Sorting-hat Vorkosigan Saga characters
Nov. 16th, 2012 12:36 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
jackRecently Liv linked to a discussion about hat-sorting[1] Vorkosigan Saga characters. I was really interested, although also interested to see I often disagreed.
The houses
First, some clarifications on how I see the houses as Rowling seemed to intend them or how they make the most sense, rather than as they come across in the books.
Gryffindor is the "good" house, but if you eschew a moral judgement, you can say they're defined by bravery/impulsiveness and loyalty/dogmatism.
Slytherin is the "evil" house, but if you eschew moral judgement, you could say they're the house of ambition and forming social alliances. I think "in-group-ness" can be very slytherin, but I don't think it has to be racial-based even though that was the primary division represented at the time Harry Potter was at school.
Ravenclaw is easy: good or bad, they're motivated by understanding.
Hufflepuff is often seen as the "other" house, but that's unfair, they seem defined by reliability (seen positively as loyalty or trustworthyness or negatively as ploddingness) and nurturingness. You can have bad-ass hufflepuffs, see below :)
[1] what's the appropriate verb here?
Miles Vorkosigan
Someone said that Miles was Gryffindor and Naismith was Slytherin. I think that's backwards: Naismith is the most charge-in-and-damn-the-consequences part of Miles, if anything, even more devoted to "do the right thing at all costs" than Miles is. Hence Gryffindor.
Whereas Miles is good, but he's ambitious good. He doesn't just want to do something good, he wants to change the world for good. He talks everyone into his way of doing things, and makes friends with everyone[2]. Ambition, networking, and silver-tongue, that is so Slytherin in a good way.
[2] I thought Slughorn was a missed opportunity, because he tries to make friends, but is way too slimy. I think it still counts as Slytherin if you make lots of friends and genuinely like them.
Cordelia
Ravenclaw, ravenclaw, ravenclaw. Not just because she's a scientist, and despite her bravery and nurturingness. But all her cool moments seem to be something she does to see if she can. Even when she's emotionally supporting people, it takes the form of "I understood you at a deeper level than you ever understood yourself, presto, that solves all your problems".
Gregor
Hufflepuff. See, badass Hufflepuffs (better to come below). Seriously, what is Gregor's primary identity? Duty. And secondarily? Looking after Barrayar. He's also brave and intelligent and manipulating, but I feel more because he knows he's supposed to.
Alys Vorpatril
Slytherin. She's very good, but what she's good at is arranging all her friends in the political scene so it all just keeps ticking along the right way. And she's one of the people who's more absorbed into the Vor system.
Again, she's also brave and intelligent and dutiful, but I think they're less central to her character.
Piotr
Gryffindor. Gryffindor doesn't exclude being ruthless (cf. Dumbledore): Piotr exemplifies doing what's right regardless of the danger and standing up for his beliefs regardless of how unpopular they are, those are quintessentially Gryffindor.
As Miles says, the problem some people have with him is that they loved him when the beliefs he was standing up for were more progressive than average, but hated it when he was standing up for views they no longer really agreed with. But even if your bravely standing up for something bad, I think that's still Gryffindor.
Aral
I think like Piotr and Miles, Aral always wanted to be Gryffindor, but was crushed by the responsibility of politics and constantly having to do the stablising thing rather than the right one.
Simon Illyan
Hufflepuff. I realise this is somewhat controversial, but my view is:
(i) Simon is motivated by duty. He wanted to serve his world in the military. He volunteered for a dangerous medical operation to insert the chip. He's unfailingly loyal to Aral and Gregor.
(ii) What is his relationship to the imperium? I feel, like Gregor, he nurtures it, giving it little opportunities for growth and encouraging it to take them, pruning back problem branches, etc, etc.
Obviously he's a rare example of a ruthless Hufflepuff. But even the ruthless things he does seem to done in a dutiful way. Both the Vorkosigans and Illyan all practice lots of armed and unarmed combat in case they ever need it. But I imagine Miles attacking his exercise regimen every day, throwing himself at it yelling "I will prevail!" Whereas I imagine Simon just automatically springing out of bed two hours early and practising those skills he knows he'll need once every five years because It's the Done Thing.
Elli Quinn
Hm. When I started considering Miles' lovers I hit a problem that most of them seem defined by Miles reaction to them, rather than their own drives. The best impression we get of Elli is probably in Ethan of Athos, although even there she's not the primary protagonist. But in that book she's a lot more Gryffindor than anything else, constantly doing risky things for the right reasons.
Prince Serg
Again, we don't have much to go on. He's nasty. Maybe angry and ruthless. But none of those are really exemplified by a particular house.
Is he brave or impulsive? Not very. Is he curious? He's a bit curious for hedonistic new experiences, but not in general. Is he hard-working, determined, patient or conscientious? Not as far as I can see. Is he personable or gregarious? Only a little bit.
I guess he's a little bit hungry for glory, but he never tries especially hard for it, just sits back and accept it. On balance, the "glory" and "nasty" make me think Slytherin, which was always the obvious choice, but not very decisively.
Comments
Looking at the last couple, people are hard to place for different reasons. Sometimes that's just because someone has personality traits that were lumped into different houses. But people naturally transcend any classification system sometimes.
What's interesting to me is the other reasons people fail to fall neatly into the classification system, because they are defined by traits which aren't really included.
That can be a weakness in either the system (understandably, as it was written for 11-year-olds), or sometimes in the characterisation of an otherwise beloved character. For instance, look at Elli or Serg: we know a lot about their competencies or proclivities, but not that much about what drives them, and I didn't notice that until I started writing this post.
