~~ so unpithy it hurts.
Oct. 24th, 2004 02:45 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
reenkaIt is incredibly odd to realize that if I were 10 years younger, I'd be shipping Draco/Ginny right now. I know this with rather high certainty. I almost yearn for my never-to-be-written grand Draco/Ginny epic, ahahaha, naturally to be unfinished (I never finished -anything- at 16).
That was random. I really was (still am...?) a ridiculous silly over-romantic doofus since before adolescence, even. Anything the least bit archetypal and grand gets my vote, in the end. If it seems likely & reasonable, I'm just going to die of boredom (though mind you, complete chaotic irrationality is boring too-- it's walking the border of possibility that's the thing). Which is probably why I'm not the best person to write a ship manifesto :D :D
The main problem with Draco/Ginny is the Draco characterization it seems to imply (though of course my Draco would still be the brat-- pairing Draco/Ginny is really about sulky brat/sunny brat). Lately I've been wondering how exactly people get the idea that Draco is (or could be) icily composed again.
It is just -so- weird to me that I can't stop questioning it. Like, I can see repressed in some ways (that is, insincere and mocking), I can see him pretending things (like with Buckbeak), and I can see him trying to be Slytherin-- and failing. But failing. He's just so bloody transparent, no matter what, isn't he? I mean... he's not transparent to -Harry- (so it does depend on who you ask), but that's because Harry's got corresponding blind-spots & issues, and he seems -determined- to interpret Draco to fit his prejudices, and, well, vice versa. That's why they're so beautiful together, blahblah.
I suppose 'fake' and 'mean' translates to 'composed' in some people... but not all, right? Sometimes that just means you're an emotionally manipulative drama queen, i.e. Draco.
It's just really weird to keep reading fics where Draco 'flowers' into this stiff-upper-lip type person. I mean, he doesn't always have to whine (in canon, either) or anything-- not about being hexed by Harry, for instance-- but then, he just lets out his frustration by making fun of his tormentors, he doesn't get all distant. If he got 'distant' as part of growing up, where would all this frustration go...? If he didn't express his anger outwardly, what would be the outlet? I mean, he couldn't become introspective (and therefore inwardly focus frustration) from stress, could he? Like, that distancing at the end of OoTP is a sign of depression, in Harry at least, but Harry was always more introverted.
I mean, it's so simple for me-- Draco takes things out on other people. He feels bad about something (Potter getting attention, say), so he tries very light sabotage, but mostly just heckles and jeers-- he expresses himself through the most basic ploys for attention. I mean, he doesn't act -sincere- or anything-- he just lets the negative emotions out by, well, bullying and taunting. A truly arrogant, dismissive person would need to actually not care about the opinions of 'those plebes'-- whereas Draco clearly does, since he tries to get their goat over and over and get them down to his level (driving Harry to violence was probably unintentional, but he must have wanted Harry to blow up).
What really frustrates me is that I see 'icy' and 'superior' described as characteristics of in character Draco, which makes me feel decidedly delusional (then again, I only agree with![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
sistermagpie on fanon/canon matters most of the time, so it shouldn't be much of a surprise). *sigh* But really the point of this ramble was to convince myself that I wasn't insane & that Draco wasn't sekritly giving signs of being icily composed while I wasn't looking. 'Cause sometimes the fanon plays tricks on one's mind, and one must have constant vigilance, man.
It's just. I don't think I'm a stickler for canon in terms of Draco... I just get confused about what exactly most people who write Draco (in H/D in particular) -think- of Draco and what sort of mental process leads them to the arrogant-jaded-and-icy-aristocrat archetype over and over again. Why? basically. My brain just freezes when I try to understand that leap of logic, so I guess I should stop. Though if any of you reading feel canon Draco is generally controlled and unemotional, I'd appreciate knowing why.
~~
Also, this tangent is only vaguely related to Lasair's post about `The Gift' Buffy episode.... But it got me to think about characters doing things which are 'understandable' (considering their history) but not 'right' considering some objective ideal of what people 'should' do in a given situation to satisfy the greater good (if that applies).
