๐๐จ๐ ๐ฐ๐๐ซ๐ญ๐ฌ ๐๐จ๐ฎ๐ฌ๐๐ฌ ๐๐ฑ๐ฉ๐ฅ๐๐ข๐ง๐๐
Like I did with the moral alignments, I thought I would make a post about why and how I sort characters into Hogwarts Houses! There are also quizzes so you can figure it out for yourself as well. I go into detail about each House, what they represent, their background and what it means to be sorted into a certain House.ย
I hope you enjoy!
*just because Iโm talking about Harry Potter doesnโt mean I align with the transphobic views of J.K. Rowling. There is no room for transphobia on my page, and I support the trans and LGBTQIA+ community*
Figuring out which Hogwarts House you belong to has been around since the HP series came out. But I think thereโs more to it than simply choosing to be inย โthe brave houseโ orย โthe smart house.โ I think it reveals a lot about a person - or rather, a large aspect.ย
Here are a few tests for you to try, comment below what you got!
Test 1ย (theย โofficialโ Wizarding World quiz)
Test 2 (from IDRlabs, they have other personality quizzes as well!)
Test 3 (Hereโs the full Pottermore quiz. The 1st quiz will only have a few questions, so thatโs why I donโt think itโs fully accurate to take)
Test 4ย (A really good one from Quotev, the questions/answers arenโt obvious)
Gryffindor: Do what is right.
Hufflepuff: Do what is kind.ย
Ravenclaw:ย Do what is wise.
Slytherin: Do what is necessary.
๐๐๐๐
๐
๐๐๐๐๐
โ Where dwell the brave at heart, their daring, nerve and chivalry set Gryffindors apartย โ
๐ธ๐๐๐๐๐๐ก: Fire
๐น๐๐ข๐๐๐๐ ๐๐ฆ: โBold Gryffindor, from wild moorโ,ย Godric Gryffindor.ย
Dwelled at Godricโs Hollow
Was an accomplished dueller
A fair man, he believed that any child who displayed magical abilities before their 11th birthday should be able to attend Hogwarts.
Gryffindor was the original owner of the Sorting Hat
Gryffindor also had a sword made, which would present itself to any true Gryffindor in a moment of need.
He was allegedly the best friend of Slytherin before he left Hogwarts
Godric will always be known for his accomplished skills in battle, and his fight against Muggle discrimination in the wizarding world.
๐ธ๐ ๐ก๐๐๐๐๐ ๐ฉ๐๐ ๐ก๐๐๐๐ก๐ :
Courage
Bravery
Standing up for what you believe in - even if your voice shakes.ย
Caring about the greater goodย
Daring/Boldย
Having a deep need to do the right thingย
Standing out from the crowd
๐ถ๐ฉ๐๐๐๐๐ก๐๐๐ ๐ก๐ฉ๐๐ก ๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐ก ๐ก๐ฉ๐๐ ๐ป๐๐ข๐ ๐:
Lucy Pevensie
Thor
Mulan
Katniss Everdeen
Merida
Batman/Bruce Wayne
Buffy Summers
Chandler Bing
๐๐๐
๐
๐๐๐๐๐
๐
โ You might belong in Hufflepuff, Where they are just and loyal. Those patient Hufflepuffs are true. And unafraid of toil.ย โ
๐ธ๐๐๐๐๐๐ก: Earth
๐น๐๐ข๐๐๐๐ ๐๐ฆ: โFrom valley broad,โย Helga Hufflepuff
A kind and warm woman who believed in loyalty, patience and hard-work as the best abilities a person can possess
Was a brilliant cook and had remarkable skills for preparing food. Her recipes are still used in Hogwarts to this day.
