because he showed bravery facing Voldemort.

I

I totally agree. I don't think all Slytherins are evil. They have just gotten a bad rep (you know the saying--one bad apple spoils the whole bunch). Harry's POV doesn't make us think otherwise, as all his experiences with Slytherins have been bad ones. True, some Slytherins just make you want to retch, but I think the vast majority could be okay. Just look at Snape, he hates Harry (because of who his father is), but he is a Slytherin and he is doing good in the fight against Voldemort. So unless Rowling proves otherwise, Slytherins aren't all that bad.

I'm sure that there are. After all what would be the point of keeping the house around if everyone in it was evil? There are some trustworthy Slytherins, just like there are nasty, untrustworthy people in other houses.

Being in Slytherin would be a putback for most normal wizards, though, because they would be influenced greatly by the "bad" crowd. Only kids with very strong characaters could be able to uphold their own personal ideals with all of the peer pressure. Also, by some twisted form of "guilty by association," it might make getting a high level job more difficult because of this trustworthy issue.

Being in Slytherin would be a putback for most normal wizards, though, because they would be influenced greatly by the "bad" crowd. Only kids with very strong characaters could be able to uphold their own personal ideals with all of the peer pressure. Also, by some twisted form of "guilty by association," it might make getting a high level job more difficult because of this trustworthy issue.
That hasn't hindered Daddy Malfoy or any of the other Slytherin parents from having high-paying jobs.....

I do agree that some of Malfoy's choices are bad but then again, so are some of Harry's. We have to remember that we are restricted by the "Harry filter," meaning everything we see is how Harry perceives it. If the stories were called "Draco Malfoy and the _______" I'm sure we would see everything totally in a different light, perhaps even agree with some of Draco's choices. Knowing his background, I doubt anyone could be that different from what Draco is now. "Pure-Blood Supremacy" is all he has heard in his entire life and I know in his place, it would be hard to believe anything on the contrary. If your father was a DE, wouldn't you think that was a respectable job, at least until you were a lot older and recognized the faults of it?

I'm not saying Draco is an angel but that it isn't really his fault for a lot of the things that he has done.

You are most definately right that we see Malfoy through Harrys POV which is not always correct. But I will not let Malfoy off the hook that easily. There is a point in everyones life when they know what is right and wrong, despite how they have been raised. I don't know if Malfoy has reached this point yet, but I'll give him a benefit of a doubt in your case. But in a reality there is a point where everyone of us knows that what we are doing is wrong. And that is the point where we choose to continue to do the wrong act and justify it or we look at it and say "This is wrong, and I'm never doing it again." So the question is has Draco hit this point. If so then I believe he is truely evil because he has chosen so himself. And if he has not hit this point and still following his fathers footsteps then of course he is not evil, just misguided. But someday that question will come to him and he will have to decide. Maybe we will even see that decision in the next book. Yet, he will still have to make the choice between right and wrong.

That hasn't hindered Daddy Malfoy or any of the other Slytherin parents from having high-paying jobs.....
They used bribery to get where they are in society right now. If Lucius Malfoy hadn't paid Fudge and the other top dogs I doubt they would spare him another glance.

But where they got the money from? The Malfoy family has probably been wealthy for many generations, far before LV came to power and got his DE's. His ancestors probably were smooth talking wizards that slithered their way to the top.

You are most definately right that we see Malfoy through Harrys POV which is not always correct. But I will not let Malfoy off the hook that easily. There is a point in everyones life when they know what is right and wrong, despite how they have been raised. I don't know if Malfoy has reached this point yet, but I'll give him a benefit of a doubt in your case. But in a reality there is a point where everyone of us knows that what we are doing is wrong. And that is the point where we choose to continue to do the wrong act and justify it or we look at it and say "This is wrong, and I'm never doing it again." So the question is has Draco hit this point. If so then I believe he is truely evil because he has chosen so himself. And if he has not hit this point and still following his fathers footsteps then of course he is not evil, just misguided. But someday that question will come to him and he will have to decide. Maybe we will even see that decision in the next book. Yet, he will still have to make the choice between right and wrong.

I honestly don't think Malfoy's gotten to that point yet. I think this is illustrated by the scene in (can't remember which... don't have the book) where he and his father are in the shop where Draco messes with something out of his league... he's genuninely scared. Lucius takes it as matter-of-fact.

I see Draco as a big fish in a small pond, kind of. He doesn't know what's out there, what kind of evil is possible. But he thinks he does. He thinks he knows everything, and that he's invincible, exactly like any other teenager does. I think he'll be forced to confront, not only his own mortality, but his own MORALITY. He's still following what Daddy Dearest has taught him (and I suppose Mommy must have had something to do with it, although I don't see it) and not thinking for himself yet. He thinks he knows what the world is about. He hasn't had to confront death yet, either the prospect of his own death, or dealing with someone else. He didn't care about Cedric. He probably only knew the name. To Draco, this whole thing is about as real as a Quidditch match... yes, some people may get hurt, but they can go to the healer and get fixed up. But to him, nobody's really getting hurt. Nobody's going to die. And I think when he confronts that, and re-evaluates his basic assumption, he's going to have a major reaction to the knowledge that, yes, people ARE dying. People he knows. This is very serious. It's not a game. That's not the kind of thing you can tell someone, they have to learn it on their own, to know it at a deep, primitive level, that this involves people's LIVES. There are consequences far more serious involved than losing the House Cup. I don't think he has that deep-down knowledge yet.

