~~ bastards r us.

[reenka]

I really like mockery. I mean, I don't go to fandom_wank that much, but in ideal it has my smirking admiration, as long as they don't take themselves too seriously. I think comedians have always been somewhat cruel; that sort of explains Fred & George, as far as I'm concerned. They mean well, but I don't think they mean nicely, and that's all right with me. Bastards are okay, aren't they? There are more important things.

I'm the sort of person who's both oversensitive about being mocked and able to take it pretty well, I think, depending on how I feel, though I almost never indulge in it. I like it because while it's often perpetuated by the self-deluded, it is still a form of hardcore brutal honesty even if there's no truth in it, and I often hold honesty above mercy as a virtue. My ideal would be mercy that didn't announce itself too loudly; that was understated and implicit rather than preachy and earnest; that was hidden beneath brashness and sarcasm, perhaps. I know all too well that kindness & politeness aren't the same thing, and politeness is merely a societal requirement, not a virtue. Brutal mercy would also be nice and that perhaps says more about me than most things I could possibly say.

So for people like me, there are several different bastard characters to choose from:

People who like effete, lightly sarcastic flouncy bois with a simple & elegant grudge (all bark, v. little bite) would go for fanon!Draco;
    "Whee, look at this shiny pretty boy! Look at him make cutesy remarks that aren't really mocking so much as witty, act sophisticated and mature, and make every girl & boy swoon!"

People who like sadistic, intellectual mocking men with a twisted & complex grudge would go for Snape;
    "Wheee, he's such a deluded bastard; look at him, led around by his emotions all the time! Watch him make one ill-advised, underhanded, desperate mistake after another! And yet, he's snarky and really needs someone to love him if only he knew what to do with it!"

People who like fiery taunting bastards with a burning grudge would go for Sirius;
    "Whee, he's such a hot-blooded bastard! Watch him growl and tear a leg off a chap for looking his way wrong! Why taunt when you can prank? Why glide when you can swagger? Indeed, why do you need anything else when you're Sirius Black??

And people who like fiercely teasing, earnest boys with a righteous grudge that needs Righteous Vengeance, I suppose, would go for Harry. Harry can also migrate into both fiery taunting and withdrawn brooding if you push him; that's why he's cute in OoTP, but I know I'm not speaking for the majority in this. However, Harry above all others symbolizes the idea of 'brutal mercy', or at least that's where I think he's heading in canon. Wah <3 (And yeah, so milquetoast Harry... seems pointless to me, kinda.)

I think I like fiery mocking bastards with a twisted grudge-- haha, some sort of mix of Sirius & Snape, and actually I could see Draco like that (so you see where the effete fanon starts to grate unless he's redeemed by being really funny). I think my complaint against effete, elegant & sophisticated boils down to 'not nearly hardcore enough, baby. not nearly'. But I guess being hardcore is a fringe characteristic for a reason (though I mean, I'd say plenty of stupid people are pretty stupid hardcore, but that's neither here nor there.)
    I think most people still want likable bastards no matter what flavor, and I do too, though perhaps I have a rare enough idea of what's 'likable'. I guess the most popular notion is that a 'likable bastard' has a heart of gold-- I just like them to have a heart of blood.
    Given that bit earlier about twisted mockingness, perhaps I should've been into Snape all along, since twisted mocking Draco isn't so much in evidence? (and I would've been if not for him being old, greasy and... did I mention old?)

Comments

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

I think obviously a lot can be forgiven when it's funny. But then, wanting to be a likeable bastard and being one are two different things. There are times when F_W spends more time telling everybody it's funny than actually being funny, for instance.

Or the twins, for instance, are sometimes actually funny in canon and sometimes just stupid. If you find it hilarious when someone breaks out in boils maybe they're a riot but, uh, not all that witty to me. Draco occasionally hits the mark, often is just embarassing (with the embarassing parts sometimes funny and sometimes repulsive). Snape can be funny, but also hurtle headlong into pathetic.

I don't know how much self-honesty this sort of thing requires, actually. It seems like it should require some, but maybe it doesn't always. I mean, I was just in, like, 2 conversations about motivation and I said, in response to judging people by their own value systems, that I find this difficult because people usually lie about their value systems. What they claim they are doing is often not what they're really doing. Often they've just dressed up something needy and petty as something honorable or worthy, you know? I think the twins telling themselves they mean well or are righteous often hurts their humor, for instance. Draco and Snape do that too, but maybe it's just so tranparent with them you can laugh it off more (though I think that's often why the few times they do so genuine passion and emotion about something important I take it seriously).

