SHIP -- Tolerance (Was Draco+Hermione? Not.)

[pennylin]

No: HPFGUIDX 67560

Hi --

Scott said:
> > Thinking Draco has a hidden interest in Hermione seems very far 
> fetched. Not only are there virtually no tangible references to such 
> interest, but it's clear how Malfoy feels about her - "filthy 
> mudblood," etc. 

Amura: 
> 
> Snape called Lily something along the line too...we will see if later 
> on a Snape/Lily ship is confirmed in the canon. ;)


Darrin retorted: <<<<<<<<That's hardly the way to strengten your case, by comparing how Draco treats Hermione to how Snape treated Lily, considering that there isn't one shred of canon to support Snape-Lily.

So, we have wishful thinking being used to support more wishful thinking.>>>>>>>

I'm no D/H shipper, though I can see the pre-OOP arguments and I'll be interested to see if any post-OOP arguments are made.  However, I really think it's offensive to dismiss someone's opinions (with regard to SHIPs or anything else) as mere "wishful thinking."  This is a literary discussion group, and opinions expressed herein are by their very nature subjective.  Scott was entitled to expresss his original opinion, however much I might disagree with it.  Amura used canon to refute Scott's opinion.  Just because you disagree that there is any evidence of D/H or S/L, doesn't mean it doesn't exist at all.  Rather than labelling opinions as "wishful thinking," you could have shown *how* you came to the conclusion that there is no canon evidence for either ship.

Amura: > Notice that everyone read the book differently. What you see as a > reference may be just another bluff in other's eyes. 

Darrin: <<<<<Uh-huh, and maybe Crabbe secretly loves Hermione too. After all, he snickered at Draco's taunts.  C'mon, let's start a Crabbe-Hermione ship.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

This level of sarcasm is again uncalled-for, IMHO.  Again, this is a literary discussion list, and opinions will vary widely.  Amura's point is completely valid. 

<<<<<<<<And where is it said that one theory has to be respected more than others? There are canon references that show Ron and Hermione have a mutual interest. There are canon references that show Ginny-Harry, Harry-Hermione and now Luna-Ron. Those ships are by far going to get better treatment than Draco-Hermione. I refuse to treat them as equals because one has canon support and another has wishful thinking mixed with filling in gaps in canon.>>>>>>>>>>>

Noone asks you to respect one theory *more* than others, Darrin.  You need not *respect* D/H at all.  You are free to make canon-based arguments that show why it can't happen (or shouldn't, in your opinion, happen).  But, it's just not good form to dismiss other people's canon-based arguments with a sarcastic reference to "wishful thinking."  Amura is right: what is "wishful thinking" in your opinion will be completely plausible to someone else.  

I actually am interested to hear any post-OOP D/H arguments, just out of curiosity.  I know there's been a thread on Redeemable!Draco, but I haven't had time to follow it yet.  It strikes me that Draco remained very stagnant in this book, which makes eventual redemption more of a question mark for me than it was prior to OOP.  While I don't favor the D/H ship (being the avid H/H shipper that I am), I do think that Draco's redemptiveness would be in keeping with the series' emphasis on individual choices.  I'm not sure I'd go so far as others as to say that I'd be disappointed in the series if Draco *isn't* redeemed at the end, but I hope if it doesn't happen, it's not because Rowling didn't consider what it might mean thematically to include it.  It seems to me from her Royal Albert Hall interview that she was trying to caution the fans not to get to confuse fanon!Draco with canon!Draco.  Do those who favor fanon!Draco have any opinions on this interview statement?  Is it worrying to you?  

Penny

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]