lisdelacroix @ April 19 2004, 23:36:54 UTC

Maybe she's being a friend and covering for him, putting herself in the spotlight by openly insulting and mocking, so as to let Draco have time to think over things and not be so prominent while not on his usual insulting soapbox. Of course, that might be my hopeful brain chanting "Draco's good! Draco's good!"

divinelight @ April 19 2004, 23:46:13 UTC

"M.B. is good! M.B. is good!" She doesn't really mean it. She's just being a good friend.

This is evil. Pure evil.

lisdelacroix @ April 19 2004, 23:47:46 UTC

"M.B. is Good!"

divinelight @ April 19 2004, 23:52:08 UTC

<3.

Anonymous @ April 19 2004, 23:48:18 UTC

I love your icon! Do you have a link to the original art?

lisdelacroix @ April 19 2004, 23:51:13 UTC

Oh goodness. It was done by someone named Catia, and it was posted for the Christmas Challenger over at Armchair Slash... here it is!

http://www.armchairslash.org/catia/catia_rain.jpg

Its one of my favorite icons, because its got one of my favorite fanarts, as well as one of my favorite quotes (from Cinnamon's Beautiful World). :)

Anonymous @ April 19 2004, 23:53:46 UTC

Thanks! ^^

catiadoodle @ April 20 2004, 12:17:50 UTC

O.O

*Dies happily*

lisdelacroix @ April 20 2004, 12:51:25 UTC

^_^ Its a very beautiful piece of work. The rest of your art is lovely as well! :)

lazy_daze @ April 20 2004, 13:55:18 UTC

WAH BEAUTIFUL WORLD. I love that fic. Now is not the time to be reminded of how angsty it was :/// Um. *is OT*

greenvarnish @ April 23 2004, 07:33:34 UTC

Your icon...is that line a reference to "Velvet Goldmine"? *_*

I really have to say I agree, btw, with that theory. Especially considering the facade he always finds necessary to keep up whenever his father is involved.

chez_caillou @ April 19 2004, 23:39:04 UTC

I agree with you. :) I hope think that Draco is only making these comments because of Lucius' influence.

Perhaps this is Millicent saying that Draco wasn't mocking the attack on the Weasleys because he really didn't want to?

I don't know if that's what Millicent is trying to do. I think she is the type of character who could really mean the things she is saying and not have a hidden meaning. *But I'm still hoping for your interpretation :)*

Also, this seems to be a hint at H/D and how Lucius is controlling Draco:

Just_Harry: You don't know anything about anything Draco's ever done to me. I could probably tell you though.

purestblood: I have a feeling your interactions are about to be severely curtailed.

But players? Great job. <3333

hermione_like @ April 19 2004, 23:53:37 UTC

But players? Great job. <3333

Totally. Of all the weeks to have exams. ;)

sistermagpie @ April 20 2004, 00:53:12 UTC

Yeah, this fascinates me. Definitely ps' player is always in complete control of the character and she's not afraid to make Draco look as bad as possible if it's in character. So I really do think MB is on the level telling Harry that she was not mocking the Weasleys for Draco, and, presumably, that Draco was not holding back because he wanted her to do it for him.

I know it seems ridiculous to examine the behavior of somebody who's been so awful (so if anybody's going to accuse me of excusing his behavior like after the outing I'M NOT!!;-) ), but it seems like Draco is somebody who genuinely believes a lot of the things his parents tell him. That's what happened in the Outing as well--he was shocked when Narcissa suddenly said homosexuality was okay when he'd learned it was bad at her knee (and seems to be gay himself). And although Draco talks in circles, I don't think his beliefs are slippery the way his father's might be.

So in trying to figure out exactly what he believes is happening here. I get the feeling that whatever the Weasleys have done, they're Purebloods and that means something to him. I think maybe we should take his words to Hermione seriously, not just as something mean he picked out of the air to hurt her. I don't think Draco's views are the same as Lucius' because Lucius is a liar and more of a hypocrite. We don't know if Draco believes Lucius' story hook, line, and sinker. Does he believe he was under Imperius when he was a DE?

I mean, think of the way people argue about any war. It's not like one side is good and the other side knows the first side is good but decides to fight them anyway. So I don't think Draco is playing for both sides. Though he hates the Weasleys, they're Purebloods (even his cruel comment about marrying Molly was practical: she's fat and she'd let my heirs die). Harry seems to be okay on that score as well. I think it's possible he does honestly believe that Muggles and Muggleborns are the root of all the problems here, that it's us against them.

I'm not quite sure how that works, given his relationships with other students at times, but it seems like he must actually believe something here to be behaving this way, because his comments have followed a pattern, he's not just hopping around insulting the Weasleys or whatever. It does sound like he does have a screwed up idea that he needs to get rid of, not that he just says whatever the nasty thing is in any given situation.

Anonymous @ April 20 2004, 02:29:13 UTC

but it seems like Draco is somebody who genuinely believes a lot of the things his parents tell him

Yes; and given things such as what Draco said in another thread, thanking his parents for being there for him, and Narcissa's comment elsewhere that 'people' should have known to be more careful...it just makes me think about how when adults do dodgy things, or things that their children don't understand or perhaps like, one justification is "I'm doing this for you/for our family." Lucius seems exactly the type who would say something like that. And what he would be doing for his family would be aligning himself with the 'winning side,' ensuring that his family isn't targeted by violent sadists by being on the side of the violent sadists. He's an example of a pureblood father taking care of his son - this would have been his line all along, but now it seems to be proved true.

