Comments | hp_essays: Real-world politics and the Hogwarts Houses

manawydn in hp_essays

Real-world politics and the Hogwarts Houses

Aug 04, 2007 13:24

Undoubtedly someone has already addressed this subject in an essay. I however was unable to find it and so am writing my own. This is my first HP essay but hopefully not my last (unless it is truly dreadful and then it would must certainly be hoped to be the only one ( Read more... )

wizarding world:politics, house:house system

Comments 28

sari_malfoy August 4 2007, 11:26:34 UTC

I just have to state again how disappointed I was, that Deathly Hallows didn't come to any expected/promised conclusion about the houses, and how ambigious the overall message came by the end (Snape being the bravest man Harry knew, but before that the allusion to Snape perhaps not being a real Slytherin at all, which I disagree with).

I wish someone would write a critical essay about the Slytherin house, pre-Dh and post-DH.

Your essay was good, I'm sure others will agree.

alldoubtaboutit August 4 2007, 12:08:47 UTC

Seconded about the Slytherin house! I also do think that the idea of Snape not being quite so Slytherin after all is nonsense. For one, mere categories do not define people, and the idea that Slytherins can't be brave without being Slytherin at the same time riles something within me. In Deathly Hallows we have had two obvious cases of 'brave' Slytherins, Regulus and Snape, and their bravery has gone almost completely unnoticed. I'm starting to think that in some way, Slytherins may be nobler in Gryffindor when it comes to acts of bravery, because if Gryffindor's defining factor is bravery, Gryffindors would aspire to bravery and do the brave thing, the one that will gain them recognition and have them hailed as heroes, which in a way, can be a very self-serving thing to do. The idea of being hailed as traditional heroes in the Gryffindor way is probably a bit repulsive to Slytherins, and so, if they were to accomplish acts of bravery public recognition would be last on the list of motivating factors ( ... )

sari_malfoy August 4 2007, 12:26:51 UTC

I agree, and consider one more thing about Gryffindor bravery against Slytherin bravery. What if Harry had been in the situation Snape was (let's forget the argument that he never would) after Lily's death. Could a Gryffindor really stand for one and a half decade of thankless serving of two masters, the hate and disgust of "regular people" etc. Would a Gryffindor stand people who knew nothing (or at least, not enough) about him/her, judging him by what they see ( ... )

alldoubtaboutit August 4 2007, 13:14:34 UTC

Reading DH filled me with so much indignation on Slytherin's behalf. Having considered myself mostly Slytherin (though I don't know why, and from manawydn's essay I'd be anything but a Slytherin), I felt that it was terribly unfair ( ... )

Thread 11

suggest Hufflepuff = classical agrarian conservatism anonymous August 4 2007, 13:15:48 UTC

How could a house that values hard work, loyalty, and teamwork... be anything else?

Oh, very easily. Karl Marx would hate the Fat Friar! Hufflepuff has a strong affinity for a kind of conservatism that doesn't have a catchy name right now and doesn't get much press -- the small-is-beautiful communitarian conservatism that cherishes traditional folkways and rural life; that prefers the small and local to the big and national (or super-national); that is suspicious of excessive industrialization and big business; thinks government should be as small and personal as possible, protect families, and mind its own business. Think of the novels of Jane Austen or Patrick O'Brian, or Distributism of the early 20th. Think "The Wind in the Willows," where Mr. Badger opens his cozy burrow to lost wanderers and recalls the prodigal Mr. Toad to his duty. Think the Shire ( ... )

Re: suggest Hufflepuff = classical agrarian conservatism manawydn August 5 2007, 06:24:01 UTC

what you describe here is not so different from communism however. Once communism is achieved after all there is no government at all, the proverbial 'people' run everything. Everyone works to aid each other and their community. So I don't think there are many inherent differences between communism and communitarian conservatism except perhaps the means by which they are achieved.

Re: suggest Hufflepuff = classical agrarian conservatism anonymous August 5 2007, 18:01:55 UTC

what you describe here is not so different from communism however... I don't think there are many inherent differences between communism and communitarian conservatism except perhaps the means by which they are achieved.Some very significant inherent differences would be the existence of government, ownership of private property, respect for religion and tradition, a belief in a basic human nature (in Marxism, there is no essential "you" and nothing essential you share with other human beings -- you are the product of your society), toleration of social hierarchy/ rejection of "class struggle", and "the means by which they are achieved" -- pragmatic social evolution vs. revolution ( ... )

Re: suggest Hufflepuff = classical agrarian conservatism manawydn August 5 2007, 23:52:54 UTC

I am fully aware of the dilemma between Marx and Lenin. But saying Lenin was a contemporary of Engles and a member of the same party hardly validate his ideas. After all both Stalin and Trotsky were contemporaries and party peers of Lenin and all three of them had rather different ideas about communism and how it should be achieved ( ... )

Thread 15

I don't see it like this at all.... anonymous August 5 2007, 17:15:48 UTC

I'm sorry, but I have to vehemently disagree with your characterizations of the houses into political factions. I doubt you could place any specific political leaning of our era into a specific house, though you can see various beliefs of political factions matching some of the characteristics of the the people in that house ( ... )

Re: I don't see it like this at all.... manawydn August 6 2007, 03:40:40 UTC

I think you are rather mistaken. I really don't see why Ravenclaw is the most individualist of all the houses. Slytherin is completely contrary not only to all the other houses but also within itself! Some Slytherins hate Death Eaters, some Slytherins love Death Eaters, some Slytherins ARE Death Eaters. Where however is the individualism shown in Ravenclaw? They seem more than content to follow the lead of the other houses in many situations. The Lovegoods are clear individuals but they seem a minority within Ravenclaw. Claiming Classical liberals have a fantastic desire to be proven right is a major over-simplyfisation and generalisation, not withstanding the fact that EVERYONE likes to be right. How many people do you know wake up with the desire to be wrong all the time ( ... )