She brought the house-elves to Hogwarts
Owner of Hufflepuffโs Cup
She was the best friend of Rowena Ravenclaw
๐ธ๐ ๐ก๐๐๐๐๐ ๐ฉ๐๐ ๐ก๐๐๐๐ก๐ :
Loyalty
A need for justice. A lot of the Hufflepuff and Gryffindor traits are intertwined, but the difference is that Gryffindors donโt need to know a person to feel the need to look out for them.ย
Patientย
Believe in fairness and equality (Helga Hufflepuff was the only founder who believed everyone should have a fair chance in being taught)
Accepting
Thinks about other people more than themselves
Would do anything at all, for familyย
๐ถ๏ฟฝ๏ฟฝ๏ฟฝ๏ฟฝ๐๐๐๐๐ก๐๐๐ ๐ก๐ฉ๐๐ก ๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐ก ๐ก๐ฉ๐๐ ๐ป๐๐ข๐ ๐:
Edmund Pevensie
Antman
Jay Gatsby
Okoye
Samwise Gamgee
Michael Scott
Alfred Pennyworth
Joey Tribbiani
Phoebe Buffay
๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐
โย Or yet in wise old Ravenclaw,ย If youโve a ready mind,ย Where those of wit and learning,ย Will always find their kind.ย โ
๐ธ๐๐๐๐๐๐ก: Air
๐น๐๐ข๐๐๐๐ ๐๐ฆ: โFrom Glen,โ Rowena Ravenclaw
A sharp and intelligent woman
She wanted to make Hogwarts the finest wizarding school in the world, teaching only those with the highest intelligenceย
Rowena wore a diadem that was said to grant wisdom to the wearer, however,ย Rowenaโs own daughter grew jealous of her motherโs incredible intelligence. Helena Ravenclaw stole her motherโs diadem and ran away, a fact that Rowena kept hidden from her fellow founders even when she fell ill.
Wanting to see Helena before she died, Rowena sent a man to bring Helena home. Unfortunately, that man was the Bloody Baron, who was in love with Helena, and stabbed her in a rage when she refused to come home.
ย After Helena was tragically killed, legend tells us that Rowena Ravenclaw died of a broken heart.ย
She was the best friend of Helga Hufflepuff
๐ธ๐ ๐ก๐๐๐๐๐ ๐ฉ๐๐ ๐ก๐๐๐๐ก๐ :
Intelligence
Wisdom
Witty
Open-minded - donโt mix well with traditional, close-minded people. Ravenclaws see the big picture, they think about what things could be, rather than what things are.ย
They think outside of the box, they donโt like being confined by rules or traditions.ย
Uniqueย
Individualistic/Original
Actually very intuitive
๐ถ๐ฉ๐๐๐๐๐ก๐๐๐ ๐ก๐ฉ๐๐ก ๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐ก ๐ก๐ฉ๐๐ ๐ป๐๐ข๐ ๐:
Susan Pevensie
Sherlock Holmes
Bruce Banner
James Bond
Annabeth Chase
Mary Poppins
Gandalf
Monica Geller
Ross Geller
๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐
โ Or perhaps in Slytherin, Youโll make your real friends. These cunning folk use any means to achieve their ends.ย โ
๐ธ๐๐๐๐๐๐ก: Water
๐น๐๐ข๐๐๐๐ ๐๐ฆ: โFrom Fenโ,ย Salazar Slytherin
He believed strongly that only wizards of pure bloodย
This belief caused a big rift between the founders, especially Gryffindor, which led to the depature of Salazarย
Despite his flaws, Salazar was a talented wizard, skilled in Legilemency and Parseltongue
Before he left, however, he created the Chamber of Secrets
๐ธ๐ ๐ก๐๐๐๐๐ ๐ฉ๐๐ ๐ก๐๐๐๐ก๐ :
Ambition
Determination
Cunning
Traditional
Strategic
Willing to do whatever it takes to achieve their goals; even using others for their gain.ย
Not all Slytherins use these traits for personal gain, however, because the founder was evil - doesnโt mean every Slytherin is.ย
Resourceful
Cleverness
Family means a lot to them
Desires respect
๐ถ๐ฉ๐๐๐๐๐ก๐๐๐ ๐ก๐ฉ๐๐ก ๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐ก ๐ก๐ฉ๐๐ ๐ป๐๐ข๐ ๐:
Peter Pevensie
Natasha Romanoff
Daenerys Targaryen
Lady MacBeth
Wednesday Addams
Selina Kyle/Catwomanย
Rachel Green
Harley Quinn
524 notes
ยท
View notes
Deconstructing Mr Darcy
My favourite character in all Austen canon is Mr Darcy. Unfortunately, as soon as I say this, everybody is like
Because when I say this people think of thisโฆ
And thisโฆ
But thatโs not why heโs my favourite character.
There is this famous quote by P.D. James in which she argues that Austen's Emma is like a predecessor of the detective novel, in the way that she sprinkles clues as to what's really going on with Frank Churchill.
And ever since, I've been reading Pride and Prejudice differently, because of course she does something similar there too.
Specifically, Austen constructs this elaborate character puzzle with Mr Darcy at its centre. Every time he and Elizabeth clash, throughout the novel, one of the central conflicts sparks up: what is Darcy really like?
