Draco as Victim in GoF (was: Re: The Huge overreactions...)

[sistermagpie]

No: HPFGUIDX 150332

> Carol responds:
> Ah. Here's where we differ, at least primarily. IMO, Dumbledore
would
> not have died if Draco had not let the DEs into Hogwarts,
activating
> the UV and forcing Snape's hand. If Snape had wanted to kill DD, he
> had plenty of other chances--sixteen years' worth--notably the ring
> Horcrux curse, which he could have allowed to kill DD with no blame
> attached to himself. Neither Snape nor DD believed that Draco could
> kill DD, nor did they think that DEs could get into the castle
thanks
> to the protections that DD had placed on it. But Draco got past
those
> protections, confronting DD in an attempt to kill him, and the
> presence of the DEs threatened Draco's life as well as
Dumbledore's,
> activating all three provisions of the UV. When Snape entered the
> room, the stage was set. He had no choice but to fulfill the UV
(save
> Draco and "do the deed") or die, taking Dumbledore, Draco, and
> probably Harry with him.



Magpie:
I see what you're saying and I agree with what's going on in the
situation. It's just that to be honest, it seems like this goes
beyond Draco being responsible for his own actions and subsumes
Snape's actions into Draco's.  You seem to speak of Draco's actions
actively while Snape's are passive.  Draco is a free person while
Snape is only acted upon, his actions forced upon him by
circumstances.

Draco is given the job of killing Dumbledore, which he accepts.  He
creates a way to breach Hogwarts' defenses and bring DEs into the
castle.  The DEs are supposed to be "backup," people who will
guarantee him an open shot at Dumbledore.  This is exactly what they
do.  Only once given that shot, Draco does not want to kill
Dumbledore.  Now the people he himself has called to the castle are
going to "back him up" to the point where he can't back down.  He's
created this situation and that's the situation he's in when Snape
arrives.  What would have happened if Snape hadn't arrived?

I imagine Dumbledore would be killed by one of the DEs.  Draco would
be killed by one of the DEs.  Draco's not killing Dumbledore would
have little practical value, since Dumbledore would die anyway by
the hand of someone Draco brought to the castle.  Draco would be an
accessory to the murder, but would not be the murderer, and he would
pay for it with his life.  A bleak ending, but an ending to the
story of Draco Malfoy, the Boy Who Cried Mudblood and Lived To
Regret It.  Draco would have lived and died by his choices.
Dumbledore would be murdered by a DE.

Instead Snape arrives, kills Dumbledore, and hustles everyone away
including Draco.  Obviously a much better outcome overall.  But how
is Draco responsible for Snape's actions?  Because of the vow?  That
was completely Snape's choice.  For putting Snape in a sticky
situation by not being as incompetent as Snape thought?  Well, yeah,
he did do that but I don't see how that makes him literally
responsible for how Snape deals with the situation.  One could also
point to Lucius for putting Draco in the sticky situation to which
he responds by getting DEs into the castle, after all. Snape sure
does Draco a great service here, but he's not forced into it by
Draco, and he's still a free agent. I think the look of hatred and
revulsion on his face is due to the fact that he knows he is
actively killing here.  And I think Dumbledore's pleading indicates
what's going on here is something between him and Snape and not just
a Rube Goldberg Draco's set in motion.

So I just think we have to look at everyone's courses of actions as
free choices even as we acknowledge the things influencing them.
Maybe I'm reading something into it that isn't there, but it just
seems like this: "IMO, Dumbledore would not have died if Draco had
not let the DEs into Hogwarts, activating the UV and forcing Snape's
hand" hides a little fancy footwork.  Dumbledore died because
Draco "activated the Vow," but that would be the Vow that Snape
willingly made in Chapter Two.  Yes Draco's bringing the DEs into
the castle may have activated the UV, but the UV was something Snape
willingly took on himself for some reason, it's not something that
just exists without Snape's having anything to do with it.  And it's 
a Vow that *had* to end in either Snape's death or Snape killing 
Dumbledore.  It wasn't open ended, like it could go on forever 
without Snape ever having to kill Dumbledore or die.  Even if Draco 
had not brought the DEs into the castle, the Vow would be activated 
by Draco not being able to kill Dumbledore.  The Vow is activated by 
Draco, but not by Draco's taking an action.  It would be activated 
whenever it became clear he wouldn't/couldn't do it.  I do think 
that if Snape had never appeared in the room Dumbledore would
have probably wound up dead anyway in the scenario I outlined above,
but still that scenario didn't happen.  Once Snape willingly
involved himself he changed the scene and made himself an active
player. Had the scenario I described happened it seems DD would be 
killed by a DD, Draco would be killed by a DE and Snape would have 
dropped dead for no other reason than he took that Vow back in 
Chapter Two.

In terms of the themes of the book, I want to be careful to be clear
that I'm not making Draco out to be a passive pawn in the situation--
he does have responsibility for his own actions, which include
agreeing to try to kill DD, taking steps to do that which result in
Katie and Ron being hurt, and letting DEs into the castle which
gives him some responsibility for what they do when they get there.
I do see Draco as actively following his own course and plan
throughout the year, one that leads to the scene in the Tower. But
Draco is also a kid being acted upon, being used as a pawn due to
the actions of adults in his life. And his actions in HBP, though
they're reflected in a dark mirror, just seem completely correct in
terms of his development to me just as Harry's are in OotP, no
matter how much trouble they cause.

As strange as it sounds, Draco's "success" with the Cabinet may wind
up to be more of an asset than the short term better outcome of his
failure.  He's just one more person who turns out to not be able to
be controlled or counted on to act according to Dumbledore's or
Voldemort's plans.  That causes trouble in the short run, but I
think ultimately it's the unexpected that makes this world more
hopeful, not less.  Whatever happens, Harry's going to win, and when
we look back whatever happened may seem like the best thing that
could have happened, because it lead to that victory.

-m