Posted:
[quote]
In large part, I understand your point of view however being the Devil's advocate that I am and my inherent personality for debate, I must take issue with some of your analysis (which I in fact find very well written and persuasive). I know my arguments may not be as strong as yours, but I'll try my best![/quote] Thank you for the kind words and I enjoy debate as much as the next person :D
[quote=shellytt]his actions in school and beyond were in large part geared towards pleasing one or both his parents, in all likelihood his father in this instance.[/quote]
I concur vehemently. Just something I noticed and would like to add: Lucius utilized Draco for his own nefarious purposes. Draco has been used as Harry-bait since the third book when he conveniently slipped the information regarding Sirius.
[quote=shellytt]His mother I believe, was overly accommodating (for lack of a better word) to Draco's needs and desires. She allowed him liberties I believe that would not have been as forthcoming had Draco had had a sibling. This can be seen by their interactions which each other in HBP. These combined influences have in part influenced Draco's actions and manner. His "right" given to him by his parents attention (pampering) and status gives Draco "the superior than thou" attitude that he exhibits with his "friends". However, his childhood development does not excuse his actions that have been exhibited since the first novel. We can use Hermione's character as a point of reference in these instances. She also being an only child, although somewhat influenced by her upbringing, she does not blindly accept what she is told. You pointed that Draco is smart, which I wholeheartedly agree with, so should he not have had an understanding of the workings of society and therefore of how biased his view on society may have been. [/quote]
I disagree. Draco being an only child has little to do with how pampered he was as a child. Take into consideration his two parents. He would have been brought up to see himself as the centre of the universe as he is the linking point - if not the end point – of the two proud and noble bloodlines. Narcissa would probably have showered him in gifts rather than affection as an effect of wanting to be motherly but not knowing how. Lucius, as we seem to have agreed, obviously put a lot of pressure on Draco.
Considering his two parents, he would have been brought up to see himself as the natural centre of the universe, the end point of two proud and noble bloodlines. From Narcissa he would have been showered in gifts rather than overt affection (I have this image of her not really knowing how to mother him but wanting to, so she gives him things instead) and from Lucius he would have had the constant expectation and brilliance, and the calm dismissal when he fails to reach those expectations.
The - I'll use your words - "superior than thou attitude" we see Draco exhibiting is circumstantial. He obviously has a lot of control (for lack of better term) over Goyle and Crabbe, whom we are led to believe are mindless buffoons. However, in HBP, we also see that Blaise Zabini, supposedly one of the more intelligent Slytherin's and a character that was completely and utterly wasted, listens to Draco's opinions but doesn't worship the ground he walks on. The above analogy can also be applied to Draco's "relationship" with Theodore Nott, another character that held so much potential but was wasted. It holds no real purpose in the narrative as a whole because there could be instances which we aren't privy to where Draco acts differently with these people. Plus, Draco knew Harry was in the compartment - who's to say it wasn't for Harry's benefit that he was acting as such?
Interesting that you brought Hermione up. Out of all the characters I can possibly think of, Hermione is the one that relates to Draco the most. Ironically, like Draco, Hermione has an extremely hard time admitting she's wrong. Hermione and Draco are quite a lot alike in my mind, but in the books, because Hermione is a Gryffindor that makes it all right. Both of them are stubborn. They are not to be disagreed with because neither is wrong. They both are extremely vocal about their opinions, often, in a painfully blunt way. Yet, no one holds it against Hermione merely because she hails from the house of Gryffindor. She is biased against Slytherins. The world Hermione would create post-war (that is to say, if she could) would have no place for Slytherins, and the Malfoys and the Blacks would be the first to be condemned when her revolution comes.
[quote=shellytt]We cannot ascribe all of Draco's forthcomings to the influence of his parents. We all have parents and know that we do not possess the same views on all issues, especially as teenagers. Therefore, to explain away Draco's deeds in the first five novels purely on the influence that his father exerted or even on the mere presence of his father is a rather nave interpretation. Draco was they way he was, because he wanted it to be so. His character has always been developed and geared towards "the dark side" because that is where Draco in reality truly wanted to be. [/quote]
Actually, his character wasn't developed until the 4-6th book. Of course, we were shown snippets of him but never enough to truly judge him. There usually is more to a person than "bully" or "coward." Just depends upon perspective.
