Dark Magic (+ a little Marietta)

[sistermagpie]

No: HPFGUIDX 176845

> > Magpie:
> > By "muddling" the view of sentience JKR gets to have it both 
ways. 
> > Animals can't understand an insult. Buckbeak is 
anthropomorphized in 
> > order to have him react to an insult *exactly* the way any human 
> > would--only with greater strength because he's an animal. 
Further 
> > stacking the deck, this is described as being an "instinct" for 
the 
> > animal. 
> > 
> 
> Prep0strus:
> But JKR is not unique in doing this, and it is not new in fantasy
> (like with unicorns).  Fantastical animals ARE different from real
> animals.  

Magpie:
I didn't say she was unique for muddling, but the way she's muddling 
it is specific for the reaction we get. We wind up with a pretty 
obvious joke--Draco says something insulting and the animal smacks 
him down. It's not particularly fantastic--it's an easy joke done on 
sitcoms as well as fantasy. Most fantasy writers, in fact, would 
probably make the animal more unique as a creature.

Prep0strus:

He didn't react exactly the way a human would - clawing
> someone for insulting them?  Maybe some people... But the point it 
is
> WAS described as instinct.  that's not 'stacking the deck' - that's
> stating the facts!  it's how it works, how the rules are set up.  
Just
> because Draco is too stupid and mean to follow the rules doesn't 
mean
> the world is conspiring against him.
> 

Magpie:
Yes, I would say that's the way a lot of people would react, 
particularly in this universe. Buckbeak is basically just belting 
him one and happens to have claws. I know that it's described as 
instinct. That was my point. The animal belts Draco for being a jerk 
but then he's an innocent animal because it was really just an 
instinct that happened to play out exactly like something human. 
Buckbeak is reacting to an insult with anger while still being 
unresponsible for reacting to an insult with anger. The switch from 
devilish fun to angelic concern is for me pretty common in the 
series.

It is stacking the deck for the reader, imo, because of how it 
works. "The world" most certainly is conspiring against Draco just 
as it often conspires against and then for Harry--Buckbeak has that 
particular instinct to put him on a collision course with this 
character. I'm talking here about the way the scene is set up, not 
Draco's own pov of his own world. Within his pov them's the breaks. 
(Just as the world conspires *with* Hagrid so that his particular 
brand of anthropomorphizing/admiring animals makes him an expert.)

> 
> Magpie:
> > So we get this highly satisfying mixture where Draco's behavior--
> > which is perfectly acceptable in dealing with an animal, 
actually, 
> > so much so that I believe in the movie it's *Hagrid* who calls 
> > Buckbeak some kind of brute while Draco is made to do things 
that 
> > would actually provoke an animal--gets him a smackdown from an 
> > animal. 

Prep0strus:
> 
> Ok, no, no, no, no, and no. Perfectly acceptable when dealing with 
an
> animal?  Ok, I've worked with chimpanzees.  Smart, amazing, 
powerful
> animals full of complexities and personality.  And if I went in, 
doing
> what I had been taught not to, bearing my teeth, standing
> aggressively, being too close, and I got a finger ripped off for 
it,
> that animal wouldn't be put down.

Magpie:
Yes, yes, yes, yes.:-) Perfectly acceptable in working with animal. 
Nobody's talking about chimpanzees and baring your teeth. Petting an 
animal while calling it a great ugly brute is something an 
affectionate animal-lovers might certainly do, imo. What Draco is 
doing is not "provoking an animal" in any real world sense--his tone 
of voice might be positively soothing for all we know. It provokes 
this fictional creature who's been created around this totally 
fantastic quirk. (Which is why Draco's actions don't horrify me in 
themselves in this scene.)

Prep0strus:
  I would be called an idiot for the
> rest of my life for acting in a way that lost me my finger, and 
they'd
> never let me near the animals again - nor should they.  And if I 
had
> spent my time insulting the creatures? Please.

