Take Me There to Disneyland

Sanctimonia Vincet Semper

Purity will always conquer

The Malfoys getting punched in the face

Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix (2007) dir. David Yates

Lucius and Narcissa Malfoy

On the same note, check out @lovesbitca8's intriguing and insightful companion story Birth Right from the Rights & Wrongs series.

“Lucius, my slippery friend. I am told that you have not renounced the old ways, though to the world you present a respectable face.”

@hogwartsonline quidditch | the malfoy family

Lucius Malfoy, first & last scene.

I always saw Narcissa divorcing Lucius after the events of the Second Wizarding War because he put being a follower of Voldemort above everything even the safety of their own son which made her lose the love and respect that she had for her husband.

I’m kind of surprised that I feel the need to defend Lucius right now, considering that I think he’s an objectively terrible person in the books, but...

It’s established that Lucius joined the Death Eaters before Draco was born. It’s very likely that Lucius was recruited right out of school, not unlike James and Lily immediately joined the Order after graduating, so it’s possible he was in with Voldemort even before marrying Narcissa. And then of course there’s the fact that Narcissa valued the same notions of blood purity as Lucius and her sister Bellatrix, even if she never actually joined the Death Eaters herself. Just because at the end of the War, she prioritized her own son’s life over Voldemort winning, she’d still believed in the inherent superiority of purebloods over everyone else, and she very likely still did even after the War.

So honestly, Narcissa probably wasn’t that upset about Lucius being a Death Eater, except perhaps from the perspective of worrying about Lucius’s safety and wanting to keep her family together. And by the time Lucius joined (again, presumably around the age of 17 or 18), there was no going back or resigning. Even if Lucius had felt any reluctance toward his membership sooner, he wasn’t going to be able to leave. And of course Narcissa really didn’t seem to be warded off by the Death Eaters at all until after Lucius was sent to Azkaban, leaving her and her son alone to the whims of a Dark Lord who decided to draft Draco into service, regardless of Narcissa or Lucius’s feelings on the matter. So it feels like blaming Lucius for not protecting Draco from Voldemort while he was in Azkaban is more than a touch unfair...and even if you want to point to after Lucius got out of Azkaban, by that point, Voldemort ran the whole of Wizarding Britain, so staying in line with Voldemort was how Lucius and Narcissa would’ve tried to protect Draco. Remember, Narcissa also asked Draco about Harry’s identity at Malfoy Manor. Unlike her son, she actively identified Hermione, lending further credit to the thought that they’d actually caught Harry. And yet both Malfoys by that point clearly were thinking of their family’s survival rather than loyalty to Voldemort, not only evident by Narcissa deciding to help Harry, but by Lucius earlier in the Battle of Hogwarts (as witnessed by Harry when he looked through Voldemort’s eyes) when he tried to persuade the Dark Lord to stop the fighting.

Even in the movies, where Lucius is depicted much more one-dimensionally bad, we get a similar scene to this, even though Draco and Narcissa still turn their backs on him in the end. The films’ reinterpretation of the Malfoy family does lend itself better to this particular headcanon than the books do, in my opinion, but I still don’t know if, following the films’ logic, you can completely blame Lucius for not shielding Draco more. Even in the movies, by the time the Malfoy family realized that their precious blood purity wouldn’t guarantee their safety, status, or even lives -- that they in fact would not be at the top of this new world Voldemort was creating, but used and discarded as soon as they outlived their usefulness -- it was far too late for any of them to escape.

Arthur was nicer, but I think Lucius was a better father because I don’t think he would have ever tried to put down or invalidate Draco’s accomplishments the way Arthur did when Percy was promoted at the Ministry.

Okay -- look. I may not like the popular fanon assumption that Lucius was an abusive father, given that it largely hinges on Jason Isaacs’s portrayal of him in the films, which was considerably less gray and more classically villainous that Lucius was in the books...

But seriously now. Even if you do want to give a mild defense of Lucius in that he clearly adored his son and wife and wanted to do everything he could for them, I think calling him a good father -- let alone one better than Arthur Weasley -- is a real stretch. Both Lucius and Narcissa spoiled Draco rotten and not only instructed him that their family was better than others solely because of their blood, but also encouraged him to look down on those people for it. This led Draco to grow up with no knowledge of empathy, compassion, open-mindedness, or even standard kindness, to the extent that Harry rather aptly compared Draco to Dudley on first meeting. And yes, I said Lucius and Narcissa were responsible for this. In the films Narcissa’s depicted more sympathetically, but in the books, she believed in the notions of classism and blood supremacy just as much as her husband did: she just didn’t formally join the Death Eaters herself.

To be fair here, Arthur and Molly Weasley weren’t perfect parents either. Their discipline styles were very inconsistent, considering that it basically boiled down to a “good cop, bad cop” scenario, there may have been some subconscious favoritism going on, and the two didn’t always show a good example to their kids of how to control one’s temper. But Arthur and Molly both raised infinitely better and more adjusted children than Lucius and Narcissa did -- all one has to do is compare Ron to Draco in the first book to see which set of parents did a better job raising their child. Ron, although insecure and a bit jealous sometimes, was helpful, supportive, amazingly generous despite not having much to give, and most of all fiercely protective of his friends. Draco, regardless of how he grew later on when the War forced him to grow the hell up, was a spiteful, vindictive bully who expected his “friends” to serve his interests first. And yeah, Harry chose the right one of those two as his best friend!

As for Percy, don’t forget the context of why Fudge promoted Percy in the first place. Yes, Arthur should and could have been more sensitive when first approaching that issue with Percy, considering that it insinuated that Arthur didn’t think Percy was capable enough to have earned the honor himself, but it doesn’t change the fact that it was true. Fudge did select Percy for the job because of Harry’s closeness with the Weasleys. Perhaps it was also because of Percy’s dutiful attitude toward the Ministry, since Fudge at that point wanted to be surrounded by “yes” men, but it most assuredly wasn’t solely because of Percy’s work ethic or skills. Percy had a right to feel proud, but at the same time, should one really be proud of earning something solely because of your political standings, rather than your qualifications or who you are as a person? The whole situation was bad for all parties, but it’s a very sympathetic problem on both sides, as far as I’m concerned. Is that really something that should label Arthur as a poor father -- particularly in comparison to the overly coddling, pampering blood supremacist Lucius Malfoy?

sanctimonia vincet semper.

You saw only what the Dark Lord wanted you to see. Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix (2007) dir. David Yates requested by @suliswrites