The Slytherins didn't join the battle of Hogwarts. They fled.

I know Rowling what said something in an interview but it looks like a retcon to me. There was no evidence in the books the Slytherins returned.

 

You know, if I wrote a best selling series and people asked me questions as to what happened in a part I didn't commit to paper I'd happily tell them.

If they started screaming, "NO WAI. RETCON," I'd lolwut.

It's like asking what you had for lunch. You say vegetable soup. Someone then says, "Fuck that, I don't like vegetable soup. You had hamburgers."

 

If Slytherins returned, why didn't she put it in the book? I doubt that was her original intention to have them return. It sounds like something she came up later.

The average fan has only read the books and they're the only things that matter to them.

 

Slughorn left Hogwarts with a large number of people. Slughorn returned to Hogwarts with a large number of people. Is it not reasonable to assume that some of those people are the same people?

It seems to me that JKR saying "Slughorn returned with the Slytherins" in interview is a matter of clarifying something that was already in the books as opposed to inserting something that wasn't there. She's merely giving you additional detail on who the people were that Slughorn returned with.

Also the specific interview is here:

 

This. So much this.

Rowling is the author of the series. The de facto god-creator of that universe. Whatever she says, goes.

There is no "oh, that's just my interpretation". There is no place for interpretations. There is no "Death of the Author" bullshit.

There is only the Word of God and the Canon.

It's like people who say Pottermore isn't canon "because they don't see it as canon". Yeah, that's cool guys, but you aren't in a position to decide what is or isn't canon. You don't get to choose.

I mean, you can ignore whatever you like but it doesn't make you right.

 

... yeah, I'm a canon fanatic and even I don't go that far. There's definitely a legitimate debate over what is and isn't canon, and a further debate over what the idea of "canon" even means, by what authority it exists, etc.

You don't get to dismiss all that just because you don't like it.

 

Is it me or does that make it sound like Slytherin is indeed the bad house? It seems to imply that she says "oh well, you were judged as a bad person at 11 but look, you can always change."

 

Yeah, I'm not a fan of that "Sometimes we sort too soon" line. It just reads like "You're starting to show the slightest modicum of human decency? You must not be a Slytherin after all!"

And as for what is canon and what isn't, the fact that she could leave such an apparently important bit of the climax out of the actual narrative is indicative that Rowling does or did not in fact care very much about how readers perceived Slytherin. If it was something she was invested in she probably would have caught it sometime in the rewriting, editing and publishing process.

Like this isn't a fanfic that you finish typing and post within five minutes. She literally had months with her manuscript. If it's a scene that actually made her smile I daresay she'd have, you know, made sure it was in the book her readers would get.

Yeah, no. As far as the book that was actually released to the public goes, Slughorn never leaves the Hogwarts grounds with a large number of people. The Slytherin students are escorted off by Filch.

 

Totally agree. There's nothing in canon that even indicates that Slytherins came back to fight. In fact didn't Voldemort say that all Slytherins joined him when he was talking to Lucius?

Now I know Voldemort is a known liar but there's nothing in canon that disproves his statement. Rowling had the chance to throw a line saying the Slytherins did return, she didn't and I find it hard to believe that was her intention in the first place. It sounds like a retcon based on what we know.

 

The relevant quotes:

And

So yeah, in the book there's no real textual evidence that Slughorn returned with the Slytherins. But for the most part, HP only includes information that Harry himself sees, and Rowling is making the point that "there is no truth, there are only points of view" in that interview. So it's not impossible to make the claim that Voldemort was speaking about only those Slytherins who were already Death Eaters, and that Harry didn't see the ones returning because he didn't expect to see any return. It's just weird, and if Rowling hadn't said it I wouldn't believe you.

 

It's still no excuse. According to Rowling, some Slytherins returned with Slughorn. Harry sees Slughorn reenter the castle, he pays enough attention to identify him and Charlie as well as families he's likely never met, and he couldn't pick out a single Slytherin in the crowd? Not even a simple "...and was that [insert-character-here]? Now that he looked, he could see [insert trait of Slytherins here. Green robe trim maybe?]". I mean she found time and space to include freaking Grawp.

I don't know, it's just not the sort of information I expect to get entirely from an interview.

 

Like I said in an earlier post there are decent Slytherins like Andromeda and Slughorn in canon. Its not totally inconceivable that the reinforcements Slughorn led had its share of Slytherins in it. Rowling confirming it should really put all debate to rest. It may not be palatable to some but its her creation and her version of events trumps everyone else's.

 

Do...do you seriously think this is about palatability?

 

Given that we've got Word of God outright stating it, with nothing in the text to contradict it, I'd go with yes.

 

The problem is that there is no textual evidence so the casual fan will not get it.

 

As for the whole bias toward the Slytherin. Take into consideration that the Wizarding World is an isolated community. Now, taking that into consideration, Houses become a big thing because everyone you meet has gone to Hogwarts and people with whom you've shared a house dorm with are more likely to be your friends or cordial acquaintances.

Also, you've been associated with this House for the majority of your teenage years, developing a sense of belonging to it as you helped younger students and were helped yourself by older students. As such, most alumni have probably keep this pride in their House and successful alumni are probably held as example to younger students through newspaper and teachers alike.

And now come the crux of the matter, Voldemort. Born in the 40s, he establishes himself as the best student Hogwarts has seen in years. He amasses followers, mostly from Slytherin because they share the same classes and we can assume spend more time together. Plus, a lot of old pureblood families encourage their children to end up in Slytherin, and we've seen how the hat takes into consideration the child's desire, because of the blood purist ideology started by Salazar. Voldemort builds upon this idea and find the most supporter within his own house.

Fast-forward a few years and you have the Heir of Slytherin, Lord Voldemort, slaughtering people left and right. Distrust is prevalent in the Wizarding World, your neighbors might be under Imperius and spying on you for the Dark Lord or worse, ordered to kill you and your family. There's a taboo on the Dark Lord's name, leading to what we can assume gruesome death to instill even more fear in his name.

All that end in 1981 when Harry Potter, son of James and Lily, Gryffindor alumni, defeat the Dark Lord. Death Eaters are prosecuted, most of them end up being Slytherin's alumni, most of them purebloods who adhere to blood purist ideology.

So now you have a society who has fought a war against a Founder's Heir. Said heir was using the Founder's ideology of blood purity. Said heir was coming from the Founder's house. Said heir's followers were mostly member of the same house.
Can you really not see why the Slytherin House is tarnished by the Dark Lord's influence?

 

Exactly. Not everyone pores over the book passages every other day or zealously follows Rowling's extra-canonical material. And they shouldn't need to micro-analyze the text or listen to interviews to figure out such an apparently important detail, especially since the books are primarily aimed at children. What preteen is going to read those last few chapters and conclude that the Slytherins came back?

I mean shit, the text is even more reticent on the topic that it is on Dumbledore being gay. And Dumbledore's sexuality actually had pretty solid Watsonian and Doylist justifications for remaining deeply subtextual.

 

I can definitely see it, that's not the point of the thread.

The point is whether House Unity was achieved or not. It wasn't.

 

It actually is: