Harry Potter Fan Theory: Which is REALLY the Most Inclusive House?

Harry Potter Fan Theory: Which is REALLY the Most Inclusive House?

 

Usually, the obvious answer appears to be “Hufflepuff”. This stereotype is clearly derived from the Sorting Hat’s Song(s), wherein House Founder Helga Hufflepuff is portrayed as an egalitarian who takes in the magical stragglers and treats them all “the same”. Hufflepuff seems to fit the bill by any modern standard of “inclusion” as a liberal principle, and its rather humble, unassuming, even uninspiring “lot” acts as the antithesis of Slytherin’s proto-Fascist prejudice and snide elitism.

That certainly would explain why Hufflepuff is Slytherin’s archrival, right? But wait, it’s not.

When Harry, Ron, and Hermione, the three central characters in the Saga, are sorted in 1991, they are almost sorted into Slytherin, Hufflepuff, and Ravenclaw respectively. Furthermore, Harry’s forgivable power drives, Ron’s bumbling loyalty, and Hermione’s insufferably sharp wit all seem to qualify them for those Houses throughout their lives, even well into adulthood, inspiring some confusion about their identity for both themselves and for their readers. Yet what House was SO inclusive that they all could CHOOSE to defy their predispositions to enter into it? What house values CHOICE over Ability or Disposition, as embodied in star pupil Albus Dumbledore?

That House is Gryffindor.

The first clue is the fact of Choice, though we might easily presume that such a policy owes more to how the Sorting Hat works than the principles which govern the respective Houses. Be that as it may, the fact remains that Ron was ALMOST sorted into Hufflepuff, but he got INTO Gryffindor off nearly nothing, but perhaps his lineage (which probably was why he made the Choice he did). Yet what if we extrapolate, presuming that a Choice is all that matters? Most students don’t seem to WANT to be in Hufflepuff, and even when they get there they’re not PROUD about it, though they could be. It’s not JUST that Hufflepuff takes in the humble bunch; it’s also that a sorting into Hufflepuff is humbling, even embarrassing. Yet if we are ALLOWED to CHOOSE our Houses, and if nobody would CHOOSE to be a Hufflepuff, then why are there so many Hufflepuffs? Simply put: they chose the Lesser of Two Evils. What was the alternative they were so eager to evade?

Right: Gryffindor.

Next to the Slytherins, let’s face it: Hufflepuffs don’t LIKE Gryffindors all that much. While Harry and his friends date Ravenclaws and fellow Gryffindors, they never seem to shack up with a Hufflepuff (of course, the Slytherins are off the table, as we shall discuss, as though we needed to). While Harry dates Cho Chang, Ron attends the Yule Ball with Padma Patil, and all three of them, Hermione included, maintain relationships with fellow Gryffindors… nonetheless it seems that each of them would sooner go to the Ball with a Foreign Student than with a Hufflepuff.

Their friendships don’t look much better. Luna Lovegood is a weirdo, but she ends up becoming one of their most valuable allies in Dumbledore’s Army (even if their secrecy is betrayed by a Ravenclaw operating under the influence of Umbridge’s coercion). While Neville and Remus both do marry Hufflepuffs, these are both men who are routinely underestimated and marginalized, and while I do not mean to perpetuate their marginalized status nor to demean their sincerity, I think it fitting to note that they marry only after they have matured and gone beyond schoolboy drama. Throughout most of the Books, Hufflepuffs challenge Gryffindor authority (Ernie MacMillan), point a rightfully suspicious finger at Harry (Justin Finch-Fletchley), and compete for Gryffindor’s Glory (Cedric Diggory). When Ron defends his best friend, it is practically a repressed Hufflepuff using his loyalty against that House which would have rewarded it.

This brings me to my Second Point: why would Hufflepuff be less Inclusive? To answer that, let’s focus on how Gryffindor is not EXCLUSIVE in the least.

Whereas Gryffindor claims to screen students based on virtues such as Courage and Bravery, it seems to be most concerned with the courage and bravery necessary to raise its member count to begin with; beyond that initial contract, the House cares little more for Courage than it does for the remembrance of a password, and all of the “Courageous” Acts that Gryffindors are known for are extracurricular. Gryffindor doesn’t seem to care how bold you are UNTIL you prove to be a coward, and only when that cowardice hurts Gryffindor’s own interests.

