Draco Malfoy Is Ever So Lame & A Taste of Moody

[cindysphynx]

No: HPFGUIDX 39089

Oh, Elkins' post has been really very helpful.  All this time I 
*knew* I didn't care for Draco, but I couldn't easily put my finger 
on the reason.  But now I know – Draco is Ever So Lame!  Boy, that 
just rolls right off the tongue, doesn't it?  ;-)

And as an extra special bonus, I am being served a healthy portion 
of Draco is Ever So Dead!  Is it possible to order up seconds of 
that one?

As for Sympathetic!Draco?  Er, I'll get to him in a minute.

**************

Elkins wrote (about Draco's effectiveness as Peer Rival):

> As the story currently stands, Draco is indeed presented very much 
>as Harry's rival, his peer antagonist.  That is his ostensible 
>narrative function within the text.  And yet, he strikes me as far 
>too *weak* a character to really fulfill this role in at all a 
>satisfying manner.  

Elkins goes on to list a tremendous number of ways in which Draco is 
Weak.  A Screw-up.  Powerless.  So far, so good.

Allow me to pile on, if I might.  ;-)

Draco's Lameness even extends to his friends.  Harry gets Ron and 
Hermione – both talented, capable, brave, heroic (despite the issues 
I have with Hermione's characterization).  Draco gets, um, Crabbe 
and Goyle, who are given nothing whatever to do and are described in 
consistently unfavorable ways.  

Draco's Lameness extends right up his family tree, too.  Lucius 
doesn't fare well at all against James Potter, does he?  James is 
Heroic (having saved Snape from a werewolf), athletic (being good at 
Quiddich) and Popular.  James got the capable Lily; Lucius got 
Narcissus.  Lucius, despite being alive and well, appears not even 
to have an *occupation*.

So what conclusion should we draw from all of this?  Elkins proposes 
that JKR might not intend for Draco to be just the Peer Antagonist:

Elkins:

> It therefore becomes difficult to avoid the nagging suspicion that 
> perhaps Draco is *not,* in fact, really meant to serve as Harry's 
> peer antagonist throughout the entire series at all, that perhaps 
>JKR may indeed have some slightly different role planned for him by 
> series' end.

Oh, I dearly hope you're right.  `Cause by the end of Book 4, I was 
really ready to skip Harry's interactions with Draco.  I mean, JKR 
has Draco do little in these confrontations other than heckle, which 
gets old fast. 

But, I fear, I'm not seeing Redeemable!Draco.  I think JKR is 
writing Draco as a flat cariacature with no redeeming 
characteristics at all at the moment.  That's how I see him, 
anyway.  

So if JKR were really intending to redeem Draco, then why has she 
deliberately dug herself into such a very deep hole?  Wouldn't the 
task of redeeming Draco have been much easier (and ultimately more 
believable) if JKR had started a bit closer to the finish line?  For 
the anti-Draco readers (and I *can't* be the only one out there), it 
would take a *tremendous* event for my sympathies to swing 
dramatically in his direction.  The fact that Draco is currently 
written as so far from redemption signals to me that JKR isn't going 
to even *try* to redeem him.  In other words, I suspect that if she 
is "cheating" in any direction with Draco, she is cheating in the 
direction of Non-Redeemable!Draco rather than Redeemable!Draco.

Put differently, I think JKR is just playing it safe.  Harry is the 
hero, of course, so Draco has to fare worse than Harry overall.  
Allowing Draco to win from time to time, granting him some power and 
sympathy, might make for a better characterization, true.  But then 
again, perhaps JKR knows that the series won't work *at all* if she 
gets this wrong and gives Draco too much in the way of 
power/sympathy.  So she plays it safe by pushing him far from 
Sympathetic and Redeemable, IMHO, which will make things easier when 
it time for Draco to spiral into True Voldemort-Style Wickedness.

Elkins:

> I don't even really believe that he's at all popular, although I 
>know that many people have come to the opposite conclusion.  

Ah, but there might be one area, one very important area, in which 
Draco is more successful than Harry – romance.  Harry certainly has 
certain advantages in this area.  He wins at sport.  He saves 
people's lives.  He gets hurt.  Harry has it all working for him.

But who gets a *real* date for the Yule Ball?  Well, Harry and Draco 
both find escorts.  But Harry, having been turned down by the one 
girl he finds attractive, is with someone he doesn't have any real 
feelings for and who he barely knows.  Draco, on the other hand, is 
with Pansy, who, while no looker, is someone with whom Draco 
frequently interacts.  Draco, it seems, is Lucky In Love.

