Character SWOT analysis
Due to certain unforseen, er, complications the two-week trip turned out to be a three-week one, and although said complications were unwelcome, the extra week I stayed in Auckland wasn't half bad at all :-) Offline friends who've been delightful companies and great support during the little advanture, who read this LJ- I shall stay in touch *this time* (sounds familiar? I have no clue why!), and I really really love you all so much *huggles*
LJ friends- I resent thee for having broken thy promises to make thyselves boring during my absence \_/ But to certain individual who alleged to have ditched HP for QAF (you know who you are), you'll be back, take it from someone who has cheated on HP with so many other obsessions she thought would've overthrown Teh HP for good but all turned out to be passionate but brief affairs. It's not the source material that possesses such staying power of attraction, it's the fandom ;-P
So I was skimming through HPFGU again and was reminded of this rather odd tendency for some people to compare one character's "goodness" or ethics with that of another's, and often end their posts with "and that is the defining difference between character A and B (and why he or she adores A but loathes B).
Now, while it's not my concern if everyone likes who I like (I prefer my favorite characters to not have an universal popularity, it makes me feel like a boring commoner :P), it puzzles me when people think one's goodness/ethics can be compared with that of another in a crude, apple-to-apple manner. Harry, is one of their favorite example of how people can turn out decent/noble despite of nasty childhood experiences that we villain apoligists use as 'excuses' for the foul behaviors of such characters as Snape and Tom Riddle. While Sirius an ample proof Draco could not blame his genes and upbringing for being an evil twerp that he is.
As I type I realize how these all have long been argued to death: The villain bashers would say look, Harry was bullied throughout his childhood the way Snape was, and he grew up a freak (with unexplainable magic ability) in a loveless environment the way Riddle did, but he never turned out to be like either of them so Snape and Tom mostly only have themselves to blame! The villain apologists or sympathetics would then say, oh we are not excusing their bad behaviors, but see, it's understandable that they became what they are, and their circumstances were not really essentially the same as Harry's... In fact I was many times trapped in similar arguments about being possibly too harsh or too lax on a character's faults as well. And I don't want to get into such debates again, I think a) since I don't base my liking of a character on their goodness/ethics relative to another, so arguing with someone who does is just pointless and b) I really don't think the goodness/ethics of a person, instead of an action can be compared with another's, unless ALL the circumstances are identical- which is almost impossible.
I have always been of the opinion that a person is fully responsible for their actions, but when it comes to punishments and rewards the reasons behind one's actions should definitely be taken into consideration. And the point *really* isn't to negate wrongfulness of a negative action or goodness of a positive action, the matter at hand is how harsh a punishment (in terms of fandom discussion: criticism/bashing) or how generous a reward (praising/sympathizing) each of us think they 'deserve' considering their respective circumstances.
It's unfortunate that these discussions often tumble down into one simply about "are you saying the good characters are bad while the bad characters are good?!". Um.
A less wanky (perhaps= not fun for some ;p) way of evaluating how 'deserving' a character is of the critique and compliments they receive, is probably not to compare their merits and faults with those of another character at all. (But it's another matter when discussing about parallels)
Allow me to put things into formulae and tables because they are easier for me to work with :D
A person is the product of nature and nurture. Nature + Nurture = Character
There are Strengths and Weaknesses among Nature and Nurture, for example, Draco having Lucius and Narcissa as parents means he would inherit a relatively good brain and certainly good wealth from them (strengths), while being subject to teachings of blood/wealth discriminations (weaknesses). And a person's choice at any given time is very much influenced by the circumstances surroundng them at the time (opportunities and threats), so Michael Porter's SWOT analysis can be applied here:
Draco Malfoy
Strengths
Intelligence
Social adaptiveness
Wealth
Fair appearances
Resourcefulness
Creativity
Good reflex
Weaknesses
A Death Eater father
A LV/DE supporting mother
Sheltered childhood that lead to dependency and lack of independent thinking
Materially spoilt
Little meaningful exposure to other ways of thinking
Opportunities
Snape's protection
Narcissa's love
Lucius' imprisonment
Dumbledore's forgiveness
Harry's witness of his wand lowering
Threats
Voldemort and fear of Voldemort
Loyalty to Lucius
The Light Side believing him to be a DE
Bellatrix making sure he won't defect
Of course, a person's strengths can turn out to be weaknesses in a different situation, for example Draco's resourcefulness enabled him to carry out a destructive DE mission successfully. And opportunities and threats do swap places as circumstances change as well. Pre-HBP, Draco had more going against him than going for him (he didn't have Snape's sworn protection nor Dumbledore's forgiveness then), and now it's a tougher call.
