Revisiting meta about Draco...
May. 8th, 2015 08:50 pm![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
sweettalkeress.livejournal.com posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
deathtocapslockDid anyone else pick up on just how much Rowling's commentary about Draco seems to infantilize him? I'm totally serious--the way she writes about him he seems to be only slightly more mature and proactive than Harry! Look at the way she phrases things:
"Much of Draco's behavior at school was modeled on the most impressive person he knew--his father--and he faithfully copied Lucius's cold and contemputous manner toward everyone outside his inner circle.
...
However, Malfoy had his own moments of humiliation at Harry's hands....
...
Much as the Death Eaters disliked Harry as an obstacle and as a symbol, he was discussed seriously as an adversary, whereas Draco was still relegated to the status of schoolboy by Death Eaters who met at his parents' house.
...
At this early stage [of joining the Death Eaters]...Draco barely comprehended what he was being asked to do.
...
Even so, he could not free himself from his conditioning: he repeatedly refused the assistance of Severus Snape, because he was afraid that Snape would try to steal his 'glory.'
...
Even when faced with a weak and wandless Dumbledore, Draco found himself unable to deliver the coup de grace because, in spite of himself, he was touched by Dumbledore's kindness and pity for his would-be killer....Dumbledore was, indeed, killed [by something Draco caused]--though not by Draco's hand. [Rowling then explains that Snape lied and covered Draco's reluctance to kill Dumbledore to Voldemort].
...
Draco survived Voldemort's siege of Hogwarts because Harry and Ron saved his life."
And from Rowling's extra notes:
"Draco never realizes that he becomes, for the best part of a year, the true owner of the Elder Wand.
...
I pity Draco, just as I feel sorry for Dudley." (But, crucially, to "pity" someone is not the same as giving them true sympathy)
I just think it seems like a pattern, you know? Are there any other characters she does this to? Or is Draco a special case?
"Much of Draco's behavior at school was modeled on the most impressive person he knew--his father--and he faithfully copied Lucius's cold and contemputous manner toward everyone outside his inner circle.
...
However, Malfoy had his own moments of humiliation at Harry's hands....
...
Much as the Death Eaters disliked Harry as an obstacle and as a symbol, he was discussed seriously as an adversary, whereas Draco was still relegated to the status of schoolboy by Death Eaters who met at his parents' house.
...
At this early stage [of joining the Death Eaters]...Draco barely comprehended what he was being asked to do.
...
Even so, he could not free himself from his conditioning: he repeatedly refused the assistance of Severus Snape, because he was afraid that Snape would try to steal his 'glory.'
...
Even when faced with a weak and wandless Dumbledore, Draco found himself unable to deliver the coup de grace because, in spite of himself, he was touched by Dumbledore's kindness and pity for his would-be killer....Dumbledore was, indeed, killed [by something Draco caused]--though not by Draco's hand. [Rowling then explains that Snape lied and covered Draco's reluctance to kill Dumbledore to Voldemort].
...
Draco survived Voldemort's siege of Hogwarts because Harry and Ron saved his life."
And from Rowling's extra notes:
"Draco never realizes that he becomes, for the best part of a year, the true owner of the Elder Wand.
...
I pity Draco, just as I feel sorry for Dudley." (But, crucially, to "pity" someone is not the same as giving them true sympathy)
I just think it seems like a pattern, you know? Are there any other characters she does this to? Or is Draco a special case?
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
MIRRORVERSE!HP TIME!
Date: 2015-05-10 06:07 am (UTC)"Draco modeled himself on the most impressive person he knew--his father--and faithfully did his best to live up to his father's cool confidence in the face of opposition.
...
However, Draco would suffer setbacks and even humiliation at Potter's hands....
...
Though the Death Eaters found Potter an irritating figurehead and obstruction, the Dark Lord's obsession forced them to regard him as a serious adversary, albeit grudgingly; they did not extend this age-inappropriate respect to Draco, who was treated as a mere schoolboy - when the same could be said of the much-discussed Potter! - by his father's peers, no matter how hard he worked to overcome the obstacles of his youth and (relative) ignorance.
...
Draco, still idealistic, earnest, and naive, did not yet grasp the enormity of the Dark Lord's command...
...
Even so, he struggled valiantly to preserve his pride: he turned down Severus Snape's assistance despite the man's repeated insistence to the contrary, because he wanted to accomplish the deed on his own merits rather than through an "adult's" last-minute intervention.
...
Even when faced with a defeated, broken enemy, Draco could not kill because, despite his commitment to the Dark Lord's service and his own need to reclaim his family's honor, he found himself moved by his fallen enemy's final words.... Though Dumbledore was indeed killed [by something Draco caused], it was not by Draco's hand. [Rowling then explains that Severus saved Draco from Voldemort's wrath by hiding from the Dark Lord the secret of the young man's compassion even to a fallen enemy].
...
Potter and Weasley would redeem themselves at the Battle of Hogwarts, where they saved Draco from a botched spell by one of his friends (who, tragically, did not share Draco's unexpected good fortune)."
It's fun to spin things the opposite way while describing essentially the same events. 8P
(Disclaimer: I am not a Draco fan by any means. I am even less a fan of JKR's slanted descriptions of characters according to her playing of favorites. Harry was regarded as a serious adversary? Voldemort's insanity is showing...)
I just think it seems like a pattern, you know? Are there any other characters she does this to? Or is Draco a special case?