Elizabethโs early interest in him is often interpreted as sexual tension/latent attraction. Iโm not saying this isnโt the case (you can argue about this). But what is evident is that her intellectual interest in characters is roused by him. Because, well, he really presents her with a tricky puzzle.
1) The mysterious man at the ball
When Elizabeth and her sisters go to the Assembly Ball at Meryton, remember, they go there to ogle Mr Bingley. He is the rich, handsome bachelor they hope to dance with when they get there.
But then they actually arrive and itโs someone else who has everyone talking. Mr Darcy. Heโs the tall, handsome stranger who turns out to be much, much richer than Mr Bingley, and who gets everyone excited.
Who will he dance with?
Well, nobody because heโs like way too important to deign to notice any of them. He stoops to acknowledge that Jane, literally the most beautiful girl in the county, is somewhat pretty. But her sister is totally beneath his notice.
With this twist upon a twist, the author invites Elizabeth and the reader to abandon their first suspicion that heโs the hero and to consider him a little absurd instead. And this is a comic novel. By that point we have met multiple absurd characters, so we know this is what is to be expected from this story.
2) The cracks
The narrator hints that Darcy enjoys a good gossip with his friends and spends his free time dissecting the many ways in which the local women donโt interest him. Again, absurd, remember? Elizabeth is among the women he judges harshly, but as he sees more and more of her this happens:
So the reader is now invited to some irony which Elizabeth is not privileged to enjoy. But itโs all in service of the comedy, right? Because itโs more delicious for the reader to see the contrast of how much Elizabeth is wrong about what he thinks of her.
You, the reader, have a good chuckle with the author about this, donโt you? But while youโre laughing youโre MISSING A CLUE! And itโs right there: Elizabeth is wrong about Darcy. Itโs lampshading the fact that she doesnโt really understand him at all.
3) The real deal
So then we get a little closer to Darcy. Elizabeth stays with him and his friends at Netherfield to nurse her sister. As Darcy continues to admire her, and as she continues to be oblivious, one evening he approaches her and this happens:
Again Elizabeth is wrong about Darcy, but here Austen adds another clue:
Soโฆ the guy who has the superpower of turning any normal situation awkward makes this super awkward situationโฆ charming?
And then Austen adds some misdirection by immediately adding:
And weโre focusing on the irony that this guy is more enchanted with her the more she rejects him. And weโre a little amazed at how arrogant this guy is that he doesnโt see how much he is disliked at this moment. Almost as self-important and oblivious as Mr Collins.
And so we donโt see thatโฆ heโs nice? And I mean, an arrogant, self-important arse, as Elizabeth thinks of him, wouldnโt be nice at this point. Heโd be wounded. Heโd make it awkward. Importantly, heโd make it awkward for her.
Itโs hard to get out of a situation like this gracefully. But he can. He knows how. He has that ability.
And this works as a bit of foreshadowing too, of course. Dancing and courtship are pretty strongly linked in Austen (and culturally in that era) and so his acceptance of her rejection in this manner lampshades his character as a lover.
But thereโs so much more. That time at Netherfield is so rich in character studies, I feel like someone could write several PhD theses on that section of the book alone.
My favourite is the one that happens when Darcy and Elizabeth literally talk about characters. Miss Bingley asserts that Darcy is perfect, has no flaws. Elizabeth is delighted: this is just what she thinks Darcy thinks of himself.
Darcy says: No, Iโm plenty flawed, thanks.
Elizabeth is curious now. Go on, oh prideful one, enlighten us mere mortals!
Darcy explains that heโs resentful, that he doesnโt forget or forgive easily.
Elizabeth has to admit that thatโs a non-ridiculous answer. Sheโs disappointed, a little, because what good is that to her, since she wanted to have a good laugh at this expense? But he predicted as much and at the beginning of this conversation challenged her on this to preempt her making a joke of the whole conversation.
He wants to continue to be serious and this happens:
Again, Austenโs sleight of hand: when we first read this, it sounds more like Darcy is just a misanthrope who has a negative and pessimistic attitude towards people. Thatโs how Elizabeth hears it too.
But he tells us himself: thatโs not what he means. Elizabeth (and the reader) is misunderstanding him. And he shows us, right away, by taking her jibe in good humour right then and there.
Multiple times, Elizabeth teases or attacks him, and heโs cheerful about it. He thinks itโs kind of funny. Bingley gets a shot or two in, and Darcy takes that on the chest too.
