But what would be the point? Has the Sorting Hat ever placed anyone in a House they very strongly didn’t want to be placed?
It assigned Harry to Gryffindor not Slytherin because Harry was strongly against the idea of joining Slytherin.
I’d guess with strict system like that, most people get pre-conceptions about which house they belong to long before sorting, so Hat’s job is usually very easy.
But what would be the point? Has the Sorting Hat ever placed anyone in a House they very strongly didn’t want to be placed?
It quite probably has, and would.
It assigned Harry to Gryffindor not Slytherin because Harry was strongly against the idea of joining Slytherin.
The hat isn’t complying here just noting that wanting desperately not to be Slytherin is evidence that you are not most suited to being a Slytherin. Me wanting desperately to be a Hufflepuff because it gives me access to a whole lot of Hufflepuffs to be my loyal minions might not be quite so persuasive.
Well, Hermione’s sorting is another example of Hat taking person’s preferences into account.
Is there any good counter-example?
Me wanting desperately to be a Hufflepuff because it gives me access to a whole lot of Hufflepuffs to be my loyal minions might not be quite so persuasive.
I’d expect people to develop serious plans of taking over the world at some age older than 11, but feel free to write fanfic to the contrary.
But if you believed strongly in value of loyalty, that might be enough. Hermione, Neville, and Peter Pettigrew all seem to have been sorted based on their value system more than on their actual traits—otherwise their sorting makes little sense.
I’d expect people to develop serious plans of taking over the world at some age older than 11
Erm, not taking over the world per se, but I was certainly thinking in long-range terms. If you look at my grade school graduation yearbook (age 12), my ambition is listed as building the first faster-than-light starship. Ah, the innocence of youth, before I got ambitious, and before I understood the local nature of causality.
Incidentally, that’s when I stopped talking about taking over the world, and also turned my attention to FTL. Public goal: Deduce the principles necessary for interstellar travel. Secret ambition: Control and drive all advanced research and current deployment of technology for transporting person, parcel and bit, then manipulate world leaders into disarmament. Ah the lonely megalomania of youth, back before I got ambitious, back when I thought I had to do everything myself.
But if you believed strongly in value of loyalty, that might be enough. Hermione, Neville, and Peter Pettigrew all seem to have been sorted based on their value system more than on their actual traits—otherwise their sorting makes little sense.
To be honest I’ve been running with the “their sorting makes little sense” theory. :)
All three were sorted into houses they new people in. This seems to have persuaded that hat a little in canon.
I would think it is likely that the hat would sort people into a house they want to be in.
Also, at age 11, many people haven’t fully developed, and putting them in a house is likely to cause them to be more like that house; there’s no reason for the hat to be overly picky about putting people where they belong. The actions of a ten-year-old aren’t great predictors of future personality.
Although thinking about it, the actions I remember taking as a ten-year-old seem pretty consistent with you I am today, but I would guess that I am an outlier in this regard.
Anyway I don’t see any reason to believe that the hat has EVER put someone in a house they didn’t want to be in, and I feel like taw is making stronger points despite the upvotes not agreeing with me.
Couldn’t a Slytherinny parent who wants their child to become powerful coach their child into wanting to be in some House other than Slytherin? Say, MoR!Lucius, coaching his son in all the ways of seizing power, but telling him awful, awful stories of what it was like to be a Slytherin. “No, no my boy, you do not want to be in that House, whatever you do!” Then, Draco under that Hat goes, “No! No! Not Slytherin! Anything but Slytherin!” And thus, ends up somewhere else.
Thus positioned, he does not automatically have to wear a suspicion-generating Slytherin badge, and he gets to be the wolf among the sheep (if he ends up in Hufflepuff or Gryffindor, where there’s no Harry and Hermione to match him). Being Slytherin is like being a Ferengi. People already expect you to scheme against them, so their guard is up. But a Hufflepuff or Gryffindor (especially Gryffindor!) MoR!Draco would start out with powerful advantages in his quest for world domination.
Since “rule the world” and “save the world” aren’t really that far apart, he probably would have ended up in Gryffindor. If you want to rule the world, presumably you think you’ve got a better way to run it than the way it’s being run. Some would-be rulers might just want the wealth and being able to boss other people around, but it’s easier to get that as a cult leader and not have to have responsibility for administering the global economy.
If you want to save the world, you could be defending the status quo (keeping that other guy from conquering the world), or you could see some threat (climate change, death) that isn’t being dealt with appropriately, and you have a better way. In either case, you are tacitly assuming that you have a pretty good idea what’s best for the world, and act to see that things go your way. Though I’m over-simplifying a bit here, I think there is an element of “who’s writing the history?” to whether one’s a “Gryffindor” or a “Slytherin.” Andrew Jackson: Gryffindor? Slytherin? What about Che Guevara?
My guess is it would be fairly common for partisans of Utopian movements (Communism, Nazism, religious fundamentalism, etc.) to fancy themselves as Gryffindor-type heroes out to save the world, while their opponents and victims would class them as Slytherins. Where would the Sorting Hat put them? :)
Although thinking about it, the actions I remember taking as a ten-year-old seem pretty consistent with you I am today, but I would guess that I am an outlier in this regard.
You aren’t. Most people overestimate the amount that people’s personalities are likely to or able to change.
Any chance we could get anecdotal evidence about this? Or better yet studies about it?
Without trying to be rude I would actually prefer you just didn’t believe me right now. It is a field of enquiry that I haven’t researched in a while and it would take me a long time to dig up the resources that I once found convincing. I seem to recall being surprised by identical-twins-raised-apart studies that focussed on the “big five” traits.
