|
Post by vegablack on Feb 19, 2009 13:00:49 GMT -5
The system of dividing students into four houses is integral to life at Hogwarts school and life in the books. What do you think of the house system? Is it an interesting way to create community in a boarding school? Does it provide family to those who are away from theirs? Is it a destructive way to divide students?
What do you think of the method used to create the houses? Is it psychologically accurate? Does it provide an insight in to Wizard culture?
|
|
|
Post by vegablack on Feb 19, 2009 13:03:06 GMT -5
Birdg made this comment on the next gen speculation thread. I thought it made some interesting points that spoke to this question. ... I kind of think the house system is bunk and no better than astrology. I could put almost every major and most secondary characters into two other houses besides their own if not all four. I mean everyone who joined and stayed in the DA gets automatic Gryffindor and Hufflepuff points from me because they've shown themselves to be brave, bold, loyal and striving for justice. If you have someone like Terry Boot, he could already be sorted into three of the four houses. Ravenclaw is what probably fits him best but I doubt he would have done poorly in Gryffindor or Hufflepuff.
|
|
|
Post by pigwithhair on Feb 21, 2009 14:10:46 GMT -5
I have to disagree with that assessment. It served a couple of purposes.
Firstly, from what I understand many schools of the type like Hogwarts (boarding schools) do have different houses, much like they have prefects. So, it's authentic to the situation.
Also, it helped the story with regards to the tension between Harry's house and the Slytherins and JKR used it well to weave in the stories of Gryffindor's sword, Hufflepuff's cup, and the diadem.
|
|
|
Post by Alexis on Feb 25, 2009 22:13:57 GMT -5
I think that in some respects the problem is not with the house system itself, but with fandom's interpretation of it. I'm thinking here of the numerous sorting quizzes and communities that reduce each house profile to a set of traits, mainly: brave, smart, loyal, or ambitious. In that respect, it is completely bunk, because people just aren't that simple.
But there's already ample support in canon to argue that house selection isn't just about character traits. Most people could thrive in one or more of the houses, but by necessity, they can only be sorted to one. Random chance is probably a factor, but so is will. Harry's a prime example, so is Sirius. Both had some "Slytherin" traits, but neither wanted to be in Slytherin.
I think trying to make solid distinctions of what type of person goes where is what makes the system potentially divisive. In Harry's school years, many Slytherins made it divisive by asserting their superiority over other groups. But I think mostly the houses are a family or a community. Harry felt at home in Gryffindor and other Gryffindors were his closest friends, but he didn't resent Hufflepuffs or Ravenclaws for not being part of his in group, and no one else seemed to either. He resented the Slytherins cause they treated him, and his friends, poorly--not because of a label.
|
|
|
Post by vegablack on Feb 27, 2009 15:05:16 GMT -5
I think that one of the most affective things JKR did in characterization was how she created characters whose house affiliation wasn't immediately obvious.
People don't divide themselves into simple categories that way. No one is just obviously brave or loyal or ambitious. I thought she was right to have us wonder why Hermione was in Gryffindor instead of Ravenclaw or to have a Ravenclaw like Terry Boot show loyalty and courage. Otherwise the books would resemble a modern Pilgrim's Progress:
Mr. braveman meets Mr. Loyal and Mr. Intelectual-curiosity and together they fight Mr. Cunning-self-interest and travel on the road to the Celestial City of self denying love, where Mr. Braveman dies so that the evil Livesforeverman will be no more.
I think the house system is more complex as are her characters. First the system is interesting for a book about the school life of preteens and teens. The sorting system not only provides a family for the students, the system acts questions of identity and selfawareness. "Who are you and what do you value -- what do you want." Most kids the age of the HP characters don't know how to answer those questions and indeed some adults don't either. The meeting with the Sorting Hat would be a very revealing moment for them as they consider what the Hat sees in them and what they want for themselves. That is an interesting moment in a book like Harry Potter that revolves around Harry discovering his own identity as the "chosen one." So much of the series is about Harry learning more about himself and how many truths have been kept from him.
