Gilderoy Lockhart: Character Analysis

[FleurduJardin]

Originally Posted by FurryDice

In the Lockhart thread, the matter of Lockhart's House came up. I'm inclined to believe that the four "bad" DADA teachers represent each of the House traits put to bad use. Quirrell -Ravenclaw; Lockhart- Gryffindor; Crouch Jr -Hufflepuff; and Umbridge -Slytherin. These characters' actions show their House traits put to bad use, rather than going against their House traits, IMO.

I'm perplexed - how do you figure Lockhart for a Gryffindor? He's not brave or loyal or honest. He's actually a cheat and a coward.

I see him more in Slytherin. Using his looks and charm the way Tom Riddle did, but without Tom Riddle's intelligence, though he was cunning and ruthless enough.

He didn't hesitate to kill or harm (obliviate) the people he stole from or tricked to get their stories. He was willing to pack up and run and let Ginny die. I don't see a Gryffindor doing that.

[Kat_Suki]

Originally Posted by FleurduJardin

He didn't hesitate to kill or harm (obliviate) the people he stole from or tricked to get their stories. He was willing to pack up and run and let Ginny die. I don't see a Gryffindor doing that.

Gryffindor's are generally brave/loyal/true - but not in all instances. So, while I don't believe Lockhart was a Gryffindor, it's not beyond the realms of possibility either. I mean, he did claim multiple feats of bravery to his name, even if he was lying about it all.

Peter was Gryffindor, wasn't he? He betrayed James/Lily. He killed 12 innocent people and allowed an innocent man to go to prison in his place. What of other Gryffindors? There's Albus Dumbledore, who fell in with Grindelwald and seemed alright with subjugating Muggles - at least for a time. Percy Weasley, who's greatest ambition was to become Minister of Magic and who dropped his family and turned on Harry in a heart beat. And Seamus Finnigan, who'd been in Harry's dorm and known him for 4 years, suddenly believed all the mad things about his friend and he turned away from that friendship and had nothing to do with him for more than half the school year. Of course, Ron Weasley, one of Harry's best mates, is prone to fits of jealousy and that jealousy has dire consequences for his friends, who he turns on rather quickly. Then there's McLaggen to consider. Use his looks and connections and expect to get his way and if not, attempts intimidation {like he tried on Harry at the quidditch trials}.

Actually, I picture Lockhart more like Zacharias Smith, that loathed wart of a Hufflepuff. Lockhart has the ability to toil through, trolling for victims and scribbling down their amazing acts of bravery, then apply a quick charm and *presto* all his drudgery has earned him fame, fortune, and an award for smiling.

[Chrysalis]

All in all, it matters not one whit what Hogwarts house one was in. There are unpleasant people in every house.

[FurryDice]

Originally Posted by FleurduJardin

I'm perplexed - how do you figure Lockhart for a Gryffindor? He's not brave or loyal or honest. He's actually a cheat and a coward.

I see him more in Slytherin. Using his looks and charm the way Tom Riddle did, but without Tom Riddle's intelligence, though he was cunning and ruthless enough.

He didn't hesitate to kill or harm (obliviate) the people he stole from or tricked to get their stories. He was willing to pack up and run and let Ginny die. I don't see a Gryffindor doing that.

My thinking was that he wanted to be seen as brave - he didn't want to be seen as intelligent, or diligent, or especially ambitious. He built up a reputation of courage for himself. I think that valuing courage like this suggests he was a Gryffindor. Valuing it in the sense that he put it above other traits, I mean. (Apart from vanity)
I don't think he displayed courage, but then, that might just be my dislike talking. In a way, it was brave to track down the people he Obliviated. These were talented witches and wizards, who had performed great feats - and he goes along and risks a memory charm against them? Any one of them could have been a believer in "Constant Vigilance" and hexed him silly when he tried to Obliviate against them. While it was underhanded, and certainly miles away from the courage of the people who were genuinely responsible for those feats, there was maybe some nugget of courage in doing that.

Plus, Wormtail was a Gryffindor who did pack up and let others die.

[Muggle_Magic]

Lockhart a Gryffindor? Over my dead body!

Saying one did brave deeds is not being brave, it's lying. Boasting one can do something then trying to run away is cowardly. Trying to Obliviate Ron and Harry to escape, leaving Ginny to the Basilisk and Riddle's not so tender mercies is selfish, ruthless and cowardly. No way Lockhart was ever Sorted into Gryffindor.

