I like the abusive relationship idea! Though it seems like it'd apply to Bella or maybe Regulus moreso than the Malfoys. I don't really know what's going on in either Narcissa or Lucius' head-- without fandom analyzing it, I can honestly tell you that canon would have given me no clue either way, so it's hard to be surprised or disappointed. As for Lucius being an idiot rather than a schemer... see, I can totally see him as an idiot before, too (especially when you remember the sheer ridiculousness of movie!Lucius), though it's hard to imagine why he has power/influence except that it's literally all about breeding and they just happen to be Purebloods. In some way I suppose there's some sort of point there, 'cause the Blacks are messed up & doomed too (another powerful Pureblood family), and the Weasleys are marginalized and poor. It seems like the reason they keep going isn't any real skill or cunning but just going with the flow and clinging to their assets and attaching themselves to power. I suppose none of this implies the ability to scheme that well, anyway.
I always thought it was ridiculous, the idea that Draco would die; I can't imagine JKR killing a student (and she didn't), though I did think Lucius would just 'cause he's disposable. But I guess him surviving or not wasn't that important? He never put himself in danger, it seems like, and he never seemed in the thick of battle-- so Voldemort would've had to personally dispatch him, and it seems like Lucius tried to be or actually was of some use to him till the end. I don't think I've seen him scheme or be intelligent throughout the books (unless you consider slipping the diary to be an intelligent survival-oriented scheme... isn't it just ridiculous? what did he really think would happen? and in the end Voldy lost a part of his soul). I think it's sorta like how the Dursleys never really got a real resolution in book 7, or Sirius-- or rather, it was kinda always like this. I feel like people die or live depending on what the plot requires, rather than to serve any character arc directly. So I suppose it's just that 'alive' was the default result, rather than the author specifically being benevolent, I feel like. She just didn't go out of her way to kill them because they didn't need to die-- and also perhaps because everything they ever did was for each other, so each other is what they got.
I dunno what my point is :> I feel like Lucius surviving post war-1 was more the messed-upness of that whole situation rather than Lucius' survivor instincts. I mean, Wormtail was free, Voldy wasn't really dead, Harry was being abused by the Dursleys, and Sirius was unjustly imprisoned. No one knew, it seemed, what really happened, and there was a lot of desire in the Wizarding World to believe whatever seemed easiest and most likely to mean Voldy wasn't an issue anymore. It was probably easy for Lucius to say Voldy was controlling him but he's fine now 'cause everyone wanted to be 'fine now' in the Wizarding world even though they weren't.
Of course this is just my guess. I am more willing to believe the 'they're complete pathetic failures & always have been' party line than is totally realistic, though, I know that :>
no subject
I always thought it was ridiculous, the idea that Draco would die; I can't imagine JKR killing a student (and she didn't), though I did think Lucius would just 'cause he's disposable. But I guess him surviving or not wasn't that important? He never put himself in danger, it seems like, and he never seemed in the thick of battle-- so Voldemort would've had to personally dispatch him, and it seems like Lucius tried to be or actually was of some use to him till the end. I don't think I've seen him scheme or be intelligent throughout the books (unless you consider slipping the diary to be an intelligent survival-oriented scheme... isn't it just ridiculous? what did he really think would happen? and in the end Voldy lost a part of his soul). I think it's sorta like how the Dursleys never really got a real resolution in book 7, or Sirius-- or rather, it was kinda always like this. I feel like people die or live depending on what the plot requires, rather than to serve any character arc directly. So I suppose it's just that 'alive' was the default result, rather than the author specifically being benevolent, I feel like. She just didn't go out of her way to kill them because they didn't need to die-- and also perhaps because everything they ever did was for each other, so each other is what they got.
I dunno what my point is :> I feel like Lucius surviving post war-1 was more the messed-upness of that whole situation rather than Lucius' survivor instincts. I mean, Wormtail was free, Voldy wasn't really dead, Harry was being abused by the Dursleys, and Sirius was unjustly imprisoned. No one knew, it seemed, what really happened, and there was a lot of desire in the Wizarding World to believe whatever seemed easiest and most likely to mean Voldy wasn't an issue anymore. It was probably easy for Lucius to say Voldy was controlling him but he's fine now 'cause everyone wanted to be 'fine now' in the Wizarding world even though they weren't.
Of course this is just my guess. I am more willing to believe the 'they're complete pathetic failures & always have been' party line than is totally realistic, though, I know that :>