Magpie:
I can't imagine calling animal control on somebody ruffling their 
Great Dane's ears and calling him a slobbery idiot, myself. Wonder 
what one would be called if one took those same chimps and released 
a dozen of them in a roomful of eighth graders after telling them 
not to bare or it'd be the last thing they'd do and one of them lost 
a finger when he smiled.

Prepostrus:
> 
> And, I reiterate, there are specific rules for dealing with a
> hippogriff.  Magical rules for a magical creature that JKR sets out
> for us.  Draco breaks the rules; he does so in an offensive way.  
As
> for Hagrid's portrayal in the movies... well, I hate the way the
> movies treat Hagrid, and I don't think it has real bearing on the 
story.

Magpie:
Yeah, I get that Draco broke the rules. I've never said he didn't. 
The movie's portrayal in this case I mentioned to show that there's 
nothing inherently violent or abusive in what Draco does in terms of 
real world standards any more than there's anything inherently wrong 
in Neville adding more than one spleen to his Potion. The movie is 
also significant, imo, because I think they feel like they need to 
make Hagrid look better and Draco worse to get the same emotion 
without the narrator to guide the audience along.

 
> Magpie: 
> > Iow, Buckbeak is an animal in his own universe, but 
his "instincts" 
> > recreate the same behavior we would see in people. With the 
added 
> > perk that "even animals" can see how much Draco sucks. And yet 
far 
> > from that being that, a tit for tat, it's the start of a 
> > second "Draco is a monstrous child!" storyline with even more 
> > Gryffindor victims, with Buckbeak now sliding easily into the 
role 
> > of Petey the Pup Who Never Hurt Nobody, Mister while Draco 
cackles 
> > over slitting his throat.
> > 
> 
> Prep0strus:
> Ok, but it's not like Buckbeak has magical foresight.  He treated
> Draco with respect until he was treated without it.  It's not that
> 'even animals' can see how much Draco sucks.  It's that Draco acts
> like a total jerk 'even to animals'.

Magpie:
I didn't mean Buckbeak had magical foresight, I meant Buckbeak's 
created so that the way Draco sucks will get him a smack down that 
he deserves. As you yourself say--Draco sucks even to animals. 
That's what I get from the scene, and to me as a reader, I start 
pulling against the author and start looking for the suck somewhere 
else.:-)

Prep0strus:
> 
> You may not like the storyline, the way Draco is drawn, but that's 
how
> it is.  How can we have sympathy for him, as if we should simply 
feel
> bad that JKR made him so terrible, so obviously, he's not really 
that
> terrible.  He IS a monstrous child.  Buckbeak never would have hurt
> him without provocation.

Magpie:
How can you have sympathy for him, you mean. Obviously many people 
do, unfortunately. There are other things going on in the scene here 
than Draco's "abuse" of Buckbeak, so different people pick up on and 
relate to different things in the scene--things that are just as 
valid and hot buttons to them. I've already agreed with you on the 
Draco character in general. Different emotional reactions aren't 
right or wrong. 

 > Magpie:
> > Well, so is Hagrid's. I've had this argument many times, and I 
will 
> > never understand see Hagrid as anything like these hypothetical 
> > teachers who run incredibly responsible classes. There's no 
> > indication that Draco isn't watching the animal for signs of 
> > aggression. He hasn't been warned about loud noises or fast 
> > movements. He's been taught to bow etc., which he does, and he 
quite 
> > possibly didn't hear the line "Hyppogriffs are proud so don't 
> > insult 'em or it's the last thing you'll do." (Obviously a 
> > ridiculous way of introducing the danger to a class full of 
kids.) 
> > With all the attention paid to Draco's cowardice, how is it that 
> > he's also reckless enough to tease a wild animal? Or is it just 
that 
> > he can be self-contradictory as long as he's bad in every way?
> > 
> 
> Prep0strus:
> Yes, the classes are ridiculous.  But so are the other classes. 
> Dangerous things can happen all over that school, and do.  but if 
the
> students acted responsibly, there wouldn't have been a problem.  
The
> other students do.  It's only Draco.  And, like I said, Snape 
wouldn't
> put up with that nonsense.