To use the most glaring example: Peter Pettigrew was NEVER particularly brave NOR courageous, to the best of our knowledge, but he managed not only to get into Gryffindor but to climb the social ladder and earn the trust of Potter and his friends in TWO generations, the second time as a RAT owned by TWO of the Weasley Brothers who were Prefects, one of whom joined the Ministry of Magic and the other of whom killed about a quarter of Lord Voldemort’s Soul. (Coupled with the fact that neither of the more rebellious Weasley Brothers identified this traitor on a Magic Map, Peter’s feats as a rat are tantamount to Pickle Rick.) How is Pettigrew a Gryffindor if he’s a cheat, a coward, and a servant of the Dark Lord?

Put simply: Gryffindor was the only House that would take him. He just didn’t have what it took for Hufflepuff.

Hufflepuff’s elitism is subtle, one disguised in egalitarian good will. Yet what do we mumble in defence of Hufflepuff when asked about that “other” House there in the corner with the Badger? It is “loyalty”, perhaps “humility” as well. Pettigrew, who seeks the company of James and Sirius and prides himself in the success, is humble not by choice, and even Voldemort can see that he’s not loyal out of virtue but utility. Even the Dark Lord is betrayed by Pettigrew, and Pettigrew is punished swiftly; Voldemort had planned for this most probable contingency.

Hufflepuff’s emphasis on “loyalty”, on “humility”, and on “equality” are not merely fetishes for genuine distinction, except perhaps in the eyes of young readers and Slytherins. They actually represent a core set of Distinguishing Values that lead the Hufflepuffs to unify against all apparent danger any time that any one of them is hurt, threatened, or killed, and if they are inclusive of the Gryffindors, neither do they exclude them from their watch-list. With Gryffindor students’ penchant for bombast, for bullying, for breaking hearts without a second thought, for temper and for an ENORMOUS ego, one that is made even more narcissistic in a Group, it’s understandable that Hufflepuffs resent Gryffindors, and NOT out of envy.

If Hufflepuff is not an EASY House to get into, it follows logically that those who lacked the chops for it would get tossed in Gryffindor, unless, of course, their natural Humility (and inferiority complex) led them to cave in to the pressure of an exorbitantly large family of Gryffindors, which explains our red-haired radical. It also follows logically that, if Slytherin is the most EXCLUSIVE House, (which, as of hiring a Basilisk to kill half-bloods, is off the table for debate, barring the revelation of some “Secret” that’s somehow more Secret than the very CHAMBER of SECRETS) then their RIVAL HOUSE would be the MOST inclusive House, and at the very heart of their rivalry would be, NOT the distinction between Courage and Cunning, (for one can have both, and should, as do Hermione Granger, Cho, and Luna) nor the distinction between Abilities and Choices, (as Harry Potter has both) but RATHER the distinction between EXCLUSION and INCLUSION. 

When Godric and Salazar had their tiff, it was not over a set of virtues, but rather over WHO WAS TO BE ALLOWED TO ATTEND. When Salazar left, what did he do first? Probably, he had the House-elves pack him a lunch*, magically brushed his teeth, packed his cauldrons, and BUILT AN ENTIRE DUNGEON JUST TO KEEP PEOPLE OUT. Clearly, “Exclusion” was Slytherin’s claim to fame, and it was Gryffindor’s stubborn INCLUSION that burnt the bridge.

This tendency is also obvious in Gryffindors, both Great and Small. Pettigrew just wants to be ACCEPTED, even if it means that people might get hurt. When he betrays the Potters, they are losing and the Big Kids on the Block are the Death Eaters. Lily wants to be ACCEPTED even as a half-blood; when poor Severus calls her a “mudblood” while her friends are turning him into a spectacle for their amusement, (such a Dark Mark thing to do, ironically, as we observe the flying muggles at the Quidditch Cup) Lily’s own sense of PRIDE in her INCLUSION in the Magic World takes precedence over her LOYALTY to that one man who taught her that it was OKAY TO BE A WITCH. 

Lily was no Hufflepuff; she had the arrogance of someone who just NEEDED to be Equal, not because she cared about Equality as Such, but rather since there’s nothing worse for narcissists than to be criticized. You can practically hear the Wedding Bells tolling then and there, as well as Snape’s eternal grudge against that self-entitled arrogance. Yet even SNAPE is far more loyal than a single Gryffindor, and all because of just one Gryffindor who’s DEAD, nearly two decades later. Even Dumbledore, observing that kind of commitment, is surprised, and this surprise should not surprise us, since we see how Dumbledore, the star and champion of Gryffindor, treats Family and Tragedy. Of COURSE, then, Dumbledore must be the one to champion INCLUSION and to vanquish Voldemort. If you’re Albus, you have to hope that Heaven is as inclusive as Gryffindor House.

[({Dm.R.G.)}]

*Addendum: Let us also not forget who hired slaves to cook and "treat" us "all the same". Oh, well: at least House Elves are Loyal, at least up until one of those Roaring Lions frees them.