Yeah, I think this is about right. Definitely right about Harry. It would be fair to say he’s less a dumb jock and more that I just thought Quidditch was stupid. I think the Slytherin virtue according to the books is ambition, and Harry does fulfill the “but good at it” qualification there.Jadagul wrote: ↑03 Sep 2019, 23:45Harry is an unreliable narrator with self-esteem issues, so he's not aware that he's better than everyone else at a bunch of things, but he clearly is. If you want the books to make sense (yes, I know), you have to assume that he is both natively pretty academically talented---especially in Defense---and also pretty damn charismatic in person. I think this is also the intended reading!
Ron is "good" at being supportive. Just like Hermione is "good" at being smart. You can make a decent case that Ron is Hufflepuff, But Good At It and Hermione is Ravenclaw, But Good At It. (Is Harry Slytherin, But Good At It? I think the books want you to think that, but it doesn't give the Slytherins any actual virtues so it's hard to say what a good one would look like.)
Ron though is kind of a shitty Hufflepuff because he’s a jerk like all the time in the back half, and the only quality of Hufflepuffs is niceness.