Will Draco come back? & Character development

[Sydney]

No: HPFGUIDX 81928

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "samnanya" <yswahl at s...> wrote:

>Time is running out for Good|Draco to emerge.
> Can anyone ferret out a sign of change in Malfoy?
> 

Zip.  Zero.  Zilch.  I'm REALLY curious to know where JKR is going
with Draco.  'Redemption Draco' seems totally unlikely to me;  mostly
because amongst all his other charming qualities he's an abject
coward.  It takes courage to change your mind and I haven't seen that
kind of inner strength from Draco at all.  

On the other hand it's weird of Rowling to keep the main nemesis
totally static, as Draco has been.  It's hard to see his function in
the story.  I mean, Draco's not even dangerous, which at least could
generate suspense;  not one of his Evil Plans has ever worked out.
He's not a particularily interesting psychological study (yet,
anyways).  He's not a warning of slippery slopes of any kind;  he was
a vicious little racist at 11 just as he is at 15.  He's just kind of
a moral punching bag.

On the other hand, two things encourage a certain kind of reader (like
me, for example), to look for some sort of change to come over him. 
First is Hagrid's line, I think in CoS, that "blood will tell", and
you should just write the kid off because he's a Malfoy.  For this to
turn out to be a sound view isn't very Rowling-esque to me, in fact
it's explicitly against the whole message of the book. 

The other is what originally seemed to be the Snape=Draco thing. I've
never thought them to be particularly similar characters;  I mean
they're both mean, but their motivations just feel totally different
to me.  Draco is spoilt, while Snape seems to have been neglected (no
canon, just an impression from general life experience). So this had
never struck me as a compelling argument.  Rowling's been encouraging
us to parallel them, but I think this is misdirection (like being
encouraged to think of Pettigrew as Neville-ish). 

Now though the James/Draco thing has been brought out, which is quite
a bit more startling!  Although James was obviously far better
material than Draco, and better brought up, they were both examples of
spoiled bullies.  James seems (at least that's a common speculation)
to have snapped out of it over the Prank, when he realized what real
harm could be.  

This is a nice sort of parallel and has the advantage of being
unexpected, but it doesn't hold very well either.  Draco's SEEN real
harm-- the Basilisk stalked the halls, Cedric died, and he's just
thrilled.  There isn't a scene of him looking disconcerted and then
reasserting his asshole-hood.  He looks downright aroused;  ugh.
>

Jake wrote:  

>>There is an important line in OotP that I believe applies 
> to 
> > > Draco.  DD, when talking about Kreacher, says, "Kreacher is what 
> he 
> > > has been made by wizards, Harry." (p. 832, OotP) Draco, too, is 
> > what 
> > > he has been made by wizards (especially his father).  I think, in 
> > the 
> > > end, Draco will go through a transformation.  Most likely, one of 
> > > the "good" characters will make the first move (early money is on 
> > > Hermione, but never count out Luna or Harry to throw a curveball). 
> > > Remember, regardless of how poorly he did it, he did originally 
> > offer 
> > > Harry friendship (PS/SS).  I think JKR will bring him around.  
> > <snip>

But is that the lesson, necessarily?  Kreacher was made what he was by
his upbringing (he would have been dusting his own mother's head
mounted on a wall, for pete's sake); but that doesn't change, well,
that that was what he was.  When someone is like that, compassionate
feelings and humane treatment are a moral duty;  but this isn't done
on the basis that he will than be 'brought around'; it's done because
he's human (well, you know what I mean).  Possibly better behaviour
will follow, but possibly not.  It's still a good idea to act in order
to limit the damage they can do.  

Anyhow, kind of a rambly post, but the way I see it there's limited
range of possiblities for why Draco is around:

-- he's just a plot device to represent negative traits, throw minor
obstacles into the path of Harry, and just be a good hissable villain

-- he's been a red herring to pattern Snape's and James' relationship on

-- I'm totally insensitive to his inner strengths, and he's going jump
out and surprise me in book 7 by saving the day.

-- he'll turn out to be a sad little snot, but will avoing being an
evil, sad little snot.  He's in the story to fill a slot on the
Spectrum of Evil, somewhere between Pettigrew and Lucius: 
self-seeking and harmful, but not needing to be destroyed.  


-- or what I think is most likely, he's a test for Harry.  Can he feel
bad for the way Draco was brought up, and let go of hatred, but still
fight him effectively if necessary?

Sydney, realizing she's contradicted herself several times in this
post, but hey, I contain multitudes...