Harry's reasoning regarding Narcissa's lie is faulty

[Carol]

No: HPFGUIDX 178058

"curlyhornedsnorkack" wrote:
> <snip>
> > 
> > It makes more sense that Narcissa lied to end Voldemort's reign.
She had nothing to gain from having Voldemort alive. She and her
husband were no longer valued death eaters. They were terrified.
> <snip>
>  She risked her life, and her husband's and son's lives, in the hope
that Harry really could kill Voldemort and end their misery.
> <snip>
> 
> Potioncat:
> I haven't seen this idea either, and I think you're right! In fact,
I think Narcissa had been disatisfied with DE-hood for a while, or she
wouldn't have gone to Snape for Draco's protection. Before DH, I 
thought she might have insisted on Hogwarts for Draco as a way of 
protecting him from either DEs or the Dark Arts. Turns out he would
have been safer at Durmstrang. <snip>

Carol responds:

I agree that the Malfoys had nothing to gain from Voldemort's return,
though I wouldn't put it past Lucius to try to regain his old position
as LV's right-hand man with Snape dead if LV had won. (He could have
acquired a new wand somehow.) And I don't think that Narcissa's
sentiments would have changed toward Voldie if he hadn't abused and
disgraced her family, and, especially, endangered her son. I don't
think that she was "dissatisfied with DEhood" per se (JKR says that
she didn't have the Mark) and she seems loyal enough in HBP and DH in
everything that doesn't relate to Draco. I also don't deny that
Harry's perception of her motives could be faulty (though I think he
sees more clearly after King's Cross than ever before, in particular a
recognition of the humanity of the Slytherins).

My question is, suppose that Draco had died in the RoR and Harry had
told Narcissa that Draco was dead. What would her reaction have been
then? I think she would have been too angry and distraught to be
rational, and perhaps would have blamed Harry for Draco's death. I
think she would have told Voldie that Harry was alive in that case.
She could not, however, have fought on the side of the DEs unless she
snatched up the wand of a fallen witch or wizard since she had given
hers to Draco.

I'm not denying that it was brave of Narcissa to lie to LV (though she
avoids his eyes to prevent detection) or that her love of her son
outweighs any remaining loyalty to LV (who had treated her family very
badly). But I think that self-interest and a desire for vengeance
would have triumphed in the end had Harry told her that Draco was
dead. Everything, for her, depended on his answer, IMO.

I think that Narcissa and Bellatrix are a contrasting pair. Both start
out caring about their families (except the rejected Andromeda) to
some degree (Bellatrix is surprisingly fond of "Cissy" in "Spinner's
End") and loyal to the Dark Lord. The difference is that, for
Bellatrix, loyalty and devotion to Voldemort (and "glory" in his
service) are more important than anything else, including life; for
Narcissa, love of her family, and especially her son, trumps
everything, however much she may support the cause of pure-blood
supremacy, especially after LV disgraces her husband and endangers her
son.

I don't consider Narcissa to be a "good Slytherin" (unlike Andromeda,
who risked and lost a great deal supporting the anti-Voldemort side),
but she's better than the irredeemably evil Bellatrix. I imagine the
elder Malfoys slipping back into something like the life they led
before Voldemort's second rise to power, but without their former
influence. Maybe Narcissa inherited Bellatirx's wealth (assuming that
Rodolphus and Rabastan were dead). What they did all day, sitting
around like a pair of dragons on their pile of gold, we're left to
imagine. It must have been a boring and unproductive life.

Carol, still wondering how the Malfoys got by without a House-elf
after Dobby was freed