"There wasn't a wizard who went bad who wasn't in Slytherin" - this isn't saying that all Slytherins are bad. I think the house has a deserved reputation for evil characters, but there are some trustworthy and good people in that house... Cunning and ambition, I think I have both and only a few people regard me as truly demonic. :)

....only a few people regard me as truly demonic. :)

Oh yes....a demonic little twit you are my friend!!!! Just kidding!!:rotfl:

I honestly don't think Malfoy's gotten to that point yet. I think this is illustrated by the scene in (can't remember which... don't have the book) where he and his father are in the shop where Draco messes with something out of his league... he's genuninely scared. Lucius takes it as matter-of-fact.

I see Draco as a big fish in a small pond, kind of. He doesn't know what's out there, what kind of evil is possible. But he thinks he does. He thinks he knows everything, and that he's invincible, exactly like any other teenager does. I think he'll be forced to confront, not only his own mortality, but his own MORALITY. He's still following what Daddy Dearest has taught him (and I suppose Mommy must have had something to do with it, although I don't see it) and not thinking for himself yet. He thinks he knows what the world is about. He hasn't had to confront death yet, either the prospect of his own death, or dealing with someone else. He didn't care about Cedric. He probably only knew the name. To Draco, this whole thing is about as real as a Quidditch match... yes, some people may get hurt, but they can go to the healer and get fixed up. But to him, nobody's really getting hurt. Nobody's going to die. And I think when he confronts that, and re-evaluates his basic assumption, he's going to have a major reaction to the knowledge that, yes, people ARE dying. People he knows. This is very serious. It's not a game. That's not the kind of thing you can tell someone, they have to learn it on their own, to know it at a deep, primitive level, that this involves people's LIVES. There are consequences far more serious involved than losing the House Cup. I don't think he has that deep-down knowledge yet.

Well said! I agree with you about Draco blurring the line between real and fantasy. However, it seems odd that he would still act this way when he knew who Cedric Diggory was. At least, I think he knew who he was and what he looked like because he was, after all, a Tri-Wizard Champion competitor and with all of the attention that they received, all of Hogwarts knew him, even Draco. Though I agree that Draco didn't particularly care one way or the other what happened to him, the fact remains that he did know full well that Cedric was murdered by Voldemort and yet he remains passive about it. So in that regard, maybe Draco really has become desensitized by the Dark Arts and the death that usually surrounds it. Just speculation though. And about that scene you were referring to in the books, I can only remember one instance where Draco and Lucius were in that shop and that was in COS, where Lucius was getting rid of some things that would implicate him as a Death Eater, evil bastrd, etc. Harry himself witnesses this interaction (after his idiocy in traveling by the Floo Network). However, I may recall another instance in either GOF or OOTP where they visit that shop again, but I can't remember. A deep post though and very nice!

Got to have been at least one...

Well said! I agree with you about Draco blurring the line between real and fantasy. However, it seems odd that he would still act this way when he knew who Cedric Diggory was. At least, I think he knew who he was and what he looked like because he was, after all, a Tri-Wizard Champion competitor and with all of the attention that they received, all of Hogwarts knew him, even Draco. Though I agree that Draco didn't particularly care one way or the other what happened to him, the fact remains that he did know full well that Cedric was murdered by Voldemort and yet he remains passive about it. So in that regard, maybe Draco really has become desensitized by the Dark Arts and the death that usually surrounds it. Just speculation though. And about that scene you were referring to in the books, I can only remember one instance where Draco and Lucius were in that shop and that was in COS, where Lucius was getting rid of some things that would implicate him as a Death Eater, evil bastrd, etc. Harry himself witnesses this interaction (after his idiocy in traveling by the Floo Network). However, I may recall another instance in either GOF or OOTP where they visit that shop again, but I can't remember. A deep post though and very nice!

He may have known who he was, but that's entirely different than KNOWING him. For instance, I know who... oh, pick someone famous... umm... George Clooney. I know who he is, but I don't know him. And if he died, it really wouldn't make much difference to my daily life. On the other hand, if my best friend died, or my grandmother, it would have a much greater impact. In the same way, I think Draco needs that impact to shatter his self-assured little world and bring him into reality, or maturity, or whatever. Harry's got that because he's known death and pain and hardship. Draco's been a spoiled brat so far, and at some point that has to end. It'll be interesting to see how he reacts to that and what his choices are.

As far as the instance, I have a very hazy recollection, but it seemed to me like Draco didn't realize that dark magic can harm him and those he cares about as well as people he doesn't like.

Thanks for the praise. I wasn't sure I was getting it out like I wanted to...

