Lockhart - Gryffindor? - Nature of Courage.

[Steve]

No: HPFGUIDX 125601


--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214"
<dumbledore11214 at y...> wrote:

> 
> ...edited...
> 
> 
> Magda: 
> I would argue that Lockhart's entire public career is one long
> example of reckless bravado.  He's always running the risk that
> someone, somewhere will prove that he didn't do what he said ...
> 
> ...edited...

> Alla:
> 
> Oh, very interesting point about his entire career being example of 
> reckless bravado.... Still, if we are saying that courage and 
> recklessness are not the same , doesn't it mean that Lockhart has no
> courage?
 
> Magda: 
> Lockhart is the Gryffindor you get when someone with few brains and
> fewer morals values courage.  And Lockhart DOES value it - in other
> people.  
 
> Alla:
> 
> I thought that Hat won't sort you in the House, unless YOU have 
> quality which is quintessential for the said house. Am I wrong? If 
> the person values cunninng and ambition in other people but not 
> cunning and ambitious person himself, does it mean that such person 
> will be sorted in Slytherin?
> 
> 
> ...edited...
> 
> Alla

bboyminn:

I made some points in another thread about the Nature of Sorting and
of House Qualities which I realize may have been somewhat convoluted.
In it I tried to make several points which I will remake here, and
this time try to make them clear and concise to prevent them from
getting lost in my endless rambling.

1.) Having the inner 'House Essense' that gets you sorted into a House
doesn't guarantee that you will ultimately be able to bring that
essense to fulfillment in your outward applied life.

While you may have Gryffindor courage, you may never be, for what ever
reason, a courageous Gryffindor.

2.) The outward manifestation of an Essential House Quality is not
always positive. We fall into the trap of assuming something like
courage will always be heroic. Peter Petigrew and Gilderoy Lockhart
are living examples that it's not. They both display courage, but use
that courage to accomplish negative things. 

As Alla points out, it took a great deal of courage and daring for
Lockhart to perpetrate the level of fraud that he did. To go on
writing book after book knowing that at some point it could all come
crashing down on him took courage in that he persevered in the face of
adversity and against all odds. 

It's just when Harry 'persevers in the face of adversity' we call it
heroic, when Lockhart doesn't we call it cowardly. As I am trying to
illustrate, even cowards have their own brand of courage.

In addition, Lockhart traveled the world over to meet the people who
/really/ did the things in his books. World travel can be a dangerous
thing, it takes courage to go off on your own to stange sometime
unstable countries, and track down and interview people. Just tracking
some of these people down is an act of courage, since some people tend
to get dangerously defensive when they hear that a stranger is looking
for them. He traveled to areas that he knew in advance were having
troubles with vampires, werewolves, and other dark creatures. These
are no small things.

Peter Petigrew displayed a form of negative courage when he was
confronted by Sirius and Peter blew up the street. He took a
calcualted risk that he wouldn't accidentally blow himself up in the
process. His choices were to act with a negative manifestation of
courage or be paralyzed by fear, he chose negative courage.

Peter showed some courage in living as a rat with the Weasleys. Mr
Weasley is afteral a member of Magical Law Enforcement, and as such,
there was a calculated risk that Mr Weasley would find him out. 

Peter also showed courage in going to Albania to seek out Voldemort.
Give the extremely bad outcome of the night a Godric's Hollow there
was a very high likelihood that Voldemort would not be too pleased to
see Peter. He may have even place the total blame for the fiasco on
Peter. So, there certainly was risk in that course of action.

I think Peter showed courage when he chopped of his hand to aid
Voldemort getting his body back. True, Peter was near scared to death,
but how many people could summon the courage to do that?

Here we see examples of people who have the core essense of courage,
but it just comes out in very negative ways.

I think, and I have in the other thread given minor illustrations,
that this same positively and negatively applied House Essense can
appear in any of the Houses. Slytherins can either be highly ambitious
ethical or unethical businessmen. Hufflepuffs can work hard toward
constructive or destructive ends. Ravenclaw's can apply their genius
to good ends or evil. Gryffindors can display great daring in
achieving good or bad things.

The quality of the outcome and the nature of intent are not the
deciding factors in determining the presence of an Essential House 
Quality.

Well, I wasn't as short as I had hoped for, but, none the less, there
it is.

Steve/bboyminn