It would be an affecting revelation for Draco. Maybe a scary one.

I don't know if I'm making sense though. I understood my thought process a lot better when I was out watering flowers earlier.... :)

a_player @ April 20 2004, 03:10:42 UTC

!

sistermagpie @ April 20 2004, 03:57:24 UTC

*falls down weeping without knowing why because of this star* :-)

greenanddying @ April 20 2004, 01:09:03 UTC

Seamus comments. Heavy implications with the comment: "Crazy what you could have had." I think it's fairly safe to say this has to do with Harry.

Although he deserves it, I cannot help but feel a bit sorry for Malfoy. He's being attacked from all fronts. But then, this is the ONLY community that somehow makes Malfoy endearing AND canon at the same time -- something I previously thought was an impossibility.

th_australia @ Deleted Deleted

Deleted

greenanddying @ April 20 2004, 01:24:15 UTC

That's a good point -- I'd forgotten about them. I feel particularly sorry for/frustrated with Narcissa, because she just doesn't seem to get it. I wonder if Remus is right, that she is shallow, or if it stems from fear of her husband and image?

Tensions have really gone up and people have begun to attack one another personally. I can't help think of the Sorting Hat's speech about houses uniting in the fifth book. I wonder if Dumbledore approves of this mass attack?

th_australia @ Deleted Deleted

Deleted

sistermagpie @ April 20 2004, 01:41:45 UTC

I wonder how that will pan out if Slytherin has lost one of their own.:-(

The thing is, though, it's interesting how Draco is in a unique position here because he seems to be seen by everybody here as an idiot, not evil. People really aren't attacking him the way they could be.

slinkhard @ April 20 2004, 09:31:38 UTC

If Slytherin had/s lost one of their own...

Ha, I think you can guess.
*smites self-righteous Gryffindors*

slinkhard @ April 20 2004, 09:17:18 UTC

Excellent tactic, Gryffindors, as usual!
God, I want to knock them over the head sometimes.

quixotic_sense @ April 20 2004, 06:50:36 UTC

If I could just say this: Go Harry!

I don't care how adorable ickle Draco is, if I was in Harry's shoes I would've thrown him out the train window. I'm also impressed with the way he boxed Lucius into a corner and got at Narcissa when Lupin wasn't able to. His last response to M.B. was ouch. Harry's usually so unassuming, but man, did the lion roar today or what?

To give Draco some credit, I don't think he really knows which side he wants to be on. So he falls back to the one position he's entirely certain of, in the one "war" that seems straightforward: Wizards vs Muggles. The Weasleys are Purebloods, but they're Muggle-lovers so they're obviously no better than Mudbloods (god, I hate using these terms). What's more, there's a longstanding hostility between the Malfoy and Weasley parents.

slinkhard @ April 20 2004, 09:52:16 UTC

I'm gonna repost something I wrote on the other thread, because I feel really strongly about it:

I hate the way Harry and the Gryffindors use violence in the books to resolves things, and I know that since NA and canon are so strongly tied, they have to keep In Character and continue it, but it makes me sick, frankly.

acetal @ April 20 2004, 11:26:44 UTC

Oh yessssssss. The boxing of Lucius into a corner was so delicious. Much love to both players!

As far as Gryffindors responding to problems with violence goes, well that's because they're not Ravenclaws or Slytherins. That which is called brave is often simply the tendency to not care about what other people may think about one's own actions.

Poor Hufflepuffs. They've gone from being loyal and hardworking to being `all the rest'.

slinkhard @ April 20 2004, 12:54:56 UTC

I gained a new respect for Hufflepuffs in the OotP song - Helga sounded the least egotistical and nicest of the founders.
Canon!Ernie sounds like a nasty little shit, though.

Word on the bravery. JKR for one, describes the willingness to physically fight as 'bravery' which is not my definition of it at all.

acetal @ April 21 2004, 07:48:14 UTC

Just to correct myself slightly (Never a good idea to post when you're not totally sober. Messes with the communication skills, don'tchaknow), what I should have said was, "careless disregard for the consequences of one's actions."

I'm not saying all Gryffindors are like that at all, but some are. That's what you get when you put people in boxes based on how they are at age 10.

Harry for instance, is like this. So were/are George and Fred. James and Sirus certainly were. Neville, on the other hand, tends to exhibit true bravery.

Of course, violence isn't exclusively a Gryffindor trait. It just seems that way sometimes from our little pinhole pov on Hogwarts. Draco, for instance, has attempted violence on Harry many times. However it's always been of a magical rather than physical nature. Considering Draco's build, though, this doesn't really count. Now, who else have we seen from Slytherin for a significant amount of time? Snape doesn't count as he is an adult and therefore more likely to have progressed further from the baseline Slytherin selection traits. Um...

...