He may have known who he was, but that's entirely different than KNOWING him. For instance, I know who... oh, pick someone famous... umm... George Clooney. I know who he is, but I don't know him. And if he died, it really wouldn't make much difference to my daily life. On the other hand, if my best friend died, or my grandmother, it would have a much greater impact. In the same way, I think Draco needs that impact to shatter his self-assured little world and bring him into reality, or maturity, or whatever. Harry's got that because he's known death and pain and hardship. Draco's been a spoiled brat so far, and at some point that has to end. It'll be interesting to see how he reacts to that and what his choices are.

As far as the instance, I have a very hazy recollection, but it seemed to me like Draco didn't realize that dark magic can harm him and those he cares about as well as people he doesn't like.

Thanks for the praise. I wasn't sure I was getting it out like I wanted to...

If Draco truly believes that dark magic can't hurt him, then I can't WAIT until he gets his first dosage of Crucio!!!! How's THAT for reality ya little git?! HAHAHA Anyway, I see more clearly as to where you are coming from with your post. Interesting choice, George Clooney......hmm. As I was saying, yeah, it's true that there is a difference between someone you know, ie family and friends, as opposed to someone you know OF, ie celebrities and politicians. However, this particular instance was a fellow schoolmate, one who had rubbed elbows with nearly everyone in the school at some point and someone who existed not in the tabloids or the television, but in real life and at your very own school. I'm going on past experience here, so bear with me. There were a couple of people at my old high school and at my college, Juilliard, that lost their lives by accident or murder. Now, while I didn't PERSONALLY know them like friends, I did see them from time to time and even said hello on occasion. That would be considered making an acquaintence, for better or for worse. Somehow, I'm beginning to see a gray area between knowing someone and knowing of someone. That's where these people fell into. I knew them enough to be affected by the tragedy and saddened by it, but I didn't know them well enough to be utterly distraught and demoralized by their deaths.

To me at least, it's quite different when it's someone at your school or your workplace or even your own neighborhood who loses their lives. Yes, Draco wasn't friends with Cedric, but they saw each other constantly in the corridors, at meal times, maybe classes. That's just like today's schools. If a fellow schoolmate of yours was killed in an accident and you knew who they were (besides the fact that they even came from your school to begin with), you'd be affected by it more or less and in a different way then if it were to be George Clooney. The whole school would be affected, just like we saw at Hogwarts.

Sure, Draco was still pretending like it was no big deal, but you have to assume that he felt something at the loss and is just way too proud and egotistical to show it openly. Otherwise, he would then truly be an evil bugger with no sympathy. I know I'm rambling, but I am from Texas, and us Texas folk are long-winded people. Kind of like Ents. Anyway, that's my opinion. Cheers!

If Draco truly believes that dark magic can't hurt him, then I can't WAIT until he gets his first dosage of Crucio!!!! How's THAT for reality ya little git?! HAHAHA Anyway, I see more clearly as to where you are coming from with your post. Interesting choice, George Clooney......hmm. As I was saying, yeah, it's true that there is a difference between someone you know, ie family and friends, as opposed to someone you know OF, ie celebrities and politicians. However, this particular instance was a fellow schoolmate, one who had rubbed elbows with nearly everyone in the school at some point and someone who existed not in the tabloids or the television, but in real life and at your very own school. I'm going on past experience here, so bear with me. There were a couple of people at my old high school and at my college, Juilliard, that lost their lives by accident or murder. Now, while I didn't PERSONALLY know them like friends, I did see them from time to time and even said hello on occasion. That would be considered making an acquaintence, for better or for worse. Somehow, I'm beginning to see a gray area between knowing someone and knowing of someone. That's where these people fell into. I knew them enough to be affected by the tragedy and saddened by it, but I didn't know them well enough to be utterly distraught and demoralized by their deaths.

To me at least, it's quite different when it's someone at your school or your workplace or even your own neighborhood who loses their lives. Yes, Draco wasn't friends with Cedric, but they saw each other constantly in the corridors, at meal times, maybe classes. That's just like today's schools. If a fellow schoolmate of yours was killed in an accident and you knew who they were (besides the fact that they even came from your school to begin with), you'd be affected by it more or less and in a different way then if it were to be George Clooney. The whole school would be affected, just like we saw at Hogwarts.

Sure, Draco was still pretending like it was no big deal, but you have to assume that he felt something at the loss and is just way too proud and egotistical to show it openly. Otherwise, he would then truly be an evil bugger with no sympathy. I know I'm rambling, but I am from Texas, and us Texas folk are long-winded people. Kind of like Ents. Anyway, that's my opinion. Cheers!

I just had my husband name celebrities, as I don't follow popular... well, much of anything popular, really. Or should I say, mainstream. Anyway, beside the point... (I like the Ent reference, by the way... :) )

I've had people I went to school with die. It didn't really affect me, because I knew of them, but I didn't know them. Does that make me a "truly evil bugger with no sympathy"? No (at least I hope not). It makes me a person who is momentarily saddened by the loss of life, but not truly affected. To me, the only difference between people I know of and celebrities are that I saw the people I know of in person once or twice.

