Draco Malfoy: Character Analysis

Yes, I said what Draco did was similar to torture. I didn't say it was torture. It is not the same as the trio and the minor trio performing hexes. They don't cause as much pain as Draco stomping on Harry's nose. Also, they're in self defense. Draco's action was not. You'll never find Harry doing that to anyone, not a Death Eater, not Voldemort (well, Voldemort doesn't have a nose, but he does have other body parts). You find Draco doing that.

It is not the same as the trio and the minor trio performing hexes. They don't cause as much pain as Draco stomping on Harry's nose.

According to whom? Draco, Crabbe, and Goyle couldn't even move when they were done with them and barely resembled humans.

Also, they're in self defense.

No, they weren't. Verbal insults do not warrant hexes or physical abuse. Harry and his friends outnumbered Draco and his, they had wands, they could have pushed them out of the compartment. Nothing warranted their attack and JKR is making the similarities between plainly obvious.

You'll never find Harry doing that to anyone, not a Death Eater, not Voldemort

Harry punches Draco repeatedly in OOTP after he insults his mother. How is that different? There's no difference in getting punched or kicked if the end results are the same. Violence is violence.

It doesn't make it okay because it's a character you like against a character you don't like.

I got to be honest. I don't know what you're referencing with the Crabbe and Goyle incident. When I said they were in self defense, I mean when the trio usually uses a hex they are in self defense. It's a lot different than Draco stomping Harry because he has the opportunity. They don't just hex Crabbe and Goyle for the fun of it, do they? That's almost what Draco is doing. Am I excusing the trio? No. I am saying that it is not like Draco. It's not about comparing them. You brought that to this. This is all about showing what Draco is capable of.

It doesn't make it okay because it's a character you like against a character you don't like. This what I feel like I'm getting from you. Come on, let's not make or take it personal.

I don't know what you're referencing with the Crabbe and Goyle incident.

The ends of GoF and OOTP, when Draco, Crabbe and Goyle confront Harry and friends on the train ride home.

This what I feel like I'm getting from you.

What? Just because I don't think everything the Trio did was perfect and wonderful and just doesn't mean I dislike them. I like them quite a lot and have spent a lot of time on this board defending Ginny and Ron in particular but some of the things Harry and his friends did were just wrong no matter what their motives were.

I'm not saying Harry is right all the time. That's not even what this discussion is about. This discussion is about Draco and my point that I feel like you're overlooking is that he is willing to inflict severe pain on someone. It's not about comparing it to what someone else does. What sparked him to stomp on Harry's face? The fact that he finally caught Harry. Harry did sneak into his compartment, but that's not the reason Draco did that. He did it because he could. He had the opportunity so he decided to hurt Harry. That shows who Draco is.

So...getting the discussion back to Draco...

1. When we first meet Draco, Harry sees him as a pampered, snobbish, bully. Did JKR plant the seeds from the beginning that he would grow to be a Death Eater?

I think he turned into a Death Eater as a result of his parent's loyalties and his upbringing. Other characters were pampered and snobbish and didn't turn into DE's.

2. Draco grew up in a home with a mother from the notorious House of Black and a father who was a Death Eater that held favor with Voldemort. Lucius craves wealth, status and power. He is a demanding father and expects nothing less than excellence from his son.

I don't really see a question in that. That's pretty much true.

3. Is Draco truly making his choices of his own volition? How much of his choice is derived from fear, or is it bravado?

I think pre-HBP most of his decisions are based on bullying and bravado. After HBP I think he is pretty much afraid of what he's gotten himself into. He really doesn't seem to have much of his old personality anytime we see him in DH.

4. Draco has used name-dropping (his father’s and Voldemort’s) and his wealth in an attempt to befriend people. He was truly dumbfounded when all Harry could muster was a “that don’t impress me much” reaction to his attempts.

Well, most people who use this tatic are suprised when it doesn't work. Most people would love to attach themselves to someone who knows famous people. He also name drop's Fudge a lot too, so it wasn't just all dark wizards he was claiming to know. If fact, early in the series he does not claim to know Voldy. That only happens after GoF when Voldy returns.

5. Is he misunderstood? Or just plain mean?

I think like all bullies, he has a mean streak. That doesn't mean as an adult he couldn't have changed. When Harry first meets Draco he get's the impression of Dudley. No one would say Dudley is misunderstood. He's a bully. And that's what young Draco is.

6. Despite his decision not to kill Dumbledore, Draco continues to serve Voldemort. Do you think he regrets his failure to kill Dumbledore? Do you think he regrets his choices in DH?

I don't think Draco chooses to serve Voldemort after HBP. I think he's just too terrified to do anything else. Plus I don't think he would abandon his parents, they would probably be killed if Draco decided to run away. Lucius has no intention of leaving the Dark Lord's service, so Draco kind of has to stay. In all of DH you never see him willingly serving anymore, it's always under threat of death. I think even when Draco attacks Harry in the Room of Requirement it's more out of a desire to help his family than it is to serve Lord Voldemort.

7. How do you think Draco's life debt to Harry and Ron might manifest itself in their future.

I think the only thing that came of it was an unspoken truce. They will never be friends, there is too much history between them. But I think both came to understand that the war is over, and so is their feud.

8. What do you think happened to Draco after DH? What might he have done as a profession? Is Pansy the wife we see in the epilogue?

Well we know that it's not Pansy he's married to. It's some random girl we've never heard of according to JKR. And Draco might not have had a profession. His father didn't. They were wealthy enough to just hang around the ministry and bribe people. I think Draco just lived the rest of his life quietly, trying not to draw too much attention to himself.

I'm not saying Harry is right all the time. That's not even what this discussion is about. This discussion is about Draco and my point that I feel like you're overlooking is that he is willing to inflict severe pain on someone. It's not about comparing it to what someone else does. What sparked him to stomp on Harry's face? The fact that he finally caught Harry. Harry did sneak into his compartment, but that's not the reason Draco did that. He did it because he could. He had the opportunity so he decided to hurt Harry. That shows who Draco is.

Actually, it surprised me that Draco only stomped Harry's nose in the attack. At the end of OotP, he told Harry that he was going to kill him for his father's going to prison. And here, he has Harry alone and at his mercy. He has a perfect opportunity to carry out his threat, but he doesn't do it.

This was not a random attack. This was revenge for his father going to Azkaban. Personally, I think that it's irrational that Draco blames Harry for Lucius going to prison. But the nose-stomping incident was my first indication that Draco really did not have it in him to be a killer.

(And by the way, I don't really like Draco very much, so my comment has nothing to do with liking or disliking the character).

[QUOTE=birdi86;5541715]Hermione, the Longbottoms, and the students under the Carrows were Cruciated. Hermione and the Longbottoms were Cruciated repeatedly. That is nowhere near similar to what happened to Harry and Harry would know since he'd already been Cruciated by Voldemort.

True having your nose broken and being left lying under an invisibility cloak, choking on your own blood is not as bad as being Cruciated. But it is considerably more painful than a slap in the face.

Futhermore, if that's similar to torture what do you call repeatedly hexing someone who is already prone on the floor and no longer fighting back like Harry and crew did at the end of OOTP?

Just what they deserved for trying to jump someone three to one. As far as the text goes no one hit them with a curse more than once. They just picked the ambush spot poorly and there was a lot of Harry's friends around to get his back.

Sorry, but if you consider what Draco did similar to torture, than what Harry and friends did a few months prior definitely counts.

Does it? Draco's, Crabbe and Goyle's actions had nothing to do with what happened to them?

Doesn't mean it was going to happen. His were the hopes of a broken and desperate man.

Desperate men can be very dangerous. I think Lucius got justice when he was sentenced to Azkaban and then escaped it by being broken out. But give Lucuis credit where it's due, he was very good at escaping justice by any means.

What do you base this on? It appears from the start there are four Death Eaters Voldemort keeps closest to him: Lucius, Snape, Bellatrix, and Pettigrew. This doesn't change throughout the series. And with Pettigrew's death, Lucius moved into the gopher/joke position.

Jokers quite often have the last laugh. Lucius did when he used Narcissa's duping of Voldemort to escape justice after the war. Isn't this the Draco thread?


No, they wouldn't. Know why? Because Draco was the Master of the Elder Wand. They were always doomed, even if they didn't know it at first. Though after they failed again and the Trio escaped, Narcissa began to realize what was happening.

Draco didn't know there was such a thing as the Elder Wand. Voldemort did not broadcast that fact around. I fail to see how Draco would have had the chance to use it in any case. As far as Draco was concerned it was Dumbledore's old wand and it was buried with him. Narcissa had no idea about it either. I don't think Snape even knew about it. Draco never knew he was the Master, Narcissa never knew he was the Master. No one knew till Harry figured it out. I really don't understand what your point is here?

It's not so much the fact that he didn't go against his parents that makes me dislike him...it's the fact that he never even had the desire to

Firstly; I've realy enjoyed reading your & addie_ep's posts here recently - welcome :wave:

There have been some interesting points raised but its past my bedtime already so I'm just going to refer to this one now.

The idea that Draco didn't have the desire to go against his parents is an interesting one imo but I think it needs to be followed up. I can't help thinking that you've found a really interesting point to consider that could really give us some ideas about Draco's character. :tu: It makes me wonder 'why?' what were the reasons such a desire might have manifested, and what reasons did it not manifest (assuming your idea that it didn't is correct). :)

Maybe if he had been able to make friends at Hogwarts--for example, like Sirius did--he would have realized how skewed his father's beliefs really were. Maybe he would have had the chance to change his path in life.

Why didn't Draco make friends at Hogwarts, I wonder? Why did he choose to have lackeys, bodyguards, instead? Pansy Parkinson seems to have been something of a friend, judging by her theatrics over his injury in PoA and cosiness on the train in HBP, but we generally hear of him spending time with Crabbe and Goyle.

However, since the main influences in his life were his parents, who had had his life mapped out from the start, he never really had a choice in things...or an incentive to go against them.

I think it's too easy to say Draco never had a choice - there's nearly always a choice, Sirius and Andromeda both made a different choice. But probably true that he had no incentive to go against the prejudice he'd been raised with. It gave him a sense of entitlement, of automatic superiority -that his life was worth more than other peoples' lives. For someone as spoiled as Draco seems to have been, it was all too easy to just choose to accept this.

No, they wouldn't. Know why? Because Draco was the Master of the Elder Wand. They were always doomed, even if they didn't know it at first. Though after they failed again and the Trio escaped, Narcissa began to realize what was happening.

It seems they believed they could regain favour again before the Trio escaped -Lucius was eager to take credit for the capture, and seemed to believe that being the one to summon Voldemort with the news would improve his status. Not knowing of the Elder Wand, they would have believed there was some way to regain at least some of their standing.

Well, most people who use this tatic are suprised when it doesn't work. Most people would love to attach themselves to someone who knows famous people. He also name drop's Fudge a lot too, so it wasn't just all dark wizards he was claiming to know. If fact, early in the series he does not claim to know Voldy. That only happens after GoF when Voldy returns.

In fairness, it would be pretty hard for him to claim to know Voldy pre-GoF, as he was only about a year old when Voldemort first fell. But, yeah, it's not only Dark Wizards, he claims one of the examiners is a friend of his father in OotP.

And Draco might not have had a profession. His father didn't.They were wealthy enough to just hang around the ministry and bribe people.

I think the Malfoys' influence and ability to bribe people at the Ministry would have been severely curtailed after the war. They would have been known as DEs, and what's more, DEs who escaped justice. People would have been wary of associating with them, especially in business matters and if it was anything questionably legal. Perhaps the Auror Department kept an eye on their activities, or Draco and his parents were concerned that this was happening.

My understanding of the Imperius Curse is that it can only be used by someone who really wants to use it. That means when Draco used the Imperius in one of his botched assasination attempts it mean't that he actually wanted Dumbledore to die (otherwise the Imperius Curse wouldn't have worked).

I said he did not know he was the Master of the Elder Wand in the very part you quoted

I really don't understand what your point is here?

That they were doomed, that Voldemort was sending out "you're doomed" signals by treating them like the new Pettigrews, that Narcissa probably already realized that they'd be better off throwing in their chips with the other side and that Draco's total inability to attempt to capture Harry in the RoR could be seen as him trying to hedge his bets. (Leave Harry alive but get the diadem or something else to show for himself so that Voldemort won't be mad.)

Does it? Draco's, Crabbe and Goyle's actions had nothing to do with what happened to them?

Doesn't matter. They could have restrained them, they could have thrown them out. Instead they attacked them repeatedly even when they'd stopped moving.

Two wrongs don't make a right.

Not knowing of the Elder Wand, they would have believed there was some way to regain at least some of their standing.

Lucius and Draco did. There's no hint that Narcissa did and her actions in the Forbidden Forest suggest she did not.

That means when Draco used the Imperius in one of his botched assasination attempts it mean't that he actually wanted Dumbledore to die (otherwise the Imperius Curse wouldn't have worked).

I think it means he really wanted Rosemerta to be under Imperius.

My understanding of the Imperius Curse is that it can only be used by someone who really wants to use it. That means when Draco used the Imperius in one of his botched assasination attempts it mean't that he actually wanted Dumbledore to die (otherwise the Imperius Curse wouldn't have worked).

Since we know so little about the inner workings of the Imperius Curse, it's uncertain what precisely he really wanted to have happen. As far as I can tell, he could have really wanted himself to live, or really wanted himself and his parents to live, or really wanted to be able to Imperio Rosmerta... so that he and his parents could live. :D

All we know, I think, is that you "have to mean it." He meant to Imperio Rosmerta. The fact that in the Astronomy Tower he apparently started to lower his wand indicates that he was most likely operating under one of the survival motivations, not under some deep-seated desire for Dumbledore to die.

I do say that Draco was supportive of Voldemort when he called Hermione a Mudblood. He was supportive of the mind set that allowed Voldemort to rise to power in the first place. He may have been 12 going on 13, but this is old enough to know what bigotry is. Ron knew and hated it.

Kit's question had to do with tangible support. But as I asked upthread, in what way was Draco offering tangible support to Voldemort in calling Hermione a Mudblood? A mindset is not tangible/material. And Voldemort himself was not tangible/material. :) Draco was supportive of blood prejudice, certainly (which long predates Voldemort in the Malfoy family), but there was really no Voldemort to be supportive of (and the Malfoys seem to have been much happier in his absence). So I'm not entirely sure where Voldemort fits in to this particular equation, given that Voldemort only semi-existed and that blood prejudice was not limited to Voldemort supporters.

If we use a Math(s) analogy :evil:, "Supporting Blood Prejudice" is a universal set containing numerous subsets of blood supremacists. "Supporting Voldemort" is one of those subsets. It is contained within the set of "Supporting Blood Prejudice," making it quite possible to support blood prejudice without supporting Voldemort in the slightest.

Now, I do think there are other arguments that could be made to indicate that Draco absorbs some attitudes specific to Death Eaters even before he reaches Hogwarts. But supporting blood prejudice is not specific to Death Eaters. Even a number of Pureblood opponents of Voldemort believed in purity of blood (cf. Dumbledore's conversations concerning certain well-placed anti-Voldemort Purebloods in GoF).

As for Ron, he was raised to hate blood prejudice, so I don't find him the best comparison to use.

[Being unable to commit cold-blooded murder] doesn't make him a spectacular human being, imo.

I don't think anyone has argued that Draco was a spectacular human being. I think some people have said that he's not a monster and that there are certain aspects of his situation that elicit some readers' sympathy.

True, and it was only pure chance that Katie and Ron did survive - if she had touched the necklace with her bare hands, or if Harry hadn't thought of or been able to get a bezoar, Draco would have been responsible for their murders. Considering who had actually suffered because of Draco's actions, it was their forgiveness he needed, not Dumbledore's.

Is this in reference to my comment on Dumbledore's sympathy? Sorry if I did not state my point clearly earlier. I was referring to the fact that Dumbledore thought it worthwhile to try to save Draco, not specifically to anybody's forgiveness.

And Draco might not have had a profession. His father didn't. They were wealthy enough to just hang around the ministry and bribe people.
Actually, i believe Lucius worked at the Ministry as one of the School Governers or some such. I do not believe Draco worked at the Ministry at all post DH. By then, the Malfoy name would have been run through the mud. So it could be that he was living off of an inheritance as most do when they come from Old Money.

1. Do I think that seeing Draco as a bully and snobbish meant he was going to a be a DE?
Yes and no. I think Draco was always supposed to be a DE. He was raised that way. I also think Draco wanted to be a DE. But as the years go by, he starts to understand that being a DE is nothing like being the school bully.
Moreover, being a bully is really far from being a DE. Draco enjoyed being a bully, he liked the sense of power, as the school belonged to him because everybody was afraid to say anything to him. But he was not made with the evil you need to become a DE and enjoy torture and killing.

2. Draco's mother was from the notorious House of Blak, and his father was a DE that held a favor with Voldemort.
Lucius likes power, likes to be on control, to get what he wants. And also, his a really demanding father. He wanted from Draco to be the way he thought it was right for his son to be. Draco was always trying to be that person, and tried as hard as he could to please his father.

3. Did Draco made his choices of his own will, or was he scared (or whatever)?
Here I would like to say both. I don't think the division here is very clear. Draco belived all the things his father taught him, but he wasn't evil. Each decision he made was driven by a different motive.
He believed in all the "pure-blood" stuff... so he called Hermione a mudblood, and he meant it.
He was mean and a bully, because his father taught him that power really matters.
He wanted to be a DE, and was also supposed to be like that. He found out it wasn't like he imagened, but still it was his desicion. I believe that at the very beginning of his "Death Eater Career" he was proud to be one.
And I can go on and on.... We can't sayhis choices were made by this or by that, each choice has his motive.

4. Draco uses of name-dropping.
Here I think he used name-dropping to gain respect. He wanted people to know that he knew people, he was well conected, and nobody can mess with him. Like he's above everybody else. He tries all the time to impress people.
Also I believed Draco hated Harry from the point Harry said to him "that don't impress me much".

5. Does Draco regrets Dumbledore's death? and, does Draco regrets his decision not to kill Dumbledore?
Both no. IMO, Draco doesn't regret his decision not to kill Dumbledore, not because he liked Dumbledore, but because as bad as Draco seems to be, he's not able to commit murder.
Also, I don't think Draco regrets Dumbledore's death. I don't believe he feels sorry about Dumbledore. And really I don't believe he feels anything about it. IMO, he's just happy it wasn't him who killed Dumbledore.

6. At the end of OotP Draco told Harry that he was going to kill him for his father's going to prision. And when he had Harry alone and his mercy he didn't carried out his threat.
Talking is easy. Everyone can threat everybody. Making a threat doesn't mean the person would carry the threat out.
Threats, most of the time, are just empty words.

7. Draco didn't make friends at Hogwarts. Instead he choosed to have lackeys, bodyguards.
IMO, Draco thinks he's too good for most of the people. And I also belive he thinks that being a friend of somebody means you care and love that person, and for Draco (in my opinion of course) love is a weakness. And Draco would not show any weakness.
About Pansy Parkinson, I don't believed he caried about her as she did for him. I don't believe he felt for her the way she felt for him.

8. Excuse Draco for not having a choice.
Absolutely not. There's always another choice. (as I said before I believe...). At any given ocasion, you have more that one way to react.
But I believe that Draco most of the time thought he hasn't not other option. That's different.

9. The Imperius Curse.
I just think Draco really meant to cause Imperius on Madam Rosmerta, and that doesn't mean he really meant to kill Dumbledore. I belive those two things (the Imperius Curse and Dumbledore's death) don't have much to do with each other.

10. "Supporting Blood Prejudice" and "Supporting Voldemort".
I think you can support the blood prejudice without supporting Voldemort. But you can't support Voldemort without supporting the blood prejudice.

11. Thank you kittling! :)

Why didn't Draco make friends at Hogwarts, I wonder? Why did he choose to have lackeys, bodyguards, instead? Pansy Parkinson seems to have been something of a friend, judging by her theatrics over his injury in PoA and cosiness on the train in HBP, but we generally hear of him spending time with Crabbe and Goyle. My guess and this is really just a guess is that he's used to being on top. The Malfoys are a prominent family in the wizarding world. He's not used to having equals. When he goes to school he doesn't have equals there, either. Crabbe and Goyle aren't equals. Pansy isn't an equal. They look up to him for being a Malfoy and he makes sure they look up to him because he is a Malfoy. He doesn't know how to have friends, because that would mean he sees someone as an equal when he thinks he's better than them.

Why didn't Draco make friends at Hogwarts, I wonder? Why did he choose to have lackeys, bodyguards, instead? Pansy Parkinson seems to have been something of a friend, judging by her theatrics over his injury in PoA and cosiness on the train in HBP, but we generally hear of him spending time with Crabbe and Goyle.

Because Ms Rowling decided against it (http://www.jkrowling.com/textonly/en/extrastuff_view.cfm?id=5).

Too bad, because I really would have liked examining the dynamics.

My guess and this is really just a guess is that he's used to being on top. The Malfoys are a prominent family in the wizarding world. He's not used to having equals. When he goes to school he doesn't have equals there, either. Crabbe and Goyle aren't equals. Pansy isn't an equal. They look up to him for being a Malfoy and he makes sure they look up to him because he is a Malfoy. He doesn't know how to have friends, because that would mean he sees someone as an equal when he thinks he's better than them.

While I think this is true, I have a slightly different read on it. I think it's possible that his family's position has isolated him and led him to develop very poor social skills - making it very difficult for him to know how to make friends, or even to know what a friend is.

In Madam Malkin's shop in PS/SS, Draco does try to "make friends" with Harry, even before knowing who Harry is. But he says all the wrong things. He has all the wrong attitudes. And I think it's safe to say that most of what he says is a product of extremely poor parenting. Instead of making friends, he ends up reminding Harry of Dudley.

Then, of course, on the train to Hogwarts, Draco makes his fatal mistake... if he ever wished to be friends with Harry Potter. He tries to "collect" Harry because of the name and then suggests that he would make a better friend than the boy Harry has spent the past few hours bonding with. And when things don't work out for Draco... well, to say he gets "nasty" is a mild word for it, I think.

I've written a blog post on all the mistakes Draco makes in his first encounters with Harry Potter. It's called "Snakes on a Train," in case you're interested. I think a lot of what we see in these initial encounters is a result of what he's been taught. And none of it is any good for making friends with anybody outside his social circle.

While I think this is true, I have a slightly different read on it. I think it's possible that his family's position has isolated him and led him to develop very poor social skills - making it very difficult for him to know how to make friends, or even to know what a friend is.

In Madam Malkin's shop in PS/SS, Draco does try to "make friends" with Harry, even before knowing who Harry is. But he says all the wrong things. He has all the wrong attitudes. And I think it's safe to say that most of what he says is a product of extremely poor parenting. Instead of making friends, he ends up reminding Harry of Dudley.

Then, of course, on the train to Hogwarts, Draco makes his fatal mistake... if he ever wished to be friends with Harry Potter. He tries to "collect" Harry because of the name and then suggests that he would make a better friend than the boy Harry has spent the past few hours bonding with. And when things don't work out for Draco... well, to say he gets "nasty" is a mild word for it, I think.

I've written a blog post on all the mistakes Draco makes in his first encounters with Harry Potter. It's called "Snakes on a Train," in case you're interested. I think a lot of what we see in these initial encounters is a result of what he's been taught. And none of it is any good for making friends with anybody outside his social circle.


If his parenting was the reason Draco was the way that he was how do you account for Sirius who was brought up under the same belief system as Draco? And yet Sirius certainly knew how real friendship worked. And I believe that Draco knew as well.

If his parenting was the reason Draco was the way that he was how do you account for Sirius who was brought up under the same belief system as Draco? And yet Sirius certainly knew how real friendship worked. And I believe that Draco knew as well.

There is more to parenting than belief systems. :)

Additionally, I don't believe I indicated that parenting is the only reason, just that it is a large factor. Also, I'm referring to Draco at age 11, in his first encounters with Harry. The patterns he has developed up to that point in his life (as seen at Madam Malkin's) perpetuate themselves at Hogwarts.

As for parenting... It does not appear that Sirius' mother was overly clingy. Draco's, on the other hand, was. She pampered Draco and over-protected him. This is fairly clear, I think, from the early books even before we meet her.

Additionally, Draco was brought up in an isolated setting (Malfoy Manor), while Sirius was brought up in London, where he would presumably have access to views other than those of his parents and would certainly have plenty of opportunities to make friends - even friends outside his social circle. So couple an overly-clingy, overly-protective mother with an isolated setting, and there's a very good chance that the boy (Draco) will not have wonderful social skills.

Additionally, Draco and Sirius have quite different personalities. Sirius is a natural-born rebel, and Draco is not. But of course, this is not the place to analyze Sirius' personality.

At any rate, I certainly do not like the way Draco interacts with Harry in these early scenes (or in most of his other scenes for that matter). But the way he interacts with Harry indicates that his social skills do leave a lot to be desired. He has absolutely no clue whatsoever on how to talk to a stranger, imo.

As for parenting... It does not appear that Sirius' mother was overly clingy. Draco's, on the other hand, was. She pampered Draco and over-protected him. This is fairly clear, I think, from the early books even before we meet her


I hardly think that allowing ones husband to be a DE and allowing all manner of dark objects in your home is condusive to over protecting ones child. In fact we see that she is not truly the one to spoil Draco. Lucius is.

Additionally, Draco was brought up in an isolated setting (Malfoy Manor), while Sirius was brought up in London, where he would presumably have access to views other than those of his parents and would certainly have plenty of opportunities to make friends - even friends outside his social circle. So couple an overly-clingy, over-protecting mother with an isolated setting, and there's a very good chance that the boy (Draco) will not have wonderful social skills

The Malfoys were socialites. Imho, Draco had every opportunity to interact with other people on a regular basis. If any parenting is at fault it is more about whom the Malfoys and Lucius especially allowed Draco to socialize with. But I wouldn't think Draco was isolated at all.


At any rate, I certainly do not like the way Draco interacts with Harry in these early scenes (or in most of his other scenes for that matter). But the way he interacts with Harry indicates that his social skills do leave a lot to be desired. He has absolutely no clue whatsoever on how to talk to a stranger, imo.

I think it depends on what Draco wanted out of his relationships. We must remember in Madam Malkins that Draco does not seem to think anything is wrong with his worldview. He talks to a stranger about his disdain with Hogwarts and the people in it. He wasn't on the look out for friends then, and certainly he wasn't out to make Harry a true friend on the train. He just wanted to acquire Harry. He wasn't interested in Harry for Harry's sake. So I don't think he had a lack of social skills. I think he just didn't bother to use them.

I don't think anyone has argued that Draco was a spectacular human being. I think some people have said that he's not a monster and that there are certain aspects of his situation that elicit some readers' sympathy.

I certainly don't think Draco is a monster. Nor do I think he's a particularly good person. Being unable to murder a defenceless person in cold blood isn't something unique, it applies to most people. Same with being unable to hand someone over to be murdered, as with the Trio in DH. I think it's definitely good that Draco isn't able to murder Dumbledore and unwilling to identify the Trio. It shows that Draco isn't a twisted individual like some of his family, Lucius or Bellatrix for example. However, I don't think it's hugely outstanding -it's what I'd expect from anyone with a scrap of a conscience.

Is this in reference to my comment on Dumbledore's sympathy? Sorry if I did not state my point clearly earlier. I was referring to the fact that Dumbledore thought it worthwhile to try to save Draco, not specifically to anybody's forgiveness.

Not exactly. I was replying to eliza's comment that while Dumbledore forgave Draco, that doesn't mean everyone had to, or did. I do think it was worthwhile to try to save Draco, and I believe he would probably have taken Dumbledore's offer if he'd had more time, but I think what he did to Ron and Katie was inexcusable.

My guess and this is really just a guess is that he's used to being on top. The Malfoys are a prominent family in the wizarding world. He's not used to having equals. When he goes to school he doesn't have equals there, either. Crabbe and Goyle aren't equals. Pansy isn't an equal. They look up to him for being a Malfoy and he makes sure they look up to him because he is a Malfoy. He doesn't know how to have friends, because that would mean he sees someone as an equal when he thinks he's better than them.

Because Ms Rowling decided against it (http://www.jkrowling.com/textonly/en/extrastuff_view.cfm?id=5).

Too bad, because I really would have liked examining the dynamics.

Everything in the entire series is because JKR decided for or against it. There needs to be an in-text reason, also. Such as Draco's idea that he was superior to others.


Then, of course, on the train to Hogwarts, Draco makes his fatal mistake... if he ever wished to be friends with Harry Potter. He tries to "collect" Harry because of the name and then suggests that he would make a better friend than the boy Harry has spent the past few hours bonding with. And when things don't work out for Draco... well, to say he gets "nasty" is a mild word for it, I think.

I think you're more accurate about Draco's intentions in saying "collect" rather than befriend. We've seen that Draco likes name-dropping, he would have loved to be able to say that famous Harry Potter was a friend. He would have liked famous Harry Potter looking to him for advice on "the wrong sort" -that's his own offer. I don't think Draco, at this point was capable of trying to befriend someone as an equal.

I've written a blog post on all the mistakes Draco makes in his first encounters with Harry Potter. It's called "Snakes on a Train," in case you're interested. I think a lot of what we see in these initial encounters is a result of what he's been taught. And none of it is any good for making friends with anybody outside his social circle.

As his social circle seems to have been largely the children of his father's DE pals, then I agree. He was in no way equipped to deal as equals with people who didn't buy into that biased rubbish and didn't fawn over the name Malfoy.

If his parenting was the reason Draco was the way that he was how do you account for Sirius who was brought up under the same belief system as Draco? And yet Sirius certainly knew how real friendship worked. And I believe that Draco knew as well.

Not to mention the incredible attitude of superiority shown by Mrs Black - the attitude Regulus bought into -that being a member of the House of Black made one practically royal.

Additionally, Draco was brought up in an isolated setting (Malfoy Manor), while Sirius was brought up in London, where he would presumably have access to views other than those of his parents and would certainly have plenty of opportunities to make friends - even friends outside his social circle. So couple an overly-clingy, overly-protective mother with an isolated setting, and there's a very good chance that the boy (Draco) will not have wonderful social skills.

Distance is no object to wizards - the isolation of Malfoy Manor wouldn't prevent people from Flooing in, or bringing their children by Side-Along Apparation. And I don't see how Sirius could have socialised with anyone outside of his parents' circle pre-Hogwarts - his parents would never have allowed it.


At any rate, I certainly do not like the way Draco interacts with Harry in these early scenes (or in most of his other scenes for that matter). But the way he interacts with Harry indicates that his social skills do leave a lot to be desired. He has absolutely no clue whatsoever on how to talk to a stranger, imo.


I hardly think that allowing ones husband to be a DE and allowing all manner of dark objects in your home is condusive to over protecting ones child. In fact we see that she is not truly the one to spoil Draco. Lucius is.

To be fair, I don't think Narcissa could have prevented Lucius from being a DE -"lifetime of service or death" and all that. While Lucius spoils Draco materially, like buying his way onto the Quidditch team, I think it is Narcissa who pays a lot of attention to Draco and fusses over him.


The Malfoys were socialites. Imho, Draco had every opportunity to interact with other people on a regular basis. If any parenting is at fault it is more about whom the Malfoys and Lucius especially allowed Draco to socialize with. But I wouldn't think Draco was isolated at all.

I think it depends on what Draco wanted out of his relationships. We must remember in Madam Malkins that Draco does not seem to think anything is wrong with his worldview. He talks to a stranger about his disdain with Hogwarts and the people in it. He wasn't on the look out for friends then, and certainly he wasn't out to make Harry a true friend on the train. He just wanted to acquire Harry. He wasn't interested in Harry for Harry's sake. So I don't think he had a lack of social skills. I think he just didn't bother to use them.

Good point -proud people like the Malfoys would want their son to be polite and mannerly and would raise him as such. Albeit with the "knowledge" :rolleyes: that he is superior as a wealthy pureblood -and that is a large part of the problem in Draco's interactions with others, I think. His so-called inferiors aren't worthy of good manners.

To be fair, I don't think Narcissa could have prevented Lucius from being a DE -"lifetime of service or death" and all that. While Lucius spoils Draco materially, like buying his way onto the Quidditch team, I think it is Narcissa who pays a lot of attention to Draco and fusses over him.
Yes. Narcissa mollycoddles Draco. Hes her only son, and being the only son of a rich snobbish woman usually means you end up a bit fussed over.

I hardly think that allowing ones husband to be a DE and allowing all manner of dark objects in your home is condusive to over protecting ones child. In fact we see that she is not truly the one to spoil Draco. Lucius is.

Starting in PS/SS, she smothered Draco with affection, imo, sending him goodies at Hogwarts nearly every day by owl post. She wouldn't even let him fight his own battle in Madam Malkin's in HBP - and Draco was already 16 and a Death Eater!

Whether she effectively protected her son or not, I think it was certainly her intention to protect him. She was way over-involved, imo, with Draco.

To be fair, I don't think Narcissa could have prevented Lucius from being a DE -"lifetime of service or death" and all that. While Lucius spoils Draco materially, like buying his way onto the Quidditch team, I think it is Narcissa who pays a lot of attention to Draco and fusses over him.

:agree: Yes.

I certainly don't think Draco is a monster. Nor do I think he's a particularly good person. Being unable to murder a defenceless person in cold blood isn't something unique, it applies to most people. Same with being unable to hand someone over to be murdered, as with the Trio in DH. I think it's definitely good that Draco isn't able to murder Dumbledore and unwilling to identify the Trio. It shows that Draco isn't a twisted individual like some of his family, Lucius or Bellatrix for example. However, I don't think it's hugely outstanding -it's what I'd expect from anyone with a scrap of a conscience.

I don't see that we particularly disagree. I'm not a Draco fan. He is somebody that I have grown to pity, not somebody that I like.

I think it depends on what Draco wanted out of his relationships. We must remember in Madam Malkins that Draco does not seem to think anything is wrong with his worldview. He talks to a stranger about his disdain with Hogwarts and the people in it. He wasn't on the look out for friends then, and certainly he wasn't out to make Harry a true friend on the train. He just wanted to acquire Harry. He wasn't interested in Harry for Harry's sake. So I don't think he had a lack of social skills. I think he just didn't bother to use them.

I don't think that being a jerk with no social skills (my opinion of Draco) is contradictory with what you have described above. Everything you describe is perfectly consistent, I think, with Draco having no clue on how to make authentic friends (and with having no clue that everything he is saying is inappropriate and rude).

As for Draco being disdainful... Yes. That is also part of my point. The disdain is one of the lessons he has been taught by his parents. Does he actually know it's wrong? I don't think it's likely that he does.

I already mentioned upthread, by the way, that on the train (i.e., once he knew who Harry was), he tried to "collect" him. But he doesn't know who Harry is when he first strikes up the catastrophic conversation with him in Madam Malkin's.

I think you're more accurate about Draco's intentions in saying "collect" rather than befriend. We've seen that Draco likes name-dropping, he would have loved to be able to say that famous Harry Potter was a friend. He would have liked famous Harry Potter looking to him for advice on "the wrong sort" -that's his own offer. I don't think Draco, at this point was capable of trying to befriend someone as an equal.

Yes. He wanted to drop names once he knew what the name was to be dropped. Again, this is consistent with what I have been saying. Name-dropping and sidling up to those perceived as influential and powerful is very much a Malfoy thing. He has picked it up from his family. And it's not very good, imo, for developing authentic social skills that would enable him to have real friends.

As his social circle seems to have been largely the children of his father's DE pals, then I agree. He was in no way equipped to deal as equals with people who didn't buy into that biased rubbish and didn't fawn over the name Malfoy.

:agree: Exactly.

Distance is no object to wizards - the isolation of Malfoy Manor wouldn't prevent people from Flooing in, or bringing their children by Side-Along Apparation. And I don't see how Sirius could have socialised with anyone outside of his parents' circle pre-Hogwarts - his parents would never have allowed it.

While distance is no object, that does not mean that Draco is rubbing elbows with anybody outside his parents' specific social circle. As for Sirius... I don't think he would have cared about what his parents allowed. I see Sirius as a rebel and an adrenalin junkie.IMO, he would have snuck out of the house and done whatever he felt like doing - probably exactly because it is something his parents would never have allowed.

Good point -proud people like the Malfoys would want their son to be polite and mannerly and would raise him as such. Albeit with the "knowledge" :rolleyes: that he is superior as a wealthy pureblood -and that is a large part of the problem in Draco's interactions with others, I think. His so-called inferiors aren't worthy of good manners.

:agree: Exactly.

Just to be clear on what I think of these encounters, here's what I posted on my blog. It's not exactly flattering to Draco:


I mentioned in another post that Draco is “a bit of a blood-prejudiced prat (and more than a little like Dudley Dursley)” – to which arithmancer replied:

I had some sympathy for Draco from the start. To me it seemed clear his approach to Harry in the robe shop was friendly. Since he did not know Harry’s mother was Muggleborn, or Hagrid was his first wizard friend, the things he said were, while revealing of the prejudices he had obviously already acquired, not intended to put off Harry in any way. He was just trying to start up a conversation with another boy who would be going to Hogwarts.

Okay. She’s got a point. The conversation in Madam Malkin’s opens with the pale, pointy-faced boy’s “Hello. Hogwarts too?” and continues with the boy rattling on about racing brooms, Quidditch, school Houses, Hagrid, and Wizarding blood. Draco (the boy) is not, at any point, intending to put Harry off. He’s just carrying on what he considers to be light conversation. The problem lies in what Draco considers to be light conversation.

As arithmancer mentions, Draco’s conversation shows the “prejudices he had obviously already acquired.” We don’t know it yet, but the parents Draco mentions (the father who is buying his books and the mother who is looking at wands) both come from wealthy pureblood families – the Malfoys and the Blacks.

Though not all purebloods engage in blood prejudice (witness the Weasleys!), both the Malfoy and Black families boast long lines of blood supremacy ideologues with long histories of despising Muggles and Muggle-borns. In fact, in Dumbledore’s notes to Beedle the Bard we find that Brutus Malfoy, one of Lucius’ ancestors, edited an anti-Muggle periodical dating back at least to 1675, when Brutus wrote:

This we may state with certainty: Any wizard who shows fondness for the society of Muggles is of low intelligence, with magic so feeble and pitiful that he can only feel himself superior if surrounded by Muggle pig-men.

Nothing is a surer sign of weak magic than a weakness for non-magical company.

In addition to inheriting a most virulent strain of blood prejudice from his ancestors, Draco’s father is an impenitent Death Eater who continues to practice Dark Magic in secret. Draco, in other words, starts from a deficit of character and empathy – despite his family wealth.

Inside Madam Malkin’s

In his first discussion with Harry Potter, here are some of the ways Draco manages not to win friends and influence people:

On the question of racing brooms:

“I don’t see why first years can’t have their own. I think I’ll bully father into getting me one and I’ll smuggle it in somehow.”

On the question of playing Quidditch:

“I [play] – Father says it’s a crime if I’m not picked to play for my house, and I must say, I agree.”

On the question of school Houses:

“Imagine being in Hufflepuff, I think I’d leave, wouldn’t you?”

On the question of Hagrid:

“Oh… I’ve heard of him. He’s sort of a servant, isn’t he?…. I heard he’s sort of savage – lives in a hut on the school grounds and every now and then he gets drunk, tries to do magic, and ends up setting fire to his bed.”

On the question of Harry’s parents being dead:

“Oh, sorry,” said [Draco], not sounding sorry at all. “But they were our kind, weren’t they?”

On the question of Muggle-borns:

“I really don’t think they should let the other sort in, do you? They’re just not the same, they’ve never been brought up to know our ways. Some of them have never even heard of Hogwarts until they get the letter, imagine. I think they should keep it in the old wizarding families. What’s your surname, anyway?”

