Twilight under the Sorting Hat

[ringswraith]

P.S. Is anyone else imagining Edward showing up in the Hufflepuff common room, running into Cedric Diggory, and both of them going, "Whoa..." Edward can't be Hufflepuff for that reason alone - the Rob effect is blowing my mind.

Hm, but by that logic, the Weasley twins shouldn't have both been sorted into the same house, either.

[December]

I love Edward, but he is a seventeen-year-old at heart,

Er, yes. But that's kinda common at Hogwarts, no? (*grin*)

He does, however, have a great deal of unflinching emotional courage

See, I guess to my mind that's pretty Gryffindor. But I see what you mean: there are all kinds of ways of being courageous, and some are subtler than the kind of stereotypical valour that Gryffindor is supposed to pick out. Which is maybe why you see Bella as a Gryffindor? And in a way of course I do too. She's certainly got that blind instinct to throw herself between other people and danger. I think what we may be coming up against is that actually, the best people in all three un-Slytherin Houses are pretty damn admirable and heroic: the differences are more ones of style than substance. Hufflepuffs just have a tinge of the clumsy and uncool about them; Ravenclaws are a bit egg-headed; but they're all heroes in their own way. And if you stop and think about it, Neville is as Hufflepuff as they come and Hermione as Ravenclaw; while Cedric bless him is as brave and upstanding as any Gryffindor and so on....

What exactly makes one think Edward would be in Gryffindor? Courage? Pre-Bella, I don't really see that. (And- well, not post, but during-Bella- his willingness to put himself before danger stems completely out of a sense of protectiveness of Bella.)

Hmmm. It's an interesting point, just how much of a disposition for derring-do you have to possess to count as a Gryffindor in ordinary life. I mean, no one in Twilight is actuated by the kind of wider moral crusade that the whole of HP basically turns on. TW is inward-looking; its heroisms basically ARE personal, and about saving the people you love -- not humankind (or vampirekind). Except for Carlisle, none of the Cullens thinks much beyond their family. (Of course you could argue that merely being a Cullen is a pretty stunning act of public, unremitting heroism -- that's something like 50 lives saved each per year by each of them, at no small personal cost. As I in fact did argue elsewhere, long ago. But leaving that to one side...). The thing is, not every generation is faced with a Voldemort. Would Arthur and Molly Weasley seem so much more heroic and public-spirited than Edward, if their courage hadn't been tested by the times they lived in? Protectiveness is probably Molly Weasley's defining characteristic. And there's Edward's own account of himself in his human youth as a chivalrous young idiot full of dreams of valour and glory.

Maybe it comes down to your sense of Edward as essentially mopey before he met Bella (moroseness is definitely not classic Gryffindor!). I think I don't feel that as strongly -- maybe there are passages I'm forgetting? I grant you that a spark comes into his life with Bella -- brings out the Gryffindor in him, maybe, that's been lying muffled under the dead weight of the half-life he's condemned to -- but I've always seen that as the essential Edward, raised from the (un?)dead. Certainly he found the tedium of highschool stupefying -- but I think many teenagers can relate to that! How many of us can imagine repeating 11th Grade for eternity without a shudder? (*grin*). But I see melancholy more than moroseness, I think, and an entirely Gryffindor-appropriate sense of the horror of being, frankly, what Voldemort is seeking to become in The Philosopher's Stone. (Can't remember the exact quote now: something about the hideous half-life you can acquire by drinking a unicorn's blood).

But that's just me: a lot of how one reads Edward's character hangs on how seriously you take the grim side of spending eternity as vampire.

ETA
oops, I see I've crossed with a number of other posts here while supper was cooking. Sorry!

[VirginiaMay]

Well, I was following the first post or two regarding Edward and Snape... but you have officially trailed off into terra ignognita for me. Since we've strayed from the topic a bit anyway, can I just ask? Are most Twilight fans also huge Harry Potter fans?? Because it seems that way to me quite often on the forum here.

[Esme echo]

I don't feel I've contradicted myself, vampball, because heroism is not merely consideration; but I have something new to think about now. I'm going to contemplate what would constitute heroism on Edward's part . . . and the definition of heroism in general. Thanks, everyone!

[ringswraith]

Well, I am thinking of courage in more general terms. Certainly it takes courage to face a vastly superior foe, but it also takes courage to admit to someone that you're wrong and ask for their forgiveness.

