The Slytherin Mystery : how does cunning fit with conservatism

[salinea]

There's a very odd symbolical dissonance in that Slytherin is the House defined on one hand by cunning and pragmatism, and on the other hand the fact that's it tied so tightly with tradionnalism, "aristocratic power" and Pure Bloods.


JKR's system work quite tightly with archetypal images otherwise. Gryffindor with fire and bravery, is the House of the Warrior caste (those who should be by most Indo-European standarts the aristocracy - they even have the Lion as a symbol) Ravenclaw associated to air and Intelligence fits to the Priest/Scholar class (especially with the way Luna is tied to Death mysteries and certain form of mysicism). Hufflepuff has got earth and harworking and loyalty (and strenght in union) - obviously the Provider's class.

But the Slytherin breaks the mold and disturbs that pretty symbolical pattern.

Because cunning, resourcefulness and disregard for rule is never never the attribute of conservatism, of the people who have all interests to enforce those rules. Cunning is the skill of the Tricksters, of the Puck, of the Loki, the Puss in Boots, the Renart the Goupil. Of the Scapin and Figaro who serve and mock and trap the Aristocracy. It's the skill of the weak folks who have only their wits to triumph (or bring themselves into ever greater trouble), of the ambitious lad who makes a deal with the devil then find a way out of it and makes a fool of the Devil at the same time.
We even say "low cunning" to underline how not noble it is.

And ambition is never the trait of the rightfully powerful people. To have ambition you have to yearn something that you not yet have. You have to want more. For one who has power, there's only to act noble and regal like and not abuse it (and certainly not do "us whatever means necessary) - Exactly like the Gryffindors do.

Yet we find the Slytherin associated with the most conformist and old-fashioned support of power. With people who belong by birth. With extremely rich and arrogant blood lines like the Blacks and the Malfoys... or do we ? Maybe it's because Slytherins gravitate so naturally more toward revolutionnary ideas that they are so many to follow Voldemort (who after all sough to overthrow the WW government in a pretty radical fashion). Except that's not at all how the DE are portrayed.

Then to confuse the matters even more JKR puts all those prankster characters like the Weasley twins and the Maraudeurs and manipulative masters like Dumbledore, Remus and Peter in Gryffindors.

As if the two Houses had exchanged features to make them more similar leaving only the core and very classical moral dilemna between Idealism and Pragmatism. (Watch the Buffy the Vampire Slayer episode the Gift if you wonder what I mean by that)


There's different hypothesis we can make from that.
A Pro-Slytherin "JKR just hates them" attitude would be simply to say that JKR took everything that was good and glamourous about Slytherin and put it in Gryffindor, and everything that should have been bad and rank in Gryffindor to put it in Slytherin. But that's not something I believe.
There's the theory that Voldemort has corrupted what Slytherin stood for and that Slughorn, for exemple, shows a better, purer (how ironic) exemple of the Slytherin ethos. But we have good sources to think that Salazar was just as Pure Bloodist as Voldemort was.
Or maybe this stems from the Wizarding World's siege mentality. That's to say, they had more reasons through the ages to fear the Muggle world than we were let to believe from Binn's homeworks and they saw themselves, indeed, as the weak folk fighting against the more powerful (and aristocratic) Muggles using only their wits and magic. And that's why some founders of that society valued cunning, ambition and pragmatism as good traits belonging to their leaders. They were revolutionnaries who succeeded.
There could be other explanations... I just hope that JKR is aware of that dissonance and that it's got a meaning somewhere in her work.

Any thoughts on the subject ?

Comments

[dherblay.livejournal.com]

I opened your icon in Photoshop so I could read all the layers. Are there really Ginny/Pansy 'shippers? I learn something new every day.

I'm reminded, for some reason, of James Gatz, who ambitiously climbed up from nothing and then, having achieved the pinnacle of success, came to represent, as Jay Gatsby, a conservative preservation of the old social order. Of course, he was fictional. I'm also a little reminded of the scions of various old political families, supposedly groomed for, if not born to, great things, whose ambitions are the outgrowth of their senses of entitlement. In America you can see them collected at Ivy League universities outside various economics or political science departments, exaggerating both the salutariness of the old order and their place in it. My ignorant impression is that it's a type I more associate with England and the English public school; if this is indeed the case, then Rowling's characterization of Slytherin would make some sense. Of course, the sorting hat's categories have always been fluid -- Harry was probably not the first student to sway his sorting through his own ambition.

