Resolutions/ Draco/Are we being too critical?

[sistermagpie]

No: HPFGUIDX 183477

> Jen: I thought Draco was trying his best to do something positive 
> when he didn't identify the Trio at Malfoy Manor.  Also when he 
> attempted to keep Crabbe/Goyle from killing Harry.  Neither effort 
> amounted to much though: the Trio were still identified and Draco had 
> to be saved by Harry in the ROR.  I believe that's the droopiness 
> Montavilla was referring to, the fact that Draco's efforts to do the 
> right thing fizzled into nothingness or transformed into another 
> opportunity for Harry to save the day rather than having meaning for 
> Draco.

Magpie:
For me this gets into the harping vs. criticism thing. Because I don't 
think JKR wrote it "wrong." I just think she wrote one thing and not 
another, and I'm describing what that said to me and what it didn't. I 
admit that I believe the story I was expecting after HBP was far more 
challenging a story to have written, period. It doesn't make it a 
failure that she didn't write that story, but she didn't. Describing 
the story I thought was happening at the end of HBP is not, imo, a 
criticism of JKR. I considered the end of HBP a real high point because 
I thought she'd set up such a juicy challenge for herself and I had no 
idea how she was going to pull it off--but I completely trusted that 
she would. I was just sitting back and seeing how she did it.

So it was disappointing to me personally, of course, that it turned out 
she wasn't trying to pull it off, but rather she was going to abandon 
stuff that I thought was her strongest thing (the on-going antagonistic 
relationships with Slytherins) and choose to focus on plot coupons and 
mini-quests for Harry. I know Harry can ace all of those and be 
courageous. It's a Tri-Wizard tournament on a larger scale, basically. 
As you say, Harry is indeed the center of his universe. 

Now, when it comes to what's being said about a storyline like Draco's, 
it's not just the Tower scene. That's one scene in context of 7 books. 
And for the most part what we do for 7 books is look down on Draco. 
This is also what she brings up in interviews: don't think too highly 
of him, he's just really bad, I felt sorry for him, but oh well, he and 
Harry could never be friends, I'm disturbed why people like him, etc. 

She clearly considers it something that Draco learns he's not a killer, 
even if that, too, can arguably be read as just another sign of 
cowardice. But it really in the end just seems just like a penance for 
the foolish boy who sucks but is not bad enough to require him paying 
the ultimate price. Learning and growing, the possibility that he could 
be something more, that is not part of his story. So that's the story I 
come away with. It's not particularly uplifting and it's not supposed 
to be.

I don't consider interviews canon, but the reason I refer to them is 
that where JKR is talking about her books she's telling us a bit about 
how she sees them. And real redemption (not redemption meaning buying 
themselves off through penance or managing to love somebody somewhere) 
is not what it's about. We don't have to respect Draco--or even Snape--
the way we respect good guys. That's partly, I think, why people keep 
coming up with the Calvinism idea. And why JKR would even be asked, 
after the books were over, whether Snape could be considered a hero--
which she says he is, but with obvious qualifications.  The inability 
for anyone to change all that much, in fact, is a running theme 
throughout the books. Everybody pretty much is who they were at 11. Of 
course Draco's story could never actually be transformative. 

I'm not imagining psychological motives to JKR here, just looking at 
what she says when talking about different stories. And for instance, 
when she talks about people like Draco and Pansy she refers to people 
who made fun of her in school--and not to say that back then she hated 
them but now she thinks about them differently etc. No, they are 
brought low or shown to be inferior. They're not lifted up or shown to 
change or given dignity. They're not equal to the heroes and the heroes 
never have to be friends with them. Again, just to be clear, when I say 
that I don't mean that this is the way JKR thinks about the real people 
she knew, or mean to suggest she's stunted emotionally or something. 
I'm saying that in the story this is the way the characters are used. 
And that's fine. But the story can't be about respect for the character 
and also about looking down on him. Harry doesn't see himself in Draco, 
they don't come closer together in the story. The main change is in 
Harry's growth from feeling powerless to powerful regarding Draco.

He sees himself in Snape only so far as Snape is sympathetic and 
admirable. Snape the hero who winds up safely in Harry's power, 
dependent on Harry to grant him the respect Harry thinks he has earned. 
Harry's victory includes a complete control over all of the people who 
don't like him. Each one winds up acknowledging Harry's greater power 
over him. 

So even if Dumbledore had actually risked everything over the soul of a 
boy that wasn't Harry (which he didn't), an unworthy boy, we don't 
actually see that his soul really is just as good as Harry's. It's 
like...it leaves it as Dumbledore being incredibly good by treating 
Draco as if his soul is a precious thing, just as shiny and good as 
Harry's soul. But this always remains a sign of *Dumbledore's* goodness 
in being so generous. So it always plays more like just more of the 
same conceited fantasy. It's like...have you ever met anybody who loves 
to give gifts but got really disturbed if someone gave them a gift in 
return? Because the gift isn't about actually wanting to do something 
nice for the other person, it's about seeing yourself as the one who 
gives without accepting in return. To be an actual good person, one has 
to push through that. HP is not about pushing through that. In the end, 
it's very safe that way. 

-m