Draco's Crimes & Misdemeanors

[Diana <dianasdolls@yahoo.com>]

No: HPFGUIDX 51640

Thanks for the great response Heidi!  I love good debates - they 
exercise the mind and make a person hone their arguments and comb 
the English language for the right words to make a solid argument!

Heidi wrote:
> 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?
> And, more particularly to Diana, why do you think that Draco 
actually knows that Lucius is involved in the petrifications in CoS? 
> I look through canon and can't see any reason for Draco to think 
that Lucius does know what's going on - just that Lucius wants him 
to stay out of it. He even says his father told him to stay out of 
it. DO you feel this way because Draco knows that the chamber was 
last opened after Lucius' time at Hogwarts? From the somewhat-
unguarded conversation in the dungeons (I say "somewhat" because 
he's not actually alone at the time) it seems perfectly clear to me 
that Draco has no idea what is attacking the students, or, in fact, 
that Lucius was involved in the creation of the instant situation. 
What in that conversation gives you the opposite impression? 

Now me:
I don't think the insults thrown out by regular eleven-year-olds 
smack of evil, but Draco is guilty of much more than nasty insults.  
Do you honestly feel that Draco's "You'll be next, mudbloods!" in 
CoS wasn't evil?  Unfortunately, eleven-year-olds *can* be evil, 
even in the real world.  There have been real-life cases, one I 
remember in particular of two boys around this age who lured a 
little girl away from her parents and then beat her to death.  Why?  
Because they wanted to see what it was like to kill someone.  They 
had no remorse and would do it again.  They were, by my definition 
of the word, evil.
How I define evil goes beyond the basic dictionary meanings and is 
not relegated to plots to take over the world.  To me, evil is the 
conscious decision to go against what is good, to purposely cause 
injury, pain and/or death to another person or living thing purely 
to suit your whim or satisfy your desire to do so.  An evil person 
will consistently choose the *wrong* side.  An evil person shows a 
*pattern* of choosing to go against the good.  And I don't care what 
Voldemort says, there is 'good' and there is 'evil' and they are not 
one and the same, though the line can sometimes be blurred [see 
Barty Crouch, Sr. for the best example of this].  A good person can 
do an evil thing and not be evil, but unlike an evil person, they 
will regret what they did and not do it again.  
I also think there is another kind of evil - and these are truly the 
most dangerous kind of evil. There are people who have no concept of 
what is good and what is evil; people who have no conscience or 
moral compass whatsoever.  Voldemort is this type of person.  To a 
truly amoral person, killing someone is no big deal - sort of like 
buying groceries at the store- an everyday occurance requiring very 
little thought.  Amoral people do not suffer remorse or guilt or 
even think of what they did in terms of good or bad.  Thankfully, 
these type of people are *very* rare, but they do exist.     
As for Draco's bigoted comments, let me provide an example.  Let's 
put Draco in the Civil War south and change his hatred of muggle-
born wizards into racism against blacks.  If he knew about a lynch 
mob roaming around town (and his had father set them in motion) and 
knew details which would help to stop them from hanging every black 
person they managed to run across at night, yet he kept silent and 
even openly rooted for them to kill as many black people as possible 
and wished he could join them as they rampaged, would his actions be 
excused as just the bragging of a little boy?  I sure wouldn't see 
it that way - evil does not have an age line built around it like 
the Goblet of Fire.  Granted, Draco's evil is being taught to him by 
his parents (father for sure also evil, of course), but that does 
not excuse his actions.  I've known children, even as young as 
eleven who have thrown off the burden of bigotry and diverged in 
their beliefs from their parents.  I certainly wouldn't excuse the 
parents who teach their children to hate, even though it is likely 
that the parents' own parents passed on the bigotry to them in the 
first place.  
It is laid out in canon that Lucius initiated the opening of the 
chamber of secrets and knows who opened it.  All quotes are taken 
from the American hardback edition of CoS.