Does Draco have any clue at all on how to make friends with strangers?

As arithmancer pointed out, none of this is intended to be rude. But much of it is rude. And what’s not rude is often disturbing.

From the moment Draco brags about bullying his father and smuggling in a broom, Harry is reminded of Dudley, and that is emphatically not a good thing. Draco is full of himself, bragging about his Quidditch-playing ability, emphasizing his social superiority over those he deems servants, expressly showing a lack of empathy over the fact the boy he’s speaking with is orphaned, and (of course) demonstrating the blood prejudice that he has absorbed from his parents – all without bothering once to find out the actual views of the boy he’s talking with, or anything else about the boy. Had he bothered, he might have had a better idea about how to proceed, but Draco just starts talking. Only when he realizes that he needs to find out whether or not this boy is from one of the old Wizarding families does he bother to ask Harry for any relevant information about himself.

Now, it’s not really possible to determine whether his narcissistic behavior is an innate character flaw or a sort of self-absorption that he has had ingrained in him as a result of his upbringing. But regardless, Harry is hardly impressed.

On the Hogwarts Express

Things get worse, though, on the Hogwarts Express – so bad, in fact, that by the time Harry puts the Sorting Hat on his head, he is begging to be put into any House besides Draco’s.

It all starts when Draco comes into the famous Harry Potter’s compartment and (in excellent Slughorn style!) starts trying to “collect” him, perhaps even bask a little in Harry’s reflected glory. But in a remark aimed precisely at Ron Weasley, Draco makes his fatal mistake… if he wishes to create a positive impression on the famous boy:

“You’ll soon find some wizarding families are much better than others, Potter. You don’t want to go making friends with the wrong sort. I can help you there.”

Oh, the arrogance! The unutterable arrogance! Harry has spent the last several hours forming a bond with Ron Weasly. What could possess young Malfoy to think that Harry would favor Draco over this new friend?

Perhaps we could say, charitably, that Draco is still something of an extension of his parents. He is only 11. He has not really reached an age where kids start to separate their own beliefs from their parents’ beliefs. But when Harry rebuffs the offer, this young extension of parental prejudice gives a positively chilling reply:

“I’d be careful if I were you, Potter,” he said slowly. “Unless you’re a bit politer, you’ll go the same way as your parents. They didn’t know what was good for them, either. You hang around with riffraff like the Weasleys and that Hagrid, and it’ll rub off on you.”

You have just been introduced to a Death Eater perspective of James’ and Lily’s deaths. Significantly, Draco is accompanied by foils Crabbe and Goyle (both sons of Death Eaters), who will go with him into Slytherin – the House that has had a blood prejudice bent since Salazar Slytherin left a Basilisk in the Chamber of Secrets, the House that has become Death Eater Central since Voldemort began to raise an army.

By filling their son with such venom, Lucius and Narcissa Malfoy have inflicted damage on this “unfortunate boy” as appalling as any of the damage Dumbledore later sees in Dudley.

Yet just as there is hope for Dudley, there is potentially hope for Draco. The wand that chose “the poor Malfoy boy” has a unicorn hair core. Somewhere deep down, there is still a core of innocence and purity in Draco, despite external appearances. We shall see if he fulfills that promise.

I certainly don't think Draco is a monster. Nor do I think he's a particularly good person. Being unable to murder a defenceless person in cold blood isn't something unique, it applies to most people. Same with being unable to hand someone over to be murdered, as with the Trio in DH.

You'd be surprised. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milgram_experiment) As this experiment depressingly showed, most people are able to do great harm, even potentially kill, if they believe they're only following orders and bear no personal responsibility. Add to that the fact that Draco stood to gain a LOT (as in safety for his family) by turning Harry Potter to Voldemort and he still refused to do it, and it does become a rather distinguished act of bravery and decency, in my opinion. As someone else said, it's not Harry and the fighters who are "regular" and Draco and the like who're remarkably bad - it's more accurate to say, in my opinion, that the latter are regular (trying to save yourself and the ones you care about by all means), and self-sacrificial people who go into the fight risking their lives for strangers are extraordinary, because that's not what average people do.

Reading about Draco refusing to turn the Trio over made me feel relieved because I thought there was hope for him after all. It also shows, in my opinion, that he talks but won't walk the walk.

You'd be surprised. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milgram_experiment) As this experiment depressingly showed, most people are able to do great harm, even potentially kill, if they believe they're only following orders and bear no personal responsibility. Add to that the fact that Draco stood to gain a LOT (as in safety for his family) by turning Harry Potter to Voldemort and he still refused to do it, and it does become a rather distinguished act of bravery and decency, in my opinion. As someone else said, it's not Harry and the fighters who are "regular" and Draco and the like who're remarkably bad - it's more accurate to say, in my opinion, that the latter are regular (trying to save yourself and the ones you care about by all means), and self-sacrificial people who go into the fight risking their lives for strangers are extraordinary, because that's not what average people do.

Reading about Draco refusing to turn the Trio over made me feel relieved because I thought there was hope for him after all. It also shows, in my opinion, that he talks but won't walk the walk.


IMO, Draco loves to talk. Talking and making threats is really easy.
There are some things that Draco does really mean to them, as he called Hermione a mudblood, because he really believed in all the "Pure Blood Prejudice". But there are some other he just talks, because he can. As he threatened Harry to kill him because it was Harry's fault Lucius was sent to Azkaban.

Being a hero and saving people's lives, and risking your own life for somebody's sake is really rare. Most people don't to that. Most people prefer to save their own butts. And that's exactly what Draco did all along, from my point of view.

Also, as is shown by the Milgram Experiment, people are able to do terrible things, just because they were order to. And we see it not just in the series, but also we see it in history, when the nazis were order to murder and torture millions of peoples, but this topic is not relevant to Draco. What is relevant, is that Draco actually acted different from the average persons when he didn't give the trio to Voldemort. At that point, as Yoana, I thought too there was still hope for him.

Starting in PS/SS, she smothered Draco with affection, imo, sending him goodies at Hogwarts nearly every day by owl post. She wouldn't even let him fight his own battle in Madam Malkin's in HBP - and Draco was already 16 and a Death Eater


As the mother of an only child myself I completely know where Narcissa is coming from. Her only baby is going to be living away from her for most of a year, every year. IMO opinion many of Narcissa's actions are based around that. She spoiled him, imho, rather inadvertantly. And she did it out of love. In fact I wouldn't have been surprised if she was over compensating for Lucius. Draco was always out to impress someone, namely Lucius. Draco rather hero worshipped his father mostly, I think, because he didn't get the love from him that he did from his mother.

That scene that you talk about in HBP would have been totally different if Narcissa wasn't there. I imagine that Draco looked upon his mother's interference with relief in some ways. No matter how old you get you want to know that someone cares about you for you. And we know that Draco's heart really wasn't into the whole DE thing anyway.





I don't think that being a jerk with no social skills (my opinion of Draco) is contradictory with what you have described above. Everything you describe is perfectly consistent, I think, with Draco having no clue on how to make authentic friends (and with having no clue that everything he is saying is inappropriate and rude).


But he wasn't interested in being authentic friends with Harry. That's my point. Had he truly been interested in being part of Harry's group he would have used his manners. Much like he did with Slughorn. And in Draco's defense sometimes, no matter how hard you try, people just don't want to be your friend (again like Slughorn) and it's not a reflection on you.

Reading about Draco refusing to turn the Trio over made me feel relieved because I thought there was hope for him after all. It also shows, in my opinion, that he talks but won't walk the walk.

The thing is Draco attempted to walk the walk the fact that all his plots failed shows ineptitude and overconfidence in his abilities and a cowardly nature. And it wasn't until his own family was threatened that he started covertly rebelling. It wasn't a sort of brave conversion or anything like Snape. Nor was it action driven rebellion like Regulus. He wasn't even as brave as Narcissa was in the Forest. In effect every action he took was cowardly, imho. He only saved the trio because he had no other options to get back into Voldy's good graces.

It wasn't a sort of brave conversion or anything like Snape.

Snape only turned because Voldemort killed the woman he loved. He found other reasons along the way to fight but Lily's death was the only reason he came over to Dumbledore's side.

Regulus only rebelled against Voldemort because he abused Kreacher and was going to send him to his death and Narcissa only rebelled out of love for her family. So, there's no way to say Draco wouldn't have done the same if Voldemort had killed one or both of his parents. I tend to think if Voldemort had killed both of his parents, Draco would have rebelled (though how successful he'd have been is anyone's guess) given how much he loved them and how much he was willing to do for them.

That said, I'm not sure what's so wrong with that. Yes, it would be better if they said "gosh, this whole oppressing Muggle-borns and Muggles enterprise is wrong!" but even if they never fully understood that, with their loved ones in danger or killed, they got to understand what all those wizards and Muggles already knew about suffering under Voldermort.

I don't think that being a jerk with no social skills (my opinion of Draco) is contradictory with what you have described above. Everything you describe is perfectly consistent, I think, with Draco having no clue on how to make authentic friends (and with having no clue that everything he is saying is inappropriate and rude).

I can't imagine socialites like Lucius and Narcissa raising a child without ensuring he knew how to communicate politely with others. Lucius' entire way of smooth-talking and bribing the Ministry depended on being able to get on well with the people in positions of power.
And some of the things he says cannot be explained away by poor social skills - on hearing that Harry's parents are dead, his question is "But they were our kind, weren't they?". That's not poor social skills, that's putting his bigotry above everything else, as only purebloods are worthy of his manners. Questions like a blunt "What happened?" or a simple "So who do you live with now?" would be more appropriate to that situation, not a prejudiced question, the first would even show lack of social skills far more than the nasty question he comes out with. To be honest, that question implies the DE mentality - the deaths don't matter if they're not wizards.

As for Draco being disdainful... Yes. That is also part of my point. The disdain is one of the lessons he has been taught by his parents. Does he actually know it's wrong? I don't think it's likely that he does.

Selectively disdainful, though - I think he would mind his manners speaking to Fudge, or any of his teachers, for that matter, or an older student he wanted to impress, such as the Slytherin Quidditch captain. He knows what disdain is, he decides to be respectful to those he can't place himself above in his own mind or to those he thinks he's impressing.

I already mentioned upthread, by the way, that on the train (i.e., once he knew who Harry was), he tried to "collect" him. But he doesn't know who Harry is when he first strikes up the catastrophic conversation with him in Madam Malkin's.

It shouldn't really matter if he knows who he's talking to. However, as I think Draco decides how to address someone depending on their blood status, and importance, it's not surprising.

While distance is no object, that does not mean that Draco is rubbing elbows with anybody outside his parents' specific social circle. As for Sirius... I don't think he would have cared about what his parents allowed. I see Sirius as a rebel and an adrenalin junkie.IMO, he would have snuck out of the house and done whatever he felt like doing - probably exactly because it is something his parents would never have allowed.

I can't see a pre-Hogwarts 10 year old being able to do much sneaking around without his mother knowing, especially not in a repressive wizarding household.

Very well thought-out blog post, by the way.

As arithmancer pointed out, none of this is intended to be rude. But much of it is rude. And what’s not rude is often disturbing.

His response to being turned down by Harry is quite a disturbing thing to hear from an eleven year old, yes.

Now, it’s not really possible to determine whether his narcissistic behavior is an innate character flaw or a sort of self-absorption that he has had ingrained in him as a result of his upbringing. But regardless, Harry is hardly impressed.

And I'm very glad that he is unimpressed and turns down Draco's offer of friendsip. It shows that Harry has integrity and basic cop-on.

Yet just as there is hope for Dudley, there is potentially hope for Draco. The wand that chose “the poor Malfoy boy” has a unicorn hair core. Somewhere deep down, there is still a core of innocence and purity in Draco, despite external appearances. We shall see if he fulfills that promise.

I agre that there is hope for Draco. While I don't think being unable to commit murder is anything to sing and dance about, it shows that Draco is a better man, a better human being than his father, he isn't capable of doing the things his father does, the reality of being a DE hits him full in the face, and he isn't able for it, he's not capable of the evil necessary to be a DE.

You'd be surprised. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milgram_experiment) As this experiment depressingly showed, most people are able to do great harm, even potentially kill, if they believe they're only following orders and bear no personal responsibility.

That experiment makes for quite disturbing reading, but I don't think a "safe" experiment situation compares to real life. And in real life, people are generally not allowed get away with horrific things with the excuse of following orders.

Add to that the fact that Draco stood to gain a LOT (as in safety for his family) by turning Harry Potter to Voldemort and he still refused to do it, and it does become a rather distinguished act of bravery and decency, in my opinion.

I think that was a good sign of Draco not being like his father. Draco had by then spent plenty of time around Voldemort and DEs - I think he was beginning to realise that no matter what happened, even if they regained Voldemort's favour, it could be lost again quicker than you can say Avada Kedavra. (Again, better than his father and aunt in the common sense department) I think that may well have been a factor, but I do also think he was genuinely reluctant to hand people over to be murdered. Already a better person than Lucius.

As someone else said, it's not Harry and the fighters who are "regular" and Draco and the like who're remarkably bad - it's more accurate to say, in my opinion, that the latter are regular (trying to save yourself and the ones you care about by all means), and self-sacrificial people who go into the fight risking their lives for strangers are extraordinary, because that's not what average people do.

I would hope that most people are not like Draco -bigots who believe others don't have the same right to life as they do and who don't figure out terrorism is wrong until it's staring them right in the face. I can accept that most people are capable of killing others in certain circumstances, however, I really don't think everyone who doesn't commit murder should be given a pat on the back.

As he threatened Harry to kill him because it was Harry's fault Lucius was sent to Azkaban.

From Draco's perspective, it was Harry's fault. However, Harry wasn't responsible for Lucius being a DE, nor for Lucius being in charge of a DE operation at the Ministry. Nor was he the one who captured Lucius. Lucius' bad decisions are Harry's fault only in Draco's mind.

But he wasn't interested in being authentic friends with Harry. That's my point. Had he truly been interested in being part of Harry's group he would have used his manners. Much like he did with Slughorn. And in Draco's defense sometimes, no matter how hard you try, people just don't want to be your friend (again like Slughorn) and it's not a reflection on you.

Maybe Draco was truly that wrapped up in his beliefs on inferiority that he thought Harry would share his opinions on the Weasley family, because of their finances. I'm quite sure he would have genuinely liked to be able to name-drop about his "friendship" with Harry Potter.

That said, I'm not sure what's so wrong with that. Yes, it would be better if they said "gosh, this whole oppressing Muggle-borns and Muggles enterprise is wrong!" but even if they never fully understood that, with their loved ones in danger or killed, they got to understand what all those wizards and Muggles already knew about suffering under Voldermort.

As the mother of an only child myself I completely know where Narcissa is coming from. Her only baby is going to be living away from her for most of a year, every year. IMO opinion many of Narcissa's actions are based around that. She spoiled him, imho, rather inadvertantly. And she did it out of love. In fact I wouldn't have been surprised if she was over compensating for Lucius. Draco was always out to impress someone, namely Lucius. Draco rather hero worshipped his father mostly, I think, because he didn't get the love from him that he did from his mother.

IMO, Draco, not only being her only child but one whose father really pushed him hard to excel in everything, made Narcissa overcompensate. I also think the diverse parenting methods of Lucius and Narcissa made Draco a prime candidate for Voldemort: he was out to try to prove himself to his father and was looking for a way to show how brave and tough he was and to be a DE even better than Lucius, AND, he was so naive from Narcissa's overprotectiveness, he couldn't see what he was getting himself into until it was too late.

That scene that you talk about in HBP would have been totally different if Narcissa wasn't there. I imagine that Draco looked upon his mother's interference with relief in some ways. No matter how old you get you want to know that someone cares about you for you. And we know that Draco's heart really wasn't into the whole DE thing anyway.

Even later, when Harry has his vision in the bathroom at Grimauld Place, even he feels sorry for Draco and the way Voldemort is using him. I don't think Harry would have felt sorry if he'd had the impression Draco wasn't being used against his will. I'm pretty sure, even though he might have felt a tiny bit resentful that his mother stepped in to help him, Draco was more relieved than anything else.

The thing is Draco attempted to walk the walk the fact that all his plots failed shows ineptitude and overconfidence in his abilities and a cowardly nature. And it wasn't until his own family was threatened that he started covertly rebelling. It wasn't a sort of brave conversion or anything like Snape. Nor was it action driven rebellion like Regulus. He wasn't even as brave as Narcissa was in the Forest. In effect every action he took was cowardly, imho. He only saved the trio because he had no other options to get back into Voldy's good graces.

He did step forward when his family was threatened, and, that separates him from people like Bellatrix, who would have sacrificed anyone in her family to please LV.

I don't see Draco as evil, just a snobby, overpampered rich kid who was used to having everything his way, and, if it didn't work that way, turning to his fahter's influence to make sure it did. If he'd been truly evil, IMO, he would not have hesitated to kill Dumbledore on the Astronomy Tower.

I don't see Draco as evil, just a snobby, overpampered rich kid who was used to having everything his way, and, if it didn't work that way, turning to his fahter's influence to make sure it did. If he'd been truly evil, IMO, he would not have hesitated to kill Dumbledore on the Astronomy Tower.

This is precisely my view on Draco. As a Draco fan from the beginning, if he were TRULY sinister, he would not have hesitated and would have carried out the task at hand.

I think a lot of Draco's actions are because he simply does not know how to act when he doesn't get his way. Think about it - he is so used to that environment (asking for something and immediately receiving it from his parents) that when the time comes for him to actually do something on his own, he simply cannot without the advice and guidence of his parents.

Lucius and Narcissa may have been "socialites" in the wizarding world, but how they act and how they teach Draco to act are two different things.

I happen to think Draco just lacks the social skills necessary to make TRUE friends like the rest of his peers, and therefore has to result to bullying others and constantly talking the talk.

I don't see Draco as evil, just a snobby, overpampered rich kid who was used to having everything his way, and, if it didn't work that way, turning to his fahter's influence to make sure it did. If he'd been truly evil, IMO, he would not have hesitated to kill Dumbledore on the Astronomy Tower.

I don't see him as evil either. IMO, he is an amoral, spoiled brat who doesn't care who he injures in his attempt to kill Dumbledore. I am sure that Draco was thnking of his father when his attempts to kill Dumbledore ended in the serious bodily harm he did to Katie Bell and Ron. Unfortunately, I don't think that is a reasonable defense for attempted murder. I don't have much sympathy for Lucius either. He ended up in Azkaban because of the criminal raid he led on the Ministry. The raid that ended in serious injury to Ron, Neville, Luna. I'm afraid that the fact he was spoiled by his mother and taught bigoted views by his father, does not in my mind excuse criminal attacks on innocent bystanders. I kind of think Katie Bell's parents might think the same, Draco's mother might cut him some slack, I'm afraid I don't.

I can't imagine socialites like Lucius and Narcissa raising a child without ensuring he knew how to communicate politely with others. Lucius' entire way of smooth-talking and bribing the Ministry depended on being able to get on well with the people in positions of power.
And some of the things he says cannot be explained away by poor social skills - on hearing that Harry's parents are dead, his question is "But they were our kind, weren't they?". That's not poor social skills, that's putting his bigotry above everything else, as only purebloods are worthy of his manners. Questions like a blunt "What happened?" or a simple "So who do you live with now?" would be more appropriate to that situation, not a prejudiced question, the first would even show lack of social skills far more than the nasty question he comes out with. To be honest, that question implies the DE mentality - the deaths don't matter if they're not wizards.

I don't think that don't asking an appropiate question when Harry told Draco his parents are dead it's lack of social skills. I believe Draco does heva e social skills, he just doesn't use them. And, imo, he doesn't use them because he doesn't find the persons who he would like to befriend with. Draco thinks he's above of most people because of his pure blood, and he doesn't even try to get to know them. He just prejudice people about their blood purity.
I also think that Draco wouldn't care if Harry's parents were muggle and died, because, in my opinion, he doesn't have any respect or values non-pure-blood's lives.



Selectively disdainful, though - I think he would mind his manners speaking to Fudge, or any of his teachers, for that matter, or an older student he wanted to impress, such as the Slytherin Quidditch captain. He knows what disdain is, he decides to be respectful to those he can't place himself above in his own mind or to those he thinks he's impressing.

Draco knows to who he needs to be nice. And that, imo, are social skills used in a wrong way. But still, he has them.



I agre that there is hope for Draco. While I don't think being unable to commit murder is anything to sing and dance about, it shows that Draco is a better man, a better human being than his father, he isn't capable of doing the things his father does, the reality of being a DE hits him full in the face, and he isn't able for it, he's not capable of the evil necessary to be a DE.

IMO, Draco always was a better person than his father. But I think he was always some kind of trapped. He acted the way his father expected from him, he always tried to be that person to please his father. Draco was evil, but, imo, not as much as we saw in the beginning.



That experiment makes for quite disturbing reading, but I don't think a "safe" experiment situation compares to real life. And in real life, people are generally not allowed get away with horrific things with the excuse of following orders.

The fact that people can't get away with the excuse of folling orders was not the purpose of the experiment. The experiment tested if people are able to do terrible and horrible things just because they were order to do them. And most of the people, as the experiment shows, are able to do them. That means, that an averge persons is able to torture and even kill another person, just because he was ordered to do that.
So, eventhough Draco is able to commit murder, he is not able to conduct to the murder of another person.
That means he did not act the way most of persons would. And, imo, that's something.



I would hope that most people are not like Draco -bigots who believe others don't have the same right to life as they do and who don't figure out terrorism is wrong until it's staring them right in the face. I can accept that most people are capable of killing others in certain circumstances, however, I really don't think everyone who doesn't commit murder should be given a pat on the back.

Nobody figures how bad terrorisem is until it's staring them right in the face. It doesn't matter which was your opinion about it before you lived it.
Sometimes you need the slap on the face to wake you up, and look at things in a different way.



From Draco's perspective, it was Harry's fault. However, Harry wasn't responsible for Lucius being a DE, nor for Lucius being in charge of a DE operation at the Ministry. Nor was he the one who captured Lucius. Lucius' bad decisions are Harry's fault only in Draco's mind.

That's what I meant. I'm sorry if it wasn't clear enough.



Maybe Draco was truly that wrapped up in his beliefs on inferiority that he thought Harry would share his opinions on the Weasley family, because of their finances. I'm quite sure he would have genuinely liked to be able to name-drop about his "friendship" with Harry Potter.

Oooh, Draco loves name-dropping :elaugh:

This is precisely my view on Draco. As a Draco fan from the beginning, if he were TRULY sinister, he would not have hesitated and would have carried out the task at hand.

I think a lot of Draco's actions are because he simply does not know how to act when he doesn't get his way. Think about it - he is so used to that environment (asking for something and immediately receiving it from his parents) that when the time comes for him to actually do something on his own, he simply cannot without the advice and guidence of his parents.

Lucius and Narcissa may have been "socialites" in the wizarding world, but how they act and how they teach Draco to act are two different things.

I happen to think Draco just lacks the social skills necessary to make TRUE friends like the rest of his peers, and therefore has to result to bullying others and constantly talking the talk. *bold and italics, mine*

It's really funny that your last paragraph not only sums up Draco, but, is also a fantastic descrption of Dudley Dursley. It struck me because I was posting on the "Big D" LS site last night as well as the Draco site, and it hadn't occurred to me the almost exact same situation with Dudley and Draco. If you don't mind, I think I'll use that quote, with credit to you, because your summation is one of the best "short and to the point" ones I've seen.

[QUOTE=kisforkelly;5542699]This is precisely my view on Draco. As a Draco fan from the beginning, if he were TRULY sinister, he would not have hesitated and would have carried out the task at hand.

His hesitating did not stop him from the attempts to kill Dumbledore that led to him injuring Katie Bell and Ron. His lack of evil intent also did not stop him from using an Unforgivable Curse on Rosemerta. Draco's lack of evil intent did not stop him from performing these evil acts.

I think a lot of Draco's actions are because he simply does not know how to act when he doesn't get his way. Think about it - he is so used to that environment (asking for something and immediately receiving it from his parents) that when the time comes for him to actually do something on his own, he simply cannot without the advice and guidence of his parents.

I'm sorry to disagree with you, but I've never heard that being spoiled was a defense against doing criminal acts. Attempted murder is a criminal act and Draco certainly tried his best to kill Dumbledore from a distance. It was only up close and personal, when he was looking Dumbledore in the eye that he had a problem.

Lucius and Narcissa may have been "socialites" in the wizarding world, but how they act and how they teach Draco to act are two different things.

I happen to think Draco just lacks the social skills necessary to make TRUE friends like the rest of his peers, and therefore has to result to bullying others and constantly talking the talk.

Lucius and Narcissa could have been the worst parents in the world but that still isn't a defence against Draco's criminal behaviour.
How does Draco's lack of true friends excuse him from being a bully?

Org post by Minerva'sCat
It's really funny that your last paragraph not only sums up Draco, but, is also a fantastic descrption of Dudley Dursley. It struck me because I was posting on the "Big D" LS site last night as well as the Draco site, and it hadn't occurred to me the almost exact same situation with Dudley and Draco. If you don't mind, I think I'll use that quote, with credit to you, because your summation is one of the best "short and to the point" ones I've seen.

Dudley it's true was a bully. Where he differs from Draco is that he did not try to kill anyone, ever. And he apologised to Harry and thanked him for saving his life. Two things that Draco never did in the entire course of the series. At the end of the series there was definite hope for Dudley growing past his parents influence. I wish it was possible to say the same about Draco, but alas the same happy outcome is in doubt. The glimpse we get of Draco at the train station is rather sad.

[QUOTE]

His hesitating did not stop him from the attempts to kill Dumbledore that led to him injuring Katie Bell and Ron. His lack of evil intent also did not stop him from using an Unforgivable Curse on Rosemerta. Draco's lack of evil intent did not stop him from performing these evil acts.

Draco used the Imperio Curse on Madam Rosmerta as Harry used the same curse on the gobbling on Gringotts... Why when Harry used it it was okay and when Draco used it it was terrible?
Yes.. I know Harry was trying to find and destroy the Horcruxes.. But Draco was trying not to get murdered, or get his parents murdered. So in my opinion, no matter what the reasons are, they are not an excuse. That's the reason they are called unforgivable.

Draco used the Imperio Curse on Madam Rosmerta as Harry used the same curse on the gobbling on Gringotts... Why when Harry used it it was okay and when Draco used it it was terrible?
Yes.. I know Harry was trying to find and destroy the Horcruxes.. But Draco was trying not to get murdered, or get his parents murdered. So in my opinion, no matter what the reasons are, they are not an excuse. That's the reason they are called unforgivable.

Whether or not the curse is Unforgivable, I think intent matters, and what it is used for matters. Draco put the Imperius Curse on Rosmerta to force her to aid in his murder attempt-- in my opinion, that is a horrific thing to do to someone. I feel that Rosmerta was victimized in a terrible way. The same goes for Katie Bell, who was Imperiused to deliver a killing package to Dumbledore.

I feel sympathy for Draco because of his situation, but victimizing other people to get out of it doesn't show him in a good light. I think that from what I saw in the books the best I can hope for is that Draco decided that after the war he didn't want to do evil things anymore-- for him I don't think it ended up being as lucrative or fun as he thought it was going to be from his upbringing.

[QUOTE=eliza101;5542874]

Draco used the Imperio Curse on Madam Rosmerta as Harry used the same curse on the gobbling on Gringotts... Why when Harry used it it was okay and when Draco used it it was terrible?
Yes.. I know Harry was trying to find and destroy the Horcruxes.. But Draco was trying not to get murdered, or get his parents murdered. So in my opinion, no matter what the reasons are, they are not an excuse. That's the reason they are called unforgivable.

Because as OldMotherCrow said the intent was entirely different. Draco forced Rosemerta to be part of his murder plot. He forced it on Katie as well and did come close to killing her. Harry forced an entry to a crypt to get the Horcrux which was fruit of a murder and robbery. If there had been any other way to get he would have used another method. Even when he used this method he did not cause physical harm to anyone. He got in and out with the Horcrux freeing an animal that was being held in bad condition at the same time. The only fatalities were the ones done by Voldemort when he went ballistic because the Horcrux he had made with the murder of a harmless old lady was destroyed. Draco was not trying to save a world, he was trying to save his life and that of his parents. Saving his parents might have been laudable, but he wouldn't have had to try to save them if they had not joined with Voldemort in the first place. My sympathy is with Draco's victims, not Draco and his parents.

eliza101:
His hesitating did not stop him from the attempts to kill Dumbledore that led to him injuring Katie Bell and Ron. His lack of evil intent also did not stop him from using an Unforgivable Curse on Rosemerta. Draco's lack of evil intent did not stop him from performing these evil acts.

Even Dumbledore acknowledged that Draco's attempts to murder him were pretty half-hearted, which was why they all failed. When Harry used an Unforgiveable Curse, it was because he was trying to find the Horcruxes. When Draco used it, it was because he was trying to keep himself and his family from being killed by Voldemort if he didn't complete his assignment.

Each succeeded in what they were trying to accomplish, but, was either right? Did the end justify the means? One character is as guilty as the other for using an "Unforgivable" curse. But, each did it, not for only themselves, but for others.

[QUOTE=MinervasCat;5542961]Even Dumbledore acknowledged that Draco's attempts to murder him were pretty half-hearted, which was why they all failed. When Harry used an Unforgiveable Curse, it was because he was trying to find the Horcruxes. When Draco used it, it was because he was trying to keep himself and his family from being killed by Voldemort if he didn't complete his assignment.

Dumbledore could well say that seeing as he was not the one injured. I wonder what Katie Bell's parents would have said if asked. It was not Dumbledore's forgiveness that should have been asked, but Katie's and Ron's. But Draco never apologised, so they could not grant it.

Each succeeded in what they were trying to accomplish, but, was either right? Did the end justify the means? One character is as guilty as the other for using an "Unforgivable" curse. But, each did it, not for only themselves, but for others.

The big difference is that Harry did not want to break into Gringotts for his own benefit or gain. He wanted to get the Horcrux and destroy it. He did not injure anyone in a physical sense, and it was necessary to win the war, so yes, I do see Harry's efforts as being very different from Draco's. Draco was put into the position he was in by his father's actions. His father performed those actions of his own free will and they were criminal. I'm not saying that Draco was in a good position, but the reasons he was in that position was because of his own and his father's actions. I can't feel too sorry for people who reaped what they sowed by their own hands. He was not a young child and help could have been given. Dumbledore was the leader of the opposition to Voldemort. Draco could have found some backbone and gone to him. He had been a pupil at Hogwarts for the best part of 6 years and he wasn't stupid. But he preferred to try to kill Dumbledore from a distance and gave no thought to the innocent bystanders who were injured. So, yes I see a very big difference between Draco's actions and Harry's. Harry's was by far the most desperate.

Each succeeded in what they were trying to accomplish, but, was either right? Did the end justify the means? One character is as guilty as the other for using an "Unforgivable" curse. But, each did it, not for only themselves, but for others.

I agree with Eliza that Harry's and Draco's situations were different.

For me, the question of whether the ends justify the means in Draco's case doesn't apply, because even without using an Unforgivable I find the end unjustifiable.

Draco targetted two innocent women who, as far as I know, where not threatening him or his family. He forced them to help him try to commit murder. The horror of the consequences is something that they will have to live with, not to mention the risk that they could have been blamed for his deeds and ended up in Azkaban. I think Katie got "lucky", simply because she accidently became Draco's victim for a second time in one day when she touched the necklace, because it stopped that murder plot from going any farther, and kept anyone else from being hurt or killed. Poor Rosmerta has to live with being forced to aid in the attack on Katie, Ron's poisoning, and her part in Dumbledore's death and Death Eaters getting into the castle. Of course none of it is her fault, but I would think she would still feel shame that she doesn't deserve to feel because she had been forced to act while under the Imperius Curse.

I do feel sympathy for Draco's position. Voldemort had done the same thing to him, only without the Imperio, by demanding Draco commit murder under threat to his family. But Draco chose to create extra victims other than Dumbledore-- victims that had nothing to do with his situation, as far as I can tell. Maybe it was a Death Eater thing Draco had learned-- wasn't there a bit in HBP about a child who had been Imperiused to kill his grandparents? But I don't see it as justifiable, with or without Unforgivable Curses thrown in.

I feel uncomfortable judging these two instances because, as I see it, the thing that makes Harry's actions allegedly acceptable is that he did them for the greater good. This opens a can of worms in regard to morals and ethics. Is it okay to do otherwise severely tabooed things if it isn't done for selfish reasons? Would Avada Kedavra be okay if it were done for the greater good or a noble cause? I never liked the fact that Harry used Unforgivables so unapologetically. It's wrong to use them and there is a reason they're called Unforgivables.

In my view, Draco and Harry were definitely in different situations - their actions were motivated differently and they have a completely different set of morals - but that doesn't make the act of casting an Unforgivable spell any less or more unforgivable. The motivation doesn't matter for the victim. He or she would be violated, tortured or killed. I'm of the opinion that there is nothing noble about that.

In my view, Draco and Harry were definitely in different situations - their actions were motivated differently and they have a completely different set of morals - but that doesn't make the act of casting an Unforgivable spell any less or more unforgivable. The motivation doesn't matter for the victim. He or she would be violated, tortured or killed. I'm of the opinion that there is nothing noble about that.


I don't belive the motives do count. The reason they are called unforgivable is the reason that don't matter why you did, you did it.
I can understand why is easier to feel sympathy for Harry rather than for Draco. But, imo, they both had their motives, and if you judge one for being wrong when they used they Imperius, you should judge both.
Harry's cause was kill Voldemort, Draco's cause was saving himself and his parents (killing Dumbledore was never the goal, it was just the way for Draco to save himself and his parents).
Both causes are justified, but the way, imo, it is not. Once again, there's a reason it is called unforgivable.

I don't belive the motives do count. The reason they are called unforgivable is the reason that don't matter why you did, you did it.
I can understand why is easier to feel sympathy for Harry rather than for Draco. But, imo, they both had their motives, and if you judge one for being wrong when they used they Imperius, you should judge both.

Okay, you believe that Draco casting the Unforgivable is, well, unforgivable no matter the circumstances. Personally, while I agree that they are wrong to use, I also apply mitigating circumstances. But even if Draco is condemned for using Unforgivables, I still think his other actions and even his motives for using them can be weighed separately.

Harry's cause was kill Voldemort, Draco's cause was saving himself and his parents (killing Dumbledore was never the goal, it was just the way for Draco to save himself and his parents).
Both causes are justified, but the way, imo, it is not. Once again, there's a reason it is called unforgivable.

I think Harry's goal was to save the Wizarding World by destroying Voldemort. I think Draco's goal was to save himself and his family by murdering Dumbledore. I also think part of Draco's goal was to use innocent people to do his killing for him and have them take the blame, and that is why he targetted Rosmerta and Katie. So that is why I judge his use of the Imperius Curse so harshly. I also think that the Imperius was performed on Rosmerta with premeditation, and that it wasn't something that happened and was over in a flash. It went on for months and months and months-- plenty of time in my opinion for Draco to reconcider what he was doing to Rosmerta.

I don't belive the motives do count. The reason they are called unforgivable is the reason that don't matter why you did, you did it.
I can understand why is easier to feel sympathy for Harry rather than for Draco. But, imo, they both had their motives, and if you judge one for being wrong when they used they Imperius, you should judge both.
Harry's cause was kill Voldemort, Draco's cause was saving himself and his parents (killing Dumbledore was never the goal, it was just the way for Draco to save himself and his parents).
Both causes are justified, but the way, imo, it is not. Once again, there's a reason it is called unforgivable.

It's like the old example of someone stealing a loaf of bread because their family is starving. Stealing is still wrong, even though the motivation is a good one.

Back to Draco's character: I think, if we look at who at what Draco was surrounded with, the background he came from and the people who reinforced the racist things that Draco's parents taught him, the chances of him changing were pretty slim. Why would he want to when his "world" told him he was right and the others were wrong?

I think the fact that he still had enough humanity left to care about his family, and, in a way, about Dumbledore (since he couldn't bring himself to kill him), and, that he later protected the trio at Malfoy Manor, IMO, is a really positive thing. It shows that he did have a heart and, maybe even a conscience. It showed that he, unlike Voldemort, was not beyond redemption.

about Dumbledore (since he couldn't bring himself to kill him)

Agreed that Draco was like a deer caught in headlight, when he was forced to do Lord Voldemort's bidding for the safety of his family, but then he wasn't a deer, was he? If he had wanted to do the right thing, then he could have easily gone to Dumbledore, who would have helped him. But he didn't. The question of him getting caught comes in very late in the book when we see that he was failing to perform the task at hand, initially it was his own self-esteem for being chosen by Lord Voldemort that was the driving force behind his efforts. He shows remorse at the end of HBP and in DH only when his family is at stake, thats not exactly a positive attitude.

[QUOTE=MinervasCat;5543321]It's like the old example of someone stealing a loaf of bread because their family is starving. Stealing is still wrong, even though the motivation is a good one.

But Draco's family was not starving. Lucius was being threatened by the madman he had helped bring back from the dead. I'm sorry to sound harsh, but IMO Lucius had not one to blame but himself for his trouble. I Think that Draco was very glad when his father was top of the Death Eater tree and very upset when he wasn't. I don't think it ever occured to him that there might be a price to pay for supporting the madman, but there was. That doesn't mean he had the right to try to kill Dumbledore by any means possible. Especially when those other means came to close for comfort to innocent parties. Rosemerta, Katie and Ron had nothing to do with his troubles, that didn't stop Draco from doing them very serious harm.

Back to Draco's character: I think, if we look at who at what Draco was surrounded with, the background he came from and the people who reinforced the racist things that Draco's parents taught him, the chances of him changing were pretty slim. Why would he want to when his "world" told him he was right and the others were wrong?

IMO being a bigot is not an excuse for behaving as Draco did. As he didn't advertise that he was the one responsible for the attempted murders I think that he knew that it would not be kindly looked upon as the behaviour of someone who had been brought up as he was. As he spent time with his father when his father was trying to dispose of illegal objects I think Draco knew what the law was regarding murdering someone.

I think the fact that he still had enough humanity left to care about his family, and, in a way, about Dumbledore (since he couldn't bring himself to kill him), and, that he later protected the trio at Malfoy Manor, IMO, is a really positive thing. It shows that he did have a heart and, maybe even a conscience. It showed that he, unlike Voldemort, was not beyond redemption

I don't think that the fact that Draco cared about his family is a very good measure of his moral values. Of course he cared about his family, we know that his mother and father loved him. IMO, all that really means is that Draco and his father would not harm a member of their family but that every one else was fair game. Narcissa did her bit in the forest, would she have done it if Draco had been safe by her side?
What, IMO is depicted in the books is the difference between acting for selfish motives and acting unselfishly. Draco and his family did nothing that would not benefit themselves in the long run. Harry and his friends were working to save the Wizarding World from Voldemort and his Death Eaters. Draco and his father were willing Death Eaters. We see the kind of world they wanted before they realised that there was no guarantee that they would not be victims themselves. The map of a world ruled over by Voldemort and his Death Eaters was written in the bruises on Neville's and Seamus' faces.

Draco was a spoiled brat. His parents made sure he got everything he wanted, by hook or by crook, so, he had never had an opportunity to do anything on his own to prove himself. As we see him in HBP, his father has fallen completely from grace and is in Azkaban. Draco is now "the man of the house," and, probably for the first time in his life, has a chance to do something to show that he is worthy of being a Malfoy -- something that will not only impress his father, but will also avenge him for the disgrace of being sent to prison.

Meanwhile, ol' Voldy is looking for a way to punish Lucius for several things: not being as loyal as Voldy thought he should have been, including seeking him out after he was nearly vanquished by baby Harry; allowing the diary horcrux to be destroyed; not getting the prophecy from the Ministry of Magic.

