Yes, I think it appropriate to enjoy Pottermore's HOGWARTS sortings with a dash of salt (irrespective of whether one enjoys discovering how they are constructed and relate to other paradigms).
I agree: fortunately for we fans, the point of what JKR set out to do was the books -- characters and stories!
The "personality tests" that much later flowed from the books' popularity and resulting Pottermore enterprise simply are what they are. (But some fans seem to take the tests very seriously, expecting an underlying design that is somehow scientifically valid -- or, perhaps more accurately said, subjectively felt to be that way.) Just as some enjoy roleplay or being trivia experts, I enjoy discovering underlying conceptualizations and the construction of things things so I understand them better.
In case I was unclear, when I say
"flaw"
in quotation marks, I am doing the opposite of criticizing JKR or her created paradigm. I was commenting, simplistically, on the interplay of several paradigms. (The issues arise re how portions of the fandom have understood, or misunderstood, paradigms and their application; the conceptualization and, therefore, programing of dating sites is fraught with similar issues and misplaced expectations.)
I am intrigued by all that JKR put into the Hogwarts sorting test design (as I am with some time-tested related paridigms such as Jung's>MBTI; the Enneagram; advanced astrological paradigms and systems) . . .
. . .
it teaches me a lot about how JKR thinks and feels and presume, which deepens and enriches my experiences with HP, the wizarding world, and interviews Rowling has given.
Re the interesting insight about the darkness and intensity of the books as they developed:
I appreciate your observation about JKR paying attention across a decade to the surprisingly broad demographic that fell in love with her books. I'd not before wondered whether or how that may have affected her conscious and subconscious creative process in the later books.
One thing I've loved about her offerings beginning with page 1 of PS/SS is how much depth and breadth and intellect informs her creation. My own personal experience was being immediately wowed because she was writing brilliantly on simultaneous child and adult levels, and continued with that same wondrous and captivating complexity in all the Potter books. I was hooked.
But perhaps I misunderstand what JKR always planned and expected -- or misunderstood the preceeding post? I thought JKR always knew and planned, in general at least, that the books would become more intense, darker, and increasingly mature (as the characters age across seven school years into adulthood).
Back to sorting -- ILVERMORNY: It will be interesting to discover whether JKR even wants to do more with fleshing out those houses. Personally, I feel no need for it.
So far, she has left both the house descriptions and the Ilvermorny sorting very, very lightly sketched. The sorting is quite simple, compared even to Hogwarts, and thus far appears less valid (in the term-of-art sense in which I use the word) -- IF one even cares about that, instead of merely enjoying it with the "grain of salt." I'm hugely more interested in Rowling's fabulous stories and brilliant characters; sadly, most fans read them as they happened, and tired of discussing them in depth long before I finally read them.