Pettigrew is a different matter. I already said elsewhere that I'm convinced he was put in Gryffindor as a plot ploy. But that belongs in another thread.

[sassygryffindor]

Originally Posted by Muggle_Magic

Lockhart a Gryffindor? Over my dead body!

Saying one did brave deeds is not being brave, it's lying. Boasting one can do something then trying to run away is cowardly. Trying to Obliviate Ron and Harry to escape, leaving Ginny to the Basilisk and Riddle's not so tender mercies is selfish, ruthless and cowardly. No way Lockhart was ever Sorted into Gryffindor.

Couldn't have said it better. taking credit for deeds and actually doing them are two completely different things. Taking credit for something you didn't do is something a Slytherin would do, as they would stop at nothing because they were so ambitious. No offense to Slytherins or anything, it's just something I read somewhere.

[Chrysalis]

Who says Gryffindors are all good people, or care for other people's welfare? Lockhart obviously valued courage, or at least the appearance of courage, above everything else. We know that Slytherins tend to despise such open glory-seeking. It fits perfectly, in my view. Lockhart knew he wasn't a hard worker, wasn't strategic enough and wasn't clever enough, so he went and obliviated all those witches and wizards so at least he could appear brave.

Slytherin, over my dead body.

[FurryDice]

Originally Posted by Chrysalis

Who says Gryffindors are all good people, or care for other people's welfare? Lockhart obviously valued courage, or at least the appearance of courage, above everything else. We know that Slytherins tend to despise such open glory-seeking. It fits perfectly, in my view. Lockhart knew he wasn't a hard worker, wasn't strategic enough and wasn't clever enough, so he went and obliviated all those witches and wizards so at least he could appear brave.

Slytherin, over my dead body.

Why do you say Lockhart wasn't strategic? His method of Obliviating gifted witches and wizards, then taking credit for their achievements worked for him, and was only exposed through chance. This scheme, plus his actions down in the Chamber of Secrets suggest that he was willing to "use any means to achieve his ends".
I think he could have conceivably been a Slytherin. But, I'm still leaning towards Gryffindor - he went for glory, not power, for starters. And he did want to be seen as brave above anything else. But I think he did have some Slytherin traits, too.

[halfbreedlover]

No one wants Lockhart in their House.

[MistressofRaven]

Originally Posted by halfbreedlover

No one wants Lockhart in their House.

True. Although, I thought I read somewhere that he was a Ravenclaw. I guess one does need brains to wipe people's memories successfully.

[blitzen]

http://harrypotter.wikia.com/wiki/Gilderoy_Lockhart that states he was in ravenclaw, but i dont recall that from any of the books, it must be a movie thing. I guess i could see him as a ravenclaw, except that none of his spells ever work (getting rid of the pixies, mending harry's arm...)

[halfbreedlover]

Originally Posted by blitzen

http://harrypotter.wikia.com/wiki/Gilderoy_Lockhart that states he was in ravenclaw, but i dont recall that from any of the books, it must be a movie thing. I guess i could see him as a ravenclaw, except that none of his spells ever work (getting rid of the pixies, mending harry's arm...)

I just clicked on the footnote, and it is indeed from the movie.

[Muggle_Magic]

Originally Posted by Chrysalis

Who says Gryffindors are all good people, or care for other people's welfare? Lockhart obviously valued courage, or at least the appearance of courage, above everything else. We know that Slytherins tend to despise such open glory-seeking. It fits perfectly, in my view. Lockhart knew he wasn't a hard worker, wasn't strategic enough and wasn't clever enough, so he went and obliviated all those witches and wizards so at least he could appear brave.

Slytherin, over my dead body.

Valuing something like courage and being brave oneself are two entirely different things. Lockhart was a coward, can't ever have been in Gryffindor. But certainly ambitious, cunning and unscrupulous enough to be a Slytherin. Sorry to trample your dead body. (No offense meant.)

Geez, even Pettigrew showed more bravery than Lockhart ever did, though it is my considered opinion, expressed in the Pettigrew thread, that he didn't belong in Gryffindor either.

[Kat_Suki]

Originally Posted by blitzen

http://harrypotter.wikia.com/wiki/Gilderoy_Lockhart that states he was in ravenclaw, but i dont recall that from any of the books, it must be a movie thing. I guess i could see him as a ravenclaw, except that none of his spells ever work (getting rid of the pixies, mending harry's arm...)

