Chapt Disc PS/SS 10, The Halloween Long - Houses

[bboyminn]

No: HPFGUIDX 188415



--- "potioncat" <willsonkmom at ...> wrote:
>
> > >Alla:> 
> But I believe I am stereotyping based on what book shows me. And well, if you think that no other (or very few) Gryffindors would have done what Harry and Ron did, ...

> Potioncat:
> ...
> 
> ...
>  
> 
> >>Alla: 
> Well, yes and do not forget about selfless rescues, but isn't Trio supposed to be the face of Gryffindors? And Draco the symbol of Slytherins?
> 
> Potioncat:
> Are you saying that Harry is just another Gryffindor with no exceptional qualities? Because I think he is the bravest of the brave. I don't think every Gryffindor would have reacted like he did to the troll. ...
> 
> 

bboyminn:

Interesting subject, and one I've tackled before. On one hand,
I do think the Houses stereotype certain normal human traits.
That is, the Houses attributes are symbolic of real life. 

However, within the confines of the stories, I think the House
characteristics define a general part of a person's nature,
but they do not completely define that person. 

In Peter Petigrew, we see that a certain type of bravery can
be considered cowardly. I think Peter had to overcome a lot
of personal fear to do what he did, and that is a form of
bravery, but the things he had to overcome fear to do, were
themselves very cowardly.

Also, while Harry, Ron, and Hermione are certainly courageous,
they are also curious, determined, in a sense smart, a bit
reckless, they do have a certain disregard for the rules, but
in a good way, and they have many other traits that make up
their personalities. 

I think what Hermione learns is you can't be a slave to rules. 
Rules are made by people, rules are fallible, rules can change
with the wind, rules can be corrupted, and while most rules 
fit the general case, they are not always appropriate to the
specific case. 

Rules are meant to be broken, but only under the right
circumstances. 

Let's look at the other Gryffindors. Where were they when
Harry was off on his many adventures? Asleep and safe in 
their warm toasty beds, minding their own business. Does
that mean they are not brave? Does that mean they when the
fight comes to them, they will not fight? I don't think so.

The difference is, that the rest of the Gryffindors are 
only brave enough to fight when a fight comes. But Harry,
Ron, Hermione, and later others of a few select Gryffindors,
are willing to go to the fight, not wait for it to come. 
Some are self-determined leaders (Harry) and others are
followers...yes, brave followers, but followers none the
less.

I think this give us a clue to what primarily sets Harry, but
also a few others, apart. Harry is willing to take the 
initiative. He is willing to take determined, and what he
sees as, necessary action without waiting for others to tell
him. He leads, he doesn't wait to follow. Harry will do what
must be done, because it must be done. 

It is these secondary characteristics that make Harry unique.
These are the things that make him determined to 'save people'. 
But, for these secondary aspects to work, you must have the 
courage to take the initiative, and have the courage to 
assert a determined will to act. 

So, I don't think any of the Houses are as simple as their
core value. If we took any character from any House, I'm sure
we could find the secondary characteristic, that allow them
to reflect their House core value in a unique way. 

As Phineas points out, Slytherins are brave too, just brave
in a different, and far more self-serving, way. They aren't 
afraid to fight, but they are wise enough to know when it is
better to lose the current battle in order to live to fight
again another day. 

So, while the House characteristics are true, what defines
any given characters is far more complex than a simple single
general House characteristic. 

As I've said, no matter how brave Harry is, if he isn't 
willing to take the initiative, and doesn't have the 
determination to follow through, no one gets rescued, and
nothing gets done. Harry just stays cozy in his bed, like
so many brave Gryffindors, and leaves it up to others to sort
out. 

I think House primary characteristics are something to be
aspired to. Take Neville, he aspires, under pressure, to be
more like his father, and eventually succeeds. I suspect
there are cunning clever Slytherins who are not evil racist, 
they are just good businessmen intent on doing their best
to get rich. I suspect there are hard working Hufflepufs
that have near genius intelligence. I suspect that there
are near genius Ravenclaws who will apply their genius
an obtain wealth through hard work and determination.

So, while a House attribute is something to aspire to, it
is a long collection of complex secondary characteristic
that will determine how the primary attribute will manifest
itself.

Further, we can have brave cowards, we can have stupid
geniuses (Riddle), we can have people who work hard at being
lazy, and every other odd combination of self-contradictory
attributes that you can imagine. 

So, a House attribute can be something to be valued and
admired, but that one attribute doesn't completely define
a person. That one attribute alone doesn't determine the 
many varied and complex ways it can manifest itself.

But then...that's just my opinion.

Steve/bboyminn