The Cabinet Plan...again (was:Re: The UV (was ESE, DDM, OFH, or Grey?)

[horridporrid03]

No: HPFGUIDX 162835

> >>Betsy Hp:
> > Who did Draco murder?  

> >>a_svirn:
> > No one. I said he stooped to murder, but we all know very well 
> > that he wasn't successful. Or, as Dumbledore said, he 
> > was "lucky". Which actually means that his victims were lucky. 

> >>Betsy Hp:
> > I'm still confused.  Who did Draco murder, that we can say he 
> > stooped to murder? What lucky victim of Draco's desire to murder 
> > are you referring to here?  Because as far as I've read, Draco    
> > had the opportunity to murder one person, Dumbledore.  And he    
> > chose not to do so.

> >>SSSusan:
> I have to say this seems a *wee* bit disingenuous. ;-)  I mean, I 
> think it's pretty clear that a_svirn's point is Draco INTENDED to 
> murder with his first two plots, and he almost did do so, even if 
> the people who ended up almost getting it weren't the person he set 
> out to kill.

Betsy Hp:
But that's not a_svirn's point as I understood it.  Or at least, 
that's not what the point was when this conversation started.  (If 
there was a shift, I missed it. Which does happen. <g>)

Here's where this conversation started:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/162798
> >>a_svirn:
> Oh, yes, Dumbledore said that he's not a killer. But what does it
> mean? He didn't say, "Draco, Draco, you are not a murderer", because
> they both knew that Draco did stoop to murder. 
> <snip>

Betsy Hp:
So a_svirn is taking the position (as far as I could tell) that while 
Draco is not a killer (as per Dumbledore) Draco *is* a murderer.  And 
(from what I understand) that Dumbledore agrees with that assessment 
and is engaging in linguistical games in order to trick Draco into 
lowering his wand.

Since I cannot see how someone can be a murderer while at the same 
time *not* be a killer I am getting a bit nit picky.  But I'm not 
being disingenuous.  I'm asking for clarity.  (I *am* quite certain 
that clarity will not come because I believe the argument is 
nonsensical.  One must kill in order to be a murderer.)

> >>SSSusan:
> It seems to me little more than semantics:

Betsy Hp:
But semantics is the entire bases of the argument, as far as I can 
see.

> >>SSSusan:
> Draco stooped to murder vs. Draco stooped to attempted murder.     
> Isn't it the *intent* which was in Draco which mattered?  So he was 
> unsuccessful.  Do we really think he was cheering about being       
> unsuccessful those first two times, saying to himself, "Yay!  I'm   
> not really a murderer!"?

Betsy Hp:
Well, *we* might not <g>, but I suspect that he felt a massive amount 
of guilt over the near deaths of both Katie and Ron.  Hence his 
physical breakdown, the lack of future attempts of this sort, and the 
eventual lowering of his wand before a powerless Dumbledore.

I don't think Draco *cheered* his failure, because he'd have seen it 
*as* a failure, a lack of manhood.  (Draco as Hamlet <g>.) But since 
Dumbledore tells us that Draco is not a killer, it follows that he is 
also not a murderer.

> >>SSSusan:
> I think not.  He INTENDED to be a murderer.

Betsy Hp:
But not, as per Dumbledore, in his heart of hearts.

> >>Alla:
> Besides just agreeing, I also think that when Dumbledore on the
> Tower was saying that Draco is not a killer, he was absolutely
> lying, because again - two murder attempts were done. :)

Betsy Hp:
You really think Dumbledore's last task was one of deception?  I 
suppose it'll take Book 7 for the final say, but IMO it makes no 
story sense (unless Dumbledore is completely deconstructed in the 
last book and is revealed as a stupid old man; lying or mistaken 
about just about everything).  If Dumbledore is either lying or wrong 
about the core of Draco Malfoy, than he becomes a pathetic failure.  
I honestly don't see JKR taking the story in that direction.

> >>Alla:
> But I also think that here Dumbledore was lying for good purpose -
> he was trying to make Draco change his mind, to appeal to his better
> part, if such exists. And it is totally possible, loathe that as I
> am that he succeeded.

Betsy Hp:
Change Draco's mind about what though?  What you're saying is that 
Draco *is* a killer, but Dumbledore reconstructed him somehow.  Which 
means Draco has become a tool in Dumbledore's hands too.  He is still 
a puppet of higher beings.  

> >>Alla:
> But if Draco's **better part** chose to listen, that to me does not
> mean that he is not a killer, because his another part, um,
> attempted to do just that.

Betsy Hp:
Draco did attempt to become a killer, a murderer.  But his attempt 
was pathetic (as per Dumbledore and Snape, and Draco actually).

And see, if just the attempt makes Draco a murderer, then it follows 
that Harry is a sadist because he threw a Crucio at Bellatrix.  I 
don't think this is how JKR is working things.

>>Betsy Hp:
> > I see Draco's statement as very fuzzy as far as truthfulness goes
> > because he refers to Fenrir as a "family friend", which is an
> > impossibility. There's no way a family as stuck on blood purity
> > as the Malfoys are is going to befriend a creature with a blood
> > disease. Draco is exaggerating, as Draco is wont to do.

> >>a_svirn:
> You forget that "family" is how Voldemort refers to his death
> eaters.
> <snip>

Betsy Hp:
Ooh, I *did* forget that!  (Damn, this gives more evidence towards 
Draco showing Borgin a Dark Mark.)  Yeah, I can totally see Draco 
meaning *that* family.  But it still doesn't follow that this means 
Draco should have expected Fenrir to come through the Cabinet.  He's 
still just pulling out the scariest threat he can think of.

Betsy Hp