Oh, yeah, the Ravenclaw patch on his robes...definitely a movie thing and we all know the movies aren't canon. Or I'm just saying that 'cause I want him to be a Hufflepuff. Seriously, in the books, he's described as wearing various colors of robes with no House affiliation apparent.

Yeah, Gilderoy was rather inept at certain types of magic. But you know, Cho wasn't that good at Defensive magic and Luna was said to be "patchy" right along with the Creevey brothers. That could be down to their simply not having had any good DADA teachers for the most part. Or it could be down to just because your smart doesn't necessarily mean you're talented when it comes to casting spells. Knowing the theory and applying it effectively are two different things.

[ignisia]

I don't think we ever find out, but I'd say either Gryffindor or Slytherin would be good bets, with Ravenclaw as a tiiiiny possibility. Hufflepuffs value fairness and hard work, and what Lockhart does is definitely unfair and lazy.

I say Gryffindor because it can definitely hold braggarts, like McLaggan, and self-serving cowards, like Wormtail. Lockhart's actions show, IMO, that he values courage (even if he does not practice it) and engages in a pretty gutsy enterprise.

And I say Slytherin, because he appears to want fame and is willing to go to extremes to get it.

[arithmancer]

Originally Posted by Muggle_Magic

Geez, even Pettigrew showed more bravery than Lockhart ever did, though it is my considered opinion, expressed in the Pettigrew thread, that he didn't belong in Gryffindor either.

He was, however, idubitaby IN Gryffindor, so supposing someone is not in Gryffindor because he was cowardly is not definitive proof he could not have been. It has been shown Lockhart valued the appearance of courage; perhaps that also explains Peter's Sorting. We know choice plays a part.

[lucky charms]

Definitely not Ravenclaw! Not one thing about him shows that he values wisdom and pursues knowledge for its own sake. In fact, he tries to get other people to do the learning for him and takes credit for it!

Slytherin seems like a safe bet, because he was definitely cunning, ambitious, and not afraid to trample on others to reach his goal. Based on the revelations he makes about his evil master plan to become famous, I'd almost even go so far as to call him a "textbook Slytherin".

Yet... there's something about his whole demeanor that just doesn't say "Slytherin". First of all, I don't think he cares at all about blood status. Also, he tries to go for the whole "heroic, courageous knight in shining armor" thing, which is a very Gryffindor thing, and which I think Slytherins would despise. The fact that he wants to be seen this way is very telling, and I can't bring myself to see him as anything else but a former Gryffindor who lost his way.

I also happen to be of the opinion that it's the traits we value the most, rather than the ones we possess in the greatest quantity, that determines which house we're sorted into. This could the apparent House misfits we see throughout the series. Most, like Hermione and Neville, "grow into" the traits they value which their House represents, and a few, like Pettigrew and possibly Lockhart, never really do. (Whew... third time I've posted this argument in different threads today)

[Rodrick]

I know Lockhart was suppose to be used as comic relief but am I the only one who did not find him funny? Making people forget who they are and taking credit for all their achievements is truly heinous. It's a crime worthy of Azkaban.

[salazarssister]

1. Why did Lockhart apply for the DaDA job in the first place?

Maybe publicity?

2. Will Lockhart ever recover?

Not fully. He probably will make some progress though

3. Is Lockhart going to make an appearance in DH?

well he didn't!

4. Basically all of the other teachers treated Lockhart with disdain because they knew that he was a fraud. Being incompetent and narcissistic as he was, Lockhart was a threat to the students. Why did Dumbledore employ Lockhart?

I think Dumbledore was desperate for anyone to take the post. If he knew about the one year curse on the post he probably thought Lockhart wasn't going to be there for a long period of time. Dumbledore probably thought Lockhart was harmless anyway

5. Why was Hermione so blinded by Lockhart's appearance? After all, he did very little to fortify his reputation.

Well because he was good looking! She didn't care about the lies he had told. In her eyes he was attractive whether he lied or not because of his physical appearance

[slytherin001]

Originally Posted by Rodrick

I know Lockhart was suppose to be used as comic relief but am I the only one who did not find him funny? Making people forget who they are and taking credit for all their achievements is truly heinous. It's a crime worthy of Azkaban.

Of course, the things that he did to credit achievements that weren't rightfully his is no laughing matter. I think what is funny, IMO, is what happened in between the moments he took credit for heroic actions he didn't do... his flamboyant personality and mannerisms were definitely humorous to me.