Draco's Crimes & Misdemeanors

[Cindy C. <cindysphynx@comcast.net>]

No: HPFGUIDX 51566

Evil!Draco, huh?  I think we already established that Draco is Ever 
So Lame, but is he Ever So Evil?

Darn skippy, he is!  ;-)

Diana wrote:

> I do not feel sorry for Draco, Crabbe and Goyle one bit. Have you
> forgotten how evil Draco and company are? 

Heidi replied:

>Evil? Diana's post was one of a few that caused me to want to 
>reiterate why I just can't see Draco, Crabbe or Goyle as evil – 


Personally, I don't have a teaspoon of doubt about Draco's Evil 
nature.  Draco presents the unusual case where there's really not a 
great deal of ambiguity surrounding most of his actions.  He doesn't 
try to conceal what he is doing or why.  He declares his motives.  
That makes the question an easy one, for me anyway.  

See, to be Evil does not require one to be the epitome of evil.  One 
needn't be Supremely Evil.  I think one can be Evil *under the 
circumstances.*  One can be Evil when compared to others, I 
suppose.  After all, "evil" is rather broadly defined, isn't it?

Evil is defined as "Morally bad or wrong; wicked.  Causing ruin, 
injury or pain; harmful.  Purportedly bad or blameworthy.  
*Characterized by anger or spite; malicious.*" (emphasis mine).

Spiteful?  Malicious?  Causing injury or pain (and at times 
attempting to do so but being foiled in the attempt)?  Yup, that's 
our Draco.

Heidi:

>I have a hard time determining that someone 14 years – and younger, 
>as Draco was in many of the examples you give below, is evil 
>without said CHILD actually killing someone in cold blood, or at 
>least trying to (in other words, 16 year old Tom would've been evil 
>even if the basilisk hadn't actually killed anyone, but Ginny 
>wouldn't've been even if the basilisk had managed to kill anyone). 

Oh, I think someone 14 years old can be Evil.  Most definitely.  A 
14-year old can be an Evil *child.*  In other words, the child might 
not have the skill, opportunity, or fortitude to commit the heinous 
act of murder, but they can certainly commit child-sized evil.  A 14-
year old who tortures a defenseless animal for sport is evil, just 
to provide one easy example.  Even if no one is killed in cold 
blood.  Thus, the fact that one can imagine more serious evil 
doesn't excuse the evil that the child *can* commit, IMHO.

So is Draco evil?

Yup.  He does his level best, and at times he seems primarily 
limited by his own incompetence and lack of skill.  For instance:

Draco fully intended to curse Harry in the back in GoF.  That's 
Evil, but incompetent evil.

Draco fully intended to cause Harry to fall from his broom in PoA.  
Evil, but incompetent and unsuccessful evil.


Heidi:

>Do insults by an 11 year old smack of evil? 
>If you think that they do, then do you also think that insults by 
>Snape show that he is evil? 
>If not, then why not? Or are they something on the "badness level" 
>that isn't quite as low as evil is?


Those are interesting questions.  My own answers are that, yes, 
insults by a child can smack of evil.  It really does depend on the 
circumstances, of course.  Knowledge of someone's vulnerability to 
the insult is a key factor in my mind in evaluating an evil insult.  
When Draco calls Hermione a mudblood, he has all of the information 
he needs to know this is an evil act.  He knows Hermione's heritage, 
he knows his own heritage, he did it with malice in public for the 
sole purpose of hurting Hermione.  Therefore Evil.

Heidi:

>What is evil about being attacked by a creature that *really* is too
>dangerous to put around a crowd of thirteen year olds, according to
>Fantastic Beasts & Where to Find Them, and then complaining to law
>enforcement about said attack and creature? We don't actually KNOW 
>that he did anything else 

Well, yes, we do know Draco did something else.  We know he took 
*pleasure* in the prospect of Hagrid losing his job.  Had Draco not 
gloated, we would have no reason to question Draco's motives, and he 
would be within his rights to complain about the attack.  But once 
he admits his motives are something else -– once he takes pleasure 
in the potential for suffering of Hagrid and/or Buckbeak, I think he 
is being malicious.  I also begin to wonder whether he is exploiting 
the situation to cause Hagrid's dismissal.  Therefore Evil.

And then there is the taunting of Harry on the train.  Draco 
committed a malicious act -– disrespecting Cedric's memory for the 
purpose of hurting those who cared for him.  Therefore Evil.

And there's more.  In the train scene, Draco basically took a 
position in support of the forces of Evil.  Supporting Evil (and 
conversely failing to support the forces of good) is in itself Evil, 
IMHO, and in that situation, Draco said what he said *solely* to be 
malicious and cause pain.  Therefore Evil.

Heidi:

>If you're going to walk away from GoF convinced that fourteen (or at
>least no more than fifteen) year old Draco is evil, and cite to 
>things he did as an eleven or twelve year old, do you also feel 
>that Sirius is evil for being a grown man, and insulting Snape? Or 
>for the insults he (likely) threw at Snape as a teenager? Or for 
>the Prank itself? 

Well, one thing Draco has that Sirius (and other characters) does 
not have is a *pattern* of Evil.  That in my mind is the trouble 
with attempting to excuse Draco's repeated malicious, unkind 
conduct.  Add in the fact that Draco never attempts to correct his 
wrongs or mitigate their impact and the fact that he has declared 
his allegiance to the Evil forces of Voldemort and I think it 
becomes clear that Draco is the most Evil student at Hogwarts and, 
when he grows up a bit, he may well wind up being one of the more 
Evil characters in canon.

One can always hope so, anyway.  ;-)

Cindy