[etrangere.livejournal.com]

Are there really Ginny/Pansy 'shippers? I learn something new every day.
I'm not sure there are GinnyxPansy shippers as such, but there are GinnyxPansy fics, certainly ^^ It's my favourite ship for Ginny, personnaly ^^

I'm reminded, for some reason, of James Gatz, who ambitiously climbed up from nothing and then, having achieved the pinnacle of success, came to represent, as Jay Gatsby, a conservative preservation of the old social order.
Yes, that's the concept I'm trying to propose in my option n°3. I think it's the one that works the more realistically. And the path I could easily see Salazar himself having walked.

I'm also a little reminded of the scions of various old political families, supposedly groomed for, if not born to, great things, whose ambitions are the outgrowth of their senses of entitlement.
Interesting. That's an archetype I have a harder time to grok, but I suppose that's what the Draco, Bellatrix and Regulus are supposed to stand for.
The other one I could see make sense is the "evil Vizir" archetype, the scheming intrigant who is that close to power, just not there yet (and doomed to never get it), but for that archetype to work you need the rightful king one to be there... and the only similar character is Dumbledore, so it works in a very awkward way.

Of course, the sorting hat's categories have always been fluid -- Harry was probably not the first student to sway his sorting through his own ambition.
Oh, I'll never disagree with that XD but even if characters are always too complexe to fit into just one House, there's still this strongly symbolical approach that is not always consistent.

[etrangere.livejournal.com]

Oh, I also meant to say :

Though I think the Old Boy's network feeling is something that is associated with Slytherin (especially with Slughorn) we get a feeling it's in general widespread in the Wizarding World. Dumbledore is just as guilty of it, for one (he puts people in work due to their political affiliation to him or utiility in the war rather than their competence, for one). So it's hard to have it be an exclusivee feature of Slytherin working for both cunning and leadership position.

[quivo.livejournal.com]

Interesting thoughts you've got here, btw - the dissonance is really startling, and quite irritating sometimes. I think JKR sort of tried to explore the duality that prejudice usually plays off on (i.e. Tom being half-blood and hating Muggles and siding with the purebloods despite the fact that he didn't really belong on their side by blood issues alone), and combined the characteristics on purpose to some degree. It does give more credence to my thought that Slytherin House and Slytherins as a rule seem destined to fail.

I mean, they all seem to have such dualistic motives in canon - they all want to be recognised as heroes and upstanding people and so on, but also want all the power possible, and supposedly will do anything to get it. It's a wierd amalgamation of wanting to be a hero and yet knowing you're not going to do really heroic things to get there properly. Slytherins seem to have some kind of latent feeling that everyone knows or will know or will therefore disrespect them if they try to do things the 'gryffindor' way or the heroic way, and yet they feel drawn to doing such things despite their common sense telling them that doing things that way isn't going to get them into power with maximum loss of life or dignity.

And then, as you pointed out, there's the issue of their being both conservative and radical at the same time. I'm not quite sure that's very dualistic, actually, as I believe no pureblooded Slytherin thinks they're being radical in their ridicule and hatred of muggles and muggleborn people - for me, that has the sort of characteristics of a belief long held by anybody who is anybody in the wizarding world. Imho, it's the muggleborns who are the radicals here, in their opinion - it's the muggleborns who are eroding their culture and exposing them to potential danger due to their continued unsafe contact with their dirty muggle relations.

So, to cut a long story short, yes I DO have some thoughts on the subject. ;)

[etrangere.livejournal.com]

It's a wierd amalgamation of wanting to be a hero and yet knowing you're not going to do really heroic things to get there properly.
Aah, yes, but that makes them fit very fashionably anti-heroic, especially Snape ^^ That kind of dissonance is fascinating, because it brings out the whole idea that sometimes you need to dirty your hand to save the world). (I did mention the Gift in my rambling : "But I have sworn to protect this sorry world, and sometimes that means saying and doing... what other people can't. What they shouldn't have to.")

Slytherins seem to have some kind of latent feeling that everyone knows or will know or will therefore disrespect them if they try to do things the 'gryffindor' way or the heroic way
That's an idea we often find in Fanon, but I have to disagree with it. I think it might be true for Snape, but not for most other people (apart from the usual House pride meaning that all other Houses are seen as junk).
I don't believe there's an actual Gryffindor / Slytherin rivality dating back to ancient times as Fanon is wont to show it.