"[Lucius] reached into Ginny's cauldron and extracted from amid the 
glossy Lockhart books, a very old, very battered copy of A 
Beginner's Guide to Transfiguration." Pg. 62
[Lucius and Arther Weasley fight.]
"He was still holding Ginny's old Transfiguration book.  He thrust 
it at her, his eyes glittering with malice.  'Here, girl-take your 
book- it's the best your father can give you-'  Pulling himeself out 
of Hagrid's grip he beckoned to Draco and swept from the shop." Pg. 
63
"...Harry, thinking fast, said, 'You must have some idea who's 
behind it all...'
'You know I haven't, Goyle, how many times do I have to tell you?' 
snapped Malfoy.  'And father won't tell me *anything* about the last 
time the Chamber was opened either.  Of course, it was fifty years 
ago, so it was before his time, but he knows all about it, and he 
says that it was all kept quiet and it'll look suspicious if I know 
too much about it.  But I know one thing - last time the Chamber of 
Secrets was opened, a Mudblood *died*.  So I bet it's a matter of 
time before one of them's killed this time...I hope it's Granger,' 
he said with relish."  Pg. 223
"[Draco] shifted restlessly in his chair and said, 'Father says to 
keep my head down and let the Heir of Slytherin get on with it.  He 
says the school needs ridding of all the Mudblood filth, but not to 
get mixed up in it.  Of course, he's got a lot on his plate at the 
moment.  You know the Ministry of Magic raided our manor last week?" 
Pg. 224
"'I d-didn't know,' sobbed Ginny.  'I found it inside one of the 
books Mum got me.  I th-thought someone had just left it in there 
and forgotten about it-'"  Pg. 330
"'So-have you stopped the attacks yet?' he sneered.  'Have you 
caught the culprit?'
'We have,' said Dumbledore, with a smile.
'*Well?*' said Mr Malfoy sharply.  'Who is it?'
'The same person as last time Lucius,' said Dumbledore. 'But this 
time, Lord Voldemort was acting through somebody else.  By means of 
this diary.'
He held up the small black book with the large hold through the 
center, watching Mr. Malfoy closely.  Harry, however, was watching 
Dobby.
The elf was doing something very odd.  His great eyes fixed 
meaningfully on Harry, he kept pointing at the diary, then at Mr. 
Malfoy, and then hitting himself hard on the head with his fist.
'I see...' said Mr. Malfoy slowly to Dumbledore.
'A clever plan,' said Dumbledore in a level voice, still staring Mr. 
Malfoy straight in the eye, 'Because if Harry here' -Mr Malfoy shot 
Harry a swift, sharp look- 'and his friend Ron hadn't discovered 
this book, why - Ginny Weasley might have taken all the blame.  No 
one would ever have been able to prove she hadn't acted of her own 
free will...'
Mr Malfoy said nothing.  His face was suddenly masklike.
'And imagine,' Dumbledore went on, 'what might have happened 
then...The Weasleys are one of our most prominent pure-blood 
families.  Imagine the effect on Arthur Weasley and his Muggle 
Protection Act, if his own daughter was discovered attacking and 
killing Muggle-borns.. Very fortunate the diary was discovered, and 
Riddle's memories wiped from it.  Who knows what the consequences 
might have been otherwise...'  
Mr. Malfoy forced himself to speak.
'Very fortunate,' he said stiffly.
And still, behind his back, Dobby was pointing, first to the diary, 
the to Lucius Malfoy, then punching himself in the head.
And Harry suddenly understood.  He nodded at Dobby, and Dobby backed 
into a corner, now twisting his years in punishment.
'Don't you want to know how Ginny got hold of that diary, Mr. 
Malfoy? said Harry.
Lucius Malfoy rounded on him.
'How would I know how the stupid little girl got hold of it?' he 
said.
'Because you gave it to her,' said Harry.  'In Flourish and Blotts.  
You picked up her old Transfigurations book and slipped the diary 
inside it, didn't you?'
He saw Mr. Malfoy's white hands clench and unclench.
'Prove it,' he hissed.
'Oh, no one will be able to do that,' said Dumbledore, smiling at 
Harry.  'Not now that Riddle has vanished from the book.  On the 
other hand, I would advise you, Lucius, not go to giving out any 
more of Lord Voldemort's old school things.  If any more of them 
find their way into innocent hands, I think Arthur Weasley, for one, 
will make sure they are traced back to you...'"  Pgs. 335, 336 & 337

It is my speculation, but I would say that Lucius *must* have 
conversed with Riddle, even if just briefly, through the diary 
before he gave the book to Ginny.  Lucius knew that the person 
[Hagrid] publicly 'blamed' for the opening of the chamber fifty 
years before was expelled.  Unless Voldemort grew nostalgic about 
his school days with his DEs over a butterbeer, which I highly 
doubt, Lucius must have found that out from Riddle in the diary.  
Lucius must have known what the diary was and what it could do [open 
the Chamber of Secrets, kill/injure/frame Ginny Weasley] or he 
wouldn't have bothered to slip the diary to Ginny in the first 
place.  He knew what kind of dangerous Dark object he was giving to 
an innocent eleven-year-old girl and the consequences it would have -
numerous deaths of students - Muggle-born students.  
Draco knows that Lucius knows all the details about the CoS because 
he tells Crabbe and Goyle [really Ron and Harry in disquise] that 
his father "knows all about it".  Given that Lucius *gave* Ginny the 
book in the first place and hoped that Ginny, regardless of her 
death in the end, would end up being blamed for killing students by 
opening the CoS and siccing the beast inside on Muggle-borns, Draco 
is correct in his bragging statements to Harry and Ron.  I am quite 
sure that Lucius did not tell Draco specifically about the diary and 
the fact he slipped it to Ginny in Flourish and Blotts.  