Albus Dumbledore, who was a ~very moral student~ who would condone GENOCIDE out of ~love~.
"And I think that the sensitive, maybe sophisticated adult reader could see that Dumbledore, who had been a very, you know, a very moral student, a model student up to that point, who goes so wildly off the rail suddenly, to think « yeah, genocide, that’ll work ! ». You know — what did he feel for this person ? "
I will never get over that. NEVER.
My uncharitable opinion is that she infantilizes Dumbledore quite a lot in order to get him out of the consequences of his actions. In the books, she has characters regard him as hopelessly naive in 'his desire to think the best of people' - regarding actions for which, if she didn't hammer on the ~too good, too pure for this world~ angle, one might think he had ulterior motives of the manipulative kind. Out of them, she excuses even an apparent advocacy of GENOCIDE as ~because of love~.
Of course, whether a character gets the protective version or the condescending version depends upon whether they're in Gryffindor or Slytherin colors... :P
Re: MIRRORVERSE!HP TIME!
Date: 2015-05-10 01:44 pm (UTC)Where did that one quote about Dumbledore come from, BTW?
Re: MIRRORVERSE!HP TIME!
Date: 2015-05-13 12:59 am (UTC)That makes no sense whatsoever. First of all, the only “evidence” we have that Scummywhore was “a very moral student, a model student up to that point” is (1) his own bragging about his wonderfulness in DH 35 and (2) the gushing about same by his sycophant Elphias Doge, who comes across kind of like one of those dolls that can be programmed to repeat a recorded, personalized message. We have no independent verification of young Albus’s intellectual or moral greatness. In fact, his other contemporaries--brother Aberforth, Auntie Muriel, and Bathilda Bagshot--all depict Albus as spoiled, conceited, self-centered, and exploitative--the opposite of Rowling’s “sanitized for her protection” description of a living saint.
As for his “suddenly going off the rails” regarding genocide, that’s also nonsense. John Douglas is a legendary FBI agent who was largely responsible for developing the agency’s profiling unit. In his book Obsession, he talks about being flabbergasted when O J Simpson got off on double murder charges, in large part because the jury thought Simpson’s being a wife beater was irrelevant regarding his potential to violently slaughter two people. This is the gist of Douglas’s remarks: “Come on, people! Nobody just wakes up one morning and says, ‘Today I begin my life of crime!’ There is always a starting point for criminal and violent behavior, and a gradual escalation to more serious crimes and greater violence over a period of years.”
In other words, there is absolutely no way Albus Dumbledore was a wonderful human being his entire life, then suddenly turned into a genocidal maniac for a few months because he fell in love with the wrong person, then went back to being a paragon of goodness once his plans blew up in his face and his lover dumped him. That’s just not how human beings behave. Rowling’s assertions are pure ass-covering fantasy on her part. They really put the arrant in arrant nonsense.
Re: MIRRORVERSE!HP TIME!
Date: 2015-05-13 06:20 am (UTC)Quoted for truth. I've always found that JKR's claim here makes Dumbledore actually come off WORSE, in that it implies that he is literally such a weak human being that he would throw away the most fundamental moral principles to go chasing after a genocidal maniac. (In fact, it makes him worse just on the grounds that DH didn't mention genocide. In fact, he actively claims in DH 35 that he had no idea Grindelwald wanted to torture Muggles. So if he was really going 'yeah, genocide, that’ll work!' during that time, he is canonically lying through his teeth in King's Cross - while seeming deeply emotionally affected, etc.
Not implausible, given his other behavior, but surprising that an interview should have inadvertently canonized that he was lying through his teeth...
Re: MIRRORVERSE!HP TIME!
Date: 2015-05-13 06:12 am (UTC)It comes from here:
http://www.gazette-du-sorcier.com/J-K-Rowling-recoit-le-Prix-James,1037
The top part is the French version - scroll down to see the English translation.
Re: MIRRORVERSE!HP TIME!
Date: 2015-05-13 06:14 am (UTC)Remove the parentheses from this link:
gazette-du-sorcier(.)com(/)J-K-Rowling-recoit-le-Prix-James,1037
Re: MIRRORVERSE!HP TIME!
Date: 2015-05-24 09:50 pm (UTC)"Your point about wizard dominance being FOR THE MUGGLES' OWN GOOD - this, I think, is the crucial point. Yes, we have been given power, and yes, that power gives us the right to rule, but it also gives us responsibilities over the ruled. We must stress this point, it will be the foundation stone upon which we build. Where we are opposed, as we surely will be, this must be the basis of all our counter-arguments. We seize control FOR THE GREATER GOOD. And from this it follows that where we meet resistance, we must use only the force that is necessary and no more."(DH 18, all emphasis as in the original)
These are the words of an imperialist, but not the words of a genocidal maniac. Or maybe they are, because Churchill said, "I am strongly in favour of using poisoned gas against uncivilised tribes. The moral effect should be so good that the loss of life should be reduced to a minimum. It is not necessary to use only the most deadly gasses: gasses can be used which cause great inconvenience and would spread a lively terror and yet would leave no serious permanent effects on most of those affected." And Churchill was certainly a genocidal maniac with at least half the body count of Hitler to his name.
Re: MIRRORVERSE!HP TIME!
Date: 2015-05-31 10:33 pm (UTC)Ugh. That quote you found... Good heavens.