And then, as you pointed out, there's the issue of their being both conservative and radical at the same time. I'm not quite sure that's very dualistic, actually, as I believe no pureblooded Slytherin thinks they're being radical in their ridicule and hatred of muggles and muggleborn people - for me, that has the sort of characteristics of a belief long held by anybody who is anybody in the wizarding world.
I agree and disagree with you both on this. I think that, yes, pro-Muggle of the Dumbledore and Arthur variety are one extreme of the "radicality" (and that tells us something when someone as patronizing as Arthur is that)
However I think that Muggleborn haters to the point of the Death Eaters is just as radical. It's going farther than respectable, conventational family would do (Sirius tells us as much about the Blacks, and I think it's fair to say the Black were already rather more to the farthest side of conservatism) Fudge is our standart of what the petty, common Wizards think. They're prejudices, but they wouldn't accept whole scale slaughter easily. They, like Slughorn, are surprised when a Muggleborn witch is very gifted, but they would shrug it off as an exception, not want to insult her.

Thanks for bringing your thoughts :D

[quivo.livejournal.com]

No problem ;)

And I definitely agree with you that both extremes of feeling towards muggleborns are radical. That's why I sort of can understand why supposedly upright, conservative families like the Blacks would sort of privately agree with Voldemort's sentiments if not his methods, and therefore understand why Slytherin is such a hotbed of conservatism and, in a way, radicalism.

I think that in the real world, the conservative Slytherins would still be the most susceptible to such extremist thinking because they all want power or feel like they've got something to prove, and that tends to lead one into joining up with such useless or awful causes especially if they espouse a more radical version the beliefs that that you already have. Of course, there are the conservative Slytherins that would privately agree but still keep very, very far away from such activities and feel a sort of grim pity for the people that join causes with such bad publicity, so yeah.

[etrangere.livejournal.com]

I think that in the real world, the conservative Slytherins would still be the most susceptible to such extremist thinking because they all want power or feel like they've got something to prove, and that tends to lead one into joining up with such useless or awful causes
Yes, that makes a lot of sense. Wanting to do great things not exactly good things and all...

there are the conservative Slytherins that would privately agree but still keep very, very far away from such activities and feel a sort of grim pity for the people that join causes with such bad publicity
That makes me laugh ^^ I could totally see that. "Oh, Lucius was arrested as a Death Eater, poor dear." *rethinks her agenda for the next New Year party*

[cygna-hime.livejournal.com]

Do we really have good authority that Salazar Slytherin was as "pure-bloodist" as Voldemort? Because I've never found such a thing. The Sorting Hat says Slytherin didn't want to teach people of non-magical descent, but he could well have good reason not to, or at least reason that is good from his point of view. In medieval England? As a school for witches and wizards? He may well have thought that letting the (in his view) ignorant, prejudiced, violent Muggles know about this, even by proxy, was just a plain Bad Idea.

I think what we're seeing here is a classical case of a group and/or ideology that was immensely liberal once...but then time moved on, and the ideas didn't.

[etrangere.livejournal.com]

The Sorting Hat said Salazar wanted to teach only "pure-blood wizards of great cunning just like him" and "only those whose ancestry's purest" so it's definitly defined in "Pure Blood" terminology. Then there's that small matter of the Basilic in the Chamber of Secret, even if that myth may have been corrupted greatly by Voldemort.

Then again, as you say, he might, in the context of his tim; beeen just practical about it. However that's fanwank (even if one I like) and that's not what the text tells us so far.

I think what we're seeing here is a classical case of a group and/or ideology that was immensely liberal once...but then time moved on, and the ideas didn't.
I could see that.

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

This was a great read--I'm still not sure exactly how it is in the books, but I think this is a good overview. Interesting, too, to think of Slughorn put forward as the "real" way Slytherins are supposed to be when Slughorn isn't cunning at all. He's the ultimate patsy who gets played over and over in the books because his soft spot is so easy to see.