Heidi wrote:
> 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 (yes, he should've been paying attention 
more, but I cannot believe that you'd allege that not paying 
attention in class is *evil). 

Now me: 
Probably not your intent, but your description makes it sound like 
Hagrid is some malevolent fiend who brought the equivalent of a 
rabid dog to the lesson and Draco was just informing the authorities 
so no one gets hurt in the future.  We all know that is not what 
happened.  And Draco and his father didn't just complain about the 
attack, Draco faked that his arm injury lasted for THREE months!  
Madame Pomfrey heeled his cut and it was painfree the same day it 
occured.  Draco delighted in Lucius pressuring the governors and MoM 
into declaring Buckbeak a dangerous creature that deserved it's head 
be cut off!  And they did their level best to get Hagrid fired.  
Sure hippogriffs *are* dangerous, but I didn't see any of the other 
students getting slashed, because no one else insulted the 
hippogriff.  Draco didn't pay attention in Hagrid's class because he 
was blatantly showing disrespect for Hagrid, not because he was 
daydreaming or it was a simple mistake.  Draco is hardly blameless 
in this incident.  The children were allowed to handle Mandrakes, 
who's cries can kill you, for goodness sake! [I know, not the 
seedlings, but they'll still knock you out cold for hours], in 
Herbology!  I don't think Professor Sprout was in danger of Neville 
Longbottom trying to get her fired just because she left him on the 
floor after fainted out in class.  Look at Lockhart's dueling club 
in Cos for another example.  Lockhart was a ninny, but I didn't see 
any of the students running to Dumbledore or the school governors 
about how dangerous the dueling club was after the smoke cleared and 
all the deuling pairs had done a lot more to each other than just 
practice a disarming spell.  Some of the lessons at Hogwarts *are* 
dangerous, but if the students don't pay attention, they're even 
more dangerous.  
 
Heidi wrote:
> We also don't know that he was lying to Rita about Hagrid, Harry or
> Hermione. We only know what she reported - and even if you take 
those comments as things he actually said... Well, let's put it this 
way - if a reporter asked Harry and/or Ron what they thought of 
Snape, I do wonder what they would say, and how it would be written 
up. 

Now me:
Rita Skeeter *could* be lying, but I seriously doubt she'd bother to 
make up quotes when someone like Draco is so willing to give her 
exactly the kind of quotes she wants.  I believe that Rita will 
gladly use REAL quotes when they serve the nasty tone of whatever 
article she's writing.  We know that Draco was talking to Rita 
Skeeter while she was transfigured into a beetle.  In GoF he was 
quoted, "I was attacked by a hippogriff, and my friend Vincent 
Crabbe got a bad bite off a flobberworm." and "We all hate Hagrid, 
but we're just too scared to say anything."  Harry reads this and 
then confronts Malfoy saying that they all don't hate Hagrid and 
that flobberworms don't have any teeth.  Crabbe sniggered and was 
pleased with himself that his lie about the flobberworms, told 
through Draco was quoted.  Draco is then quoted as saying "Well, I 
think this should put an end to the oaf's teaching career..."  Draco 
said those things to Rita to try to get Hagrid fired.  Also in GoF 
Draco was quoted as saying "Potter can speak Parseltonque,...There 
were a lot of attacks on students a couple of years ago, and most 
people thought Potter was behind them after they saw him lose his 
temper at a deuling club and set a snake on another boy.  It was all 
hushed up, though.  But he's made friends with werewolves and 
giants, too.  We think he'd do anything for a bit of power."  None 
of that information would have been known to Rita Skeeter - Draco 
had to have told her all of it in his quote.  We know that Harry 
didn't attack all the students, but Draco phrased it like Harry was 
the one who had done so.  
If a reporter asked Ron and Harry what they thought of Snape, they'd 
probably say that his wasn't their favorite class, but I *know* that 
Harry wouldn't tell the reporter blatant lies about Snape.  For 
examply, you would not see a quote in the paper from Harry about 
how 'Snape almost slipped a dangerous and highly-regulated truth 
serum in my pumpkin juice because I'd made my potion wrong in 
class'.  Even when he strongly suspected Draco of being the Heir of 
Slytherin, Harry did not run straight to Dumbledore and try to get 
Draco expelled/arrested/punished/whatever.  Harry, Ron and Hermione 
tried to get proof of Draco's guilt before tattling on him.  They 
would have exposed their use of the Polyjuice potion gladly if they 
had found out for sure that Draco was attacking the students.  I 
believe they didn't report Draco's comments that Lucius knew what 
was attacking the students because they honestly thought Draco was 
just bragging and more than likely lying.  In that one instance 
Draco was telling more truth than even he knew at the time.     
 