The characters are discovering who they are and what their purpose is. The sorting hat and the houses are parts of that.
Characters can betray themselves and their own nature. Just because you are brave or smart doesn't mean you can't fail. The brave or loyal have betrayed the smart and talented failed themselves in real life all the time -- Why not in Harry Potter?
I agree that fandom distorts these issues in the books. Part of it is a view of character that is bound to a word description. Some people write or discuss the characters as if they've been given a word prompt and have to stick to it: kind, anxious, lacking self-conficence, clever, snarky etc. In real life people can be anxious in some situations and not in others. People can be very shy but able to get beyond themselves while performing for example. Fandom is often straight jacketed by the words they apply to a house or a character.
In the books how defined by their house do you think the characters are? Are the images of themselves limited by their house. ARe they able to embrace parts of themselves not represented by their houses?
|
|
|
Post by birdg on Feb 27, 2009 17:25:46 GMT -5
Yeah, but none of their house systems are supposed to speak to a person's character and values like the Hogwarts system does. Someone may root for the Red Sox and another person for the Yankees but only the truly fanatical and nutty will claim that who you root for in that situation speaks to what kind of person you are and judge you for it.
The House system is taken to encapsulate a person. Now, I agree that many fans don't pay attention to the the variety and nuances in each house but if people didn't believe some of what is said about the Houses - that only the truly brave go to Gryffindor, the intelligent to Ravenclaw - why is there any argument at all over which Houses Al and Rose should be? If they could be just as brave in Slytherin or intelligent in Hufflepuff than who cares? If there's nothing wrong with not being in Gryffindor than why do people dig in their heels over two characters who are little more than names on a page?
Sorting validates and defines people during one of the most tumultuous aspects of their life, just when they're trying to figure out who they are. It's a magical personality test with some gravitas to it. I think in actuality the Sorting Hat tells you what you want to hear and nothing more which explains how Peter Pettigrew made it into Gryffindor. Some children may have a good idea of who they are and what they want but most know what they want to be and put in an environment with other children who feel the same they will try to conform accordingly. Some will come to be the embodiment of their House values, some will fail and most will fall somewhere in between because who isn't brave/intelligent/ambitious/fair at least some of the time?
It's a very clever twist on the boarding school tale (and a great marketing idea, when you think about it). That said, I think the House system is silly and pointless at best and dangerous and destructive at worst. It has no real value, the same could be achieved by having the kids count off and assigning them to a certain house based on a set of traits and telling them to live by those traits. And it creates an unnecessary division that probably does follow into their adult lives - again think of how some people get about their college or sorority and now add a magical personality test to that mix and imagine how nuts people would be. A division that's probably exacerbated during war.
I wonder if any in the wizarding world would feel the same way but even if they did, I doubt the House System would ever be abolished. Everyone wants to believe they're the special snowflake that's braver, smarter, more ambitious than everyone else.
|
|
|
Post by vegablack on Feb 27, 2009 17:45:46 GMT -5
Outside of the concept of magic the house system is ridiculous, but I assume for the working of the story that the Sorting Hat can see into your mind. I like the Sorting Hat concept and think the idea that he does what you what pointless. I think the Sorting Hat places you not because you asked but in response to the way you ask, the arguments and pattern of thinking revealed. The reasons given explain more than the desire.
I find it interesting for instance that many people in fandom will claim to be in Hufflepuff and will imply that they aren't good enough for the other houses. "If I were in Hogwarts then I would probably be put in Hufflepuff." They believe that they are being humble and not making claims for themselves.
No one seems to realize that it is hardly humble to claim to be hardworking, loyal, just and truthful. These aren't easy qualities to have and tend to take work and sacrifice. Most people fail at achieving those goals.
The claim to be a Hufflepuff based on the assumption that your being modest in claiming those qualities doesn't actually reveal respect for those qualities no matter how much you might claim the house.