In conculsion, we can't really say anything about houses and tendencies because we don't have a large enough sample size from each house. It's like saying all Hufflepuffs are paranoid based. Or that all Ravenclaws are nervous wrecks. We can't say that the other houses aren't as equally prone to violence as Gryffindors.

sistermagpie @ April 21 2004, 13:55:59 UTC

Are we talking about canon or NA? Because Neville in canon definitely has the same hothead gene as the rest of the Gryffs from my pov--why else go to attack Malfoy in the hallway for making a comment about crazy people that wasn't directed at him? (He also throws himself into a fight between Ron and Draco.)

And also canonically, Draco really hasn't attempted violence on Harry many times that I can remember. He throws a hex at him in GoF (before the ferret incident), he duels with him in the hallway later in that book. The duel is CoS is part of the club. Am I forgetting other times? He trips him in OotP. He also goes for his wand at the end but so does Harry...

He really isn't much of a doer in canon. He talks a lot but he doesn't much resort to any kind of violence, magical or otherwise, that I remember. Neither do Crabbe and Goyle. Almost always the Slytherins are on the receiving end of a pounding or a curse. When they start fights, it's usually with words with the Gryffs making it violent (Ron jumps on Draco in PS, Neville jumps on both of them and C&G pull him off).

acetal @ April 22 2004, 09:53:49 UTC Hedging much? Me?

Canon.

With regard to Neville, I was talking about careless disregard for the consequences of one's actions. i.e. There being a difference between rashness and true bravery. Neville is shown to experience knee-trembling fear, but works through it. The others aren't shown to think about things so much. They just do them anyway. It's true though, that later on in the books Neville does seem to pick up some of their traits and act more like a `typical' Gryffindor. Generalisations never seem to work that well. Eh.

Well, like I said, considering Draco's build it doesn't really pay for him to get into fights. Ah yes. The ferret incident. Was about to bring that up. It just seems like more. `Too much' fic, I suspect. Perhaps `many' should be read in the context of one, two, many, lots.

quixotic_sense @ April 20 2004, 13:49:57 UTC

So what would you do, then? Think about it: The family who practically adopted you when you had no one has just lost one son to a Killing Curse, and another was tortured so badly that he went catatonic. Fred, George, and Charlie were all tortured. And the man who's suspected of being in on it -- if not one of the perpetrators -- isn't only going scot-free, he's gloating about the killing and torture. His son, whom you thought of as a friend, taunted you and your friends with what he had to know would hurt you badly.

Let me repeat what Harry said to Narcissa: Maybe I hit him because he asked if Ron wasn't on the train because he was dead too. Maybe I hit him because he said it was a pity it wasn't Hermione instead. Maybe I hit him because he's letting Millicent make fun of the Weasleys so he doesn't have to do it himself and maybe I hit him because he keeps saying I told you so. Maybe I hit him because I wanted to. But I really think you should ask him instead.

Nobody said you had to like what he did. But I find it astounding that people are so ready to let Draco and M.B. and even Goyle off the hook by finding justifications for their actions, but pile on "self-righteous Gryffindors." Because, hey, it's okay to make fun of people burying their son and friend, but it's not okay to be angry with someone making a mockery of your grief.

I don't think Harry was trying to resolve anything when he punched Draco. He punched Draco because he's grieving and hurting and Draco's insults were the last damn straw. It was a knee-jerk reaction, not a calculated plan of action. Harry hasn't declared war on the Slytherin, nor has he even blamed the Slytherins for the Weasley's loss -- note that he remained polite, though distant, with Narcissa. The people he did attack physically and verbally were people who said or did appalling things to him and his loved ones.

I don't think Lupin should've encouraged Harry, though I can understand why he did it. Frankly, I'm more worried about that than what Harry punching Draco, because Lupin is an adult and should know better. Harry may the supposed saviour of the wizarding world, but he's still a boy. He doesn't need this shit on top of everything else.

On a not-quite-unrelated tangent, I'm worried about what this will do to the budding relationship between Ron and Parvati. I very much doubt Daily Prophet's speculation about Parvati being the actual target -- I think the Weasleys were deliberatedly targeted by the Death Eaters. But the thought may always remain at the back of Ron's mind, that maybe if the Death Eaters got the "right" twin, his brothers would still be okay. I hope this won't be the case.

slinkhard @ April 20 2004, 14:00:16 UTC

"But I find it astounding that people are so ready to let Draco and M.B. and even Goyle off the hook."

People? As far as I know, I'm the only one who's made this point, and I have no doubts I'm in the minority on this one. And also, correct me if I'm wrong, no-one but me has defended Goyle.
You can go ahead and criticise my opinions personally, I don't mind! I love a debate.

I don't think Draco taunted or mocked George's death. I have no doubt he meant every word about Ron and Hermione.
Millicent has, but then we're really edging into dodgy territory - is it right to punish people for their friend's (or family's) mistakes? Because Harry's step-parents don't look good if it is.

To me it's a simple issue: Draco and all the Slytherins are being cold and cruel about the Gryffindor's tragedy (and indeed, from their POV, why should they care? Fred and George were never nice or even civil to them.)
Is it ok to hit someone because they're being cruel?
Imho, no.

I completely agree with you on Lupin, who can be weak-willed, and has a tendency to...not spoil Harry exactly, but something like.
I also agree with you on Harry's reaction being from anger and how he doesn't/hasn't blame the Slytherins.

