diatribe on ambition
16 Jan 2007 05:59 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
mayoraaseiAlthough I haven't touched a canon Harry Potter book in over 4 years >_> This rant has been a while in coming. Thanks to fanfics.
I don't know why ambition has been equated to evil. Yes, Rowling has chosen to portray it in that light, and frankly I think it's inevitable, because a house of ambitious people around each other are bound to become bitchy.
But it's stupid to forget that ambition is a neutral quality. Some of the kindest - and some of the most terrible - leaders in history are extremely ambitious people. In the European feudal society where rank is passed on by blood, unfortunately ambition does often bear up as ugly bickering between the royals and the aristocrats.
It would be stupid to think that's the only path ambition can take you. The best emperors in Chinese history are ambitious - without ambition they wouldn't have led the people to revolt against an oppressive, corrupt government. Some of the best courtiers/ministers are highly ambitious without losing their loyalty to their emperor. Ambition doesn't define a person. You can be kind and ambitious, you can be loyal and ambitious, you can be brave and intelligent and compassionate, and ambitious. It's these people who will create wonders in society, who will toil for an ideal. Anyone who has ever sat down and said with conviction, "I want to change society" is ambitious, but society can be changed for good.
It's stupid to confine ambition to the thirst for world domination. Ambition can lead to bad things being done, and an obsession with ambition can lead to many terrible things being done. Ambition itself, however, is not inherently evil and is often what drives changes in society.
Let's not forget, all ye American fanfic writers, that ambition forms the essence of the American dream, of any "rags-to-riches" tale.
SLYTHERIN == AMBITIOUS =/= EVIL
I don't know why ambition has been equated to evil. Yes, Rowling has chosen to portray it in that light, and frankly I think it's inevitable, because a house of ambitious people around each other are bound to become bitchy.
But it's stupid to forget that ambition is a neutral quality. Some of the kindest - and some of the most terrible - leaders in history are extremely ambitious people. In the European feudal society where rank is passed on by blood, unfortunately ambition does often bear up as ugly bickering between the royals and the aristocrats.
It would be stupid to think that's the only path ambition can take you. The best emperors in Chinese history are ambitious - without ambition they wouldn't have led the people to revolt against an oppressive, corrupt government. Some of the best courtiers/ministers are highly ambitious without losing their loyalty to their emperor. Ambition doesn't define a person. You can be kind and ambitious, you can be loyal and ambitious, you can be brave and intelligent and compassionate, and ambitious. It's these people who will create wonders in society, who will toil for an ideal. Anyone who has ever sat down and said with conviction, "I want to change society" is ambitious, but society can be changed for good.
It's stupid to confine ambition to the thirst for world domination. Ambition can lead to bad things being done, and an obsession with ambition can lead to many terrible things being done. Ambition itself, however, is not inherently evil and is often what drives changes in society.
Let's not forget, all ye American fanfic writers, that ambition forms the essence of the American dream, of any "rags-to-riches" tale.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2007-01-16 12:28 pm (UTC)