For some reason it also makes me think of something I read about the movie Animal House. When what's his name was writing it--damn, I can't think of his name, but the guy who's written all the great comedies and has starred in many of them. HAROLD RAMIS! Okay, Harold Ramis was talking about writing Animal House and he said he had no love for the fraternity system at all and certainly hadn't experienced it. So he thought well, he'd just take all the good things about fraternities and give them to Delta House (it's like a surrogate family) and all the bad things and give them to the bad house (it's elitist and forces conformity etc). This made me suddenly wonder if it's not better to look at Gryffindor and Slytherin as somehow divided against themselves that way, which is why it really needs to come together.

[etrangere.livejournal.com]

I do think Slughorn has a fair amount of cunning, even if we don't see use it to get on top of things a lot. Having the trisckster being tricked (especially because of his greedinss) is a classical story for the archetype I was mentionning. Then again, I don't think Slughorn is a very good trickster either, or a good exemple of cunning. ^^

So he thought well, he'd just take all the good things about fraternities and give them to Delta House (it's like a surrogate family) and all the bad things and give them to the bad house (it's elitist and forces conformity etc).
XD yes, exactly !

I do think of Gryffindor and Slytherin as two sides of the same coin. That's what makes all the GryffindorxSlytherin ships so fascinating

[laurus-nobilis.livejournal.com]

I like the third theory best, combined with what dherblay said. At least, that's the impression it gives me, but I'll admit that I'm not too interested in the Slytherins so I haven't really thought about it.

[etrangere.livejournal.com]

^_^

I like all of the Houses ! I tend to be scattered that way ^^

[indigestible.livejournal.com]

Hmm, I guess ... hasn't the wizarding world changed enough from the founding of Hogwarts that the Slytherins aren't really conservative anymore, but rather reactionary revolutionaries? As you say, Gryffindor has more conservative values, including overt nepotism, etc. Fudge really seems to be the face of conservatism in the books.

It's interesting, because it gives the books a very conservative feel, in a sense. How often do you paint the clever, tricky ones as evil and have your heroes battling to preserve the status quo and existing authority?

[etrangere.livejournal.com]

It would be intersting to have that, but that's not how they're painted either. Dumbledore's crowd tends to simply not care about their government. There's absolutly not legal backing to Dumbledore's Order of the Phoenix : it is indeed a private vigilante army the man built just to fight the person he thought was a menace. (meanwhile in OotP lots of Slytherins were allying themselves with the Ministry authority of Umbridge)
And many Gryffindors, at least the heros, are depicted as tricky, ressourcul etc.

[indigestible.livejournal.com]

Hmm, it's true the Gryffindors are pretty tricky themselves, but I think (and I could be wrong) that they never really seem to perceive this as a virtue in themselves. They do tricky, resourceful things, but are then praised, both by the author and by other characters as being brave and skillful. (With the exception of the twins, but I guess that seems more like, how to say, just for fun. See: their mother's reaction to their new career path.) The Gryffindors are the ones who are relatively happy with life as is, where as the Slytherins are trying to create something new. Again, I could be wrong, but I feel like a much more common fantasy trope is to set the bulk of the novel after the Great Evil has already seized power, so our heros are a bunch of rag-tag renegades fighting against an established order of injustice.

This may be why the whole Order of the Phoenix thing felt off to me. You have this picture of a small, secret society fighting against the growing darkness, etc, but it never so much as seems that Voldemort has gained a real power. We're told that Umbridge is helping Voldemort by alienating non-human races, but life still seems pretty safe, pretty accessible to muggle-borns, etc.

Of course, perhaps this is just a general failing of JKR's writing, that I've never found Voldemort to be at all scary or particularly competent. XD

[darksumomo.livejournal.com]

[H]ow does cunning fit with conservatism[?]

Ever heard of Karl Rove?

[etrangere.livejournal.com]

No.

PS : I'm talking about archetypes

[darksumomo.livejournal.com]

No.

Consider yourself lucky.

PS : I'm talking about archetypes

In that case, carry on.

[pixychelle.livejournal.com]

But we have good sources to think that Salazar was just as Pure Bloodist as Voldemort was.

Actually, I'm not so sure that we do. As far as I can remember, we know that:

1. Salazar and Godric were very close friends. Now, I don't always see eye to eye with all of my friends, but I can't imagine being close friends with a racist on the level of Voldemort. Obviously, this isn't hard evidence, but it casts a certain amount of suspicion on the idea that Salazar was a "Pure Bloodist."