Perhaps TW isn't as... momentous as HP is with regards to good versus evil events. But in what we do see, such as the fight in EC, Edward fights not against insurmountable odds, but against opponents he believes he can best. That doesn't really take any courage to do. Even in the confrontation of BD, while it can be thought that speaking up to the Volturi took courage, it was something he'd accepted he'd have to do (and Bella kinda ruined it with her whole "I'm so awesome!" routine but that's another topic).

Compare this with say, Alice, who left everyone in the middle of BD to go find something she didn't even know existed. Now that took courage- facing the unknown (especially for her, who is so used to seeing what could be) and having to believe that her family would be fine without her (and Jasper).

[December]

Certainly it takes courage to face a vastly superior foe, but it also takes courage to admit to someone that you're wrong and ask for their forgiveness.

Definitely. Does that mean Edward qualifies, then? Because he certainly does that, repeatedly (though maybe not as often as we'd like!).

As for courage against impossible odds, I grant you that Edward's opportunities are more limited than Harry's. As is only natural: he's a completely different archetype, answering to a different fantasy -- his point is to be invulnerable, a perfect protector, where Harry's is to be the plucky halfling. In this sense, Edward's role in the fantasy probably comes closer to Dumbledore's. But on the rare occasions where reckless, doomed courage is called for -- leaping at Jane in Volterra, say -- it seems to me Edward acquits himself exactly as Harry would.

I do also take seriously the thought that choosing to face burning pain rather than hurt other people -- day after day, year upon year -- takes a kind of hardihood and, well, valour that marks all the Cullens out as the kind of quiet heroes the Sorting Hat would recognize for Gryffindors in a heartbeat.

Not to be contrary, or anything....(*grin*)

[Ouisa]

I think the thing missing here is the element of choice.
Harry would have made an excellent Slytherin, the hat told him so but he chose to be a Gryffindor. Which might be exactly what makes him a Gryffindor. JKR has said many times that Hermione would have been an excellent Ravenclaw and Neville a perfectly perfect Hufflepuff but there he is wielding the sword of Gryffindor in the final battle. I think the Sorting Hat see that which is essential to our souls.

I cannot see Edward as a Ravenclaw (and not just because I'm totally one and don't want to have anything to do with him). Yes he's smart, but it's not essential to his soul. (Jasper would make a great Ravenclaw though....) I also can't see him as a Hufflepuff. Sure he doesn't harm people by not eating them. And yeah that's painful for him but I don't think he really cares about other people beyond not eating them. He' s rather aloof. That's what makes Bella so revolutionary for him. He actually cares about her as a person, what her favorite color is and why she's living in Forks.

Now I could make a case for Edward as a Slytherin.....going to any means necessary to get what he wants....especially in Eclipse when he's being such a jerk about keeping her human but that's probably not the essential Edward either (darn.)

So I guess it' better be GRYFFINDOR for him....not only by process of elimination but by what I think he himself would choose to be.

Also I think to answer VirginiaMay's question I think many TW fans are Harry fans. I think it has to do with being book people or paranormal book people. We like books. We like to talk about books. These two series have been the most significant series of the last decade.

[December]

I think the thing missing here is the element of choice.

Aaaaaaghhh!!!!

*takes cover*

[24601]

I think the thing missing here is the element of choice.

Harry would have made an excellent Slytherin, the hat told him so but he chose to be a Gryffindor. Which might be exactly what makes him a Gryffindor. JKR has said many times that Hermione would have been an excellent Ravenclaw and Neville a perfectly perfect Hufflepuff but there he is wielding the sword of Gryffindor in the final battle. I think the Sorting Hat see that which is essential to our souls.

I agree completely. A choice was made. My question to you is was the choice Predestined?

Imagine an alternative world where Harry was Slytherin, Hermione a Ravenclaw and Neville a Hufflepuff. Very different?

So did each of these characters have a choice or had their destiny been chosen for them?

Apologies for derailing this topic.

[Ouisa]

Ha. I have been contemplating that question all weekend, ever since I read Matched by Ally Condie! But then again that discussion goes back to the days of the old TUGPM threads as well. Personally I'm not a big fan of pre-destination. Perhaps Harry could beat Voldemort as a Sytherin (with Snape at his side?). There has to be a fan fiction out there on this one......