The other trouble with Draco, I think, is that he ultimately does do what Phineas says is a Slytherin trait: maybe he's got some courage, but when it comes down to it he always decides to save his skin.
Maybe that's what's so cowardly about the forest scene? He didn't make sure anyone was else was ok. (Hee, except in Movie!Canon. Which cracks me up no end.) Because, really, since even the Gryffindor bravery definition doesn't mean not being afraid, I can only presume that the definition of cowardice is either a) overt self-protectiveness and neglecting of protecting others or b) showing *gasp* your feelings (of fear, in this case) But then, if a) applied at all, it wouldn't make much sense, because for all the 'hero complex' jive and talk of 'chivalry', the Gryffindors kind of warrior ethos doesn't leave much (not that I want to criticise the house, lest I be seen to need to discredit a fictional group or anything!) room for the weak. It's okay to rescue girls, or defend absent friends, but the boys seem to have a system of 'stand on your own two feet, sink or swim'. Look at Neville, the timidest, most emotional; and least popular. Not to mention, there are plenty of scenes, the three-headed dog one, for example, which are extremely similiar (no screaming, except again, in movie canon, but some pretty quick running, and no indication of anybody checking to see if the others are okay.) Not to mention, Harry shows no concern for Malfoy when Neville and his flare goes up. I'm sure he would help out an enemy, in an emergency (especially what with those Snape-James parallels that keep cropping up) unlike Malfoy, but we've not had that much indication of that yet, really. It's not like there's exposition of 'By the way, Malfoy didn't get eaten by the giant spiders/wandered the whole forest all night, since Hagrid was so very professional and oh, I don't know, made sure?!'
I think for me it comes more in the form of cowardly arguments.
Yes, I think being honest with yourself is a form of bravery. If you're kidding yourself, you can be physically heroic, but it's ultimately meaningless if you've no idea of your own motives. I often find myself running into trouble because I assume everyone is as aware of their nasty sides as I am! (Gosh, that sounds so arrogant, and yet, pathetic...)
When I started posting places I remember being very aware of posting on the 'net as almost an exercise in courage, as stupid as that sounds, and I actually think it did have an impact on my personality in general.
Totally. Even now, I try to avoid outright arguing (wouldn't know it, would you? ;) or discussing anything too personal (I can't bear it when people bring up their life experiences as a way to win unrelated fandom arguments, anyway.) and get nervous doing stupid things like chatting on AIM or writing an email.
That's probably just my version of courage--I don't go for the swashbuckler so much as the person speaking the truth even if it's dangerous.
Oh, yeah. I often find on soap operas, even, the 'villainous' characters are the ones who say true things, but things you're 'not supposed' to say. But...they're *true!* Heh. I guess I really must be a Slytherclaw, because I think an ability to be perceptive and identify others weaknesses is very useful, and not really something to be ashamed of. Especially since, as always, good characters are allowed to say hurtful but correct things all the time.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2005-02-09 03:16 pm (UTC)*yoink* Mine! Bye! *flees*
Aw, thanks! <3
Already had some fish, if not improv.
http://www.livejournal.com/users/roxannelinton/29448.html?thread=526600#t526600
The other trouble with Draco, I think, is that he ultimately does do what Phineas says is a Slytherin trait: maybe he's got some courage, but when it comes down to it he always decides to save his skin.
Maybe that's what's so cowardly about the forest scene? He didn't make sure anyone was else was ok.
(Hee, except in Movie!Canon. Which cracks me up no end.)
Because, really, since even the Gryffindor bravery definition doesn't mean not being afraid, I can only presume that the definition of cowardice is either a) overt self-protectiveness and neglecting of protecting others or b) showing *gasp* your feelings (of fear, in this case)
But then, if a) applied at all, it wouldn't make much sense, because for all the 'hero complex' jive and talk of 'chivalry', the Gryffindors kind of warrior ethos doesn't leave much (not that I want to criticise the house, lest I be seen to need to discredit a fictional group or anything!) room for the weak. It's okay to rescue girls, or defend absent friends, but the boys seem to have a system of 'stand on your own two feet, sink or swim'. Look at Neville, the timidest, most emotional; and least popular. Not to mention, there are plenty of scenes, the three-headed dog one, for example, which are extremely similiar (no screaming, except again, in movie canon, but some pretty quick running, and no indication of anybody checking to see if the others are okay.) Not to mention, Harry shows no concern for Malfoy when Neville and his flare goes up. I'm sure he would help out an enemy, in an emergency (especially what with those Snape-James parallels that keep cropping up) unlike Malfoy, but we've not had that much indication of that yet, really. It's not like there's exposition of 'By the way, Malfoy didn't get eaten by the giant spiders/wandered the whole forest all night, since Hagrid was so very professional and oh, I don't know, made sure?!'
I think for me it comes more in the form of cowardly arguments.
Yes, I think being honest with yourself is a form of bravery. If you're kidding yourself, you can be physically heroic, but it's ultimately meaningless if you've no idea of your own motives.
I often find myself running into trouble because I assume everyone is as aware of their nasty sides as I am! (Gosh, that sounds so arrogant, and yet, pathetic...)
When I started posting places I remember being very aware of posting on the 'net as almost an exercise in courage, as stupid as that sounds, and I actually think it did have an impact on my personality in general.
Totally. Even now, I try to avoid outright arguing (wouldn't know it, would you? ;) or discussing anything too personal (I can't bear it when people bring up their life experiences as a way to win unrelated fandom arguments, anyway.) and get nervous doing stupid things like chatting on AIM or writing an email.
That's probably just my version of courage--I don't go for the swashbuckler so much as the person speaking the truth even if it's dangerous.
Oh, yeah. I often find on soap operas, even, the 'villainous' characters are the ones who say true things, but things you're 'not supposed' to say. But...they're *true!* Heh. I guess I really must be a Slytherclaw, because I think an ability to be perceptive and identify others weaknesses is very useful, and not really something to be ashamed of. Especially since, as always, good characters are allowed to say hurtful but correct things all the time.