This is a perfect storm. One seeking revenge and glory -- the other seeking someone to do his dirty work. Draco had been raised to admire Voldemort. To have Voldemort request that he carry out a task would have seemed like an honor -- at first.

But, as the HPB progresses, we see Draco lose his passion for his task and begin to feel the pressure. When Harry finds him in the bathroom crying, it is a very touching moment because we see the boy, Draco, not a Death Eater.

By the end of HBP, Draco knows he's in way over his head and is only being used to get back at his father. He also feels that he is saving his parents' and his own lives by carrying out killing Dumbledore. But, when the time comes, he can't do it.

When we see him at the opening of DH, he is a pale, frightened child being used as a puppet by Voldemort -- again under threat of his or his parents' deaths. As I said a few posts before, even Harry feels sorry for him when he sees him in the vision he has in the bathroom at Grimauld Place. That's saying a lot.

Again, IMO, Draco was spoiled, he was a racist, he was nasty and cruel, but, deep down, he was not evil. If he'd been evil, he would have killed Dumbledore without a moment's hesitation and gloried in it. He would not have cringed as Charity Burbage hung over his diningroom table being tortured by Voldemort. He would not have failed to identify Harry at Malfoy Manor. And, like Bellatrix, who was truly evil, he wouldn't have cared if Voldemort killed his whole family if that's what it took to show his loyalty.

Draco was a spoiled brat. His parents made sure he got everything he wanted, by hook or by crook, so, he had never had an opportunity to do anything on his own to prove himself. As we see him in HBP, his father has fallen completely from grace and is in Azkaban. Draco is now "the man of the house," and, probably for the first time in his life, has a chance to do something to show that he is worthy of being a Malfoy -- something that will not only impress his father, but will also avenge him for the disgrace of being sent to prison.

I agree with you, and I believe I said it too in the past - Draco never had the real chance to actby his own will. He got what he wanted, he was spoiled, and suddenly he needs to take care and save his family without having any experience on how it's done. And, imo, that's the reason he becomes lost, and hesitates so much. Do the bad thing and save his father from Azkaban and himself from being killed, or do the right thing, go to Dumbledore, and risk himself and his parents?

Meanwhile, ol' Voldy is looking for a way to punish Lucius for several things: not being as loyal as Voldy thought he should have been, including seeking him out after he was nearly vanquished by baby Harry; allowing the diary horcrux to be destroyed; not getting the prophecy from the Ministry of Magic.

Draco was only the punnish to Lucius for failing so much. Voldemort knew Draco won't be able top commit the murder, that he would fail in that task, so he gave it to Draco. Knowing from the beginning he would not success.

This is a perfect storm. One seeking revenge and glory -- the other seeking someone to do his dirty work. Draco had been raised to admire Voldemort. To have Voldemort request that he carry out a task would have seemed like an honor -- at first.

And at fisrt, I belive Draco would be really glad that Voldemort gave him that kind of task. But Draco starts to understand the difference between being a bully and being a DE, he understood that being a DE is not a dreamy as he thought.

But, as the HPB progresses, we see Draco lose his passion for his task and begin to feel the pressure. When Harry finds him in the bathroom crying, it is a very touching moment because we see the boy, Draco, not a Death Eater.

By the end of HBP, Draco knows he's in way over his head and is only being used to get back at his father. He also feels that he is saving his parents' and his own lives by carrying out killing Dumbledore. But, when the time comes, he can't do it.

I believe Draco tried to kill Dumbledore, even knowing he wasn't able to commit murder, just to try to save himself and his parents. But it became really hard for him, even more than he expected it would be, and that's the reason he was so broke inside, and let himself cry, and not once.
The scene when we see Draco crying in Mirtle's bathroom was really touching.

When we see him at the opening of DH, he is a pale, frightened child being used as a puppet by Voldemort -- again under threat of his or his parents' deaths. As I said a few posts before, even Harry feels sorry for him when he sees him in the vision he has in the bathroom at Grimauld Place. That's saying a lot.

Again, IMO, Draco was spoiled, he was a racist, he was nasty and cruel, but, deep down, he was not evil. If he'd been evil, he would have killed Dumbledore without a moment's hesitation and gloried in it. He would not have cringed as Charity Burbage hung over his diningroom table being tortured by Voldemort. He would not have failed to identify Harry at Malfoy Manor. And, like Bellatrix, who was truly evil, he wouldn't have cared if Voldemort killed his whole family if that's what it took to show his loyalty.

I agree with every word.

[QUOTE=MinervasCat;5543418]Draco was a spoiled brat. His parents made sure he got everything he wanted, by hook or by crook, so, he had never had an opportunity to do anything on his own to prove himself. As we see him in HBP, his father has fallen completely from grace and is in Azkaban. Draco is now "the man of the house," and, probably for the first time in his life, has a chance to do something to show that he is worthy of being a Malfoy -- something that will not only impress his father, but will also avenge him for the disgrace of being sent to prison.

Meanwhile, ol' Voldy is looking for a way to punish Lucius for several things: not being as loyal as Voldy thought he should have been, including seeking him out after he was nearly vanquished by baby Harry; allowing the diary horcrux to be destroyed; not getting the prophecy from the Ministry of Magic.

This is a perfect storm. One seeking revenge and glory -- the other seeking someone to do his dirty work. Draco had been raised to admire Voldemort. To have Voldemort request that he carry out a task would have seemed like an honor -- at first.

But, as the HPB progresses, we see Draco lose his passion for his task and begin to feel the pressure. When Harry finds him in the bathroom crying, it is a very touching moment because we see the boy, Draco, not a Death Eater.

By the end of HBP, Draco knows he's in way over his head and is only being used to get back at his father. He also feels that he is saving his parents' and his own lives by carrying out killing Dumbledore. But, when the time comes, he can't do it.

When we see him at the opening of DH, he is a pale, frightened child being used as a puppet by Voldemort -- again under threat of his or his parents' deaths. As I said a few posts before, even Harry feels sorry for him when he sees him in the vision he has in the bathroom at Grimauld Place. That's saying a lot.

Again, IMO, Draco was spoiled, he was a racist, he was nasty and cruel, but, deep down, he was not evil. If he'd been evil, he would have killed Dumbledore without a moment's hesitation and gloried in it. He would not have cringed as Charity Burbage hung over his diningroom table being tortured by Voldemort. He would not have failed to identify Harry at Malfoy Manor. And, like Bellatrix, who was truly evil, he wouldn't have cared if Voldemort killed his whole family if that's what it took to show his loyalty.

I still fail to see why being a spoilt, selfish brat gives Draco an excuse to try and murder people. All I saw was a Draco who was filled with self pity. He IMO, was like the thief who was not sorry that he stole, but was very sorry he was going to jail. Who didn't care who was injured as long as he completed the task and got his father off the hook that his father had hung himself on. Yes, he found out the hard way that it was not easy to kill someone in cold blood while looking them in the eye. This is not something to clap him on the back for. This is the way it should be, I'm not going to say that Draco was doing something extra good for finding it difficult to commit cold blooded murder. And while it is possible that deep down he was not cruel and bigoted with all the evil such things entail, I for one believe that digging for his better side might have taken a very long time. It may have been a perfect storm, but Draco could have found a safe harbour if he had gone to Dumbledore instead of trying to kill him.
Draco may have had qualms when faced with the reality of what he had been espousing, but he did not fight against that reality. Sirius and also Regelus were brought up the same way that Draco was. They both took their stands, Sirius when he was much younger that Draco. They both took their stands and died for their beliefs. The only thing IMO, Draco ever did that could be seen as admirable was to hold onto Goyle in the fire scene. I discount the scene where he did not identify the Trio at the Manor, for one thing he may not have been totally sure it was them. And we have already seen it was hard for his to look people in the eye and condemn them to death. He had no real problem when people were out of sight.

Ahem: REVISED: Character Bashing/Worship: aka Shades of Gray (http://www.cosforums.com/showthread.php?t=108021)

[QUOTE]

I still fail to see why being a spoilt, selfish brat gives Draco an excuse to try and murder people. All I saw was a Draco who was filled with self pity. He IMO, was like the thief who was not sorry that he stole, but was very sorry he was going to jail. Who didn't care who was injured as long as he completed the task and got his father off the hook that his father had hung himself on. Yes, he found out the hard way that it was not easy to kill someone in cold blood while looking them in the eye. This is not something to clap him on the back for. This is the way it should be, I'm not going to say that Draco was doing something extra good for finding it difficult to commit cold blooded murder. And while it is possible that deep down he was not cruel and bigoted with all the evil such things entail, I for one believe that digging for his better side might have taken a very long time. It may have been a perfect storm, but Draco could have found a safe harbour if he had gone to Dumbledore instead of trying to kill him.
Draco may have had qualms when faced with the reality of what he had been espousing, but he did not fight against that reality. Sirius and also Regelus were brought up the same way that Draco was. They both took their stands, Sirius when he was much younger that Draco. They both took their stands and died for their beliefs. The only thing IMO, Draco ever did that could be seen as admirable was to hold onto Goyle in the fire scene. I discount the scene where he did not identify the Trio at the Manor, for one thing he may not have been totally sure it was them. And we have already seen it was hard for his to look people in the eye and condemn them to death. He had no real problem when people were out of sight.


I would be glad to think that the inside is what matters. I don't say that he behaved in a respectful way, but still, in my opinion, he wasn't evil in his heart. Draco did care about his family and didn't want them to be murdered. Well... he didn't care about other people being murdered, but I think it's because he didn't feel any feeling about them. Is not that he wanted them to be killed, he just didn't care. Just like with Ron, Madam Rosmerta, Dumbledore, and so on... Those persons weren't close to him, so it didn't matter to Draco if they were dead or alive. I don't say it is right to think that way, or that it's right to don't have any empathy at all for anybody, but still, he wasn't a murderer. He wasn't able to kill with his own hands (or wand in this case..). It's selfish, I agree. But it is not evil.
And in most of the cases, all people act the same way. We see in the news, in the TV, in the computer and all the media, about people suffering, starving, dieing (I'm sorry if I wrote it wrong.. I just never remember how to write it right, :)), being abused, being molested and so on... And most of the people don't do anything to change it. But when it comes closer, to someone of our family, or friends circle, then we start to do something. The same is with Draco, when other people died and were tortured, he didn't care, but when it came closer to him, as he and his parents being threatened to death, he suddenly started to care.
It is something very common in our society, to look the other way as long as it's not related to us. It's not right, but that's the way it is. And so acted Draco.


I have to add that all I wirte are only my opinions, and in any way I am workshipping Draco.

What to say about this topic...? I suppose I should just go over my experience with the character.

We're introduced to him in Madam Malkin's, and right off the bat, Harry's not very pleased with this boy who insults Hagrid and shows all the signs of having been just as spoilt as Dudley. I wasn't too happy with the kid either. As the years progress, Draco continues to be a minor antagonist to Harry and his friends, insulting them at every turn. Things become more serious when Harry learns of the DEs and Draco's family connection to them and their beliefs, and Harry's and Draco's rivalry reaches a fever pitch in OotP. I remember viewing Draco as, at this point, either an annoying thorn in Harry's side or a possible danger. But nothing else.

Well, that didn't really last long. Yes, Draco is these things and more, but IMO it's poor character development have a character in there without a motivation and reasons for his behavior. Why does Draco hate Harry? Why does he become a Death Eater? Why does his hatred grow after OotP? And, above all, if you're going to write a complex story about peace, love, and understanding, I believe it would be good if your bad guys are at least a little human. Well, HBP and DH gave me the answers to our "why" questions and, on top of that, humanized this antagonist (IMHO). :tu: We see Harry paying more attention to Draco in HBP, and he sees how Draco's task eventually begins to wear on him. This never really registered with me when I first read HBP. So the snob's getting a little tired. So what?

Then the waterworks begin. I can't even begin to tell you how shocked I was that Draco Malfoy was capable of crying, really crying, not whining about new brooms or hamming up a scratch from a Hippogriff. I mean, capable of an emotion other than anger. Heck, when he was worried over his own family, I was surprised. It was a turning point for me, at least. This was a character to watch. This was no longer a caricature of a snobbish, rich schoolboy-- Draco Malfoy had a serious problem in his life, and if it could make this boy, who always seemed so proud of himself, cry, then I at least found him deserving of some sympathy.

I don't believe Draco's actions can be excused, but I don't think they overshadow the other important point made in HBP and DH: that Draco and his family have feelings and are capable of love (and sometimes even good deeds!) In fact-- and perhaps I'm being optimistic-- I believe that means a little more in light of the story's central themes.

What to say about this topic...? I suppose I should just go over my experience with the character.

We're introduced to him in Madam Malkin's, and right off the bat, Harry's not very pleased with this boy who insults Hagrid and shows all the signs of having been just as spoilt as Dudley. I wasn't too happy with the kid either. As the years progress, Draco continues to be a minor antagonist to Harry and his friends, insulting them at every turn. Things become more serious when Harry learns of the DEs and Draco's family connection to them and their beliefs, and Harry's and Draco's rivalry reaches a fever pitch in OotP. I remember viewing Draco as, at this point, either an annoying thorn in Harry's side or a possible danger. But nothing else.

Well, that didn't really last long. Yes, Draco is these things and more, but IMO it's poor character development have a character in there without a motivation and reasons for his behavior. Why does Draco hate Harry? Why does he become a Death Eater? Why does his hatred grow after OotP? And, above all, if you're going to write a complex story about peace, love, and understanding, I believe it would be good if your bad guys are at least a little human. Well, HBP and DH gave me the answers to our "why" questions and, on top of that, humanized this antagonist (IMHO). :tu: We see Harry paying more attention to Draco in HBP, and he sees how Draco's task eventually begins to wear on him. This never really registered with me when I first read HBP. So the snob's getting a little tired. So what?

Then the waterworks begin. I can't even begin to tell you how shocked I was that Draco Malfoy was capable of crying, really crying, not whining about new brooms or hamming up a scratch from a Hippogriff. I mean, capable of an emotion other than anger. Heck, when he was worried over his own family, I was surprised. It was a turning point for me, at least. This was a character to watch. This was no longer a caricature of a snobbish, rich schoolboy-- Draco Malfoy had a serious problem in his life, and if it could make this boy, who always seemed so proud of himself, cry, then I at least found him deserving of some sympathy.

I don't believe Draco's actions can be excused, but I don't think they overshadow the other important point made in HBP and DH: that Draco and his family have feelings and are capable of love (and sometimes even good deeds!) In fact-- and perhaps I'm being optimistic-- I believe that means a little more in light of the story's central themes.


I belive we had the same experience with Draco. At the vey beginning, when I met Draco in PS/SS I didn't like him either. But, ironicly, I read it when I was 11. I also grew up with the books. So at first, he seemed to me like "another" Dudley.
But the turning point for me was when, in HBP, Draco cried. And just like you, seeing that Draco, proud proud Draco, was able to cry, changed a lot in me. Then I started to understand and see other things I didn't see at first.

I'm no excusing him either, I believe he made a lot of wrong choices, but I was glad to see that he was human, and there were some feelings hidding in his shell.

I belive we had the same experience with Draco. At the vey beginning, when I met Draco in PS/SS I didn't like him either. But, ironicly, I read it when I was 11. I also grew up with the books. So at first, he seemed to me like "another" Dudley.
But the turning point for me was when, in HBP, Draco cried. And just like you, seeing that Draco, proud proud Draco, was able to cry, changed a lot in me. Then I started to understand and see other things I didn't see at first.

I'm no excusing him either, I believe he made a lot of wrong choices, but I was glad to see that he was human, and there were some feelings hidding in his shell.

I read your's and ignasia's points very carefully. I don't want it to seem that I am unsympathetic or that I am not aware that this is not a good representation of human behaviour. It is IMO a good representation of some types of human behaviour. We also see through the books representations of other types of behaviour. We see this in the scene where Pansy cries out that Harry is in the hall. The reaction of the majority of the students is not that of grabbing Harry to turn over to Voldemort, thus saving their lives and that of their parents, but a spontaneous drawing of their wands to protect him. This is the view of human behaviour that impresses me. I can find nothing redeemable about Draco's behaviour in HBP. Yes it is representative of some types of behaviour, but IMO it is representative of some the worst types rather than the best. JKR through her books show us a wide spectrum of behaviours and Draco's is only one among many. So though I can understand what drives Draco to do what he did, I will not sympathise with it. My sympathies go to his victims and their families.
I don't believe is is character bashing to say that I don't admire a character's actions and I will not say that Draco's behaviour should be automatically understood as he was acting under duress. There were other avenues available to Draco, he simply chose to ignore them. He spent a lot of time planning with the DE's to kill Dumbledore and that time could have been better spent with Dumbledore planning how best to protect his family from Voldemort. Harry knew in his first year at Hogwarts that Voldemort feared Dumbledore, I am sure that in his Sixth year Draco knew the same. I know it seems that he felt pressured by the love he had for his parents, my problem is that I cannot be sure it was love for his parents that was the main reason for his actions. I am also not too impressed that he found the actual act of murder with his own hands difficult. As I have said before, the further away from his victims he was, the easier Draco found it.
My opinion of Draco is that although I find his actions understandable in some ways, I will not condone them by saying he had his reasons. I don't find the reasons compelling enough to justify them. All criminals, (and attempted murder is a criminal act) have reason for why they committed their crimes. Some are more compelling than others and should be taken into account, but all criminals IMO should be held to account for their crimes. There is no such thing as a victimless crime and Draco certainly had victims.

Iggy, I was much older when reading these books, but I too felt much the same over Draco's character development.It wasn't until HBP, that I also began to see that Draco had more depth than being just the spoilt rich brat and bully of the earlier books. It was a shock and I did pity him. As I saw it, Draco made wrong choices based on his upbringing and the expectations of him made by his family.


I don't believe Draco's actions can be excused, but I don't think they overshadow the other important point made in HBP and DH: that Draco and his family have feelings and are capable of love (and sometimes even good deeds!) In fact-- and perhaps I'm being optimistic-- I believe that means a little more in light of the story's central themes.

I'm no excusing him either, I believe he made a lot of wrong choices, but I was glad to see that he was human, and there were some feelings hidding in his shell.

I agree with you both, Iggy and addie. I don't condone Draco's actions either. I did however feel sympathy for the boy who found himself with such a heavy burden that he couldn't see his way out of.

Yes, running to Dumbledore would have seemed the obvious solution to some, as it did with Snape. However, Draco was much younger and may have not seen it as a viable option. Afterall, he believed Snape was a DE working for Voldemort, but also that Dumbledore believed Snape was working for him. So, I can see why Draco would be reluctant to approach Dumbledore for fear Snape would get to know about it and report back to Voldemort.

I just saw Draco in HBP, as a misguided and desperate young boy caught up in a dangerous adult world and responding to it all as he had been brought up to.

Draco did care about his family and didn't want them to be murdered. Well... he didn't care about other people being murdered, but I think it's because he didn't feel any feeling about them. [B]Is not that he wanted them to be killed, he just didn't care. [B]Just like with Ron, Madam Rosmerta, Dumbledore, and so on... Those persons weren't close to him, so it didn't matter to Draco if they were dead or alive. [B]I don't say it is right to think that way, or that it's right to don't have any empathy at all for anybody, but still, he wasn't a murderer. [B]He wasn't able to kill with his own hands (or wand in this case..). It's selfish, I agree. But it is not evil.
Bold mine

I think that’s a very important point – its certainly not to Draco’s credit that he is so blasé about others dying, but as you point out it is relatively normal – we depersonalise strangers especially when they belong to a group that further separates them from us (be it race,)

The same is with Draco, when other people died and were tortured, he didn't care, but when it came closer to him, as he and his parents being threatened to death, he suddenly started to care.

Indeed – what is to his credit somewhat imo is that when the reality of torture and murder became a reality for him he does in fact begin rehumanise the victims be they a teacher he has never been taught by (thus a comparative stranger) or his school yard rivals. Perhaps this action is not as well developed as we might like but thee are his first ‘baby steps’ to embracing the reality he’s been hiding from for sometime – at this point I would not expect the perfect steps of an experienced person but the faltering baby steps of a beginner.

I have to add that all I wirte are only my opinions, and in any way I am workshipping Draco.

Perhaps you mean that you are not worshiping Draco? :)

Well, that didn't really last long. Yes, Draco is these things and more, but IMO it's poor character development have a character in there without a motivation and reasons for his behavior. Why does Draco hate Harry? Why does he become a Death Eater? Why does his hatred grow after OotP? And, above all, if you're going to write a complex story about peace, love, and understanding, I believe it would be good if your bad guys are at least a little human. Well, HBP and DH gave me the answers to our "why" questions and, on top of that, humanized this antagonist (IMHO). :tu: […]This was no longer a caricature of a snobbish, rich schoolboy-- Draco Malfoy had a serious problem in his life, and if it could make this boy, who always seemed so proud of himself, cry, then I at least found him deserving of some sympathy. I don't believe Draco's actions can be excused, but I don't think they overshadow the other important point made in HBP and DH: that Draco and his family have feelings and are capable of love (and sometimes even good deeds!) In fact-- and perhaps I'm being optimistic-- I believe that means a little more in light of the story's central themes.

:tu: I very much agree with you here – I think there is the world of difference between having understanding or sympathy for a character & excusing or hero worshiping them and I feel like you’ve explained the sympathy aspect well (my opinion of course! :p)

Yes, running to Dumbledore would have seemed the obvious solution to some, as it did with Snape. However, Draco was much younger and may have not seen it as a viable option. Afterall, he believed Snape was a DE working for Voldemort, but also that Dumbledore believed Snape was working for him. So, I can see why Draco would be reluctant to approach Dumbledore for fear Snape would get to know about it and report back to Voldemort.

Given that we know, as you point out, that Draco believed that Snape had hoodwinked Dumbledore I not only find it very understandable that Draco did not run to him for fear of his actions being reported to Voldermort, I also think that it would have considerable affected his view of Dumbledore. Harry see’s him as a brilliant man Draco see’s him as someone who is easily fooled by the right sob story so his view is not going to include Dumbledore being brilliant or the person who can in reality save him from the predicament he is in even if his running to him for help is not reported. :sigh:

Given that we know, as you point out, that Draco believed that Snape had hoodwinked Dumbledore I not only find it very understandable that Draco did not run to him for fear of his actions being reported to Voldermort, I also think that it would have considerable affected his view of Dumbledore. Harry see’s him as a brilliant man Draco see’s him as someone who is easily fooled by the right sob story so his view is not going to include Dumbledore being brilliant or the person who can in reality save him from the predicament he is in even if his running to him for help is not reported. :sigh:

Exactly, Draco doesn't see Dumbledore in the same way as Harry and so wouldn't necessarily think of approaching him for help.

In fact, Draco seems so desperate that I think he would have asked for help if he thought he could be helped. However, he doesn't seem to think anyone can help him.

HBP, Sectumsempra
'Don't,'crooned Moaning Myrtle's voice from one of the cubicles. 'Don't...tell me what's wrong...I can help you...'
'No one can help me,' said Malfoy. His whole body was shaking.

And:

HBP, The Lightening Struck Tower
'But now we can speak plainly to each other...no harm done, you have hurt nobody, though you are very lucky that your unintentional victims survived...I can help you Draco.'
'No you can't,' said Malfoy, his wand hand shaking very badly indeed. Nobody can. He told me to do it or he'll kill me. I've got no choice.'

(emphasis mine)

Exactly, Draco doesn't see Dumbledore in the same way as Harry and so wouldn't necessarily think of approaching him for help.

In fact, Draco seems so desperate that I think he would have asked for help if he thought he could be helped. However, he doesn't seem to think anyone can help him.

HBP, Sectumsempra
'Don't,'crooned Moaning Myrtle's voice from one of the cubicles. 'Don't...tell me what's wrong...I can help you...'
'No one can help me,' said Malfoy. His whole body was shaking.

And:

HBP, The Lightening Struck Tower
'But now we can speak plainly to each other...no harm done, you have hurt nobody, though you are very lucky that your unintentional victims survived...I can help you Draco.'
'No you can't,' said Malfoy, his wand hand shaking very badly indeed. Nobody can. He told me to do it or he'll kill me. I've got no choice.'

(emphasis mine)

Interesting viewpoint. Is Draco saying what he says because he believes it or is he saying it to justify to himself for so nearly killing two innocent people and Imperiusing another? Did he really believe that Dumbledore would be so helpless in protecting his family? Dumbledore, the only wizard that Voldemort feared? Of course Dumbledore is being a little blasé in dismissing the unintentional victims, but so is Draco. Would anyone who posts on this thread be so blasé about actions committed by themselves that led to the severe injuring of another person? I have a better opinion of my fellow posters than that. It is very easy to say that it is only human nature to ignore the suffering of others and only be concerned about your own family, would it be so easy if you had to do it? I hate to think that is how I would act in a like situation. Of course I could be wrong, perhaps I would commit acts that would lead directly to the attempted murder of an innocent bystander, but I sincerely hope that I never would. I don't think I could ever be coerced into attempting murder, but it is something that I have never had put to the test. I do know that committing one evil is no way to prevent another evil from happening. I think Draco acted wrongly and I don't excuse him because of the situation that his family was in. The other students who were in that situation in the Great Hall did not act like that. Defying Voldemort as far as they knew was a death sentence on them and their families and they drew their wands in defence of Harry. Draco never once drew a wand in support of the Light.

There were other avenues available to Draco, he simply chose to ignore them. He spent a lot of time planning with the DE's to kill Dumbledore and that time could have been better spent with Dumbledore planning how best to protect his family from Voldemort. Harry knew in his first year at Hogwarts that Voldemort feared Dumbledore, I am sure that in his Sixth year Draco knew the same.
Yes, running to Dumbledore would have seemed the obvious solution to some, as it did with Snape. However, Draco was much younger and may have not seen it as a viable option. Afterall, he believed Snape was a DE working for Voldemort, but also that Dumbledore believed Snape was working for him. So, I can see why Draco would be reluctant to approach Dumbledore for fear Snape would get to know about it and report back to Voldemort.
I do not think Draco "running to Dumbledore" was as obvious a solution for him as it seems. I believe Snape went to Dumbledore because he had no other option. As you say, eliza101, there were multiple avenues available for Draco - much more accessible avenues then going to Dumbledore, the man he was meant to murder. From SS/PS, Draco shows disdain for Dumbledore. He was raised in a household that despised Dumbledore and admired Voldemort. As I see it, Lucius influenced Draco so that Draco shared the same superior beliefs as his father. Draco was simply unable to follow through on those beliefs in such a crude manner - much like many of the other old pureblood families, who, before Voldemort "showed his true colors," agreed with Voldemort. However, I think he convinced himself he was able to act on his beliefs, like his father had done. Thus, he felt compelled to carry out the deed.
Going to Dumbledore for help was never an option for Draco, I think, if we look at it from his perspective. Draco was not like Harry, who was introduced to the wizarding world with a reverence for Dumbledore. I do not think Draco would have seen Dumbledore as even capable of protecting him and his family. He had spent his entire life being told, by Lucius, that Dumbledore was an old fool and would, one day, be bettered by Voldemort. Lucius's allegiance to Voldemort, itself, shows this to Draco. Why would, in Draco's mind, his father wager everything on a side (Voldemort) that would lose? Therefore, I think Draco was convinced Dumbledore would not be able to protect or help him. Add in the fact that showing any pro-Dumbledore tendencies - much less going to Dumbledore for help - risked death by Voldemort. I do not think, and I would imagine Draco felt the same way, that Draco was an accomplished enough Occlumens to block Voldemort if Voldemort really wanted access to Draco's mind.

This said, I do not condone Draco's decisions, but I do think he shows incredible decency, considering his upbringing. Lucius had no problem causing pain and death. Draco seemed to share Lucius's beliefs, but he was unable to directly cause the same pain and death. As others have said, Draco was fairly distanced from the Katie and Ron incidents. He was not staring Katie in the face when she was cursed, nor did he intentionally spike Ron's drink with poison. These two attacks, meant for Dumbledore, show very timid attempts to deal death to anyone. The odds were incredibly slim, as Dumbledore said, that the necklace or mead would reach Dumbledore. These attempts show, in my opinion, that Draco was unable (and he knew he was unable) to actually kill someone.
However, when he was faced with the process of killing Dumbledore, he was unable to do so. Compared to what Lucius would have done, I, in a way, commend Draco's character here. Despite his Dark upbringing, he evolved his own sense of good, which stayed his hand when faced with the opportunity to commit murder.
Of course Dumbledore is being a little blasé in dismissing the unintentional victims, but so is Draco. Would anyone who posts on this thread be so blasé about actions committed by themselves that led to the severe injuring of another person?
I do not think anyone on this thread can be compared to Draco. As I have elaborated above, Draco's upbringing is unusual and entirely slanted towards the Dark Arts, which, as I see, warped his sense of good and evil. After all, Voldemort's infamous saying is that there is no good and evil, only power.
Also, I do not think Draco was that blasé about his actions. I think he pretended to be uncaring so that he did not appear incapable of murdering Dumbledore. On the Astronomy Tower, I think he felt he had to use "what he'd done" as a weapon, rather than a weakness, in order to frighten Dumbledore. Showing remorse for his actions, at this point, would have likely removed any hope he had of killing Dumbledore - of saving him and his family.

Interesting viewpoint. Is Draco saying what he says because he believes it or is he saying it to justify to himself for so nearly killing two innocent people and Imperiusing another?

Why wouldn't he? Voldemort doesn't show much mercy to those who fail him. Even if Draco survives, who's to say his mother or father won't die for his failure. It's not like Voldemort really needs all three of them.

Did he really believe that Dumbledore would be so helpless in protecting his family?

He couldn't do much for the Potters or the Longbottoms or Sirius. And those were people he liked. Now, I don't think Dumbledore would be less apt to protect Draco because he didn't like him but I wouldn't be surprised if Draco thought so.

Also, after Dumbledore had been murdered, I'm sure Draco must have thought he was right in believing Voldemort to be more powerful than Dumbledore if he could have someone close to him (Snape) turn on Dumbledore. In fact, the truth turned out to be the exact opposite but I'm sure seeing that was enough to snuff out any thoughts of rebellion Draco had and just made him more paranoid about ever finding himself on Voldemort's bad side.

Draco never once drew a wand in support of the Light.

I don't think anyone has argued otherwise so I'm not sure why you keep bringing up this straw man.

Also, I do not think Draco was that blasé about his actions. I think he pretended to be uncaring so that he did not appear incapable of murdering Dumbledore. On the Astronomy Tower, I think he felt he had to use "what he'd done" as a weapon, rather than a weakness, in order to frighten Dumbledore. Showing remorse for his actions, at this point, would have likely removed any hope he had of killing Dumbledore - of saving him and his family.

Also possible he was using Occlumency there to push aside any doubts he had and focus at the task at hand. From what JKR has said, it sounds like Occlumency can be used to block out feelings of compassion and the like.

Interesting viewpoint. Is Draco saying what he says because he believes it or is he saying it to justify to himself for so nearly killing two innocent people and Imperiusing another?

Actually, the text does a pretty good job of describing Draco's emotional state. He's not blasé at all imo. He seems rather to be in a state of near-hysteria. The text describes Draco's voice shifting registers (basically, going up an octave), his face going white. While we might consider Draco's other options from a distance, it seems to me that Draco is absolutely terrified and that it is quite likely that he honestly does not believe he has any other options.

Did he really believe that Dumbledore would be so helpless in protecting his family? Dumbledore, the only wizard that Voldemort feared?

On the Astronomy Tower, Draco explicitly states that Dumbledore is just a stupid old man who is losing his grip if he thinks Snape is working for him. So yes, it does seem likely that Draco thinks Dumbledore is helpless to protect his family.

Additionally, Draco was brought up by a DE to hold a very different view of Dumbledore than Harry does. So far as I can recall, Draco has never expressed anything other than disdain for Dumbledore. He does not appear to have ever believed that Dumbledore is the great, all-powerful wizard that we believe him to be. In fact, it is not unlikely that he was brought up to hold a view of Dumbledore that is similar to Bella's. (Bella basically snorts when Snape refers to Dumbledore as a great wizard).

Additionally, as TT mentioned earlier, Draco believes Snape is a true DE. If Draco goes to Dumbledore, and Snape is what Draco thinks he is, Draco's parents could be dead before Dumbledore has even had a chance to help them. Now, we know that Snape is a double agent working for Dumbledore - not a double agent working for Voldemort. But Draco doesn't know that.

Of course Dumbledore is being a little blasé in dismissing the unintentional victims, but so is Draco. Would anyone who posts on this thread be so blasé about actions committed by themselves that led to the severe injuring of another person? I have a better opinion of my fellow posters than that.

I am certainly not blasé about the unintended victims. But trying to analyze and dissect what's going on with Draco is not the same thing, imo, as excusing him or saying that what he did was right.

I am certainly not blasé about the unintended victims. But trying to analyze and dissect what's going on with Draco is not the same thing, imo, as excusing him or saying that what he did was right.

Perhaps I am approaching this from the wrong angle. What could Draco have done not to injure someone else in his attempts to placate Voldemort and save his father? Was Draco correct to do his best to placate Voldemort or was he acting as wrongfully as his father, when his father went to the Ministry to get the Prophecy and capture Harry to bring to Voldemort. I won't go into Lucius' crimes, because we all know the evil acts Lucius committed from Chamber of Secrets onward.

Is it enough to say Draco deserved understanding and sympathy or should Draco have been held to account for the attempts to kill Dumbledore that led to Katie's and Ron's very close brushes with death? Should we measure Draco's behaviour against the other student's, who when threatened with death and the death of their families, spontaneously drew their wands to fight. Does sympathy for Draco outweigh justice for his victims? Can he have both, justice tempered with sympathy? Should this sympathy ignore the fact that he let dangerous criminals such as Greyback into the school? Especially Greyback who was known to attack children and who took such joy in causing death and injury to them?

Weighing in the balance, Draco's many criminal acts and the harm they could have, and indeed did cause against his worry over what would happen to his father, just how much sympathy and understanding does he warrant? When I weigh Draco's crimes against his fear and worry over his father, I also weigh the fear and worry of Katie Bell's family. I weigh the fear and worry of Arthur and Molly who have two sons who are severely injured by Draco's fear and worry. I weigh the fear and worry over every student who drew a wand to fight against Voldemort, because it was the right thing to do, and they did so in face of fear and worry for their families. I have to confess, Draco comes out very much wanting, IMO.

Perhaps I am approaching this from the wrong angle. What could Draco have done not to injure someone else in his attempts to placate Voldemort and save his father? Was Draco correct to do his best to placate Voldemort or was he acting as wrongfully as his father, when his father went to the Ministry to get the Prophecy and capture Harry to bring to Voldemort. I won't go into Lucius' crimes, because we all know the evil acts Lucius committed from Chamber of Secrets onward.

Lucius crimes are not Draco's fault, but they absolutely affected Draco's personality and behavior. Draco grew hearing his father talking about blood prejudice, evil and distorted things, so he believed in them. And that's a part of who he became. Also watching him doing Voldemort's tasks (even if he failed or he didn't) affected Draco.

Is it enough to say Draco deserved understanding and sympathy or should Draco have been held to account for the attempts to kill Dumbledore that led to Katie's and Ron's very close brushes with death? Should we measure Draco's behaviour against the other student's, who when threatened with death and the death of their families, spontaneously drew their wands to fight. Does sympathy for Draco outweigh justice for his victims? Can he have both, justice tempered with sympathy? Should this sympathy ignore the fact that he let dangerous criminals such as Greyback into the school? Especially Greyback who was known to attack children and who took such joy in causing death and injury to them?

Weighing in the balance, Draco's many criminal acts and the harm they could have, and indeed did cause against his worry over what would happen to his father, just how much sympathy and understanding does he warrant? When I weigh Draco's crimes against his fear and worry over his father, I also weigh the fear and worry of Katie Bell's family. I weigh the fear and worry of Arthur and Molly who have two sons who are severely injured by Draco's fear and worry. I weigh the fear and worry over every student who drew a wand to fight against Voldemort, because it was the right thing to do, and they did so in face of fear and worry for their families. I have to confess, Draco comes out very much wanting, IMO.

Attempt of murder is also a criminal offense. But one thing is to attempt, and a different thing is to succeed. And Draco, altought his poor tries, he didn't want to succeed in commiting murder. So, IMO, he is guilty, but less guilty. (I'm sorry if I am not clear enough).


I think that’s a very important point – its certainly not to Draco’s credit that he is so blasé about others dying, but as you point out it is relatively normal – we depersonalise strangers especially when they belong to a group that further separates them from us (be it race,)

It is human to ignore the suffering of others.

Depersonalitation is a very common thing. And it's also human. We use depersonalitation at most of the times, because of the empeathy of human nature. People are born with empathy, but we learn to depersonalise strangers, because we are not capable to sympathyse with all people and all situtations. That's why Draco didn't care about people being close to be killed, or people who died. And this changed when it became more personal, and was around him and his family. He could not longer avoid it.


Indeed – what is to his credit somewhat imo is that when the reality of torture and murder became a reality for him he does in fact begin rehumanise the victims be they a teacher he has never been taught by (thus a comparative stranger) or his school yard rivals. Perhaps this action is not as well developed as we might like but thee are his first ‘baby steps’ to embracing the reality he’s been hiding from for sometime – at this point I would not expect the perfect steps of an experienced person but the faltering baby steps of a beginner

I belive for Harry was easier because his parents were murderer, they were victims of a killer, and it was a reality for him, from a younger age. Harry knows personaly what death is like, he knows that the one murdered are not the only victims, but also the people that were close to them. He knows how death affect someone's life. But Draco does not know all that. He never faced death, he was never a victim of anything. It was all new to him. The reality shocked him.




Also, after Dumbledore had been murdered, I'm sure Draco must have thought he was right in believing Voldemort to be more powerful than Dumbledore if he could have someone close to him (Snape) turn on Dumbledore. In fact, the truth turned out to be the exact opposite but I'm sure seeing that was enough to snuff out any thoughts of rebellion Draco had and just made him more paranoid about ever finding himself on Voldemort's bad side.

Draco didn't know that Snape was in Dumbledore's side. He belived Snape was the no.1 DE. He had Snape following him all the time. So he could thought that Snape was following him to be sure he would not go to Dumbledore.
I'm also sure that Draco had a lot going in his mind, who to trust? What to do? So it would made him really paranoid, and made him confuse about everything and everybody.


Actually, the text does a pretty good job of describing Draco's emotional state. He's not blasé at all imo. He seems rather to be in a state of near-hysteria. The text describes Draco's voice shifting registers (basically, going up an octave), his face going white. While we might consider Draco's other options from a distance, it seems to me that Draco is absolutely terrified and that it is quite likely that he honestly does not believe he has any other options.

Draco never liked Dumbledore, why would he come to him to ask for help?
Draco is lost and desesperate, so he belives no one can help him. He belives he has no way out, and also very scared to try to search help and being caught, what could make his situtation worse. Voldemort never showed mercy for anyone, especially those who have failed him. So he didn't saw why would he risk himself in that way.




And - Yes, I meant I don't workship Draco. Sorry for my mistake. :lol:

Lucius crimes are not Draco's fault, but they absolutely affected Draco's personality and behavior. Draco grew hearing his father talking about blood prejudice, evil and distorted things, so he believed in them. And that's a part of who he became.

I agree very much with this. I see Draco (and others like him) as being virtually brainwashed by the pureblood prejudice that Lucius and Narcissa had taught him was a normal attitude.

That is certainly not to excuse Draco. He, like anyone else, is a free moral agent and Rowling shows him as such. Lucius and Narcissa do seem to have brought him up with a big sense of self-entitlement, hence the bullying behaviour we see from him in the early part of the series.