Heidi wrote:
> (btw - Diana - you might want to reassess this comment:
> > -knows that his father is fully aware of what is attacking 
students
> > in CoS, yet doesn't tell Dumbledore and does nothing to help 
> > anyone -  he even complains that his father won't allow him 
> > to help the 
> > person doing the killing!
> 
> Nobody was killed, so there's no way that Draco could've wanted to 
help whoever was doing "killings". At this point, what Draco knows 
is that last time, someone died - but this time, all he knows is 
that Dumbledore has told everyone that the Mandrakes will revive 
anyone who's petrified so it's a bad thing, but not quite the same 
as death.

Now me:
The only reason no one was killed was because of lucky chance.  
Draco was hoping someone *died* in the next attack, like Moaning 
Myrtle dead.  The goal of Tom Riddle [and Lucius Malfoy by giving 
the diary to Ginny] was to *kill* Muggle-borns...not 
petrify...*kill*.  Every one of the students petrified was 
*supposed* to die, but because of circumstances were petrified 
instead.  The teachers were worried because with every attack it was 
more and more likely the next student attacked was going to be found 
stone dead, and not 'merely' petrified.  Draco wanted to help 
whoever was attacking students succeed in killing some of them - not 
just petrifying, but murdering them - and he specifically mentions 
Hermione as his favored target for the one who would be the first to 
actually die.  If someone tries to kill you, but fails because he 
missed your heart when he stabbed you, would you say that person 
wasn't really trying to kill you because you didn't actually die?  
Of course not - the intent to kill is there, but the execution of 
the attempted murders didn't work out as planned.  
You're right, petrification is not the same as death, but the goal 
was never to petrify them in the first place - only luck and 
circumstance saved those students from instant death.  
See my quotes from canon above for how much Draco knew about Lucius' 
involvement and Lucius' real, knee-deep involement in the attacks in 
CoS.  
 
I had written:
> > -is [more than likely, no solid canon yet] fully aware of the 
pain inflicted upon Harry at the hands of Voldemort; all witnessed 
by Draco's, Goyle's and Crabbe's fathers

Heidi replied:
> Nope, no canon. None at all. No reason to think that he has any 
idea what happened in the graveyard. Do you really think that Lucius 
wrote it all into an interceptable letter? Or had a conversation 
with Draco via the fireplace, in those few days between the Third 
Task and the end of term? Why do you think it's more than likely, 
when what we actually have canon support for is quite the opposite - 
we *know* from CoS that Lucius tells Draco to stay out of the 
attacks on the Muggleborns, and we *know* from GoF that Draco is in 
the forrest, rather than with the Death Eaters, during the marauding 
after the Cup. How does this mesh with your contention that it's 
more than likely that Draco's aware of what happened in the 
graveyard?

Now me:
I said there was no canon- *yet*. :) I do believe that Draco knows 
at least a bit of what went on in the graveyard.  The fact that 
Sirius Black regularly writes to Harry, even though he's a wanted 
criminal who will meet a fate worse than death if he's caught, tells 
me that someone with the connections and status of Lucius Malfoy has 
no reason to expect his letters to his son intercepted.  
Why do I believe Draco knows at least some of what went on, 
especially the pain inflicted upon Harry?  Because of Draco's manner 
when he entered the train car.  He was swaggering and confident -
that's how intrepreted his words and 'smirked'.  I can't see him 
doing that if he'd believed Harry, with Cedric's body in tow, had 
escaped the newly re-bodied Lord Voldemort without any injury or 
pain inflicted, for the THIRD time.  Dumbledore did not mention to 
the school what Harry had endured in the graveyard, only that Harry 
had escaped and risked his own life to bring Cedric's body back.  I 
believe that Draco knew, at the very least, about Voldemort's 
inflicting pain upon Harry in the graveyard when he went into that 
train car at then end of GoF.  I can't prove it in canon, but when I 
read that scene, I just felt Draco's gloating had a much nastier 
undertone than others have read into it.  