You've also raised an interesting point re: Ron/Parvati.

quixotic_sense @ April 20 2004, 14:44:25 UTC

Re: Draco and M.B. -- I'm referring to previous discussions in other nraged posts, including the thread at the top of the comments here. As for Goyle, check the other comments in this post. Someone has said that Goyle is too child-like to be deliberately cruel.

Maybe I hit him because he's letting Millicent make fun of the Weasleys so he doesn't have to do it himself and maybe I hit him because he keeps saying I told you so. The "I told you so" may not have been intended to be a mockery of George's death, but it's not exactly tactful or sensitive either -- and, considering how Draco always tries to be deliberate about everything, I find it difficult to believe that he wouldn't at least have some inkling of Harry's probable reaction. It's not as if it isn't obvious that Harry must be grieving. Draco could've chosen to avoid the topic altogether, as he has in his post before this one. He didn't. And he kept saying "I told you so."

To me it's a simple issue: Draco and all the Slytherins are being cold and cruel about the Gryffindor's tragedy (and indeed, from their POV, why should they care? Fred and George were never nice or even civil to them.)

Again, M.B. and Draco need not have said anything about it either. They don't need to like the Weasleys to recognise that the family is hurting. To recognise that Harry is hurting. As recent interaction between Harry, M.B., and Draco suggested, there is at least some warmth, if not outright friendship. The Gryffindors and Slytherins too were beginning to discover that, hey, "they" aren't all bad. Goyle and Crabbe are friends with Colin Creevey, for example. Seamus and Draco are more than acquaintances, as well.

It must have been doubly devastating for Harry to discover that his rapport with M.B. and Draco isn't worth beans, because when it comes down to the crunch, they don't care that he cares.

And, you know, it's not just a "Gryffindor" tragedy. The reaction from Luna, Hannah, Susan, Lisa, Padma, Hooch, and Sinistra make that clear. There's Cho, too -- she was working with Charlie, and it was hinted that they may have had a short affair. I don't think anyone has mentioned what Penny's House was in Hogswarts, but she was affected too. I think it's pretty obvious that it's not about which House you're in. And I very much doubt that Draco and M.B. represent "all" Slytherins.

Is it ok to hit someone because they're being cruel? Imho, no.

No, it's not "okay." But I can understand and symphatise with him, just as it's possible for me to understand why M.B. created wehavefive without finding it any less appalling. For me, nothing is ever as simple as whether it's okay or not to do something, not without putting it in context. In this case, there are reasons for what Harry did. Not excuses, maybe not even justification, but he has his reasons. Just as Draco and M.B. have their reasons for their cruelty. But when I think about it and stand back and look at them, my sympathies are still with Harry.

slinkhard @ April 20 2004, 14:56:22 UTC

Tactful and sensitive...no, not really, but then the Gryffindors aren't known for these traits, either.
(Fred and George, in particular.)

"...they don't care that he cares."

Does anyone really care about M.B/Draco apart from fellow Slytherins?
Certainly there would be no outpouring of grief at either of their personal tragedies.
Harry cares, as long as they're toeing the party line (interesting divergence with canon here, when Harry and Seamus fight in OotP), the line he dictates. Otherwise it's a punch in the face!

It's easy to see things from Harry's POV, but remember, he KNOWS Lucius is a Death Eater. He has no personal connections with him.
Draco doesn't KNOW this (fact check me here if I'm wrong). He has evidence staring him in the face, and for all we know, Lucius could be out and proud about it at home, but we don't know Draco knows.
For him to accept his father (and mother?) as coldblooded murders would require him to either join them or change his loyalties.
It's a huge step for anyone, especially someone with very few emotional attachments outside of their family - I mean, aside from his likely personal safety away from the Death Eaters, what does the side of the Light have to offer?

Not excuses, maybe not even justification, but he has his reasons. Just as Draco and M.B. have their reasons for their cruelty. But when I think about it and stand back and look at them, my sympathies are still with Harry.

Good point. Empathy but not excusing. That's what I'm trying to get across from my side (because my sympathies, as usual, are with Draco and the Slytherins), although I may be failing miserably.

quixotic_sense @ April 20 2004, 15:22:16 UTC

Does anyone really care about M.B/Draco apart from fellow Slytherins? Certainly there would be no outpouring of grief at either of their personal tragedies.

I think it's wrong to assume that. Harry would. Seamus would. Draco has hardly been cuddly with either of them, but they seemed to have mastered the art of rolling with Draco's sarcasm. I don't think that this would've hit Harry quite so hard if Draco was just his nemesis. For that matter, I don't think Hooch and Sinistra "really care" about the Weasleys either, but they still recognised what happened to the twins and Charlie as a tragedy.

Harry cares, as long as they're toeing the party line (interesting divergence with canon here, when Harry and Seamus fight in OotP), the line he dictates. Otherwise it's a punch in the face!

I don't see why you have to accept everything someone does to show that you care for them -- that just makes one a doormat, not a good friend. I think Harry (and Seamus) is very aware of Draco's prejudices. But there's only so much he can be expected to take, and I suspect that Harry wasn't quite expecting Draco to go that far. I love my friends dearly, but I would probably punch them in the face if, say, they were to tell me that I should dump my girfriend because homosexuality is wrong.

Draco doesn't KNOW this (fact check me here if I'm wrong). He has evidence staring him in the face, and for all we know, Lucius could be out and proud about it at home, but we don't know Draco knows.

