Prejudice
Prejudice against different classes has been around for a very long time. It has been defined in these earlier times by Harriet Hudson’s analysis of The Squire. This analysis is of middle English popular romances, there was no way one could actually move up or down in social rankings, it was only by mere luck that someone was able to do so (Hudson 80). In earlier writings, prejudice was shown in the way to move around in social status was to gain property or marry into it, and those were the only options. The nobles of this time were able to be secure in their spot in the social order because of their “assured lineage, an entailed title , and non partible estates.” This was a way for the noble people to assert themselves over the lower classes who had no titles and fragmented estates (81). This was prejudice against those who did not have money. This prejudice led to social inequality of those who did not have money by pushing them into an oppressed state where they could not change their social standing without help from the higher class who would not help the lower class because they enjoyed the high social standing leaving the poorer, lower class with no way to change their lives for the better.
Britton Harwood defines the prejudice between classes as class being “not the cause of conflict but the consequence of conflict over surplus product.” In this definition of the rivalry between classes, one can assume that class is not even an issue. The class differences only come from the power of one group of people with more of the “values produced by labor”, like money or property, than another group (95). The power struggle resulting from whomever has the most most money can lead to prejudice against the poor class. This prejudice leads to social inequalities in which the wealthier class can mentally put down the other class. The wealthy class does this to make the poorer class believe that they have less personal worth than the higher class and therefore do not merit the better lifestyle that the wealthy class leads.
|
You would think that in today’s society books that are being published now there would have a lack of class differences because of sayings you might have heard when you were little about “everyone being equal” but there are still some differences in the classes no matter how hard authors try and avoid it. At the beginning of chapter three in Evading Class in Contemporary British Literature, Driscoll quotes Martin Amis, one of the authors in his analysis. The quote reads “Do you still think any of that crap matters, class and so on? It doesn’t. It’s crap. It’s crap.” This quote exemplifies the beliefs of many that class shouldn’t matter but even within Amis’ own work the thoughts about class are “reinforced...rather than undermin[ed]”(97). In Driscoll’s analysis of Amis’ book Money, he points out that the satire that Amis uses in the book is “pushed to the point where we ... believe there are no class problems”(100) but in the novel John Self, a working class man, hopes that oppertunities and money will “bring equality” (101) which relates to the earlier English writings that money and property can propel you forwards in class standings. The prejudice shown in these writings illustrate the fact that the only way to succeed in moving upwards in social standings would be to gain money or else be stuck in whatever class you are in forever, giving the upper class advantages over everyone else. This also relates back to the social inequalities that money, and with it power, bring to a society. Money can also bring about the oppression of individual thought, as shown by John Self’s beliefs that money can make everyone equal. This is an oppression of the individual thought because as this is the belief of what the community surrounding John would like him to believe subjecting him to oppression of his own thoughts and into conformity with the beliefs of the people surrounding him.
Social inequality
Social inequality is demonstrated in the book Imperial Masochism: British Fiction, Fantasy and Social Class by John Kucich. There is a chapter part in this book talking about bullies and bystanders. This part of the chapter talks about setting up a boy to be punished by making him miss a football practice (144). Also, within the same book by Kucich, there is talk about an omnipresent bully. Because this omnipresent bully can lead those who are being bullied to have “idealized” the bully and hope to receive some kind of “redemptive love” from the bully for the victim. These victims who are being made fun of and emotionally put down, or even physically bullied to believe that their life is worth nothing to the bully. This would identify with the “wish to triumph over the abuser by transforming infinitely abusive attention into infinitely loving attention” (147). This relates to oppression because the omnipresent bully pushed the bullied persons into believing that they are lower than the bully. This shows the social inequality towards those who are perceived to be lower in status than the supposedly ‘greater’ person.
I will use these texts to relate to the Harry Potter series by looking specifically at how the house elves are treated. The house elves Dobby, Winky and Kreacher all have different ways that they regard wizards depending on how they were treated in the homes that they served. The social inequality and prejudice toward these house elves can be seen in multiple chapters within the Harry Potter series by J.K. Rowling. I will be looking at different sets of chapters for each of the main house elves showcased in the Harry Potter books.