The houses
First, some clarifications on how I see the houses as Rowling seemed to intend them or how they make the most sense, rather than as they come across in the books.
Gryffindor is the "good" house, but if you eschew a moral judgement, you can say they're defined by bravery/impulsiveness and loyalty/dogmatism.
Slytherin is the "evil" house, but if you eschew moral judgement, you could say they're the house of ambition and forming social alliances. I think "in-group-ness" can be very slytherin, but I don't think it has to be racial-based even though that was the primary division represented at the time Harry Potter was at school.
Ravenclaw is easy: good or bad, they're motivated by understanding.
Hufflepuff is often seen as the "other" house, but that's unfair, they seem defined by reliability (seen positively as loyalty or trustworthyness or negatively as ploddingness) and nurturingness. You can have bad-ass hufflepuffs, see below :)
[1] what's the appropriate verb here?
Miles Vorkosigan
Someone said that Miles was Gryffindor and Naismith was Slytherin. I think that's backwards: Naismith is the most charge-in-and-damn-the-consequences part of Miles, if anything, even more devoted to "do the right thing at all costs" than Miles is. Hence Gryffindor.
Whereas Miles is good, but he's ambitious good. He doesn't just want to do something good, he wants to change the world for good. He talks everyone into his way of doing things, and makes friends with everyone[2]. Ambition, networking, and silver-tongue, that is so Slytherin in a good way.
[2] I thought Slughorn was a missed opportunity, because he tries to make friends, but is way too slimy. I think it still counts as Slytherin if you make lots of friends and genuinely like them.
Cordelia
Ravenclaw, ravenclaw, ravenclaw. Not just because she's a scientist, and despite her bravery and nurturingness. But all her cool moments seem to be something she does to see if she can. Even when she's emotionally supporting people, it takes the form of "I understood you at a deeper level than you ever understood yourself, presto, that solves all your problems".
Gregor
Hufflepuff. See, badass Hufflepuffs (better to come below). Seriously, what is Gregor's primary identity? Duty. And secondarily? Looking after Barrayar. He's also brave and intelligent and manipulating, but I feel more because he knows he's supposed to.
Alys Vorpatril
Slytherin. She's very good, but what she's good at is arranging all her friends in the political scene so it all just keeps ticking along the right way. And she's one of the people who's more absorbed into the Vor system.
Again, she's also brave and intelligent and dutiful, but I think they're less central to her character.
Piotr
Gryffindor. Gryffindor doesn't exclude being ruthless (cf. Dumbledore): Piotr exemplifies doing what's right regardless of the danger and standing up for his beliefs regardless of how unpopular they are, those are quintessentially Gryffindor.
As Miles says, the problem some people have with him is that they loved him when the beliefs he was standing up for were more progressive than average, but hated it when he was standing up for views they no longer really agreed with. But even if your bravely standing up for something bad, I think that's still Gryffindor.
Aral
I think like Piotr and Miles, Aral always wanted to be Gryffindor, but was crushed by the responsibility of politics and constantly having to do the stablising thing rather than the right one.
Simon Illyan
Hufflepuff. I realise this is somewhat controversial, but my view is:
(i) Simon is motivated by duty. He wanted to serve his world in the military. He volunteered for a dangerous medical operation to insert the chip. He's unfailingly loyal to Aral and Gregor.
(ii) What is his relationship to the imperium? I feel, like Gregor, he nurtures it, giving it little opportunities for growth and encouraging it to take them, pruning back problem branches, etc, etc.
Obviously he's a rare example of a ruthless Hufflepuff. But even the ruthless things he does seem to done in a dutiful way. Both the Vorkosigans and Illyan all practice lots of armed and unarmed combat in case they ever need it. But I imagine Miles attacking his exercise regimen every day, throwing himself at it yelling "I will prevail!" Whereas I imagine Simon just automatically springing out of bed two hours early and practising those skills he knows he'll need once every five years because It's the Done Thing.
Elli Quinn
Hm. When I started considering Miles' lovers I hit a problem that most of them seem defined by Miles reaction to them, rather than their own drives. The best impression we get of Elli is probably in Ethan of Athos, although even there she's not the primary protagonist. But in that book she's a lot more Gryffindor than anything else, constantly doing risky things for the right reasons.
Prince Serg
Again, we don't have much to go on. He's nasty. Maybe angry and ruthless. But none of those are really exemplified by a particular house.
Is he brave or impulsive? Not very. Is he curious? He's a bit curious for hedonistic new experiences, but not in general. Is he hard-working, determined, patient or conscientious? Not as far as I can see. Is he personable or gregarious? Only a little bit.
I guess he's a little bit hungry for glory, but he never tries especially hard for it, just sits back and accept it. On balance, the "glory" and "nasty" make me think Slytherin, which was always the obvious choice, but not very decisively.
Comments
Looking at the last couple, people are hard to place for different reasons. Sometimes that's just because someone has personality traits that were lumped into different houses. But people naturally transcend any classification system sometimes.
What's interesting to me is the other reasons people fail to fall neatly into the classification system, because they are defined by traits which aren't really included.
That can be a weakness in either the system (understandably, as it was written for 11-year-olds), or sometimes in the characterisation of an otherwise beloved character. For instance, look at Elli or Serg: we know a lot about their competencies or proclivities, but not that much about what drives them, and I didn't notice that until I started writing this post.
no subject
Date: 2012-11-18 03:30 pm (UTC)