In HBP, Rowling also shows Draco as being under intense pressure and with a human, vulnerable, side to his character. For the first time, the reader empathises with him. We do not excuse him for what he did to poor Katie and the others, of course not! But we understand the pressures that are being exerted on him, and the kind of upbringing that would make him callous and indifferent about the predicament of non-pureblood people. We understand this ... we do not justify it.

And as we clearly see in DH, Draco does not enjoy inflicting torture on others.

He may not ever become heroic in this series, but he certainly becomes a much more human, three-dimensional and even more humane character ... and I am glad about that. :)

Draco did things in 6th year which should have earn't him a one way ticket to Azkaban and its actually surprising that he didn't end up there.

The Malfoys have their ways of getting out of things. Actually, I think (correct me if I'm wrong) Harry might have had something to do with them not going to Azkaban.

Draco did things in 6th year which should have earn't him a one way ticket to Azkaban and its actually surprising that he didn't end up there.

Apparently he showed Moral Fiber that doesn't exactly acquit him of all the bad that he had done, but earn him a second chance given the possibility of remorse. And then there are so many other reasons about him not acting out of himself but peer pressure actually pure pressure,and everything else that everyone above have already elucidated. ;)

He was raised in a household that despised Dumbledore and admired Voldemort. As I see it, Lucius influenced Draco so that Draco shared the same superior beliefs as his father. Draco was simply unable to follow through on those beliefs in such a crude manner - much like many of the other old pureblood families, who, before Voldemort "showed his true colors," agreed with Voldemort. However, I think he convinced himself he was able to act on his beliefs, like his father had done. Thus, he felt compelled to carry out the deed.

I see Draco (and others like him) as being virtually brainwashed by the pureblood prejudice that Lucius and Narcissa had taught him was a normal attitude.

My problem with the "blame Draco's upbringing" argument that keeps coming up - where does the buck stop? The same argument can be made for Lucius -that he was willing to torture and kill Muggles and Muggleborns because those are the beliefs he was raised with, his father, exactly the same, all the way back to the Brutus Malfoy mentioned in the Beedle notes -and further back. At some point, a person's attitudes and actions are their own responsibility, not that of their upbringing -and people can hold different attitudes to the way they grew up-they do it all the time -it's the reason our lives, lifestyles and attitudes are different from those of people five centuries ago, imo, or even one century ago.


As others have said, Draco was fairly distanced from the Katie and Ron incidents. He was not staring Katie in the face when she was cursed, nor did he intentionally spike Ron's drink with poison. These two attacks, meant for Dumbledore, show very timid attempts to deal death to anyone. The odds were incredibly slim, as Dumbledore said, that the necklace or mead would reach Dumbledore. These attempts show, in my opinion, that Draco was unable (and he knew he was unable) to actually kill someone.

For timid attempts, it was pure luck in both cases that Ron and Katie weren't murdered. Maybe Draco wasn't putting the full effort into killing Dumbledore, but he didn't seem to care who he hurt in his attempts.


Also possible he was using Occlumency there to push aside any doubts he had and focus at the task at hand. From what JKR has said, it sounds like Occlumency can be used to block out feelings of compassion and the like.

If Occlumency can enable people to commit murder without any qualms, I'm glad it was never one of Harry's strengths.

Actually, the text does a pretty good job of describing Draco's emotional state. He's not blasé at all imo. He seems rather to be in a state of near-hysteria. The text describes Draco's voice shifting registers (basically, going up an octave), his face going white. While we might consider Draco's other options from a distance, it seems to me that Draco is absolutely terrified and that it is quite likely that he honestly does not believe he has any other options.

I think this panic, together with Draco's obvious fear when forced to torture people for Voldemort and refusal to identify the Trio are probably the only things I can say that are positive about him, and the few flickers of something other than a mini-Lucius we see in him. He doesn't want to commit murder, that much is clear, however, he doesn't seem to care about the two people he did very nearly murder.


Attempt of murder is also a criminal offense. But one thing is to attempt, and a different thing is to succeed. And Draco, altought his poor tries, he didn't want to succeed in commiting murder. So, IMO, he is guilty, but less guilty. (I'm sorry if I am not clear enough).

I don't think he is any less guilty of attempted murder than anyone else who attempted murder in the series - they were attempts to kill Dumbledore that very nearly cost two innocent people their lives.

It is human to ignore the suffering of others.

Depersonalitation is a very common thing. And it's also human. We use depersonalitation at most of the times, because of the empeathy of human nature. People are born with empathy, but we learn to depersonalise strangers, because we are not capable to sympathyse with all people and all situtations. That's why Draco didn't care about people being close to be killed, or people who died. And this changed when it became more personal, and was around him and his family. He could not longer avoid it.

Personally, I see a huge difference between desensitising oneself to upsetting things on the news and desensitising oneself to be able to commit murder. And yes, one can't sympathise or empathise with everyone, but there's a difference between that and depersonalising someone enough to kill them.

I belive for Harry was easier because his parents were murderer, they were victims of a killer, and it was a reality for him, from a younger age. Harry knows personaly what death is like, he knows that the one murdered are not the only victims, but also the people that were close to them. He knows how death affect someone's life. But Draco does not know all that. He never faced death, he was never a victim of anything. It was all new to him. The reality shocked him.

I have thankfully never been affected by the murder of anyone I know, or anything horrific like that, and yet, I knew when I was Draco's age, and much younger, that murder is wrong. A person should not need to be staring the reality of death in the face to know that murder is wrong, certainly not at the age of sixteen.

And as we clearly see in DH, Draco does not enjoy inflicting torture on others.

Is it possible that being faced with the actual reality of the "glorious" DE lifestyle he wanted was the badly needed kick in the rear end wake-up call for Draco? The same smug Draco who gleefully told the Trio that they'd be the first to go, now that Voldemort was back, and who hoped that the Monster of Slytherin would kill Hermione? Faced with the reality of grovelling to Voldemort may have been the worst couple of years of his life, but I think they may have done him a lot of good in terms of figuring out things that people with a well-adjusted conscience knew already - that torture and murder are not actually good things. Maybe it wrought a change in Draco, it's something I wonder about.

If Occlumency can enable people to commit murder without any qualms, I'm glad it was never one of Harry's strengths.

Well, it didn't help Draco (and from what JKR has said, it wouldn't) but yes, it does seem like Occlumency does have such a use from what we know of it in canon and what JKR has said about it. I don't think knowing Occlumency would turn someone like Harry or Hermione or Ron into a murderer but if you already have some messed-up morals, it could be the thing that pushes a person over the edge.

Well, it didn't help Draco (and from what JKR has said, it wouldn't) but yes, it does seem like Occlumency does have such a use from what we know of it in canon and what JKR has said about it. I don't think knowing Occlumency would turn someone like Harry or Hermione or Ron into a murderer but if you already have some messed-up morals, it could be the thing that pushes a person over the edge.

I don't think it would have pushed any of the Trio to murder, but I do think it's an unfortunate skill to be taught to someone who has "messed up morals", like Draco. If it helps someone who sees torture and murder as right to compartmentalise more...it's disturbing to think that a useful skill against mind invasion could help someone to shut down their conscience.

It seems to me that Draco does not really enjoy killing and torturing people. He was so terrified. Despite of sometimes being annoying and nasty, he basically hadn't lost his innocence. Nor does any of the trio, none of them really tried to kill even when they are in mortal danger. Unlike Crabbe, I think he's the one who really enjoyed it.

Winky45:cool:

addie_ep, Treacle, Kitt, Iggy -- Rather than have a whole page of quotes, I'll just say it looks like we all pretty much agree that Draco didn't make a very good impression on any of us at all through the first five books. He looked down on those he thought were "lesser" than he and his pure-blood family and friends, and didn't really start to care much until he and his family were in danger. He was not in the least bit likable. One of his lowest points, IMO, was the attempt to get Buckbeak executed and his indifference to Hagrid's feelings during that time.

However, when he finally got his chance to become a DE, it didn't take him long to see how things really were. As several others have pointed out, it was one thing to "talk the talk," but, when he actually had to "walk the walk," it was an entirely different situation.

I like your idea of "baby steps," Kitt, to describe the beginning of Draco's transition to "human being." That's what they were for Draco, very small "baby steps." But, they were steps. He was making progress in a positive direction. Maybe his motivation wasn't as noble as it should or could have been, but, to me, seeing Draco standing there crying was a major turning point.

Someone mentioned Sirius and Regulus Black and their rejection of Voldemort as examples of what Draco could have been like.

I think it needs to be remembered that Sirius got sorted into Gryffindor House and was best friends with James who was from, a very, very anti-Voldemort background. Why Sirius was sorted there, we don't really know, as he came from a long line of Slytherins. It could have been because he wanted to be a "good guy" and fight against Voldemort, although, I hardly think at 11-years-of-age, that Sirius was that "socially conscious." It could just have been that he wanted to be with his friend, James Potter, and that's where James had expressed on the train that he wanted to be.

As for Regulus -- much like Draco, he did not turn against Voldemort unitl one of his own was harmed. When Voldemort took Kreacher to the cave, tortured him by making him drink the potion in the bowl, and then went off and left him there to die, that is when Regulus turned away from him. But, Regulus did not join the fight against Voldemort. Instead, he sent Kreacher home and stayed in the cave where he died. While this was a noble act, it made little to no difference during the first war against Voldemort.

IMO, when Draco, the arrogant, self-assured boy who was always used to getting his way, had finally realized what he'd gotten himself into, the weight of it on his shoulders was more than he could stand. IMO, not only his own wrong choices, but those of his father -- and the realization that his father had been wrong about Voldemort all this time -- had also sunk in. Most boys hero-worship their fathers, and, I don't think Draco was any different. When he realized where Lucius' loyalty to Voldemort had gotten them and the gravity of the task that had been set before him because of that involvement, I think that really took a toll on Draco. Possibly, he was also feeling some guilt over this "disloyalty" to his father, too. Who knows? But, in HBP, we see a pretty broken and pathetic shadow of the former boy who was going to make sure Harry got in with the "right" group.

MrSleepyhead, you make some really excellent points about Draco's views of Dumbledore which I think are often overlooked. Lucius had done nothing but run him down to anyone who would listen, and, Draco parrotted Lucius' distain for Dumbledore everytime he had a chance. Your statement that Draco never had an option to go to Dumbledore, to me, was spot on. He wasn't like Harry, who had learned about Dumbledore from Hagrid, one of Dumbledore's biggest fans.

Add in the fact that showing any pro-Dumbledore tendencies - much less going to Dumbledore for help - risked death by Voldemort.

This isanother excellent point.

I don't think that anyone here condones Draco's actions in becoming a DE, or in his attempts on others' lives. And, I agree that no one on this thread can be compared to Draco.

What we are trying to say, IMO, is, not that we think Draco was some sort of shining star to be held up as an example, but, that we can see how Draco got to be what he was, and we can also see something positive in him for loving his family. Being so deeply immersed in the background that he came from, that he was still capable of human feelings, unlike any of the other DE's...Bella and the rest of the gang, was a positive thing.

That doesn't make him a "good" person by any means, but, it does make him worthy and capable of redemption. It shows that, while he was not "evil" in the sense that Voldemort, Bella, and most of the other DEs were.

IMO, when Draco, the arrogant, self-assured boy who was always used to getting his way, had finally realized what he'd gotten himself into, the weight of it on his shoulders was more than he could stand.
Well that exactly is the point. Draco started turning around when his family was threatened. If he had managed to repair the vanishing cabinet as if it were a cake walk, we wouldn't have seen him change in the least bit. He would still have been deluded with his own impression of Voldemort and carried on to be a faithful Death Eater. It was his failures that forced Voldemort into blackmailing him, exposing him to the dark sides of Lord Voldemort that Draco's eyes were opened. And when he does realize that he might be on the wrong side, the damage has been done, and people have died because of him. Just because he doesn't harm them in person shouldn't acquit him for all his wrongs. All I can say is, his turn to the good side came at a very huge expense.

Well that exactly is the point. Draco started turning around when his family was threatened. If he had managed to repair the vanishing cabinet as if it were a cake walk, we wouldn't have seen him change in the least bit. He would still have been deluded with his own impression of Voldemort and carried on to be a faithful Death Eater. It was his failures that forced Voldemort into blackmailing him, exposing him to the dark sides of Lord Voldemort that Draco's eyes were opened. And when he does realize that he might be on the wrong side, the damage has been done, and people have died because of him. Just because he doesn't harm them in person shouldn't acquit him for all his wrongs. All I can say is, his turn to the good side came at a very huge expense.

He only begins to think he is on the wrong side because his side wants him dead (or at least doesn't care if he dies). It has nothing to do with begining to think that Voldemort's beliefs are wrong.

He only begins to think he is on the wrong side because his side wants him dead (or at least doesn't care if he dies). It has nothing to do with begining to think that Voldemort's beliefs are wrong.

Well doesn't your reason lead to what I have said, because when he was threated by his side, did he start seeing the error in the ideologies that governed the Death Eaters.

Well doesn't your reason lead to what I have said, because when he was threated by his side, did he start seeing the error in the ideologies that governed the Death Eaters.

However i don't think his ideologies change at all. Even though Draco stops supporting Voldemort he only does that because he realises just how badly the Malfoy family is being treated. I don't think he ever began to think mudblood's deserve equality but rather he saw that if Voldemort won the war the Malfoy family would be at the bottom rung of pureblood society.

However i don't think his ideologies change at all. Even though Draco stops supporting Voldemort he only does that because he realises just how badly the Malfoy family is being treated. I don't think he ever began to think mudblood's deserve equality but rather he saw that if Voldemort won the war the Malfoy family would be at the bottom rung of pureblood society.

I have to agree with this. The driving force behind Draco is his own and his family's best interests. We see him very upset that he cannot deliver what Voldemort wants and because of that his father may suffer. We never see him sorry that he has injured Katie and Ron. We never see him sorry that he forced Rosemerta to collude in a murder plot and we never see him sorry that he was the direct cause of Death Eaters invading the school and Bill's severe injuries at the hand of Greyback. Draco is sorry that he hasn't done what Voldemort demanded of him, and his father might get into very hot water because of this. We don't even know for sure that Voldemort would have killed Lucius. Voldemort after all needed the Death Eaters and killing one of his major supporters would not really have given him the hearts and minds of the others. IMO the Death Eaters were driven purely by self interest, with the exception of Bella and Voldemort knew this. It's what he charges them all with in the graveyard scene at the end of GOF. Voldemort kept them in line, including Draco and his father with threats and promises. If the other Death Eaters had seen that Lucius could be killed for failure it would not exactly have reassured them as to their well being.
I know I keep stressing that Draco did not help the Light in any way. That is because I think it is very important. In the situation of the second war, if you did not help the Light, then you were helping Voldemort. I think the entire WW came to realise this at the Battle of Hogwarts. Everybody in the WW came to realise that Voldemort had to be defeated and that everyone had to stand for or against Voldemort. Unfortunately Draco did not stand against Voldemort. I think he was very lucky that Narcissa did what she did for Harry, but would she have done it if Draco had been with her in the forest?

I think he was very lucky that Narcissa did what she did for Harry, but would she have done it if Draco had been with her in the forest?

That's a good point. I personally don't believe she would, but it is a hard question.

I also believe, following your post, that Draco wasn't in either side, not Voldemort's and not Harry's. He just wanted to live.

We understand this ... we do not justify it.
He may not ever become heroic in this series, but he certainly becomes a much more human, three-dimensional and even more humane character ... and I am glad about that.
What we are trying to say, IMO, is, not that we think Draco was some sort of shining star to be held up as an example, but, that we can see how Draco got to be what he was, and we can also see something positive in him for loving his family. Being so deeply immersed in the background that he came from, that he was still capable of human feelings, unlike any of the other DE's...Bella and the rest of the gang, was a positive thing.

That doesn't make him a "good" person by any means, but, it does make him worthy and capable of redemption. It shows that, while he was not "evil" in the sense that Voldemort, Bella, and most of the other DEs were.

Thank you Pearl_Took and MinervasCat... that's what I'm trying to say all along...


I don't think he is any less guilty of attempted murder than anyone else who attempted murder in the series - they were attempts to kill Dumbledore that very nearly cost two innocent people their lives.

That's not what I meant, and I knew it would come unclear... My point is that he is guilty on attempting murder, but he is less guilty than a murdered because he didn't want it.
I know it's unclear again... so nevermind. :)

About the depersonalitation... everybody does it in a different way.
It is all conected to the way we were raised, to the things we saw and heard in our lives. If everybody won't have depersonalitation in the level of being able to kill somebody... there would be no murderers in the world, and I'm affraid that's not true.


It seems to me that Draco does not really enjoy killing and torturing people. He was so terrified. Despite of sometimes being annoying and nasty, he basically hadn't lost his innocence. Nor does any of the trio, none of them really tried to kill even when they are in mortal danger. Unlike Crabbe, I think he's the one who really enjoyed it.

I agree with you, but I don't believe it was innocence. I just think everybody has a limit of "bad things" he can do. Draco was certainly not innocent, but he wasn't either a murderer or capable of torture (and also enjoy both).


I belive Draco didn't go to Dumbledore because that's a thing Harry would do. Draco never liked Dumbledore, he was never close to him, he didn't trust him, so there was no reasonable reason why Draco would go to him.

[QUOTE=addie_ep;5546258]That's a good point. I personally don't believe she would, but it is a hard question.

Thank you for acknowledging that. It is a hard question, it was a hard position for Narcissa to be in. I think my main point is that she didn't really deserve any kudos for what she did. IMO, she did not do what she did for Harry, but for her on. Harry was grateful, that's clear. But as a reader standing back my judgement is not as kind as his was. I admit it.

I also believe, following your post, that Draco wasn't in either side, not Voldemort's and not Harry's. He just wanted to live.

And there is nothing inherently wrong with that. I just don't like it when he hurts other people to do that.
I also don't think he was as evil as Voldemort or Bella. I just don't think he deserves kudos for that either. The fact that he did what I consider to be very evil acts prevents me from saying that he was a lot better than they were. The fact that no one died as a result of Draco's actions was more his good luck than his good management. Yes. he was very upset in the bathroom scene. He was very upset that all his efforts to kill Dumbledore had failed and it did not do to fail Voldemort, this was old news. Was he glad that his efforts to kill Dumbledore had failed, because it is not nice to kill your headmaster? IMO, no he wasn't. He was upset that his father was in trouble with Voldemort and by reason of his failure to commit murder, so was he. I have real trouble drumming up a lot of sympathy here. If you don't want to fail a psychotic madman, don't join his club and agree to follow his orders. I sound like Judge Judy

That's not what I meant, and I knew it would come unclear... My point is that he is guilty on attempting murder, but he is less guilty than a murdered because he didn't want it.
I know it's unclear again... so nevermind. :)

I really do get what you mean. What I am saying is that while Draco may not want to kill anyone in particular, that does not stop him from trying to carry out his orders from Voldemort. I am sure that there was nothing personal in his attacks that resulted in Katie spending months in St Mungo's and Ron almost dieing of poisoning. The impersonality of the attacks did not stop them from being as dangerous as Draco could make them. He is not a murderer, but he is guilty of attempted murder and serious assault.

About the depersonalitation... everybody does it in a different way.
It is all conected to the way we were raised, to the things we saw and heard in our lives. If everybody won't have depersonalitation in the level of being able to kill somebody... there would be no murderers in the world, and I'm affraid that's not true.

This is sadly very true, but I don't see it as an excuse for Draco's indifference to the consequences of his actions. I may distance myself from things I see on the television but that does not stop me from contributing to charities that help the homeless and aid to Save the Children. Yes there are bad things happening in the world today, but it would be a lot worse if people did not donate their time and money to help. We may be desensitised to a certain extent but there are a lot of people doing all they can to help change things.

I agree with you, but I don't believe it was innocence. I just think everybody has a limit of "bad things" he can do. Draco was certainly not innocent, but he wasn't either a murderer or capable of torture (and also enjoy both).

I belive Draco didn't go to Dumbledore because that's a thing Harry would do. Draco never liked Dumbledore, he was never close to him, he didn't trust him, so there was no reasonable reason why Draco would go to him.

No Draco was not a murderer, he only tried his best to be one and failed. He was not a torturer, that's true. I am not too impressed by this. As far as I know I have never met a torturer, let alone someone who enjoyed being one. As far as I know it is normal not to be either a murderer or a torturer, so Draco in this regard was simply like most other people, neither better than the norm or worse.
Not going to Dumbledore for help because that is something that Harry would do? I'm sorry that does not make sense to me. One would think as Harry was the most visible symbol of resistance to Voldemort that doing something that he would do, would be obvious.

Thank you for acknowledging that. It is a hard question, it was a hard position for Narcissa to be in. I think my main point is that she didn't really deserve any kudos for what she did. IMO, she did not do what she did for Harry, but for her on. Harry was grateful, that's clear. But as a reader standing back my judgement is not as kind as his was. I admit it.

I never understood why Harry was greatful to her. From my point of view, it was obvious that Narcissa didn't turn him on because she wanted to know if Draco was safe, she didn't to it for Harry's sake. But still remains the question, why didn't she turned him on after Harry told her Draco was alive in the castle?




This is sadly very true, but I don't see it as an excuse for Draco's indifference to the consequences of his actions. I may distance myself from things I see on the television but that does not stop me from contributing to charities that help the homeless and aid to Save the Children. Yes there are bad things happening in the world today, but it would be a lot worse if people did not donate their time and money to help. We may be desensitised to a certain extent but there are a lot of people doing all they can to help change things.

I understand your point, and I agree.



No Draco was not a murderer, he only tried his best to be one and failed. He was not a torturer, that's true. I am not too impressed by this. As far as I know I have never met a torturer, let alone someone who enjoyed being one. As far as I know it is normal not to be either a murderer or a torturer, so Draco in this regard was simply like most other people, neither better than the norm or worse.


And that's what I tried to say. Draco is not better than an average person, and he isn't worse. I don't think he is a hero, I don't think that not being a murderer is something out of the norma, and I don't excuse him for trying to murder a person and for making severe injures (almost costing life itself) to innocent victims. All I'm saying is that I try to understand him, but not justify. It was wrong, most of the things he did, and I don't try to make it look different.
But still, I rather see most the good sides about him (even if there are almost any of them) than looking at the bad.



I have to add: I'm sorry I am not always clear with my point.. English is not my language, but I try my best :)

I never understood why Harry was greatful to her. From my point of view, it was obvious that Narcissa didn't turn him on because she wanted to know if Draco was safe, she didn't to it for Harry's sake. But still remains the question, why didn't she turned him on after Harry told her Draco was alive in the castle?

Hehehe, you're english isn't bad, just I think when you say turn him on, you meant turn on him. Turn him on means that Harry is in love with Narcissa :lol:

Anyway, the reason I think Narcissa let Harry alone was because she had nothing left to do. She had enough. She knows Draco is alive, she has found him in the castle. She had nothing to do. The Malfoys aren't necessarily good or evil. They are survivors. They made choices that would hopefully ensure they will live.

She just found out that Harry survived Avada Kedavra, again. To her, it seems that Harry cannot die. Why fight him if he can't die and you could? They made the choice of flight because they want to live.

I hope that makes sense.

why didn't she turned him on after Harry told her Draco was alive in the castle?

IMO, she was tired of being on Voldemort's side. She and her family had been tourchered, threatened with their lives, and their home taken from them by him. Also she accually had LOVE that Voldemort did not.

She just found out that Harry survived Avada Kedavra, again. To her, it seems that Harry cannot die. Why fight him if he can't die and you could? They made the choice of flight because they want to live.

I hope that makes sense.


I don't think that's because it seemed to Narcissa that Harry couldn't die. I don't believe she even thought about Harry in the forest. IMO, she was too busy worring about her son...
I agree they wanted to live, but I just don't see why Narcissa, after Harry told her Draco was fine, didn't just go to Voldemort and tell him Harry wasn't dead?
Draco threatened Harry because in his opinion it was Harry's fault Lucius ended up in Azkaban. Wouldn't Narcissa think the same thing? Maybe she could also blame Harry about everything. Since Lucius was put in Azkaban, the Malfoys weren't the same family as they were before. They lost their power, Lucius lost his status in the DE's hierarchy, then Draco had to kill Dumbledore. And Voldemort put this mission on Draco knowing he was going to fail, as a way of punnishing Lucius for his mistakes. So all that "deterioration" in the Malfoy family started when Lucius got in Azkaban.

In cloncusion, I still don't see why Narcissa didn't tell Voldemort that Harry was still alive after Harry told her Draco was fine.

why didn't she turned him on after Harry told her Draco was alive in the castle?

IMO, she was tired of being on Voldemort's side. She and her family had been tourchered, threatened with their lives, and their home taken from them by him. Also she accually had LOVE that Voldemort did not.


I don't know if she even was on Voldemort's side. Lucius was, and also Draco, but we don't know if Narcissa was a DE.


Anyway... This is about Draco, not about Narcissa's decisions... so I guess this is not the place to discuss them.

I don't think that's because it seemed to Narcissa that Harry couldn't die. I don't believe she even thought about Harry in the forest. IMO, she was too busy worring about her son...
I agree they wanted to live, but I just don't see why Narcissa, after Harry told her Draco was fine, didn't just go to Voldemort and tell him Harry wasn't dead?
Draco threatened Harry because in his opinion it was Harry's fault Lucius ended up in Azkaban. Wouldn't Narcissa think the same thing? Maybe she could also blame Harry about everything. Since Lucius was put in Azkaban, the Malfoys weren't the same family as they were before. They lost their power, Lucius lost his status in the DE's hierarchy, then Draco had to kill Dumbledore. And Voldemort put this mission on Draco knowing he was going to fail, as a way of punnishing Lucius for his mistakes. So all that "deterioration" in the Malfoy family started when Lucius got in Azkaban.

In cloncusion, I still don't see why Narcissa didn't tell Voldemort that Harry was still alive after Harry told her Draco was fine.




I don't know if she even was on Voldemort's side. Lucius was, and also Draco, but we don't know if Narcissa was a DE.


Anyway... This is about Draco, not about Narcissa's decisions... so I guess this is not the place to discuss them.

I think your English is excellent. I admire people who can learn a foreign language so much. I can't learn one to save my life. I agree with your points about Narcissa's choices. She could have turned on Harry after he told her Draco was safe. There are several reasons I can think of why she didn't. One is that she genuinely thought that Voldemort's time was coming to an end, another is that she simply didn't want to be a part of a murder. Or it simply could have been a mixture of the two. She did show bravery, more bravery than her son ever did.

I think Draco gets some sympathy due to Tom Felton's portrayal of him in HBP. I am not claiming anyone in this thread feels that way, because I don't believe that any of you do. Outside of this thread is a different matter. I didn't feel any sympathy for Draco when I read HBP, but when I saw the movie I saw emotion I didn't see there before.

I'm not trying to make this a film discussion because I don't think that's allowed here in LS.

I do think Draco had an awful time his sixth year. He didn't actually kill Dumbledore, but he's still guilty for the death. He fixed the cabinet and brought in the Death Eaters. If he hadn't brought them in Neville wouldn't have gotten hurt and Bill would not have been attacked. If he had not made the deal with Voldemort Dumbledore would not have asked Snape to carry out what he knew Draco would not be able to do. Dumbledore still would have died, but no one would have helped him get there faster.

No Draco was not a murderer, he only tried his best to be one and failed.

Tried his best? By sending a man a necklace and having a poison sent to the Potions' Master to pass along to Dumbledore? He would have done a better job by just walking behind Dumbledore one day and hitting him with a Killing Curse while his back was turned. It's not like he had to worry about being caught. Snape would have had to help as a Death Eater and Voldemort would have been that much closer to being in charge.

I don't think Draco's the great intellect some make him out to be but I do think he's capable of being a bit smarter than that, if he wants to be. The only remotely intelligent plan of his was the final one and even that hinged on: 1.) Dumbledore being alone when he returned 2.) Dumbledore not handing his butt to him.

If Dumbledore hadn't known before what was going on with Draco, he would have wound up Stunned on the Tower before he had time to say "Expelliarmus".

I do think Draco had an awful time his sixth year.

:agree:

He didn't actually kill Dumbledore, but he's still guilty for the death. He fixed the cabinet and brought in the Death Eaters. If he hadn't brought them in Neville wouldn't have gotten hurt and Bill would not have been attacked. If he had not made the deal with Voldemort Dumbledore would not have asked Snape to carry out what he knew Draco would not be able to do. Dumbledore still would have died, but no one would have helped him get there faster.

I really think extenuation factors come into play - I'm pretty sure that many systems of justice would take into consideration ones family being held hostage - at any rate I do! :)

'If he had not made the deal with Voldemort' makes it sound a little like Draco went to Voldermort with the plan (at least in UK English :)) which isn't the case. We know that Draco was given the task and we have a clear interpretation given to us about why Draco was given the task (a slow torture for his parents who had annoyed Voldermort) he was never expected to succeed except in his own eyes and possibly Cissy's - his mother, teacher & headmaster had no such illusions.

As I recall (and I may be wrong) Dumbledore asked Snape to do what he did because they both knew that
a) Draco (& probably his family) would be killed when/if he failed to kill Dumbledore
b) Snape would no longer been needed as a DE spy at Hogwarts in the foreseeable future as Voldemort expected to have power over Hogwarts very soon.
c) Therefore Snape would be expected to do it when Draco failed (which was expected)
d) Whatever happened Dumbledore was going to die at the hands of either:
a. Riddle/Voldemort (via the cursed ring) in which case Voldemort would become master of the wand :scared:
b. Draco – in which case his soul/innocence would finally be lost
c. Snape – giving Dumbledore’s spy his final proof of loyalty, setting him up as securely as possible given the circumstances to watch over Harry/Voldemort & pass on his message at the correct time. Given all this I think it is safe to say that even if Draco hadn’t been tasked with killing Dumbledore both Dumbledore & Snape would still have been put in the same position.

:agree:



I really think extenuation factors come into play - I'm pretty sure that many systems of justice would take into consideration ones family being held hostage - at any rate I do! :)

'If he had not made the deal with Voldemort' makes it sound a little like Draco went to Voldermort with the plan (at least in UK English :)) which isn't the case. We know that Draco was given the task and we have a clear interpretation given to us about why Draco was given the task (a slow torture for his parents who had annoyed Voldermort) he was never expected to succeed except in his own eyes and possibly Cissy's - his mother, teacher & headmaster had no such illusions.

As I recall (and I may be wrong) Dumbledore asked Snape to do what he did because they both knew that
a) Draco (& probably his family) would be killed when/if he failed to kill Dumbledore
b) Snape would no longer been needed as a DE spy at Hogwarts in the foreseeable future as Voldemort expected to have power over Hogwarts very soon.
c) Therefore Snape would be expected to do it when Draco failed (which was expected)
d) Whatever happened Dumbledore was going to die at the hands of either:
a. Riddle/Voldemort (via the cursed ring) in which case Voldemort would become master of the wand :scared:
b. Draco – in which case his soul/innocence would finally be lost
c. Snape – giving Dumbledore’s spy his final proof of loyalty, setting him up as securely as possible given the circumstances to watch over Harry/Voldemort & pass on his message at the correct time. Given all this I think it is safe to say that even if Draco hadn’t been tasked with killing Dumbledore both Dumbledore & Snape would still have been put in the same position.

I agree that even if Draco wasn't tasked to kill Dumbledore, both Dumbledore and Snape would still be put in this position. Dumbledore put on the ring, which was an horcruxe, it had a really powerful curse, and both Snape and Dumbledore knew that Dumbledore didn't have much left to live. So Dumbledore's death would occur anyway, being Draco involved or not.

'If he had not made the deal with Voldemort':
I don't see the deal here. It wasn't Draco's idea. He didn't went to Voldemort and said "Look Voldy, I have a really good plan, wanna hear about it?"
And neither viceversa... Voldemort didn't consult Draco if he wanted to take the task, he didn't made him a space to refuse....

Tried his best? By sending a man a necklace and having a poison sent to the Potions' Master to pass along to Dumbledore? He would have done a better job by just walking behind Dumbledore one day and hitting him with a Killing Curse while his back was turned. It's not like he had to worry about being caught. Snape would have had to help as a Death Eater and Voldemort would have been that much closer to being in charge.

I don't think Draco's the great intellect some make him out to be but I do think he's capable of being a bit smarter than that, if he wants to be. The only remotely intelligent plan of his was the final one and even that hinged on: 1.) Dumbledore being alone when he returned 2.) Dumbledore not handing his butt to him.

If Dumbledore hadn't known before what was going on with Draco, he would have wound up Stunned on the Tower before he had time to say "Expelliarmus".

Well I never, ever said that I thought Draco to be the sharpest stick in the bundle. And yes I do think he did his best to kill Dumbledore from a distance. IMO, his best was not that great, but I give Draco points for trying. Walking up to Dumbledore and hitting him over the head would have been too close to Dumbledore for Draco. He had, IMO trouble with handling violence up close and personal, especially when he was the one supposed to be dealing out the violence. I don't give too much credit to Dumbledore either. I think Dumbledore was incredibly blasé about the safety of other people. He knew what Draco was up to and let it continue in the vain hope that Draco would come to him and ask for help. IMO, and granted it is only my opinion, Dumbledore should have paid a little bit more attention to the innocent victims that Draco left strewn over Hogwarts and less to the hope that Draco might come to him for forgiveness and help. I don't know why Dumbledore let Draco continue as long as he did, I suspect the main reason was plot driven as Rowling had to take us through the entire school year.

Org post by leah49
I think Draco gets some sympathy due to Tom Felton's portrayal of him in HBP. I am not claiming anyone in this thread feels that way, because I don't believe that any of you do. Outside of this thread is a different matter. I didn't feel any sympathy for Draco when I read HBP, but when I saw the movie I saw emotion I didn't see there before.

This is something that I have not really had a problem with. I think Tom Felton is a young man with a future, but I didn't buy into his portrayal so much. The main reason is because I did not feel sympathy for Draco in the book and I thought the film did an excellent job in portraying the damage that Draco did to Katie and Ron. Tom did a very good job of making Draco sympathetic, but all I could see was Katie hanging in mid air, with her mouth open in a silent scream. I suppose I felt like Draco's anguish was not nearly enough to compensate for that. I still feel the same way.

I don't feel any part of Dumbledore's death can be laid at Draco's door.

The actual killer was Snape, a man trusted by Dumbledore and possessed of full access to the castle. Snape did not need, or benefit from, any assistance from Draco. And Dumbledore would, in my opinion, have asked Snape to kill him regardless of Draco's problem. His real reason for asking is explained by Harry in "The Flaw in the Plan". It is to deal with the problem of the Elder Wand.

I don't feel any part of Dumbledore's death can be laid at Draco's door.

The actual killer was Snape, a man trusted by Dumbledore and possessed of full access to the castle. Snape did not need, or benefit from, any assistance from Draco. And Dumbledore would, in my opinion, have asked Snape to kill him regardless of Draco's problem. His real reason for asking is explained by Harry in "The Flaw in the Plan". It is to deal with the problem of the Elder Wand.

Indeed, Draco may have been responsible for the timing of Dumbledore's death, but not the deed. Dumbledore was dying and he had already arranged that Snape would kill him.

I don't feel any part of Dumbledore's death can be laid at Draco's door.

The actual killer was Snape, a man trusted by Dumbledore and possessed of full access to the castle. Snape did not need, or benefit from, any assistance from Draco. And Dumbledore would, in my opinion, have asked Snape to kill him regardless of Draco's problem. His real reason for asking is explained by Harry in "The Flaw in the Plan". It is to deal with the problem of the Elder Wand.

Exactly. Dumbledore planned his death as part of his military strategy for defeating Voldemort - i.e., the part of his strategy involving the Elder Wand. He tried to use the Draco ploy as an initial means of getting Snape to agree to it, but Snape balked immediately. Getting Draco out of the mess he was in was never part of Snape's agreement with Dumbledore. And Snape only agreed to go along with the Unbreakable Vow after he had given Dumbledore his word that he would kill him. There's more involved in how Dumbledore finally got Snape to go along with the agreement, but that's as much as pertains to Draco.

The part Draco played in Dumbledore's death would have mostly to do with the exact timing of the thing.
(But even that is uncertain, given that Dumbledore was already dying from Voldemort's potion and asking for Snape. Was he planning to ask Snape to save him or to kill him? We don't really know.)

But let's say for the sake of argument that Dumbledore was planning to ask Snape to save him (i.e., give him just a little more time) when he returned to Hogwarts with Harry. Then Draco's role would have had more more to do with the timing of Dumbledore's death. That is, in this scenario, Draco would have created the circumstances (surrounded by Death Eaters) in which Dumbledore would beg Snape to do it now, rather than save him from Voldemort's Locket Horcrux potion and buy him a little bit of time.

Personally, I think that Dumbledore was asking Harry to get Snape in order to ask Snape to kill him - i.e., that Dumbledore's death would have happened on that night regardless of whether or not Draco had let in the Death Eaters. But that's just personal opinion. There's no canon either way.

Still, Draco did let in the Death Eaters, and Bill was seriously hurt in the ensuing fight. So regardless of Dumbledore, Draco certainly bears some responsibility for the non-lethal casualties.

Draco is responsable of almost killing innocent people, he's guilty of attempt of murder.. he is guilty for letting the DE inside Hogwarts... he is guilty for trying (in a relly "lame" way) to kill Dumbledore, but - he is not guilty for Dumbledore's death. It was something that was premeditated and was going to happen any way. Draco could have something to do with the timing, but Dumbledore only had about 6 months since he put the ring on.. so it's not like he died years before he was supposed to.



About HBP movie...: I really understood Draco in the book, I sympathysed with him.. I almost cried when I found out he was crying all that time in the bathroom... but in the movie, it just did nothing to me. I just saw Tom Felton looking at himself in the mirror. But when Katie was up in the air with her silent scream and that "look" in her eyes.. that hit me hard.
It's interesting the difference in the reactions while reading the books and while watching the movies...

I think one thing we have clearly established is that none of us condone or completely excuse Draco's actions. He put many people in danger and caused serious harm to several. So, no one here is going to let him off lightly for that. He was responsible for those things and should face the guilt of it, if nothing else.

But, the points many of us have been trying to make, IMO, and which seem to be getting miscommunicated for some reason are:

1) Draco was not evil, as were most of the other DEs. As I've mentioned before, Bella wouldn't have had any problem bringing in any or all members of her family to be tortured or killed if she thought it would win her Brownie points with Voldemort. She was truly evil, torturing and killing for the sheer pleasure of it. She sure wasn't very sympathetic to her sister's and nephew's plights during Voldemort's occupation of their home.

But, Draco wasn't totally innocent, either. He wanted to be a DE, IMO, to impress his father and show that he was able to do something on his own. Unfortunately, by the time he realized what that was all about, it was too late to bail out, and he was stuck with the task that would determine the fates of his family and himself.

2) Draco could feel love for his parents, and, he suffered badly because of the fear that he was going to fail his task (which was Voldemort's plan), and, his parents and he would be tortured and/or killed.

3) Draco was a product of his upbringing, and, his admiration for Voldemort and dislike of Muggles and non-purebloods was part of that upbringing. However, Draco did not go to Voldemort and make a deal to kill Dumbledore. He was a pawn...a way for Voldemort to get even with Lucius. IMO, more of the blame for Draco's dilemna was Lucius' fault than anyone else's. This, however, is not completely excusing Draco for his own actions.

4) Draco, like Regulus Black, changed when someone he loved was threatened. Up to the time that Draco actually saw Voldemort in action, he'd only heard the stories about him. It was one thing to hear about them, another to see the actual pain and suffering of a person who was being tortured and then killed and fed to a snake. Unfortunately, by that time Draco had no choice but to continue to try to complete the repairs to the cabinet and to kill Dumbledore. Did that mean that he changed his philosophy on Muggles and non-purebloods? Probably not. But, IMO, he probably did change his feelings about Voldemort and about the way that they should be treated.