I had written: 
> > -tries to get Harry and his friends expelled from Hogwarts
> > many times 

Heidi replied:
> Well, many times, they've broken school rules. They're out after 
hours, they actually *do* have a dragon, and Harry is in Hogsmeade 
without a permission slip. These are not permissible things, and 
while I do understand that there can be a differentiation between 
breaking immoral rules or breaking rules for the right reasons, I'm 
not quite sure what the "right" reason would be to justify Harry's 
going to Hogsmeade.   Further, reporting a classmate to the teachers 
can be a tacky, mean, silly or cruel thing to do - but if the 
student has *actually* done something wrong, well, then the reporter 
can't personally do anything about it - but the teachers certainly 
can! If Harry hadn't been in the wrong, on some level, by being out 
after hours with Norbert, Professor McG wouldn't've taken points. 
How is being a tattletale evil?

Now me:
Why is it Draco's right to turn them in and tell on them in the 
first place?  Is it any of Draco's business what they're doing?  
More specifically, is Draco informing on them to teach them a 
valuable lesson about following rules?  Of course not.  Draco wants 
to see Harry expelled/punished/yelled at.  Draco tells on Harry not 
to keep Harry safe from harm, but to see him be punished.   Even 
Neville knows it is wrong to be a tattletale - he doesn't tell any 
of the professors when Draco puts the leg-locker curse on him in 
PS/SS.  Tattletales are *not* liked and for very good reason - 
because most tattletales feel they are justified in minding everyone 
else's business.  Harry threw mud at Draco, which was probably not 
the best thing to do as it ended up exposing him and allowed Draco 
to report him being in Hogsmeade.  Harry messed up and, because 
Draco is naturally a nosy, arrogant bully and tatttletale, Harry 
ended up getting chewed out by Snape.  I don't see Harry, Ron and 
Hermione trying to follow Draco around and report him for breaking 
rules, do you?  
If Draco was worried about the safety of the school, Harry, Hagrid 
or, even the dragon, why didn't he run to tell McGonagall 
immediately after he saw the dragon in Hagrid's hut?  Why was Draco 
even out of bed?  Would his actions be excusable if he'd been up out 
of bed and breaking rules for his own agenda and only accidentally 
spotted Norbert?  Why didn't Draco follow Harry, Ron and Hermione to 
the front door, see them leave and then go get McGonagall?  Because 
Draco wanted to see what they were up to and wanted to taunt them 
with the fact he knew something that would get all of them in 
trouble.  He waited as long as he did to tell on them because he 
wanted maximum fallout - not only Hagrid in trouble for hatching an 
illegal dragon, but Harry and Hermione caught red-handed sneaking it 
off school grounds with the permission from Ron Weasley's older 
brother.  Draco would have had a card trick if his plan had 
succeeded.  IMHO, Draco's motives for telling on Harry are always 
mercenary and for the benefit of Draco's enjoyment and always 
intended to be to the detriment of Harry.  Draco told Professor 
Flitwick about Harry receiving a broom in PS/SS because he wanted 
Harry to get in trouble, but that really backfired on Draco.   
I think Professor McGonagall took off as many points as she did 
because Harry questioned her taking off fifty points in the first 
place.  I think she only added that "each!" after Harry stammered 
that she couldn't do that.  Professor McGonagall was very upset with 
Harry's actions because she *thought* Harry had purposely lied to 
Draco in order to get *him* punished/expelled [and had inadvertently 
gotten Neville to break the rules as well].  I think she was upset 
that she might have misread Harry's character and was shocked he'd 
try to do something so devious.  She was mistaken, but Harry 
couldn't tell her they'd really been getting rid of a dragon 
either.  

I had written: 
> Side note about canon: 
> > Cedric was more than likely not a
> > Muggle- born student either, though canon does not mention 
> > his parentage in 
> > this regard.

Heidi wrote:
> Yes, it does. His father works for the Ministry, so at most he's a
> half-and-half, like Seamus. 