Magpie:
Actually, all the teachers have to put up with this nonsense--making 
clear that they won't put up with it is part of a teacher's job. But 
I don't know what this has to do with anything anyway. You say it 
was only Draco, and yes, it was Draco. I have hard time thinking it 
*couldn't* have been anyone else given the set up (especially 
Neville, who was running around in a panic) and wind up thinking it 
was Draco because the author made sure to create a creature whose 
latin name might as well have been Targetus Draconis. Your emotional 
reaction to this seemed to be "OMG, Draco is such a horrible child!" 
Mine was, "I wish Hagrid would get eaten by something..." You focus 
on how Draco's not listening was especially bad because the class 
was so dangerous, while I think the class was stupidly dangerous.

Prep0strus:

> 
> And if he didn't hear the line about not insulting them - that's 
also
> his fault. Pay attention. Dangerous creatures.  Draco's a jerk, but
> he's not supposed to be a moron.  Draco teases the animal because 
he
> doesn't believe Hagrid - he thinks Hagrid's an idiot. 


Magpie:
He's right there, imo. But regardless I already agreed to this, that 
he wasn't paying attention--and pointed out that all the students 
have times when they don't pay attention, and it's only here where 
it becomes a cardinal sin. (I mean, I know the idea is supposed to 
be that it's extra stupid here because the animal is SO DANGEROUS 
but it still sounds like more than that, like there's just zero 
tolerance for something people and kids do all the time, and this is 
the first day.) Even here --he's stupid for not listening for those 
10 seconds and yet is also teasing the creature because he didn't 
believe what he didn't hear. How's he doing both? We see him 
whispering in the moment Hagrid says this one thing, and we see him 
following the directions he was listening to. If he didn't believe 
Hagrid why'd he bow? I thought part of the burn on Draco was that he 
thought he was in the clear and successful.

Prep0strus:
> 
> "This is very esy," malfoy drawled, loud enolugh for Harry to hear
> him.  "I knew it must have been, if Potter could do it.... I bet
> you're not dangerous at all, are you?" he said to the hippogriff. 
> "Are you, you great ugly brute?"
> 
> Draco isn't courageous.  He's arrogant and superior to something he
> considers below him.

Magpie:
If he was actually provoking this animal intentionally, he was 
courageous (and more stupid)--he could have gotten himself killed! I 
think he's just being arrogant and superior. I am arguing against 
him being courageous here.

Prep0strus: 
> And, again, if you want to criticize  the way he's written, that's
> very very valid.  But it doesn't make him any better.  He still is
> terrible.  Even if she makes him a doddering caricature of a 
person,
> that's how she made him.  He's a horrid little boy.

Magpie:
I am criticizing the way he's written. I also happen to be 
criticizing the way other things are written--and saying the way I 
took the scene. One's visceral reaction to Draco is subjective, and 
how angry one is at him in the scene is too. I started by basically 
agreeing with you about Draco, and I have agreed with your posts on 
the Slytherins in general. I disagreed about certain things in the 
scene and the way I see them--and I still do. Draco can still be a 
bad character for me without having this reaction to the Buckbeak 
storyline. Perhaps our only difference is that you dislike Draco and 
I don't, but is that really something to argue about? It seems like 
we've gotten into this big emotional area that can't be argued for 
no reason.

> > Magpie:
> > Gee, you mean like throwing a firecracker in a cauldron? I 
believe 
> > it was Crabbe and Goyle that suffered the consequences then. No 
big 
> > deal. But to answer your question, of course they'd suffer the 
> > consequences. Draco does here. I didn't disagree that Draco 
suffered 
> > the consequences of his own actions-that's why Buckbeak slashed 
him. 
> > That's also why he actually learns to listen in class later--
listen 
> > very carefully because he knows not to trust Hagrid to really 
put 
> > across the danger accurately.
> > 
> 
> Prep0strus:
> If Snape had caught Harry... whoo-boy, he would've been in 
trouble. 
> Just lucky to get away.  But let's remember motivations as well. 
> Harry's motivation was a distraction so he could do something he 
felt
> vital to defeating evil.  Draco's motivation is that he's a nasty
> little git.