5) Draco was still redeemable. His soul had not been permanently damaged by murder, and, he could still make amends for his previous actions and their results. The fact that he was able to love set him apart from the other DEs and, especially from Voldemort.

6) Draco is not to be admired or looked up to. He is to be pittied. But, we also have to make some effort to understand him and what motivated him. If we don't, the whole point of his character is lost.

Putting ourselves in Draco's place, under the circumstances he found himself in, who knows for sure how we would have reacted or what we would have done to save our family's lives and our own. Self-preservation is one of the most basic of instincts. Preservation of one's family is another.

I don't feel any part of Dumbledore's death can be laid at Draco's door.

The actual killer was Snape, a man trusted by Dumbledore and possessed of full access to the castle. Snape did not need, or benefit from, any assistance from Draco. And Dumbledore would, in my opinion, have asked Snape to kill him regardless of Draco's problem. His real reason for asking is explained by Harry in "The Flaw in the Plan". It is to deal with the problem of the Elder Wand.

Yes Dumbledore's machinations leave a lot to be desired. Draco is not responsible for them or for Dumbledore's death. Draco bears responsibility for his own crimes and they were many.
I believe that Draco committed evil acts, he committed these evil acts over a fairly long period of time. What is the difference between an evil person committing an evil act that seriously hurts someone, and the same evil act committed by someone who is coerced? What is the difference to the victim of the evil act? Should Katie's and Ron's families take comfort that there was nothing personal in the acts that led to serious injuries? Should they have taken comfort in Draco's anguish? Bear in mind that we don't know for sure what was the cause of Draco's anguish. We don't know if he was sorry for the pain he caused or if he was sorry for the fact that he had not succeeded in his primary mission to murder Dumbledore.
The reason that I ask these questions is very basic. How does society as a whole deal with evil acts? How do we balance compassion for the victims with justice for the perpetrator? Was the fact that Draco really did not answer for his crimes a good thing for him personally? I just don't think a crisis of conscience on Draco's part for what he was doing is either enough or even properly displayed.

Org Posted by Minerva'sCat
6) Draco is not to be admired or looked up to. He is to be pittied. But, we also have to make some effort to understand him and what motivated him. If we don't, the whole point of his character is lost.

Putting ourselves in Draco's place, under the circumstances he found himself in, who knows for sure how we would have reacted or what we would have done to save our family's lives and our own. Self-preservation is one of the most basic of instincts. Preservation of one's family is another.

This is very true, it's also true for the families of his victims. They too want to preserve their children's lives. When does Draco's concern for his family start to override their concern for their children? I just don't think it is as simple as saying Draco was driven by concern for his family. If we all thought like that there would be anarchy

I think one thing we have clearly established is that none of us condone or completely excuse Draco's actions. He put many people in danger and caused serious harm to several.

I agree! Draco is responsibility for his actions that caused damage to others.
He did put people in danger with his botched and careless attempts on Dumbledore's life. They were as Dumbledore said, "unintentional victims". We do not know how Draco felt about almost killing Katie and Ron, however we do know that his attempts at killing Dumbledore were very poor,which I think indicated that he really deep down didn't want to become a killer.

5) Draco was still redeemable. His soul had not been permanently damaged by murder, and, he could still make amends for his previous actions and their results. The fact that he was able to love set him apart from the other DEs and, especially from Voldemort.

Yes! I think this is one of the main themes of the story; that it is love that sets us apart.

6) Draco is not to be admired or looked up to. He is to be pittied. But, we also have to make some effort to understand him and what motivated him. If we don't, the whole point of his character is lost.
:agree:
For me it is more interesting trying to understand Draco's motivations for his actions, than simply judging them.

Putting ourselves in Draco's place, under the circumstances he found himself in, who knows for sure how we would have reacted or what we would have done to save our family's lives and our own. Self-preservation is one of the most basic of instincts. Preservation of one's family is another.

I happen to think that some people, if put exactly in Draco's shoes would have just done it, and killed Dumbledore.
The fact that Draco couldn't, I think shows that he is capable of redemption.

I happen to think that some people, if put exactly in Draco's shoes would have just done it, and killed Dumbledore.
The fact that Draco couldn't, I think shows that he is capable of redemption.

I am quite sure some people would. I would speculate that the greater majority of people would not. I also would not say that Draco was incapable of killing Dumbledore. I would say that his best attempts went awry and that instead of killing Dumbledore as he planned them to, they injured innocent bystanders.
I too would like to understand why he did it. I would simply prefer to study his motives from a safe environment, preferably one where he was located away from innocent bystanders.

If you think he was, in fact, capable of killing Dumbeldore, how do you explain his failure to do it while he could, at the tower? Even after the Death Eaters arrived, he still didn't act. He had a pretty strong motivation (that basically left him the choice between Dumbeldore's life and his parents' lives), solid support and an escort to safety. Yes he still didn't kill him. Why?

Also, about whether motivation for an evil act matters. Yes, it makes no difference to the victims, but if you think motivation makes no difference, how do you approach Harry's use of Unforgivables? Is Harry's Crucio just as wrong as when a Death Eater uses it?

But, Draco wasn't totally innocent, either. He wanted to be a DE, IMO, to impress his father and show that he was able to do something on his own. Unfortunately, by the time he realized what that was all about, it was too late to bail out, and he was stuck with the task that would determine the fates of his family and himself.
IMO, Draco's desire to become a Death Eater actually made him more innocent at heart. How so? Draco was raised in a family that believed in the Pureblood supermacy. He grew up in a house in which it was believed that being a DE is the best thing one could achieve. His parents probably have never shown him what it really means to become a DE. I think what he only had the chance to see, was his father returning from whatever mission he was given by Voldemort, boasting about his success and the Dark Lord's approval of his deeds.
I can imagine Draco being impressed by those stories and fantasizing about being like his father one day. However, this exactly isn't how it happened. He didn't join Voldemort out of his own will. He wasn't old enough to have created his own view on what Voldemort was doing. For all we know, he might have stayed sort of neutral like her mother and her family (The Blacks). It was Voldemort that recruited him in his order. Being that young and inexperienced, he was so proud as we've seen during his ride to Hogwarts. He must've believed that carrying out the mission wouldn't have taken even a few months of the school year. And so things changed, and became complicated. He started to look sick and pale. Slowoly he came to realise that murder wasn't that easy.. or forgivable.
That's when (I think) the internal fight about; which was more important: his family's safety Or the murder of an innocent Dumbledore? Apparently his family seemed more important to him, and he tried to complete the process. The fight was still going on untill he was face to face with Dumbledore on the tower.
While I don't wholly approve of Draco's choices. I think the blame lay on his parents and especially Narcissa who wasn't really on Voldemort's side. She could've shown her son a brighter side of life. She could've shown him that he could've done better things in the world.

And yes I do think he did his best to kill Dumbledore from a distance.

Yeah, I don't see how three attempts and failing each time is doing his best. Again, if he wanted to actually succeed he could have just Imperio'd someone at Honeydukes and have them send him poisoned candy. Or get Kreacher to poison his drink during dinner (or let him into the kitchens to do it). Or sent him cursed socks.

In five seconds, I figured out three ways that were a lot less convoluted than what Draco attempted. And sure all two of those things would have required Draco to know a little about Dumbledore but again, if he were serious, I'd think he would have done some studying on the man.

I don't give too much credit to Dumbledore either. I think Dumbledore was incredibly blasé about the safety of other people.

Dumbledore didn't seem to be at his best emotionally/physically/mentally during HBP. Probably because he was dying. A lot of his poor judgement can be attributed to that.

to the innocent victims that Draco left strewn over Hogwarts

Why do you make it sound like he went on a bloody rampage? There were three (Rosemerta, Katie, Ron) and maybe one more (Bill) if you want to include what the Death Eaters did when they got inside. I think those three or four are awful enough.

IMO, Draco's desire to become a Death Eater actually made him more innocent at heart.

While I get what you're saying, I don't think I'd characterize Draco as "innocent at heart". More like profoundly naive.

I would speculate that the greater majority of people would not.

Well, there's no way of knowing that and I have say that in my experience most of fandom that I've seen (here, on FAP, LJ, SQ, Checkmated) says otherwise.

While I don't wholly approve of Draco's choices. I think the blame lay on his parents and especially Narcissa who wasn't really on Voldemort's side.

Oh, I think Narcissa was always on Voldemort's side. She was just a bit quicker on the uptake than her menfolk were and had a bit more guts (and perhaps wasn't quite as proud).

While I get what you're saying, I don't think I'd characterize Draco as "innocent at heart". More like profoundly naive.
Yes, that's the word I should've used. :)
Well, there's no way of knowing that and I have say that in my experience most of fandom that I've seen (here, on FAP, LJ, SQ, Checkmated) says otherwise.
I'm not sure what you mean. Do you mean that, other people would've sacrificed themselves and their families in order not to commit murder? If so, I think this depends a lot on the nature of that person. If they're selfless and brave they'd probably have done that and chosen the right way once they saw it. But someone who values his family above others wouldn't do the same. Besides murderer or not, Draco was never fond of Dumbledore.

If you think he was, in fact, capable of killing Dumbeldore, how do you explain his failure to do it while he could, at the tower? Even after the Death Eaters arrived, he still didn't act. He had a pretty strong motivation (that basically left him the choice between Dumbeldore's life and his parents' lives), solid support and an escort to safety. Yes he still didn't kill him. Why?

This is true, and Dumbledore seems to know that Draco is not capable of killing him.

" I'm standing here with a wand - I'm about to kill you"

"My dear boy, let us have no more pretence about that. If you were going to kill me, you would have done it when you first disarmed me, you would not have stopped for this pleasant chat about ways and means."(HBP, The Lightening-Struck Tower)

Bellatrix93, I agree. I think that Draco was very much a product of his upbringing. He wanted to please his parents and be like his father. I see him as being very naive.

IMO, Draco's desire to become a Death Eater actually made him more innocent at heart. How so? Draco was raised in a family that believed in the Pureblood supermacy. He grew up in a house in which it was believed that being a DE is the best thing one could achieve. His parents probably have never shown him what it really means to become a DE. I think what he only had the chance to see, was his father returning from whatever mission he was given by Voldemort, boasting about his success and the Dark Lord's approval of his deeds.
I can imagine Draco being impressed by those stories and fantasizing about being like his father one day. However, this exactly isn't how it happened. He didn't join Voldemort out of his own will. He wasn't old enough to have created his own view on what Voldemort was doing. For all we know, he might have stayed sort of neutral like her mother and her family (The Blacks). It was Voldemort that recruited him in his order. Being that young and inexperienced, he was so proud as we've seen during his ride to Hogwarts. He must've believed that carrying out the mission wouldn't have taken even a few months of the school year. And so things changed, and became complicated. He started to look sick and pale. Slowoly he came to realise that murder wasn't that easy.. or forgivable.
That's when (I think) the internal fight about; which was more important: his family's safety Or the murder of an innocent Dumbledore? Apparently his family seemed more important to him, and he tried to complete the process. The fight was still going on untill he was face to face with Dumbledore on the tower.
While I don't wholly approve of Draco's choices. I think the blame lay on his parents and especially Narcissa who wasn't really on Voldemort's side. She could've shown her son a brighter side of life. She could've shown him that he could've done better things in the world.


I agree with much of what Bellatrix said. I think one thing that the Harry Potter books tried to show was that the choices someone makes don't play out in a vacuum-- other people will be affected and will have to deal with the concequences of choices that they did not make. I think the choices Harry's parents made affected Harry-- to be a loving family, to be brave and stand up for the right thing, to die protecting Harry. Likewise I think that decisions Draco's family affected him-- his family loved him, taught him to hate others based on their "blood purity", and condoned murder and violence and coercion as a means to an end. But I also think that while parents' choices are responsible for where a child starts out in life, the choices someone makes are their own and even if they start out in a bad place because of their upbringing they are still responsible for what they choose to do. But I think Lucius and Narcissa piled enough baggage on Draco to make his starting point really difficult. I'm going to cut Draco some slack, too, because he was still underage when Voldemort coerced him into attempting to murder Dumbledore. Sixteen is old enough to know better, so his age doesn't get him completely off the hook, in my opinion, but I look at it as mitigating.

I see Draco's situation as similar to Xenophilius Lovegoods. They are sort of opposite numbers. Draco is on the evil side, and Voldemort has threatened his family if Draco doesn't do an evil act; Xenophilius is on the good side, and the Death Eaters have threatened his family if he doesn't do an evil act. I don't think their choices to commit the evil act are the right ones, but I pity them both for the situation they are in, and place the blame for their predicament on Voldemort, who is the one determined to create the evil, as I see it.

I think where Xenophilius and Draco differ is in their methods. Voldemort has demanded the murder of Albus Dumbledore or else from Draco, and I have sympathy for Draco even when he chooses to attempt to carry out the murder. Voldemort does not demand any other victims from Draco while he is threatening Draco's family, though. So victimizing Rosmerta and Katie I see as uncoerced choices made solely by Draco. I think he has chosen to make more victims than had been demanded by Voldemort. It might sound weird to some people, but I find how Draco went about trying to kill Dumbledore to be the bigger crime, because while he was coerced into targetting Dumbledore, he was not coerced into targetting the other people, but freely chose to do so. In my opinion, Draco had a lot of Death Eater tools and methods that he had acquired over the years, and he chose to use them; it was as if he was trying his best to think like and be a Death Eater.

I think Draco was brought up to think that being a Death Eater was an easy way to get everything he wanted, that he and his family wouldn't suffer, only other people who didn't count because they were inferior would suffer. I think he might have even thought it was going to be fun. I think Draco started to learn the hard way that it wasn't going to be fun or easy afterall, and it wouldn't bring him the things he wanted. He seemed to have lost the smug and gloating attitude he exhibited in the earlier books at the thought of other people suffering-- but even up to the end he would still target others if it would eleviate his own suffering. Maybe the best that could be said of him was that he had stopped making "extra victims", like he had with his attempts on Dumbledore's life. I wish there had been more of a change, but sometimes people just don't change radically.

birdi86;5546699]Yeah, I don't see how three attempts and failing each time is doing his best. Again, if he wanted to actually succeed he could have just Imperio'd someone at Honeydukes and have them send him poisoned candy. Or get Kreacher to poison his drink during dinner (or let him into the kitchens to do it). Or sent him cursed socks.

In five seconds, I figured out three ways that were a lot less convoluted than what Draco attempted. And sure all two of those things would have required Draco to know a little about Dumbledore but again, if he were serious, I'd think he would have done some studying on the man.

I know you have a post after this, but I'll answer this one first. I don't see how two murder attempts that do severe damage to Katie and Ron can be dismissed as Draco not doing his best to kill Dumbledore. They were the best he could come up with and they were deadly enough. Ron came so close to dying that it isn't not something that I am prepared to dismiss as 'Draco's heart wasn't in it, therefore he wasn't trying hard.' Katie's attack was severe enough to spend months in St Mungo's, the attack that Ron intercepted was much more deadly and much better aimed.
I really don't know what to reply to your second point. Perhap's you are better at plotting a murder than Draco is portrayed to be.

Dumbledore didn't seem to be at his best emotionally/physically/mentally during HBP. Probably because he was dying. A lot of his poor judgement can be attributed to that.

This is a good point and it certainly is something to consider.

Why do you make it sound like he went on a bloody rampage? There were three (Rosemerta, Katie, Ron) and maybe one more (Bill) if you want to include what the Death Eaters did when they got inside. I think those three or four are awful enough.

Yes they are. Four is a rather large body count, perhaps not enough to strew all over Hogwarts, but I think they would take up the best part of a hospital ward.

While I get what you're saying, I don't think I'd characterize Draco as "innocent at heart". More like profoundly naive.

I don't thnk I would describe Draco as either. I think if I had to describe him I would have to say self-deluding. He thought that he could do all these bad things and then when faced with the reality of actually standing in front of someone, like he was standing in front of Dumbledore, he just couldn't kill him. I don't think he cared very much for Dumbledore's life. I just think he was squeamish.

Well, there's no way of knowing that and I have say that in my experience most of fandom that I've seen (here, on FAP, LJ, SQ, Checkmated) says otherwise.

Well, hopefully neither you nor I will ever find out. I don't base my judgement of the human race on what people post in fandoms.

Oh, I think Narcissa was always on Voldemort's side. She was just a bit quicker on the uptake than her menfolk were and had a bit more guts (and perhaps wasn't quite as proud).

This I would say is fair assesment on Narcissa, but I do think she was proud. Too proud just to follow Voldemort's judgements.

Org post by Yoana:
If you think he was, in fact, capable of killing Dumbeldore, how do you explain his failure to do it while he could, at the tower? Even after the Death Eaters arrived, he still didn't act. He had a pretty strong motivation (that basically left him the choice between Dumbeldore's life and his parents' lives), solid support and an escort to safety. Yes he still didn't kill him. Why?

Also, about whether motivation for an evil act matters. Yes, it makes no difference to the victims, but if you think motivation makes no difference, how do you approach Harry's use of Unforgivables? Is Harry's Crucio just as wrong as when a Death Eater uses it?

What I said was that Draco was quite capable of attempting to murder Dumbledore from a distance. Up close and looking in Dumbledores eyes it is a different ball game.
Yes, while I consider Harry's use of Imperius at the bank to be somewhat excusable, (he had to obtain the Horcrux so it could be destroyed, and he did no physical harm.) I am not so forgiving for Harry's use of Crucio in any of the situations that he used it in. So, yes I would say that Harry's use of Crucio was every bit as wrong as when a Death eater used it.
I have never denied that Draco had motivation, I have always maintained that his motivation was not enough to justify any of his actions. I maintain that no matter what his motivation was his actions were criminal. I don't believe that his breakdown was motivated by remorse for what he was doing. I think his breakdown was caused by the stress of not fulfilling Voldemort's demands. There is IMO a big difference there.

Yes, that's the word I should've used. :).

I agree, "naieve" is more of what I was thinking as well. That's because Draco wasn't able to make an "informed decision" about Voldemort or about being a Death Eater since all he'd ever seen and heard was positive about Voldy and his "cause." He'd been convinced that anyone who didn't believe that way was wrong, and, when Voldemort came back to power he would make them all pay dearly.

Do you mean that, other people would've sacrificed themselves and their families in order not to commit murder? If so, I think this depends a lot on the nature of that person. If they're selfless and brave they'd probably have done that and chosen the right way once they saw it. But someone who values his family above others wouldn't do the same. Besides murderer or not, Draco was never fond of Dumbledore.

As I said before, I'm not sure any of us know for sure what we would have done if we'd been raised the same as Draco, and then found ourselves in his situation with the fate of our family, as well as our own lives, resting on our shoulders. It's easy to sit here and feel that we have a higher moral standard, but, it's another to be in the center of the storm and trying to survive.

And, your point about his not even liking Dumbledore is excellent. As we saw in so many of Draco's statements, he didn't like or respect him. So, if he couldn't kill someone he had so little concern for, that says a lot. If anything, the fact that Draco practically despised Dumbledore should have made it even easier for him to kill him. But, he couldn't do it when he was standing there face to face with him.


Bellatrix93, I agree. I think that Draco was very much a product of his upbringing. He wanted to please his parents and be like his father. I see him as being very naive.

Yes, I think we really need to keep that in mind. And, even though Draco was exposed to other ways of thinking, when we see with Lucius' conversation with Mr. Weasley in the bookstore it reaffirms that he was taught to disregard them and look down on the people who made them. We know Lucius was an active DE, and Narcissa's own family had burned people off the Family Tree for going against Voldemort. We see in scenes with Lucius and Draco, and, from Draco's bragging and using his father as a weapon to try to intimidate others, that Draco both idolized and feared his father. What chance was there that he was going to take any other path than the one he did?

I'm sure several people will bring up Sirius Black as an example of what Draco "could" have been like. But, Sirius had two things going for him that Draco did not:

1) Sirius had a rebelious streak, which Draco did not. Sirius, for whatever reason, was capable of thinking a bit "outside the box" on some things and seemed to relish in going against the family beliefs...so much so that he got thrown out and disowned by most of his family at age 16.

2) He made friends with James right from the start, which, IMO lead to his wanting to be, and getting, sorted into Gryffindor House. This put him in a whole different environment than if he'd been sorted into Slytherin.

As for Regulus -- again, I point out that he did not turn against Voldemort until someone he loved, Kreacher, was nearly killed by him. Even then, Regulus did not go and actively fight against Voldemort. He gave Kreacher the horcrux to hide, and, then, for all intents and purposes, committed suicide by remaining in the cave and being killed by the inferi. So, to try to draw any parallel between him and Draco is difficult. If Draco had allowed himself to be killed, it still would not have saved his parents -- which was one of his gravest concerns.

I don't feel any part of Dumbledore's death can be laid at Draco's door.
Seriously? Dumbledore still would have died, but it would not have been at the hands of Snape if Draco didn't agree with Voldemort's plan. Snape would not have had to watch over him.

The actual killer was Snape, a man trusted by Dumbledore and possessed of full access to the castle. Snape did not need, or benefit from, any assistance from Draco. And Dumbledore would, in my opinion, have asked Snape to kill him regardless of Draco's problem. His real reason for asking is explained by Harry in "The Flaw in the Plan". It is to deal with the problem of the Elder Wand.

The actual killer was Snape, but Draco is just as guilty. He knew it was going to happen. He set it up to happen. He brought in the Death Eaters. He tried to send the posion to Dumbledore with it getting intercepted by Ron, thus posioning Ron. He tried to send the necklace to Dumbledore with it getting intercepted by Katie, thus sending her to St. Mungo's. Draco didn't actually say "Avada Kedavra" but he is very much guilty.

It's like, oh what am I trying to say? I can't think of the words. It's when people are found guilty of a crime because they knew about it and were part of it, accessories to the crime, I guess they call them. Draco didn't actually commit it, but he was an accessory, so he's guilty, too.

While I don't wholly approve of Draco's choices. I think the blame lay on his parents and especially Narcissa who wasn't really on Voldemort's side. She could've shown her son a brighter side of life. She could've shown him that he could've done better things in the world.

Narcissa supported pure-blood supremacy just as much as the rest of her family did, I think she just didn't want to get her hands dirty, and would probably have preferred if Lucius let others do the dirty work, too- rather than preferring that it wasn't happening at all. She certainly would have preferred if Draco had nothing to do with it -but by then, the decision was out of her hands.

Yeah, I don't see how three attempts and failing each time is doing his best. Again, if he wanted to actually succeed he could have just Imperio'd someone at Honeydukes and have them send him poisoned candy. Or get Kreacher to poison his drink during dinner (or let him into the kitchens to do it). Or sent him cursed socks.

Even if Draco had been told about Kreacher, he could well have assumed that Kreacher was still at Grimmauld Place, or that he had been forbidden to contact him (as he later was), and he would have known that as he wasn't Kreacher's master, he couldn't call Kreacher to him.


I see Draco's situation as similar to Xenophilius Lovegoods. They are sort of opposite numbers. Draco is on the evil side, and Voldemort has threatened his family if Draco doesn't do an evil act; Xenophilius is on the good side, and the Death Eaters have threatened his family if he doesn't do an evil act. I don't think their choices to commit the evil act are the right ones, but I pity them both for the situation they are in, and place the blame for their predicament on Voldemort, who is the one determined to create the evil, as I see it.

Although their situations are similar, the ways in which they get themselves into those situations are different - Draco is in the situation because he and his family have aligned themselves with a twisted megalomaniac and they've let him down, Xenophilius is in that situation because he and his daughter took a stand against the same twisted megalomaniac.

I think Draco was brought up to think that being a Death Eater was an easy way to get everything he wanted, that he and his family wouldn't suffer, only other people who didn't count because they were inferior would suffer. I think he might have even thought it was going to be fun.

I agree, "naieve" is more of what I was thinking as well. That's because Draco wasn't able to make an "informed decision" about Voldemort or about being a Death Eater since all he'd ever seen and heard was positive about Voldy and his "cause." He'd been convinced that anyone who didn't believe that way was wrong, and, when Voldemort came back to power he would make them all pay dearly.

I think this is a combination of very messed up morals and some self-delusion, partially due to his upbringing and partially due to his refusal to question what he has been told. Draco's experiences in HBP and DH were an eye-opener he wouldn't have had if Lucius hadn't botched the Ministry break-in in OotP. I'd like to think that he learned morally from that -that torture and murder isn't the right thing. I think he at least learned that future pureblood fanatic organisations should be avoided, though.

2) He made friends with James right from the start, which, IMO lead to his wanting to be, and getting, sorted into Gryffindor House. This put him in a whole different environment than if he'd been sorted into Slytherin.

I don't believe the Sorting Hat puts people into a House solely so they can be with a friend - it didn't do so for another pair of friends in that generation, after all. They need to have the qualities associated with that House, too.

Seriously? Dumbledore still would have died, but it would not have been at the hands of Snape if Draco didn't agree with Voldemort's plan. Snape would not have had to watch over him.

As has been pointed out, Dumbledore planned his death as part of a military strategy dealing with the Elder Wand. ("King's Cross," "The Flaw in the Plan").

He tried to coerce Snape into doing it by appealing to an interest in Draco, but Snape refused to do it for Draco's sake ("The Prince's Tale"). The initial agreement with Dumbledore was already in place before Snape made the Unbreakable Vow - which he made more for the purpose of protecting his status as a spy than for protecting Draco, and even then he was hesitant to make the part of the vow that involved killing Dumbledore, even though he had already given Dumbledore his word that he would do it ("Spinner's End" - note that Dumbledore has already sustained the injury to his hand, thus establishing that this is after Snape agreed to Dumbledore's plan).

Many months after making the Unbreakable Vow, he threatened to not kill Dumbledore (and would thus have broken the Unbreakable Vow and died himself) - and Dumbledore had to reveal additional details in order to get Snape to re-commit to his plan ("The Prince's Tale").

I'm bringing up all this Snape/Dumbledore detail because it pertains to the question of whether or not Dumbledore was killed for the sake of Draco. I personally find it pretty clear from the text that (regardless of Dumbledore's motives), Draco had little or nothing to do with the actual agreement between Dumbledore and Snape... and that Snape did not AK Dumbledore primarily for the purpose of protecting Draco but simply because Dumbledore asked him to do so that night.

Snape saw the situation. He knew that this was the moment that Dumbledore had told him would present itself, and that it was the moment in which he would have to act if he was indeed protecting Draco. But he hesitated. Dumbledore had to remind him of their agreement ("Severus, please") before Snape would lift his wand.

And it is certainly possible to argue that Dumbledore would have begged Snape to do so on that night regardless of whether or not Draco had let the Death Eaters into Hogwarts. Dumbledore was actively dying from Voldemort's Potion and was already asking for Snape. If he was going to die, he needed to do something about the Elder Wand (even if that part of his plan did not work out so well). Because of his need to dispense of the Elder Wand, I personally think that he was asking Harry to get Snape so that Snape could enact their agreement, not to try to get Snape to put a second stopper on Death.

Dumbledore was killed for the sake of Draco

Nice post CCS. :tu: All I would like to say is that Draco only managed to add another reason that would prevent Severus from not killing Dumbledore. The Unbreakable Vow if broken would have killed Snape and undone all the efforts that were put to ensure that he lived on and kept on working as the spy and fulfilled his destiny.

He was probably self-delusional. I mean, Draco's fate was in a big part decided even before he was born in such a family: pureblood racists and Voldemort supporters. His self-delusion was that he believed he was able to prtect his family and himself by joining Voldemort and doing "great things". But then, he realised, too late, that these things were murders and torture. It's clear to me that he wasn't happy about it and that's why I pity him.

Perhap's you are better at plotting a murder than Draco is portrayed to be.

Perhaps. Or maybe, and this is just a wild guess, JKR made it obvious he wasn't trying his best so it would make sense when Dumbledore made that very same statement and when she would eventually have to clarify that in interviews, which she did.

It's out there, I know, but maybe if the author shows something in the text in actions, has it backed up in words in the text and then confirms it in an interview? Maybe that's the correct interpretation. There's a difference between literary theories that allow multiple interpretations of the text independent of the author and believing that both the text and author are wrong.

Well, hopefully neither you nor I will ever find out. I don't base my judgement of the human race on what people post in fandoms.

Nor do you seem to base it on science, judging by how you've clearly ignored my mentions of Milgram's Experiment. Or history since I think every war and genocide every would say differently. Which is fine but belief alone really doesn't a compelling argument make.


he would have known that as he wasn't Kreacher's master, he couldn't call Kreacher to him

I'm sure his mother or Bellatrix could have helped him out there, after all they were able to use Kreacher to get Harry to the Department of Mysteries.

Seriously? Dumbledore still would have died, but it would not have been at the hands of Snape if Draco didn't agree with Voldemort's plan. Snape would not have had to watch over him.


The actual killer was Snape, but Draco is just as guilty. He knew it was going to happen. He set it up to happen. He brought in the Death Eaters. He tried to send the posion to Dumbledore with it getting intercepted by Ron, thus posioning Ron. He tried to send the necklace to Dumbledore with it getting intercepted by Katie, thus sending her to St. Mungo's. Draco didn't actually say "Avada Kedavra" but he is very much guilty.

It's like, oh what am I trying to say? I can't think of the words. It's when people are found guilty of a crime because they knew about it and were part of it, accessories to the crime, I guess they call them. Draco didn't actually commit it, but he was an accessory, so he's guilty, too.

I don't think anyone has dismissed Draco's being involved in the plot to kill Dumbledore. But, there were two entirely different plots unfolding at the same time: the one that Dumbledore had set in motion so that he was sure Snape would be the one to kill him, and, the one that Draco was carrying out as part of a coerced effort by Voldemort to kill Dumbledore.

The pertinent issues, as I see them are:


Draco entered into the situation with an extremely nieve attitude, not really understanding what he was getting himself into. I seriously doubt that he'd ever seen anyone tortured or killed and had no idea of the reality of it. All he saw was the glamor of his father being a rich and powerful person, in part, because he was a DE;

He was set up to be used as a pawn by Voldemort in order to punish Lucius -- Voldemort, IMO, was certain Draco could not carry out killing Dumbledore, therefore giving Voldemort the "reason" (as if he needed one) to kill Draco's parents, and, figuring Draco would possibly be killed himself;

He made two pretty lame attempts on Dumbledore's life, neither of which had a lot of chance of success;

When he was actually faced with the opportunity to kill Dumbledore, Draco could not do it. Even prior to that, we see him "losing his taste" for being a DE.


So, what we have is a spoiled, pompous teenager who, based on what has been pounded into his head for sixteen years, nievely becomes involved in something and finds himself way over his head. By the time he realizes this, it is too late to back out. His and his parents' lives are now at risk. So, does he do something "noble," and allow himself and his parents to be killed? Or, does he do something all-too-human, and try to save himself and his parents, even though he knows what he's got to do is wrong?

If we don't look at all of this, at Draco's background, personality, motivations (love for his parents; self-preservation), then how can we analyze his character? If we only look at him in black-and-white, good-or-bad, we miss the nuances of the character. We miss how he changed; how he grew; what he did differently after seeing the reality of suffering and death that he might or might not have done before; the toll that the whole situation took on him emotionally. Those are the deeper things to look at in his character. Not just whether he was "good" or "evil."

If we don't look at all of this, at Draco's background, personality, motivations (love for his parents; self-preservation), then how can we analyze his character? If we only look at him in black-and-white, good-or-bad, we miss the nuances of the character. We miss how he changed; how he grew; what he did differently after seeing the reality of suffering and death that he might or might not have done before; the toll that the whole situation took on him emotionally. Those are the deeper things to look at in his character. Not just whether he was "good" or "evil."

I can only wholeheartedly agree. :tu::agree::clap:

I'm sure his mother or Bellatrix could have helped him out there, after all they were able to use Kreacher to get Harry to the Department of Mysteries.

That's assuming he asked them. Also, Kreacher went to Narcissa when Sirius told him to get out, I don't think he could actually go to them if they called him. And if he had been forbidden by his master, by now Harry, there would be nothing they could do to get Kreacher to help.

That's assuming he asked them.

...Bellatrix was already helping him. She taught him Occlumency and was pretty much his Death Eating mentor.

there would be nothing they could do to get Kreacher to help.

That didn't happen till after Ron's poisoning which was February. And nothing was stopping Draco from going to Kreacher... except Draco.

Don't wanna offend anyone but in my opinion, Malfoy was a [staff edit] from start to finish. We see it in the chamber of secrets when he's making jokes and hoping that hermione would be the next student to be attacked. What did hermione ever do to him at that point?. Nothing. I think he made a joke about Cedric Diggory's death as well.

He seemed to like bossing people around as we see him do with Crabbe, Goyle and even sometimes his dad, but when it came to voldy he knew he was way out of his league and that if he didn't deliver then he was the one that was gonna get it. I don't think he really cared much about whether dumbledore lived or died, he was just too scared to do it himself.

I didn't really have much sympathy for him or his dad, because they only cared about themselves and both were obviously terrified of what voldy would to to them if they failed. Even Crabbe and Goyle had him sussed for what he really was at the end.

Don't wanna offend anyone but in my opinion, Malfoy was a [staff edit] from start to finish. We see it in the chamber of secrets when he's making jokes and hoping that hermione would be the next student to be attacked. What did hermione ever do to him at that point?. Nothing. I think he made a joke about Cedric Diggory's death as well.

He seemed to like bossing people around as we see him do with Crabbe, Goyle and even sometimes his dad, but when it came to voldy he knew he was way out of his league and that if he didn't deliver then he was the one that was gonna get it. I don't think he really cared much about whether dumbledore lived or died, he was just too scared to do it himself.

I didn't really have much sympathy for him or his dad, because they only cared about themselves and both were obviously terrified of what voldy would to to them if they failed. Even Crabbe and Goyle had him sussed for what he really was at the end.


No offense. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. :)

I didn't really have much sympathy for him

I think Draco's problem was that he was loved. He had to fight against that love to do the right thing in the end and he succeeded both on the Tower and in Malfoy Manor imo. He was so truly loved by his parents, he never thought they could be wrong. So, if they were supporting someone, then not only was it right, but the person they were supporting was not too bad either. I think that's how he looked at it.

It was only after he became a DE that Draco realised everything was not as he thought. Despite the threat of his parents lives hanging over him, Draco was unable to kill Dumbledore. That makes him different from the DEs like Bellatrix and Lucius even imo. While Draco obviously cared about his father and mother's lives and tried to off Dumbledore by various means through the year (maybe it was easier for him to do this), when he came face to face with Dumbledore, who was weak and disarmed, Draco was unable to kill him imo.

I think Draco's problem was that he was loved. He had to fight against that love to do the right thing in the end and he succeeded both on the Tower and in Malfoy Manor imo. He was so truly loved by his parents, he never thought they could be wrong.

So love didn't work for him as it is supposed to be, huh. It didn't solve his problems rather made it worse. :hmm:

Draco was unable to kill him imo.
Everyone is showing this act of Draco as if it was something noble he did, by not killing Dumbledore. In real life, an attempt on life is also a punishable offense, and the guilty isn't just let go because he/she couldn't kill the person, whatever be the motivation behind it (people are forced to kill for many reasons, including threat to their own family-like in case of Draco). Draco here attempted the same not once but thrice, doesn't that make him guilty on the charge of attempt to life on 3 accounts? :hmm:

So love didn't work for him as it is supposed to be, huh. It didn't solve his problems rather made it worse.

HBP was all about the negatives - as well as the positives - of love. From petty jealousies (Harry's, Ron's, and Hermione's), to depression (Tonks), to kidnapping and assault (Merope), to recklessly endangering the lives of others in an attempt to commit murder (Draco).

Everyone is showing this act of Draco as if it was something noble he did, by not killing Dumbledore.

What Draco did - endangering the lives of others - and that he even wanted to be a Death Eater speaks to his warped morals and lack of compassion or moral courage. But considering Draco really believed Voldemort would kill him and/or his parents, it does speak to his potential to change that he couldn't do it. It doesn't make him a good person but it does show he's not completely lost. Which is what Dumbledore wanted and what JKR has said in interviews.

Draco here attempted the same not once but thrice, doesn't that make him guilty on the charge of attempt to life on 3 accounts?

Evidently not from what JKR has said. And he was underage and under duress (believing he or his parents would die if he didn't) so it's not like he got bored one day and tried to kill people of his own free will and without any pressure from anyone else.

I mean, if I break into someone's house, hold their family hostage and tell one person I'll kill them one-by-one unless they kill someone for me, not only would I be living in crime thriller, but if that person did kill whoever I told them to, they'd have a pretty good case as to why they're not really guilty.

It doesn't make him a good person but it does show he's not completely lost.
I agree with that, he was not a lost cause and thus we see him go unpunished after all. But my point is how many people are there who are in the same situation as Draco and they do get punished, that doesn't mean they are lost. Infact the purpose of the punishment is to ensure that the person realizes his/her mistake and tries to make amends (this doesn't happen often, faulty prison system). Okay Draco goes of free because due to lack of time it was required that he realized the mistakes and tried to put it right, but what I don't get is, how that makes it so noble that everyone is trying to justify his er..mistakes. He did what he did and IMO he realized a tad too late.

Evidently not from what JKR has said. And he was underage and under duress (believing he or his parents would die if he didn't) so it's not like he got bored one day and tried to kill people of his own free will and without any pressure from anyone else.

Killing someone or for that matter intending to just because you are forced by someone doesn't acquit you from being guilty. You are still put at stand and charged for your offense. ;)

My general take on Draco is that he viewed the life of a Death Eater in a romanticized (and filtered) way through his father; and/or he may have felt an obligation to follow in his father's footsteps (as I recall, Lucius had distinct expectations for his son). I think he became a Death Eater for these and maybe other reasons, but then realized what it was really about too late and became stuck in a position where he had to perform a task he found he did not want to do, or risk the deaths of his parents and himself.

Despite the fact that Draco did attempt to kill Dumbledore and harmed innocent people along the way, there are a couple of things that cause me to feel a certain amount of sympathy and understanding for his character. First, I tend to agree that Draco was struggling very much with his assignment - not just with the physical means of attempting it, but in whether he really wanted to do it. See, I think Draco was uncomfortable with killing, but had to try something or else Voldemort would harm his family. By trying plans with low probabilities of success, he would be able to buy time for himself. But I believe he had no qualms in watching others commit murder, as evidenced by his bringing in the Death Eaters via the Vanishing Cabinet. And I don't think he ever gave any thought as to casualties other than Dumbledore. In fact, I think he displays significant negligence in this regard. But while I don't at all excuse or condone his behavior, I do have a certain amount of feeling for his difficult situation, and the fact that he was still quite a young person at the time. Again, I'm not saying this excuses him, but it's a factor I take into consideration when judging his character.

Through all of this, I don't believe Draco ever changed his opinion of muggleborns and blood purity. I think he questioned becoming a Death Eater because a) his family was in danger; b) I honestly don't believe he was cut out to deliberately murder people (discounting murder through negligence), and c) it's a possibility that he disliked being bullied around, instead preferring to be the "superior" one (as in his relationship with Crabbe and Goyle).

This is an excellent summation of Draco. There are a couple of things I would add along with what you have written:

My general take on Draco is that he viewed the life of a Death Eater in a romanticized (and filtered) way through his father; and/or he may have felt an obligation to follow in his father's footsteps (as I recall, Lucius had distinct expectations for his son).

IMO, his upbringing has a huge effect on Draco's ability to relate to others. As I said before, I seriously doubt if Draco ever saw anyone die, and only formed his opinions of Voldemort and his DEs from his father's romantacized stories and those he probably heard from other DEs that were associated with his family.

