[stracciatella]

ЗЫ русский обоснуй в комментариях

(с) sjaejoneswriter.tumblr.com/post/132248577248/th... - с картинками но я не могу их сюда впихнуть т.к. смотрю все через proxfree

So this entire post arose from a conversation I was having with a friend of mine. As we are wont to do, we were discussing Harry Potter and sorting various acquaintances of ours into each of the four Houses when my friend confessed she wasn’t sure of the House to which she belonged. I said, “Gryffindor” without a second thought.
But my friend was unsure. Pottermore had sorted her into Ravenclaw, not to mention her sister and one of her best friends (both staunch Gryffindors) also told her she was Ravenclaw. She herself thought she might be Hufflepuff. However, as the Ravenclaw-est of Ravenclaws, I felt obligated to correct her. I tried explaining my theory of the different value axes and alignments over Gchat, but decided visual aids were probably going to be more helpful.
Hence the Hogwarts House Matrix.
I’ve divided these traits into primary alignments and supporting characteristics
To explain the alignments (in declining order of weight):
Governed by morality vs. ethics: Ruled by a sense of Right and Wrong vs. Correct and Incorrect.
Externally vs. internally validated: Derives a sense of satisfaction from achievements and praise vs. personal accomplishments.
Socially vs. individually orientated: Effects and is affected by social situations and peers vs. is unaffected by others’ opinions.
The supporting characteristics are as follows:
Reactive vs. proactive action: How one responds to external stimuli.
Subjective experience vs. objective reality: How one believes the world should be judged.
Driven by passion vs. guided by reason: The raison d’être for doing.
Really, in my opinion, you can generally figure out which House you’re in by answering two questions:
1. Are you governed by morality or ethics?
2. Do you derive satisfaction from internal or external validation?
Answering those two questions gives you a pretty good picture of what I’ve defined as the core value of each House:
Gryffindor = morality + external validation = Justice
Hufflepuff = morality + internal validation = Fairness
Slytherin = ethics + external validation = Success
Ravenclaw = ethics + internal validation = Knowledge
The characteristics of Bravery, Hard Work, Ambition, and Cleverness are external manifestations of the core values. You must be brave to seek justice, you must work hard to be fair, you must be ambitious to find success, and you be clever to gain knowledge.
(More charts and LONG explanations under the cut!)
I will admit I kept flip-flopping on a few of the alignments, particularly whether or not Slytherin was governed by ethics or morality. I was stymied because my mother is Slytherin, and whenever we get into arguments she has a definite sense of right and wrong. (She would be a Gryffindor if she valued Justice over Success.) However, I ultimately came down on Slytherin being governed by ethics supported by subjective experience, which I think accounts for some of the grudges Slytherins can hold.
To get a little more in-depth…

“In the name of Justice, Gryffindors can be Defensive.”
I’ve always thought of Gryffindors as being somewhat insufferably righteous, and I say this with the utmost love. They, like their element, are firebrands, champions of (lost) causes (like Hermione and S.P.E.W.), and passionate defenders of Good. They are the social justice warriors of Hogwarts. They see injustice, they will seek reparations.
Hermione is often trotted out as being a potential Ravenclaw because she is the brightest witch of her generation, but Hermione is Gryffindor through and through. She takes up the cause of house elf civil rights, she punches Malfoy in the face for insulting Hagrid, she faces Rita Skeeter’s acid quill in pursuit of what’s Right. And, unlike Ravenclaws, Hermione is externally validated; after all, the fear the boggart preys on in Prisoner of Azkaban is that she has failed all her classes. She seeks external validation for her intelligence.
Gryffindors can definitely be the touchiest of the four Houses, probably because they live by subjective experience AND are driven by passion. When upset, they tend to sulk.

“In the name of Fairness, Hufflepuffs can be Indecisive.”
Sharing the Gryffindor moral compass are the Hufflepuffs, but they are guided by reason and live in an objective reality, so they are less inclined to bursts of temper and pettiness. Hufflepuff gets the short end of the stick sometimes; they lack the martyrdom of Gryffindor, the glamor of Slytherin, and the uniqueness of Ravenclaw, so when it comes to describing this House, you get things like, “Um, hard work? Loyalty? Niceness?”
But honestly, Hufflepuff’s philosophy is actually best summed up by the Sorting Hat in Order of the Phoenix: “I’ll teach the lot and treat them just the same.” They like things to be fair. And because they value Fairness, they cannot let passion overtake them, nor can they operate on a subjective basis. Because of this, I think Hufflepuffs are best suited for positions of power and/or authority, but their reactive natures mean they don’t pursue these positions all that often. (They seem to be well suited to teaching, or maybe that’s because I know two teachers who are Hufflepuffs.) Still, the world would probably be a much better place if run by this House; the only downside is that in their adherence to fairness and equality, they may compromise to the point of futility.
While even-keeled, when upset, Hufflepuffs tend to ignore you. To them, the ultimate insult is to turn their back on you.