As a matter of fact, a person who I associated with because of band, but wasn't really close to... her boyfriend (or ex-boyfriend at the time) tried to commit suicide and failed, leaving him a vegetable. I was somewhat sad, because I'd met him a few times, but I'm not still upset about it. On the other hand, I found out that a friend of mine who I lost contact with has had a couple suicide attempts, and that made me wonder if there was something I could have done, and why she felt that life was that bad.

I guess what I'm trying to say is, the closer a person is to you, the more it affects you. I never saw any evidence that Draco was particularly close to Cedric more than knowing him by name and face. Nobody close to Draco has had anything bad happen to them. Bellatrix was in Azkaban from the time he was small, if not before he was born. Lucius has always squirmed out of whatever trouble he's been in. His friends and their parents similarly avoided trouble. But when it hits home, he'll have a lot of thinking to do and some hard choices to make. I'm pulling for him to make the right ones.

I just had my husband name celebrities, as I don't follow popular... well, much of anything popular, really. Or should I say, mainstream. Anyway, beside the point... (I like the Ent reference, by the way... :) )

I've had people I went to school with die. It didn't really affect me, because I knew of them, but I didn't know them. Does that make me a "truly evil bugger with no sympathy"? No (at least I hope not). It makes me a person who is momentarily saddened by the loss of life, but not truly affected. To me, the only difference between people I know of and celebrities are that I saw the people I know of in person once or twice.

As a matter of fact, a person who I associated with because of band, but wasn't really close to... her boyfriend (or ex-boyfriend at the time) tried to commit suicide and failed, leaving him a vegetable. I was somewhat sad, because I'd met him a few times, but I'm not still upset about it. On the other hand, I found out that a friend of mine who I lost contact with has had a couple suicide attempts, and that made me wonder if there was something I could have done, and why she felt that life was that bad.

I guess what I'm trying to say is, the closer a person is to you, the more it affects you. I never saw any evidence that Draco was particularly close to Cedric more than knowing him by name and face. Nobody close to Draco has had anything bad happen to them. Bellatrix was in Azkaban from the time he was small, if not before he was born. Lucius has always squirmed out of whatever trouble he's been in. His friends and their parents similarly avoided trouble. But when it hits home, he'll have a lot of thinking to do and some hard choices to make. I'm pulling for him to make the right ones.

As Lucius would say, "Admirable sentiments, indeed." I agree with you. By the way, Bellatrix (Lestrange) is a female, not male. Yeah, I know that Draco and Cedric weren't close, but when you said that "It makes me a person who is momentarily saddened by the loss of life, but not truly affected," you just admitted that you were in fact affected by it to some degree. It was temporary, yes, but you were still touched ever so briefly because of it. The sadness at the loss of life affected you at the time being. Admit it.

I totally understand what you're saying, so I'm not taking things out of context, it's just that we are all affected by such things, no matter how long or short those emotions last. You and I are both over those losses we mentioned during our school years, but you can't say that it didn't affect you; because it did. We just weren't as close to those people as others and so it wore off very quickly.

As far as Draco is concerned, that temporary sense of sadness is the kind of feeling that I'm trying to convey and I don't know if I'm making my point clear enough. That's the gray area that I was referring to earlier, the middle of the road sentiments that lie there. It's hard to explain but I don't know of any other way of interpreting that.

Well, that upbringing doesn't neccessarily make one turn out evil, as Sirius and Andromeda demonstrated. In fact, with Sirius gone, I picture Andromeda seeing herself and her daughter as the sole people upholding the honor of the Noble and Most Ancient House of Black, and seeing her sisters as so blinded by fear, and the hatred that comes from it, that they've lowered themselves to being another's slave.

I would expect Andromeda was a Slytherin like her sisters.

Having only read pages five and six, I would like to add my two cents.

Firstly, the original Slytherin himself, must not have totally without scruples, for if he was, how could have the cofounders permitted his presence, even to begin with. So even the slytherins have basic level of trust worthiness, if it suits them.

Secondly, this seems to be one of those, shades of good and evil types of posts. Whilst background and upbringing do help define who we are, its our choices that make us. I really cant second guess what a cornered syltherin might do.

Interesting times ahead for Master malfoy and company.

As Lucius would say, "Admirable sentiments, indeed." I agree with you. By the way, Bellatrix (Lestrange) is a female, not male. Yeah, I know that Draco and Cedric weren't close, but when you said that "It makes me a person who is momentarily saddened by the loss of life, but not truly affected," you just admitted that you were in fact affected by it to some degree. It was temporary, yes, but you were still touched ever so briefly because of it. The sadness at the loss of life affected you at the time being. Admit it.

I totally understand what you're saying, so I'm not taking things out of context, it's just that we are all affected by such things, no matter how long or short those emotions last. You and I are both over those losses we mentioned during our school years, but you can't say that it didn't affect you; because it did. We just weren't as close to those people as others and so it wore off very quickly.