Since he more than likely was home-schooled until he went to Hogwarts, he never had any exposure to life other than through the "Malfoy/DE Filter." This sent him into the world with an intense dislike for Muggles and non-purebloods, a disrespect for Dumbledore, a feeling of superiority over people like Hagrid, and an arrogance and self-assurance backed up by his father's position and ability to make sure Draco got everything he wanted. He was totally unprepared to really get along with others -- he wanted to prove he was above them all.

I think he became a Death Eater for these and maybe other reasons, but then realized what it was really about too late and became stuck in a position where he had to perform a task he found he did not want to do, or risk the deaths of his parents and himself.).

I agree. I think he was so nieve that he saw only the glamour of being a DE until it was too late. What he didn't realize was that the reality of being a DE was nothing like his imagined adventure -- and, in addition to that, he was being used by Voldemort to get revenge on Lucius.

Draco's nievete made him an easy recruit. His father was in prison, and, it gave him what he thought would be an opportunity to get some revenge for that and to prove himself without his father's constant backing. I don't think he realized that it was a set up all the way around by Voldemort. His arrogance wouldn't let him thing that way.

When it actually came down to killing, though, I don't think he had the stomach for it. We see his reaction to the torture and murder of Charity Burbage at the beginning of DH, and, this is after he sees Dumbledore killed. So, he is getting a taste of the reality of being a follower of Voldemort, and, it's lost it's glamour. He can't even stand to watch Professor Burbage as she is being tortured. He looks down.


Despite the fact that Draco did attempt to kill Dumbledore and harmed innocent people along the way, there are a couple of things that cause me to feel a certain amount of sympathy and understanding for his character. First, I tend to agree that Draco was struggling very much with his assignment - not just with the physical means of attempting it, but in whether he really wanted to do it. See, I think Draco was uncomfortable with killing, but had to try something or else Voldemort would harm his family. By trying plans with low probabilities of success, he would be able to buy time for himself. But I believe he had no qualms in watching others commit murder, as evidenced by his bringing in the Death Eaters via the Vanishing Cabinet. And I don't think he ever gave any thought as to casualties other than Dumbledore. In fact, I think he displays significant negligence in this regard. But while I don't at all excuse or condone his behavior, I do have a certain amount of feeling for his difficult situation, and the fact that he was still quite a young person at the time. Again, I'm not saying this excuses him, but it's a factor I take into consideration when judging his character.

As much trouble as he was having with the cabinet, Draco must have realized that he had to do something to show that he was at least making an effort to kill Dumbledore.

So, he used the necklace and the brandy. Unfortunately, as you point out, he put others in danger with those efforts -- but, there was no way for him to know that Katie would open the necklace, nor, would he have had any idea that Ron would be the one drinking the brandy. Those were both unexpected. His target was Dumbledore, and, IMO the efforts were weak and Draco meant them to be. He was just under pressure to produce some sort of results. If anything, failing was more likely to make people suspicious (Harry was) and to make sure any additional efforts failed as well.

These are other major points that seem to get skipped over in the "good vs. evil" designation of Draco. That, while he willingly walked into a situation, he had no idea what he was walking into. When he did realize this, it was too late and there was too much at stake to try to pull out -- and, especially to fail in his assignment.

Draco was being held hostage, as were his parents. His life and theirs were in danger, and he was doing what he felt he had to do to save himself and his family.

Through all of this, I don't believe Draco ever changed his opinion of muggleborns and blood purity. I think he questioned becoming a Death Eater because a) his family was in danger; b) I honestly don't believe he was cut out to deliberately murder people (discounting murder through negligence), and c) it's a possibility that he disliked being bullied around, instead preferring to be the "superior" one (as in his relationship with Crabbe and Goyle

Again, this goes back to his upbringing and, in part, to his lack of contact with Muggles, Muggle-born witches and wizards, and non-purebloods. By the time he reached Hogwarts his prejudices were so deeply ingrained, and, the source of his disinformation (his father) was so respected by him that he did not question this information.

Once again, to clarify:

I don't think anyone posting here condones or excuses Dracos negative actions at anytime during the HP series. He was a spoiled, selfish, arrogant, prejudiced, self-centered little boy who was a royal pain in the rear at school. He was mean, nasty, snobbish, unlikable.

He said stupid things, like the remark about hoping Hermoine was the next Muggle to be killed by the monster from the Chamber of Secrets -- but, since I doubt he'd ever seen anyone die, these were just more nasty dispicable words, just like the racial slur, "Mudblood." But, again, he was parrotting what he had been taught from the cradle up. It was all he knew. He had no impetus for thinking in a way other than his parents. This is why I put a lot of the blame for Draco's problems on his parents. They are responsible for his upbringing and they made him what he was.

Draco's upbringing and motivations do not, however, make the injuries to Ron and Katie or his attempted murder of Dumbledore right.

But, once again, I ask: If any of us was faced with the same situation -- having our family held hostage and having no place else to turn for help; being told you either kill a particular person, or you and our family will be killed, how many of us would be able to be anymoe noble or courageous than Draco. How many of us would be able to do any differently than he did.

However, I don't think Draco was "evil." Compared to the likes of Voldemort, Bellatrix, Umbridge, Grayback, Barty Crouch, Jr., Avery, Alecto and Amycus Carrow, Antonin Dolohov, Macnair, Mulciber, and people like them, Draco was small potatoes. Those people tortured and killed for the sheer plesure of it.

Draco does not deserve praise for not doing the wrong thing, but, I think he does deserve recognition for having some saving graces, such as being able to love.

So love didn't work for him as it is supposed to be, huh. It didn't solve his problems rather made it worse. :hmm:

lol. How was love supposed to work?

Draco was loved and because he had a happy home and parents who cared for him, and because he was a spoilt boy, he never really thought about the causes his parents supported and were part of and he never explored the rightness or the wrongness of their actions or their causes imo.

He was proud to be a part of what his father was; probably thought it was his rightful place since Lucius was in jail; it was not until he joined the DEs he understood that the opposite side may have actually a reason to fight Voldemort and put his father in prison. I think that time would have been a very confused one for Draco; one where he discovered his parents had faults; big ones; plus his own inadequacies. Added to that was the job at hand which asked for Dumbledore's life. I think Draco preferred to kill Dumbledore without meeting him; maybe he knew all along that he would not be able to use the AK or any other curse to maim or kill another, even Dumbledore who was Voldemort's more hated enemy after Harry, which made him better than so many others imo.

Everyone is showing this act of Draco as if it was something noble he did, by not killing Dumbledore.

I don't know about this being a noble act, but I think it surely makes Draco different from people like Voldemort, Lucius, Bellatrix and McNair who killed because they could and without remorse.

In real life, an attempt on life is also a punishable offense, and the guilty isn't just let go because he/she couldn't kill the person, whatever be the motivation behind it (people are forced to kill for many reasons, including threat to their own family-like in case of Draco). Draco here attempted the same not once but thrice, doesn't that make him guilty on the charge of attempt to life on 3 accounts? :hmm:

Oh, yes. He could have very easily killed Katie and he could have done real damage to the students when he brought the DEs through the Vanishing Cabinet. He is guilty of a lot of things, but I think he is not lost completely because he could not murder in cold blood, even when it meant punishment for his parents and himself.

eta :: Great post MCat! :)

So love didn't work for him as it is supposed to be, huh. It didn't solve his problems rather made it worse. :hmm:


Everyone is showing this act of Draco as if it was something noble he did, by not killing Dumbledore. In real life, an attempt on life is also a punishable offense, and the guilty isn't just let go because he/she couldn't kill the person, whatever be the motivation behind it (people are forced to kill for many reasons, including threat to their own family-like in case of Draco). Draco here attempted the same not once but thrice, doesn't that make him guilty on the charge of attempt to life on 3 accounts? :hmm:

This is I think the point that I have been trying to make. Draco had motives and he was perhaps worried about his parents welfare, this is never really made clear in canon. That is all very well and good, but his motives don't change what he did to Katie and Ron. They don't change the fact that he did try to kill Dumbledore. I know he couldn't bring himself to do the actual deed, but like FurryDice I don't see that as something he should be praised for, he fully intended to do so and he let the Death Eaters into the castle at peril to the people who were there to protect the children. It doesn't matter what his motives were, his actions are what caused injuries to innocent people. He never shows remorse on page for his actions, we see him upset that's true. Is he upset because he nearly killed two of his classmates or is he upset because after months of trying he still has not killed Dumbledore? This question is not resolved on page and I feel it is important. I know that JK Rowling has spoken about this in interviews, but I do not consider her interviews canon. I don't consider them canon because some people do and some people don't and it just seems to cause strife, so I am sticking to the canon in the actual books.

Everyone is showing this act of Draco as if it was something noble he did, by not killing Dumbledore.

I honestly think the problem is that the discussion is becoming polarised because people are taking very different attitudes to what character analysis is. Some are simply looking at Draco & trying to understand his character – how things seemed to him, why he acted as he did etc, others see it as a time to judge him. The problem is that the two group’s are speaking at cross purposes and I suspect this is equally as frustrating for both sides of the divide. :)

For myself I am part of that first group; - I want to understand Draco & what he is being used to signify in the series. I don’t condone his actions but I think examining them thoroughly can lead to a better understanding of him & his role in the series. I don’t want to have to say constantly ‘I’m not condoning …’, ‘I’m not saying this is right …’ etc because I’m not saying it & it simply isn’t part of my thinking process in analysis and I suspect others have a similar attitude.

Draco’s failure to kill Dumbledore is not noble but it is a very hopeful sign and in terms of the book (such as Dumbledore saying killing is not nearly as easy as innocents believe’*) it does show Draco as an innocent in the larger scheme of the plot.

* from memory so I may have the wording slightly off but the sentiment is correct I believe. :)

I believe he had no qualms in watching others commit murder, as evidenced by his bringing in the Death Eaters via the Vanishing Cabinet.

When Dumbledore said ‘killing is not nearly as easy as innocents believe’ I think that we are being told more than just ‘killing is difficult to do’ I think that the statement is underpinned by the idea that people really don’t understand the reality of killing until it is forced on them (& personally I believe this is true even for people who understand very well that it is a wrong thing to do - jmho). I think this idea is shown to us rather clearly with Draco, not just in his half hearted attempts to kill Dumbledore or in his eventual inability to use a killing curse. To me one of the main ways we are shown this is that until he sees death up close he just doesn’t see letting DE into Hogwarts as it really is. I don’t think the consequences of this action are very real to him. However the next time we see Draco in the first chapter of DH we see a person who does understand what death & murder are, and can’t hide his horror of witnessing someone being murdered. Basically I’m just saying that yes in HBP your right but that changes very quickly :)

I honestly think the problem is that the discussion is becoming polarised because people are taking very different attitudes to what character analysis is. Some are simply looking at Draco & trying to understand his character – how things seemed to him, why he acted as he did etc, others see it as a time to judge him. The problem is that the two group’s are speaking at cross purposes and I suspect this is equally as frustrating for both sides of the divide. :)

For myself I am part of that first group; - I want to understand Draco & what he is being used to signify in the series. I don’t condone his actions but I think examining them thoroughly can lead to a better understanding of him & his role in the series. I don’t want to have to say constantly ‘I’m not condoning …’, ‘I’m not saying this is right …’ etc because I’m not saying it & it simply isn’t part of my thinking process in analysis and I suspect others have a similar attitude.

Draco’s failure to kill Dumbledore is not noble but it is a very hopeful sign and in terms of the book (such as Dumbledore saying killing is not nearly as easy as innocents believe’*) it does show Draco as an innocent in the larger scheme of the plot.

* from memory so I may have the wording slightly off but the sentiment is correct I believe. :)



When Dumbledore said ‘killing is not nearly as easy as innocents believe’ I think that we are being told more than just ‘killing is difficult to do’ I think that the statement is underpinned by the idea that people really don’t understand the reality of killing until it is forced on them (& personally I believe this is true even for people who understand very well that it is a wrong thing to do - jmho). I think this idea is shown to us rather clearly with Draco, not just in his half hearted attempts to kill Dumbledore or in his eventual inability to use a killing curse. To me one of the main ways we are shown this is that until he sees death up close he just doesn’t see letting DE into Hogwarts as it really is. I don’t think the consequences of this action are very real to him. However the next time we see Draco in the first chapter of DH we see a person who does understand what death & murder are, and can’t hide his horror of witnessing someone being murdered. Basically I’m just saying that yes in HBP your right but that changes very quickly :)

I think I really do understand what you are trying to say and I respect it. Where I differ is that I don't really see any real change of attitude in Draco from the beginning of HBP to the end of DH. I really don't. I see him upset at a murder being committed on his dining table, but I don't see pain on behalf of the woman being killed. This is my main problem with understanding Draco. I don't thnk ther is that much to understand. I think Draco is one of the most shallow characters in the books. Everything in Draco's life centres around him and how it affects him. I don't see any empathy for other people or respect for human life. If it's bad for Draco, then it's bad. If it's good for Draco then it's good. I know Narccissa and Lucius actually did love their son, they searched for him through the battle, calling his name. Where was Draco? He isn't shown looking for his parents. That I think is my point, I see Draco as being concerned only with Draco.

...Bellatrix was already helping him. She taught him Occlumency and was pretty much his Death Eating mentor

Don't think Bella had that much effect on him. She was prisoned during his childhood. She only got to stay with him for one year, half of which he was staying at Hogwarts.

In fact I don't think Draco had any DE education. He only acted based on what he saw. It's almost like someone who was thrown into the water without learning to swim.
(I'm not saying that he should've been trained. Just that he didn't have full understanding of what he was committed to).

I see him upset at a murder being committed on his dining table, but I don't see pain on behalf of the woman being killed.

I sincerely doubt he would survive if he had shown pain after Charity's death. She was killed by a bloody murderer who was actually sitting at this dining table. And I bet Draco was too afraid for himself and his family to mourn the woman's death.

I try to understand him, not to justify him.

I honestly think the problem is that the discussion is becoming polarised because people are taking very different attitudes to what character analysis is. Some are simply looking at Draco & trying to understand his character – how things seemed to him, why he acted as he did etc, others see it as a time to judge him. The problem is that the two group’s are speaking at cross purposes and I suspect this is equally as frustrating for both sides of the divide. :)

For myself I am part of that first group; - I want to understand Draco & what he is being used to signify in the series. I don’t condone his actions but I think examining them thoroughly can lead to a better understanding of him & his role in the series. I don’t want to have to say constantly ‘I’m not condoning …’, ‘I’m not saying this is right …’ etc because I’m not saying it & it simply isn’t part of my thinking process in analysis and I suspect others have a similar attitude.

Thank you! :clap::clap::clap:

Draco’s failure to kill Dumbledore is not noble but it is a very hopeful sign and in terms of the book (such as Dumbledore saying killing is not nearly as easy as innocents believe’*) it does show Draco as an innocent in the larger scheme of the plot.

* from memory so I may have the wording slightly off but the sentiment is correct I believe. :)

Exactly. And "hope" is one of the main themes of the HP series.


When Dumbledore said ‘killing is not nearly as easy as innocents believe’ I think that we are being told more than just ‘killing is difficult to do’ I think that the statement is underpinned by the idea that people really don’t understand the reality of killing until it is forced on them (& personally I believe this is true even for people who understand very well that it is a wrong thing to do - jmho). I think this idea is shown to us rather clearly with Draco, not just in his half hearted attempts to kill Dumbledore or in his eventual inability to use a killing curse. To me one of the main ways we are shown this is that until he sees death up close he just doesn’t see letting DE into Hogwarts as it really is. I don’t think the consequences of this action are very real to him. However the next time we see Draco in the first chapter of DH we see a person who does understand what death & murder are, and can’t hide his horror of witnessing someone being murdered. Basically I’m just saying that yes in HBP your right but that changes very quickly :)

I think this emphasizes Draco's nieve attitude when getting involved with the DEs. He did not really know what was going on "inside" the group. Once he did see how insignifigant people, like him, were used, the glamour quickly wore off. Once he saw death face to face, it wasn't glamorous. It was cruel and ugly and not at all what he thought.

Thank you Kitt, for reiterating what this thread is for: character analysis, not character judgement. I, for one, will try to refrain from whether I think Draco was "good" or "evil" and stick more to analyzing what made Draco tick.

The Plan by Dumbledore and Snape was put in place before the Unbreakable Vow. Yes, but I see that as the reason Snape goes into the Unbreakable Vow. He knows he can do it, because Dumbledore is dying already and has asked him to do it. If they hadn't made this plan already it might have taken Snape more to get him to make the Vow.

Dumbledore was already dying and would have died regardless of what anyone did, but I do believe Snape's involvement was to protect Draco. Dumbledore didn't need Snape to do anything. Draco did. Dumbledore knew that. Dumbledore wanted to protect Draco.



Everyone is showing this act of Draco as if it was something noble he did, by not killing Dumbledore. In real life, an attempt on life is also a punishable offense, and the guilty isn't just let go because he/she couldn't kill the person, whatever be the motivation behind it (people are forced to kill for many reasons, including threat to their own family-like in case of Draco). Draco here attempted the same not once but thrice, doesn't that make him guilty on the charge of attempt to life on 3 accounts? :hmm:

I agree. This partly what I was trying to say in my previous post, I just couldn't think of the words at the moment.

Dumbledore was already dying and would have died regardless of what anyone did, but I do believe Snape's involvement was to protect Draco. Dumbledore didn't need Snape to do anything. Draco did. Dumbledore knew that. Dumbledore wanted to protect Draco.

Dumbledore was dying from the curse Voldemort placed on the ring. If he just died from this curse, Voldemort would have become the Master of the Elder Wand as he would have defeated Dumbledore. So, Dumbledore needed Snape to kill him before he died of the curse. Therefore, I don't see that Draco's involvement made any difference in this matter, in fact Dumbledore says it makes things more simple.


(DH, The Prince's Tale)
"You have done very well, Severus. How long do you think I have?"
Dumbledore’s tone was conversational; he might have been asking for a weather forecast. Snape hesitated, and then said, “I cannot tell. Maybe a year. There is no halting such a spell forever. It will spread eventually, it is the sort of curse that strengthens over time.”

Dumbledore smiled. The news that he had less than a year to live seemed a matter of little or no concern to him.

“I am fortunate, extremely fortunate, that I have you, Severus.”

“If you had only summoned me a little earlier, I might have been able to do more, buy you more time!” said Snape furiously. He looked down at the broken ring and the sword. “Did you think that breaking the ring would break the curse?”

“Something like that…I was delirious, no doubt…” said Dumbledore. With an effort he straightened himself in his chair. “Well, really, this makes matters much more straightforward.”
Snape looked utterly perplexed. Dumbledore smiled.

“I refer to the plan Lord Voldemort is revolving around me. His plan to have the poor Malfoy boy murder me.”
(emphasis mine)

Also, if Draco had managed to kill Dumbledore, he would have been Master of the Elder Wand, meaning he would have been easy for Voldemort to kill and take control anyway.

But Draco DID become master of the Wand! Remember? He disarmed Dumbledore by force. It wasnt until Harry dislodged Draco's wand that the Elder Wand changed allegiances. Of course Voldemort didnt know that because of Snape's actions. Also he thought taking the wand from Dumbledore's tomb would suffice.

My mistake. :yuhup: I knew that. :whistle:

Is he upset because he nearly killed two of his classmates or is he upset because after months of trying he still has not killed Dumbledore?
Now that is a very good question. I personally think the he was upset because he had managed to land himself in such a fix. His illusions about what being a DE was, landed him in a situation he would have rather not be. He was scared for his family, and I think he did feel bad about what he was being asked to do. Like Dumbledore had said, Draco is not a killer. :no:

I honestly think the problem is that the discussion is becoming polarised because people are taking very different attitudes to what character analysis is. Some are simply looking at Draco & trying to understand his character – how things seemed to him, why he acted as he did etc, others see it as a time to judge him. The problem is that the two group’s are speaking at cross purposes and I suspect this is equally as frustrating for both sides of the divide.
I have to agree with this. :tu:

Draco’s failure to kill Dumbledore is not noble but it is a very hopeful sign and in terms of the book (such as Dumbledore saying killing is not nearly as easy as innocents believe’*) it does show Draco as an innocent in the larger scheme of the plot.

Like TGW has said earlier Draco wasn't a lost cause and I think we all agree with that.

I think Draco is one of the most shallow characters in the books. Everything in Draco's life centres around him and how it affects him.
There is a reason for that, its not his fault he was brought up that way. His character was molded as such by his parents which only reflects their personal self upon him.

Where was Draco? He isn't shown looking for his parents.
Thats a very interesting point, I never thought of it that way. Maybe he was just cowering somewhere trying to stay away from the action after all that he had seen over the last couple of years.

Don't think Bella had that much effect on him. She was prisoned during his childhood. She only got to stay with him for one year, half of which he was staying at Hogwarts.

But we know that Draco looked up to her at that point of time. He aspired being a DE and she was the best, so i wouldn't be surprised if he was affected by her, seeing that after parents the mentor is the one to have the deepest impact. ;)

I honestly think the problem is that the discussion is becoming polarised because people are taking very different attitudes to what character analysis is. Some are simply looking at Draco & trying to understand his character – how things seemed to him, why he acted as he did etc, others see it as a time to judge him. The problem is that the two group’s are speaking at cross purposes and I suspect this is equally as frustrating for both sides of the divide. :)

Well, pretty much every post contains a judgement on Draco in one form or another, along with character analysis in one form or another. The first probably flows naturally from the evidence of the second. It's really okay if we all have different opinions on Draco and his actions and what it means to his character. :)

For myself I am part of that first group; - I want to understand Draco & what he is being used to signify in the series. I don’t condone his actions but I think examining them thoroughly can lead to a better understanding of him & his role in the series. I don’t want to have to say constantly ‘I’m not condoning …’, ‘I’m not saying this is right …’ etc because I’m not saying it & it simply isn’t part of my thinking process in analysis and I suspect others have a similar attitude.

I think it is about choices, personally. I think Draco is an example of someone in a bad place that he can't seem to get himself out of. Part of the problem I think is that his decision making skills at the onset strike me as very Death Eater-ish (Imperius people to commit murder, sneak Death Eaters into the castle), and I think poor choices lead to a set of more poor choices and so on and so forth. And, as Dumbledore pointed out to Harry, sometimes the only choice is what attitude someone choses to take on when they find themselves in a terrible situation. I think Draco showed a lack of character because of his inability to change. Even at the end of DH, Draco was trying to capture Harry so he could bring him to Voldemort. I don't think Draco wanted to directly kill anyone, but he was still willing to participate in murder indirectly if it would help him.

I think that once the influence of Voldemort was removed, Draco probably was not as big of a threat as his parents or other surviving Death Eaters. I think Draco found his situation stressful and horrible and never enjoyed it-- unlike the others, who experienced the bad side of it too just like Draco, but also experienced years of using Death Eater tactics to successfully get them what they wanted.

I think this emphasizes Draco's nieve attitude when getting involved with the DEs. He did not really know what was going on "inside" the group. Once he did see how insignifigant people, like him, were used, the glamour quickly wore off. Once he saw death face to face, it wasn't glamorous. It was cruel and ugly and not at all what he thought.

Thank you Kitt, for reiterating what this thread is for: character analysis, not character judgement. I, for one, will try to refrain from whether I think Draco was "good" or "evil" and stick more to analyzing what made Draco tick.

Wasn't Draco present at the Quidditch World Cup when the Death Eaters were attacking the Muggleborn?

I don't think we should say that Draco was 'good' or 'evil' either. I hope that I have always made clear that I post about Draco's actions, but I do not cast him as evil. I don't think he is a particularly deep person, and I think he was criminally careless regarding other peoples lives. These are not character traits that are particularly pleasant, but they are not inheritantly evil either. It is what Draco did that I don't like. I wish that the text had made clear that he did change for the better, but unfortunately I can find nothing in the text that would really support that theory. He did not kill Dumbledore when he was facing him. I do not see this as being proof of a good character. He loved his parents, most children do. He held onto Goyle in the fire, Goyle was his friend for years, I should hope so. None of these actions really speak in Draco's favour. What do they really say, he was not as bad as Bellatrix? Again this is not really saying very much about Draco's character.

There is no criminal act without a motivation, but not all motivations lead to criminal acts.
Draco was strongly motivated to kill Dumbledore. From his point of view it was Dumbledore's life or his parents'. Naturally, he chosed his parent's lives. But, putting aside for a moment the innocent victims he almost killed, his atteptings in killing Dumbledore were really weak, and showed no real intention on killing Dumbledore. He felt trapt, and tried to get away. So it came something like- he tried but didn't try to kill Dumbledore.
I'm not justyfing, I'm trying to analyse his acts.



Also, about whether motivation for an evil act matters. Yes, it makes no difference to the victims, but if you think motivation makes no difference, how do you approach Harry's use of Unforgivables? Is Harry's Crucio just as wrong as when a Death Eater uses it?


I belive motivation does not make any difference. A person can be highly motivated to do something, but to chose not. As when we are angry, when someone let us down, and even when someone had a really traumatic experience. If we acted only by our motivations, we all could become murderers. What difference us from animals, is that between the motivation and the act we can think and analyse what are we going to do.
Draco had the motivation to kill Dumbledore, but he wasn't a murderer, that's why he didn't tried his best to kill Dumbledore. He had the motivation (and, IMO, it was pretty strong), but he didn't try his best to accomplish it. And that makes all the difference between motive and act.

Also, I do belive that Harry's crucio is just as wrong as when a DE uses it. If it is unforgivable, it unforgivable. It is not OK for Harrt because he's Harry, and it's wrong for the DE because they are Death Eaters. It is unforgivable, because that's the way they are. No excuses.

addie_ep;5547822]There is no criminal act without a motivation, but not all motivations lead to criminal acts.
Draco was strongly motivated to kill Dumbledore. From his point of view it was Dumbledore's life or his parents'. Naturally, he chosed his parent's lives. But, putting aside for a moment the innocent victims he almost killed, his atteptings in killing Dumbledore were really weak, and showed no real intention on killing Dumbledore. He felt trapt, and tried to get away. So it came something like- he tried but didn't try to kill Dumbledore.
I'm not justyfing, I'm trying to analyse his acts.

I understand what you are saying. What I am trying to say is that his half-hearted attempts to kill Dumbledore were still quite serious. They were serious enough to do real damage and IMO, it did not matter to Draco that they were.

I belive motivation does not make any difference. A person can be highly motivated to do something, but to chose not. As when we are angry, when someone let us down, and even when someone had a really traumatic experience. If we acted only by our motivations, we all could become murderers. What difference us from animals, is that between the motivation and the act we can think and analyse what are we going to do.
Draco had the motivation to kill Dumbledore, but he wasn't a murderer, that's why he didn't tried his best to kill Dumbledore. He had the motivation (and, IMO, it was pretty strong), but he didn't try his best to accomplish it. And that makes all the difference between motive and act.

I suppose that I feel that Draco's motives, whatever they were, had very little to do with the outcome of his actions. I am not so hard-hearted that I cannot feel sympathy for Draco, but that sympathy is small compared to the compassion I feel for his victims. Voldemort could have been holding his mother and father over a volcano and I would still say that Draco was very wrong to do what he did. There is an old saying, two wrongs do not make one right. It's not enough to say that other people might have done the same thing as Draco in that situation, that doesn't make Draco's actions correct, nor does it unmake his crimes.

Also, I do belive that Harry's crucio is just as wrong as when a DE uses it. If it is unforgivable, it unforgivable. It is not OK for Harrt because he's Harry, and it's wrong for the DE because they are Death Eaters. It is unforgivable, because that's the way they are. No excuses.[/QUOTE]

This I whole-heartedly agree with. Again two wrongs do not equal one right. Because someone else does wrong does not give anyone the right to do another wrong.

But, once again, I ask: If any of us was faced with the same situation -- having our family held hostage and having no place else to turn for help; being told you either kill a particular person, or you and our family will be killed, how many of us would be able to be anymoe noble or courageous than Draco. How many of us would be able to do any differently than he did.


I think this is absolutely the question that we need to ask ourselves when we judge Draco. :tu: My answer would be no, I don't think I could do differently. The choice he faced wasn't really whether or not to kill. It was either to kill Dumbledore or to indirectly kill his own mother and father if he failed to do so. It was only Dumbledore and Snape's kindness that gave him a third option.

I think Draco's reaction to that situation is quite realistic IMO. The choice is such a horrible one to make that ultimately he cannot make it: he buys time with poor, indirect attempts, and ultimately, standing on the Astronomy Tower, talks and talks because he can't bring himself to do it. When Dumbledore offers to protect him, we see him begin to lower his wand. Eventually Snape comes and takes the problem away from him.

I really can't feel anything but pity for Draco during HBP. It doesn't make his actions the moral ideal, no, but in this case the moral ideal (refusing to kill Dumbledore and so causing the death of yourself and your family) is something that I would venture to suggest most people wouldn't be able to do. I don't think I could do it.

I think Draco is a much less likeable character in earlier books, in fact. This may have something to do with the way Harry sees him, but certainly the clear enjoyment he gets out of making hurtful comments, getting Buckbeak executed etc. is much worse in many ways than his forced attempts to murder Dumbledore. Of course, behaviour like Draco's is seen in many children and it doesn't necessarily make them evil, or even bad adults. I think going through what he went through in HBP and DH gave Draco a sense of what it was like to be bullied and how much it hurt, probably making him into a kinder adult (although we don't see enough of him post-DH to judge).

I think this is absolutely the question that we need to ask ourselves when we judge Draco. :tu: My answer would be no, I don't think I could do differently. The choice he faced wasn't really whether or not to kill. It was either to kill Dumbledore or to indirectly kill his own mother and father if he failed to do so. It was only Dumbledore and Snape's kindness that gave him a third option.

I think Draco's reaction to that situation is quite realistic IMO. The choice is such a horrible one to make that ultimately he cannot make it: he buys time with poor, indirect attempts, and ultimately, standing on the Astronomy Tower, talks and talks because he can't bring himself to do it. When Dumbledore offers to protect him, we see him begin to lower his wand. Eventually Snape comes and takes the problem away from him.

I really can't feel anything but pity for Draco during HBP. It doesn't make his actions the moral ideal, no, but in this case the moral ideal (refusing to kill Dumbledore and so causing the death of yourself and your family) is something that I would venture to suggest most people wouldn't be able to do. I don't think I could do it.

I think Draco is a much less likeable character in earlier books, in fact. This may have something to do with the way Harry sees him, but certainly the clear enjoyment he gets out of making hurtful comments, getting Buckbeak executed etc. is much worse in many ways than his forced attempts to murder Dumbledore. Of course, behaviour like Draco's is seen in many children and it doesn't necessarily make them evil, or even bad adults. I think going through what he went through in HBP and DH gave Draco a sense of what it was like to be bullied and how much it hurt, probably making him into a kinder adult (although we don't see enough of him post-DH to judge).

Totally agree. :tu::tu: I would certainly never want to find myself in the situation that Draco was in, no matter how he got there.

Dumbledore was dying from the curse Voldemort placed on the ring. If he just died from this curse, Voldemort would have become the Master of the Elder Wand as he would have defeated Dumbledore. So, Dumbledore needed Snape to kill him before he died of the curse. Therefore, I don't see that Draco's involvement made any difference in this matter, in fact Dumbledore says it makes things more simple. I do not think the wand works that way. If Dumbledore dies Voldemort can't just waltz in and become the owner of the wand, can he? He can do what he did, steal the wand from Dumbledore's tomb, but he can't be the real owner of the wand, I don't think.

I do not think the wand works that way. If Dumbledore dies Voldemort can't just waltz in and become the owner of the wand, can he?

I think what Treacle means, is if Dumbledore had died from the curse Voldemort placed on the ring, the Elder Wand may have seen it as a defeat, in this case death (not by natural causes). The Elder wand might have recognized its previous owner had suffered a defeat by a stronger opponent, and sensed who created/placed the curse, ie Voldemort. It might have been a risk Dumbldore was unwilling to take. Remember, the Elder Wand doesn't need to be directly picked up/duelled for in order for ownership to swap, because Draco didn't retrieve it after disarming Dumbledore, yet he became the next master. Also, Harry became its new master, when Harry wrestled Draco's wand out of his hands at Malfoy Manor; the Elder Wand was not directly present at the time of the scuffle there. This is how I understand it to work. Draco's involvement/siuation strengthened Dumbledore's reslove to help further. Imo.

Well, this is going off-topic, but I have to say I strongly disagree with that theory.

Anyway, back to Draco Malfoy.

Totally agree. :tu::tu: I would certainly never want to find myself in the situation that Draco was in, no matter how he got there.

If, God forbid you were ever in a situation comprable to Draco's and you acted like he did, then you would be arrested. The law cannot be ignored because you are being blackmailed. Draco was in a tough spot, no doubt. But he was in that tough spot because to begin with he wanted to be. This cannot be ignored either. Draco wanted to be a Death Eater, just like his father, Now it's true he was young. In that siruation it was up to his parents to say no, don't do it. You are too young and we will have to take our chances. They didn't do it, and Draco stepped up. Was this admirabled of him? Was it really admirable to join a group of career criminals led by a phsycopath? The thing is, Draco believed with all his heart in what the phsycopath was espousing. We could say that it was only what he had heard from his parents all his life. Does that excuse Draco from buying into it? I don't thnk so, like I said in one of my earlier posts, I didn't have to be taught that it was wrong to torture and kill, I kind of picked up on that fact because, well there are laws against it. Draco knew the laws of his society and he broke them. When he broke them he caused serious harm to come to others. That is what he should have faced in a court of law, that is what he escaped through Harry's compassion and gratitude to Draco's mother. I don't feel the same compassion for Draco, I feel it for his victims. Katie hanging in mid air, silently screaming in agony. Ron going into convulsions from the poison, and Bill spending a lifetime with his face scarred and the possibility of becoming a werewolf. I'm not judging Draco but I certainly think he should have been judged.

I think what Treacle means, is if Dumbledore had died from the curse Voldemort placed on the ring, the Elder Wand may have been seen it as a defeat, in this case death (not by natural causes). The Elder wand might have recognized its previous owner had suffered a defeat by a stronger opponent, and sensed who created/placed the curse, ie Voldemort. It might have been risk Dumbldore was unwilling to take. Remember, the Elder Wand doesn't need to be directly picked up/duelled for in order for ownership to swap, because Draco didn't retrieve it after disarming Dumbledore, yet he became the next master. Also, Harry became its new master, when Harry wrestled Draco's wand out of his hands at Malfoy Manor; the Elder Wand was not directly present at the time of the scuffle there. This is how I understand it to work. Draco's involvement/siuation strengthened Dumbledore's reslove to help further. Imo.

Well, this is going off-topic, but I have to say I strongly disagree with that theory.


I have answered this in the Elder Wand thread.

Draco wanted to be a Death Eater, just like his father,

I think the fact that he wanted that but as soon a he began to realise what it really meant he changed his mind is the point.

Until then we had heard about people who wanted to be DE but changed their mind but it was both told as history/background & done so in what I think was a very distanced way.

Draco's experience was JKR giving readers an insight into how the 'dream' can turn sour very quickly. Sadly because of the Harry PoV that dominates the telling of the story it has to be done in a slightly distanced way but she used a few tricks and more than one break from the Harry PoV to show readers what Draco's situation was & how it changed. She used his character to illustrate what other characters had been through in the past. This is why I think she intended for readers to feel for him because we had to understand why people like Regulus & Severus changed. It was always because someone they loved was threatened and I think that is why we get to she Draco’s first very human moment as Harry overhearing Myrtle talking to someone hurt & desperate. We might already know its Draco but we also know how Myrtle is not overly prone to be sympathetic – yet the first thing we hear is her being very sympathetic. To me this seems to invite the reader that he has earned it some how and that perhaps we should consider extending some sympathy or at least patience to him.

To me it’s like seeing the story from the outside & then finally being given a few glimpses of the inside – she’s preparing us for what’s to come and helping us understand how trapped people do feel once they join the DE.

I think the fact that he wanted that but as soon a he began to realise what it really meant he changed his mind is the point.

Until then we had heard about people who wanted to be DE but changed their mind but it was both told as history/background & done so in what I think was a very distanced way.

Draco's experience was JKR giving readers an insight into how the 'dream' can turn sour very quickly. Sadly because of the Harry PoV that dominates the telling of the story it has to be done in a slightly distanced way but she used a few tricks and more than one break from the Harry PoV to show readers what Draco's situation was & how it changed. She used his character to illustrate what other characters had been through in the past. This is why I think she intended for readers to feel for him because we had to understand why people like Regulus & Severus changed. It was always because someone they loved was threatened and I think that is why we get to she Draco’s first very human moment as Harry overhearing Myrtle talking to someone hurt & desperate. We might already know its Draco but we also know how Myrtle is not overly prone to be sympathetic – yet the first thing we hear is her being very sympathetic. To me this seems to invite the reader that he has earned it some how and that perhaps we should consider extending some sympathy or at least patience to him.

To me it’s like seeing the story from the outside & then finally being given a few glimpses of the inside – she’s preparing us for what’s to come and helping us understand how trapped people do feel once they join the DE.

Yes, I totally agree. That's the point. Without his having been "lost," what good would it be for Draco to have shown even the slightest improvement in his character?

I also like the way you analyze the scene in the bathroom. Myrtle's attitude toward Draco is very different than her usual hystrionics. And, the difference in Draco as we see him there from the arrogant little brat in the robe shop is so dramatic. I felt so sorry for him at that moment.

Draco wanted to be a Death Eater, just like his father,
I don't see what's wrong with that. Didn't Harry want to fight with the Order just like James did? Every child looks up to his father/mother as the best person in the world and would like to follow their steps. Which actually makes Draco a better person than Lucius, here. When he realised what being a DE meant he back tracked at once (at least emotionally), unlike Lucius who was DE for years and never thought of the well fare of his family, what this might one day cost them.
I don't think being better than Lucius, makes Draco a great person. But it makes him somewhat good IMHO, because he didn't shut his eyes when he saw the truth about and the cruelty of Voldemort. Something that makes Draco often associated with Regulus. ;)

If, God forbid you were ever in a situation comprable to Draco's and you acted like he did, then you would be arrested. The law cannot be ignored because you are being blackmailed.

No - but that would definitely count as mitigating circumstance - at least in my country. Which also says something about the impossibility of the situation, because even the law makes a sort of an exception if you're pressed against the wall in such a way.

I think the fact that he wanted that but as soon a he began to realise what it really meant he changed his mind is the point.

I agree! :agree: He learned the hard way what being a DE really meant.

This is why I think she intended for readers to feel for him because we had to understand why people like Regulus & Severus changed. It was always because someone they loved was threatened and I think that is why we get to she Draco’s first very human moment as Harry overhearing Myrtle talking to someone hurt & desperate. We might already know its Draco but we also know how Myrtle is not overly prone to be sympathetic – yet the first thing we hear is her being very sympathetic. To me this seems to invite the reader that he has earned it some how and that perhaps we should consider extending some sympathy or at least patience to him.

Indeed, and the bathroom scene of Draco crying isn't the first time we hear Myrtle being sympathetic to Draco.

She tells Harry and Ron:

"No, I mean he is sensitive, people bully him, too, and he feels lonely and hasn't got anyone to talk to, and he's not afraid to show his feelings and cry!"(HBP,The Unknowable Room)

No - but that would definitely count as mitigating circumstance - at least in my country. Which also says something about the impossibility of the situation, because even the law makes a sort of an exception if you're pressed against the wall in such a way.