I don't think I've made this clear: I think there are obvious issues with Draco's character even without Lucius – he's flawed. He's completely ego-centric. Draco's ego is more nave. He's not nearly as cynical as his father and he thinks not simply in what he is justified in doing but what makes those justifications work. To Lucius it's more "I can do this because I am a Malfoy". To Draco its "A Malfoy can do this because a Malfoy know what's best."
In some instances, he's down right pathetic, and a complete loser. He tries to live up to so much, as he is the spawn of two noble bloodlines, but fails so dramatically. We're told he is a bigot, he's insincere, he's greedy a complete and total snob in his earlier years. However, we're also told that 'a lot of people are idiots at the age of fifteen.' thus, placing Draco on a parallel structure with James (Somewhat as a darker version of James.) Draco is a bully, yes, but that does not make him the bad guy or a "dark" character; it just shows he is immature.
What is the "dark side"? The side that sides with Voldemort or the one that doesn't see eye to eye with Harry's beliefs? Harry thinks it to be the same thing but it's not. There is a major difference in disagreeing/doubting what Harry says and believing in the doctrines set by Voldemort. Yet, in the books, a dark character is anyone who doesn't concur with Harry.
[quote=shellytt]As Draco's character develops throughout the books, there seems to be no learning curve showcasing what in general society has been deemed right and wrong or if he does show some semblance on understanding it is understated. He blindly follows doctrines instilled in him by prejudiced society, without apparent care of whether these doctrines are in fact the correct moral attitude to be taken.[/quote]
You raised the point that there is no learning curve in the books. That could be true but merely because the books are in Harry's point of view. However subtle, the change in Draco's character is present as we see him seeking consolation in Myrtle.
On one hand, you deem society as the judge of what is right and wrong yet conversely, you disparage them by claiming they are "prejudiced" and have a skewed sense of moral sense. It's a double edged sword :P
I do believe that at a young age (before 9-10), words like prejudice, racism and such are extremely hard to understand. This is when you can mould a child. If he's constantly told that muggle born witches/wizards are inferior, he's going to take it to be an accurate knowledge claim, not something debatable. The analogy is equivalent to how kids are told B comes after A not the other way around. They think it's a fact not something debatable.
The society in which Draco grew up believes witches and wizards of muggle origin are inferior. Ergo, he truly has learnt what society deems right and wrong. In retro respect, can't the same be said for the Weasleys? "Mad" and "mental" are two words often used by them to describe some muggle invention. Albeit unintentionally, Arthur does demean the muggle way of living. I don't recall the exact words but Arthur says something to the effect "bless them for living without magic" in a manner one might refer a retarded person who can tie their own shoes. He finds it so odd that muggles can do something better than Wizards. They might not want to eradicate muggle or even kill them but the prejudice of wizard/pureblood supremacy is definitely there.
[quote=shellytt]Draco is not a coward and he never was, which can be a dangerous trait in Draco's character. He aims to serve himself without consequence to anyone else, as can be seen in HBP, by his singular attempts at Dumbledore's murder evidenced throughout the book. The question arose, whether Harry, would have returned for him in the forest. I can unequivocally say that the answer is YES. Harry did in fact return for Draco in a similar if not more dangerous situation of peril in DH. This act of heroics by Harry was even more spectacular, given the knowledge and hatred that Harry had long harboured for Draco. [/quote]
Oh, I don't know. There are several ways Draco could be considered a coward and in several ways he isn't one. Bravery can be seen as a rash action to some people and to those, self-perseverance an asset. An argument supporting the first hypothesis would be: Draco is almost always flanked by his cronies when he confronts Harry which indicates fear. Conversely, he is brave (or stupid; ironic how often these two traits coincide.) enough to insult Harry when the majority favours him. Another reason that could potentially prove Draco as a coward is he boasts of serving the Dark Lord but when he's asked to walk the talk, he fails.
Draco constantly feels the need to prove himself to his father which counters the argument that he is self-serving. From Lucius, he would have had the constant expectations of brilliance, and the calm dismissal when he fails to reach those expectations. If my memory doesn't betray me, Draco does consider the ramifications of his actions but in a stunted, childlike way as somewhat hinted in DH.
