Who needs redemption?

[butterfly]

Interesting article on the Slytherins here. It's by sistermagpie. Some OotP spoilers.

Also, a question: at what point are people unredeemable?

I'm thinking of this not only because of Draco. It's because of Connor, Angel, and Spike. It's because of any character labeled 'evil'.

What responsibility do we, in general, have to people who are doing horrible things? Being raised to believe horrible things?

As a society, we lock them up when they go too far. We send people to therapy.

What do we have the right to do?

We take children away from abusive parents. But how do you define abuse? It isn't always clear-cut.

If Angel had been a danger to his son, would Wesley have been right to take him away? If Wesley had reason to believe that Angel was a danger (and he did), does that give him the right?

And, this is something that's been troubling me while I'm rewriting the Connor essays, at what point do you give up on someone?

Should you ever give up? Is there a certain age that means that someone is locked into who they'll always be? What age would that be?

Comments

babble

[shusu.livejournal.com]

Having had some education training... I have to say that it's completely subjective. There are guidelines, there are laws... but in the end it's responsible parents, social workers, therapists, and most importantly friends who end up making the call, drawing the line. Deciding whether a person is a danger to themselves or others depends on the context, the severity, the frequency of behavior... and the gut feelings of those watching.

Some things are not ever locked in. Some things are proven in clinical tests to be locked in at a certain age range. Most things depend on the person and their own growth and maturity. When you meet people in their thirties, forties, fifties acting immature, you'll realize what an artificial thing age lines are. Useful, necessary, but artificial.

Which is why not one child deserves to lose out on compassion and moral clarity. We all draw the line.

Food for thought indeed

[selenak.livejournal.com]

Basically? I don't think one should ever give up on people. In practice, though, obviously, you have to stop them from harming others. Certainly, if I saw a man beating a child, I would rather step in and interfere with what could be a parent-child relationship than consider what caused the man to beat the child in the first place. (After the child is out of harm's way, I certainly think a conversation, and not just a threat, with the man would be in order.)

Of course, things rarely are that simple in Real Life. Or even in well written fiction. In the case of the Wesley/Angel/Connor situation you mention, there's the additional factor of Wesley disregarding several options out of personal issues: he could tell Angel himself about the prophecy - Angel would be quite capable of agreeing to send Connor away for his safety. He could tell Fred and Gunn, jealousy notwithstanding. He could ring up Cordelia. Heck, he could even ring up Giles if he needs someone who is familiar with the damage Angel is capable and not hero-worshipping like the others, but not an enemy, either. He does not. Lack of communication is always a cardinal sin in the Jossverse.

Moving over to the Potterverse, one reason why I never understood the Draco following isn't that he's labelled as an evil character, but that he's a quite dull character. (As opposed to, say, first season BTVS Cordelia who fulfilled much the same function than Draco does but was at least genuinenly witty, if cruel, in her insults and showed some glimpses of humanity.) Which isn't to say that Rowlings isn't interested in shades-of-grey, or the whys and wherefores of evilness. (Examples for the later: Voldemort, who is a cardboard Evil Overlord, true, but the Tom Riddle background given in CoS and used in GoF again, gives him some genuine motivation to develop into said Overlord, not to mention distinct parallels to Harry. Kreacher, who is what wizard society made him into. Examples for the former: Snape, obviously.) Just not in Draco.

Thank you

[butterfly.livejournal.com]

That's helpful. Knowing that from a more professional point of view, as opposed to my own knee-jerk one of "Of course no one is born a monster."

Re: Food for thought indeed

[butterfly.livejournal.com]

Yes, Wesley had tons of options (I really need to watch those episodes), but, like you say, real life is complicated and as I understand it, he was feeling very alone and was working with very little sleep. That tends to enhance bad decisions. As Buffy showed us in the latter part of S7.

Re: Draco

I think, in part, it's because she hasn't given him any obvious layers. We're ('we' being Draco fans) forced to look about and really work at figuring out a person behind the stereotype. Because - and this is definitely a personal thing - I hate dismissing characters as stererotypes. I can't do it if I'm to take a series seriously. The characters need to be characters and not stereotypes. So, if the author doesn't provide depth, I'll feel the need to look for hints as to the depths or to make them up entirely.