Hmm... I know I read something about this a while ago... *digs around in historic_alley* Ah, here we are. Make of that what you will. I think Draco suspects, at the very least.

slinkhard @ April 20 2004, 15:41:29 UTC

Seamus and Harry would care as long as it didn't conflict with their own interests, imho.

I agree, just because someone is your friend, doesn't mean you have to put up with their views if they're personally offensive to you, but it's a big world. A lot of people have views that offend me, but I'm not going to punch them all in the face.

I don't want to go off on a personal tangent here, just using an example I think is relevant -
I love my grandfather dearly, and he believes homosexuality is wrong.
What's the point of arguing? He's not going to change his mind and neither am I.
And as long as he personally isn't going to go out there hurting homosexual people, Fred Phelps style, I'll let it rest.
He probably wouldn't be upset by an AIDs death in the paper, for example, and if he mocked it (which I doubt he would, fyi) I'd confront him. But what's violence going to solve?

If you punched your friend in the face for their views, you've lost a friend (and the chance to try and change their mind) and you've behaved badly yourself into the bargain. It's kind of a high price to pay for the satisfaction of letting off steam.

Hooch and Sinistra - I don't know, I find it kind of hypocritical if one doesn't care about someone, to get involved. I know it's politer, and all, but it's just my own opinion. I mean, a lot of the people 'mourning' weren't close to George as a person, it's more about showing support to the remaining Weasley's, but to me...

I mean, what was the point of Hooch's post? She goaded Lucius and Narcissa BEFORE (christ, I've got to learn tags, I just want to emphasis that, not shout at you!) she offered assistance to Arthur.

They recognise it as a tragedy - to the Weasley's.
I mean, I don't want to be cruel, but it's not going to be a tragedy to the world, and it can't be expected to be.

As for Draco's knowledge - hmm. He suspects, certainly, but he's going to need confirmation and further to that, proof that the Death Eaters are wrong, before he changes, imho.
I mean, at this point, he likely believes his father's top priority is protecting the WW from the Muggles and Muggleborn.
He's going to need (and the game, thus) proof that:
a) Muggles and/or Muggleborns' lives have value (He's not going to mourn the loss of two Weasley's when they're 'blood traitors' and had no positive relationship with him.)
b) His father's loyalty to the cause is of higher priority to him than Draco's life

mimulus_arbutus @ April 21 2004, 16:07:36 UTC

yikes, i didn't want to jump into the fray here, but....
I love my grandfather dearly, and he believes homosexuality is wrong. What's the point of arguing? He's not going to change his mind and neither am I. And as long as he personally isn't going to go out there hurting homosexual people, Fred Phelps style, I'll let it rest.
He probably wouldn't be upset by an AIDs death in the paper, for example, and if he mocked it (which I doubt he would, fyi) I'd confront him. But what's violence going to solve?

just to more closely parallel this to the NA situation:
what if matthew shepherd was your friend, and your grandfather not only was unremorseful about his death (caused by close friends of your grandfather) but thought it was a pity your 2 best friends weren't killed as well?
violence is not appropriate (heh, especially not towards your grandfather) but neither is gloating over the death of someone's loved one to their face and suggesting to others present that they should be tortured and killed as well, just for being born a certain way.

I mean, I don't want to be cruel, but it's not going to be a tragedy to the world, and it can't be expected to be.
to extend this thought to draco and millicent: just because they don't care doesn't give them the right to really hurt the people who do. (ditto to what quixotic_sense said about recognizing their pain) i agree with you that anyone not involved should stay out of things, from hooch and sinistra unsolicited sympathies to (especially!!) draco and millicent's heartless taunting.

If you punched your friend in the face for their views, you've lost a friend (and the chance to try and change their mind) and you've behaved badly yourself into the bargain. It's kind of a high price to pay for the satisfaction of letting off steam.
agreed, except in this situation it's NOT just letting off steam, it was an immediate gut reaction to something extremely cruel and pointedly hurtful from someone he trusted. it wasn't over their views (they've debated the mudblood thing before without resorting to violence), it was because he implied/said "i'm glad your friends are dead, comatose, and recovering from horrible torture [by the hands of his father, no less], they deserved it and so do your other friends."
i'm not trying to excuse harry's punching draco (though they do have a history of violence together, so it's not at all unexpected), but holy hell, after something like that i'd probably deck him too.

however, i agree that it's unfortunate they are all stuck in their stereotyped little boxes, the slytherins being cruel and the gryffindors being violently vengeful. (the players are doing a great job though!)

slinkhard @ April 21 2004, 16:22:47 UTC

Jump in, the more the merrier!
*looks over shoulder* As long as the mods don't mind...

"caused by close friends of your grandfather"
Well, there's a different kettle of fish! Can't control someone's friends, but yeah, in that situation I guess I would behave differently (still not punching though! ;)

"it's NOT just letting off steam, it was an immediate gut reaction."
That he's proud of, and Lupin is encouraging.