I'm assuming the time you are talking of is when Harry saves him from the fire? Doesn't that happen after Harry sees that Draco is being tortured by Voldemort and manages to sympathize with him? The instance I was specifically referring to was the one in the first book where I don't believe Harry, being the 11-year old that he was, would have run back to insure Draco's security.
[quote=shellytt]The many acts of violence and injuries that have been sustained by Draco, throughout the novels can in someway be attributed to his own deeds. The saying what goes around comes around comes to mind. I am not trying to explain away, the apparent unfairness of the situations that he was sometimes faced with, but everything that was done to him he had done the same and sometimes worse. (again I am not campaigning for vindictive action, but I can see the reasoning). [/quote]
I can honestly see the reasoning but in the interest of fairness, why must he be the only person to pay? Sirius wasn't overtly nice and to me, much more of a bully than Draco ever was. Yet, he is made out to be martyr. James is a lot like Sirius but he's supposedly very nice and made out to be martyr, as well. Gryffindor bias, much? There is a possibility that Draco could be a pretty nice guy if one takes the time to know him. This is exactly why I love Fandom!Draco much more than Canon!Draco.
[quote=shellytt]We have to remember that this is a novel and the author would harbor the hope that in the fight of good vs evil, good will ultimately win in the end, as can be evidenced by Draco's many failings throughout the novels. Whatever JK Rowling's purpose was, I do believe that she had in fact intended a "softening" of Draco's character in the latter novels, which evoked pity and sympathy. I have never liked Draco's character, however I did feel his struggles, however, that does not mean that my perception of him will change because of that. Just as my dislike for Snape still exists, even though we knew of his intentions. [/quote]
Big words. Let's take a moment and analyze the above italicized passage. The terms "good" and "evil" heavily depend upon personal moral beliefs. As a student who takes anthropology, we're taught that the lines between "good" and "evil" are often very blurry. That which is "evil" to someone is "good" to another. For example: Cannibalism is generally unaccepted and frowned upon in Western societies as it is considered an act of "immorality" and "inhumanity" but there are tribes, using the term very loosely, that consider cannibalism as an act of releasing the kindred soul from its "fleshy prison". "Good" and "evil" are two relative terms which are no different than "white" and "black" but we know shades of grey lie between. To categorize a person as "good" or "evil" one is essentially saying they simply cannot possess qualities of the other spectrum, which we know is false. "Good" and "evil" are obscure words that really do little to define any explicit doctrines.
I think that's where the problem lies in the series. It's overtly "if you aren't with us, you're against us." The books turn themselves around backwards to punish characters who don't see eye to eye with Harry, probably because after GoF, we know this is war and in JKR's allegedly practical viewpoint, anyone who is told about Cedric's death and does not support the "good guys" deserves what he/she gets. I'm not talking about the "bad guys" such as Voldemort, Peter, or Bella but about people like Draco and Percy, who did not believe Harry's claims that Voldemort was indeed back and chose to side with the ministry instead. Even Ron, to some extent, who didn't blindly believe Harry in GoF was alienated and shown to be a jerk.
From the few interviews I've stumbled upon of JKR, she time and again indicates that Draco's popularity among fans is largely due to Tom Felton, who plays him in the movies. This is far too easy an analysis, which assumes that fans must have to write off his canon character in order to like him. Thus, I can't really comment if she meant to soften his character or not but what I can state definitively is that – evoking sympathy for Draco is in the text, whether she meant it or not.
[quote=shellytt]Lastly, as a female reader, whilst I do feel sympathy for the underdog in the stories, I am more moved by the strong female characters in the novels, especially the likes of Professor Mc Gonagal, the stalwart protector, Molly Weasley, the impassioned housewife, Tonks, the admirable career woman, and of course Hermoine, an advocate for right. [/quote]
For some reason, I could never bring myself to like Molly. Perhaps that's just me but there is something about her that just irks me especially in OOTP. Even towards the end, where she kills Bella, it seemed somewhat surreal. I truly believed that Bella would have chewed her up; she certainly seems unhinged enough.
On a side note, that was a pleasure to both read and refute =)
Love Friendship Dating and Relationships
Bindi