As far as Draco is concerned, that temporary sense of sadness is the kind of feeling that I'm trying to convey and I don't know if I'm making my point clear enough. That's the gray area that I was referring to earlier, the middle of the road sentiments that lie there. It's hard to explain but I don't know of any other way of interpreting that.

The "he" I was referring to when I talked about Bellatrix was Draco. I know she's female.

When my acquaintance's ex-boyfriend tried to off himself, it didn't affect me deeply enough to realize that I was a shallow, immature, self-centered pain in the rear (which I was). It affected me enough to say, Dude, that sucks. What a moron. There was no REAL effect on me. I figure Draco's the same way. Like when I heard that a girl I was in class with got attacked by a dog. I said, That sucks. Glad I wasn't her, it's gonna take a lot of surgeries to fix that. I didn't examine my own mortality and realize the way I'd been living wasn't quite right. Yeah, I was sad for a moment, but in Draco's case, he could possibly justify it to himself... "If he hadn't tried to show off (or whatever) he wouldn't be dead." I don't see Draco as being able to put himself in someone else's shoes, so to speak.

But my grandparents dying did affect me like that (somewhat... we weren't real close, but that's another story). Someone I was really close to dying would affect me like that, like a close friend or a nuclear family member, someone whose loss affects your daily routine. I think that's what it'll take.

Well, that upbringing doesn't neccessarily make one turn out evil, as Sirius and Andromeda demonstrated. In fact, with Sirius gone, I picture Andromeda seeing herself and her daughter as the sole people upholding the honor of the Noble and Most Ancient House of Black, and seeing her sisters as so blinded by fear, and the hatred that comes from it, that they've lowered themselves to being another's slave.

I would expect Andromeda was a Slytherin like her sisters.

But Sirius made his own choices, and had that loss of someone near and dear to him in James and Lily. (I don't know much about Andromeda, so I'll leave that discussion for someone else.) And Sirius was a Gryffindor in the first place, so that doesn't really pertain to this discussion. Still, I think that Sirius making his own choices is the reason he was a Gryffindor in the first place. He saw what his family was doing and disagreed with it, forging his own path. He realized right and wrong earlier, but that doesn't mean that those who are blinded by their upbringing are necessarily hopeless cases. More like late bloomers, maybe. :)

I honestly don't think Malfoy's gotten to that point yet. I think this is illustrated by the scene in (can't remember which... don't have the book) where he and his father are in the shop where Draco messes with something out of his league... he's genuninely scared. Lucius takes it as matter-of-fact.


I can't say if Malfoy has or hasn't reached that point yet in his life. The scene you are talking about happens in the Chamber of Secrets which is only the second book. True he may still have not reached that point in the fifth book. But I'm inclined to believe that he may have already and if he hasen't, Draco will most definately make that decision in the next book.

I was talking with my mum last night about this. And she brought up a valid point. That true everybody knows what is right and wrong and they make a decision to change or keep on doing their evil whatevers, but that their background and who they are effects their decision. So even thought Draco could possilbly become good, I bet that since his parents are evil, he will most likely choose to be evil like his father.

But Sirius made his own choices, and had that loss of someone near and dear to him in James and Lily. (I don't know much about Andromeda, so I'll leave that discussion for someone else.) And Sirius was a Gryffindor in the first place, so that doesn't really pertain to this discussion. Still, I think that Sirius making his own choices is the reason he was a Gryffindor in the first place. He saw what his family was doing and disagreed with it, forging his own path. He realized right and wrong earlier, but that doesn't mean that those who are blinded by their upbringing are necessarily hopeless cases. More like late bloomers, maybe. :)

But, both Sirius and Andromeda demonstrate that having the racist, rich, aristocratic upbringing doesn't neccessarily mean someone brought up in it can't distinguish between right and wrong. Draco is capable of knowing better. Sirius and Andromeda both rejecting that viewpoint early on does pertain to this discussion, as Draco loses any excuses.

He even has an advantage Sirius and Andromeda didn't have, by having, first hand, the Pureblood Supremist theory disproven for the entire time he's been at Hogwarts. He's seen Harry, a "halfblood", and Hermione, a muggleborn, outperforming everyone, especially himself, since he got there, not to mention his "halfblood" cousin, the metamorphmagus Auror, setting a standard for members of the Black family that he hasn't been able to maintain. Snape probably figured he had the next Nymphadora when Draco arrived at Hogwarts, and must be very disappointed. Draco can't honestly claim that the "halfbloods" and muggleborns are diluting the magical gene pool, any more.

The "he" I was referring to when I talked about Bellatrix was Draco. I know she's female.

When my acquaintance's ex-boyfriend tried to off himself, it didn't affect me deeply enough to realize that I was a shallow, immature, self-centered pain in the rear (which I was). It affected me enough to say, Dude, that sucks. What a moron. There was no REAL effect on me. I figure Draco's the same way. Like when I heard that a girl I was in class with got attacked by a dog. I said, That sucks. Glad I wasn't her, it's gonna take a lot of surgeries to fix that. I didn't examine my own mortality and realize the way I'd been living wasn't quite right. Yeah, I was sad for a moment, but in Draco's case, he could possibly justify it to himself... "If he hadn't tried to show off (or whatever) he wouldn't be dead." I don't see Draco as being able to put himself in someone else's shoes, so to speak.