I know this is an emotive subject, but for me so is the idea that if someone mouths off they deserve to be hit.
(On serious ground here, that makes me sick, even in a fictional context. It's one of the excuses used by domestic abusers most often 'S/he wouldn't shut up.')
To me, there is nothing a person can say that would warrant violence. Nothing.

mimulus_arbutus @ April 21 2004, 17:20:52 UTC

agreed ;)

lupin should NOT be encouraging/adding to the violence

my point was basically just that it is also NEVER right to express satisfaction over the suffering and death of someone's loved one to their face, to say it was justified and right or that others deserve the same fate. that inhumane cruelty (as i see it, maybe not how draco intended it) makes me sick as much as the violence does.

slinkhard @ April 21 2004, 17:24:26 UTC

Lupin is one of my least favourites. I like the player (I think s/he makes him more likeable than say StrictlyCanon!Lupin), but I have issues with canon!Lupin that pass over onto him, and one is that imho, he's spineless.
Here, he's all talk - 'Well done Harry, for hitting someone. I'm just going to threaten people, but not actually do anything.'

"my point was basically just that it is also NEVER right to express satisfaction over the suffering and death of someone's loved one to their face, to say it was justified and right or that others deserve the same fate. that inhumane cruelty (as i see it, maybe not how draco intended it) makes me sick as much as the violence does."

Also an excellent point!

sistermagpie @ April 21 2004, 16:32:56 UTC

but thought it was a pity your 2 best friends weren't killed as well?

This isn't a defense of ps here, but you're misquoting him throughout. Draco certainly has implied that the Weasleys brought this on themselves, but he did not say that it was a pity Ron and Hermione were not killed as well. What he said was that it was a pity Hermione wasn't killed instead. He also asked her if Ron were not on the train because he was dead. Obviously this is nasty as well, but it's still different. I don't know the exact significance, but since I don't get exactly what he's saying I want to keep it accurate.

just because they don't care doesn't give them the right to really hurt the people who do.

Very true. Though I think Draco is making it clear he does care--just not in a nice way.

It's just I don't think we'll ever really get what's going on here from the Slyth's side if we stick to Harry's pov. For Harry this may not have anything to do with views on mudbloods, but for Draco I think it does. And while Harry would probably describe Draco here as "suggesting to others present that they should be tortured and killed as well, just for being born a certain way," again I don't think that's how he would see it.

mimulus_arbutus @ April 21 2004, 17:14:58 UTC

i'm still not sure as to WHY they were killed, it's always assumed it was in connection to parvati's dream, but as someone pointed out, lucious KNEW it was her and not george, and a player said his reasoning was alluded to in his post. (all here i wonder if draco knows the reason?

but anyway, yeah i guess i was just inferring that from draco, thinking that's probably how harry read it, but (as you point out) it isn't necessarily how draco meant it. i do think he is basically suggesting that mudbloods should be "killed just for being born a certain way" (or at least be kept seperate from purebloods) in his comment to hermione though. (i'm not totally clear on what your last sentence there meant, by the way)
it's very interesting, the discussions that have sprung up surrounding this about draco's feelings towards mudbloods, the "israeli/palestinian" nature of this conflict. (i think you said that?) talk about tricky! i think the problem lies in everyone "choosing sides" and then refusing to look at the other side as anything other than evil/stupid/wrong/destroying wizardkind.

you usually have good input on this sort of thing, do you have any ideas on draco's motivation for his comments on the train and how might he be feeling about this whole situation?

sistermagpie @ April 21 2004, 18:25:42 UTC

all here i wonder if draco knows the reason?

I'm wondering about what the reason is too. It seems like the Malfoys are all hinting there's a reason here others don't know. Dracotold Seamus that he (Seamus) didn't know what was going on. I figured that referred to Lucius bringing Draco into his confidence (a sign of respect) and giving him the reason the Weasleys were attacked.

i do think he is basically suggesting that mudbloods should be "killed just for being born a certain way" (or at least be kept seperate from purebloods) in his comment to hermione though. (i'm not totally clear on what your last sentence there meant, by the way)


Sorry! I think he is saying that Hermione deserved to die instead because she is a mudblood, but it seems like he associates her being a Mudblood with being the enemy. Like a Nazi saying the Jews should be killed because Jews were destroying Germany. Or when homophobics say they're "hating the sin and loving the sinner." It does really come down to punishing someone for being born a certain way, but it's not how they frame it to themselves, I don't think.

So Draco would perhaps say that he is not going out and attacking Muggles or Mudbloods (after all, he stays away from the Muggleworld) just for being born that way, he is blaming them because of what they've done/are doing/want to do to the WW.

you usually have good input on this sort of thing, do you have any ideas on draco's motivation for his comments on the train and how might he be feeling about this whole situation?

Thanks!:-) I'm wrong pretty regularly, but I've been trying to figure out Draco's position too because he's not exactly in line with the other Slytherins. He hasn't joined in (or led) their jokes the way he usually would-he's more acting alone, not spinning out fights ad nauseum just so he can get the last word. Could be simple cowardice, but then why not enjoy safety in numbers and join in on his parents' threads more?

Instead he keeps dropping specific comments and then shutting up--and his remarks often seem to me crueler than what others are saying. It seems like he's singled out Molly and Hermione (so wonderfully Oedipal given his troubled relationship with Narcissa-female issues?) and attacked them both with the language of blame. Why stay relatively silent in many threads and then post to Molly's post, obviously the worst place for him to show his face, the most likely to get him another punch in the nose? And then only post twice-just because he won? When did he learn to be so devestating when he's usually such a loose canon? Even his post to Arthur is really directed at Molly.

