On Draco (characterization, abuse), topics in general, and canon

[Tandy, Heidi]

No: HPFGUIDX 21101

Magda wrote:

> 
> Apologies to Draco fans up front but I can't see Draco having a big
> part to play in future books or having any kind of major personal
> transformation to the "good side".

> Draco is painted with strokes that are too broad to make him a
> carefully delineated character.  He's more of a type ("spoiled rich
> brat") than a real person.

But a lot of the "major-minor" characters (those with not many lines but a
presence that is visible in all 4 books to date) have the capability of
becoming much more - look at Ginny - yes, she had a role in Book 2, but a
lot of that role was to be unconscious while Harry battled Riddle and the
basilisk. And until the very end of Book 3, Snape was not a carefully
delineated character at all - he was the Mean Teacher, really. And it was
only in Book 4 that we got a picture of some of the Nuances of Snape

Amy wrote:
"BTW, as you have already discovered, the tough thing about defending 
Lucius is that not only do most people hate Lucius, but those who you might 
think would be your natural allies, the Defenders of Draco, are going to 
try to shoot you down also because their theories depend upon Lucius being 
an insane, abusive, most likely sexually-abusing father."

It all depends on how  you define insane. Obviously, he's not insane under
the M'Naughton rule - he does know where he is & what is happening, and he
doesn't think, in CoS, that he's handing a jelly donut to a puppy dog when
he gives Riddle's diary to Ginny. You can argue that he has a mental illness
- possibly antisocial personality disorder, which is characterized by a lack
of regard for the moral or legal standards in the culture. But that would
require the moral and/or legal standards in the wizarding world to think
badly of those prejudiced against house elves and muggle-born wizards &
witches, and I'm not perfectly sure that he is so diametrically outside the
moral & legal standards that he would match that definition in the wizarding
culture, which is, of course, the only one that counts here. 
Abusive? Yes, I think he is - at least psychologically abusive - the scene
in CoS at Mr Borgin provides at least a hook to hang that theory on. But I
don't defend the idea that Draco may not end up as a Bad Death Eater Guy
based solely on the impression of evilness that Lucius gives - but if he
isn't going to end up Bad, then he's going to have to break with Lucius at
some point, mentally and physically and emotionally. 



DM wrote:
> Ack.  My apologies.  I guess I didn't read my "Welcome to 
> HPforGrownups" e-mail closely enough.  I thought speculation was okay 
> (and is usually a good topic for discussion).  In my mind, 
> I 'know.'  Being a fanfiction writer (which many of us are), cannon 
> is always a kind of hazy line to cross (since so many things can be 
> read into any series).  Sorry if I've offended anyone's sensibilities 
> here.  I'll be more careful in the future.

I don't think this is something that's so clearly spelled out in the Welcome
message (hey, elves - is this something we want to add to our general
checklist for Elflings?). Speculation is wonderful and ok and all those
other good things. I write (and beta-read) fanfic as well, and I personally
feel (IMHO and all) that anything can be done in fanfic as long as you have
canon backup for it. In other words, since JKR has said in a chat that Ron's
birthday is March 1, anyone who writes fanfic after that chat *must* have
his birthday then. Or since she wrote in canon that Angelina is black,
anyone who writes fanfic after GoF came out *must* have her as being black.
But if you want to speculate as to how wizards travel long distances based
on the one line in QTTA that many wizards do not apparate long distances and
therefore before brooms were comfortable, they traveled by ship, all the
better for you!
Just sprinkle your posts with a few IMHO and AFAIK and drop the "know" and
replace it with "think" or "believe" or "have concluded that it is possible
that..." and you'll be alright. 

PurpleFanta wrote
> As a new member, I am sure i have done the same.  But IMHO, with all 
> the new people, I am sure that there are lots of new ideas on old 
> topics.  i don't think it is possible to exist as a discussion group 
> and not bring up topics time and time again.  When I have a question, 
> I want to know what this group thinks now... not what they decided a 
> few months ago.  Perhaps, I have no right to make this request, but 
> please don't yell "check the archives" everytime us newbies have 
> question...  it makes me long for a Cheering Charm...

For discussion topics, that's a perfectly reasonable request. For fact
questions, like When is Ron's Birthday (see above) or "Which House Is
Flitwick Head Of (ravenclaw, in case someoene forgot) there's nothing to
discuss and there are no ideas to have. There is information from JKR which
is either in the archives or in Steve's Lexicon (linked to from the front
page of the yahoogroup) and when it comes to things like that, people should
do a simple search, like RON BIRTHDAY, and get the info they need. I haven't
noticed many "stiffles" of dicsussion, just pointers to the archives for
"fact" questions