A lot of thought was clearly put into this article, which I can appreciate, though I wish a bit more time had been put into it. First of all, let me address your final claim: Yes, there is enough Hogwarts to go around. I think all lovers of Hogwarts and the universe it represents would agree that part of the magic of Hogwarts is that anyone can join in, from Purebloods to orphans in their closets. However, I have some issues with your article (school allegiances aside): 1. Do they not teach proofreading in English 101 courses at Rhodes? I know that if I had turned in a paper with such glaring errors in its introductory paragraph, I would have been asked to hand in my gown. 2. “Stooping to the level of those mountain-dwellers is beneath us,” while a lovely turn of phrase, makes little logical sense. I had to read the sentence in question several times before I was able to get over my incredulity and move on. 3. By “Hogwarts-esque” and “Hogwarts-inspired” I am forced to assume you mean “Gothic Revival,” an architectural style that has been popular, particularly in academic settings, since the 19th century. Also, I would hope that not all of your buildings were built after 1997, which is of course when Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone was released in the UK. 4. You describe a room in Palmer Hall as a “cloister” which is an inappropriate use of the term. A cloister is in fact a rectangular open space with one line of vaults all around, not the multi-vaulted structure depicted in the photo, which looks more like a space that would be properly defined as a crypt. 5. I am trying to keep this as impartial as I can, but I must address your claims about Rhodes’ tower and defend my own. Sewanee’s campus has an observatory and three separate towers: including one that contains a carillon, and one housing a ring of eight English Change Ringing Bells as well as a clock that chimes the quarter hour. 6. I do not consider myself a member of Slytherin House, but I find your assessment of the Sewanee post as “Slytherin” to be short-sighted and lacking in the sort of house unity that Dumbledore would have encouraged. Houses shouldn’t be used as insults. It is stressed in the books that it is important to be loyal to your house, and I believe both of these articles were simply doing the same for their schools. It is ridiculous to measure how “Hogwarts” one school is versus another. The important thing is that, no matter what school you attend, you find a way to make it as much a home as Hogwarts has become for so many of our generation.