He seemed to tell Hermione that her presence was a danger to the Weasleys-that's how I interpreted his asking if Ron was dead too. He pressed the survivor guilt--Molly and Hermione are walking around undeserving while George and Charlie are not. Remember his words to Hermione about Ernie: "You do realise you've just added Macmillan to the list of people who are now in danger due to consorting with Mudbloods, don't you?/Oh, so then you think it's all right, since he's already been infected? As long as you keep telling yourself that." Hermione's re-entrance into the game and Harry's life full force seems well-timed with this all.

ps also hits Molly as a mother-she didn't notice when the twins went missing. I don't know if he read her full post, but his response wasn't even taunting, just a cold direction for her to put it under a cut. It dismissed her post as a self-indulgence, especially in light of her not even missing the twins while they were being tortured if she claims to care so much. (So hard to not compare this to his possible judgment of Narcissa's wailing after he himself had disappeared for days, only now he's claiming his mother would notice if he was gone.)

So, I don't know what I think.:-) It just seems like he thinks he sees this situation very clearly and isn't simply gloating. There's some of that ("I told you so") but usually when he gloats it's endless. He's using fewer words and hitting the mark more often. He just seems more serious than usual where the others sound more like usual.

mimulus_arbutus @ April 21 2004, 19:15:05 UTC

(ugh, the molly situation just makes me feel ill and guilty, remembering how irritated i was when my mom called and said, "i need you to come home so we can drive to the hospital in seattle. your father's been in an accident...." because it was ruining my weekend plans! )

god this whole thing is all hard for me to read on NA. the players are wonderful and seem to understand the actual emotions and reactions of someone in this situation, but then that makes it hurt all the more, because it is so realistic.

sistermagpie @ April 22 2004, 14:12:33 UTC

Oh yeah. I know just what you mean. It's human nature and doesn't mean you don't care about the person. (I mean, you just react to things as they come because you can't process everything at once.) So neither you nor Molly should feel badly but being people who do care, you do feel badly.

{{You and Molly}} And hope your dad recovered.

mimulus_arbutus @ April 22 2004, 17:16:46 UTC

thanks
he didn't, that's why i felt so guilty and why i can relate to what she's going through. :(
i have so much respect for the players, even more than before. some of them must have been through situations where they lost a loved one in RL, because they hit it all so spot-on.
i wish i could hug them, you know? :)

sistermagpie @ April 22 2004, 17:46:00 UTC

Yeah. I'm really sorry about your dad.

pengolodh_sc @ April 20 2004, 21:47:51 UTC

I am not certain if it is said outright, but I believe the evidence is very strong in CoS that Penny Clearwater was in Ravenclaw, and was a prefect. At any rate, she must at least for quite some time have been close to the Weasleys, being/having been Percy's girlfriend.

Anonymous @ April 20 2004, 19:43:05 UTC

Wait, and the Slytherins don't? Or does death and torture not equal violence anymore?

slinkhard @ April 20 2004, 19:48:18 UTC

Hi anonymouse!
Do you need a code? (Do we even have codes at lj anymore?!)
Or are you a player?
If you're the latter, then I've no need to tell you your job, and you'll already know that I'm refering to the Slytherin students, who canonically have used violence only in retaliation (Crabbe and Goyle to Neville in PS and one could argue throwing a bludge in OotP, but if throwing things is the same as a punch, we're in a gray area) or to restrain (Millicent in CoS and OotP.)

If you're the former, have some balls and get an lj!

pengolodh_sc @ April 20 2004, 21:38:43 UTC

Codes were discontinued at LJ several onths ago - there was at the time lots and lots of wailing and gnashing of teeth among many LJ-users; the dentists must really have raked in money at the time.

Just to prevent any misunderstandings - the anonymous post you replied to wasn't mine.

slinkhard @ April 21 2004, 15:14:14 UTC

Thanks! (see how with it I am? impressive, no?)

sistermagpie @ April 20 2004, 14:38:04 UTC

His last response to M.B. was ouch.

Actually, that wasn't his last response to M.B. Their further exchange is a bit more interesting, I thought, for Harry saying he "didn't like Draco because something bad happened to him." I figured M.B. was referring to her not liking the Weasleys now that something bad has happened to them, but did something bad happening to Draco have anything to do with why Harry began to see him differently? Because Harry takes it as referring to him, even if he correct her in thinking this is why he likes Draco.

To give Draco some credit, I don't think he really knows which side he wants to be on. So he falls back to the one position he's entirely certain of, in the one "war" that seems straightforward: Wizards vs Muggles.

But why assume there is any other war for him? Draco's been fairly consistent in his response to this. He hasn't mocked the Weasleys specifically for the tragedy except to show anger and judge them for whatever they were doing that led to this (in his mind). He hasn't been kind about it by any means--I'm not claiming that. But he's not waving, "Let's kill the rest of them!" banners.

I think he feels he and the Weasleys should be on the same side (because they are Purebloods). It seems more to me like he sees the Weasleys as collaborating with the enemy. Look at the way Lupin et al. are speaking to Lucius: "You are a horrible father. Look at what you're doing to your son." Draco seems to have much the same idea about the Weasleys.

His son, whom you thought of as a friend, taunted you and your friends with what he had to know would hurt you badly.

