Tolkien, Ravenclaws, and Hufflepuffs...

[neotoma]

I've dived back into Lord of the Rings recently (long weekend of knitting combined with watching all three Extended Editions), and really JRRT wrote a *lot* of Ravenclaws and Hufflepuffs.

It's very odd -- there are Gryffindor characters (mostly Rohirrim, to boot) but not as many as you'd expect for an epic fantasy.

Aragorn certainly *isn't* a Gryffindor. Neither is Frodo. And Gandalf is a Slytherin.

It's not that surprising, I suppose, considering JRR Tolkien *was* a Ravenclaw -- a professor who invented languages for fun -- but it's still odd. As is writing an entire species as Hufflepuffs (ie Hobbits). But it's odd that Lord of the Rings is the modern ur-fantasy, and yet its characters don't quite fit the mold.

Comments

[axiom_of_stripe]

dude, aragorn is totally a gryffindor.

[neotoma.livejournal.com]

Totally is not. Ravenclaw with a guilt trip, movie-verse anyway.

[axiom_of_stripe]

1. paths of the dead.
2. i know! let's charge the gates of mordor!

[neotoma.livejournal.com]

But those were *plans*. He had information in the first (and a sharp poke in the back from Elrond), and a strategy in the second.

And really, he's mostly doing it because someone has to, and letting the Hobbits go alone is a recipe for disaster.

I bet you don't want to hear my idea on Boromir or Gimli, then.

[axiom_of_stripe]

And really, he's mostly doing it because someone has to

see! that's what i'm saying. total gryffindor, that. :)

[neotoma.livejournal.com]

No, it's Ravenclaw. "I'm doing it, because I don't trust any of *you* to get it right." Though not quite so meanly put, because Aragorn has manners.

[axiom_of_stripe]

nope, i still hear "i'm doing it because someone has to and i'm the only one who can". but then, i'm a gryffindor myself. :)

[neotoma.livejournal.com]

I suppose it depends on whether you "only one who can" means 1) "I'm the only one with the skills" or 2) "because the rest of you can't find your head with a map and a flashlight".

1) is Gryffindor, 2) is Ravenclaw.

[nugatorytm.livejournal.com]

If Aragorn was arrogant enough to not trust anybody else to "get it right," he would have opted to follow Frodo and instructed Legolas and Gimli to go rescue Merry and Pippin. Nor would he have made sure Boromir thought his honor was restored before he died. Aragorn is too much of a giving and unselfish person to be anything but a Gryffindor.

Frodo also falls into Gryff territory for the same reasons. Frodo isn't carrying the ring because of loyalty to Gandalf or anyone else. He's doing it out of his sense of honor, duty and responsibility. (My daughter informs me that Frodo's motive in the whole thing is that nothing would get done unless he volunteered; everyone else was too busy bickering. That would make Frodo a Ravenclaw, wouldn't it?)

Legolas and Gimli lack the initiative to be true Gryffindors, they are happy and content following Aragorn's orders. I see them as Hufflepuffs, along with the rest of the hobbits, Sam especially.

I'll agree with you on Boromir and Gandalf. Gandalf is Dumbledore; no one can tell me Albus is pure Gryff, he's got to have some Slytherin tendencies in there somewhere.

[neotoma.livejournal.com]

I don't know if it's exactly *arrognace* that Aragorn has. He knows he's the man for the job, and really, the way that Tolkien set it up, there really is no one else who could do that job -- reuniting the Kingdoms of Men to challenge Sauron is a bit of a tall order.

Frodo is so not a Gryffindor. He's a Ravenclaw/Hufflepuff mix.

Legolas and Gimli are Gryffindors -- not all of Gryffindors are supreme leaders, as someone has to be the follower. If you want to see a true Gryffindor style dominance struggle, watch Theoden and Aragorn's little "King, Not!King" stare-down a couple of times. Legolas and Gimli are more like Ron Weasley in that they don't really want to be in charge, they just wanted to be aimed at something.