Austen manages to create this impression of him in the readerโs mind of a guy who is angry and prideful all the time, but when we review his actions, how often is this really true?
4) Darcy through the eyes of others
In many analyses, Elizabeth is blamed for being so easily taken in and so stubbornly mistaken in Darcy, but in all fairness, look at what she has to work with!
So much of what she learns about him is through other people, and so what she knows is filtered by their interests, skewed perspectives and compromised judgements. The fawning of Caroline Bingley and Mr Collins, the hatred of George Wickham, the deference of Mr Bingley, the lack of deference from Colonel Fitzwilliam, the way Charlotte views men, the way Jane always finds good things to say about anybody, her motherโs vulgar prejudice, all of it adds to a picture of absolute confusion. And the worst offender is Darcy himself, of course, because he stubbornly refuses to clarify anything about himself, partly because he canโt and partly because he just wonโt.
Darcyโs stay in Hertfordshire culminates in this exchange, at the Netherfield Ball, between Darcy and Elizabeth:
5) Mr Darcy in love
Darcy really is a hard nut to crack, and in large part itโs because he makes himself hard to crack. The baseline here is pretty bad but it gets so much worse the more he loves Elizabeth and the more he is determined to hide from her.
Before, he just doesnโt care what people think of him. But now, he does care and he desperately wants them not to know that he has, annoyingly and embarrassingly, fallen head over heels in love.
Austen strings us along in this confusion until the absolute shock that comes with his proposal. Even though we as readers always knew more than Elizabeth did, and even though both we the readers and Elizabeth had tonnes of evidence and clues about Darcy and his real character, this twist comes as a complete surprise.
And because we, the readers, and Elizabeth, the protagonist, are surprised, we donโt notice another important clue. Darcy is also shocked. Like, weโre all sitting in this scene, aghast, amazed, shocked. We all came to this point following a trail of wrong clues, misdirections, misunderstandings and mistaken assumptions.
But what does this tell us about Darcy? Other than what he finally reveals through his letter, we learn that the entire time he thought Elizabeth:
Knew what she was doing, flirting with and encouraging him
Understood his prevarication
Expected a proposal
The poor man doesnโt come out of this looking good, does he? It makes him look really arrogant, self-important and big-headed. And to an extent, well, it is.
But thereโs also another, kinder, reading to all this: that heโs someone who overthinks things.
Thereโs the conversation in Netherfield with Bingley where he deprecates those who do things rapidly as if it were a virtue. We know from other parts of the novel that heโs a bookish (he prides himself in his library), intellectual (he admires those who read), โcleverโ (in the narratorโs own words) guy.
Used to responsibility, used to being relied on to guide and advise people, used to solving knotty problems, Darcy approached his problem (loving a girl who is in every way beneath him) in the same way. He deserves a large portion of the smackdown he receivesโno argument from me here. It does him good, later, as we all know. But when we revisit the novel, these deeper dimensions of his character become more apparent whenever we come to this moment: that Darcyโs flaws are not just the obvious ones here (pride, arrogance, lack of manners) but also shades of other traits of his.
6) A mystery to the very end
At this point, Austen begins to clear the mist a little. Darcy gets such a blow with Elizabethโs rejection that our heart does go out to him, and then the letter explains so much, you begin to feel like heโs been wronged with our harsh view of him. Weโre brought into his home, and so, slowly, we are shown that, yes, heโs sort of quiet and taciturn, and maybe his people skills arenโt exactly up there, but heโs actually quite nice, at least willing to try to be outwardly more friendly, but in essence heโs a kind person and a responsible landowner. Elizabeth begins to see that heโs rather attractive.
The reader and Elizabeth begin to thaw towards him. And then Lydia runs away, All seems lost. Wickham has been such a wicked force in Darcyโs life, Elizabeth has already tried Darcy to the edge of what any reasonable man would put up with and Elizabethโs family exposes herself in the worst possible way.
What I love is that Darcyโs true character is always, always most visible through his actions. This mirrors the whole point of the novel of course: that we should pay attention not to impressions, superficialities (words) but to what people really are, and what they actually do (actions). So, Darcy doesnโt say anything, in fact he swears everybody to silence. He just does. He saves Elizabethโs family in the most warm-hearted, generous and forgiving way possible.