You are very correct. It would be up to a court of law to decide. They would weigh the evidence, Draco's situation and the damage that he did. I would hope that everything would be looked at and Draco would have a fair and just decision made about his culpability. In the books Draco never faces up to what he did. He never apologizes and in the last scene he is really in, (I don't really count the epilogue) he is still trying to convince a Death Eater that he Draco, is on the Death Eaters side. Before that he was trying to capture Harry to take him to Voldemort. Suffice it to say that I am unconvinced that Draco has had a change of heart. I think Draco did what would benefit Draco at all times and that was his main concern. He IMO, was not concerned if his half-hearted attempts to kill Dumbledore injured other people. The implements he used were themselves lethal, it was his methods to get them to his target that was less than reliable. Those methods were dangerous to any number of outside parties and the fact that both attempts did serious harm shows this. I think that Draco never faced up to his more than criminal negligence in this matter, he never thought about the harm done when he let the Death Eaters into Hogwarts. Yes he was in a difficult position, but we never see him stop once and judge himself. Did he really have no other choice than to expose so many innocent children to the very real danger of Fenrir Greyback? Yes, Draco should have his situation taken into account, he should also have his actions taken into account. And the results of these actions. There is not one occasion when Draco acts in HBP that an innocent person is not severely injured. I cannot ignore that because Draco might have worried about his parents or he might have been worried that he did not carry out Voldemort's orders quickly enough.

I think this is absolutely the question that we need to ask ourselves when we judge Draco. My answer would be no, I don't think I could do differently. The choice he faced wasn't really whether or not to kill. It was either to kill Dumbledore or to indirectly kill his own mother and father if he failed to do so. It was only Dumbledore and Snape's kindness that gave him a third option.


If I was in Draco's place, I think I would do the same thing he did. But, you can never know until you really are in that place.
I would also say that I disagree that we judge Draco. Well, I, in my case, do not judge Draco. We don't have the right to judge him. Instead, I prefer to use the term "analyze" or "understand his acts". I'm sorry, I know it is not that important, but it really bothers me to say that I judge someone.

I really can't feel anything but pity for Draco during HBP. It doesn't make his actions the moral ideal, no, but in this case the moral ideal (refusing to kill Dumbledore and so causing the death of yourself and your family) is something that I would venture to suggest most people wouldn't be able to do. I don't think I could do it.

I understand your point, but I don't believe it is pity, but empathy. You (as I do) can empathize with him, because you are able to put yourself in his place and feel what he probably felt. That's not pity.


About the Elder Wand theory, it is not related to Draco…


If, God forbid you were ever in a situation comprable to Draco's and you acted like he did, then you would be arrested. The law cannot be ignored because you are being blackmailed. Draco was in a tough spot, no doubt. But he was in that tough spot because to begin with he wanted to be. This cannot be ignored either. Draco wanted to be a Death Eater, just like his father, Now it's true he was young. In that siruation it was up to his parents to say no, don't do it. You are too young and we will have to take our chances. They didn't do it, and Draco stepped up. Was this admirabled of him? Was it really admirable to join a group of career criminals led by a phsycopath? The thing is, Draco believed with all his heart in what the phsycopath was espousing. We could say that it was only what he had heard from his parents all his life. Does that excuse Draco from buying into it? I don't thnk so, like I said in one of my earlier posts, I didn't have to be taught that it was wrong to torture and kill, I kind of picked up on that fact because, well there are laws against it. Draco knew the laws of his society and he broke them. When he broke them he caused serious harm to come to others. That is what he should have faced in a court of law, that is what he escaped through Harry's compassion and gratitude to Draco's mother. I don't feel the same compassion for Draco, I feel it for his victims. Katie hanging in mid air, silently screaming in agony. Ron going into convulsions from the poison, and Bill spending a lifetime with his face scarred and the possibility of becoming a werewolf.

I believe, as you do, that wanting a criminal life, as being a DE, it is not admirable at all. But I also believe that it wasn't just his choice. Draco was driven to that choice because of his father. I don't excuse him for believing in all that he truly believed, but I believe he is not the only one with guilt, but also his father, for teaching him all that.
Nobody directly taught me that killing and torturing it is wrong, I caught it by myself. But instead of most of us, Draco was taught that killing and torturing, it was not only ok, but it is also something that should be included in an everyday's life. He was taught it is an acceptable thing. He always knew his father did it, and Draco really looked up for his father, like he was a truly hero.
I do feel compassion for Draco, but I do not, in any way, justify his acts. As well, I believed he should be judged for his attempts of murder, not by me, but by the court of law. And he deserves the punishment they would give him. I was disappointed he got away with that.
I felt for his victims, as I felt for Draco too.

I think the fact that he wanted that but as soon a he began to realise what it really meant he changed his mind is the point.

Until then we had heard about people who wanted to be DE but changed their mind but it was both told as history/background & done so in what I think was a very distanced way.


I agree. Draco did want to become a DE, until he discovered what it was all about. But I guess by the point he understood what is like to really be a DE, he couldn't turn back and say it wasn't what he expected (we're talking about saying no to Voldemort….)

I don't see what's wrong with that. Didn't Harry want to fight with the Order just like James did? Every child looks up to his father/mother as the best person in the world and would like to follow their steps. Which actually makes Draco a better person than Lucius, here. When he realised what being a DE meant he back tracked at once (at least emotionally), unlike Lucius who was DE for years and never thought of the well fare of his family, what this might one day cost them.

Every kid looks up to his parents, no matter who they are, or how horrible they are. It is just the way of humanity.

I think this is absolutely the question that we need to ask ourselves when we judge Draco. My answer would be no, I don't think I could do differently. The choice he faced wasn't really whether or not to kill. It was either to kill Dumbledore or to indirectly kill his own mother and father if he failed to do so. It was only Dumbledore and Snape's kindness that gave him a third option
If I was in Draco's place, I think I would do the same thing he did. But, you can never know until you really are in that place.
I would also say that I disagree that we judge Draco. Well, I, in my case, do not judge Draco. We don't have the right to judge him. Instead, I prefer to use the term "analyze" or "understand his acts". I'm sorry, I know it is not that important, but it really bothers me to say that I judge someone.

I think we all judge when we start to analyse a character. Part of the job of analysing is deciding whether you think someone is admirable or not. Or whether you would act differently than they did in the same situation. This does not mean condemnation. I will judge whether I think Draco's actions were understandable or not, but I will not condemn him. There is a difference. I make no bones about saying I think Draco was a nasty specimen, that he was shallow and selfish and that he was criminally careless with the lives of others. I think someone like that should have stood trial for his crimes. This is not condemnation, but ensuring justice for his victims. They also had a life and parents, they also had a right to live their lives without serious injury being inflicted on them by Draco. Whether of not any of us would do the same thing in Draco's place is immaterial. He did the actions, he is the one who should answer for them. It is never easy to pass judgement and it shouldn't be. Weighing someone in the balance is putting your life on the scales as well, but sometimes it has to be done. Justice is not just for the accused, it is also for the victims.


I understand your point, but I don't believe it is pity, but empathy. You (as I do) can empathize with him, because you are able to put yourself in his place and feel what he probably felt. That's not pity.

I can understand that you feel empathy for Draco. That's fine. I feel empathy with his victims. I also feel that they did not get justice. Draco get a 'Get Out of Jail Free' card from Harry. Katie Bell got a 6 month stay in St Mungo's.

I believe, as you do, that wanting a criminal life, as being a DE, it is not admirable at all. But I also believe that it wasn't just his choice. Draco was driven to that choice because of his father. I don't excuse him for believing in all that he truly believed, but I believe he is not the only one with guilt, but also his father, for teaching him all that.
Nobody directly taught me that killing and torturing it is wrong, I caught it by myself. But instead of most of us, Draco was taught that killing and torturing, it was not only ok, but it is also something that should be included in an everyday's life. He was taught it is an acceptable thing. He always knew his father did it, and Draco really looked up for his father, like he was a truly hero.
I do feel compassion for Draco, but I do not, in any way, justify his acts. As well, I believed he should be judged for his attempts of murder, not by me, but by the court of law. And he deserves the punishment they would give him. I was disappointed he got away with that.
I felt for his victims, as I felt for Draco too.

I think what you feel is admirable, I just cannot work up that much sympathy for a racist. Yes, Draco followed behind his father, who followed his, etc. etc. Where does the responsibility stop? Draco was not a small child. He was an adolescant young man. He had a brain and he knew how to use it. There were other influences in the Wizarding World and he was exposed to all of them. He chose what to believe, and he chose the path that his father was on. I wish that I could believe that Lucius did have so much influence on his son, but there is not much evidence to go on. We see one short scene at the beginning of Chamber of Secrets, and that pretty much is it as far as Draco and Daddy together.
I agree. Draco did want to become a DE, until he discovered what it was all about. But I guess by the point he understood what is like to really be a DE, he couldn't turn back and say it wasn't what he expected (we're talking about saying no to Voldemort….)

Every kid looks up to his parents, no matter who they are, or how horrible they are. It is just the way of humanity.

Well before Draco became a Death Eater he was at the Quidditch World Cup and the Death Eaters paid a visit, beating Muggleborns and burning. He was there, he saw what they were doing, he heard what they were saying. He knew what they did and what they did during the First War. Draco did not spend his life hermetically sealed away from the realities of what Death Eaters practised. He grew up knowing what they did, what he found hard to swallow was the reality of him doing the same things. IMO, Draco did not like getting his hands dirty, he had no problem with other people doing his dirty work.

I think what you feel is admirable, I just cannot work up that much sympathy for a racist. Yes, Draco followed behind his father, who followed his, etc. etc. Where does the responsibility stop? Draco was not a small child. He was an adolescant young man. He had a brain and he knew how to use it. There were other influences in the Wizarding World and he was exposed to all of them. He chose what to believe, and he chose the path that his father was on. I wish that I could believe that Lucius did have so much influence on his son, but there is not much evidence to go on. We see one short scene at the beginning of Chamber of Secrets, and that pretty much is it as far as Draco and Daddy together.

I think we should keep in mind that Draco is living in a society where being a Death Eater is absolutely frowned upon. People may have varying views about Muggles and Muggle-borns, but hatred of Death Eaters is almost universal. On the other hand, he's living in a Death Eater household, where Voldemort's ideals are upheld and practiced. If he comes out of this situation as a Death Eater -- or rather as an excited sixteen-year-old who sees being a Death Eater as a sort of grown-up adventure, as I think the case is -- I think this suggests that the Death Eater part of his world had more of an effect on him.

Also, consider the way each of those two "worlds" (the WW and the DE world) would have treated him as a child. To most wizards, he would have been a snobby Malfoy whose parents were DE -- and as a result, I imagine he got a lot of rudeness and unpleasant treatment when he was a kid from non-Death Eaters. In the "Death Eater world," however, he has two loving parents who spoil him and obviously treat him as something very special -- I think this is fairly strongly indicated throughout the books. People are inclined to trust those they love, and this, I think, largely accounts for Draco's eagerness to become a Death Eater.

Another thought -- I really, really doubt that Lucius and Narcissa would have talked much about killing and torture at the family dinner table. Lucius, to me, seems like the kind to use a lot of euphemisms and gloss over the criminal part of the whole Death Eater thing. Also I don't know how much the books say about his actual involvement in that sort of thing. I'd imagine he'd also be the type to avoid getting his hands dirty. And Narcissa seems too motherly to talk about killing in front of her little boy. So it doesn't seem unreasonable to assume that, when he signed up, Draco had little or no idea of the violence being a Death Eater would involve. This seems supported by his strong reaction to the reality of DE-ing in HBP.

I'm rambling far too long, but I want to mention one more thing that I haven't seen talked about much: Draco has grown up in a world were injury and death are practically nonexistent. Broken bones are fixed by a single spell (except when Lockhart intervenes), broken noses can be repaired almost before they hurt, there are potions and incantations for everything. Considering the shock it is to most of us when we encounter death, close-up, for the first time -- in a world where people die far more easily than in Draco's -- it's not hard for me to imagine that he might have a very vague and unrealistic view of death even at the age of 16.

I think we should keep in mind that Draco is living in a society where being a Death Eater is absolutely frowned upon. People may have varying views about Muggles and Muggle-borns, but hatred of Death Eaters is almost universal. On the other hand, he's living in a Death Eater household, where Voldemort's ideals are upheld and practiced. If he comes out of this situation as a Death Eater -- or rather as an excited sixteen-year-old who sees being a Death Eater as a sort of grown-up adventure, as I think the case is -- I think this suggests that the Death Eater part of his world had more of an effect on him.

Also, consider the way each of those two "worlds" (the WW and the DE world) would have treated him as a child. To most wizards, he would have been a snobby Malfoy whose parents were DE -- and as a result, I imagine he got a lot of rudeness and unpleasant treatment when he was a kid from non-Death Eaters. In the "Death Eater world," however, he has two loving parents who spoil him and obviously treat him as something very special -- I think this is fairly strongly indicated throughout the books. People are inclined to trust those they love, and this, I think, largely accounts for Draco's eagerness to become a Death Eater.

Another thought -- I really, really doubt that Lucius and Narcissa would have talked much about killing and torture at the family dinner table. Lucius, to me, seems like the kind to use a lot of euphemisms and gloss over the criminal part of the whole Death Eater thing. Also I don't know how much the books say about his actual involvement in that sort of thing. I'd imagine he'd also be the type to avoid getting his hands dirty. And Narcissa seems too motherly to talk about killing in front of her little boy. So it doesn't seem unreasonable to assume that, when he signed up, Draco had little or no idea of the violence being a Death Eater would involve. This seems supported by his strong reaction to the reality of DE-ing in HBP.


First of all, about judging, I disagree completely. We, as equal human beings, have no right to judge other people.
Doing an analysis is not the same as judging.
I'm sorry, but I can stand the use of that word.


Back to Draco... I guess most of the people do not understand how hard is the connection between a child and his parents. It is so strong that it goes behind the reasonable. For me, it was obvious the way Draco acted. All the things he believed in are understandable, because it was what his father taught him. He wanted to be a DE because he wanted to please his father. I also guess that his way of acting evoluted from copying his father, and later he just embraced it. Wether he liked to be that selfish and "bad", it just became a part of him. We all are too much alike our parents, wether if we like it or not (even more than we ever imagined).
He was not a good person with a big heart. He liked the position when all the people do the dirty work for him. Most of the people like having someone else to do the dirty work for them. And it doesn't have to be killing and torturing, it can be also sending someone to tell something we are embaraced or afraid to say. It doesn't matter what. So in that case, he's not that different from most of us.

Judging Draco for being selfish and bad and whatever is too easy. And in no way I'm not saying he wasn't. But everything has a reason, and I'm just trying to understand why was he that way and why he did act that way. I'm not saying all what he did it was right.

First of all, about judging, I disagree completely. We, as equal human beings, have no right to judge other people.
Doing an analysis is not the same as judging.
I'm sorry, but I can stand the use of that word.

Huh? I think I'm missing something, here. I'm not sure who brought up judging in the first place (I think it was you or kittling, can't remember), but now I'm really lost as to what you are talking about. Could you explain?

First of all, about judging, I disagree completely. We, as equal human beings, have no right to judge other people.
Doing an analysis is not the same as judging.
I'm sorry, but I can stand the use of that word.


Back to Draco... I guess most of the people do not understand how hard is the connection between a child and his parents. It is so strong that it goes behind the reasonable. For me, it was obvious the way Draco acted. All the things he believed in are understandable, because it was what his father taught him. He wanted to be a DE because he wanted to please his father. I also guess that his way of acting evoluted from copying his father, and later he just embraced it. Wether he liked to be that selfish and "bad", it just became a part of him. We all are too much alike our parents, wether if we like it or not (even more than we ever imagined).
He was not a good person with a big heart. He liked the position when all the people do the dirty work for him. Most of the people like having someone else to do the dirty work for them. And it doesn't have to be killing and torturing, it can be also sending someone to tell something we are embaraced or afraid to say. It doesn't matter what. So in that case, he's not that different from most of us.

Judging Draco for being selfish and bad and whatever is too easy. And in no way I'm not saying he wasn't. But everything has a reason, and I'm just trying to understand why was he that way and why he did act that way. I'm not saying all what he did it was right.

Well I had parents that I loved and repected very much and I remember having lots of arguements with them about the issues that affected the world we lived in, especially when I was in my teens. You had to live through the 60's to know what I meant. My father didn't speak to me for a couple of weeks once over the war in Vietnam. That was when I was 17, when I was 16 my mother put her foot down about me going to a rally in Washington DC.
I was more forgiving when I was younger and I was idealistic in the way teenagers were. Is that why I hold a hard line with Draco? Perhaps, I only know what he did appalls me at the most basic level, and yes sometimes judgements have to be made.

Draco followed the family line. He didn't question it. He let his parents' beliefs become his. This does put blame Draco. He can change. Just because his parents believe doesn't mean he has to. Look at eliza's example. Look at Sirius in the story. Look at Seamus. At first he believed his mom in OOTP but in the middle of the year he changes his tune. He thinks for himself.

I think we should keep in mind that Draco is living in a society where being a Death Eater is absolutely frowned upon. People may have varying views about Muggles and Muggle-borns, but hatred of Death Eaters is almost universal. On the other hand, he's living in a Death Eater household, where Voldemort's ideals are upheld and practiced. If he comes out of this situation as a Death Eater -- or rather as an excited sixteen-year-old who sees being a Death Eater as a sort of grown-up adventure, as I think the case is -- I think this suggests that the Death Eater part of his world had more of an effect on him.

And while being a DE is "frowned upon", being a pureblood racist isn't. Many of the "good" families are racist. And there is a thin line between what is accepted and what is not. Lucius Malfoy was a DE, but when we see him first, he's rich, important, and in good terms with the Ministry. The Blacks were proud of Regulus until they understood what the DEs did. I mean, Draco lives in a world where many of his family beliefs are accepted. Being a DE can seem as an exception, a secret only for the chosen. When Draco understands what they really are, it's too late. So he does eveything to just fit in.

And while being a DE is "frowned upon", being a pureblood racist isn't. Many of the "good" families are racist. And there is a thin line between what is accepted and what is not. Lucius Malfoy was a DE, but when we see him first, he's rich, important, and in good terms with the Ministry. The Blacks were proud of Regulus until they understood what the DEs did. I mean, Draco lives in a world where many of his family beliefs are accepted. Being a DE can seem as an exception, a secret only for the chosen. When Draco understands what they really are, it's too late. So he does eveything to just fit in.

If that were true, and I am not saying it is, because I don't believe it, all it would mean is that Draco is incapable of thinking for himself. This does not bode well for someone who is at school for 9 months of the year. But we see throughout the series Draco can and does think for himself. No one told him to send the necklace, no one told him to poison the wine. No one helped hm repair the cabinet except Crabbe and Goyle who stood lookout. Draco is responsible for his beliefs. He saw those beliefs enforced first hand at the Quiddich World Cup. That was a full two years before HBP. He went to Diagon Alley and he saw what was happening with the businesses there as a direct result of Death Eater activity. Draco did not walk around with blinders on nor were his ears stopped up. IMO, Draco knew full well what being a Death Eater entailed. He didn't like it when he was the one being called on to deliver the dead body of Dumbledore, that didn't stop him from trying to deliver it. When did he have his change of heart? When Dumbledore was looking at him with pity and he couldn't do the deed, so Snape did it for him. He didn't cry 'don't'.

This does put blame Draco. He can change. Just because his parents believe doesn't mean he has to.
But he did change after all. Agreed he couldn't turn as easily and quickly as Seamus, but then Seamus hadn't gotten as deep in as Draco had. Seasmus's actions didn't directly impact the well being of his family, Draco's did. If he failed his family died. The equation was simple, for someone like Draco, for whom things had always been easy, to expect him to man up as quickly and set an example by defying Voldemort, I don't see that happening.

Moreover it wouldn't have been good for the story you know, that would make him another one of the martyr who gave up his family for the greater good, we already have a lot of those...(Harry, Neville)..;)

Draco is responsible for his beliefs. He saw those beliefs enforced first hand at the Quiddich World Cup. That was a full two years before HBP.

You know why he has those believes? Because he grew up with it. He had never thought that his parents were wrong, no child wants to believe that and neither do the parents want them to. So he believed what the Death Eaters did was right. He believed that the Muggles were worthless play things and that the muggleborns were just mudbloods corrupting their pure society. So he wasn't against the torturing of the muggles at the Quidditch world cup, so he simply condoned it. Things like these didn't happen often in front of him to realize. He was just too full of himself at the time to think about it. But when he got into the thick of things, when he actually saw what its like to be a Death Eater, he tried to double back, but too late, he was too deep for well, second thoughts.

Draco followed the family line. He didn't question it. He let his parents' beliefs become his. This does put blame Draco. He can change. Just because his parents believe doesn't mean he has to. Look at eliza's example. Look at Sirius in the story. Look at Seamus. At first he believed his mom in OOTP but in the middle of the year he changes his tune. He thinks for himself.


How many 11-year-olds question their parent's political or moral viewpoints?

How many people who are raised in a "self-contained" world have any idea what goes on outside of it"

Sirius was rebelling against his family, but, we don't really see why he did it at first. Was it really because of their racism, or was he just flexing his pre-teen wings? What does an 11-year-old who has grown up, much the same way Draco was raised, know about racism? What contact did Sirius have with Muggles and non-purbloods until he came to Hogwarts? And, keep in mind, he was sorted into Gryffindor, and, became best friends with James and was around his family, who were not racists. Because of this he was exposed to a whole different world than even his brother, Regulus. Regulus was a DE until someone he loved was harmed by Voldemort. That's when he turned.

As was pointed out, Seamus Finnegin's family was not being held hostage and their lives did not depend upon his loyalties.

When analyzing Draco's character, all of the factors must be taken into account. If not, then we are being "judgemental" instead of "analytical." Draco starts out being very shallow and one-dimensional, but, the character grows throughout the series, and, IMO, I don't think we can look at the Draco in HBP or DH as the same person we see in Madam Malkin's Robe Shop.

I'd like only to add, that I place the "too late" moment for Draco when Voldemort returns. Lucius isn't very happy with this, and he's right. The Malfoys probably felt like trapped. And those who tried to fly... well, remember Karkaroff. So Draco follows his father and his mother's fate.

=mysterious;5549200]But he did change after all. Agreed he couldn't turn as easily and quickly as Seamus, but then Seamus hadn't gotten as deep in as Draco had. Seasmus's actions didn't directly impact the well being of his family, Draco's did. If he failed his family died. The equation was simple, for someone like Draco, for whom things had always been easy, to expect him to man up as quickly and set an example by defying Voldemort, I don't see that happening.

We don't know that he changed. There is not one place in canon when he says that he was wrong. He was lowering his wand with Dumbledore, but Dumbledore had just told him he would hide him and his parents. That is not a sign that he changed. The last words we hear him say is to a Death Eater when he is trying to tell him he is on the Death Eater's side. Yes he could have just been saying it, equally he could have meant it with all his heart. He never contradicts the statement in canon. Seamus was never close to becoming a Death Eater. Seamus did not want to believe Voldemort came back. He changed his mind when it could no longer be denied. Not great, but not a Dark Mark on his arm either, Also he paid for his stand when the Carrows beat him up.

Moreover it wouldn't have been good for the story you know, that would make him another one of the martyr who gave up his family for the greater good, we already have a lot of those...(Harry, Neville)..;)

Oh I don't think we would have to worry about Draco giving up as much as a cup of hot chocolate for the greater good.

You know why he has those believes? Because he grew up with it. He had never thought that his parents were wrong, no child wants to believe that and neither do the parents want them to. So he believed what the Death Eaters did was right. He believed that the Muggles were worthless play things and that the muggleborns were just mudbloods corrupting their pure society. So he wasn't against the torturing of the muggles at the Quidditch world cup, so he simply condoned it. Things like these didn't happen often in front of him to realize. He was just too full of himself at the time to think about it. But when he got into the thick of things, when he actually saw what its like to be a Death Eater, he tried to double back, but too late, he was too deep for well, second thoughts.

Well you know, I would think that the fact that the Death Eaters were masked and hid from the authorities might have given him the idea that these things were not looked upon favourably. When things are not looked upon favourably and are against the law it might have occurred to him that they were wrong. In fact, I'm sure he knew they were wrong, he did not parade around Hogwarts with the Dark Mark on his arm displayed. It isn't to his credit that he found out that it was hard to kill someone when he was looking that someone in the eye and that someone was actually pitying him. This is something I think the majority of people would find impossible to do. I know that there are people out there who would have found it very easy, but you know what, like Dumbledore with Draco I pity them. My pity does not stop me from thinking that people like that, if they commit crimes need to stand trial for their crimes.

JKR tells us how to feel about Draco through the eyes of the main character Harry, who feels pity for him several times from HBP through DH. Through Harry's eyes, Draco is being abused and coerced himself, and that is why Harry forgives him and why they are both there in the Epilogue - which is a cue that the reader should cut him some slack because Draco is just another victim of the Dark Lord's madness. JMO

Readers can judge, but you need to judge in the context of the story. And in the Wizarding World, people have been known to change and mend their ways, which is part of the overall theme of suffering and redemption, not to mention forgiveness. If no one was ever forgiven in the books, Azkaban would be full of people who did Unforgiveables, including Harry.

Draco and his family are not happy with the Dark Lord's rise to power - Voldemort says so himself in DH.

“Why do the Malfoys look so unhappy with their lot? Is my
return, my rise to power, not the very thing they professed to desire for so many years?”

“Of course, my Lord,” said Lucius Malfoy. His hand shook as he wiped sweat from his upper lip. “We did desire it—we do.”

To Malfoy’s left, his wife made an odd, stiff nod, her eyes averted from Voldemort and the snake. To his right, his son, Draco, who had been gazing up at the inert body overhead, glanced quickly at Voldemort and away again, terrified to make eye contact.

In the same scene, Chapter One of DH, the Malfoys are clearly disgusted and terrified about what is happening, especially when their old friends the other Death Eaters sit and laugh at them about the way Voldemort took over their home. Clearly that is why Narcissa couldn't trust any of them in HBP.

“What say you, Draco?” asked Voldemort, and though his voice was quiet, it carried clearly through the catcalls and jeers. “Will you babysit the cubs?”

The hilarity mounted; Draco Malfoy looked in terror at his father, who was staring down into his own lap, then caught his mother’s eye. She shook her head almost imperceptibly, then resumed her own deadpan stare at the opposite wall.

JKR tells us that Draco is either terrified or sitting "in terror" twice, so he's not enjoying the spectacle of a woman dying over his dining room table. I don't see any racist feelings going on in those scenes, especially from Draco. I think they have almost been cured and are just worrying about staying alive.

But the bottom line for me is when Harry realizes that Draco is again "terrified" by what he is having to do for the Dark Lord, and Harry is "sickened" by the way Draco is being "used" by Voldemort. Draco has no choice if he is to protect his family and Harry recognizes that. If Mr. Lovegood can be forgiven so readily by Hermione, then it stands to reason that Draco can also be forgiven for being forced to do things out of love for his family.


A log fell in the fire: Flames reared, their light darting across a terrified, pointed white face—with a sense of emerging from deep water, Harry drew heaving breaths and opened his eyes.

He was spread-eagled on the cold black marble floor, his nose inches from one of the silver serpent tails that supported the large bathtub. He sat up. Malfoy’s gaunt, petrified face seemed burned on the inside of his eyes. Harry felt sickened by what he had seen, by the use to which Draco was now being put by Voldemort.

JKR tells us how to feel about Draco through the eyes of the main character Harry, who feels pity for him several times from HBP through DH. Through Harry's eyes, Draco is being abused and coerced himself, and that is why Harry forgives him and why they are both there in the Epilogue - which is a cue that the reader should cut him some slack because Draco is just another victim of the Dark Lord's madness. JMO

Readers can judge, but you need to judge in the context of the story. And in the Wizarding World, people have been known to change and mend their ways, which is part of the overall theme of suffering and redemption, not to mention forgiveness. If no one was ever forgiven in the books, Azkaban would be full of people who did Unforgiveables, including Harry.

Draco and his family are not happy with the Dark Lord's rise to power - Voldemort says so himself in DH.

“Why do the Malfoys look so unhappy with their lot? Is my
return, my rise to power, not the very thing they professed to desire for so many years?”

“Of course, my Lord,” said Lucius Malfoy. His hand shook as he wiped sweat from his upper lip. “We did desire it—we do.”

To Malfoy’s left, his wife made an odd, stiff nod, her eyes averted from Voldemort and the snake. To his right, his son, Draco, who had been gazing up at the inert body overhead, glanced quickly at Voldemort and away again, terrified to make eye contact.

In the same scene, Chapter One of DH, the Malfoys are clearly disgusted and terrified about what is happening, especially when their old friends the other Death Eaters sit and laugh at them about the way Voldemort took over their home. Clearly that is why Narcissa couldn't trust any of them in HBP.

“What say you, Draco?” asked Voldemort, and though his voice was quiet, it carried clearly through the catcalls and jeers. “Will you babysit the cubs?”

The hilarity mounted; Draco Malfoy looked in terror at his father, who was staring down into his own lap, then caught his mother’s eye. She shook her head almost imperceptibly, then resumed her own deadpan stare at the opposite wall.

JKR tells us that Draco is either terrified or sitting "in terror" twice, so he's not enjoying the spectacle of a woman dying over his dining room table. I don't see any racist feelings going on in those scenes, especially from Draco. I think they have almost been cured and are just worrying about staying alive.

But the bottom line for me is when Harry realizes that Draco is again "terrified" by what he is having to do for the Dark Lord, and Harry is "sickened" by the way Draco is being "used" by Voldemort. Draco has no choice if he is to protect his family and Harry recognizes that. If Mr. Lovegood can be forgiven so readily by Hermione, then it stands to reason that Draco can also be forgiven for being forced to do things out of love for his family.


A log fell in the fire: Flames reared, their light darting across a terrified, pointed white face—with a sense of emerging from deep water, Harry drew heaving breaths and opened his eyes.

He was spread-eagled on the cold black marble floor, his nose inches from one of the silver serpent tails that supported the large bathtub. He sat up. Malfoy’s gaunt, petrified face seemed burned on the inside of his eyes. Harry felt sickened by what he had seen, by the use to which Draco was now being put by Voldemort.

Well it's never pleasant when your home is taken over by a homicidal maniac, even when you have been a devoted servant in his cause. Especially when the homicidal maniac kills a poor woman on your dining table and then invites his snake to dine on her. I could feel sorry for Narcissa there, she was probably wondering if Nagini would be finished on time for her to serve the rest of her guests. I'm being very hard there, but I do have a point. I'm quite sure that the Malfoys loathed what Voldemort did in their home. Did they loath what he did for the woman's sake or was it because it was their home and they would be left with the mess to clean up?

Harry can feel sorry for Draco, Harry is extremely forgiving. I reserve my pity for Draco's victims. For me to feel sorry for Draco I would need proof other than what could very well be crocodile tears. I know Draco feels sorry for himself, that's enough pity for me.

We don't know that he changed.
For starters he didn't fight with the Death Eaters. In the epilogue we see him acknowledge Harry, Ginny, Ron and Hermione and then he turns away, clearly not at ease to face them. And that is not it, Harry and Ron who are Aurors doesn't seem to put off with his appearance, we even have Ron warn his daughter Rosie not to get too friendly with Draco's son Scorpius only because he belongs to a pure-blood family and not because his father is not a good person.

Well you know, I would think that the fact that the Death Eaters were masked and hid from the authorities might have given him the idea that these things were not looked upon favourably.
You see, for a person like Draco who was brought up like I have said in my previous post, it wasn't like that. For him, his father was involved in an elite group of selected few great wizards of the pure blood families who were despised by the authority and others because they were so exclusive. If you have read The Godfather, you would see that all the sons of Don Vito Corleone, even his son Micheal who didn't want anything to do with the family business, believed in his father. Why do you expect much different from Draco?


he did not parade around Hogwarts with the Dark Mark on his arm displayed.
Obviously he didn't, he had realized that he was part of the elite group that needed to lay low. Did you see the change in his attitude on the train ride from King Cross to Hogwarts in HBP. He no longer cared about bullying and all. He clearly said that he had better things to devote his time to (or something similar, i don't have the exact quote) and did you notice the haughty attitude. Well till now he is just living his dream, to follow in his fathers step and become a Death Eater.

Till now Draco's character isn't much of an interest as it isn't very deep, it is what happens after this, that makes his character interesting as it brings out who he is rather than what he pretended to be. What he was, was what his parents wanted him to be. What he became eventually is what he really was. Why it took so long for him, well he was in a bubble created by his parents, which burst only then. ;)

You know why he has those believes? Because he grew up with it. He had never thought that his parents were wrong, no child wants to believe that and neither do the parents want them to. So he believed what the Death Eaters did was right. He believed that the Muggles were worthless play things and that the muggleborns were just mudbloods corrupting their pure society. So he wasn't against the torturing of the muggles at the Quidditch world cup, so he simply condoned it. Things like these didn't happen often in front of him to realize. He was just too full of himself at the time to think about it. But when he got into the thick of things, when he actually saw what its like to be a Death Eater, he tried to double back, but too late, he was too deep for well, second thoughts.


Yet Draco spent most of the year at Hogwarts - for seven years. He was exposed to other ways of thinking, he met Muggle-born witches and wizards. I think that you make a valid point about parental influence but, in my view, it would be more convincing if Draco had been living in an isolated environment with only his parents and like-minded people around him.

Draco deserves pity for the pressure he was under in DH, in my opinion. Nobody should find himself or herself in a situation where one is forced to murder someone to protect his/her loved ones. But unlike other characters who had to redeem themselves for horrible actions they may have done under pressure, Draco survives the war and the books. Yet from what we see, he never faces up to his responsibility.

=mysterious;5549241]For starters he didn't fight with the Death Eaters. In the epilogue we see him acknowledge Harry, Ginny, Ron and Hermione and then he turns away, clearly not at ease to face them. And that is not it, Harry and Ron who are Aurors doesn't seem to put off with his appearance, we even have Ron warn his daughter Rosie not to get too friendly with Draco's son Scorpius only because he belongs to a pure-blood family and not because his father is not a good person.

He didn't fight against them either. What did he do except what he thought woulld be best for hm? He doesn't acknowledge Harry and Co in a good manner. He gives a 'curt' nod. Harry doesn't have to do anything, he already forgave Draco, or at least let go of any hard feelings he had for Draco. This doesn't say anyting about Draco, it says volumes about Harry. Ron isn't going to say bad things about a child he doesn't know to his little girl, Ron isn't a Death Eater, never was.

You see, for a person like Draco who was brought up like I have said in my previous post, it wasn't like that. For him, his father was involved in an elite group of selected few great wizards of the pure blood families who were despised by the authority and others because they were so exclusive. If you have read The Godfather, you would see that all the sons of Don Vito Corleone, even his son Micheal who didn't want anything to do with the family business, believed in his father. Why do you expect much different from Draco?

I don't expect anything from Draco except that which I would expect from any other human being, repect of others. It covers a lot and I don't mean the repect that's talked about in the 'Godfather.' It's interesting that you would bring up 'The Godfather'. I was brought up to be a good little Gypsy girl. To marry one of my kind and live a life on the road. I did nothing of the sort and you know what, my parents did not disown me, They didn't understand me at times and we had our troubles at times, but we were still a family. I don't buy into the it's family beliefs so you have to believe it. But that's me, I was always stubborn.

Obviously he didn't, he had realized that he was part of the elite group that needed to lay low. Did you see the change in his attitude on the train ride from King Cross to Hogwarts in HBP. He no longer cared about bullying and all. He clearly said that he had better things to devote his time to (or something similar, i don't have the exact quote) and did you notice the haughty attitude. Well till now he is just living his dream, to follow in his fathers step and become a Death Eater.

Somehow this argument fails to convince me that Draco is heading for a change of heart.

Till now Draco's character isn't much of an interest as it isn't very deep, it is what happens after this, that makes his character interesting as it brings out who he is rather than what he pretended to be. What he was, was what his parents wanted him to be. What he became eventually is what he really was. Why it took so long for him, well he was in a bubble created by his parents, which burst only then.

I'm afraid I have to differ here. I think Draco is as deep at the end of the books as he was at the beginning. IMO he was always about as deep a teaspoon to quote Hermione. Draco did not live in a bubble, he was at a boarding school for 9 months out of the year, He was as exposed to different viewpoints there as anyone else. IMO. Draco wanted to be a big, bad man. Then he found out that big, bad men sometimes actually have to be bad and he didn't have the spine to do that. Yes, he was in a tough place. What did he do about it. He made a couple of attempts on Dumbledore that failed to do kill him. They did however almost kill two innocent parties. And what did he do then, he went to Moaning Myrtles bathroom and cried about how much trouble he was in. It's no sin to cry, the Good Lord knows this, it is a sin to almost kill two people and then moan about how you didn't kill the person you were told to kill.

Yet Draco spent most of the year at Hogwarts - for seven years. He was exposed to other ways of thinking, he met Muggle-born witches and wizards. I think that you make a valid point about parental influence but, in my view, it would be more convincing if Draco had been living in an isolated environment with only his parents and like-minded people around him.

Draco deserves pity for the pressure he was under in DH, in my opinion. Nobody should find himself or herself in a situation where one is forced to murder someone to protect his/her loved ones. But unlike other characters who had to redeem themselves for horrible actions they may have done under pressure, Draco survives the war and the books. Yet from what we see, he never faces up to his responsibility.

Most of Draco's time at Hogwarts was spent among his "type." He was sorted into Slytherin House, as his family would have expected. He spent all of his free time with other Slytherins, which would have been expected of him. When we see Lucius' attitude toward another pure-blood family (the Weasleys) because they like Muggles, what do you think he would have done to Draco if word had gotten back to him that Draco was "fraternizing" with Muggles or non-purbloods? Draco still had great admiration for his father and would not have wanted to go against him.

As for facing up to his responsibility, IMO, watching Charity Burbage die hanging over his diningroom table brought a lot of reality to his life and, at that time he did face up to his responsibility. That, IMO is what Harry sees in his vision. If Draco had not faced up to what he had done, he would not have changed, which, we are pretty clearly told in DH that he did.

Could someone, please, explain to me exactly what would constitute "showing" that Draco had changed? I'm not clear, as, IMO, the author has gone to great lengths to show that he has.

Yet Draco spent most of the year at Hogwarts - for seven years. He was exposed to other ways of thinking, he met Muggle-born witches and wizards. I think that you make a valid point about parental influence but, in my view, it would be more convincing if Draco had been living in an isolated environment with only his parents and like-minded people around him.

Whilst at Hogwarts, Draco doesn't appear to mix with anyone except those who have the same viewpoints he was brought up with.In other words Pure Blood supremists. I think this only serves to further reinforce those viewpoints. I also think that his arrogance and superior attitude, which I think he got from his upbringing, as we see this behaviour in both Lucius and Narcissa, did not help him to change and see things differently.


Draco deserves pity for the pressure he was under in DH, in my opinion. Nobody should find himself or herself in a situation where one is forced to murder someone to protect his/her loved ones.
Indeed!:agree:


And what did he do then, he went to Moaning Myrtles bathroom and cried about how much trouble he was in.It's no sin to cry, the Good Lord knows this, it is a sin to almost kill two people and then moan about how you didn't kill the person you were told to kill.

According to the canon Draco cried about being bullied and having no one with whom to confide, and also that he couldn't do it.

Most of Draco's time at Hogwarts was spent among his "type." He was sorted into Slytherin House, as his family would have expected. He spent all of his free time with other Slytherins, which would have been expected of him. When we see Lucius' attitude toward another pure-blood family (the Weasleys) because they like Muggles, what do you think he would have done to Draco if word had gotten back to him that Draco was "fraternizing" with Muggles or non-purbloods? Draco still had great admiration for his father and would not have wanted to go against him.