2. Salazar didn't want Muggleborn students at Hogwarts. We are never told exactly why he doesn't want them there, unless I've missed it somewhere. Given that the Wizarding world broke off because of persecution by Muggles, it's entirely possible that Salazar didn't want them in Hogwarts because he saw anyone who wasn't a Pureblood as a *security risk*.

After centuries of living in secrecy but not necessarily fear, the WW has lost an understanding of the way wizards of that time period probably viewed Muggles. Add some recent prejudicial Dark Wizards into the mix, and it could easily become a generally accepted "fact" that Salazar hated Muggle/borns when that was not exactly the case.

Interesting essay. :)

[pixychelle.livejournal.com]

And dude, someone already made a similar comment. This is what I get for leaving a comment sitting around for hours before hitting the post button. *facepalm*

[etrangere.livejournal.com]

I think you make good points, and like with cygna_him I must say it's an explanation for Salazar's behaviour I prefer a lot, but the text doesn't support that yet.
With the book 7's opportunity to explore the Founders' history via the horcruxes quest, I hope we'll get a more nuanced and complex outlook on them...

very close friends indeed ^^ SalazarxGodric OTP

[pixychelle.livejournal.com]

I doubt that Harry would understand complex nuances about Slytherin even if the man rose from the grave, defeated Voldemort himself, and then started a home for orphaned Muggleborns. I'm not holding out much hope of getting them in book 7.

Oops, I think my bitter's showing.

I'm quite sure that the text doesn't absolutely support the idea that Salazar had other reasons for denying the Muggleborns entrance, but my point was more that we didn't really have hard evidence either way, considering the circumstances in the WW's past. A couple of lines from the Sorting Hat that aren't necessarily Salazar's own words and which only say that he only wanted Purebloods don't really show his ideas in context. Since we're not only getting Harry's unreliable viewpoint, but he's been flat out lied to before (Hagrid's "not a Dark Wizard who hasn't come from Slytherin," anyone?), I'm hardly inclined to take anything at face value.

Of course, you're also right that the idea that Slytherin was into blood purity all the way is a reasonable extrapolation from the text as well, especially if we take the idea that the Hat does have the Founders' personalities imbued into it.

One thing that I will never understand (outside of a purely metatextual perspective, which can't be entirely ignored, I realize very well) is why, if Slytherin House is really so bad, so bigoted, and so Dark, hasn't it been disbanded?!? Why was it allowed to exist past Slytherin leaving the school to begin with? No one is so one sided that s/he could only fit into that one House. Why didn't the other Founders nip the problem in the bud and simply get rid of Slytherin House and place the students into the other Houses of best fit? There's got to be more to it, and I think Salazar's actual beliefs might play into it. Unless it's simply a case of JKR going "because I said so!", which is her right.

I'm going way off course from your original essay, aren't I? Sorry. :x

very close friends indeed ^^ SalazarxGodric OTP

Damn straight.

[pixychelle.livejournal.com]

HTML 1. Pixy, 0.

[ariss-tenoh.livejournal.com]

I really think Rowling simply tried the easiest route to create her villains. By making them aristocrats from noble families who are rich and place value on their bloodlines. Rowling can say as much as she wants that it's "our choices that define us" but that's not really true. You get the impression from the very first book that Slytherins are evil, that Malfoys are evil, and that Dumbledore is right. In HBP, she compounds this error by making Voldemort evil because he was born in a supposedly evil family. So again, nature determines your virture and value.

To get back to your original point, I'm also not sure that Slytherins are conservatives. By preserving the status quo, they are protecting their own status in their society. Yet we see that the more ambitious among them are backing Voldemort, presumably not only for power but for a desire of change.

If we take your caste system:

Gryffindors = warriors.

Ravenclaws = scholars and scientists.

Hufflepuff = merchants, farmers, and such.

Then Slytherins would equal the Dark Mages/Loremasters in fantasy novels. Those who stand in the shadows and hold the reins of power and society.

Interesting essay by the way^_^

[etrangere.livejournal.com]

I'm not convinced JKR's writing is that simplistic. She's created some complexe characters (Voldemort apart) especially in Slytherin. I know she's surprised me in HBP on her handling of Draco, Regulus and Snape - so now I lend her a bit more trust than I did before for writing in a non manicheistic way. She still loses with Tom, yeah >_<

To get back to your original point, I'm also not sure that Slytherins are conservatives. By preserving the status quo, they are protecting their own status in their society. Yet we see that the more ambitious among them are backing Voldemort, presumably not only for power but for a desire of change.
There's some ambiguities with the DE being, as cookedcandy said reactionary revolutionaries. They are pretty radical in their ideas. But the ideas themselves are hardly new I think.

