/Hurt/comfort/Elkins post about Draco

[dumbledore11214]

No: HPFGUIDX 156197

> > Alla:
> > Draco's sufferings I just see as very **fair**, so I see nothing 
to
> > comfort Draco with, and for me I see no hurt-comfort there.
> 
> Magpie:
> But that's a different issue than what Elkins is talking about in 
that post, 
> if I recall the post correctly.  She is talking about the word 
choice the 
> author uses to write a scene--a technique which not all writers 
might refer 
> to as "hurt/comfort" but one which fits that description.

Alla:

Well, yes and no, IMHO. Now, I am sort of feeling nervous to even 
start analysing Elkins post in depth, since I worship her writing 
ability and feel that I cannot come even close to her, so I may 
babble more than usual and please ask if something is not clear.

What I was trying to say to Betsy is that I don't see 
**hurt/comfort** as a technique ( but again, I am ready to stay 
corrected on it). It **may** match the description as you said, but 
I am not sure that writer consciously uses it, but more like us fans 
see the **choice of words** where we want to see it,where we want to 
accept the character as sympathetic.

That is where IMO our emotions may come in too, to make us **look** 
for something in the text to justify us seeing the character as 
sympathetic, where the author may or may not intend it.

IMO, this is a strong, justifiable interpretation, but also made on 
both intellectual  and emotional level.
(Right now, I am only talking about emotions and hurt/comfort).

And actually this is what Elkins herself says in her post.

Elkins:

"There are two reasons that Draco doesn't really work very well for 
me
as a character in his current state. One of them is more emotional
and meta-textual, while the other is more purely literary."

Alla:

All that I am trying to say that her post is not the example of 
absence of emotions. Analysis of the text is done on intellectual 
level, but the metathinking is done on more emotional one IMO, 
although of course with the canon support too.

For example, speaking about word choices Elkins describes. One of 
the examples she gives is that Draco "yells" when Buckbeak strikes 
him and that is supposedly makes his sufferings more macho.

Elkins:
>so why can't she do the same for Draco? She doesn't even have
>him "scream" when he gets attacked by Buckbeak. He's certainly
>acting like a great big baby, but at the same time, the verb that 
>she
>actually chooses to use for his line there is "yell," which is a lot
>more macho then her usual "shrieking," to be sure. 

Alla:

I don't see how this choice of word by JKR is supposed to make Draco 
more sympathetic, more stoic, etc. For all I know maybe JKR just got 
temporarily tired from using **shrieking** and used **yell** instead.

Maybe it was not anywhere near on her mind to elicit sympathy for 
Draco in this instance? I know it did not for me.


Magpie: 
> You're talking about whether Draco is sympathetic based on whether 
or not he 
> deserves to be punished, but Elkins is not, imo, claiming that 
he's 
> sympathetic because he doesn't deserve it.  She sees the 
maliciousness of 
> his actions and I think acknowledges that the scene is meant to be 
> satisfying as punishment for him on one level.  What she's trying 
to do is 
> figure out Draco's role in the story (writing pre-OotP), and 
that's where 
> the "underdog" thing comes in. 

Alla:

Yes, she indeed tries to figure out Draco's place in the story, but 
I maintain that the **underdog** thing is not necessarily coming 
from there. Yes, the **weak protagonist** part of her post deals 
with Draco's place in the story, but **redeemable Draco** is done  
more on metathinking level IMO.

And yes, Elkins acknowledges maliciousness of Draco's actions, but I 
do think that she downplays them too in a sense that Draco's intent 
seemed to not matter to her much ( that is the impression I got). As 
long as Draco was not able to carry the action out, that means that 
he is lame , pathetic loser. Again, that is my impression from her 
post.

For example here is another part of her post.

Elkins:

"In the Harry Potter books, the more immediate and sensory 
information
about both Draco and House Slytherin often seems designed to undercut
the more overtly stated narrative message.

In the first book, for example, JKR tells us that the Slytherins have
won the House Cup for years and years running. The Gryffindors, we
are informed, are therefore the Underdogs. Really, they are.