How much have you changed since you were 10?
I’m taller and my philosophy has changed (I was raised by religious believers). My interaction with that philosophy and personality is more or less the same (but matured and far more effectively applied.)
ETA: I google’d it and came up with this but neither I nor my university seems to have a subscription to peek inside.
It is not something I have read but my university seems to have access. If you are particularly curious you could message me with an email address.
But what would be the point? Has the Sorting Hat ever placed anyone in a House they very strongly didn’t want to be placed?
It assigned Harry to Gryffindor not Slytherin because Harry was strongly against the idea of joining Slytherin.
I’d guess with strict system like that, most people get pre-conceptions about which house they belong to long before sorting, so Hat’s job is usually very easy.
It quite probably has, and would.
The hat isn’t complying here just noting that wanting desperately not to be Slytherin is evidence that you are not most suited to being a Slytherin. Me wanting desperately to be a Hufflepuff because it gives me access to a whole lot of Hufflepuffs to be my loyal minions might not be quite so persuasive.
Well, Hermione’s sorting is another example of Hat taking person’s preferences into account.
Is there any good counter-example?
I’d expect people to develop serious plans of taking over the world at some age older than 11, but feel free to write fanfic to the contrary.
But if you believed strongly in value of loyalty, that might be enough. Hermione, Neville, and Peter Pettigrew all seem to have been sorted based on their value system more than on their actual traits—otherwise their sorting makes little sense.
Erm, not taking over the world per se, but I was certainly thinking in long-range terms. If you look at my grade school graduation yearbook (age 12), my ambition is listed as building the first faster-than-light starship. Ah, the innocence of youth, before I got ambitious, and before I understood the local nature of causality.
Incidentally, that’s when I stopped talking about taking over the world, and also turned my attention to FTL. Public goal: Deduce the principles necessary for interstellar travel. Secret ambition: Control and drive all advanced research and current deployment of technology for transporting person, parcel and bit, then manipulate world leaders into disarmament. Ah the lonely megalomania of youth, back before I got ambitious, back when I thought I had to do everything myself.
To be honest I’ve been running with the “their sorting makes little sense” theory. :)
All three were sorted into houses they new people in. This seems to have persuaded that hat a little in canon.
I would think it is likely that the hat would sort people into a house they want to be in.
Also, at age 11, many people haven’t fully developed, and putting them in a house is likely to cause them to be more like that house; there’s no reason for the hat to be overly picky about putting people where they belong. The actions of a ten-year-old aren’t great predictors of future personality.
Although thinking about it, the actions I remember taking as a ten-year-old seem pretty consistent with you I am today, but I would guess that I am an outlier in this regard.
Anyway I don’t see any reason to believe that the hat has EVER put someone in a house they didn’t want to be in, and I feel like taw is making stronger points despite the upvotes not agreeing with me.
Couldn’t a Slytherinny parent who wants their child to become powerful coach their child into wanting to be in some House other than Slytherin? Say, MoR!Lucius, coaching his son in all the ways of seizing power, but telling him awful, awful stories of what it was like to be a Slytherin. “No, no my boy, you do not want to be in that House, whatever you do!” Then, Draco under that Hat goes, “No! No! Not Slytherin! Anything but Slytherin!” And thus, ends up somewhere else.
Thus positioned, he does not automatically have to wear a suspicion-generating Slytherin badge, and he gets to be the wolf among the sheep (if he ends up in Hufflepuff or Gryffindor, where there’s no Harry and Hermione to match him). Being Slytherin is like being a Ferengi. People already expect you to scheme against them, so their guard is up. But a Hufflepuff or Gryffindor (especially Gryffindor!) MoR!Draco would start out with powerful advantages in his quest for world domination.
Since “rule the world” and “save the world” aren’t really that far apart, he probably would have ended up in Gryffindor. If you want to rule the world, presumably you think you’ve got a better way to run it than the way it’s being run. Some would-be rulers might just want the wealth and being able to boss other people around, but it’s easier to get that as a cult leader and not have to have responsibility for administering the global economy.
If you want to save the world, you could be defending the status quo (keeping that other guy from conquering the world), or you could see some threat (climate change, death) that isn’t being dealt with appropriately, and you have a better way. In either case, you are tacitly assuming that you have a pretty good idea what’s best for the world, and act to see that things go your way. Though I’m over-simplifying a bit here, I think there is an element of “who’s writing the history?” to whether one’s a “Gryffindor” or a “Slytherin.” Andrew Jackson: Gryffindor? Slytherin? What about Che Guevara?
My guess is it would be fairly common for partisans of Utopian movements (Communism, Nazism, religious fundamentalism, etc.) to fancy themselves as Gryffindor-type heroes out to save the world, while their opponents and victims would class them as Slytherins. Where would the Sorting Hat put them? :)
You aren’t. Most people overestimate the amount that people’s personalities are likely to or able to change.
Any chance we could get anecdotal evidence about this? Or better yet studies about it?
How much have you changed since you were 10?
ETA: I google’d it and came up with this but neither I nor my university seems to have a subscription to peek inside.
Without trying to be rude I would actually prefer you just didn’t believe me right now. It is a field of enquiry that I haven’t researched in a while and it would take me a long time to dig up the resources that I once found convincing. I seem to recall being surprised by identical-twins-raised-apart studies that focussed on the “big five” traits.
I’m taller and my philosophy has changed (I was raised by religious believers). My interaction with that philosophy and personality is more or less the same (but matured and far more effectively applied.)
It is not something I have read but my university seems to have access. If you are particularly curious you could message me with an email address.