Want FREE books and FREE Amazon gift cards?
Each day we announce via email a book that is either FREE or on a temporary sale at a great discount price. These are not your average free books. These are incredible insider deals on well-rated books. OnlineBookClub.org is where tomorrow's bestsellers are born. We also give away over $1,000 per month of free Amazon gift cards in free daily giveaways, exclusively to those signed up to these announcements! Hurry, sign up free now:
Gryffindor - Dauntless and Candor
Hufflepuff - Amity and Abnegation
Ravenclaw - Erudite
Slytherin - Dauntless, Candor and Erudite
Dauntless: Gryffindors and Slytherins both exhibit bravery. A lot of people think Slytherins are cowards because they're cunning but I think it shows they're willing to do whatever it takes to get the job done and I think that takes a certain amount of bravery. Is it the best kind? Probably not. But there are all different kinds of bravery, as the book touches on. Gryffindors would probably fall more under the original idea of Dauntless that Four talks about while Slytherin could follow under Eric's lead.
Candor: Gryffindors seem to be very upfront and honest, so there's that. Slytherins, not so much, but they also don't seem to fear speaking their minds. However, their sense of self-preservation keeps them from being an open book. The reason I put Candor for both Gryffindors and Slytherins is because they see things in black and white. Things are either good or bad, there's little in between.
Amity: Pretty self-explanatory, I think.
Erudite - Obvious reasons for Ravenclaw. For Slytherin, they seem to value education and knowledge, but more importantly power. Knowledge is power (and so is the ability to make serums that control other people, just a more corrupt version).
Abnegation: I think Abnegation is better for Hufflepuffs than Gryffindors. Gryffindors have a lot of flair and a lot suffer from hero-complexes and large egos. That wouldn't fly in Abnegation, in my opinion.
- Lilimaster of Bookshelves
- Posts: 3978
- Joined: 17 Jul 2015, 20:19
- Location: Snuggling with a Book :)
- Favorite Author: J.K. Rowling
- Favorite Book: Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone
- Currently Reading: Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban
- Bookshelf Size: 370 books
View Reviewer Page
- Reading Device: Kindle Paperwhite
- 2017 Reading Goal: 140 Books
- Goal Completion: 34%
Second, I think there is further difference in the characteristics of even similar groupings. Continuing with Gryffindor versus Dauntless. The Dauntless must be fearless as fear is seen as weakness. Gryffindors, however, are BRAVE, which is entirely different. This means that they are aware of their fears and they face them. Take Neville for example. He is not the definition of fearless by any means with his shy and timid personality. However, in the first novel he is brave enough to stand up to his friends to try to keep them from getting into more trouble. In later books he even joins Harry and his friends in their fight against Voldemort; finally becoming someone that makes his grandmother proud.
One previous poster mentioned that "at least you get to choose your faction." However, if you recall Harry also chose his house. According to Albus, "It is our choices...that show us who we truly are, far more than our abilities." Harry even encourages his own son to remain confident in his ability to choose which house he wants to be in. You may not be stuck in one house for the rest of your life, but you are not free to change houses once you are placed in one. Whether faction or house, you remain with that choice forever.
hannahbm13 wrote:I think it is very interesting that they both separate people based on their personalities. I wonder if maybe Veronica Roth got the idea from Harry Potter? I think there is a very clear similarity.
I think I read somewhere that Veronica Roth read the HP books as a teenager. Like what someone else stated earlier, the traits aren't new, but the likeness in becoming part of a 'faction' or 'house' are really similar.
On another note, one thing that doesn't make any sense to me though is why she brought Harry Potter as an example for what she thought was right in the ending of Allegiant...
Maze Runner does it to - with all inhabitants of The Glade having their defined roles, and Thomas' breaking out of this ideal causing tension which makes events move towards the finale. Hunger Games has the Districts - a way to segregate people by confining them to pre-set roles.
It is a tool which is massively commonly used, but I think you're right - the Houses embodying certain emotional / social traits is certainly reflected and amplified in the Factions.