Gryffindor qualities, WAS Re: Peter's basic nature

[va32h]

No: HPFGUIDX 144970

> Alla wrote:
> 
> As to  your example with Peter - it IS possible that JKR intends 
what 
> you argued,  but it is also possible that acting courageously always 
> WAS in Peter's  basic nature, 

va32h:

It's frustrating to have Wormtail be a Gryffindor and yet be such a 
spineless little scumbag. But, I have always thought that 
courage/bravery was not the defining Gryffindor characteristic. 
There's a certain show-offy nature to Gryffindors, a desire to be 
publically admired. And dare I say it? A certain amount of hubris! 

Fred and George enjoy being known as the class cut-ups, and are proud 
of their reckless, rule-breaking reputation. Hermione believes in 
following rules, but she is quite willing to break them whenever it is 
in her best interests to do so. 

Ron basks in the admiration of his House after the Quidditch final in 
OoTP, and even before that, he embellished his adventure in the Lake 
from GoF.

Even Harry, who is at first put-off by all the attention he garners at 
Hogwarts, comes to imagine himself hoisting the Triwizard Cup before a 
cheering crowd. He has  a blatant disregard for any rules that 
interfere with his personal desires. And what did the Sorting Hat say 
about Harry - "a thirst to prove yourself". 

So Wormtail can continue to be a cowardly Gryffindor. Possessing no 
extraordinary talents or good looks himself, he still manages to 
capture public attention by aligning himself with those who do. He 
rationalizes his sins as being the only options he had. He is proud of 
his status as Voldemort's right hand man (literally! although that is 
an old joke by now). Wormtail even managed to turn his faked death 
into an opportunity to elevate himself - by "dying" as a hero and 
receiving a posthumous Order of Merlin. 

va32h, who thinks Wormtail's remainging role is to repay his debt to 
Harry, not be saved by Harry's mercy yet again.