[HPforGrownups] Re: why is malfoy a prefect?

[Shaun Hately]

No: HPFGUIDX 101061

On 12 Jun 2004 at 20:44, stefaniealexisread wrote:

> "stefaniealexisread" <stefaniealexisread at y...> wrote:
> > If prefects are chosen upon merit, why on earth is Malfoy one? I 
> > think that's all I have to say. 
> 
> 
> Alright it's me again. When I asked why Malfoy was a prefect there 
> were a couple of inconsistencies?
> 
> 1) Why would Snape try to be on malfoy's good side when it is clear 
> he isn't anymore? He's working aginst Voldemort and he revealed that 
> in the trials years ago which cleared him of being a death eater.

That's how we see it - we don't know how the Death Eaters see it.

See, we know from statements in the canon, that when Voldemort 
fell, a significant number of the Death Eaters talked their way out 
of trouble in various ways - including Lucius Malfoy:

"And when You-Know-Who disappeared," said Fred, craning around to 
look at Harry, "Lucius Malfoy came back saying he'd never meant any 
of it. Load of dung - Dad reckons he was right in You-Know-Who's 
inner circle."" (from 'Chamber of Secrets')

""I smell guilt," he said. "There is a stench or guilt upon the 
air. A second shiver ran around the circle, as though each member 
of it longed, but did not dare to step back from him. "I see you 
all, whole and healthy, with your powers intact - such prompt 
appearances! and I ask myself... why did this band of wizards never 
come to the aid of their master, to whom they swore eternal 
loyalty?.... And I answer myself," whispered Voldemort, "they must 
have believed me broken, they thought I was gone. They slipped back 
among my enemies, and they pleaded innocence, and ignorance, and 
bewitchment..."  (from 'Goblet of Fire')

Lucius may believe that Snape simply did what we know he did - 
betraying Voldemort just as a way of escaping punishment. He may 
still believe that Snape is truly onside.
 
> 2) When Cedric Diggory died Malfoy and his crew showed absolutely no 
> sympathy at the end of book 4 and wouldn't raise their glasses to 
> Harry. I remember that shocked me because it crossed a line -- it 
> means that Malfoy is not simply misguided but EVIL. So why appoint a 
> person who clearly is going to grow up and be a death eater in a 
> position of power at hogwarts? Especially at a time when Dumbeldore 
> emphasizes 'unity'. And really if the Slytherins are all like this 
> why don't they get rid of this house altogether? It just seems to 
> breed dark magic lovers/muggle haters.

Well, I'd disagree that it shows Malfoy is evil. At the end of 
Goblet of Fire, he's still a child - a lot of people don't see it 
that way, but I do. He still has time to change - no matter how 
foul he is now.

I knew boys at school who were every bit as foul, IMHO, as Draco 
Malfoy at the same ages. I was their favourite target - I even had 
to deal with something akin to the attitudes that Draco shows 
towards Muggles - because I was at one of the country's most 
exclusive schools, and in their opinion, the son of a nightwatchman 
didn't belong there - it was a place for people like them whose 
father's ran the organisation my father guarded at night (some of 
them got really confused when I was 15, and Dad was suddenly 
promoted into a management position at the Commission - but it 
didn't do anything to change the attitudes of the really foul 
ones). Some of these boys were *genuinely* foul - in fact, they 
were worse than Draco. He's an amateur by comparison. Quite 
seriously. He was nowhere *near* as bad as some of these people at 
the same age - and believe I remember the age - because at the end 
of my fifteenth year - the same stage, Harry, Draco, and the others 
are at at the end of Order of the Phoenix, my father died suddenly 
- and his death became the spur for some of those boys *worst* and 
most hideous acts towards me - Draco's attitudes don't even come 
close.

*But* - and here's the point - by the time we finished school, two 
years later - all but one of those boys had changed. They did 
change. They grew out of it.

Draco is not irredeemable - he still has time to change. Draco is 
*not* on a path that he can't turn away from. It's not too late for 
a 15 year old child to change. There's no certainty he will change, 
of course, either. But it's not impossible.

As to why they don't get rid of the House altogether - well, we 
really don't know if Slytherin is a breeding ground for dark magic 
lovers and muggle haters. The Slytherins we've seen are certainly 
like that - but the only ones we've seen from the start of their 
schooling - Draco, Crabbe, Goyle, Pansy - seem to have started out 
with these attitudes. If they are a universal, I'd say they are 
more likely to be there when the kids arrive, rather than being 
created.

If the attitudes are there, abolishing the House would simply 
spread these perverse beliefs around the school. They'd still be 
there - and the students would have an increased opportunity to 
'infect' others. In many ways, the conflict we see between the 
other Houses and Slytherin may be a good thing - because it makes 
the students from other Houses less likely to be influenced by the 
Slytherins. If there is a universal Slytherin poison, the House may 
concentrate and focus it certainly - but it may also help to 
confine it.


Yours Without Wax, Dreadnought
Shaun Hately | www.alphalink.com.au/~drednort/thelab.html
(ISTJ)       | drednort at alphalink.com.au | ICQ: 6898200 
"You know the very powerful and the very stupid have one
thing in common. They don't alter their views to fit the 
facts. They alter the facts to fit the views. Which can be 
uncomfortable if you happen to be one of the facts that 
need altering." The Doctor - Doctor Who: The Face of Evil
Where am I: Frankston, Victoria, Australia