Re: Draco Unredeemed and the Cabinet That Won’t Die (long)

[Renee]

No: HPFGUIDX 159184

> > bboyminn:
> > 
> > I have no problem with Draco being redeemed as long as 
> > people are clear about what 'redeemed' means in this
> > context. Too many people think it means that Draco 
> > becomes Ron-II; Harry's best buddy and all-time friend.
> > Sorry, but that is simply not going to happen. Draco will
> > always be selfish, self-centered, and self-serving. 
 
<snip>

> > Right now I'm leaning in favor of Draco working against
> > Voldemort, but being against Voldemort doesn't mean Draco
> > will ever be good or nice. His actions will always be for
> > purely self-serving reasons. 
> 
> Magpie:
> I think this is a stingy way to look at it, pre-emptively saying 
> Draco doesn't get to change even if he does change because he's got 
> so much to make up for he'll always be comfortably in the red when 
> it comes to badness.  

<snip>
> 
> There's nothing about Draco as a character (just as there isn't 
> anything about Snape) that says he couldn't genuinely choose the 
> side of good ever or ever act out of the right impulses, that he 
> must always be purely self-serving and bad.  

<snip>

> I have no idea where the character would go, but I do 
> see hints that a rift between the houses must be healed, and to me 
> that suggests the new generation has to learn something significant 
> in order to meet Gryffindor halfway to work with them.  Not the 
> familiar fandom story where Harry gets to rack up the required 
> Slytherin points by working with them while everything remains 
> comfortingly black and white. Also, I think JKR has been careful 
> about just how much Draco "owes" to anyone--it's really not much.  
> He's been consistently unpleasant, but suffers for it in every book, 
> doesn't get off without punishment (often coming immediately), 
> doesn't cause lasting damage.  As I believe Geoff said in some of 
> the posts he linked to, no one is beyond redemption.  If you change 
> your mind, you change your mind.  From then on, you are changed.

Renee:
As long as we don't know what exactly it is that changes, changing
your mind is a rather vague concept, and it doesn't automatically mean
you're a changed person. The change can be partial, from black to
grey, so to speak. Or you can have a less than stellar motive for
changing your mind. It's not a matter of black and white... 

What if, for instance, Regulus Black (assuming he's RAB) turned
against Voldemort because he discovered the purebloods were merely
used as tools, and this angered him? We don't know why exactly he
tried to thwart Voldemort, but it doesn't have to be because he
suddenly realised racism is wrong. Maybe he did, but this doesn't
necessarily follow from the fact that he changed his mind about
Voldemort. 

Likewise, Draco can very well go on believing that purebloods are
several notches above the rest of the WW, yet come to the conclusion
this conviction is not worth damaging your soul by killing people.
This is commendable, but it doesn't make him a wonderful guy. And he
doesn't have to be. (I'd even go as far as saying that he has a right
to go on considering himself superior to halfbloods and muggleborns.
Though I'm not sure JKR will let him.)    
 
The interesting thing about Slytherin House is that it is a necessary
part of the whole, as JKR has pointed out, while stil representing
less desirable traits (it *is* the Pureblood house, unless you think
the Hat is singing nonsense). Like Harry will have to come to terms
with the negative impulses within himself, Hogwarts, or rather, the
other three Houses, will have to learn to accept Slytherin *despite*
its less pleasant aspects. What will have to disappear, is the
scapegoat function of Slytherin, the attitude personified by Hagrid in
PS/SS when he says all dark wizards come from this House. 

If Draco is a true representant of Slytherin - and I believe he is -
he does not have to change all that much, personality-wise. As long as
he changes allegiances.

Renée