That is, Buffy was willing to destroy the world 'cause she couldn't bear to make her sister a sacrifice so it could continue-- she was definitely operating on a code that applied to her and only her. That is, you couldn't say that someone else 'should' have done what Buffy did, 'cause it was all tied up in her own pov (which is the definition of selfishness, I suppose).
The question for me is-- why does the societally-imposed ethical system intrinsically trump an individual's sense of personal 'rightness'?
Of course, the idea of a 'greater good' as opposed to survivalism is rather basic as far an ethical system-- though most people would choose the most instinctually self-preserving option if trapped, I'm guessing. I suppose it just seems unfair to expect people whose world view doesn't match a certain model to include any given 'law'-- like, the whole world of BtVS doesn't operate upon the concept of mercy, really-- it's all about eliminating threats and doing what has to be done and 'protecting the innocent' by the innocent (girl).
That is to say, no matter if one's committing a 'good' or 'evil' act, one's acting out of the personal belief that one is justified or right on some level, even if it's an entirely emotionally-driven level. I think in a way, the whole world of BtVS conspired to produce Buffy and many of her flaws & strengths-- the Watcher Council was pretty corrupt, the vampires just kept coming and were proclaimed to have no souls, many of Buffy's patrols required split-second life-and-death decisions which were left up to her. She learned to go with what 'felt' right. She wasn't counseled in any sort of spiritual or larger system of thought-- she was basically a killing machine. So it should be no surprise that she chose selfishly when pushed to her limits-- she had no solid ethical foundation which to draw upon, therefore any 'law' (spoken by her Watcher or the viewer) would be extraneous and ultimately futile.
People kill because they think the other person 'deserves' to die (making it right) and other people condemn them for the same reason. And if one disregards one's personal code of ethics to adopt some imposed system which exist to tell its followers how to act, how does one ever -know- how to act if that system were to be threatened or even demolished by unprecedented circumstances...? If one lived one's whole life according to a 'holy' mercenary mind-set where violence and self-preservation went hand in hand, how does one know how to behave like a truly just being?
Because that's the basic precept of morality, isn't it? The idea that there are some things people -should- do (or even -be-), regardless of personal circumstance or feeling-- and that's precisely what I can't quite accept.
It reminds me of why I always thought I -had- no conventional sense of 'morality'. I only know what feels right to me, no more or less than that-- and I can't ever be sure that I'm capable of honestly prescribing behavior for others, though sometimes I think I'd be good at it because it's hard to resist thinking I -am- right in my 'hunches', even though I do my best to second-guess myself.
It's like... we have our ordinary lives, our circumstances-- and we only know what we know because we were so lucky (or unlucky). Our gut reactions aren't all drawn from circumstance, but our knowledge of ethics-- that's circumstantial, isn't it? And isn't the knowledge & awareness of 'the greater good' something that's not inborn? It seems like most politicians have no idea of it, certainly. Learning to value the -world- and not just one's own self & family (or clan)-- I would say that most of us haven't learned that, and in her behavior in privileging her sister over... everyone else Buffy was quite typically human, actually.
Man, now I know why I stay away from ethics classes. My head hurts.
~~
Btw, this is beautiful. Omg, KirkNot For President!!1 No, you don't understand, it's BEAUTIFUL. heh. cellia, this link's for you <3 *DIES OF GEEKDOM* (Omg, mating ritual!!1)
That was random. I really was (still am...?) a ridiculous silly over-romantic doofus since before adolescence, even. Anything the least bit archetypal and grand gets my vote, in the end. If it seems likely & reasonable, I'm just going to die of boredom (though mind you, complete chaotic irrationality is boring too-- it's walking the border of possibility that's the thing). Which is probably why I'm not the best person to write a ship manifesto :D :D
The main problem with Draco/Ginny is the Draco characterization it seems to imply (though of course my Draco would still be the brat-- pairing Draco/Ginny is really about sulky brat/sunny brat). Lately I've been wondering how exactly people get the idea that Draco is (or could be) icily composed again.
It is just -so- weird to me that I can't stop questioning it. Like, I can see repressed in some ways (that is, insincere and mocking), I can see him pretending things (like with Buckbeak), and I can see him trying to be Slytherin-- and failing. But failing. He's just so bloody transparent, no matter what, isn't he? I mean... he's not transparent to -Harry- (so it does depend on who you ask), but that's because Harry's got corresponding blind-spots & issues, and he seems -determined- to interpret Draco to fit his prejudices, and, well, vice versa. That's why they're so beautiful together, blahblah.