I do apologize for the error. I figured that you did know she was female, but I wasn't sure. Now that I have read it again, I can see what you meant. Sorry!

And, suffice it to say, it seems that we have a quite different outlook on mortality and human life in general. Not to say one of us is wrong or right, its just two different perceptions.

When my acquaintance's ex-boyfriend tried to off himself, it didn't affect me deeply enough to realize that I was a shallow, immature, self-centered pain in the rear (which I was). It affected me enough to say, Dude, that sucks. What a moron. There was no REAL effect on me. I figure Draco's the same way. Like when I heard that a girl I was in class with got attacked by a dog. I said, That sucks. Glad I wasn't her, it's gonna take a lot of surgeries to fix that. I didn't examine my own mortality and realize the way I'd been living wasn't quite right. Yeah, I was sad for a moment, but in Draco's case, he could possibly justify it to himself... "If he hadn't tried to show off (or whatever) he wouldn't be dead." I don't see Draco as being able to put himself in someone else's shoes, so to speak.

But my grandparents dying did affect me like that (somewhat... we weren't real close, but that's another story). Someone I was really close to dying would affect me like that, like a close friend or a nuclear family member, someone whose loss affects your daily routine. I think that's what it'll take.

You make a good point, but if I may intercede in you all's conversation...
Draco probably was affected by Cedric's death, to some degree. Even if Draco wasn't exactly saddened by Cedric's death (because, I'm sure he didn't actually care), but he could have been terrified or confused because his father was involved in the brutal murder of a boy at his school. Of course he knows his dad's a death eater, but Draco was only a baby when they were at large at the time of Voldemort's first reign, and he probably hasn't been exposed to the sadistic, murderous side of his father. So, I guess what I'm saying is that even though Draco knows his dad is cruel, he most likely hasn't seen him murder before, and what he could've been feeling would have been shock, not for Cedric, but because of his father's involvement.

I believe, yes... if it's between Slytherin to Slytherin... I guess, they're trustworthy with their fellow Slytherin

I believe, yes... if it's between Slytherin to Slytherin... I guess, they're trustworthy with their fellow Slytherin

lol! :rotfl: I never even thought of that. But even still bad people stab other bad people in the back.

Snape is trustworthy,otherwise,Dumbledore wouldnt ask him to be the Potions Master,or go on that spy thing he told him to do at the GOF.

Snape is trustworthy,otherwise,Dumbledore wouldnt ask him to be the Potions Master,or go on that spy thing he told him to do at the GOF.

Yes that is true, but at the same time Snape did join the DE. He turned his back on the Order and jumped sides. Just because Dumbledore thinks that he is trustworthy, doesn't mean that he really is. So people are just better at pretending than others are.

lol! :rotfl: I never even thought of that. But even still bad people stab other bad people in the back.

And that's their problem... :p

Yes that is true, but at the same time Snape did join the DE. He turned his back on the Order and jumped sides. Just because Dumbledore thinks that he is trustworthy, doesn't mean that he really is. So people are just better at pretending than others are.
I never knew that Snape was in the Order untill after he stopped being a Death Eater. I didn't think he was in the Order and turned traitor.

Actually Dumbledore told that Snape "rejoined our side". I'm very much afraid it can be interpreted either way. But I'm not aware of any reason to think that he was a member of the order before, turned death eater and then turned back to the order.

I'm sure someone mentioned it already, but Phineas Nigellus seems to be a reliable Slytherin. I don't think unreliable people generally become headmasters.

Personally, I do not believe it would be fair to stereotype all slytherins to be untrusttworthy, so I am sure some of them have trustworthy. Plus, Harry was almost sorted there, andhe is just about as trustworthy (for the readers) as it gets.

i believe that i minority of slytherins that we have never heard of could be trustworthy in some ways because though peter pettigrew was in griffindor, he did ended up as a death eater.

Well I'd like to think that Severus Snape is trustworthy and I dunno if its about trust. Im sure alot of them are trustworthy- its all about the cause

I think that a Slytherin could definitely be trustworthy if both crave the same goal. Slytherins have been thrown into a bad light all together since Book 1.

"There isn't a witch or wizard who went bad that wasn't in Slytherin."

I think that Slytherins are smart, cunning, and very goal oriented. This doesn't completely make them untrustworthy that just makes them one sided to things and strong-willed. Slytherins such as Malfoy, Crabbe, Goyle, and Parkinson are just the ones who shed a bad light on the house itself.

I think it was made a stereotype that all Slytherins are untrustworthy. It's hard to point at one certain group of people and say they are evil because of what house they are in. I think there is a few Slytherins who are trustworthy, we just don't know about them yet.