Anyway, I could write books on this subject just because of how much there is to say, and this is but the tip of the iceberg, but Iโll leave off here. I just wanted to explain why I love Mr Darcy, the character, and why you should too. Not as a literary romantic hero, not as a literary crush but as a really interesting, beautifully written, complex character in his own right.
84 notes
ยท
View notes
With the rise of booktok/booktwt, there's been this weird movement against literary criticism. It's a bizarre phenomenon, but this uptick in condemnation of criticism is so stifling. I understand that with the rise of these platforms, many people are being reintroduced into the habit of reading, which is why at the base level, I understand why many 'popular' books on booktok tend to be cozier.
The argument always falls into the 'this book means too much to me' or 'let people enjoy things,' which is rhetoric I understand -- at least fundamentally. But reading and writing have always been conduits for criticism, healthy natural criticism. We grow as writers and readers because of criticism. It's just so frustrating to see arguments like "how could you not like this character they've been the x trauma," or "why read this book if you're not going to come out liking it," and it's like...why not. That has always been the point of reading. Having a character go through copious amounts of trauma does not always translate to a character that's well-crafted. Good worldbuilding doesn't always translate to having a good story, or having beautiful prose doesn't always translate into a good plot.
There is just so much that goes into writing a story other than being able to formulate tropable (is that a word lol) characters. Good ideas don't always translate into good stories. And engaging critically with the text you read is how we figure that out, how we make sure authors are giving us a good craft. Writing is a form of entertainment too, and just like we'd do a poorly crafted show, we should always be questioning the things we read, even if we enjoy those things.
It's just werd to see people argue that we shouldn't read literature unless we know for certain we are going to like it. Or seeing people not be able to stand honest criticism of the world they've fallen in love with. I love ASOIAF -- but boy oh boy are there a lot of problems in the story: racial undertones, questionable writing decisions, weird ness overall. I also think engaging critically helps us understand how an author's biases can inform what they write. Like, HP Lovecraft wrote eerie stories, he was also a raging racist. But we can argue that his fear of PoC, his antisemitism, and all of his weird fears informed a lot of what he was writing. His writing is so eerie because a lot of that fear comes from very real, nasty places. It's not to say we have to censor his works, but he influences a lot of horror today and those fears, that racial undertone, it is still very prevalent in horror movies today. That fear of the 'unknown,'
Gone with the Wind is an incredibly racist book. It's also a well-written book. I think a lot of people also like confine criticism to just a syntax/prose/technical level -- when in reality criticism should also be applied on an ideological level. Books that are well-written, well-plotted, etc., are also -- and should also -- be up for criticism. A book can be very well-written and also propagate harmful ideologies. I often read books that I know that (on an ideological level), I might not agree with. We can learn a lot from the books we read, even the ones we hate.
I just feel like we're getting to the point where people are just telling people to 'shut up and read' and making spaces for conversation a uniform experience. I don't want to be in a space where everyone agrees with the same point. Either people won't accept criticism of their favorite book, or they think criticism shouldn't be applied to books they think are well written. Reading invokes natural criticism -- so does writing. That's literally what writing is; asking questions, interrogating the world around you. It's why we have literary devices, techniques, and elements. It's never just taking the words being printed at face value.
You can identify with a character's trauma and still understand that their badly written. You can read a story, hate everything about it, and still like a character. As I stated a while back, I'm reading Fourth Wing; the book is terrible, but I like the main character. The worldbuilding is also terrible, but the author writes her PoC characters with respect. It's not hard to acknowledge one thing about the text, and still find enough to enjoy the book. And authors grow when we're honest about what worked and what didn't work. Shadow and Bone was very formulaic and derivative at points, but Six of Crows is much more inventive and inclusive. Veronica Roth's Carve the Mark had some weird racial problems, but Chosen Ones was a much better book in terms of representation. Percy Jackson is the same way. These writers grow, not just by virtue of time, but because they were critiqued and listened to that critique. C.S. Lewis and Tolkien always publically criticized each other's work. Zora Neale Hurston and Langston Hughes had a legendary friendship and back and forth with one another's works which provides so much insight into the conversations black authors and creatives were having.
Writing has always been about asking questions; prodding here and there, critiquing. It has always been a conversation, a dialogue. I urge people to love what they read, and read what they love, but always ask questions, always understand different perspectives, and always keep your mind open. Please stop stifling and controlling the conversations about your favorite literature, and please understand that everyone will not come out with the same reading experience as you. It doesn't make their experience any less valid than yours.
1K notes
ยท
View notes