Kia - porque también somos lo que hemos perdido (no_remorse) wrote in idol_reflection,
Kia - porque también somos lo que hemos perdido
no_remorse
idol_reflection

  • Mood:
  • Music:

Hermione Granger

Title:
Two roads diverged in a yellow wood
And sorry I could not travel both
And be one traveler, long I stood
And looked down one as far as I could
To where it bent in the undergrowth

Fandom: Harry Potter
Character: Hermione Granger
Author: Kia
Spoilers: Book One to Five

Note and disclaimer: Hindsight is always 20/20. What today appears to be difficult decision, becomes the easiest of choices tomorrow when you know the consequences of your choice. The same rule applies to the characters in novels - you should reserve judgement until you finish the book. Hermione's story isn't finished and that makes her a difficult character to be judged.


Hermione Granger is without question the most important and visible female character of the Harry Potter books. Harry met her first on the train from King's Cross to Hogwarts in Book One, when she searched for Neville's toad. She has been a vital element and character of the series ever since.

Hermione was born in Britain in either 1979 or 1980 (this is dated by Nearly Headless Nick celebrating his 500th "deathday" in Harry's second year and his death year being 1492.) Her parents are muggles (non-magical folks) and dentists. She was supposed to have a sister, but Rowling never came around writing her in. Hermione is intelligent, although to which degree has been a topic of contention recently, she is the best student in Harry's year, something she achieved by studying hard and being an over-achiever. (She took "Muggle Studies" in her third year despite being a muggleborn.) She became a prefect in her fifth year and is viewed by many as the most likely candidate to become Head Girl.

She has been described as pretty, having bushy brown hair and brown eyes. She is best friends with Harry and Ron ever since they defeated a mountain troll on Halloween during their first year. She didn't had any friends at Hogwarts before and hasn't made many friends since. Hermione used to have fairly poor social skills - she used to like rules, had no sense for tact and she used to let everyone know that she knows everything and everything better than anyone else. These character traits have slowly and gradually diminished over the course of the five books and are now a lot less predominant than they used to be. Yet they still hide what becomes obvious on a second look - Hermione is very insecure.

Hermione is also friends with Ginny Weasley, but it is impossible to tell how deep or casual that friendship is due to the fact that these two characters hardly ever interact with each other in Harry's company. Hermione seems to have a rather highbrow sense of humour, she dislikes the practical jokes of the Weasley Twins, yet she is not above drily remarking that Ron predicts in his phony Diviniations homework that he will drown twice.

Hermione Jane Granger shares a middle name with the series' most hated character: Dolores Jane Umbridge - and indeed they do have a few things in common. Both share affection for rules, both are self-righteous, both believe that the ends justify the means, both are ruthless, both believe that they know without a doubt what is good and what is evil and they act accordingly.

There is one important difference between them though: Hermione is self-righteous, but she is also never wrong. It sounds incredible, but it's true - Hermione might not always completely right, but she never gets it completely wrong and actually gets it more often completely right than anyone else. That's not only true for such assumptions as believing the Midnight Duel to be a set-up, believing that the Basilisk is behind the petrifications in Harry's second year, the Firebolt coming from Sirius, Remus Lupin being a werewolf, Crookshanks not killing Scabbers, Harry not putting his name into the Goblet of Fire, believing Viktor Krum to be a genuinely nice guy, Rita Skeeter being an animagus, predicting Cho's emotional state to the last detail, Umbridge being a genuine danger to Hogwarts and the "kidnapping" of Sirius being a trap, no, Hermione is also never wrong when she has a plan and executes that plan.

Let's take the infamous jinx on the DA signature parchment: It shouldn't have worked. If there had been no mirror in Umbridge's office, if Marietta had been less vain or more out for vengeance... everyone would have been expelled faster than you can say "Hogwarts". The jinx caused a bad case of acne, but it didn't alarm DA that someone had spilled the beans; it worked as a form of vengeance, but it didn't stop the sneak from telling. And it made no difference to the reason why someone spilled the beans and it made no exception for Hermione's friends. If Ron had told Umbridge about DA under the Cruciatus curse, then he would have suffered under the jinx as much as Marietta. But although all odds were against the jinx working as a protection for DA, it worked.