Not that there's one way to do humor well. You can be funny while passionately believing in things or funny while believing in nothing. Self-delusion can be funny and so can self-awareness.

[yourpoison.livejournal.com]

As usual, you are saner and probably more awake than me :))
But yes. I was mostly wanting to make up little taglines about Draco & Snape & complain about the lack of hardcore-mocking!Draco of yore, I dunno if you could tell :>
It's true that the twins aren't really all that funny-- as I often do, I was going more with the intent & archetype behind their characters than their... um, demonstratable behavior; it's really interesting, seeing them meaning well as being a delusion... I mean, hard to tell if it is (they haven't done anything truly good or evil yet, just chaotic).

The thing about lying about one's value system didn't even occur to me (since that's probably the very last thing I'd ever imagine lying about myself). I may not be fully aware of my values or change/highlight some aspects depending on mood, but it's near-impossible to just make something up. It's true that people get caught up in others' expectations or the group-think collective values of whatever venue they're in.
This:
Often they've just dressed up something needy and petty as something honorable or worthy, you know?
This bears thinking on, definitely. That's probably why I said I could admire f_w's ideal rather than its practice; in practice I do believe most people don't achieve their ideals and probably don't even want to. I mean, anyone could talk the talk & make themselves sound good, but it doesn't necessarily mean they even -could- act like that if they wanted to, since instincts & knee-jerk reactions come into play. Like the guy who's really in love with his wife but cheats all the time anyway. "But baby, I didn't mean it!" &etc.

I didn't really think the twins' humor & their well-meaningness had to be conflated; I just thought that this makes it mostly inadvertent/unconscious cruelty, then, and this could be ascribed to so many people. But "lie" sounds like a conscious choice; I'd imagine most people deceive themselves as much as they lie, don't they? I can see how it's all harder to take on the 'side of the righteous', in any conflict probably, because shouldn't the righteous actually be righteous or something? *sigh*

For instance, the twins don't amuse -me-, but they amuse themselves, it seems like, and should I judge humor-motivated actions by whether they amuse -me-? I'm not sure. Someone could be a bad comedian but they'd still be a comedian, or something. But I did say that about funniness redeeming in terms of making people who're otherwise bastards likable;I think to me, Fred & George don't fit into the 'bastard' so much as the 'jackass' (stupid prick) category, sort of the way I don't get upset at f_w because it's like, when they suck, it's because they don't have any more of a clue than who they mock. Draco, James & Sirius are jackasses more than bastards too, but Draco is more harmless than Fred & George 'cause he's just such a pathetic loser as well, so hard to take seriously :> But I guess for me, likability doesn't enter into the equation in the same way for jackasses, 'cause they're... moronic teenagers ('just stupid', as you said)? Not mean so much as... they belong on MTV :>

Self-delusion can be funny and so can self-awareness.
This is v. true :D (Well, not that anything you said is untrue, so I'm basically just babbling at you as usual.) You know, I think the most self-aware character in HP canon is probably Dumbledore, and it's pretty sad that he's just not all that funny :/ hahah

[malafede.livejournal.com]

I don't think the twins mean well. Not that they mean evil. They just mean FUN, you know, that's why I love them so. :)

[yourpoison.livejournal.com]

I didn't mean to conflate their theoretical well-meaningness & the pranks; I think they're separate qualities that sort of put things in a certain context (of comedy rather than malice-- and if there wasn't that well-meaningness, it would no longer be merely 'fun'... though there are some issues with that statement). In my own context, I said 'comedy can be cruel, but that's its nature', basically, and it's alleviated by the comedian not being cruel for cruelty's sake, and that's what I meant by 'well-meaning'.

[malafede.livejournal.com]

i don't think they mean well in any context. whatever they do, it just seems to follow the basic rule that it's has to be funny.

[yourpoison.livejournal.com]

Ahhh, here is where I feel like I should know canon more on the tip of my tongue or something. I didn't mean to say their actions seemed to imply a purpose other than humor or what have you (though I think there's been mixed things like them escaping on their brooms that had a 'point'); I myself see people as well-meaning unless they consciously don't. That is, unless you can prove them as neutral, and I think their mere implicit friendship/relationship with the rest of the Weasleys, say, as well as my outlook on humor (ie, it's not really dangerous), knocks them into the realm of the well-meaning. Doesn't mean they're doing 'good' or even intending to most of the time, just that stupid humor in itself isn't enough to make them more negative than neutral (to me).