The Hogwarts Houses

Apr 30, 2005 12:10

I've been meaning to say this for quite some time: I don't believe in the Hogwarts houses and don't take them into account when writing fics or considering characterisation. There ( Read more... )

meta: hp, hp discussions

Leave a comment

Comments 30

tammaiya April 30 2005, 03:22:19 UTC
What *I* really don't like about the House system is the way book 5 basically says, "Yeah, the Hufflepuffs are the rejects. The other three took the ones they wanted, and... well, Ms Hufflepuff felt sorry for the rest of 'em. *shifty look*"

(*is somehow unable to remember her first name, despite being able to remember Salazar, Godric and Rowena* *CURSE YOU, MURPHY!*)

Reply

(The comment has been removed)

tammaiya April 30 2005, 06:05:35 UTC
Ah, I thought so, but I was unsure enough to leave it out. *g*

And good point about the Hufflepuffs- I really love Zacharias, especially. The thing with Hufflepuffs is by essentially classing them as "other", you're not restricting them so much.

Ooh, that's clever.

Reply

donnaimmaculata April 30 2005, 06:35:20 UTC
Harry's a Hufflepuff, though I don't think of him as overly loyal.

I love you for saying that. I think Harry is nothing but loyal. And as I was planning on discussing people's perceptions of different character traits and their manifestations at some point, I will make sure to ask for your input. It'll be very interesting to see which attributes different readers contribute to the characters.

Reply


(The comment has been removed)

donnaimmaculata April 30 2005, 08:25:00 UTC
Yeah, I think we did ( ... )

Reply

Here via d_s mafdet April 30 2005, 19:02:51 UTC
My impression is that it was Rowling's intentions to illustrate the many faces of bravery, but as it is, fandom often assumes that "brave'" equals "reckless" and concludes that ever Gryffindor must be reckless. But "brave" can be the exact opposite of "reckless":

On that note, I want to point out that Neville may be physically not a risk-taker (he fell off his broom in PS/SS) but he is emotionally very brave. Case in point: Who was the first of the Gryffindor boys to actually ask a girl to the Yule Ball? And who, when the first girl he asked turned him down, just sucked it up and asked another girl, rather than turning tail and pulling the covers over his head ( ... )

Reply

anonymous May 1 2005, 04:13:09 UTC
you can't say that because a person shows character trait A, they necessarily also show character trait B, but will never show character trait C. This, however, is an argument that often pops up in discussions ("Snape is a Slytherin, he would never do that!")

Yes! Thank you! If a good Slytherin is like Fanon!Lucius --subtle, restrained, manipulative and skilled at presenting himself in a good light -- Snape is less of a Slytherin than Remus Lupin or Dumbledore. He's inflexible, he works hard and is, I think, completely loyal (whether to DD or Vmort is moot). He'd have done pretty well in Hufflepuff, imho.

Here from DS, btw.

Reply


out_fox April 30 2005, 06:38:53 UTC
I agree the Houses reflecting character concept is a bit of a farce (fics that challenge the idea of Sytherins as cold & evil are my favourite) but..Harry as a Hufflepuff ( ... )

Reply

lanjelin May 1 2005, 12:06:06 UTC
This is very interesting; I've thought a lot on Harry's personality and would like to ask you what you mean more exactly by "unsubtle in his selfexpression and understanding of ethics". Not necessarily because I disagree with you of course, I just want to hear some opinions. :)

I myself suspect that he has this "saving things" behaviour because of his (subconscious) utter lack of trust in the adults. (Brought on by his upbringing with the Dursley's.) He just doesn't expect them to be of any help to him, because that's what he's been used to all his life.

his bravery is sometimes useful, sometimes not; but who's expecting an 11-15 year old to have perfect control? What I always think when reading the books is that he throws himself so completely into danger, because he's really saving the only things he's got. His friends, Hogwarts, the wizarding world even; where would he be without them ( ... )

Reply


froda_baggins April 30 2005, 13:35:24 UTC
So, basically what it boils down to is "house stereotypes are stupid"? I agree with that.

Personally, I think the Sorting Hat probably uses a lot of different factors in deciding the house of a particular student, like, well first the students should be relatively evenly divided amongst the houses, the personalities of the students, the traits that need to be nurtured, which houses the children prefer, and any number of other things that are probably taken into account.

Which is why a lot of the characters in the books don't fit neatly into one house; because the traits they show are not the only factor in deciding their house, not by a long shot.

Er, dunno where I'm going with that. *taps chin*

Reply


sistermagpie April 30 2005, 18:56:20 UTC
This is such a fascinating idea, the way that seriously, any character could be put into any house and be seen as the "typical" character of that house. It's a great way to just trick the reader--people just fit characters into the house traits as they know them. Once you know *any* character well you start questioning why he wasn't put in some other house. That means most of the Gryffindors are suspect: I know I've read essays suggesting better houses for Hermione, Neville, Percy and Harry at least--oh, and Crabbe and Goyle.

That's why, I think, it's so fun for people to take a character where we don't know their house and discuss what it might have been. Some people assume Gilderoy was a Slytherin--personally I like him as Gryffindor. Obviously it doesn't change his personality, it just changes how he's perceived.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up