I suppose 'fake' and 'mean' translates to 'composed' in some people... but not all, right? Sometimes that just means you're an emotionally manipulative drama queen, i.e. Draco.
It's just really weird to keep reading fics where Draco 'flowers' into this stiff-upper-lip type person. I mean, he doesn't always have to whine (in canon, either) or anything-- not about being hexed by Harry, for instance-- but then, he just lets out his frustration by making fun of his tormentors, he doesn't get all distant. If he got 'distant' as part of growing up, where would all this frustration go...? If he didn't express his anger outwardly, what would be the outlet? I mean, he couldn't become introspective (and therefore inwardly focus frustration) from stress, could he? Like, that distancing at the end of OoTP is a sign of depression, in Harry at least, but Harry was always more introverted.
I mean, it's so simple for me-- Draco takes things out on other people. He feels bad about something (Potter getting attention, say), so he tries very light sabotage, but mostly just heckles and jeers-- he expresses himself through the most basic ploys for attention. I mean, he doesn't act -sincere- or anything-- he just lets the negative emotions out by, well, bullying and taunting. A truly arrogant, dismissive person would need to actually not care about the opinions of 'those plebes'-- whereas Draco clearly does, since he tries to get their goat over and over and get them down to his level (driving Harry to violence was probably unintentional, but he must have wanted Harry to blow up).
What really frustrates me is that I see 'icy' and 'superior' described as characteristics of in character Draco, which makes me feel decidedly delusional (then again, I only agree with
sistermagpie on fanon/canon matters most of the time, so it shouldn't be much of a surprise). *sigh* But really the point of this ramble was to convince myself that I wasn't insane & that Draco wasn't sekritly giving signs of being icily composed while I wasn't looking. 'Cause sometimes the fanon plays tricks on one's mind, and one must have constant vigilance, man.It's just. I don't think I'm a stickler for canon in terms of Draco... I just get confused about what exactly most people who write Draco (in H/D in particular) -think- of Draco and what sort of mental process leads them to the arrogant-jaded-and-icy-aristocrat archetype over and over again. Why? basically. My brain just freezes when I try to understand that leap of logic, so I guess I should stop. Though if any of you reading feel canon Draco is generally controlled and unemotional, I'd appreciate knowing why.
~~
Also, this tangent is only vaguely related to Lasair's post about `The Gift' Buffy episode.... But it got me to think about characters doing things which are 'understandable' (considering their history) but not 'right' considering some objective ideal of what people 'should' do in a given situation to satisfy the greater good (if that applies).
That is, Buffy was willing to destroy the world 'cause she couldn't bear to make her sister a sacrifice so it could continue-- she was definitely operating on a code that applied to her and only her. That is, you couldn't say that someone else 'should' have done what Buffy did, 'cause it was all tied up in her own pov (which is the definition of selfishness, I suppose).
The question for me is-- why does the societally-imposed ethical system intrinsically trump an individual's sense of personal 'rightness'?
Of course, the idea of a 'greater good' as opposed to survivalism is rather basic as far an ethical system-- though most people would choose the most instinctually self-preserving option if trapped, I'm guessing. I suppose it just seems unfair to expect people whose world view doesn't match a certain model to include any given 'law'-- like, the whole world of BtVS doesn't operate upon the concept of mercy, really-- it's all about eliminating threats and doing what has to be done and 'protecting the innocent' by the innocent (girl).
That is to say, no matter if one's committing a 'good' or 'evil' act, one's acting out of the personal belief that one is justified or right on some level, even if it's an entirely emotionally-driven level. I think in a way, the whole world of BtVS conspired to produce Buffy and many of her flaws & strengths-- the Watcher Council was pretty corrupt, the vampires just kept coming and were proclaimed to have no souls, many of Buffy's patrols required split-second life-and-death decisions which were left up to her. She learned to go with what 'felt' right. She wasn't counseled in any sort of spiritual or larger system of thought-- she was basically a killing machine. So it should be no surprise that she chose selfishly when pushed to her limits-- she had no solid ethical foundation which to draw upon, therefore any 'law' (spoken by her Watcher or the viewer) would be extraneous and ultimately futile.
