Draco Redemption Evidence

[Haggridd]

No: HPFGUIDX 16315

--- In HPforGrownups at y..., Penny & Bryce Linsenmayer <pennylin at s...> 
wrote:
> 
> 
> Haggridd wrote:
> 
> > Heidi said: > 1. In all of PoA and GoF, when Draco comes into 
their
> > compartment on the train, Crookshanks never reacts badly to him. 
Now,
> > if
> > Crookshanks has *no* kneazle blood, this is clearly irrelevant, 
but if
> > the car is part kneazle and therefore in posession of "an uncanny
> > ability to detect unsavoury or suspicious characters..." then the 
lack
> > of
> > > reaction to Draco means he is neither unsavoury or suspicious.
> 
> > > 2. It is *arguable* that when he saw Hermione in the woods at 
the
> > > World Cup, he was actually trying to warn her to get out of the 
way
> > > of the Death Eaters. It's about as arguable and as supported by
> > canon > evidence as any conclusion that Hermione likes Ron is.
> >
> > Hagridd said: Subtle is right!  I would take issue with you that 
the
> > evidence for a budding attraction for Hermione and Ron is less 
evident
> > in the canon.
> 
> Well, *I* would take issue with you that there's an attraction 
*between*
> the two of them.  There's as much canon evidence that Hermione likes
> *Harry* rather than Ron as there is that she returns Ron's feelings.
> :--)  Even all the die-hard shippers of both camps agree on that 
much.
> <g>  This will all be in the Romance FAQ.
> 
> > The suppositon that Crookshanks is a kneazle is another example of
> > taking an unsupported assumption and building upon it.
> 
> :::clears throat:::  Kneazles are in the *canon* (the FB book). 
Why 
is
> this assumption *unwarranted*?  It's at least as reasonable as any 
other
> assumptions one might make based solely on canon evidence.  Isn't 
it?  I
> don't get your point Hagridd.
> 
> It's fine to say that you don't buy the assumptions that Heidi is 
making
> in her arguments for a possible canon redemption of Draco.  But,
she 
is
> using canon evidence after all.  And, I don't think utilizing any 
canon
> evidence at one's disposal can be considered "unwarranted."  It
does 
not
> make sense (and isn't fair to those who don't read fanfic) to use 
fanfic
> to support canon arguments, but Heidi didn't do that.  She's using 
canon
> to illustrate a possible set-up for a Draco redemption.
> 
> Penny
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I take your point, Penny; it is a good one, but the mere existence of 
a beast like the kneazle is not sufficient.  There should be some 
textual "hook" upon which to hang your inspiration.  Why not then say 
that Draco is the illegitimate son of Snape and Narcissa Malfoy. 
Both persons are "in the canon"; Snape is a wizard, Narcissa is a 
witch; Snape favors Draco, but there is nothing even to hint that it 
might have happened.  I am not attacking Heidi.  I thinks she engaged 
in a very plausible and inspired bit of speculation; but the text 
doesn't support it, even obliquely.  I have similar pet ideas:  e.g., 
I think that Fred & George will become Unspeakables, and run the Joke 
Shoppe as a front. I don't claim that JKR has given any foreshadowing 
that this will transpire.

Haggridd