Now me:
Could you direct me to the passage where it mentions Diggory works 
for MoM?  I can't find it. Thanks. :)  
Cedric is not Muggle-born student, and as his father works for MoM, 
you're right that he'd would be no less than a half-blood.  He's 
probably a pure-blood, given how much his father is into 
Quidditch.  ;)   

Heidi quotes me and combines bits:
> I'm combining the next two bits that Diana posted, to give sort of 
a transition to the train sequence - she says that Draco...
> > -threatens Harry, Hermione and the Weasleys at the
> > end of GoF with death.  Draco's not just saying that - he really 
believes that his father and Voldemort will bring about the deaths 
of everyone he's talking to in that train car - and he gloats 
gleefully about it.  
-gloats about the death of a student who never did him any harm, no 
> > evidence of any in canon.  
> > -is a raging bigot that advocates the torture, humiliation and 
death of Muggles, Muggle-born wizards and, using his term, Mudbloods

Heidi replied:
> I want to address the train scene, from outside Harry's 
perspective for a moment. Diana and many other people have posted 
here in the past few days that Draco provoked the trio - and Gred 
and Forge as well, into feeling that cursing Draco was reasonable - 
and I recongize that it does not seem to have been the intention of 
any of the individuals to knock the three out, so I have to say that 
despite what I'm about to post in here, I don't think that any of 
them were unreasonable to throw a curse at Draco, Crabbe or Goyle. I 
mean, you hit someone with Jelly Legs, they can curse you right 
back. 
> 
> But Draco didn't have his wand out, and even beyond that, if you 
look only at Draco's words, it's quite clear that everything he's 
saying in that scene is actually *true*. I don't think it's fair to 
say that it was *definitely* a threat or *definitely* advocacy. Yes, 
he *really* does believe that Voldemort (note: he *never mentions 
Lucius in that scene) will bring the deaths of Muggle-borns and 
those who support Muggles. 

<snipped Heidi's quotes from GoF of Draco's comments on the train>

 > What in this little speech is untrue? Let's parse it, briefly:
>First bit  - he's being dismissive, true. But is this sentence 
evil? Or is he actually showing himself in agreement with them about 
Rita? Is this a clue that she's misquoted him too?
>  Second bit - Again, is this sentence evil? Or is he asking them,
> possibly unkindly, why they seem to be in denial about the great 
risk that all three of them are in - Harry because he's Harry, and 
Hermione and Ron because they're his friends, moreso than for any 
reason. And if he's asking them, is it *just possible* that he is 
simply curious?

Now me: 
What made Draco's comments evil had nothing to do with how sincere 
or truthful his statements were.  I did not read any of Draco's 
comments as meant to warn the Harry and his friends.  None of his 
comments were meant in a friendly way.  Let me draw your attention 
to this paragraph:  
"Crabbe and Goyle were standing behind him.  All three of them 
looked more pleased with themselves, more arrogrant and more 
menacing, than Harry has ever seen them."  [Pg. 729 in GoF]  

Look at the use of verbs to describe Draco, Crabbe and Goyle 
expressions in the train car ¡Vthey were 'smirked' and 'leered'.  
These are not genial, just-curious verbs.  Draco is relishing the 
danger Harry and his friends are in because Lord Voldemort is back!  
He's not trying to give them a heads-up to warn them ¡V he's trying 
to scare them!  Draco's "I warned you!" is in the past tense, and is 
meant to chastise Harry for turning down Draco's handshake in PS/SS 
when Draco held out his hand.  Of course Harry had turned him down 
because he isn't a raging bigot against Muggles and Draco was 
obviously a spoiled, arrogant brat who reminded him of Dudley.  
Draco is basically doing a 'neener-neener-neener' at Harry by saying 
that because Harry turned down his offer [read acceptance of his POV 
toward Muggles and everything else] of friendship, Harry [because he 
wouldn't join Voldemort's 'winning' side], Hermione [because she's a 
Muggle-born] and Ron [because he's a Weasley], will be killed by 
Lord Voldemort now that he's returned.  
Then he crosses the line and demeans Cedric and Cedric's death by 
saying Cedric deserved to die and was only first of many, many 
deaths to come.  
Draco is taunting them by asking them if they are in denial because 
he's suggesting they are ignoring Voldemort's return because they 
must now be quaking in their boots that the Dark Lord has returned 
and are so scared they've blocked it out of their minds.  What Draco 
doesn't know is that Harry and his friends know what's coming now 
that Voldemort's back, but know that, as teenagers, they can't do 
anything about it right then.  I don't consider it remotely possible 
that he's just curious what Harry and his friends think about 
Voldemort's return.  