What if someone was to say I'm afraid that I'm not commited to truth and fairness enough for Hufflepuff. I have lied to get out of trouble and have been unfair to others to help my friends and get my way. I fear that all I have to go for me is my native intellect something that I didn't give myself and haven't strived for. I fear that I'm not good enough for Hufflepuff. I think I will be stuck in Ravenclaw.
I'd guess that person might be a Hufflepuff. Certainly they showed respect for the qualities the house valued.
|
|
|
Post by pigwithhair on Feb 27, 2009 17:49:52 GMT -5
My meaning was that it adds to the overall British tone of the story, but since you bring it up, I disagree that everyone is only Sorted into the House they want to be in.
The best example of this is Hermione. She says she was nearly Sorted into Ravenclaw. It would logical to me that, if given the choice, Hermione would have indeed chosen Ravenclaw, given what she knew her first hour at Hogwarts. Then she treasures learning above all else. Later she begins to mellow a bit. But she wasn't Sorted into Ravenclaw.
Also: it is never stated what House Pettigrew was in; many in fandom assume he was in Gryffindor due to his association with the other Marauders, but JKR has never said which House he was in.
You bring up an interesting point about why care which House if you don't believe each House has certain traits the Sorting Hat looks for. Well, that could be true of some students coming to Hogwarts for the first time. Hermione, of course, read all about Hogwarts before she came her first year, but she's the exception there. What about other Muggle-borns who know nothing about Hogwarts? They probably don't know enough to care which House they're Sorted into.
If some readers don't believe that the traits matter one jot, well, maybe they don't but according to JKR (through the Sorting hat) the hat does look for those traits. I agree this is blown out of proportion in fandom. People has all sorts of contrasting traits. In Harry's case, I agree the Sorting hat listened and did not place him in Slytherin. But if there wasn't something of the Gryffindor traits in Harry, the hat could have as easily placed him in either of the remaining Houses as well.
|
|
|
Post by Author By Night on Feb 28, 2009 11:07:28 GMT -5
Many in fandom assume he was in Gryffindor due to his association with the other Marauders, but JKR has never said which House he was in. Meanwhile, I think he was actually very much a Gryffindor. Peter did what was best for the people he wanted to be associated with; Percy, another Gryffindor, did the same thing - twice. He first abandoned his family because they were going against the Ministry of Magic; when it turned dark, Percy turned back to his family, because they once again stood for something Percy himself believed in. And then there's Sirius, who abandoned his own family, because he didn't think they were who he wanted to be. In betraying his own friends, Peter was technically being brave (from a fellow Death Eater's perspective) - he must have known Sirius would figure it out eventually. And yet because Peter believed it was the best thing to do, he did it. I know Peter said he was afraid in Prisoner of Azkaban, but Sirius doesn't believe him. Was it the right choice? No, of course not. But Peter acted in the best interests of the people he wanted to win the war. That is a Gryffindor trait. Sirius probably attacked his own boyhood friends the same way - and in fact, Sirius was absolutely willing to kill Peter. Not for the reasons the wizarding world thought, but being willing to kill someone you spent Meanwhile, someone like Lucius Malfoy, a Slytherin, might follow Voldemort - but because Voldemort serves his best interests. When Voldemort's best interests endangered his son, Lucius fled the battle to look for Draco. His best interests were no longer killing Muggleborns, but saving his child. I think that is how the House system works. It's not really about whether you're good or bad, logical or loyal, but about your core characteristics. Is it flawed? I think it still is to some extent, because even core characteristics can change. Even Dumbledore, the Headmaster of the school (for crying out loud ), thinks there's flaws. However, I think that part of the reason we see so many flaws is because there's flaws in the writing itself. I love the books, but I think we have the disadvantage of being shown a huge world, and yet being limited to the point of view of one kid. That said, I also think JK Rowling wants her readers to come to their own conclusions about how things work. She's stated in interviews that she's surprised people believe all Slytherins to be bad. (Sorry for the tl;dr factor of this post...)