Same can be said of a myriad of other things Hermione has done like: poisoning two fellow students, kidnapping and blackmailing a fellow human being, leading a teacher to a likely death. All these acts have turned against all odds and problems out to work in Hermione's favour. Hermione has been right, despite the fact that her actions are more than just a little bit questionable. This is interesting and one of the big Hermione issues, because it questions the authorial intent. Is Rowling setting up Hermione for a fall here, is Rowling preparing the cleverest subtext about the nature of war or is Hermione getting rewarded with a gold star for her actions actually the author believing that Hermione is right?

I cannot answer this question. And because I cannot answer this question, I cannot tell you whether Hermione self-righteousness does truly translate into being right. It appears that way right now, but that can change. Considering that so far Hermione has pissed off not only a high-ranking ministry official, but also an influential reporter and plans to free what can be viewed as property owned by the government, there is more than one possibility how Hermione can be really, really wrong for once.

(It's interesting to note that people start to have issues with Hermione, the best student in her year, who is pretty, can make an international Quidditch superstar make fall in love with her, is admittedly like Rowling when she was young, knows everything from obscure spells to Cho's innermost feelings, who is always right and gets away with murder. If Hermione's flaws continue to be perceived as being only bushy hair and an abrasive personality, then the accusations of Hermione being a canon Mary Sue will multiply by tenfold.)


Hermione is not only ruthless and self-righteous, but she is also compassionate and loyal. She is the only person in the entire Wizarding World that advocates the abolishment of the house-elf slavery. The fact that Rowling chose the word "slavery" instead of all the other much more neutral words, she could have chosen, is a red flag that Hermione (once again) is on the right track, although her S.P.E.W. (Society for Promotion of Elfish Welfare) campaigns have been very, very ineffective so far. She is loyal to a degree that borders on self-denial. Despite her deep belief in her own infallibility and knowledge, when Ron and Harry oppose her, Hermione bows to their pressure and falls in line. There are only three instances where Hermione didn't relent and in all three she was believing that she was protecting either Harry's life (the Sirius "kidnapping" and the Firebolt fight) or Crookshanks (the Scabbers Incident).


In the HP movies Hermione is played by Emma Watson, who portrays her as disturbing mix of Spice Girl, genius, the girl next door and Buffy the Vampire Slayer. For some reason (favouritism?) the script gives Hermione both the Basil Exposition role and all the juicy lines, even when they originally belonged to Ron. People are now praying for Steve Kloves' early retirement.


In fandom Hermione is one of the most popular characters around. She is disliked by quite a few people, but even more people identify with her. That creates the interesting phenomenon of the "Hermione Sue" wherein Hermione is used as a facade for a self-insert. The most blatant instances are the makeover!Hermione fics in which Hermione straigthens her hair, gets miraculously DD boobs, wears a pound of make-up and listens to the band of the hour - be it Linkin Park or Evanescance. Unfortunately most self-insert!Hermiones are a lot more difficult to spot, if at all, as they come in all guises and some of them are even in character.

In discussions of the text references to that self-identification are not uncommon either. How on the mark this self-identification is, is a matter of the debate in itself and as fandom's readings of the character Hermione Granger are pretty divergent to begin with, this matter will never be settled.

Fandom!Hermione is - due to her popularity - the female shipping and fanfic equivalent to Harry - from Hermione/Dumbledore to Hermione/Giant Squid every possible Hermione pairing has been written. The most popular Hermione ships are Draco/Hermione - the Hermione ship with the most fanfiction to its name, Snape/Hermione - Kink Central, Hermione/Ginny - the most popular femmeslash pairing and most wankily Ron/Hermione and Harry/Hermione.

Both the Ron/Hermione and Harry/Hermione ship consider it more than possible that their ship will sail in the last two books and that puts them a bit at odds with each other. While there seems to be a wide-spread consensus that Ron has a crush on Hermione, Hermione's romantic feelings have been a bit more obscure ever since she recovered from her crush on Gilderoy Lockhart. She had a relationship with Viktor Krum, that was at least on his side romantic, and she still exchanges letters with him. Beyond this fact there have been conflicting signals coming her - or to word this more exactly - with every potentially romantic action of Hermione's comes with an in-built alternative, non-romantic explanation. Some people believe that the reason for that is that Rowling is preparing the Love Triangle of Doom, but that's an entirely different story.

Both groups mostly ignore the possibility that they both might wrong, although it is quite a likely scenario. Some H/H and R/Hr shippers find themselves re-united on the Harry/Ron/Hermione threesome ship, a ship known for its smut and its love for the Trio as a unit.