I've long felt that the way Rowling portrays the Slytherins in the books is unrealistic. I mean - they are ALL horrible you know? Stupid and horrible like Crabbe and Goyle or cunning and horrible like Malfoy but they have no redeeming features. And - none of the people in other houses will speak to them or befriend them, and they reciprocate by hating the people in other houses! It seems like Slytherins really don't have a chance .. they are presumed to be embryo dark wizards and treated as such.

I know Slughorn was a Slytherin and presumably he was meant to redress the balance a little but it seems like too little, too late (and he's not, for that matter, a very likeable character anyway). Why can't there be just one or two Slytherin pupils who aren't against muggle borns or aren't inclined to side with Voldermort? After all Harry was nearly put in Slytherin!!

Maybe we'll see that in book 7?

Afterall...they have to unite...

yes, it occured to me once or twice while reading the books, Slytherin is definitely not the perfect house at Hogwarts

But we can't tell if everybody in Slytherin is like Malfoy, Crabbe or Goyle. After all, the other Slytherins in Harry's year are not as mean as Draco is with Harry. OK, let's say that most of the DE were in Slytherin but it's not sure that all Slytherins turn out to be dark wizards or muggle-born killers...

You can't say that whole Slytherin is stupid, brutal are Death Eaters and so on. We don't know all from there and furthermore there were also intelligent students like Tom Riddle and Draco. And I'm sure that there are alot of Slytherins who stand away from the "Mudblood" haters.

I agree, I don’t think the Slytherin house is portrayed realistically at all. Have we seen any Slytherin students who aren’t nasty and vicious or just stupid and ugly? Sure JKR tells us in an interview that not all Slytherins are bad, but so far we haven’t really seen any Slytherins who are undoubtedly good. I mean, I and many others believe that Snape is Dumbledore’s man through and through, but not everybody believes that, and also it would be nice to see a good Slytherin who has never been a Death Eater. It’s not enough that JKR tells us in an interview that Slytherins aren’t all bad, we need to see that in the books too.

I don’t know if JKR intended Slughorn to be a “good Slytherin”, but in my opinion he really isn’t. Sure he can be pleasant in his way, but I don’t think there’s anything admirable about him. It seems that the only thing he cares about is himself, and I find that repulsive.

I think JKR will have to show us in book 7 a Slytherin who has never been a Death Eater and who Harry actually likes. I’m actually hoping that Tonks could be a Slytherin, she’s nice and she’s an auror and Harry likes her, and I think it would important to have a Slytherin like that. Otherwise the series will seem somewhat shallow in a way: everyone who is in the house that Harry doesn’t like is either evil or stupid or both. That kind of childish view was fine in the earlier books because the books are from Harry’s point of view, but I sincerely hope that will change now that Harry is older.

I know Slughorn was a Slytherin and presumably he was meant to redress the balance a little but it seems like too little, too late (and he's not, for that matter, a very likeable character anyway). Why can't there be just one or two Slytherin pupils who aren't against muggle borns or aren't inclined to side with Voldermort? After all Harry was nearly put in Slytherin!!

Well one of the criterias for being put in Slytherin is that your ancestry is pure and another that you use any means to achieve your ends . If you can use every means to achieve your ends doesn't that mean that you are quite egocentric and don't care much for others? and as your ancestry should be pure many of those put in Slytherin will be brought up by I-am-pure-blood-proud parents, making them think that they are superior to others. This is enough to make any kid mean and nasty, not necessarily evil even though that is quite probable.
But I agree with you the Slytherins are a bit too one dimensional and I guess that in some ways has to do with Harry Potter being a childrens book. Sadly grown ups some times seem to think kids don't understand anything but simplefied charachters.

.I mean, I and many others believe that Snape is Dumbledore’s man through and through, but not everybody believes that, and also it would be nice to see a good Slytherin who has never been a Death Eater. It’s not enough that JKR tells us in an interview that Slytherins aren’t all bad, we need to see that in the books too.

I don’t know if JKR intended Slughorn to be a “good Slytherin”, but in my opinion he really isn’t. Sure he can be pleasant in his way, but I don’t think there’s anything admirable about him. It seems that the only thing he cares about is himself, and I find that repulsive.
(...)
I think JKR will have to show us in book 7 a Slytherin who has never been a Death Eater and who Harry actually likes. I’m actually hoping that Tonks could be a Slytherin, she’s nice and she’s an auror and Harry likes her, and I think it would important to have a Slytherin like that. Otherwise the series will seem somewhat shallow in a way: everyone who is in the house that Harry doesn’t like is either evil or stupid or both. That kind of childish view was fine in the earlier books because the books are from Harry’s point of view, but I sincerely hope that will change now that Harry is older.

I for one think that Snape in some ways brakes the pattern of Slytherins, but that's probably because we only see his grown up self. I don't see Snape as someone who would do anything to get what he wants without thinking of the consequences. He is too smart to belive in the pure bloods only **** and sure he's mean but that isn't enough to put you in Slytherin.

Slughorn on the other hand is a true Slytherin in my opinion.

