The Dullest Redemption Subplot Ever

[errolowl <nithya_rachel@hotmail.com>]

No: HPFGUIDX 51638



I wrote:
>Draco hasn't really done anything yet. But I think its that *yet* 
>that is under attack. He does seem setup on a fast track to 
>Deatheaterhood. I`d say redeem him from JKR!! ;-)

Elkins:
>Hee! Well, I guess my point there really was that people sometimes
>like to use the word "irredeemable" to refer to Draco, and often cite
>the fact that he dissed Cedric's memory on the train as proof 
>positive of this assessment.

<g> I got your point Elkins, and I agree that nothing Draco has done 
makes him "irredeemable", or indeed vile enough to require
drastic redemption. A tiny repentance will do. And yes, I firmly 
believe that *anyone*, however "evil" can be redeemed. I
guess that was just my way of saying that whatever Draco needs to be
`redeemed' from is yet to come from JKR. :-)

However, at this point in time he does have some things to *repent* 
of, including his bullying attitude and his lack of empathy.


Elkins:
>So far, Draco's envy, spite, malice, and so forth has led him to 
>commit a rather petty series of crimes: crimes little worse, in 
>fact, than those which Snape also engages in from time to time. 
>Verbal abuse. Bullying. Gloating over others' misfortunes. 
>Vindictive behavior. 

If, as is the common consensus, Draco is merely going along with his 
fathers principles, or trying to shock the people around him, I would 
add `failing to consider his own actions' under that list of
things to repent of as well. A crime committed out of ignorance is 
still a crime.

If on the other hand, Draco is aware of what he is doing and has 
consciously taken a stand at his father's side, he is well on his
way to needing
umm, redemption! ;)
Is there any real indication in canon whether Draco has done so or 
not? It can be argued both ways I guess.


Elkins:
>When confronted with *real* evil, however, he seems rather 
>at a loss. He flees from unicorn-blood-swilling Quirrellmorts and 
>dementors on trains. He loiters around in the woods while his father 
>and all of his DE buddies harass the muggles and he shows not the 
>slightest sign of interest in actually watching what they are doing. 
>He's not craning his neck to watch the dangling muggles and getting 
>off on what is happening to them. Instead, he's just hanging around 
>in the forest and throwing strangely ambiguously phrased taunts in 
>the Trio's general direction.

None of which shows me that he is *not* capable of real evil! <g> The 
above instances show his high sense of self-preservation. Dark shapes 
in the forbidden forest and soul-sucking dementors *are* things to 
flee from. Any wizard would have, given the choice. The only ones who 
would want to confront these creatures would be the good guys. There 
is nothing that says dark wizards personally get along well with the 
dementors! And Draco *was* watching the muggle assault. Daddy could 
have told him to stop getting underfoot (which if we believe the 
movie, he could do all the time) but to watch and learn from a safe 
distance.

No, I'm not saying these are indications of his capacity for real 
evil – just that they're not disqualifications. :-)

Elkins:
>So when Dicentra writes, for example:
>
>> To this I would add that evil has to do what you want, not just 
>> what you do. If you continually *want* to do evil deeds over good 
>> ones, you're evil, even if you don't actually do them.
>
>I would have to disagree. I think that if you override your desire 
>to do evil deeds, then you are doing well, no matter how badly you 
>may want to be doing them.


I agree with you Elkins. *Wanting* to do an evil deed, or having the 
temptation to do evil is not Evil in of itself. But I read
Dicentra's comment as evil *intent* - and in my naivety I put
that as having given in to that want and to fully intend to do evil, 
willingly. That makes me uncomfortable because I attribute serious 
issues to it – but it still hasn't been manifested as evil.
Kind of like minority report where intent to commit the crime is 
crime enough.

Me:
>> The theme here would be "save him from his future". 
Elkins:
>Yes. I agree that right now this is precisely what Draco needs to be 
>saved from. Although really, he often strikes me as far more in 
>danger of a nervous breakdown than of becoming Ever So Evil in the 
>classic sense.

Hee! How so Elkins? I see Draco as a strong character, evil or not. I 
wouldn't make him a candidate for a nervous breakdown...I'd
be interested in your diagnosis!

But I don't see him as becoming ever-so-evil in the classic sense 
either. I compare him to what Tom Riddle would have been like at the 
same age and find Draco curiously lacking in initiative to perpetuate 
evil. Besides, if Harry wins out for good, a Dark Lord would not be a 
comfortable thing for Draco to be in the future.


>> But he's cast in the negative quadrant of the storyline, so I 
>>guess he's fair game for a `redemption theory' however lame.
>
>Oh, indeed! And I didn't mean to suggest at all that the entire 
>topic was lame or anything. Not in the least! I was just hoping to 
>point out that so far, the kid just hasn't really *done* anything 
>all that terrible. His sins exist more in the realms of the 
>potential than in the actual at this point in the story, IMO.


You didn't say the topic was lame – I did! And not the
*entire topic* was limping, mind you...just it's relevance to
Draco's actions to date. Which is what I think we both are
saying. <g>.He's fair game nevertheless.

Errol
Whose instinctive reading of Draco was dismissive as a would-be tough 
guy, and who really wouldn't be getting steeped in these evil 
discussions <G> if June would just hurry up and get here!