The Virtues of Hufflepuff House and Cedric Diggory (Was: Snape and . . .cour

persephone_kore persephone_kore at yahoo.com
Thu Jul 15 18:04:42 UTC 2004


No: HPFGUIDX 106423

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "delwynmarch" <delwynmarch at y...>
wrote:

> Del replies :
> Well, she's the one who had a kid (Neville ?) say that "Hufflepuff
> wouldn't be too bad", and Hagrid call the Hufflepuffs "a load of
> duffers" (might not be exact quotes, but I'm sure I'm not very far),
> right back in PS/SS.

PK
What Hagrid actually said was "Everyone says Hufflepuff is a load of
duffers, but --" before Harry interrupts him. Personally I think it's
pretty clear Hagrid disagrees. (I did fall for the misquote once
myself, but had been surprised by it since the only one I remembered
actively insulting Hufflepuff was Draco, so I was pleased to find
Hagrid hadn't actually done more than report a common opinion and
start to object to it.)

> HunterGreen:
> > The sad thing is that Cedric was always looked upon as such 
> > a "surprise" in a way to the Hufflepuff house (which as its said 
> > over and over again in GoF, hardly ever gets any glory). The 
> > general attitude in the books is that being a Hufflepuff is 
> > nothing to be proud of. And I wonder how much of that is JKR's 
> > intention. 

I would personally say that whether Hufflepuff *really* never gets any
glory or people are simply exaggerating because it's been a while (the
latter is entirely possible; these are teenagers, and Slytherin
dominated things for several years followed by a rather startling
contingent of exceptional Gryffindors), JKR probably does mean to
indicate that a lot of people look down on Hufflepuffs. 

I also would say that she means they are *wrong*. The qualities she
gives Hufflepuff in sorting are almost unequivocally positive (in a
general way: obviously anything taken to extremes or pointed the wrong
way can have a dark side). It's Helga she gives the sort of inclusive
admissions policy Dumbledore favors -- and while I've seen people
suggest Helga's emphasis on loyalty is sinister, I really don't think
that's how it's presented. (No, I don't see a contradiction between
loyal/just/hard-working as Sorting-traits and a willingness to teach
anybody. The latter doesn't mean she wasn't assertive about ones she
already knew she wanted, and I'd be very surprised if her approach
didn't involve encouraging or instilling the qualities she considered
to be the basis of good character into her students.) And despite what
some people seem to think, all the Hufflepuffs we actually see for
very long seem to be pretty darned capable.

Del:
> 
> Then in CoS, Ernie's bunch of Hufflepuffs appear quite stupid, 
> coward and even ridiculous for believing so easily that Harry is the
> Heir of Slytherin and for making up huge stories about Harry and 
> Justin.

PK:

Well, most of the school must appear stupid, cowardly, and ridiculous,
then. *We* know what actually happened, but most of the students
didn't, and rumors seem to be wildfire there. The evidence looked to
be rather against him -- just as it did in GoF. 

Del:
> 
> Then of course there's simply the way the few Hufflepuffs we know 
> are described : Justin the bubbling Muggle quasi-aristocrat or 
> obvious queer figure,

PK:

All right, you've lost me on this one. I know there's a fanon
convention about Justin and m/m pairings -- well, I've been informed
of it as a common assumption, anyway; I can't really distinguish it
personally from all the other willy-nilly shipping -- but I've never
really seen why this is supposed to be "obvious." I'm also trying and
failing to remember him "bubbling" about anything. Not that bubbly
people can't be fun, but I remember him mentioning having been down
for Eton when everybody else is discussing their backgrounds and
previous experiences, and that's really all I can think of. 

Del:
> Ernie the New Percy, Hannah Abbott and her pigtails.

PK:
What's wrong with pigtails? As for Ernie, sure he's pompous and
self-important, but I really like him, myself. For one thing, he's
funny. *g* For another, he makes sure that if he's going to retract or
apologize for something, he's at least as loud and as public about the
apology or retraction as he was about whatever he's decided he was
wrong about. And that's *not* necessarily easy.

Del:
> And of course Cedric "pretty boy" Diggory. We readers might be aware
> that Cedric is really a neat person, but Harry's (and the other
> Gryffindors, in particular the twins) constant dislike of him is
> *bound* to have an effect on our judgement after a while.

PK:
Well, I suppose that's possible. Of course, it's explicitly pointed
out that Harry respected Cedric and changed his mind to decide Cedric
was a "useless pretty boy" after learning Cedric had asked Cho to the
Yule Ball. I'd say that tells us more ill of Harry than of Cedric.

Del:
> And then in OoP, we get Zacharias Smith !

PK:
Yes, first we listen to people griping about Hufflepuffs being
depicted as gullible (not that they fall for anything half the rest of
the school doesn't, though perhaps Hannah creates wilder theories),
and then we get introduced to a skeptical one and everybody gripes
about HIM. Wah. ;)

Del:
> So yes, I think it is quite obvious that JKR intended for us to have
> little consideration for the Hufflepuffs. Now, why ever she would do
> that, I have no idea, but the proofs are there.
> 
PK:
I think it's clear that she means for much of the wizarding world to
have little consideration for the Hufflepuffs, and that the probable
reason is that Hufflepuff virtues are simply not the terribly flashy
kind or the most fun. They're harder to appreciate *in oneself* than
the rest, especially for the immature; they may tend to be more often
the wind beneath wings than the eagle. Utterly necessary, but invisible. 

Hopefully, at least by the end of the series, attentive readers won't
be able to miss that. :)

PK





More information about the HPforGrownups archive