You forget that Harry was almost placed in Slytherin, and only because of hearing about how bad it is from Ron he chose not to.[/quite]
Moot point. Even so, Harry chose not to go into the house that had evil, or a non-caring nature assigned to it. He selected, and the sorting hat agreed, that he was not to be a part of Slytherin. You cannot bring this up as an excuse. Perhaps you ought to read the first, second, fifth and sixth books again?
Now, if Slytherins have various prejudices, and these are so bad, why is Ron not called out on his prejudice against Slytherins... who are not all bad. Oh no - being ambitious is a bad thing! Heavens forbid, for example, someone like Hermione is ambitious.
What on earth does this have to do with anything? Yes, Ron has prejudices but he'd never kill, harm, or abandon anyone for them, as Slytherins have a bad habit of doing. Yeah, Slytherins have ambition over all else, but it so happens that your shining examples place a bit more importance on other traits to their character.
You forget that for the most part, all wizards would show traits common to each house (bravery, intelligence, loyalty and ambition). For example, Hermione, a bloody Gryffindor, shows those things. One could argue that even a Bellatrix Lestrange shows these things - I'm not a fan of her but she shows bravery in fighting, she's reasonably intelligent, she's loyal to the Dark Lord and she aspires to be the greatest in his circle.
Yes, that's true. Every wizard does show a little of each of those properties. But as I just said, Slytherins, above all else tend to show a bit more "ambition" to acheive their goal. Perhaps ambition is just a way of glossing over what Slytherin is all about though...the books, which are much better evidence than what your deluded mind points towards, tend to show that they have a little more to them than "ambition".
No, it doesn't. After all the 'I'm not a coward!' stuff in Half Blood Prince he doesn't get the spectacular death, or even the redemption just prior to it. He dies with everyone thinking he's still evil. That's not fair. Severus deserved better.
And he got better, Harry cleared his name.
Moving on...
Early on in the piece, Hermione says she got rid of her parents by modifying their memories (i.e. by Obliviating them) to make them forget they ever had a daughter, and to make them think they wanted to move to Australia.
Later on, Hermione claims she'd never performed a memory charm before, but she "knew the theory".
That's a contradiction in terms, is it not? It's sloppy editing.
I was just discussing this before with someone on MSN. It needs a re-read. From what I can recall, Hermione modified the memories of her parents, and then confessed to Harry that she wasn't sure she did a good job. Later on, she said as you said, when in haste and then simply obliviated the memories of the death eaters. I think its acceptable for her to make such mistakes when in a rush, but it does need a re-read. Either way, it's hardly a gaping plot hole that had much of an impact upon anything. Yeah, maybe if Dobby had shown up celebrating at the end then you could have a whinge, but atm you're making a mountain out of a molehill.
But yes, re-read. If there's a plothole then so be it I guess.
It depends on what you define as the 'greater good'. I just think it's entirely hypocritical.
Either way, as I said, these two curses are restricted by law not because they're pure evil, but because they're a hazard.
Okay, maybe the Dark Lord was slightly distracted, but it doesn't explain Narcissa. She seemed to know he was alive.
Nope.
I'll have a look at those websites later. I did enjoy the book, I thought it was fantastic. I do happen to think that you're a bit deluded in your obsession with Slytherin, I do think that you put too much emphasis on small matters, I do think that you're making the book out to be far worse than it actually was, and I do think you gloss certain parts over to make your point. It's a pity you didn't enjoy it, but Rowling did say that many wouldn't. That's a shame.