[nugatorytm.livejournal.com]

With Aragorn, I believe it was the old saying of: "There are those who aspire to greatness; then there are those who have greatness thrust upon them." Aragorn did not aspire to greatness; he denied his heritage for years before he was forced to confront it. Humility is not a Ravenclaw trait, as I remember.

Then again, as you said in another comment, Ravenclaws and Hufflepuffs were cast aside in favor of the Gryffindor/Slytherin feud, and we know very little of the underused Houses.

Hermione should have been a Ravenclaw, in my opinion. She is all for "knowledge for its own sake," but I believe Rowling stuck all three friends in the same House for convenience's sake.

[neotoma.livejournal.com]

No, Hermione lost any chance of being a Ravenclaw when she said that there were better things than books and cleverness.

Ravenclaws are all *about* books and cleverness. And occasionally proving that you *can* build a trebuchet based on sketchy records by using one to launch a piano across a football field.

Or just putting a propeller beanie on your university building. (http://hacks.mit.edu/Hacks/by_year/1996/beanie/)

[miazilla.livejournal.com]

Aragorn is too much of a giving and unselfish person to be anything but a Gryffindor.

Wait, what? Only Gryffindors are giving and unslefish? Uh, yeah. Don't think so.

[neotoma.livejournal.com]

'Giving and unselfish' aren't the first words that I think of when Gryffindors come up, no....

[gritkitty.livejournal.com]

I bet you don't want to hear my idea on Boromir or Gimli, then.

I do! Boromir in particular.

[neotoma.livejournal.com]

Huffelpuff -- and driven crazy because of it. The One Ring hammered at his sense of loyalty and duty -- it pried apart his loyalty to the Fellowship with his loyalty to Gondor. At the end, he could barely tell who his sett was, which is why he died for Merry and Pippin. They were the ones who'd been acting consistently Hufflepuff towards him, and thus provoked the "Mine! Hurt them and I'll tear your arms off!" reaction.

Gimli and Legolas are the Gryffindors -- their pissing contest/counting of kills is pure Gryffie behavior. (Poor Orlando Bloom seems to be typecast as Gryffies). See also Gimli's attack on the Ring with his axe, and Legolas blurting out Aragorn's identity at Council.

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

I can see that. One of the big problems trying to fit JKR into JRRT is the whole "everyone should break the rules!" vs. "we all have our duty!"

[neotoma.livejournal.com]

Well, to get away from the silly-fun meta, and into the serious-depressing meta for a moment, there's a very simple reason for that.

JRRT was born and grew up before World War One; duty was taken so much more seriously then.

JKR is post WW1, and thus duty is much less a driving force in her works -- the entire Western World had their faith in the value of duty and honor crushed in the trenches, and will never look at things quite that way again.

[gritkitty.livejournal.com]

A reasonable take on House sorting. I like your reasoning; it dovetails with my own thoughts on how no person has qualities from only one house. Except Sam, maybe: he could have founded Hufflepuff House.

This is fun. There are loads of Slytherins (Denethor, Wormtongue, Saurman), Hufflepuffs (hobbits, much? and Bombadil), and Gryffindors a'plenty.

I don't see lots of Ravenclaws in LotR, though you make a good arguement for Aragorn (I think he'd be sorted Gryffendor, "but would have done well in Ravenclaw", and I see Faramir as a Ravenclaw/Hufflepuff type, and, oo, Boromir as Gryffendor/Hufflepuff -- hey, I'm getting all hybrid, here). The thing about Ravenclaws is that they don't have as defined traits as the other houses, maybe? Ravenclaw characters from the books don't make big impressions on me, at any rate, even if I think I'd probably get sorted there, but then, I know I'd get placed there because I'm an unambitious, lazy, cowardly smart-ass. Ha ha!

