Narcissa Malfoy Debate 1

Admin

Deputy Head

Subject: Narcissa Malfoy Debate 1 Fri Sep 23 2011, 16:16

Narcissa Malfoy- a loving mother or scared follower?

In the last Harry Potter book, the Deathly Hallows, we learned that Narcissa Malfoy was willing to do anything to protect her son- even if it meant disobeying the Dark Lord. Now, let’s take in the idea that Draco was, in fact, with them the whole time in the forest. Do you think Narcissa’s answer would have changed to ‘no, he is a live,’ or remained the same? In this debate, each team needs to give me their idea on why it would have changed and why it would stay the same. Sources count, so provide them if you have any.

Pro Team: it would remain the same answer
Con Team: it would have changed

Each debate is open for a month. If the Con team goes first, then it should follow a con, pro, con, pro sequence and likewise if the Pro team goes first. Try to not go out of order so it makes grading easier. Also, try not to put much into one post so you have much to use later.

This will be open for one month

Subject: Re: Narcissa Malfoy Debate 1 Thu Sep 29 2011, 12:15

Had Draco been at his mother's side throught the Battle of Hogwarts, there is no way Narcissa Malfoy's answer to Voldemort would not have changed from "Yes, Harry's dead" to "No, he's still alive". As she has showed countless times throughout the series, she, and her husband, are very fickle, switching sides when it bests suits their needs, but in the case of Narcissa, she is also very protective of her only son. There are many examples of this throughout the book, but I will start out with the background for her protectiveness of her son.

First off, Narcissa and her husband claimed to be under the Imperius Curse throughout the First Wizarding War, avoiding Azkaban prison, showing their self-interest, choosing the side that they truly believe will win. So when Narcissa detects that Harry is still, in fact, alive, that was a moment where she obviously had to consider, beyond just her son which was her major reasons for answering the way she did, that Harry, who was able to withstand the Killing Curse twice now, would most likely end up on the winning side, which convinced her that lying to Voldemort might be enough to get her out of Azkaban a second time, which we know, was in fact the case as she and her family were pardoned for their crimes through her lie to Voldemort.

However, her fickle behavior was not the major reason for her answers, but her protectiveness over her son, as stated before. In 1991, when Draco was first heading off to attend school, we later learn that Lucius wanted him to attend Durmstrang Institute, known for the Dark Arts and admittance for only pure-bloods and half-bloods. However, Narcissa was unable to put such distance between herself and her son and insisted that Draco go to school locally, at Hogwarts. If she couldn't even imagine him being out of the country at school, there's no way she would have been okay with a war lasting longer than it already had when she was not aware if her son was alive or dead. We also know that Narcissa was so devoted to her son that she sent him sweets by owl every day at school; taking the time to give that much attention and love to her son should be enough to make clear that her answer would have changed; she would not put him at such needless risk.

It is also known that following her proclamation, both her and her husband ignored the rest of the Battle of Hogwarts, only focused on finding Draco. If her son was not the reason for her answer, why would she enter the battle just to find Draco? No, it is clear that had Draco been in the forest, there would have been no reason for Narcissa to lie to Voldemort; without her son, her fear for Draco's life rose above her desire to be on whichever side was to win.

With the son she adores so with him, there would be nothing for her in lying to Voldemort that Harry was dead. By saying that Harry was dead, it enabled her to search for her son much more quickly than if Voldemort had learned that Harry was, in fact alive. Why would she put herself, her husband and her precious son at risk by lying to Voldemort if her whole family was together and safe? She would have handed Harry over quickly not only to stop the war, but to put her family back into the safety of Voldemort's favor.

Sources: http://harrypotter.wikia.com/wiki/Narcissa_Malfoy
Harry Potter and the Sorceror's Stone
Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows

Subject: Re: Narcissa Malfoy Debate 1 Sun Oct 02 2011, 09:48

Naricssa Malfoy is a smart woman and certainly one of self interest and therefore her answer in the forest would have remained the same whether or not Draco was standing by her side. Now, some may say that she, as a woman of self interest, would change her answer so to better protect her family and herself. However, I present to you the case that it was in her best interest all along to lie to Voldemort about Harry being dead because she had the most to gain from Voldemort falling.

Imagine a world where Lord Voldemort reigns without Harry Potter to trump him. It'd be so much different than the world in the seventh Harry Potter book. Oh wait, it wouldn't be. See, even if Harry Potter wasn't around there would still be a war going on. As Neville stands up to say when Harry is brought back supposedly dead, there would be many that continued to fight against Voldemort. This would mean that Narcissa's family would continuously be in danger still. Her son would be put in the middle of fighting, her husband as well, even herself. There would always be a large resistance toward Voldemort and the war would continue on for a long while still. What would she have to gain from that? Especially, with the strong chance at the end of it that she wouldn't come out on the right side. Voldemort had fallen before and even with Harry dead, his best friends would be alive to continue his work and try to get him out of the way.

There was also more to risk in that very moment by saying that Harry was alive. What if a fight broke out right in the forest? With Draco in the middle of it? The risk that her son could get hit wouldn't be one that Narcissa would be willing to take. Nor would she be willing to take the risk that she would get hit for the sake of Voldemort. By lying she was able to give herself a bit of leeway to get out of there when Voldemort did discover that he was alive because obviously it'd create quite a scene and probably a panic. Also, she was giving the other side a chance to win. She realizes that Harry Potter is a good, loyal sort of fellow and that if he survives and wins, he won't let anything happen to her family or herself because she saved his life. He'd remember that debt and give her family a way to walk away from the happenings without punishment. Harry had the better chance of ending the war swiftly, of stopping the danger for her family, and of just giving her something more to look forward to.

By telling the truth to Voldemort, she wouldn't gain favor with him. Not in the low statue that her family was already in with Voldemort. There was no standing left for them to gain on that side, so Narcissa, being the smart woman that she is, would have kept her answer because it's the one with which she had the most to gain.

Sources
http://www.hp-lexicon.org/wizards/narcissa.html
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows

» Narcissa Malfoy
» Twilight Debate #2: The Edward Debate
» Twilight Debate #3: The Jacob Debate
» Lucius/Narcissa
» The Malfoy's