In fanfiction Hermione's name is often shortened to a Mione or even Mya. In the books Hermione never allowed anyone but a twenty-feet, speech-impaired giant to shorten her name into anything but Hermione.

Fandom in general disregards the possibility of Hermione dying before the end of Book Seven. It is worthy to note that Hermione has been labeled by Rowling as someone "Harry needs badly," (considering Hermione's input in Harry's Get Out Of These Seven School Years Alive schemes this is more than true) her loss would be an actual loss to the light side, to Harry, it would hit everyone and the reader where it hurts. It would be dramatic. But what makes me believe that it is a real possibility is the fact that Hermione hadn't had a storyline of her own in OotP and that she didn't developed as a character either. The Hermione, we meet at the beginning of the novel, is exactly the same Hermione we leave at the end of the novel. But then one can easily make a case for her not needing to develop anymore.

If Rowling really intends to portray Hermione's more questionable actions as right, then there is no lesson Hermione still needs to learn. Everything that Ron and Harry still have to work for character-wise, they still have to learn, would be already learned by Hermione. If Harry Potter is seen as a Bildungsroman, then one can see Hermione of having finished the race for psychological, moral and intellectual maturity early.

Too early. If Hermione is finished in her development, then she is bound to become a static character that has nowhere to go. To read about such characters (and to write them) is boring. Characters need development to fuel a story, need to make mistakes to get the story, the plot working, so if Hermione has been finishing her development early, Rowling can take her nowhere worth going anymore. In that case it would make sense to kill her off.

But then there are good arguments for Rowling killing Ron or Harry, too. Hermione isn't necessarily the most likely Trio member to die, but she isn't the least likely candidate either.


In conclusion, nothing conclusive can be said about the direction where Hermione is heading, only where she is right now. It's a tight spot, Rowling has written herself in, in my opinion. Whether Hermione will be right for the rest of the books or not– her characterisation will determine the way many people perceive Rowling's ethics and the quality of Rowling's writing.



Recs:
Due to the fact that in-character!Hermione is a topic of contention, I won't rec any fanfiction.

Art:
Hermione Granger by Joreal
Hermione with Crookshanks by Kemotan
Hermione, Harry, Ron by Glockgal
Halloween!Hermione by yukipon
Hermione crying by Yethro
Hermione with time-turner by Katrina
Hermione and Crookshanks by thistlefinch
Hermione as Head Girl by sas
Hermione with rat by Dominique

Discussion:
Hermione is prejudiced: 1, 2, 3, 4 by morgan_d
Blackmail in GoF by Elkins
Hermione? Brightest witch of her age? Brilliant? Not on your life. by mirabellawotr
Rebuttal regarding Hermione's intelligence by readerravenclaw
Subscribe
Y'know, after reading this essay I went to the info page to re-read the rules and idea of this community.

We encourage everyone to sign up and introduce us to their favorite...

I actually don't feel that Hermione is your favorite. While some others may write too much about their own ideas, I found too little here from you. What does interest you in Hermione? What do you prefer and why? What's your idea of canon and why? I would have loved to gotten recs, although and because they would show what you would want Hermione to be like in fanfic.

All your links read more anti-Hermione and I don't like the wording of "female fanfic mattress". I feel you're writing from a prejudiced viewpoint, and if you have another opinion deep inside of you and are really interested in this character, you missed the opportunity to show at least me what that interest is.

I like Hermione and she is one of my favourite characters, but I thought that the title of this community was idol_reflection, not idolization.

These are my thoughts on Hermione and yes, I am critical of the direction this character is going, in fact I am majorly concerned with it. And that's why questioning Hermione modus operandi of "the ends justify the means" occupy so much space instead of the shipping question or Hermione's insecurity issues or her S.P.E.W. campaign. Because that is what I consider the break or make issue for Hermione's characterisation. However I don't think that I can make the call and say that Hermione won't take a fall in regards of this modus operandi, and that's why I can't damn her and that's why I can't absolve her. I cannot say that what Hermione does is evil, not with the possibility on the horizon that Rowling thinks it's okay. But if you think that wording it as "poisoning, kidnapping, blackmail, getting someone killed" doesn't contain a note of personal opinion and judgement, when I could use a lot less inflammatory language, well....