Magpie:
I didn't compare anything about their characters in the scene, I 
just pointed out that kids goofing around in class is a pretty 
normal thing. I don't blame anybody else for Draco's not listening 
or for insulting the hyppogriff. I just don't think what he did in 
the scene with Buckbeak is so very surprising for a 13-year-old boy--
even one who wasn't the most repulsive thing in the universe. 


> > Magpie: Draco deserves 
> > it. Neville deserves a little patience. Draco made a deliberate 
> > mistake. Neville made an honest mistake. Even though they both 
could 
> > have basically done the same thing. Kids make mistakes.
> > 
> 
> Prep0strus:
> but draco DID deserve it.  Neville DID make an honest mistake.  
Even
> if Draco wasn't warned, what kind of a nasty little kid treats an
> animal like that, no less a potentially dangerous animal?  That's 
not
> a 'mistake'.  It's a deliberate, foolish action.
> 

Magpie:
As I've said before, lots of people would "treat an animal like 
that" imo. He's petting it and saying, "You aren't dangerous at all, 
are you, you big ugly brute." I think plenty of kids--even non-nasty 
ones--could do that and even consider it affectionate. I used to 
call my Kerry Blue "Fungus Face" when she needed a bath because her 
beard got a bit funky--it's an insult, but it was affectionate.

However, I don't see why that doesn't make it a mistake. Neville is 
given instructions just like Draco is. Neville doesn't follow them 
even though he wants the Potion to turn out well. Draco follows 
instructions about bowing etc. Presumably he doesn't want to get 
attacked by the thing--he's a nervous nellie in general. But only 
Neville's mistake is honest and only Draco deserves it.

 
> > Magpie:
> > Funny, because I also find it one of the more sickening in the 
HP 
> > books, but for a slightly different reason. The Slytherins 
getting 
> > pleasure in Buckbeak being put down is one, but I'm also creeped 
out 
> > by Slytherin's being set up to do that in the first place. The 
> > author uses an animal created for the purpose of attacking him 
> > because he "deserves it" and then uses it as a springboard 
> > for "Please Don't Shoot My Dog!" casting the equally 
irresponsible 
> > teacher as the victim. Because Hagrid's not giving a damn about 
> > people getting hurt is kind of cute while the Slytherin's is 
clearly 
> > sick. It's all about whipping up that feeling about the 
Slytherins, 
> > isn't it. It's like the exact kind of sadistic attitude so 
> > disgusting in the Slytherins permeates the book and is given a 
> > totally righteous spin, which is why PoA is one of my least 
favorite 
> > books despite the great revelations in the Shack.

> Prep0strus:
> But Slytherin wasn't set up by anyone... except the author.  Which 
is
> not a 'setup' - it is a scene that shows the character of the 
characters.

Magpie:
Who I believe was the person I said set him up, didn't I? That's the 
whole point. Of course it's a set up--I'm discussing the way the 
whole scene/story is set up. I *agree* with you that canonically all 
the bad things people say about Slytherin are true, that they have 
earned their own bad reputation. I do not agree with the arguments 
that they are misunderstood, that there is anything much good there 
at all. I just also find this whole storyline in PoA as written 
unpleasant and strangely related to exactly what's unpleasant about 
Draco's own attitude.

Prep0strus:
> 
> Hagrid not giving a damn about people getting hurt is just plain
> false, as we see in his quick actions to rescue Draco and get him 
to
> the healer, as well as how upset he is later.
> 
> "madam Pomfrey fixed him best she could," said hagrid dully, "but 
he's
> sayin' it's still agony... covered in bandages...moanin'..."
> 
> Hagrid cares a lot, and suffers way more throughout the incident 
than
> Draco does.  Draco suffers momentary pain, then he actually gets a
> bonus out of it.  Hagrid is in misery over thinking he hurt a 
child -
> he does love teaching.  he's worried about losing his job (possibly
> appropriately, but the standards do seem very different at Hogwarts
> than in RL).  And he's heartbroken that Buckbeak might be killed 
for
> acting as a hippogriff.