|
|
|
Post by pigwithhair on Feb 28, 2009 15:43:18 GMT -5
Hmm... Pettigrew was terrified of what would be done to him if he didn't turn James and Lily over to Voldemort. I don't see that as bravery. If you mean that he did whatever it took for what he most wanted, that would be ambition in my book, though I don't think he was cunning or ambitious enough for Slytherin House, either. My interpretation from the books is that he was cowardly and selfish.
|
|
|
Post by vegablack on Mar 1, 2009 2:28:56 GMT -5
Since Peter is an extablished liar, I'm not sure that the reasons he gives Remus and Sirius for his actions are the true ones. I don't assume that he is being honest when he tells them his reasons for betraying James and Lily. I feel the reasons for his betrayal were a mystery.
He is unctuous and tends to suck up to the powerful, but I'm not sure that necessarily means he is cowardly. Dastardly perhaps but not necessarily cowardly.
I would also add that people can betray their own nature. A person who is loyal in general can be unfaithful etc. We are talking about behavior and values. Is bravery a trait like brown eyes or is it a value that you honor at times and other times betray? No one universaly adheres to their values. If they did they would be perfect which people are not. You can abandon and betray your family, your friends, your beliefs, your own self for any number of reasons.
|
|
|
Post by Author By Night on Mar 1, 2009 10:12:00 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by magikcat on Mar 1, 2009 11:15:53 GMT -5
In the beginning (the founder years), the house system was just a way for the Founders to associate with the students they most wanted. I think the sorting hat put the people with the house it believes they would flourish and get along with most. I wonder if Neville would have blossomed as much as he did had he been put into another house, for example (but that's another discussion . I don't really see the house system as a horrible system if this is what's kept in the Sorting Hat's "mind" -- it's easier to make friends with people that at least have the same interests as me. And the books give plenty of examples of students who are in different house but who are quite friendly with each other.
|
|
|
Post by starsea on Mar 1, 2009 16:26:50 GMT -5
Also: it is never stated what House Pettigrew was in; many in fandom assume he was in Gryffindor due to his association with the other Marauders, but JKR has never said which House he was in. Probably because she didn't think it needed stating. Given Peter's intimacy with the Animagus plans and his "hanger on" status, I can't believe he was anything but a Gryffindor and a dorm mate of the others. If he'd been in another house, they wouldn't have paid him much attention and it would have been incredibly difficult for him to sneak out at night and join them. Also, as a British girl, houses are very common over here: both my primary and secondary schools had houses (in my primary, it was the Greeks, Vikings, Anglo-Saxons and Romans; in my secondary: famous stately homes around the area).
|
|
|
Post by Chocolatepot on Mar 3, 2009 20:53:04 GMT -5
I agree that a part of the problem is fandom. And not just wrt Sorting Quizzes - in canon, there's not that much difference between the minor character students in terms of house division, but fans identify with one house and then exaggerate their traits in both fic and meta.
But does it really? I mean, it's a more personal sorting method than those used in regular schools, but it just says, "You care about intelligence," and the rest is ... people being people. "Our group is better than their group," and that.
I thought that since Dumbledore was in Gryffindor, she was for either one? I don't have my book, does anyone else?
I think a big issue in a lot of people's complaints is that the world changed over the course of the series. It *did* start off with all Slytherins being bad, to varying degrees; was the preoccupation with house points on purpose to show that Harry was young and innocent, or because she was writing a school story? I'd really like JKR to talk or write in depth about what changed and what she knew from the beginning.
|
|
|
Post by birdg on Mar 3, 2009 21:16:04 GMT -5
They care about intelligence over bravery or loyalty when push comes to shove. (Or they think they do, anyway.) Only one house gets intelligence, only one house gets bravery and so on and so forth. When it comes to sorting, students have to make a choice about what they value over others and it does speak to their character and to the character of the group they will join.
|
|
|
Post by MWPP on Mar 7, 2009 22:58:41 GMT -5
One of the aspects I've found fascinating is that every person has all of the various Houses' qualities present; some have 95% House A, with the other 5% divided between the other Houses' qualities, while others have closer to an even distribution, and still others have every other possible combination.