People kill because they think the other person 'deserves' to die (making it right) and other people condemn them for the same reason. And if one disregards one's personal code of ethics to adopt some imposed system which exist to tell its followers how to act, how does one ever -know- how to act if that system were to be threatened or even demolished by unprecedented circumstances...? If one lived one's whole life according to a 'holy' mercenary mind-set where violence and self-preservation went hand in hand, how does one know how to behave like a truly just being?
Because that's the basic precept of morality, isn't it? The idea that there are some things people -should- do (or even -be-), regardless of personal circumstance or feeling-- and that's precisely what I can't quite accept.
It reminds me of why I always thought I -had- no conventional sense of 'morality'. I only know what feels right to me, no more or less than that-- and I can't ever be sure that I'm capable of honestly prescribing behavior for others, though sometimes I think I'd be good at it because it's hard to resist thinking I -am- right in my 'hunches', even though I do my best to second-guess myself.
It's like... we have our ordinary lives, our circumstances-- and we only know what we know because we were so lucky (or unlucky). Our gut reactions aren't all drawn from circumstance, but our knowledge of ethics-- that's circumstantial, isn't it? And isn't the knowledge & awareness of 'the greater good' something that's not inborn? It seems like most politicians have no idea of it, certainly. Learning to value the -world- and not just one's own self & family (or clan)-- I would say that most of us haven't learned that, and in her behavior in privileging her sister over... everyone else Buffy was quite typically human, actually.
Man, now I know why I stay away from ethics classes. My head hurts.
~~
Btw, this is beautiful. Omg, Kirk
cellia, this link's for you <3 *DIES OF GEEKDOM* (Omg, mating ritual!!1)
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2004-10-31 10:16 am (UTC)I was actually mostly confused 'cause there was this icon telling people what Draco Malfoy is not (how he's cold, calculating & the only part of Potter he wants is his head on a plate, thankyou), and I was like... er..... heh. When people start saying that's in character, I start going, "um... am I just... living in some alternate universe...?"
Though that bit about not being good at it implies that maybe he could be bumbling yet cold & calculating...?? Though those things really don't go together. At all. ^^;;
Yeah, it's that -transparency- that um... I find so... Draco, that I just don't see in the cold-ass!Draco. I mean, Harry's the only one who really doesn't 'get' the obvious things Draco does, it seems :>
no subject
Date: 2004-10-31 12:02 pm (UTC)Oh, I do think you can be (isn't Remus quite a bit detatched, as well? And though he's introverted, and not perhaps always seeking contact, I wouldn't call him asocial...), but it may be less common.
Though, I mean, I think Luna has lots of feelings-- just not related to other people :>
Oh yes, about Crumble-horned snorkacks, for instance.;-) I think she has strong feelings regarding her parents too, the only time we see her get worked up is if someone derided what her father do, or the things she believes in.
I was actually mostly confused 'cause there was this icon telling people what Draco Malfoy is not (how he's cold, calculating & the only part of Potter he wants is his head on a plate, thankyou), and I was like... er..... heh. When people start saying that's in character, I start going, "um... am I just... living in some alternate universe...?"
Yes, one begins to wonder. But then there are those who will claim that any portrait of an unredeemed Draco is IC (the more EVIL, the more IC), as if every unpleasant person was just the same. No wonder the fics get crappy; anyone who thinks that writing a believable character is done by deciding that character X is Evil!, character Y is Good, character Z is a nut-case, etc, isn't very likely to be able to bring any sort of depth into the characters.
Though that bit about not being good at it implies that maybe he could be bumbling yet cold & calculating...??
Well, you can try to manipulate and not succeeding, aren't you at least a little bit manipulating in tha case? And if you try to calculate but aren't very successful, you would be more calculating than someone who doesn't even try coughlikeHarrycough, wouldn't you?
Heh, in my own fic Draco, himself, thinks he's so good at masking thoughts and feelings, and wonders if everybody else can read minds when they see though him.
You think Draco's transparency would be obvious, wouldn't you? But then, if you follow the discussions in this fandom, it seems that there's a whole lot of readers who aren't able to see through him...