#how would the house stereotypes be different if the golden trio and drac were in different houses

[tigris-types]

In Denfense of All the Houses

So i feel likw the main reason the Hogwarts houses are seen as the stereotypical way as they are depends a lot upon how they are paired up. And by that I mean as G (good, brave, heroes) vs S(evil, sneaky, villain), and by default H (friendly, kind, dumb) vs R(creative, antisocial, smart). Notice how these dont really incorporate what the houses actually stand for, but because they are paired with another house, they are given opposite attributes. And I feel like this really hampered our understanding of the houses.

The narrative gives us a reason why G is good and S is evil, but due to this focus, it makes us want to do a similiar thing with H and R too. Therefore, H and R become opposites and as one is seen as friendly the other becomes antisocial and as one is seen as smart thr other becomes dumb. But these arent what the houses stand for! Any of them!

So I want to take a look at how the houses may have been interpreted differently if the narrative focused on a different pairing.

[[MORE]]

So what is the Golden Trio was sorted into Ravenclaw? Herminone is book smart, Ron knows strategy, and Harry wants to learn. Then the narrative would be R vs S. R would be as good, heroes. S would still be seen as evil, as villains. But, where R would have out of the box ideas, instead of S being seen as sneaky, maybe they would be seen as more grounded or more in touch with others. As R seems to encourage individual pursuits and success perhaps S would be seen as group success. Maybe it would be R (creative, smart, individual) vs S(straight forward, grounded, pack mentality). However, they each encourage students to follow their ambition, but since those ambitions would be in different fields, this aspect would be lost.

Then in this scenario, it would also be G vs H. Neither would be seen as the great heroes. Perhaps still more heroic than S, but not as much as the original. Perhaps the bravery of G would be seen as recklessness as opposed to H's security and keeping others safe. Perhaps the kindness of H would make G look brash in comparison. And perhaps, the openess of H, would make G look like a cliche . So perhaps in this scenario we would see H (safe, kind, friendly) vs G (reckless, brash, mean). Not quite the heroes we imagined huh?

--------------idk how page breaks work--------

But then what if the Golden Trio was sorted into Hufflepuff? Herminone is hardworking, Ron is kind, and Harry is loyal. Then it would be H vs S. I fear if this was the scenario, S would get an even worse reputation. As the need would be there to give them completely opposite traits. H values hardworking, fairness and loyalty, but perhaps in this scenario we would also add good, heroic, kind, and protective to their traits. But, if they are paired with/against S, that would make S lazy, unfair, cutthroat, evil, villain, and selfish by comparison. They each value protecting their own, but they have a different way going about it and I feel that would be lost in this comparison.

And in this case, we would have R vs G. Instead of H being seen as dumb, that trait would move to G. But where G is brave and voices its opinions, bravery would be seen as loud as opposed to R's quiet and studious manner. Since R is seen as smart, they must think things through, which would make them appear cautious in opposed to G's jumping in to defend. G also values chivalry which in turn would make R seem rude. It would be R (smart, quiet, cautious, rude) vs (dumb, loud, brave, polite). Neither really showcases what's important to the house but rather a rough understanding how they are seen from the outside.

-------page break I guess?----------------------

And what if the villains werent in S? Would the good/evil or hero/villain traits still apply? Would loud G been seen as a villain to quiet R? Or would R be seen as intelligent and tricky and evil against G's straight forward actions and general heroics?

Would G be seen as bullies and closed minded in comparison to H's welcomness and friendliness? Or H be seen as wanting to hideaway and as cowards in comparision to G's bravery and showing off?

And what if the villains werent in S, but the heroes were? Would they finally be seen as cunning and ambitious instead of sneaky and evil? Would they be seen as apt politicians instesd of backstabbing villains?

Or what if the houses rivalry stayed the same as the books but instead of S vs G in the forefront, it was H vs R. Who would be the hero then? I feel they would be more readily seen for what they are then simple stereotypes. Maybe one would be seen as more grounded and serious and the other more with their heads in the clouds and more silly. Maybe one would be in the pursuit of knowledge while the other is in the pursuit of followers. Or G would be seem as athletic and strong jocks, while S is seem as weak nerds. Or maybe, not at all.

But you see how when we want to pair up all the houses and create this house rivalry with the rivarlry that exists with good and evil, it creates this perception of the houses that isnt true.

S isnt inherently evil or villainous, just ambitious, cunning, determined, and value self-preservation.

G isnt inherently heroic or good, just brave, courageous, athletic, and values chivalry.

H isn't inherently dumb or useless, just hardworking, fair, loyal, and values kindness.

R isnt inherently antisocial or stuck up, just creative, intelligent, wise, and values individuality.

-------------final page break-----------------

And so, I feel like a lot of this gets lost in translation so to speak when trying to quickly summarize the houses. And I think a part of the reason for that is the house rivarly and tje need to see the houses as opposites to eah other when they're not. Traits from any of the houses can be used for good or evil and I think ots important to understand that. After all, if the story had been any different, perhaps we would have different sterotypes about the houses.