So my point is that isn't what Draco was doing. His words to Hermione are, imo, accusing, not taunting. He really does think it's a pity that they had to die when she's the one who deserved it. This is on her head--she got them killed and she'll get Ron killed too. Because that's probably her plan, being a Muggle. They use real wizards for their own ends, or something.

It's not that this makes it any more of a rotten thing to say, but it's not simple taunting or laughing at the Weasley's misfortune anymore than Harry's taunting of Lucius about his DE days is just laughing at things not working out for him. Harry's view of what Draco is doing really doesn't have to be taken as 100% accurate. He's told us what Draco said, but when he attempted to assign him a motive (letting MB mock the Weasleys so he didn't have to) MB said this was incorrect.

So it's not that Harry is bad for wanting to punch him in the nose. But although it's tempting, I don't think we (or Harry) can just assume that underneath it all Draco "knows" Harry's right and his parents are wrong. Draco may take the danger of Muggleborns as a fact the same way Harry takes his own ideas about being open-minded as a fact.

The one thing about ps here, and it's not an excuse for his behavior but I think it's an important fact, is that he's not just sitting above it all and enjoying the show. This is the way a lot of people seem to be reading his actions, that he's just not caring about what happened, is enjoying the small satisfaction of seeing the Weasleys hurt any way he can and is trying to have it both ways, be friends with the Gryffs while still in tight with his parents. But I think, on the contrary, he's the one (understandably) getting punched in the nose because he is standing up for what he believes on some level. It's just not so pretty when what he believes is hateful.

slinkhard @ April 21 2004, 08:38:23 UTC

"I don't think we (or Harry) can just assume that underneath it all Draco "knows" Harry's right and his parents are wrong. Draco may take the danger of Muggleborns as a fact the same way Harry takes his own ideas about being open-minded as a fact."

Once more you get to the root of it!

sistermagpie @ April 21 2004, 14:01:55 UTC

I've been thinking this morning about Draco's comment about Nazis this summer. When he returned to Hogwarts he said, "Well, well, well. The Hogwarts Express has ushered us off to Hogwarts, much like Jews to a Muggle concentration camp. I'm certain they'll be turning the showers on at any moment. I did some light reading over holidays, could you tell?"

Everyone assumed this was a good sign, Draco reading about Nazis, learning what the DEs were really like. But even in his throwaway comment he doesn't put himself in the place of the Nazis but the Jews. Couldn't his "light reading" have educated him as to what Muggles would have in store for wizards? I mean, WE associate Voldemort with Hitler, but as far as I know there were no muggleborn camps.

I'm really thinking we're perhaps wrong to keep thinking of this in terms of World War 2 and maybe should start seeing Draco more like someone involved in the Israeli/Palestine conflict.

jupistrahan @ April 20 2004, 06:55:21 UTC

Narcissa's player, I have so much love for you! ~~<3~~

To tell the truth, I almost feel bad for Narcissa. Even though we all know that she was aware of the plans on her husband, and that she tends to stand by his actions merely for the family reputation, rather than her personal feelings on the matter. It's rather blatant that she's trying to play both sides, acting friendly towards everyone, and even offering seemingly sincere condolences *OMG <3<3<3 Narcissa!* she refuses to side against Lucius, which appears to be damning her in the eyes of everyone else.

I can't help but wonder(hope!) that maybe she truly does mean well for Remus and Harry, but her loyalty to 'family unity' is so overpowering that she even forsakes them to support her husband.

It's worth hoping.... I just cannot help but love her. ^ ^;;

vassilissa @ April 20 2004, 08:13:43 UTC

Now, to go along with Harry's comment up above, I'm wondering if Draco's silence and these comments to Harry was a roundabout way of Draco taking sides with Harry. If you look at his comments to Harry as a warning, it could be suggesting that Ron could have been killed as well. And Hermione's a "Mudblood" so she's in danger too.

I'm starting to agree with you.

Thing is, their whole stance is different. Harry's all 'We have not choice but oppose this,' and Draco, even beside his basic prejudices, is all 'This is *dangerous*. That could have been you, don't you get it?'

It's not 'I told you so' as in gloating, it's 'I told you so' as in 'Now do you believe me?'

It may be a bigger gulf between them right there than their opposing views on The Muggle Question.

I hold out some hope after Draco wouldn't let Harry get beaten up, but I fear he just wants himself and Harry safe, not what's right even according to him.

I used to hope that he'd change his convictions because of Harry's influence - not in the way he seemed to fear before, a deliberate change *for* Harry, but out of exposure to new angles and viewpoints. He's done some of that already, like it or not. But I'm losing hope. He's so scared.

He seems to have decided on a course of action now. I hope he can change it if he finds it isn't the right one.

slinkhard @ April 20 2004, 09:16:04 UTC

Harry's all 'We have not choice but oppose this,' and Draco, even beside his basic prejudices, is all 'This is *dangerous*. That could have been you, don't you get it?'

Word.

gg_83 @ April 20 2004, 22:45:50 UTC

Utterly off-topic, but I just discovered historic_alley, and was poking around, and I found this, and Arthur's comment at the end, in light of what has happened, just broke my heart.

onthehillside @ April 21 2004, 00:37:25 UTC

That sent chills down my back.