Ron (was: Re: Prefects and points)

[anthyroserain]

No: HPFGUIDX 106151

Arya:
> > Nope.  IMO, I do not think the Trio is equal.  Sorry.  I think 
it's
> > Harry, then Hermione, and then Ron.  
> > 
> > but that doesn't mean one is better than the other as a person. 
> > People are not judged comparitively in the end; it's more like 
Danish
> > judging (from 4H), where each individual is judged on their own 
> > unique circumstances and individual acheivements. 

Katie: 
I'm so confused. If you're ranking the Trio, and yet you say it  
doesn't mean one is better than another as a person, then what do 
the rankings mean? Who's best at checkers?


Del:
> Ordinary people are ordinary because they do ordinary things. They
> don't fight monsters and psychopaths : they let the professionals 
do
> that. Ordinary students turn to the teachers, they don't go 
breaking
> the rules to face death yet once again. Those are no ordinary 
things,
> hence Ron is not ordinary.

Katie:
Del, I am so with you here. For all Dumbledore's blather about our 
choices, not our abilities, defining us, Harry is treated as crown 
prince (and no, that's not a HBP reference ;) of the WW from the 
first pages of PS/SS. Don't get me wrong; I quite like Harry and 
think he has often made great, noble decisions. But why 
is "defeating" Voldemort as a *baby* a great accomplishment? Harry's 
practically titled by the time he arrives at Hogwarts. Give the kid 
a break!

Ron's choices, his loyalty and steadfastness, mark him out as a 
truly extraordinary person with a merely ordinary appearance and 
talents. I think this makes him quite admirable, while also quite a 
bit easier to relate to than Harry, who is, as Del says, "a 
Prophesied hero in disguise." They're both admirable people, but 
it's a lot easier to see how, with the right decisions and ideals, 
we could each be as noble as Ron. 


Arya:
>> Harry is the champion of the books; the
> > hero and the one for whom we are meant to feel empathy for and 
to 
> > root for.

Katie:
I'm not convinced that JKR writes Ron as a comic-relief, buddy 
character-- I think she thinks far more highly of him than that-- 
but even if she had written him that way, so what? Authorial intent 
can only go so far. To quote an old D.H. Lawrence saw: "Never trust 
the teller, trust the tale." The "true hero" of a story depends on 
who is reading it.


This is now where I go off on a small, somewhat unrelated rant 
that's more opinion than anything else. (Canonists and those who 
dislike personal feelings in posts, you may want to cover your 
ears.) I don't think JKR's answer about Ron not 
being "authoritarian" was an insult at all. It sounded rather like a 
compliment to me. I personally have never seen anything 
in "leadership skills"; I prefer the more arbitrary stuff, like 
personal loyalty, dedication, honor, and the willingness to suffer 
or die if need be for one's ideals. "Leadership" is more to do with 
charisma and a desire to influence others than anything else. 
     So Ron's not a great leader? Big %$&*^$# deal. Malfoy's a real 
leader, and look how great he's turned out. (Yes, this has little to 
do with being chosen as a prefect; I merely wanted to defend Ron's 
character.) 
 

-Katie
 who thinks Hufflepuff is vastly underrated