But what we actually see *happening* over the course of the books is
Gryffindor taking the cup again and again and again, and Harry always
winning every Quiddich match in which he is pitted directly against
Draco, and all of the other houses uniting behind Gryffindor, and
Dumbledore's infamous "dissing the Slyths" scene at the end of PS/SS.

This is the reason, I think, for the prevailing notion that there is
a strong bias against House Slytherin. The narrative voice tells us
that this is absolutely not in fact the case. But everything that we
actually see happening before our very eyes conveys a slightly
different message."

Alla:

Let's look at Slytherin winning the Cup for seven years example. I 
am not sure what in the text gives Elkins the impression that 
despite Slytherins winning the Cup for seven years in a row, they 
are the underdogs of the series.

I know it sends no such message to me. In fact, every time I read 
about Dumbledore **bias** against Slytherins, the only thing I need 
to do is to remember that they indeed won the Cup for seven years in 
a row and talk about **bias** makes me amused.

So, I make the conclusion (which can be wrong of course) that Elkins 
sees bias again Slytherins ( or maybe she does not, since she talks 
in general), where she **wants** to see bias against Slytherins, 
because she likes them and since it is IMO not supported by the 
text,she brings in metathinking. I mean, don't get me wrong I love 
metathinking arguments, but I think this one **is** more emotions 
based than text based and she IMO acknowledges it too.

Am I making sense?


Magpie:
 Not to claim that Draco's really a poor 
> put-upon creature, but to show that he's not powerful enough to 
carry the 
> role of even a school-age antagonist (he's just lame).  So maybe 
that's not 
> his role. 

Alla:

I get this part. Draco as a weak protagonist is indeed very 
textually based. I disagree with it, but it is more **textually 
based** as I see it.

Magpie:
 Throughout canon he's always punished or hurt more soundly than 
> what he gives out, while he himself never causes any real long-
term damage 
> to anyone.  It's not that she's made him sympathetic, but she 
hasn't killed 
> the possibility for sympathy as efficiently as she could have.

Alla:

But that is the thing - for me she did kill the possibility of 
sympathy for him and now, when I acknowledge that he can be 
sympathised with in book 6, I really cannot, because what happened 
before was too repulsive for me, if I look at his actions in context.
 
Magpie:
> Elkins then looks at the language JKR uses to describe his scenes 
where he's 
> in pain, the hurt/comfort factor, showing not that Draco inspires 
sympathy 
> in everyone but that JKR intentionally allows sympathy to be 
possible by 
> giving him scenes of real pain rather than just making all his 
pain scenes 
> repulsive.

Alla:

Oh, but how do we know that this is intentional on JKR's part? Maybe 
she would prefer to discourage sympathy?

Magpie:
  Lots of people feel no sympathy for him because of his own 
> actions and personality--but lots of people do. 

Alla:

Yes, of course.


Magpie:
 > Elkins didn't make specific predictions of what was going to 
happen with 
> Draco, but I think HBP absolutely validated a lot of the things 
she was 
> pointing out about the character. What Elkins calls the 
hurt/comfort factor, 
> Draco the conflicted nutter--that's exactly the stuff that was 
used in his 
> story.  (She even had Myrtle as the hurt/comfort fan!;-)  Lots of 
moments in 
> HBP were like deja vu to H/D hurt/comfort readers.

Alla:

Was it though? Of course as I said, I myself see where sympathy for 
Draco could come from in HBP? But does JKR describe Draco conflicted 
nutter or Draco's murderer in making?

Is his tale supposed to elicit sympathy for him or caution? As in - 
be careful, if you want to start getting involved in the gang of 
murderers and torturers, you can be in deeper than you know and very 
very fasr.


Magpie: 
> JKR, of course, always knew where the character was going and has 
been 
> writing him the same all along.  He hadn't had his feet held to 
the fire 
> pre-HBP, but she was always preparing him for the sympathetic (to 
her at 
> least) story of HBP and beyond--and I think completely 
understanding how 
> some readers were going to react with too much sympathy.

Alla:

I am just not sure how much sympathy JKR wanted for Draco.

JMO,

Alla, who quoted small parts of Elkins' post and recommends to 
everyone to read the whole post and in fact any post of hers.