Heidi wrote:
> Third bit - and probably one of the more non-SHIP-debated sections 
of GoF... What is he saying that is a definite lie? He thinks 
Harry's side will lose - if he was perfectly chipper about this, why 
does he say "warned"? To taunt? Oh, possibly. But is it definite? 
Isn't it possible - just a little bit possible - that he's again 
*warning* Harry, Ron and Hermione of the threat that truly comes to 
them from the Dark's corner?  Perhaps he is - but also, perhaps, he 
has to be guarded in how he warns them, because he's not alone - 
Crabbe and Goyle are with him, and it's entirely possible that they 
tell Lucius what Draco says and does. And it seems to be common 
knowledge that Voldemort's targets last time were muggle-born 
wizards and witches and those who supported Muggles - so to
> say that Mudbloods and Muggle-lovers will be the first ones that
> Voldemort will go after is, well, true. 

> If you look at it as a warning - badly and quite gittishly given - 
the
> import of it changes - without requiring the reader to actually 
change
> their take on Harry, Ron and Hermione's reaction to his speech. In 
other
> words, he could be honestly warning them - he wasn't threatening 
to do
> *anything* to them at that moment, no matter how you read canon 
(his
> wand was not out) - and the trio's reaction could be quite
> reasonable-at-the-time. 
> 
> Here's a brief fanfic illustration of how, from Draco's 
perspective, the
> visit to their cabin could've been in warning, not as a threat:
> 
<snip fanfic>

Now me:
     The problem is that you are ascribing feelings and motives to 
Draco that are not shown anywhere in canon ¡V not even one tiny bit 
in canon.  Your fanfic presumes that Draco is, basically, a teenage 
Snape who's really undercover for the good side and is trying to 
help/protect Harry and his friends without them knowing it.  I 
wouldn't buy that for one instant.  Unlike Snape, who's been shown 
in canon attempting to save and/or actually saving Harry's life, 
there is no duality shown in Draco's actions.  And the 
verb 'smirked', which is in canon, cannot be mistaken for 'smiling 
honestly'.  These are not synonyms.  
     In addition, why would Draco be warning Harry about how much 
danger they're in from Voldemort?  I think Harry knows how much 
danger he's in from Lord Voldemort!  After all, he was tortured, 
stabbed, forced to fight a duel and chased through a graveyard by 
Voldemort and a bunch of DEs just a week or so before Draco comes 
into the train!  Even *if* Draco didn't know what Harry went through 
in the graveyard [personally, I think he knows a least some it 
straight from his father], Dumbledore had told the school that Harry 
had faced Voldemort and barely escaped with his life!  After 
Hermione spent a month or two petrified on a bed in the hospital 
wing, I'm sure she's fully aware of how much danger she's in from 
the equivalent of Hitler in the WW.  And Ron, being told everything 
that happened by Harry, would also know the dangers involved for 
him, his friends and his family.  Draco would have to be as thick as 
a tree trunk to think Harry and his friends were'nt aware of the 
threat they face from Voldemort's return.  Draco wasn't warning 
them ¡V he was threatening them!

I had written:
> > Draco's actions throughout the four books are many times
> > reprehensible.  There are a few times when his sneering facade 
> > falters, such as when Hermione makes the comment that the 
Gryffindor 
> > Quiddtich team all got in on pure talent, while Draco had his 
father 
> > buy his way onto to their team for one example.  When Harry 
makes W
> > the comment about Draco's mom looking like she's was smelling 
dung 
> > [just before Moody shows up and turns Draco into a ferret], 
Draco's 
> > facade slips there too. 
> 
Heidi replied:
> Right. And when Hermione slaps him, he doesn't respond negatively 
at the
> time, and we have no evidence that he goes to a teacher to complain
> either. How does this square with your belief that he's evil? I'm 
not
> even sure that reprehensible applies to many of the things he's 
done,
> such as reporting Harry for breaking school rules (although if he 
really
> did trick Harry into being out after hours for the duel, that would
> qualify... But he was *eleven* at the time!)
 Irene's post of yesterday matches my take on the situation quite 
well:

