In a way, YES he had deserved it.
Interestingly, while Draco has done a lot of things in HBP that objectively deserve much cursing, it was his face-stomping Harry that made him so very unforgivable in many's eyes (probably because he neither cried over nor was punished, or looked like will *ever* be punished for it
( Read more... )
Comments 26
I don't know if it's just absurd, or amusing, that there are people who go on about Draco being irreddemable because "he broke Harry's nose!!1", when he almost killed somebody (well, three, since he almost killed two by accident). Silly me to think that Dumbledore's, Ron's or Katie Bell's life should be worth more than Harry's nose. ;-)
Though a broken nose is a nasty business, it hardly seems worse then hexing someone to a slug and stepping on their head, and we're living in a world where someone's broken skull can be easily repaired, so yeah, I cheered too, not because Harry "desrved it", but because, as you said, it was his turn. Has been for a long time.
Reply
Haha perhaps because school rivalry is where the tension is, where people can refer back to their own life experiences on. Most people have not attempted murder, the obviously morally-reprehensive action on Draco's part after all.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Yup, it wasn't even about Harry having "started it" this time with his spying. It was simply Harry taking a risk doing something stupid, and got caught by his enemy since year 1 who had at the time more reasons to hurt him than usual ;-)
So ITA that part of the thing there is to even them out so they can go forward on different ground.
I see it as the last page of Harry and Draco's "epic" schoolboy rivalry, and the beginning of a new phase between them.
I think it's a bad idea to try to jump back to just totting up a bad score for Malfoy. Harry's beyond it, and so is Draco.
Word!
Reply
Reply
Reply
First off, he's using the same old trick of the invisibility cloak. From book one, its been his "let's sneak around" device. I wouldn't be surprised if by book six it was one of those secrets that everyone knows. Draco isn't the least bit surprised by it. There are better ways to eavesdrop that don't require being in a full room where anyone can bump into you. And then jumping unto a rack isn't the most graceful nor silent way to get out of the way. Following that with making the "Uff" sound.
Draco would have to be blind, deaf and comatose not to notice all that. So Harry got caught. IMO, Draco held back. He could have done a lot worse. He was beaten to a bloody pulp the year before. All he did was step on Harry's face and his hand, not that bad when you consider it.
Reply
And don't forget he stuck his foot out so the door bounced back when Blaise was trying to shut the door. Smooth, very smooth Harry.
Yeah, if that little violent incident had any moral of the story at all, it would be not to get too cocky just because a trick has worked wonder in the past- constant vigilance! Or something.
I was rather surprised Draco had held back, like you said. The kid certainly had matured quite a bit during a fatherless summer.
Reply
Reply
But neither can be 'valid' on its own ;-)
but I really find it hard to look at any controversial issue such as this without seeing all aspects of it (motivation and action).Yes. Though I did skip much of the evaluation stage because when we are talking about these two guys, it's hardly individual conflicts that aren't partial outcome of (a) previous one(s), and they almost always have bearing on future conflicts that are bound to come along- it's a vicious cycle. The motivations behind each of their nasty words and actions against each other, except for the earliest ones, were almost 100% to hurt the other party. Draco got most of the blame because he certainly has initiated most of the fights, and his words are often nastier and unacceptable by today's society, but hasn't Harry also elevated the level of their fued by being the first to resort to physical violence ( ... )
Reply
Oh no, I think both are perfectly valid; I just don't think they make complete sense on their own. But you can look at one of these situations and hold the motivational aspect into higher consideration than the final outcome, or vice versa, and it's still a valid way to judge the situation. From Ron's attacking Draco in PS to Draco's releasing the Death Eaters into Hogwarts in HBP, JKR has always been careful to give us both sides of the problem: the violence, and what motivated the violence. So if you're looking only at one or the other, it's not as though you're misreading the canon.
it's hardly individual conflicts that aren't partial outcome of (a) previous one(s), and they almost always have bearing on future conflicts that are bound to come along- it's a vicious cycle. The motivations behind each of their nasty words and actions against each other, except for the earliest ones, were almost 100% to hurt the other party. Draco got most of the blame because he certainly has initiated ( ... )
Reply
You perhaps wouldn't be misreading canon, relying on just one perspective of looking at things- but that's never my biggest concern though. Take the GOF train scene for example, I could not be sure then if those who read it as "the Gryff guys were doing no wrong" had the author's backing, but I would disagree with them in principle no matter what Rowling true intention there was- I am not arguing about how that scene should "correctly" be read, I simply disagree with the notion that the Gryff guys were doing the "right" thing, regardless of what Rowling has intended us to think.
I've never quite seen how the D.A's randomly popping up and hexing Draco and Co. factors into Harry and Draco's relationship as it stands. I totally agree! That's why I did not use that incident as an example of their starting-a-fight-and-ended-up-receiving-a-disproportional-backlash pattern of interaction, it was a nasty accident really. As a Draco fan I felt ( ... )
Reply
Leave a comment