When the Sorting Hat takes time to decide it is because the other qualities are strong enough it has to weigh the possibilities. With Draco the Hat barely gets near him, so he is one of the 95%ers, whereas someone like Cedric is more 40-50% Hufflepuff with the rest of him a HUGE percentage of Gryffindor (to add the bravery needed to compete in the Tri-Wiz Tourney, or even to be the Quidditch Captain). The whole discussion above and in the other thread about Peter is because he is in a similar situation. We are assuming he's in Gryffindor due to his friendship with the other Marauders, but his inner Slytherin keeps asserting itself. Hermione is obviously about evenly divided between Gryffindor and Ravenclaw with just dibs and dabs of Hufflepuff (keeping care of everyone and packing her little beaded bag while they are on the run in DH) and Slytherin (smacking Draco in PoA, possibly some of the other acting out when she starts to no longer be little miss perfect - like taking Umbridge into the Forest).
Anyhow, with all of that in mind, what House was Lockhart in?
Who do you wonder about, or think was mis-sorted?
And why do you think so?
.
|
|
|
Post by pigwithhair on Mar 8, 2009 11:12:50 GMT -5
From Chocolatepot:
I don't think the actual world changed as the books went on as much as Harry's perception changed as he grew, and we were, with very rare exceptions, only priviledged to Harry's POV. The wizarding world, in particular Draco, seemed very black or white when Harry was younger but later on he learned things were more complex. The importance of Quidditch and House points and homework fell to the wayside as Harry matured, hence the story and what we were exposed to adjusted as well.
Mwpp said: Good question. I would say Slytherin because his ambition for fame drove him to such lengths as to destroy other lives simply for their stories. I interpreted that as his strongest trait. I can't see him in Gryffindor or Ravenclaw and I don't think him industrious enough for Hufflepuff.
As to who was mis-Sorted I believe the best example of that was Snape. Even Dumbledore remarks that perhaps they Sort too early - or too young, I don't have the book in front of me to remind me which word he used. Snape was very ambitious yet later his bravery was his strongest trait, and probably the one he would most identify with.
|
|
|
Post by starsea on Mar 10, 2009 18:50:48 GMT -5
I don't know, I thought Dumbledore was unusually tactless when he said that. Snape is proud of being a Slytherin and enjoys being the Head of Slytherin House. To have all that just dismissed by Dumbledore saying "Hmm, you really are more of a Gryffindor, what a shame, you could have been in the same house as Lily" is hurtful.
|
|
|
Post by vegablack on Mar 11, 2009 17:11:28 GMT -5
I agree with Pig with hair that the emphasis on house points and quidditch fell to the way side because Harry matured and his interests changed. I think JKR was extremely effective at matching Harry's perceptions, emotions and interests to his age.
It would be as ridiculous for Harry to have had mature perceptions and interests at eleven.
Basing the house system on something "real" like values and personality qualities is dangerous because it creates the myth that the divisions themselves are real and important. I think that is behind Dumbledore's statement that they sort to soon. Dumbledore isn't thinking that a Slytherin can be brave and chivalrous too. He is thinking that if the qualities he values is found in another person they should have been in Gryffindor.
This is strange. Most societies believe all people should be loyal, hardworking and even brave. To isolate these in one group and for the members of that group to value each other especially highly becuase of it is dangerous.
The divisions in Hogwarts go beyond normal house divisions in a British school. I think because of the effects of the wars and because everyone believes the divisions are real and not arbitrary.
I don't think the house system can be done away with. I suspect it is built into the magical fabric of the school.
|
|