Well Harry was not pure blood so we know that there can be half bloods in Slytherin .. well Snape himself is one too :). It's just as shame that it seems to be the other three houses versus Slytherin .. there were no Slytherins at all in the DA, for instance. The only Slytherin girl we ever see is Pansy Parkinson who is, as Hermione says 'a cow.' I'd have liked to have seen references to one or two others who, even if they weren't necessarily friends with the Gryffindors could at least be civil.

In the other houses, we often see characters who are not Slytherin but are horrible anyway .. Zacharias Smith or Cormac McClaggen for instance. Just one or two nice Slytherins could have redressed the balance :)

There was an interview where JKR addressed this. I agree that Slughorn is too little, but I actually like him. I think most people don't because we see him through Harry's eyes, and Harry has very different values than Slughorn. JKR said that in no way are all Slytherins like Malfoy, but I'm no good at finding JKR quotes. :)

Well there could be some Slytherins who aren't all bad, and we just haven't seen them yet. Or maybe they weren't when they came there, but from the house reputation and how others felt about them, they turned bad.

In the Mugglenet/Leaky interview JK said this:

ES: Why is Slytherin house still –

JKR: Still allowed!

[All laugh]

ES: Yes! I mean, it's such a stigma.

JKR: But they're not all bad. They literally are not all bad. [Pause.] Well, the deeper answer, the non-flippant answer, would be that you have to embrace all of a person, you have to take them with their flaws, and everyone's got them. It’s the same way with the student body. If only they could achieve perfect unity, you would have an absolute unstoppable force, and I suppose it's that craving for unity and wholeness that means that they keep that quarter of the school that maybe does not encapsulate the most generous and noble qualities, in the hope, in the very Dumbledore-esque hope that they will achieve union, and they will achieve harmony. Harmony is the word.

So clearly they aren't all bad - its just that we don't hear much about any good ones because it is all from Harry's point of view, and he is rather prejudiced against Slytherin.

What Numair said. Perhaps that book 5 theme of house unity will come into play with the Slytherin house in book 7.

But even if JK sais that there are good Slytherins I think she should let us see them. She has made harry change his mind about so much, why not about the Slytherins? Maybe she's saved the lesson for book 7

I dont think being ambitious and Cunning makes you untrustworthy. (look at Slughorn!) and not all slytherins are bad.

Of course some Slytherins have been trustworthy... I think it would be impossible for there not to have been. Hogwarts has been around for -- how many years? A thousand? :shrug: Not sure, but anyway, it's been around for a long time. How could there not have been at least one trustworthy person in Slytherin?

But even if JK sais that there are good Slytherins I think she should let us see them. She has made harry change his mind about so much, why not about the Slytherins? Maybe she's saved the lesson for book 7
I think we should see some more in book 7 too.

Well, I wouldn't exactly call Slughorn trustworthy but he certainly isn't a Death Eater. I think that there are some Slytherins who don't get in the house just because they are going to be a Death Eater. It's the Harry-filter at work again, as someone above mentioned.

No Slughorn is definitely no trustworthy, look at the memory and him giving away facts on horcruxes. Snape on the other hand, thats a trustworthy guy ;)

I wonder if there were any Slytherins going with people from other houses to the yuleball? It seems as though they are kinda short on girls in that house so I guess they must have. Malfoy went with Parkinson, the only Slytherin girl we know of, so Blase and the others must have had to ask Rawenclaws or huffelpuffs or gryffindors

Well, JK has said that not ALL Slytherin's are bad, and not ALL Slytherin's are future DE's in Training. There are DE affiliates in other houses. We've seen it happen before with Wormtail...

i've done a search and nothin came up so i was just thinking that we all associate slytherin with the dark arts but thinking about it it has turned out some decent wizards and witches

like slughorn - ok hes a bit vain but ...

i was wondering what you guys thought about it and if you knew any other decent witches/ wizards from slytherin?

xxx

Snape. =)


I actually belief that Slughorn was meant to show the readers that not all Slytherin's should be considered as evil as J.K. Rowling made them look from Harry's point of view. She said something along the lines of discrimination being what annoys her the most and ironically the majority of readers stereotype against the Slytherin characters.

yeah also didn't regulas turn out 2 be good in the end?

xxx

Draco wasn't going to go through with murder neither, was he?

Tonks was in Slytherin and she is trustworthy.... right?

Dang it... what if she is not? and she is just a spy???? I JUST thought about it.. what if there a huuuge revelation about Tonks??

Well.. to THIS point... Tonks has been trustworthy... and she was in Slytherin

Slughorn is good... he is just human with defects... nothing to be ashamed of.
But he is trustworthy too...

Where's any canon-evidence that Tonks was in Slytherin? O_o

Dumbledore seemed to trust Slughorn, enough to offer him a job in Hogwarts. And although he can come across as simpering and a social climber I think underneath it all he is really trustworthy.

Tonks was in Slytherin and she is trustworthy.... right?

Dang it... what if she is not? and she is just a spy???? I JUST thought about it.. what if there a huuuge revelation about Tonks??

Well.. to THIS point... Tonks has been trustworthy... and she was in Slytherin


There is no canon evidence that Tonks was in Slytherin. none.
(to your question Greeney)