Now me:
Draco backs away from Hermione because, in part, he's afraid of what 
she can do him when she pulls her wand out.  Draco is a coward.  He 
knows Hermione is capable of leveling any number of nasty hexes 
against him.  However, probably the biggest reason is that Hermione 
caught him completely by surprise when she slapped his face ¡V he 
definitely wasn't expecting that.  Even Crabbe and Goyle were 
bewildered and looked to Draco for instructions on what to do.  
Draco didn't tell a professor because then the professor would have 
asked Hermione, Harry and Ron for their side and then what Draco has 
said about Hagrid would have come out.  I've gotten the impression 
from all the professors, even Snape, that speaking badly about any 
of the professors by the students is not looked kindly upon.  I also 
believe that Snape and  Hagrid get along fairly well and since the 
only professor likely to not hear Harry's, Ron's and Hermione's side 
of the story before passing out punishment is Snape, and that 
doesn't do Draco any good.  
If?  If?  Draco definitely set up Harry to get caught and expelled 
by challenging him to a duel.  The next day Draco and his friends 
were quite surprised that Harry and Ron were still at Hogwarts and 
hadn't been expelled!  And I would say his comments and actions in 
CoS are reprehensible - hoping Hermione is the next student attacked 
and the first to actually die, shouting "You'll be next, Mudbloods!" 
at the first attack, concealing his father's implicit involvement in 
the opening of the Chamber of Secrets in the first place.  
In PS/SS, his blatantly bigoted comments to Harry in Madame Malkin's 
shop strike me as reprehensible.  He had never met Harry and yet 
immediately spouted off about 'pure-blood' and how Muggle-borns 
shouldn't be allowed at Hogwarts at all.  Of course, I view bigoted 
behavior and comments as reprehensible in general.  Draco's actions 
in PoA were also reprehensible ¡V trying to scare Harry of his broom 
in the final Quidditch match, trying to cheat by sabotaging the 
Gryffindors was reprehensible, even without a certain attempt to 
injure/kill Harry.  In GoF, pretty much everything he does is bad ¡V 
trying to get revenge on Hagrid by getting Buckbeak executed and 
Hagrid fired and most of his nasty comments to Harry ¡V especially 
those flashing 'Potter stinks' badges.  Those behaviors are 
reprehensible to me, and I'm sure there are others I just can't 
remember right at this moment.  

Irene had replied as well:
> <<Oh dear, now we judge Snape on the basis of Sirius's 
impressions? 
> Sirius, of all people? Can you imaging Harry's portrait painted by 
> Draco? How close to reality that would be? But Draco is bad boy 
and 
> Sirius is so ever noble and fair. OK, how about Cedric's portrait 
as 
> painted by Fred and George in PoA?>>
> 
> 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? 
> 
> If you don't, then it's a bit unfair to say that Draco is, at this
> moment in canon, evil. 
> 
> Snarky. Obnoxious. Bratty. Sometimes sulky (see end of COS). 
Vengeful. 
> 
> Evil? Where?

Now me:
I don't view Snape entirely on Sirius' impression of him.  And the 
comparisons are not the same.  We, the readers, have seen the 
interaction between Draco and Harry since they were both eleven 
years old.  We are seeing how Draco treats Harry and how Harry 
reacts and treats Draco back ¡V there is nothing left out calling for 
massive speculation ¡V no missing years or adventures ¡V we're reading 
it as it happens!  The interaction between Snape and Black has not 
been revealed to us in detail.  We've only gotten glimpses of what 
has happened from each side.  And both sides are so consumed by 
hatred and bitterness for what happened in the past, neither version 
can be trusted as the complete truth.  I have never said Sirius is 
so noble and fair that his POV of events must be completely true and 
as impartial as Mother Justice.  Snape's version of events isn't the 
complete truth either.  
See earlier in this post about my comments that eleven-year-olds can 
be evil.  Draco is evil and has been evil in my view since CoS.  I 
felt he was probably evil in PS/SS, but in CoS I was convinced of 
it.  I don't think it's the least bit unfair to say that Draco, at 
this point in canon [at fourteen] is evil.  Others may not be 
convinced or feel differently, but to me, Draco is undoubtedly evil 
at this point.  
I must also point out that unlike Draco, who we've seen choose the 
bad side unerringly for years, we've only heard of ONE nasty [albeit 
it nearly fatal] prank pulled by Sirius Black.  Yes, Black, Lupin 
and James did romp around Hogsmeade and Hogwarts as werewolf and 
unregistered animagi, but their intent was not to do evil, but to 
have adventures and fun.  The marauder's map requires 'mischief 
managed' to close ¡V not 'evil accomplished' after all. ;)  And 
mischief is not the same as evil!  Fred and George are definitely 
mischievous, but hardly evil.  

Heidi wrote:
> Btw - Diana, would love to see you submit your fanfic to 
TheDarkArts.org
> Please let me know if you need help wih the fanfic submission 
process
> (http://www.fictionalley.org/submit.html). 

Now me:
Thanks for the compliment, but the little piece I inserted into my 
post is all there is at the moment.  If I get inspired, I may write 
more, though.  ļ

 Diana
dianasdolls