My view of fanon!Hermione is not favourable, because I do believe that there the Hermione Sue phenomenon is quite popular. (I will think about re-wording the admittedly crass mattress thing) The reason why I didn't rec fanfiction is that I took into account that I've been exposed to two groups of people accusing each other regularly of writing OOC!Hermione. I haven't regularly read fanfiction for a year and that's why I couldn't think of one fic that wouldn't have someone somewhere complaining about Hermione being OOC and I wouldn't have understood that complaint.

To address the rest of your concerns: canon is a collective delusion and what I like about Hermione is the brutal honesty that Rowling used to describe her, I like her tactlessness, her blunders, her love for knowledge, her sharp analyzation skills, her gentle and not-so gentle smackdowns, her courage, her loyalty, her ability to be self-sacrificial, her nerdiness, her being real enough to give millions of women and girls a positive object for self-identification. (And that's not coincidentally what I wrote about in my post.)
This is definitely one of my favorite essays I've read thus far in this community. I really enjoyed reading it.
What a great essay. The point I liked best (and simultaneously worries me most) is this:

Is Rowling setting up Hermione for a fall here, is Rowling preparing the cleverest subtext about the nature of war or is Hermione getting rewarded with a gold star for her actions actually the author believing that Hermione is right?

I'm terribly worried that it's the last. I'm hoping it's not.
A quick question:
When you said Hermione was never wrong. Did you mean that as she always ends up right, that what she does is never in the wrong or something else entirely?
Because I would have to disagree with you if it was the first: In CoS Hermione is as certain as Harry and Ron that Malfoy was the Heir of Slytherin.
In the second sense, Harry Potterverse makes so she isn't in the wrong, you know the end justifies the means as long as you are on the good side.

I really liked your essay.
I meant that whatever the situation, Hermione always gets it kind of right. Even if she doesn't completely get it, she is never completely wrong. Yes, the heir of Slytherin is different, but it is a group effort and as a group the Trio has been wrong repeatedly. When Hermione thinks on her own, she never gets it wrong.
Actually, Hermione has been wrong at least once. In PS/SS, she thought that Snape was jinxing Harry's broom. He was actually trying to protect Harry from Quirrell/Voldemort's attack. (And I will anticipate any accusation of her attempting to murder/harm Snape here by quoting:

"Bright blue flames shot from her wand onto the hem of Snape's robes. It took perhaps thirty seconds for Snape to realize that he was on fire. A sudden yelp told her she had done her job. Scooping the fire off him into a little jar in her pocket, she scrambled back along the row - Snape would never know what had happened.")

There may or may not be other instances, but there is at least one time that she was wrong. ;)

As for "poisoning two fellow students," I'm uncertain if you are claiming that Hermione "poisoned" Crabbe and Goyle? If that's the incident that you're referring to, she gave them (and again I'm quoting,) "a simple Sleeping Draught" not a poison. Although, it is certainly possible that anything could be a poison in large enough quantities.

As for leading a teacher to a likely death, that's debatable. Obviously, Umbridge did not die. And Hermione's own words to the centaurs were "We only came in here because we hoped you'd drive her off for us--" Personally, I doubt that Hermione considered that Umbridge would be murdered - although, that is a possibility. As for whether or not what Hermione did was justified... Some people seem to think so and some do not. I tend to agree with those who feel that she was desperate and acted on the first thought that came to mind. Consider that Umbridge was about to cast the Cruciatus Curse on Harry. Hermione was aware at this point of two things: (1) that Neville's parents had been driven permanently insane by the extended use of the Cruciatus Curse and (2) that Umbridge had already sent the dementors after Harry. Umbridge says, "He never knew that I ordered dementors after Potter last summer, but he was delighted to be given the chance to expel him, all the same..." So, in my view, Hermione had no reason to think that Umbridge would stop with only the Cruciatus.

Whether or not Hermione will end up being Rowling's Mary Sue is still very much up in the air. We don't know if Hermione is, in fact, being set up for a very large fall or not.
Actually, Hermione has been wrong at least once. In PS/SS, she thought that Snape was jinxing Harry's broom.

But a teacher was jinxing Harry's broom, so while she got the wrong teacher, she still got the right idea. And her plan to stop the jinx worked despite her suspecting the wrong teacher.

she gave them (and again I'm quoting,) "a simple Sleeping Draught" not a poison.

A poison is a substance that contaminates, injures or kills. As knocking someone out is an injury, is causing temporary physical harm, the Sleeping Draught is a poison regardless of the dose.

As for leading a teacher to a likely death, that's debatable.

