I would say that the books tell the story from a Gryffindoor/Slytherin weighted point of view. That is not to say that the other houses are irrelevant, but rather that they (literarily speaking) must take a back seat in order for the plot to continue. If the story was constantly reflecting how the Hufflepuffs and Ravenclaws felt about a certain issue, I think the plotline for the story would be incredibly scatterbrained.

The story is about Harry. . . so I think that we have to follow him, and his friends. Are there equally interesting stories in other houses? I'm sure there are, but J.K. Rowling was not telling their stories.

However, I don't think that her polarizing the houses in the story necessarily polarized her fans. I, for one, have been a die-hard Ravenclaw ever since I read the books. Several people on this site have also longed to be a part of Ravenclaw, which leads me to believe that people have strong feelings about all four houses. (Hufflepuff not so much. . . because they're kind of considered to be the weak doofuses at Hogwarts ).

That being said, I don't think it's wise to segregate "goodness" and "badness" among house lines. Like Sirius said (paraphrasing), "We all have both light and dark inside us, but it's what you choose to act on that makes you who you really are."

On Pottermore we learned that Quirrel was a Ravenclaw. . . and he was a dark wizard. We don't know what house Umbridge was in (although I'd wager it was Slytherin) but if her extreme loyalty to her convictions (even if they're wrong) were any cue, she could have been in Gryffindoor. Snape and Slughorn were both in Slytherin, and both of them were massive good guys.

Dumbledore said (in DH, King's Cross Chapter) that he thought Hogwarts sorted students too soon. At age 11, you're hardly the person who you are when you are of age. But either way, "It is not our abilities who make us who we really are. . . it is our choices."

Another thought-provoking question from outside conversation: Is it possible (or likely) that a wand could be used against its maker?

In my mind, it would depend upon the wand and the witches or wizards involved.

However, I wonder also if the answer lies in the books.

This question has bothered me for a while. Wands seem to be so incredibly loyal to those whom they choose. It would make sense for them to remain loyal to the one who gave them "life."

At any rate, I don't think that a wand would refuse it's master's wishes; even if that meant torturing it's creator. The wand probably wouldn't "like" to hurt it's maker, and I don't think it would be quite as powerful if acting against it's maker as it would be against a stranger.

umm... I'm clamoring to be in Hufflepuff I know if I ever went to Hogwarts thats immediately what I would be put in, so Hufflepuff pride through and through!

(sorry- just throwing some random Hufflepuffness in here!)

Not to worry, georgiefan1. I know many people (myself included) who think that Hufflepuff is generally underrated. I'm glad to see someone who is a Puff and proud of it!

Yeah, I agree that Hufflepuffs are way underrated. Cedric was a Hufflepuff, and everybody kept talking about how insanely smart he was (not to mention that he was chosen to be Hogwarts champion).

I'm clamoring to be in Hufflepuff

Ditto! In fact, the very few tests I've taken always put me in that beloved House, which pleases me verrrry much. ♥ the Puffs.

"Hufflepuffness". Great adjective, georgie.

I am currently doing a reread of Half Blood Prince and (now that I know how the series ends) I had this question. When do you think Snape knew that he had to die?

It is clear from Dumbledore's indecision about Malfoy's attempts on his life throughout the book, that he knew that he would have to die in order to complete the "mission against Voldemort." In any event, he does nothing to stop Malfoy, talks about Malfoy's attempt at murder to Snape (which we find out in Deathly Hallows: The Prince's Tale) and instructs Severus to kill him.

That being said, Dumbledore knew that he was in possession of The Elder Wand, and seems to have known that Voldemort would come after it, once he was dead. So he was putting Severus directly in the line of fire of Voldemort, but from what I can tell, he never told Severus. Snape is never (that we see in the text) told "You're going to kill me after I allow Draco Malfoy to disarm me. Voldemort will then think that you're the master of The Elder Wand, when in reality it will be Draco Malfoy. Then he'll kill you after he takes my wand in order to (presumably) gain its allegiance, and then Harry will be able to defeat him."

So, when do you think Severus knew that he was marked for death, and do you think that he minded?

I think that Snape was aware that he was always in mortal danger while playing double agent -- including the events of Deathly Hallows. That said, I don't think he was ever explicitly told "You're in danger because you killed Dumbledore," though he may have understood that from some of the talk going on about wands in that book. Most likely, he accepted his death because it protected Harry. His last words and wishes make me think that he did not feel angry or betrayed in his death (though I imagine he and Dumbledore had a long talk in the afterlife).

I have to agree with shastastwin, I think he always knew his death would come, without the Elder Wand being a factor. Either from Voldemort finding out his true allegiance or battle.... I think he always knew death was coming.

Hey, fellow fans!

Not to be a bother, but I have a request...
Could you please be a little more careful when it comes to important spoilers? I mean, I know the books and films have been around for ages. But not everyone is on the same page as you are.

Granted, I have seen every film so I wasn't hopelessly spoiled this time. But others might not be as lucky. As it is, I'm still in the midst of book four. (first read-thru) And if I hadn't seen the films and had come across what you said, I'd be really angry for not getting to learn it on my own.

Just thought you'd want a heads up. And thanks in advance for understanding! (I can see it from your perspective too... when people really love something, sometimes they forget others aren't caught up. So I get it.)

I can understand that, PA. . . but certainly you can understand our neglecting of using spoilers? The Goblet of Fire film has been out for 7 years; the book has been out for 12 years, and the entire series has been out for 5 years.

The last 4 books deal with so many intriguing issues - issues that the first three books don't even touch. They hold the issues about which everybody wants to talk about, and the issues which will undoubtedly continued to be discussed in this thread.

The only way to avoid completely avoid spoilers would be to A: finish the series or B: Avoid conversations that you know will have spoilers.

At any rate, we'll do our best.

Yes, this is the Harry Potter thread. Naturally, spoilers will be present. And just so this post isn't pointless, I will add that I've read that once an author becomes quite popular, editors are less likely to ruthlessly edit their work, preferring instead to be yes men/women. It happened with Stephen King and it happened with J.K. Rowling, and George R.R. Martin. I wish someone had the guts to tell them, "King/Rowling/Martin, you may have sold millions of books but you're not God. Your books need a lot of work. You need to let me cut this down to size." I mean I love Rowling's work (and King's to an extent) but there's quite a bit of flab in HP books 4, 5, and 6.

but there's quite a bit of flab in HP books 4, 5, and 6.

How-so? I just finished rereads of Books six and seven, and found them to be incredibly "trim." What would you have cut?

Okay, maybe not Book 4 but Book 5 has about 200 extraneous pages towards the beginning (they're a real chore to slog through and add little/nothing to the story). I love Book 6 but there's quite a bit of snogging, when the focus should be on Voldemort's past and Harry's increasingly dangerous quest. I found few problems with Book 7. It's one of my favourites and incredibly trim. Book 5 is the only seriously flabby book, the padding in the others isn't really a problem.