~~ 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

[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).