Comments on: What the Sorting Hat really asks http://idiozeitgeist.com/2010/08/11/sorting-hat/ The blog of St. Chris. Tue, 05 Jun 2018 02:04:31 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: St. Chris http://idiozeitgeist.com/2010/08/11/sorting-hat/#comment-896 St. Chris Thu, 12 Aug 2010 15:22:51 +0000 http://idiozeitgeist.com/?p=452#comment-896 <p>True. Slytherin was originally "This is beneath me. Give it to someone who does that sort of thing." The second sentence is implied by the first; I've changed it to "What's in it for me?"</p> <p>This made me think about the Weasley twins. They're always looking for a personal benefit -- so should they be in Slytherin? I think their intent is different (although we all have many facets, and they certainly aren't paragons of altruism).</p> <p>I originally had Gryffindor as "Aw, that's not fun!" and thought to add "How can I make this entertaining?" (Fred and George's true motivation). "Where's the fun in that?" subsumes them both.</p> True. Slytherin was originally “This is beneath me. Give it to someone who does that sort of thing.” The second sentence is implied by the first; I’ve changed it to “What’s in it for me?”

This made me think about the Weasley twins. They’re always looking for a personal benefit—so should they be in Slytherin? I think their intent is different (although we all have many facets, and they certainly aren’t paragons of altruism).

I originally had Gryffindor as “Aw, that’s not fun!” and thought to add “How can I make this entertaining?” (Fred and George’s true motivation). “Where’s the fun in that?” subsumes them both.

]]> By: Scott http://idiozeitgeist.com/2010/08/11/sorting-hat/#comment-895 Scott Thu, 12 Aug 2010 13:44:53 +0000 http://idiozeitgeist.com/?p=452#comment-895 <p>I would have had Slytherin as "What's in it for me?"</p> I would have had Slytherin as “What’s in it for me?”

]]>