“In the pursuit of Knowledge, Ravenclaws can be Callous.”
And here we come to my House. When I was younger, I was often (erroneously) Sorted into Gryffindor because I am “brave”. In actuality, I’m an adrenaline junkie; I jump out of perfectly good airplanes for fun. I seek thrills, and some of those thrills are dangerous. But I am neither governed by morality nor validated by external praise, and because of that, I am Ravenclaw through and through.
Luna Lovegood is an excellent example of a Ravenclaw. A lot of Ravenclaws would probably fall into the “absentminded professor” stereotype, but I’ve always thought of Ravenclaw as the Nerd House. You know, the House where it’s totally cool you have this weird obsession with German typography and can spend hours reading up on Antiqua-Fraktur debate and argue about the stylistic genome of certain blackletter typefaces and…ahem. Not that I speak from personal experience or anything *cough*.
While Ravenclaws might live in an objective reality (it’s hard to be subjective when in the pursuit of information, you seek EVERY POSSIBLE SIDE), they are driven by passion. It’s hard to go down these knowledge rabbit holes unless you LOVE what you’re researching.
Because of that passion, Ravenclaws abide by the saying that the opposite of love is not hate, but indifference. It’s hard to upset a Ravenclaw, but if you lose their esteem, they become contemptuous and disdainful. (We are well practiced in the eyeroll.) Ravenclaws like myself have also been accused of being self-centered and callous, but honestly, sometimes ideas are much more interesting (and less upsetting) than people.

“In the pursuit of Success, Slytherins can be Malicious.”
I think a lot of people identify as Slytherin because it’s the sexy House. Evil is sexy, amirite? Who doesn’t love a villain, I mean, really. But the two Slytherins I love and (have) live(d) with are my mother and my partner, and neither of them are the least bit villainous or evil. They are, however, both incredibly ambitious.
Funnily enough, they each straddle an axis: my mother straddles the ethics/morality line (nearly Gryffindor) whereas Bear straddles the external/internal line (nearly Ravenclaw). But ultimately, when it comes down it, if you asked my mother if she valued Justice or Success, or if you asked Bear whether he valued Success or Knowledge, they would both answer Success.
And there’s nothing inherently Good or Evil about that. Slytherins, being guided by reason and also being proactive actors, tend to get shit done. (Whereas Ravenclaws—who are also proactive actors—tend to get distracted by their passionate interest in…things other than errands.) They are eminently practical, even ruthless, some might say.
They are also rather prickly. Like Gryffindors, they live by subjective experience, and can be incredibly competitive. And because they aren’t governed by morals, they believe the ends justify the means. At worst, this can call for sabotage and cheating, but at best, it means they are relentless in the pursuit of what they want.
Now, when a Slytherin believes Success and Status are synonymous, that’s when you can run into problems. Often Status comes with Success, but some Slytherins think Status is easier to attain, and therefore conflate the two. Their ambition is corrupted, and so it’s pretty easy to see how the entire pureblood philosophy came about in Harry Potter.
Slytherins, when upset, tend to brood. (And do they brood. Both my mother and Bear are champion brooders.)

@темы: 10 points to gryffindor

Comments

[хендрикс]

зависла, интересно) загуглила Ethics vs. Morals, мне кажется в русском нет особенной разницы, ближе к философскому определению, но разобралась.

[Jeanne dArc]

Интересно, что Слизерин individually orientated. Поняла, что по этому качеству я отличаю их от всех других факультетов.

[хендрикс]

Jeanne dArc, и Рэйвенкло тоже, но вот Слизерину надо чтобы еще и уважение в обществе, такие противоречивые )

[Jeanne dArc]

хендрикс, так это и к тем и другим относится? значит я не до конца поняла структуру.
я думала на какой стороне написаны характеристики, к тому и относится.

[stracciatella]

так, держите русский вариант
stracciatella.diary.ru/p197945711.htm

[Jeanne dArc]

stracciatella, мега спасибище