As for facing up to his responsibility, IMO, watching Charity Burbage die hanging over his diningroom table brought a lot of reality to his life and, at that time he did face up to his responsibility. That, IMO is what Harry sees in his vision. If Draco had not faced up to what he had done, he would not have changed, which, we are pretty clearly told in DH that he did.

Could someone, please, explain to me exactly what would constitute "showing" that Draco had changed? I'm not clear, as, IMO, the author has gone to great lengths to show that he has.

I have to confess that I did not read anything about Draco having a change of heart in DH. His last scene is the one where he is trying to cinvince the Death Eater that he's on the Death Eater's side. Then there is the curt nod that he gives Harry at the train station. I suppose the last one could be taken as a sign that Draco had changed his ways, but I'm not convinced. I think what would have made me think that Draco had changed sides is if he had stayed behind when the Slytherin students left the hall and walked over to take his place with those who were fighting Voldemort. Instead, he comes back to try and capture Harry to take him to Voldemort.

Org post Treacle Tartlet
According to the canon Draco cried about being bullied and having no one with whom to confide, and also that he couldn't do it.

Well yes, I suppose in a way Voldemort was bullying him. Maybe having no one to confide in was a reason for crying. I thought Snape was trying to get him to talk about his woes. We know he couldn't kill Dumbledore, that's why he was crying.

it would be more convincing if Draco had been living in an isolated environment with only his parents and like-minded people around him.
Didn't he live with like minded people. He was constantly with Crabbe and Goyle who well didn't exactly have enough character to influence him, but certainly the oil to fire Draco's beliefs that Death Eaters were something prestigious, elite and great. Another person whom we see constantly around him is Pansy, not the kind of person who would influence Draco for he didn't take much interest in her. Girls can be influential but not Pansy. Apart from that I don't see him fraternizing with anyone who would influence him otherwise. So yeah even at school, he was still in his bubble. ;)

Draco deserves pity for the pressure he was under in DH, in my opinion. Nobody should find himself or herself in a situation where one is forced to murder someone to protect his/her loved ones. But unlike other characters who had to redeem themselves for horrible actions they may have done under pressure, Draco survives the war and the books. Yet from what we see, he never faces up to his responsibility.
I totally agree with that. I do not acquit him of his actions but at the same time feel sorry for him.

I don't expect anything from Draco except that which I would expect from any other human being, respect of others.
He didn't have that, well ever I think. Initially he was too absorbed to respect others, later when he was forced into his predicament, well obviously he wouldn't respect anyone. And I agree with you that he didn't kill Dumbledore because he respected the man, but he couldn't kill a man, not exactly representative of respect for human life but you see a hint of it, and that is all is needed in HP world, a little hope. ;)

Somehow this argument fails to convince me that Draco is heading for a change of heart.
I didn't mean it that way, it was just a counter argument to your statement. :p

Draco did not live in a bubble, he was at a boarding school for 9 months out of the year, He was as exposed to different viewpoints there as anyone else.
I would suggest you read my response to Moriath in this very post. :)

Draco wanted to be a big, bad man. Then he found out that big, bad men sometimes actually have to be bad and he didn't have the spine to do that.
I disagree, he wanted to be like his father, and well for the society his father wasn't a big bad man. He (Lucius) was someone who wielded power. Draco wanted that. But you know what is interesting. Lucius when at his heights of power had the power that money bought him, not his magical prowess, and Draco thought it to be otherwise and thus the desire/dream. Or maybe he thought that the status of DE came along with the money, kind of "Family Business".

And what did he do then, he went to Moaning Myrtles bathroom and cried about how much trouble he was in. It's no sin to cry, the Good Lord knows this, it is a sin to almost kill two people and then moan about how you didn't kill the person you were told to kill.
I agree, he made mistakes and everything. Like I said, I don't think he was innocent. But like you have pointed out, he cried, a sign of remorse. Something that we see of utter importance. Harry asks Voldemort, one who has done far more worse things than Draco, to show remorse. Well Draco is one step ahead. :lol:

Could someone, please, explain to me exactly what would constitute "showing" that Draco had changed? I'm not clear, as, IMO, the author has gone to great lengths to show that he has.
It canon I think that is required. ;)

Most of Draco's time at Hogwarts was spent among his "type." He was sorted into Slytherin House, as his family would have expected. He spent all of his free time with other Slytherins, which would have been expected of him. When we see Lucius' attitude toward another pure-blood family (the Weasleys) because they like Muggles, what do you think he would have done to Draco if word had gotten back to him that Draco was "fraternizing" with Muggles or non-purbloods? Draco still had great admiration for his father and would not have wanted to go against him.
Didn't he live with like minded people. He was constantly with Crabbe and Goyle who well didn't exactly have enough character to influence him, but certainly the oil to fire Draco's beliefs that Death Eaters were something prestigious, elite and great. Another person whom we see constantly around him is Pansy, not the kind of person who would influence Draco for he didn't take much interest in her. Girls can be influential but not Pansy. Apart from that I don't see him fraternizing with anyone who would influence him otherwise. So yeah even at school, he was still in his bubble.

Yet he went to classes in which Muggle-borns were. He saw and met Hermione and other half-bloods and Muggle-borns almost daily for six years. And I think the argument that Slytherin house isn't full of Death Eaters has been quite convincingly made by others. We know that it isn't impossible to have friends outside of Slytherin house, either. If Draco remained surrounded by like-minded people, it happened out of choice. I maintain that Draco was a not very courageous opportunist. For years he was an opinion leader in Slytherin house. I think that, if he had decided to not actively bully people for their blood, others would have followed.

Yet Draco spent most of the year at Hogwarts - for seven years. He was exposed to other ways of thinking, he met Muggle-born witches and wizards. I think that you make a valid point about parental influence but, in my view, it would be more convincing if Draco had been living in an isolated environment with only his parents and like-minded people around him.

But the first 11 year’s are very influential – probably more so than his 7 at Hogwarts. By the time he gets to Hogwarts he already has strong views and a circle of friends. This group are all sorted into Slytherin and as a result it I them that Draco spends most of his time with – thus further reinforcing his early conditioning rather than contradicting it.

If you look at Harry it is not until OotP that he really starts to mix with people outside of his house. I would expect that the same is true for Draco, possible more so if Harry’s idea that all the houses hate Slytherin is true.

But unlike other characters who had to redeem themselves for horrible actions they may have done under pressure, Draco survives the war and the books. Yet from what we see, he never faces up to his responsibility.

To be fair we don’t get to see the time period where Draco would face up to his responsibilities / pay for his action. We can’t assume that just because the series ends before these vents have a chance to take place that they haven’t (or assume the opposite for that matter :)). Draco may or may not have apologised, made aments etc we just don’t know for sure. However the brief interaction between him & Harry in the epilogue makes it look as if they have made some sort of peace between them (certain if it is compared to the way we see adults who meet their childhood rivals act, such as Lucius/Arthur)

Yet he went to classes in which Muggle-borns were. He saw and met Hermione and other half-bloods and Muggle-borns almost daily for six years.
Well he doesn't listen to them, does he? :huh: Moreover even in class we see him flanked by his own house mates, especially Crabbe and Goyle. Moreover I don't see Draco being influenced by the likes of Hermione. And for that I blame the education system of Hogwarts. They don't have any class that encourages debate or exchange of dialogue. All they have are lectures where professors come, drone and go. They sit there flanked by their liked ones and exchanging small talks with each other. So no chance of being influenced by anyone else.

And I think the argument that Slytherin house isn't full of Death Eaters has been quite convincingly made by others.
Agreed, but then with Draco's attitude you could see that no one who didn't share his ideologies ever interacted. Those who weren't like him, well they pretended so. I don't have the exact quotes right now, but if I can, I will get them. :)

We know that it isn't impossible to have friends outside of Slytherin house, either.
I agree but with Draco he didn't want to and you agree with that....

If Draco remained surrounded by like-minded people, it happened out of choice.

I maintain that Draco was a not very courageous opportunist.
I totally agree, he didn't want to be anyone that he wasn't already. He had the perfect life, all the money he needed, the right company of henchmen who listened and attended to his every whim, what else did he want. He was happy and contended. Indirectly I am saying that Draco wasn't very ambitious. He wanted popularity but not so much.

For years he was an opinion leader in Slytherin house. I think that, if he had decided to not actively bully people for their blood, others would have followed.

Obviously he had that influence. He could have done loads of good things, but he chose not to, for he believed in his father and the cause of the Death Eaters, which I think he saw as the purification of their society from the scum (non pure blood). He had power and he used it for his fun, by bullying people.

=kittling;5549585]But the first 11 year’s are very influential – probably more so than his 7 at Hogwarts. By the time he gets to Hogwarts he already has strong views and a circle of friends. This group are all sorted into Slytherin and as a result it I them that Draco spends most of his time with – thus further reinforcing his early conditioning rather than contradicting it.

If you look at Harry it is not until OotP that he really starts to mix with people outside of his house. I would expect that the same is true for Draco, possible more so if Harry’s idea that all the houses hate Slytherin is true.

Well I rather doubt that Narcissa and Lucius discussed the finer details of race hatred with Draco over the dinner table every night as he was growing up. Considering Lucius' and Narcissa's social mien I would be surprised if he ever ate at the dinner table with the adults at all. It is possible to grow up with people who believe something with all their hearts and to come to the conclusion all on your own that their beliefs are not yours and to move beyond them. Draco didn't, Draco never tried to move out of the beliefs that he grew up with. Is this wrong? I don't know. It indicates to me that he liked the beliefs he was brought up with, and he did not want to learn anything else. Is that wrong? Yes, when those beliefs go against the laws of your society and they involve derogatory treatment of people you consider beneath you. In this situation it is not enough IMO, to say,
'Oh he couldn't help his beliefs, he wasn't taught any different.'

When you know the laws of your society does not permit you to attack and harm another person because of their financial condition or their parent's ethnicity, then you have been taught that such things are wrong and the beliefs are wrong because they are not condoned in law. Draco knew first hand that such things were wrong at the Quiddich World Cup, because he saw first hand that the Death Eaters, including his father went out to commit their crimes masked, concealing their identities to avoid prosecution. He was intelligent enough to know why his father concealed his identity. When Draco went to Hogwarts with the Dark Mark on his arm he concealed it. When he gave Katie the cursed necklace he concealed his identity. He Imperiused Rosemerta so that she could not tell who gave her the poisoned wine to send to Dumbledore. Draco makes a point of concealing his crimes. This means that he was in full knowledge that the authorities would not be impressed by his reasons for committing those crimes. IMO, he also concealed the crimes because he knew that he was wrong and he didn't want the kids he went to school with knowing how low he had sunk.

To be fair we don’t get to see the time period where Draco would face up to his responsibilities / pay for his action. We can’t assume that just because the series ends before these vents have a chance to take place that they haven’t (or assume the opposite for that matter :)). Draco may or may not have apologised, made aments etc we just don’t know for sure. However the brief interaction between him & Harry in the epilogue makes it look as if they have made some sort of peace between them (certain if it is compared to the way we see adults who meet their childhood rivals act, such as Lucius/Arthur)

The last we see of the Malfoys after the Battle they are sitting with everyone else. No one is going up to them to arrest them. When we see Draco at the station there is no mention of him having served any kind of sentence. Ron doesn't mention anything like that when he speaks to Rosie, and if Draco had answered for his crimes I believe Ron would have said something to Harry. As it is not mentioned in canon, I have to assume it didn't happen.

If, God forbid you were ever in a situation comprable to Draco's and you acted like he did, then you would be arrested. The law cannot be ignored because you are being blackmailed.

Yes, you would be arrested, because someone that will kill or attempt to kill someone else, even if they were blackmailed into it and the judge and jury sentencing them would probably have made the same choice, is a danger to others if left free. As you've mentioned, many of Draco's attempts to murder Dumbledore put other lives at risk. But it doesn't make what he did unforgivable and certainly not un-understandable (if that's even a word!). And I think a court would take into account both Draco's youth and the enormous pressures he was facing when deciding on a sentence (and would probably arrange counselling or other help for him while in prison).

Draco was in a tough spot, no doubt. But he was in that tough spot because to begin with he wanted to be. This cannot be ignored either. Draco wanted to be a Death Eater, just like his father, Now it's true he was young. In that siruation it was up to his parents to say no, don't do it. You are too young and we will have to take our chances. They didn't do it, and Draco stepped up. Was this admirabled of him? Was it really admirable to join a group of career criminals led by a phsycopath?

I agree, it was a bad decision. But even if Draco had been reluctant it wouldn't have changed anything anyway, it might only have made things worse. So Draco would have been in the tough situation no matter what decision he made. But yes, he was an idiot for supporting Voldemort. Again, however, it's a decision that many people could have made. We see Snape and Regulus, both of whom have a bit more courage than Draco in the end and manage to hurt Voldemort (and whom I at least would describe as ultimately good people in the end), initially fall into the same trap. And to take a real world example, initially the Nazi party was elected in a democratic way (admittedly this was before they showed how far they would go in their racial cleansing, but they were still a party we would consider racist).

The thing is, Draco believed with all his heart in what the phsycopath was espousing. We could say that it was only what he had heard from his parents all his life. Does that excuse Draco from buying into it? I don't thnk so, like I said in one of my earlier posts, I didn't have to be taught that it was wrong to torture and kill, I kind of picked up on that fact because, well there are laws against it. Draco knew the laws of his society and he broke them. When he broke them he caused serious harm to come to others.

So if you lived in a society where there were no laws against torture and killing or it was even sanctioned by that society, you wouldn't know they were wrong? I doubt that the sense of right and wrong comes from the laws of the country you are in more than it comes from the values of your parents/guardians/teachers/other influential adults, and the general culture of a country (the media, books etc.).

For Draco, in his first 11 years his parents are pretty much the only influential adults (as we don't hear of wizarding primary schools I assume he was taught at home). Those of you that have read "The Tales of Beedle the Bard" may recall that Lucius once wrote to Dumbledore asking him to ban the story "The Fountain of Fair Fortune" from Hogwarts on the grounds that it depicts wizard-Muggle marriage and Draco might be influenced into "sullying his bloodline". Therefore we can assume that in his early life, Draco's parents kept a tight rein on what he read too. Therefore, it is completely unsurprising that he's racist towards muggle-borns.

Draco was taught to despise Mudbloods and Muggles, and to hate blood traitors. He was also taught that it was perfectly OK, indeed desirable, to join an organisation that aimed to kill these people. But Draco didn't need to be taught that it was wrong to torture and kill either- despite this upbringing, he cannot kill Dumbledore and he shows great reluctance to use Cruciatus.

That is what he should have faced in a court of law, that is what he escaped through Harry's compassion and gratitude to Draco's mother. I don't feel the same compassion for Draco, I feel it for his victims. Katie hanging in mid air, silently screaming in agony. Ron going into convulsions from the poison, and Bill spending a lifetime with his face scarred and the possibility of becoming a werewolf. I'm not judging Draco but I certainly think he should have been judged.

I feel compassion for both Draco and his victims. Of course I would rather Ron and Katie, Bill, even Madam Rosmerta, didn't get hurt. They went through horrible things because of what Draco was forced to do- but Draco also went through hell in the two years of HBP and DH- can you imagine Voldemort living in your house, when you've lost his favour almost completely, and don't know at what point you'll finally be killed?

Perhaps we could have expected him to be sent to Azkaban post-DH. But Harry, through his connection to Voldemort's mind, knew that Draco was being forced to do what he did, and that in the absence of Voldemort Draco was not likely to be a danger to the wizarding world (unlike say Bellatrix- had she survived she would definitely have tried to revenge Voldemort's death or even reform the DEs). I assume that's why he escaped Azkaban.

I feel compassion for both Draco and his victims. Of course I would rather Ron and Katie, Bill, even Madam Rosmerta, didn't get hurt. They went through horrible things because of what Draco was forced to do- but Draco also went through hell in the two years of HBP and DH- can you imagine Voldemort living in your house, when you've lost his favour almost completely, and don't know at what point you'll finally be killed?

Perhaps we could have expected him to be sent to Azkaban post-DH. But Harry, through his connection to Voldemort's mind, knew that Draco was being forced to do what he did, and that in the absence of Voldemort Draco was not likely to be a danger to the wizarding world (unlike say Bellatrix- had she survived she would definitely have tried to revenge Voldemort's death or even reform the DEs). I assume that's why he escaped Azkaban.

Yes. What actually happened to Draco and family was far worse, imo, than life in Azkaban. Harry saw what they were put through via the scar connection. And I believe that this - in addition to Narcissa's lie - is why Harry saw to it that all the Malfoys received mercy after the War.

In fact, I think it is incorrect to say that Draco and his family escaped justice. Voldemort tormenting them daily in their own home was a far worse punishment, I think, than any court ever could have levied. (Voldemort in your home vs. Azkaban without Dementors? I know which one sounds harsher to me!).

Harry, I believe, made a very wise choice in extending mercy. And I don't think it's an accident that it's shortly after seeing adult Draco at King's Cross that he tells Albus Severus that it doesn't matter to him if the boy is sorted into Slytherin. I think it's a rather clear signal from the text that Harry's former Slytherin nemesis did reform from pursuing Dark Magic - just as Albus Severus' namesakes did.

=Kharina;5549733]Yes, you would be arrested, because someone that will kill or attempt to kill someone else, even if they were blackmailed into it and the judge and jury sentencing them would probably have made the same choice, is a danger to others if left free. As you've mentioned, many of Draco's attempts to murder Dumbledore put other lives at risk. But it doesn't make what he did unforgivable and certainly not un-understandable (if that's even a word!). And I think a court would take into account both Draco's youth and the enormous pressures he was facing when deciding on a sentence (and would probably arrange counselling or other help for him while in prison).

You make good points throughout your post and I will go through them one at a time. I agree with what you say here, A compassionate court of law would attempt to understand and counsel as well as providing justice for the victims. I'm not saying this is wrong at all, but it is something that Draco never faced so we cannot know if it would have been effective.


I agree, it was a bad decision. But even if Draco had been reluctant it wouldn't have changed anything anyway, it might only have made things worse. So Draco would have been in the tough situation no matter what decision he made. But yes, he was an idiot for supporting Voldemort. Again, however, it's a decision that many people could have made. We see Snape and Regulus, both of whom have a bit more courage than Draco in the end and manage to hurt Voldemort (and whom I at least would describe as ultimately good people in the end), initially fall into the same trap. And to take a real world example, initially the Nazi party was elected in a democratic way (admittedly this was before they showed how far they would go in their racial cleansing, but they were still a party we would consider racist).

I'm afraid that I don't believe in saying that 'A' would have acted like 'B' in the same situation is a very good case for defense. I really don't excust the German people who voted for Hitler either. It cannot be denied that they of their own free will voted into power a dangerous man who had already published his manfesto for world domination in 'Mien Kampf'. But that's nothing to do with Draco. There is such a thing as personal responsabilty. Something that Draco seems not to have heard of.

So if you lived in a society where there were no laws against torture and killing or it was even sanctioned by that society, you wouldn't know they were wrong? I doubt that the sense of right and wrong comes from the laws of the country you are in more than it comes from the values of your parents/guardians/teachers/other influential adults, and the general culture of a country (the media, books etc.).

Well I have to confess that I have never heard of a society that does not condemn murder. There are unfortunately too many examples of societies, even today that practice/d torture. But you know what is striking about these societies, they practice behind closed doors and they deny it when accused. When people deny doing something, they know it's wrong. Draco saw first hand that the Death Eaters hid their identities, and that they denied that they had done anything wrong. He did not live in a bubbled, and even if he did, bubbles are clear. You can see through them.

For Draco, in his first 11 years his parents are pretty much the only influential adults (as we don't hear of wizarding primary schools I assume he was taught at home). Those of you that have read "The Tales of Beedle the Bard" may recall that Lucius once wrote to Dumbledore asking him to ban the story "The Fountain of Fair Fortune" from Hogwarts on the grounds that it depicts wizard-Muggle marriage and Draco might be influenced into "sullying his bloodline". Therefore we can assume that in his early life, Draco's parents kept a tight rein on what he read too. Therefore, it is completely unsurprising that he's racist towards muggle-borns.

Oh yes, Draco was most probably taught at home. He would probably have had a tutor or a governess. We don't know what he would have been taught by this person, if indeed such a person existed. But I agree that Draco was probably carefully taught to be racist. Does this excuse him from being one? He made the decision to practice what his parents taught him, no one else.

Draco was taught to despise Mudbloods and Muggles, and to hate blood traitors. He was also taught that it was perfectly OK, indeed desirable, to join an organisation that aimed to kill these people. But Draco didn't need to be taught that it was wrong to torture and kill either- despite this upbringing, he cannot kill Dumbledore and he shows great reluctance to use Cruciatus.

I'm not impressed that Draco found it hard to kill Dumbledore. I don't remember what passage he tried to use Cruciatus in off hand. The thing is, most people would find it hard to kill someone in cold blood. It's not a sign of a great moral being to find murder difficult.



I feel compassion for both Draco and his victims. Of course I would rather Ron and Katie, Bill, even Madam Rosmerta, didn't get hurt. They went through horrible things because of what Draco was forced to do- but Draco also went through hell in the two years of HBP and DH- can you imagine Voldemort living in your house, when you've lost his favour almost completely, and don't know at what point you'll finally be killed?

I would feel more compassion for Draco if I was not convinced that if his father had not disappointed Voldemort so much and was still in Voldemort's good books, Draco would have rolled out the red carpet for him.

Perhaps we could have expected him to be sent to Azkaban post-DH. But Harry, through his connection to Voldemort's mind, knew that Draco was being forced to do what he did, and that in the absence of Voldemort Draco was not likely to be a danger to the wizarding world (unlike say Bellatrix- had she survived she would definitely have tried to revenge Voldemort's death or even reform the DEs). I assume that's why he escaped Azkaban.

I think Harry is exceptionall forgiving. I am not. I think Draco would have been a danger to anyone who angered him and he could hurt in a sly way without it rebounding on him. Draco did not IMO, turn against Voldemort. I think Draco was always on Draco's side.

There is such a thing as personal responsabilty. Something that Draco seems not to have heard of.
I agree, he isn't a responsible person, or atleast wasn't. But then he did come forth to take on the responsibility of getting the Death Eaters into Hogwarts, he wasn't forced then. It was only when things weren't working to Voldemort's liking that things became forced rather than voluntary. So we do see some sense of responsibility. ;)

He did not live in a bubbled, and even if he did, bubbles are clear. You can see through them.
Actually the reason we call it a bubble is because your horizon of thoughts are limited to what is inside the bubble, you don't expand your view beyond the bubble. That was the case with Draco. ;)

BTW I really like the statement about the bubbles being clear, it only shows that one doesn't really have to make a stupendous effort to get out of the bubble to be able to see clearly, you just have to have the desire to look outside the bubble and things are crystal clear. :tu:

Does this excuse him from being one?
IMO it does. You can't blame a child for his beliefs that have been engraved in him/her throughout childhood. That is why when kids go on trial for some crime they aren't usually sent to prison but a correction facility. For it is understood that the child is under the influence of someone rather than working on free will (that is the case usually, not always). Same standards should apply to Draco.

I would feel more compassion for Draco if I was not convinced that if his father had not disappointed Voldemort so much and was still in Voldemort's good books, Draco would have rolled out the red carpet for him.

That is so true, because of the difficult circumstances, Draco's bubble got burst. :tu:

When analyzing Draco's character, all of the factors must be taken into account. If not, then we are being "judgemental" instead of "analytical." Draco starts out being very shallow and one-dimensional, but, the character grows throughout the series, and, IMO, I don't think we can look at the Draco in HBP or DH as the same person we see in Madam Malkin's Robe Shop.You don't know what I'm using to base my opinions of Draco on so you cannot say whether I'm being judgemental or analytical. My examples were to say that children can think differently than their parents so we cannot excuse Draco because of what his parents think. We all have our own opinions and if they don't match with someone else's that doesn't make them wrong or judgemental. Draco may have been "contained" before age 11, but when he started school he was not in that containment anymore.

For starters he didn't fight with the Death Eaters. He wasn't fighting against them. He was against Harry. What do we have in the book that says he wasn't fighting with the Death Eaters? In the epilogue we see him acknowledge Harry, Ginny, Ron and Hermione and then he turns away, clearly not at ease to face them. And that is not it, Harry and Ron who are Aurors doesn't seem to put off with his appearance, we even have Ron warn his daughter Rosie not to get too friendly with Draco's son Scorpius only because he belongs to a pure-blood family and not because his father is not a good person. What's your point here? This contradicts him changing, imo, but you might see it differently.

Most of Draco's time at Hogwarts was spent among his "type." He was sorted into Slytherin House, as his family would have expected. He spent all of his free time with other Slytherins, which would have been expected of him. When we see Lucius' attitude toward another pure-blood family (the Weasleys) because they like Muggles, what do you think he would have done to Draco if word had gotten back to him that Draco was "fraternizing" with Muggles or non-purbloods? Draco still had great admiration for his father and would not have wanted to go against him. Not all Slytherins are bad. Not all Slytherins are Muggle-haters. Look at Andromeda Tonks nee Black. We infer she's a Slytherin because Sirius says he's the only one of his family to not be in Slytherin. There probably are more like Andromeda in Slytherin. That means not all are thinking the same way as Lucius Malfoy and thus giving Draco more views than what he grew up with.

Not all Slytherins are bad. Not all Slytherins are Muggle-haters. Look at Andromeda Tonks nee Black. We infer she's a Slytherin because Sirius says he's the only one of his family to not be in Slytherin. There probably are more like Andromeda in Slytherin. That means not all are thinking the same way as Lucius Malfoy and thus giving Draco more views than what he grew up with.
Agreed, not all Slytherin are bad, but the ones around Draco weren't those who influenced him, they are influenced by him, so no chance of any change, even at school. ;)

1. When we first meet Draco, Harry sees him as a pampered, snobbish, bully. Did JKR plant the seeds from the beginning that he would grow to be a Death Eater?

I don't think so. It's hard for me to answer that question; because I read the first book before the hype, and so had no idea what was to come in the later books. Therefore, for me, I initially only viewed Malfoy as the typical opponent to Harry: a school-boy antagonist, and did not have any preconcieved ideas of what he would become.

Saying that, as the books progress, it seems logical that this would be the path Draco would follow - as his father was a Death Eater. I do think, though, that Malfoy is presented as a typical bully - he's not brave, he's not big, he's not clever, he just acts like a hard man to belittle others around him. I don't think the school-boy arguments between him and Harry from the first few books have much bearing on the greater battle between good and evil that unfolds later in the series. I've never though of Malfoy as particularly evil; and I never really saw him as a massive threat to any of the characters.


3. Is Draco truly making his choices of his own volition? How much of his choice is derived from fear, or is it bravado?

I've always sort of thought Draco got involved with LV (at first) because he thought it was the 'cool' thing to do. A bit like drugs and that, or smoking - when people do something reckless or a bit stupid in an effort to make people think they're hard.

I also think Draco resents authority a little bit. When teachers, Dumbledore, even his own mother and father, try and tell him what to do, he rarely accepts it and often gets a bit stressed out: for example, he is angered when Snape tries to meddle in his affairs in HBP, and wants to carry out the Dark Lord's orders by himself. I would say Draco probably has the signature ambitious trait of a Slytherin but that his motives are pretty much selfish ones - get one up on Harry etc.

I think further in, though, Draco gets afraid of what he is involved in - maybe a bit like Regulus Black, getting in so far and then not being able to get out. This is pretty obvious when LV is using the Malfoy Manor as a base; the Malfoys clearly resent this a bit, especially as they aren't being favoured or being given any perks. This emphasises the selfish nature of all of the Malfoys. But I think what is more notable is that they are all scared of what the Dark Lord can do - and this fear is what drives them in the end to still carry out his cause.

Obviously not a great comparison but still a comparison with Draco helping Death Eaters onto the grounds of Hogwarts.

If a civilian was on a military based (authorised of course) and that civilian helped the enemy gain access to that military base and as a result of this the commander was murdered then if caught that civilan would at a very minimum be put in jail for life and depending on the country would probably get executed.

Not relevant to what i was talking about but in regards to Draco and his intelligence i don't think anyone has brought up the possibility that Draco had a huge advantage in potions and a few other subjects as right from the begining Draco probably had private tutors in the few months he was back at home. Don't underestimate the value of a few months of one on one lessons and this is something that Harry, Ron and Hermione didn't have access too.

Agreed, not all Slytherin are bad, but the ones around Draco weren't those who influenced him, they are influenced by him, so no chance of any change, even at school. ;)

Except of course Draco was not tied to what his parents believed. He had a mind of his own. He could think for himself. If while sitting in Potion's he had paid attention to Hermione's results. He would have seen a Muggleborn do better than anyone else in producing fine work. This was a class where results were right there for everyone to see. If the potion was supposed to be lilac and Hermione's was and everyone else's was purple then it would have to be surmised Hermione did it and no one else did. This was shown time and again in the classroom. Did Draco ever stop to think that Hermione couldn't be subhuman because a subhuman could not produce the results that she did? No, he didn't. He chose not to believe the evidence of his eyes over the propaganda spouted by his parents. His choice.

Not relevant to what i was talking about but in regards to Draco and his intelligence i don't think anyone has brought up the possibility that Draco had a huge advantage in potions and a few other subjects as right from the begining Draco probably had private tutors in the few months he was back at home. Don't underestimate the value of a few months of one on one lessons and this is something that Harry, Ron and Hermione didn't have access too.

Being born in a magical family, Ron probably could learn something also. If he didn't, then someone didn't care - himself or his parents. We know Ginny learned to fly before she went to school. Harry and Hermione's situation of course is different.

If while sitting in Potion's he had paid attention to Hermione's results. He would have seen a Muggleborn do better than anyone else in producing fine work.
That did nothing but fire up his anger, because his father didn't forget to point it out that a mudblood was doing better than him. So I don't see how Draco would let it slide and be objective. I agree with your logic, whenever someone beats us we try to find out why they are better and stronger than us. But in case of Draco he used to find Hermione inferior and himself too above her to seek something from her.

That did nothing but fire up his anger, because his father didn't forget to point it out that a mudblood was doing better than him. So I don't see how Draco would let it slide and be objective. I agree with your logic, whenever someone beats us we try to find out why they are better and stronger than us. But in case of Draco he used to find Hermione inferior and himself too above her to seek something from her.

Then it was Draco's choice to ignore the evidence of his eyes and common sense. If your father tells you the sky is purple with green stripes when you can see for yourself that it is blue, then your own common sense will tell he's wrong. I think Draco knew in his heart that his father was wrong, he just didn't like it. It was his choice. I don't believe Draco lived in a bubble separated from talented and intelligent Muggleborns. The Wizarding World did not practise apartheid.

I don't believe Draco lived in a bubble separated from talented and intelligent Muggleborns.

Well, he did for the first eleven years of his life. Sure, that doesn't excuse him for what happened once he was sorted into Slytherin but he grew up with a father that wouldn't even let him read books that featured sympathetic Muggle characters. (Canon thanks to Dumbledore's notes in Tales of Beedle the Bard.) So upon arrival at Hogwarts, Draco had his head full of pure-blood nonsense.

Well, he did for the first eleven years of his life. Sure, that doesn't excuse him for what happened once he was sorted into Slytherin but he grew up with a father that wouldn't even let him read books that featured sympathetic Muggle characters. (Canon thanks to Dumbledore's notes in Tales of Beedle the Bard.) So upon arrival at Hogwarts, Draco had his head full of pure-blood nonsense.

Draco has learned from his toddler years to hate Mudbloods, and he kept that ideology throughout his Hogwarts life. I think only after he left Hogwarts did he have an opportunity to change his mind about Muggleborns.

Being born in a magical family, Ron probably could learn something also. If he didn't, then someone didn't care - himself or his parents. We know Ginny learned to fly before she went to school. Harry and Hermione's situation of course is different.

There is a huge difference between having your parents to help you study and having a full time private tutor. Draco's father probably bought him all the potion ingrediants and with the tutors help Draco was probably studying potions (and other classes that didn't involved wand work) during the breaks between school. The Weasley's didn't have nearly enough money to do that (as i would imagine potion ingrediants are expensive).

If your father tells you the sky is purple with green stripes when you can see for yourself that it is blue, then your own common sense will tell he's wrong.
That comparison isn't exactly justified because reading the fine elements of one's character and comparing colors aren't of the same degree. Let me make it clear, if you are made to hate someone, despise the person and that person is better than you at something you yourself would never take a leaf out of their book. Unless of course you are as open minded and forgiving as Albus Dumbledore which clearly very few people in this world are and Draco was one of them.

I think Draco knew in his heart that his father was wrong, he just didn't like it.
Actually I never saw that.

The Wizarding World did not practise apartheid.
Not intentionally, just accidently. ;) Like I have stated the classes were so designed that it didn't promote much interaction with each other and stuck with like minded people. The only interaction they seemed to have was during the dueling lessons in second year. Other than that they had this interaction at the secret meetings of DA where you could see that they weren't comfortable with each other initially.

Didn't he live with like minded people. He was constantly with Crabbe and Goyle who well didn't exactly have enough character to influence him, but certainly the oil to fire Draco's beliefs that Death Eaters were something prestigious, elite and great. Another person whom we see constantly around him is Pansy, not the kind of person who would influence Draco for he didn't take much interest in her. Girls can be influential but not Pansy. Apart from that I don't see him fraternizing with anyone who would influence him otherwise. So yeah even at school, he was still in his bubble. ;)

I belive Draco was always in his buble, and altough he understood some things (like what was really to be a DE), he still lived in that buble. He learned from his father about the blood prejudice, to be a bully, to want to be a DE, and so on... You can say that the moment he started Hogwarts he met muggle borns and half blooded, but the fact is that he didn't met them at all. He always was with his bodyguard Crabbe and Goyle, always with the Slytherins, always in the same circle. He never had the intention to meet people that were different from him, so he didn't have the chance to "open up" and see the truth. Even in Hogwarts he stayed with the persons who had the same beliefs as he had, so how could he change his world view?


I disagree, he wanted to be like his father, and well for the society his father wasn't a big bad man. He (Lucius) was someone who wielded power. Draco wanted that. But you know what is interesting. Lucius when at his heights of power had the power that money bought him, not his magical prowess, and Draco thought it to be otherwise and thus the desire/dream. Or maybe he thought that the status of DE came along with the money, kind of "Family Business".

I agree with you. Draco was taught by his father that power, money and social status are the most important things, so he wanted to be like that. He became a bully, because he thought that he have no equals, he's above everyone else. He uses name-droping to show how powerful he and his family are. It was all about the respect he wanted for himself, and because (obviously) he didn't get respect the way that is gain (because he deserved it), he tried to get his respect by frightening and bullying other students (and even teachers). It didn't matter to him the way he got the respect, it was important to him just to get it.

There is a huge difference between having your parents to help you study and having a full time private tutor. Draco's father probably bought him all the potion ingrediants and with the tutors help Draco was probably studying potions (and other classes that didn't involved wand work) during the breaks between school. The Weasley's didn't have nearly enough money to do that (as i would imagine potion ingrediants are expensive)

Where does it say in canon that Draco had any kind of private tutor? We know he has been taught to fly but that's about it (and the Weasley kids have also learned that). As children aren't permitted to do magic outside school, I doubt that Lucius Malfoy (who wants to look like a 'good guy' in the eyes of wizarding law) would do anything as obviously illegal as engage a private tutor for Draco in magic during school holidays.

He might turn a blind eye to his son practicing magic at home, as we know that the ministry can only pinpoint the location of magic, not who did it, so kids in wizarding homes can get away with practicing magic and it is up to their parents to enforce the law there. But a private tutor would be too obvious. Also I don't think Draco shows any signs of having been privately tutored: if he had been he'd be much better than everyone else in lessons, and we don't see that at all.

The only time anyone tutors him outside Hogwarts in canon is Bellatrix in the summer between books 5 and 6- and this is more to train him in being a Death Eater than to improve his school marks! So I'm not sure where this whole thing about a private tutor is coming from.

I belive Draco was always in his buble, and altough he understood some things (like what was really to be a DE), he still lived in that buble. He learned from his father about the blood prejudice, to be a bully, to want to be a DE, and so on... You can say that the moment he started Hogwarts he met muggle borns and half blooded, but the fact is that he didn't met them at all. He always was with his bodyguard Crabbe and Goyle, always with the Slytherins, always in the same circle. He never had the intention to meet people that were different from him, so he didn't have the chance to "open up" and see the truth. Even in Hogwarts he stayed with the persons who had the same beliefs as he had, so how could he change his world view?

I agree, Draco didn't have opportunities to interact with Muggleborns at Hogwarts. We see that Slytherin is pitted against the other three houses and more divided than those houses are from each other. Muggleborns are in every house but Slytherin. So Draco only ever interacted with Muggleborns as enemies at school, which won't have helped.

We don't know what was different about, say, Andromeda Tonks nee Black, as she was definitely in Slytherin. But she and Draco aren't the same people so I'm not sure there's a valid comparison. Andromeda may have been more intellectually curious than him, wanting to find out about Muggleborns first hand, or maybe she was more rebellious. Or maybe she was a stuck up pureblood until she fell in love.

What we do know about Andromeda is that even she retains some prejudices. In book 7, Remus says that the Tonkses aren't happy about his marriage to Nymphadora- he asks "What parents want their only daughter to marry a werewolf?" This suggests that both Andromeda and Ted have prejudices against werewolves. Prejudices are hard to get rid of and even those who go against their family's teaching don't manage to shake them off entirely. Sirius retains his prejudice against house-elves: Dumbledore points out that "Sirius never saw Kreacher as a being with feelings as acute as a human's." So I don't think we can blame Draco for hating Muggleborns because he's been taught to, even if he did have access to evidence against those beliefs- after all, things that have been ingrained since childhood are rarely that open to evidence- I think they go deeper than the thinking part of the brain.

We can criticise him for being a bully, for being a coward, and for his many other character flaws, but I don't think overall he was a bad person. Of course, he wasn't a good person by any stretch of the imagination: I think one of the things that fascinates me about Draco's character is that he's in the middle, just like a normal, real person. I can imagine him actually exisiting. Voldemort is too 'pure evil' to be realistic (as is Bellatrix), IMO, and I might argue that Harry is a little too good. I think Draco's one of the most realistic characters in the series. I'm not sure what this says for the state of the human race, but it speaks of some talent on JKR's part to make an unpleasant character someone I can identify with so well.

if you are made to hate someone, despise the person and that person is better than you at something you yourself would never take a leaf out of their book. Unless of course you are as open minded and forgiving as Albus Dumbledore which clearly very few people in this world are and Draco was one of them. I tend to agree that it is very difficult to stop hating a group of people when you are conditioned to do so from a very young age by someone who's opinions you trust, like Draco would have trusted his father's. It does take someone who has an open mind and who is an independent thinker to question the validity of their beliefs when they encounter evidence contrary to what they've been taught. Draco was not able to do this. Rather than living in a "bubble" (and therefore being somewhat shielded from seeing the truth), I believe he was just too secure in his beliefs to question them. Also, it's possible he was able to explain away that Hermione's academic superiority was just a fluke and that all other muggleborns aren't like that. It's unclear as to whether he is able to change his worldview as an adult, or at least to moderate his views a bit (I haven't read DH in a very long time, but as I recall he only makes a cameo in the epilogue and doesn't speak at all). I would like to think that Draco didn't teach Scorpius to hate muggleborns and muggles, but realistically he probably would have passed on at least some portion of these thoughts to Scorpius.

Also, it's possible he was able to explain away that Hermione's academic superiority was just a fluke and that all other muggleborns aren't like that
Now that you have said that, something springs to my mind. Draco thought of muggleborns as people who didn't deserve magical knowledge as they didn't have magic in their blood (ancestry) and were like thieves. What if this notion instead of making Draco stop and think about it, made him hate Hermione even more?