Elkins:

> As a reader, therefore, my reaction to Draco in his narrative role 
>as Harry's peer rival is primarily one of intense *frustration.*  
>It just doesn't seem right to me.  It doesn't work.  It's not a 
>fair enough contest.  Draco strikes me as so hopelessly outclassed 
>on every conceivable level that I simply can't take him at all 
>seriously as Harry's peer antagonist.  Harry already has him licked 
>on all fronts, as far as I'm concerned, so if that's really all that
> Draco is there to do, then what on earth is the *point* of him?

I find it interesting that so many people answer this question 
("What is the point of Draco?)" with Redeemable!Draco.  I'm thinking 
more along the lines of GoingToHellOnASled!Draco.  You know, DE!
Draco, who will become increasingly Evil and will take his place 
among the DEs who can't shoot straight.  The disloyal, cowardly 
DEs.  The "Shrieking During Cruciatus" DEs.  

Why isn't it that the Train Stomp could well be the turning point 
for Draco?  To date, he has been Evil but Harmless and Powerless.  
Isn't Draco's future much more likely to be having JKR take him 
farther down the path of Evil?  That would explain why she started 
off so far down that path to begin with.  She isn't planning some 
Miraculous Redemption.  She just got a head start on making Draco 
Ever So Evil.

Heck, just for fun, one could draw parallels between the Train Stomp 
and the Prank.  If one likes to speculate that Snape became a DE 
largely because of Dumbledore's non-reaction to the Prank, then 
perhaps Draco will be pushed toward Evil if Dumbledore doesn't 
discipline the Trio for the Train Stomp?  And I don't have a crystal 
ball or anything, but I really don't see Dumbledore disciplining the 
Trio for the Train Stomp.  Nope, can't see it happening.  Which will 
give us Draco the Bitter Future DE.

After all, Draco is being set up as marginally competent and 
powerless.  And who else do we know who was marginally competent and 
powerless?  Peter, that's who.  I wonder if, like Peter, Draco will 
conclude that the best way to distinguish himself is by turning to 
Evil.

**************

OK, enough about Redeemable!Draco.  On to why all of these male 
characters are so darn Sexy!  Let me re-arrange Elkins' post a bit 
to get right to the Meat of this thing:  ;-)

Elkins:

> What "Hurt-Comfort" comes down to is the fact that women are just 
>plain Bent, and adolescent girls even more so.  They *like* to see 
>male characters suffer, so long as they do so with some degree of 
>manly dignity, because it turns them on.  Male vulnerability 
>garners their sympathy, and it also kind of excites them.  They 
>like it.  No one ever wants to 'fess up to this, but it's true.  

Oh, thank goodness!  I thought I was losing my mind there.  I was 
starting to wonder what was *wrong* with me!  And now I know.  I 
simply succumbed to the "Hurt-Comfort" phenomenon.  Better yet, it's 
not even my fault!  JKR did it to me *on purpose*!

<nods vigorously>

Elkins (on Snape, Sirius, Lupin):

>All three of those characters have erotic appeal primarily because 
>they all *suffer* so much.  Lupin's kindness wouldn't alone be 
>sufficient to make him so sexy; it's all of that exhaustion and 
>illness and emotional damage that really nets in the fans.  Sirius 
>without all those years spent in Azkaban wouldn't have nearly the 
>following that he has.  And Snape...well, it's all that angst that 
>does it, right? 

Oh, wow!  This explains Hagrid and Dumbledore, too!  Does Hagrid 
ever get physically hurt?  Nope, nothing comes to mind.  Oh sure, he 
was unjustly accused in CoS and when he was expelled long ago, but 
that is *nothing* compared to the horrors visited upon Sirius and 
Lupin.  And Dumbledore?  Uh, having a scar on his leg that looks 
like a map of the underground doesn't do it for me *at all* because 
we don't know how he got it.  No, Dumbledore doesn't get hurt 
either.  Heck, I have deeper "Hurt Compassion" feelings for 
Professor Kettleburn than Hagrid or Dumbledore.

Same thing for all of the male characters over whom women do not 
swoon:  Arthur Weasley, Percy, the Twins, Vernon.  No heinous 
injuries = no sex appeal.  Now, Charlie Weasley has potential, what 
with having that big shiny dragon burn on his arm.  

<gazes longingly out window dreaming of visibly scarred and wounded 
men>

Elkins:

> Yeah, I think that JKR knows what she's doing with that one.  I 
>think she knew full well that all the adolescent girls were just 
>going to swoon in guilt-ridden sadistic crush-mode the second that 
>she smacked poor Harry with all of that Cruciatus in the graveyard, 
>and I think that she knew exactly what she was doing when she 
>started beating out her tune on that "Harry can't cry" drum, too.  