I shall go on and do a SWOT on other characters in a later entry. Off to lunch now :D
LJ friends- I resent thee for having broken thy promises to make thyselves boring during my absence \_/ But to certain individual who alleged to have ditched HP for QAF (you know who you are), you'll be back, take it from someone who has cheated on HP with so many other obsessions she thought would've overthrown Teh HP for good but all turned out to be passionate but brief affairs. It's not the source material that possesses such staying power of attraction, it's the fandom ;-P
So I was skimming through HPFGU again and was reminded of this rather odd tendency for some people to compare one character's "goodness" or ethics with that of another's, and often end their posts with "and that is the defining difference between character A and B (and why he or she adores A but loathes B).
Now, while it's not my concern if everyone likes who I like (I prefer my favorite characters to not have an universal popularity, it makes me feel like a boring commoner :P), it puzzles me when people think one's goodness/ethics can be compared with that of another in a crude, apple-to-apple manner. Harry, is one of their favorite example of how people can turn out decent/noble despite of nasty childhood experiences that we villain apoligists use as 'excuses' for the foul behaviors of such characters as Snape and Tom Riddle. While Sirius an ample proof Draco could not blame his genes and upbringing for being an evil twerp that he is.
As I type I realize how these all have long been argued to death: The villain bashers would say look, Harry was bullied throughout his childhood the way Snape was, and he grew up a freak (with unexplainable magic ability) in a loveless environment the way Riddle did, but he never turned out to be like either of them so Snape and Tom mostly only have themselves to blame! The villain apologists or sympathetics would then say, oh we are not excusing their bad behaviors, but see, it's understandable that they became what they are, and their circumstances were not really essentially the same as Harry's... In fact I was many times trapped in similar arguments about being possibly too harsh or too lax on a character's faults as well. And I don't want to get into such debates again, I think a) since I don't base my liking of a character on their goodness/ethics relative to another, so arguing with someone who does is just pointless and b) I really don't think the goodness/ethics of a person, instead of an action can be compared with another's, unless ALL the circumstances are identical- which is almost impossible.
I have always been of the opinion that a person is fully responsible for their actions, but when it comes to punishments and rewards the reasons behind one's actions should definitely be taken into consideration. And the point *really* isn't to negate wrongfulness of a negative action or goodness of a positive action, the matter at hand is how harsh a punishment (in terms of fandom discussion: criticism/bashing) or how generous a reward (praising/sympathizing) each of us think they 'deserve' considering their respective circumstances.
It's unfortunate that these discussions often tumble down into one simply about "are you saying the good characters are bad while the bad characters are good?!". Um.
A less wanky (perhaps= not fun for some ;p) way of evaluating how 'deserving' a character is of the critique and compliments they receive, is probably not to compare their merits and faults with those of another character at all. (But it's another matter when discussing about parallels)
Allow me to put things into formulae and tables because they are easier for me to work with :D
A person is the product of nature and nurture. Nature + Nurture = Character
There are Strengths and Weaknesses among Nature and Nurture, for example, Draco having Lucius and Narcissa as parents means he would inherit a relatively good brain and certainly good wealth from them (strengths), while being subject to teachings of blood/wealth discriminations (weaknesses). And a person's choice at any given time is very much influenced by the circumstances surroundng them at the time (opportunities and threats), so Michael Porter's SWOT analysis can be applied here:
Draco Malfoy
Strengths
Intelligence
Social adaptiveness
Wealth
Fair appearances
Resourcefulness
Creativity
Good reflex
Weaknesses
A Death Eater father
A LV/DE supporting mother
Sheltered childhood that lead to dependency and lack of independent thinking
Materially spoilt
Little meaningful exposure to other ways of thinking
Opportunities
Snape's protection
Narcissa's love
Lucius' imprisonment
Dumbledore's forgiveness
Harry's witness of his wand lowering
Threats
Voldemort and fear of Voldemort
Loyalty to Lucius
The Light Side believing him to be a DE
Bellatrix making sure he won't defect
Of course, a person's strengths can turn out to be weaknesses in a different situation, for example Draco's resourcefulness enabled him to carry out a destructive DE mission successfully. And opportunities and threats do swap places as circumstances change as well. Pre-HBP, Draco had more going against him than going for him (he didn't have Snape's sworn protection nor Dumbledore's forgiveness then), and now it's a tougher call.
I shall go on and do a SWOT on other characters in a later entry. Off to lunch now :D