Then Slytherins would equal the Dark Mages/Loremasters in fantasy novels. Those who stand in the shadows and hold the reins of power and society.
XDD I was trying to refer Dumezil's Indo-European Tri-functionnal system rather than RPG classes, but that works are an archetype too. Though, while Pure Blood elitism has been attributed to Salazar by the Hat, we never had any clues that the Dark Arts themselves have anything inherently Slytherin about them... Am I wrong ?

Thanks ^^ glad you enjoyed

[ariss-tenoh.livejournal.com]

*grins*
To be honest, I'm not one of those people who attribute Great Writing to Rowling. Yes, she's breathed new life into the fantasy genre (have you noticed how many schools of magic novels there are now on Amazon?) and there are a lot of interesting ideas in her HP books but nothing so grand and complex that deserves all the hype that die-hard HP fans lavish on her. Sorry if I'm the sceptic here^_~

Ah! I'm not familiar with Dumezil. Now I feel like an idiot^^

No, you're right. We see Pettigrew and he's a Gryffindor using dark arts. I'm betting that whole Dark Arts=Slytherin thing came from Grindewald and then Voldemort rising to power so soon.

[etrangere.livejournal.com]

Oh, I'm pretty contemptive of JKR's writing, especially as far as style goes (let's not even get into world building or plotting ability) but I do think she creates vivid, interesting and often complex characters (and even when they're quick and dirty caricatures, they can have hidden depth). And I think she's often less manicheist than people accuse her of being.

Yes, she's breathed new life into the fantasy genre
Bah. Did she ? She's just made it more popular to the wide public. I don't think she's changed the fantasy genre as such much. I don't even think she knows much about the fantasy genre. (there was an article where Pratchet was sporking her comment saying she hadn't realized HP was fantasy which was very funny)

(have you noticed how many schools of magic novels there are now on Amazon?)
Yeah, but to be fair, it was a fairly popular and widespread cliché before JKR wrote HP. I remember fondly reading Horowitz' stories as a kid with the same kind of setting and grim humour.

Ah! I'm not familiar with Dumezil. Now I feel like an idiot^^
I wish I could have found a better link about it, but that's all I could get in a hurry. It's an interresting but very criticized theory ^^

I'm betting that whole Dark Arts=Slytherin thing came from Grindewald and then Voldemort rising to power so soon.
You think Grindewald was a Slytherin ? I always thought he wasn't even Brittish. We do see Durmstrang associated with the Dark Arts ^^

[ariss-tenoh.livejournal.com]

To be honest, I prefer HP fanfiction to the Canon books. Shocking, I know^_^ But the fanfic writers explore what's only hinted at in the books and are less prejudiced against Slytherins.

By "breathed new life" I meant made it popular and renewed the interest of casual readers. Not anything groundbreaking.

We're told Dumbledore defeated Grindelwald aren't we? Or did I imagine that? I'd think he was British.

[etrangere.livejournal.com]

To be honest, I prefer HP fanfiction to the Canon books
Me, too.

We're told Dumbledore defeated Grindelwald aren't we?
Indeed.

I'd think he was British.
The date of his defeat was 1945. I've read quotes from an interview that asked if it was meant to mirror WW2 and JKR said it was.

But I could live with him being Brittish. The world needs less pulp Nazi. (hear that FMA ?!)

[ariss-tenoh.livejournal.com]

The Japanese anime and manga fascination with Nazis is disturbing to say the least^^

[biting-moopie.livejournal.com]

Hi! I very much enjoyed this post and the resulting discussion. Sorry I don't have much more to add, just wanted to tell you that it was great.

:)

[etrangere.livejournal.com]

Thank you, much appreciated ^^

[misstopia.livejournal.com]

I really like this essay, but I had one question (since I did not "do" HP fandom with you):

to say that JKR took everything that was good and glamourous about Slytherin and put it in Gryffindor, and everything that should have been bad and rank in Gryffindor to put it in Slytherin. But that's not something I believe.

Why not?