This post is about Harry Potter. I know! It's been a couple months.
Also, I feel like I should mention (and, uh, apologize to the P@) that I won't be doing that thing where you summarize your life in six words. I just ... no. Sorry.
NOW LET'S TALK ABOUT HARRY POTTER.*
As I've mentioned a few times, I listen to Harry Potter podcasts. Specifically, I listen to PotterCast and MuggleCast. Caz knows what I'm talking about. Anyway, I decided recently that I'm going to stop listening to MuggleCast. I just can't take it anymore. The last episode I listened to (which may or may not be the last one they put out) the hosts mispronounced (because they were clearly completely unfamiliar with) no fewer than four words, and not terribly complex ones at that. For example, "truant." You've been to fucking high school, don't even give me that. (I mean, except for the one girl on the show, who was homeschooled, and who therefore never has any trouble with pronunciation or comprehension.) Also, they debated why the Weasley twins would use the code name "Rodent" for that thing they do. (Are there still spoilers?) Is it because they're ratting people out or something? The Weasley twins, people. That, plus the way they massacre Latin every other episode just really pushed me over the edge. And! They all seem to enjoy Twilight, unironically, and I just don't even know what to do with that.
Not that PotterCast doesn't have its moments of stupidity. And then there's Sue Upton and her whole obsession with Hufflepuff, which, when I'm paying attention, makes me want to stab myself in the eye. Just the one eye, though. However, even with some lapses, I find myself pretty consistently entertained by PotterCast. So I'm going to keep listening to that one. They really need to cut out the segment with all the chicks who can't read off a page, though. Cut it, or give them a few speech lessons or something. I can't even pay attention to what they're saying half the time; it's painful.
Um. What's my point here? One of the dangers of listening to podcasts is that it's like reading a message board where you're not registered and can't reply to anything. It's very frustrating sometimes when you've got the answer down and they're floundering all over the place trying come up with something. And then you yell and curse at the air in front of you. It's awkward. It's why I listen to podcasts in my room.
There are two things that I'd like to discuss today that I've been thinking about because of podcasts. Well, actually, I'd been thinking about them before podcasts, but the podcasts gave me the desire to talk about it because apparently I'm the only one who understands. And, naturally, my blog is the only place where I have that kind of platform. But that's okay, you guys like Harry Potter. Right? You guys still like Harry Potter? Guys?
Okay, Issue 1. This is the general issue, and it has to do with Sorting, and how people are sorted. There seems to be this ... fundamental misunderstanding about Sorting. A widespread fundamental misunderstanding, that leads to unnecessary consternation about things like, why is Hermione in Gryffindor if she's so smart? Should Snape have been sorted into Gryffindor if he did brave things? Is Luna really smart enough to be in Ravenclaw?
Here's the thing. On casual inspection, Sorting seems like it's one thing. If you're smart, you go in Ravenclaw. If you're brave, or a jerk, you go in Gryffindor. If you're evil, you go in Slytherin, and if you're D. none of the above, you go in Hufflepuff. But see, you have to wonder. JK Rowling makes this big deal about how it's not our abilities that define us, but our choices. It's a theme. So, it's weird, then, for her to have this system in place where people are labeled, separated, and therefore defined, according solely to their abilities.
A-ha! Here's the crux: people are not sorted based on their abilities. They're sorted based on their values. Loyalty, bravery, intelligence, ambition: which one do you place higher than the rest? That's what Sorting is. Yes, Hermione is smart, but she would be a Gryffindor no matter how smart she was because, as she explains in the very first book: there are more important things [than book smarts]. Snape would never be a Gryffindor, no matter how many brave things he did, because he didn't give a shit about bravery.
This also explains why families tend to wind up in the same house. Look at the Weasleys. All of them wound up in Gryffindor, despite the fact that they're all very very different people with different talents and goals. Why? Because their parents instilled them with the same values growing up. I mean, at least until the time they were eleven. Neville (I want to punch in the face everyone who says Neville should have been a Hufflepuff) was raised to believe that his parents were the ultimate standard, his parents who were very brave. He was never going to be anything other than a Gryffindor. Sirius wound up in a house where none of the rest of his family had ever been placed because his values went against theirs.
I mean, I'm right, aren't I? You see the logic in this, don't you? So why does no one else seem to get this? (I don't mean you people. I mean the Harry Potter people.) Why are they still trying to figure out what houses people would be in based on what they do?
Which brings us up to Issue 2. And this is no where near as long. A couple weeks ago PotterCast had a discussion on what house Dolores Umbridge would be in. And they gave arguments for three options. Which was hilarious to me because the house that they didn't even consider is the house that I always assumed she would be in: Umbridge is totally a Hufflepuff. Think about it. I mean, I'll explain further if anybody wants, but ... think about it.
*Oh, snap, looks like I did it anyway.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
I haven't listened to either in a very long time (having actual work to do at work rather than data entry killed that), but I definitely gave up on MuggleCast first for the exact reasons and frustrations you listed.
I agree on your "Sorting by Values" idea, but I think the hat does mess it up sometimes. Mostly because I refuse to believe that Peter Pettigrew's values got him into Gryffindor. I mean, granted, we don't know his upbringing, but his characterization is that he's a hanger-on, leaching to and valuing whatever will help him get by. I mean, he might value bravery and loyalty, but only as far as he can use it himself. Which all seems much more Slytherin or Ravenclaw to me.
I'd be interested to read why Umbridge = Hufflepuff.
I think that Pettigrew very much idealized people who were brave, which is why he looked up to the other Marauders so much, even though they were supposedly peers.
I mean, he fell in with the Death Eaters, but he never liked any of them. He never actually idealized or admired Voldemort, he was just too weak to stand up to him. He also did whatever he could to keep himself alive, but I don't think he ever actually thought that was a good thing. He knew that he was being weak.
I think that he probably had the potential for bravery, but he never got over the fear. This may or may not have anything to do with the fact that people like his best friends were always telling him how weak and stupid he was all the time. [/not a Pettigrew apologist]
Word.
I mean, I agree.
...I love you.
I wish I had the capacity to actually think about these things in any sort of depth, rather than just reading and squeeing and going "ooh".
It's kind of fire bad, tree pretty with me and Harry Potter.
Oh, and also - I agree. If I didn't make that clear enough. Also also - ditto Crystal as to why Umbridge is a Hufflepuff.
Post a Comment