<lights cigarette>

But . . . but . . . there is one male character who just doesn't fit 
the pattern at all:  Moody.  Now, I just love Moody because I'm 
drawn to his power and Toughness.  And he sure has been injured 
enough times.  And he is so alone and desperately needs the love of 
a good woman and all. 

But good grief, is there a single person out there who can make the 
case that Moody is *sexy*?  I mean it is difficult to even *type* 
Sexy!Moody.

So why is that?  Moody suffers, both before GoF and during GoF.  But 
for some reason, I worry that I might not even *like* Real Moody, 
let alone sympathize with him.  It does seem that JKR is trying to 
show him hurt yet brave about it.  JKR really lays it on 
thick:  "Stunned . . . very weak. . . . he's freezing."  Later, 
Moody is in the hospital and is "motionless."  Moody fights bravely 
before being subdued by Crouch Jr. and Wormtail.  Normally, I would 
eat this stuff up.  But it doesn't work at all if JKR is trying to 
set up Moody as another Lupin or Sirius Sympathetic Male Character.  

Why not?  And why is Moody's portrayal at the staff table "extremely 
twitchy, jumping every time someone spoke to him" so 
unsatisfactory?  Was that JKR's attempt to make sure that we don't 
begin to identify to closely with Moody?  Is he supposed to be 
something other than heroic, hmmmmm?  And most importantly, is there 
any way I can twist this canon to support Ever So Evil Moody?  ;-)

Elkins:

>I even think it possible that she might have had some inkling of 
>what she was up to when she kicked Snape's emotional legs out from 
>under him for just a second there in "The Egg and the Eye." 

I don't know.  I think JKR needs to have Snape really take a beating 
before he'll make it into the same league as Lupin or Sirius.  
Grabbing his arm in the "The Egg and the Eye" doesn't make it.  
That's one reason why I don't quite get all of the Sexy!Snape 
feeling on the list.  If we add a few Cruciatus Curses into the mix, 
Snape might rise to the level of Sirius and Lupin.  But not yet.  
Not by a long shot.  Maybe later.

Elkins:

> For one thing, she never lets Draco win.  <snip>  
> And that is sympathetic.  It's sympathetic because for the most 
>part, people prefer to root for underdogs and losers, especially 
>ones who have pluck and always get back on their feet again no 
>matter how many times they're knocked down.  

Yes, but is the underdog really sympathetic when the victor is 
always the hero?  I mean, Draco usually plays the loser in 
comparison to Harry (and Hermione, to a lesser extent).  In 
contrast, Draco gets Ron's goat on a regular basis.  Draco triumphs 
over other Slytherins and becomes the Seeker.  Draco triumphs over 
Neville in the Rememberall incident.  Draco triumphs over Hagrid in 
the Buckbeak incident, losing out in the end to Harry, not Hagrid.  

So this supports my preferred reading of Draco – that he isn't 
sympathetic or being set up for redemption.  His purpose is only to 
make Harry look good and give Harry someone to beat.  If Draco 
changes, then who will fulfill that role in the next three books?

No, I think we're struck with Ever So Lame Draco, but we can dream 
of Ever So Evil Draco.

Elkins:

> This phenomenon, which sometimes goes by the name "Sympathy For 
>the Devil," can be fought.  <snip>  No particular effort is being 
>made to counteract Sympathy For the Devil when it comes to Draco, 
>which does sort of make you wonder whether part of the reason for 
>this might not be that the author herself really doesn't *want* for 
>him to forfeit all of that nice reader sympathy that he gets by 
>virtue of being marked as the designated loser.  

Ah, but there's a big difference between Draco and Voldemort.  JKR 
is much more constrained by reality in writing Draco, I think.  
Draco *can't* be allowed to do anything truly monstrous because if 
he did, the reader would be jolted into wondering how Draco can get 
away with it without being expelled.  Voldemort, of course, is 
operating outside the proper wizarding world.  So he can be a 
monster, and he is.

Personally, I am hoping that the next three books are set outside of 
Hogwarts.  Then Draco will be free to spread his Ever So Evil 
wings.  If he doesn't, then we'll know that the reason isn't the 
constraints of the Hogwarts setting.

So how can we rule out the possibility that JKR is writing these 
sympathetic Draco characteristics as a nod to believability rather 
than to generate any real sympathy in the reader?

Cindy (hoping Elkins will someday write an essay making me feel 
better about my *issues* with Hagrid)