Hermione herself called the Centaurs "murderous" after the Grawp episode, she witnessed them trying to kill one of their own, she knew of their anti-human attitude. To lead an adult (a non-foal), who wass extremely prejudiced against intelligent magical creatures, to these Centaurs is leading someone to a probable, if not certain death. Now we can argue about self-defense until we are both blue in the face (in fact I have argued this before), but regardless of the validity of the claim that this was self-defense, leading someone to a probable or certain is still just that. Even if it is justified, the action itself doesn't change.
I think what they're trying to say is that while you're making sense, you do seem to be putting a negative spin on Hermione's actions.

Yes, Snape is a teacher. Fine. But the fact is she thought it was Snape the person, the evil prat which they all hate who they, including Hermione, wanted to kill Harry. Not Snape the Professor.

Yes, technically it was poison. But it was also a mild sleeping solution. Playing with semantics was just some negative spin. Admit it: saying what she gave them was poison would illicit much more negative reactions from the public who like to equate poison with say, anthrax. If you had said, "mildy dosed two students with a sleeping potion", the reaction you would have gotten would have been mild in return. Thus you spinned it negatively.

Leading someone to perhaps a death is negative yes, but it regardless of that action it was in self-defense. Adding those two extra words would have made it look too soft, and thus you left them out. Spin.

Your essay is well thought out and it does make a lot of sense, but like the vast majority of fan essays, it's not neutral. It leans. Doesn't matter to me whether it leans pro or con, left or right, it still leans, and thus it loses a lot of pull with me. *shrug*
Yes, Snape is a teacher. Fine. But the fact is she thought it was Snape the person, the evil prat which they all hate who they, including Hermione, wanted to kill Harry. Not Snape the Professor.

Yes, but when it mattered her suspecting Snape the teacher (instead of just suspecting Snape the evil prat) and acting on it saved Harry's life, when Snape was sitting on teachers' bench close to Quirrell. If that counts for something.

Yes, technically it was poison.

They were out cold for more than an hour. That's not a mild dose IMO. But actually what made me use the verb "poison" here wasn't the fact that Hermione "dosed" them, but rather that she hid the sleeping draught in food that Crabbe and Goyle didn't know was tainted. That was insideous - not unlike the case where allegedly an Ukranian politician was given a non-toxic dose of a certain substance in his soup. He didn't die, in fact, it isn't clear what the "certain substance" was, if the aim was to kill him or even if the story is true, but if you look to coverage of the story, the verb used to describe the action of putting a non-toxic dose in food consumed by an unsuspecting victim, is "poison." I used the word correctly and put Hermione's action in perspective by doing so. "Dosing" implies consent on Crabbe and Goyle's side and that it was done openly and neither is true.

that action it was in self-defense

I don't consider it self-defence. That's why I did not put these two words in the original post. Because I don't consider it true and it is a post that represents my opinion. I do think we can argue about the question if it was self-defence and I had that discussion a few times, but I do take a side in that discussion.


I really tried not to spin my post, but rather to do a balanced post on the good side and the bad side of Hermione Granger. I am sorry that you think I failed.
Here via d_s. This was an incredibly well-written essay. You've touched on several issues I myself have also noticed; namely, that Hermione has matured too quickly. I find it very intriguing that you draw from this the idea that it would plausible for Hermione to die before Book 6. I myself assumed it would be Ron who died, if any of the trio members were killed.

Another curious fact -- Hermione sharing a middle name with Umbridge. I'm more inclined to attribute it to laxness on the part of Rowling. ^^**

Thank you for an excellent read. Putting this in my memories. ^^
Hermione sharing a middle name with Umbridge. I'm more inclined to attribute it to laxness on the part of Rowling.

There is actually another explanation (which is frankly a bit weird once you look at the "Dolores" part of it) - Rowling's favourite author is Jane Austen (hence the repeated use of the name), but the weird thing is that Rowling's favourite novel of the 20th Century is Nabokov's "Lolita" and the real name of the character of Lolita is "Dolores Haze" - so Umbridge's two names could be actually a reference to two favourites of Rowling. Why should would want to use them for Umbridge of all characters, however, is anyone's guess.
Oo, now that's interesting. I wonder if Rowling is saying something about the sexuality of the adult/child relationship between Umbridge and Harry. I definitely hadn't thought about it before, but if you think sex = control/power/possession, there is definitely an interesting idea there.