Magpie:
Because when Hagrid puts people in dangerous situations he doesn't 
mean it so it's kind of cute. Hagrid feels badly here *even when he 
shouldn't because it was all Draco's fault.* This is why this book 
in particular is one I don't like, though it points to what I found 
disappointing in the whole series. I should have actually known what 
was coming the way this worked out way back in Book III (no 
possibility for compromise here--Draco/Slytherin just must be 
stopped so the good guys can prevail!).

Prep0strus:> 
> These classes are dangerous, these animals are dangerous. but the
> Griffindors are right - it WAS a good lesson.  A lesson these kids
> SHOULD learn.  Respect for these creatures, and everyone in class 
was
> doing very well, following instructions and learning.  Only Draco,
> because he is a 'bad' kid has a problem.  And that problem is 
easily
> fixable with a trip to Pomfrey.

Magpie:
Yup, good thing it was Draco hurt, because being a "bad kid" the 
lesson can still be "a good lesson" even after it ended in disaster 
after a short time (Hagrid loves teaching!!). If only I could get on 
board with this attitude I'd probably have loved the book. 
Unfortunately, all I see is exactly what you're describing--the 
author creating a character to be a hate object, to never stop 
deserving punishment, so I should be feeling sorry for the poor 
students and Hagrid whose class was ruined. 

And since the whole book makes me dislike the wrong people, the very 
things Draco does that are objectively wrong that are supposed to 
horrify me don't bother me the way they should. I know Hagrid's 
pet's going to be fine and he's going to keep his job; I know 
Draco's not going to get what he wants. So while I see that JKR has 
created Draco to be 100% repulsive, I still spend the book disliking 
Hagrid and not angry at Draco at all. Don't much like Buckbeak 
either (though I didn't think he deserved to be executed).

Prep0strus:
He can't be 'set up'
> any further than he wants to go.

Magpie:
Not sure what you mean by that. Draco does whatever the author tells 
him to do--in some cases even when I'm not sure what his motivation 
is. I think Draco's behaving completely repulsively in PoA as well 
(even though I still don't think he's that bad in the first lesson), 
but he still doesn't get my hatred. 

Prep0strus:
> 
> Also, he ruined class for everybody for the rest of the semester. 
> Good job.  (I know care of magical creatures wasn't anybody's 
favorite
> class, but it would have been mine, and i'd be pissed to be stuck 
with
> flobberworms)

Magpie:
And there's a big reason why my hatred goes elsewhere. Draco ruined 
the first class for everybody by getting hurt. And every other 
decision Hagrid makes in his class is also Draco's fault. No 
responsibilty for Hagrid at all (no surprise--this is the guy who 
sternly gives kids detention for saving his own a**). And here my 
entire life I've thought I wouldn't want to be a teacher because it 
was too much responsibility and controlling a bunch of adolescents 
who would know doubt include a few boys who challenge authority or 
show off would be a normal part of the job. So I hate this 
storyline. Don't like talking about it either, but am completely 
incapable of stopping myself whenever I read about that awful Malfoy 
boy in this scene (rather than the rest of the book).

zgirnius:
Apparently your idea of dramatic, and mine, differ...dramatically. 
<g>
In "The Battle of Hogwarts", the images of Draco dragging the
unconscious Goyle away from the oncoming fire, and later, sitting
high on the pile of desks with his arms wrapped protectively around
his friend, were plenty dramatic enough for me. 

Magpie:
Possibly! Only because I find your description of the actions here 
written more dramatically and heroically than I think they are in 
canon:

"Malfoy grabbed the Stunned Goyle and dragged him along: Crabbe 
outstripped all of them, now looking terrified..."

"And then he saw them: Malfoy with his arms around the unconscious 
Goyle, the pair of them perched on a fragile tower of charred desks, 
and Harry dived."

It's Harry who sounds dramatically heroic here to me. 

-m (who never felt any connection to Slytherin the house at all 
until the final book, when they seemed so much like the Damned of 
this universe she perversely felt a kinship)