[neotoma.livejournal.com]

Faramir is a Ravenclaw to the bone; he's also apparently closest to JRRT doing a self-insert. Half his father's harassment is about him being a "wizard's pupil", and not being sufficiently obedient and loyal for Denethor's tastes. He's a soldier because ever Gondorian nobleman *is* under the threat of Mordor, not because he's interested in fighting as a joy in itself. Oddly enough, he winds up with very-Gryffindor Eowyn, in what seems to have been a good marriage.

Of course, half Boromor's problems stem from being too obedient and loyal under a burden that crippled him (this is really apparent in the books, where just before the end, Boromir is chewing his fingers and muttering to himself -- while none of his companions intervene. There's a reason I rather like the movie versions better, and that whole mess is one of them).

Frodo is very Ravenclaw-y for a Hobbit, as is Bilbo. Merry and Pippin are more Gryffindor-ish (especially Pippin, who never met a heap of trouble that he didn't roll in like a puppy), but Frodo loves his books and his stories, and really didn't want to go adventuring. He *had* to, because the Shire had to be protected, but he'd rather have stuck the Ring under a brick if he could have.

Neither Ravenclaws or Hufflepuffs get explained very well by JKR. Some of that is the limitations of Harry's POV (*so* unobservant), and some of that is her own hand-waving disinterest in them.

[lady_songsmith]

Mm... beg to differ. Faramir is a Hufflepuff. He's loyal to the bone; to his father, his brother, his country, and his king. No one ever said Hufflepuffs couldn't be learned and wise. Faramir's defining characteristic is his honor and loyalty, not his desire for knowledge.

Though you might have a case for movie!Faramir not being a 'puff. *stews over the character assassination in TTT*

*hunts for LOTR icons, discovers none are uploaded, settles for Gryffindor* ;-)

[neotoma.livejournal.com]

No, really, Faramir is a Ravenclaw. Especially in the novels, where he basically starts monologuing about ancient lore, books, knowledge,and all things dear to a Ravenclaw's heart.

[lady_songsmith]

I think we're going to have to agree to disagree then, because to me Faramir's all about the loyalty and fairness. Hence, 'puff.

[ldybastet.livejournal.com]

Only Ravenclaws can have plans and strategies? Everyone else acts at random?

[neotoma.livejournal.com]

Err, no. Ravenclaws have plans, Hufflepuffs have plans, Slytherins have plans.

Gryffindors get aimed at things -- "point this side at enemy".

[jedirita.livejournal.com]

Part of the problem with the whole sorting into houses thing is that JKR tends to stick all the good guys into Gryffindor, even if they really aren't. I mean, Molly Weasley? Total Hufflepuff. Anyway, JKR's dubious house selections kinda skew all attempts to sort characters from other books.

As for the Hobbits as Hufflepuffs, I think that was kinda the point for JKKT, wasn't it?

[neotoma.livejournal.com]

Oh, JKR is so totally ridiculous about Gryffindors == Good Guys. She really does skew things -- especially because we've seen very *few* adults who obiviously not Gryffindors yet not antagonists.

Yeah, I think so. Of course, JRRT had very rose-colored glasses when it came to pre-industrial farming, but the Hobbits are a wonderful idea.

[vulgarweed.livejournal.com]

here via Daily Snitch.

You are so right. I think, bookversewise at least, there are only two clear and obvious Gryffindors in the main LOTR cast: Eowyn and Gimli. Arguably Legolas and Pippin too.

Your Boromir=Hufflepuff theory makes total sense, and don't get me started on my Sauron=Hufflepuff theory. :) (It has to do with hard work and loyalty to the legacy of his mentor Morgoth. If you want to know what it looks like when Ravenclaws go bad in Middle-Earth, well, that's Saruman to the bone.)

[neotoma.livejournal.com]

Sauron as a Hufflepuff? That sounds fascinating!

And yeah, Saruman was a Ravenclaw who went bad.