I take it you read quite a bit? I only ask b/c I really like to read, but when I ask ppl if they like to, they look at me like I have three heads... ^^**
(I guess it's a bit silly replying to an old post and you probably already know this.)

I always assumed the name Dolores was thought along the same lines as 'Umbridge' and intended as a reference to the Latin word 'dolor -> pain, sorrow'. Indeed 'dolores' is the plural of 'dolor'.

Some personal information follows below. I hope it's not offensive.

- - -

As for no-one liking poor Dolores, as you mentioned in another article. Well... I did. As a classical (big M) Masochist I found her to be an interesting embodiment of female authority. The detention scene was erotic to me.

Bellatrix, on the other hand, didn't really do anything for me. If you're familiar with some D&D terminology it's Lawful/Evil that fascinates me, not Chaotic/Evil.

As for her ugliness... Well. I can deal with fat. In fact, fat and overly feminine is a combination I can appreciate. Toadlike, on the other hand, is hard to get around but I still don't think I saw the character as all that physically unappealing when reading the book (I've only read the work once through and there's been some time, I'll pay notice to what exact descriptions are used on my next time around).

Would I have liked Umbridge even more had she been young, thin and beautiful? I suppose I would have. What I would really prefer, though, is an author with enough imagination to describe a fat female character as physically appealing. Or at least not completely unattractive.
I know about dolor having spent seven years of my life learning Latin and for the longest I accepted it as The Explanation for Umbridge's name. But only when I researched the influence of snyesthesia on a writer and used the one writer where you can do that, who actually told the world in which colour he sees the letters of the alphabet and his most infamous play with words - Lolita, Lo, Lola, Dolly, Dolores, I realised that Dolores might be more than just pain.

You are dead on with the fat criticism, especially since "fat" people are never good guys in HP. Or as I joked once that you should watch out for Molly Weasley because those extra-pounds spell DOOM. But her ugliness... well, that's the reason why no one in fandom likes her. There are fangirls for everyone but Vernon and Umbridge, but with Umbridge... even her "fanlisting" wishes for her death.
I love this. I am, however, desperately hoping that the house-elf issue turns out to be what Hermione is Finally Wong about, because I think the whole comparison of house-elves (who like being servants) to human slaves is bogus as all hell and if I were black it would piss me off. Contrary to Star Trek: The Next Generation, there's no reason for non-human sentients to have the same drives and needs as humans, and Hermione strikes me as the sort of person who, if she met a race of sentient bees, would start agitating to free the workers.
I don't know about freeing the workers, since teaching the queen to be more than a baby-producing machine and founding a retirement home for old drones seem to be admirable goals when reforming a bee society. ;)

On my part I hope it's not the house-elves, because Rowling opened a can of worms with the use of the word "slavery" that she can't simply close with proving Hermione wrong. If you read Philip Pullman going apeshit over Lewis' treatment of Susan and the Calormenes in Narnia, then you simply don't have to develop any imagination what happens if Rowling declares slavery natural and okay. At the end of the day the humanity of the elves or lack thereof doesn't matter, only that Rowling used the term slavery and no retroactive continuity, no explanation is going to get her out of that.
Well, Hermione used the word 'slavery' and I would be delighted to see her proven wrong for once, i.e., it's not 'slavery' because elves aren't human and don't have human drives--any more than bees do.

See, I don't quite understand why you would want intelligent bees to behave like humans. They're not.
Well, Hermione used the word 'slavery' and I would be delighted to see her proven wrong for once, i.e., it's not 'slavery' because elves aren't human and don't have human drives--any more than bees do.

But they resemble human more than bees do and in the context of a fantasy stories can be taken as a metaphor for certain ethical groups. Lewis' Calormenes are not Arabs, they're fictional. They are not called "Arabs" by anyone in the story,they are not altogether beyond redemption. Yet Pullman understands them as Arabs and their treatment in the Narnia Chronicles as racist.

Rowling called (even if you perceive it as by proxy) the house-elves slaves. If she doesn't prove that slavery - no matter what fictional creature we are talking about - is bad, bad, bad, the Pullman's of this world won't hesitate calling her out on it. I am afraid I might be one of them, because I think your bee comparison is off. Bees live the way they live - and they serve no one and don't have to punish themselves for mistakes - because it's their biological imperative.

If it was a biological imperative (a matter of survival) for house-elves to serve humans for free, then Dobby would be dead by now.
They liked it 0