it is absolutely, hilariously astonishing to me how often i’m asked to provide a 25 page extensively sourced MLA formatted academic style paper about why i think pansy parkinson is a character worth discussing, but…here we are, i guess.
fanon pansy =/= canon pansy.
canon pansy =/= fanon pansy.
canon pansy is a one-dimensional bully with no discernible personality traits beyond “mean” and “myopic”. she’s villainized by the story. her primary function within the narrative is to follow draco malfoy around. she’s background noise. she giggles, and she shrieks, and she makes fun of harry & co. pansy parkinson is also a figurative dumping ground for an alarming number of awful, misogynistic, enormously unflattering stereotypes for female characters—her relationship with draco is depicted as at least partially one-sided, which makes her seem desperate; she has a tendency to mock other students for their physical appearances, which makes her seem insecure; and she’s likened, more than once, to a literal dog. literally. a dog.
(rowling had a truly terrible habit of peppering the hp books with a lot of these villainous non-characters, who were almost always slytherins, and who were almost always described as either unattractive, unintelligent, or both. see: millicent bulstrode, who is jokingly suspected of being related to a troll. marcus flint, who cheats at quidditch, is held back multiple school years, and has appallingly bad teeth. crabbe & goyle, who are violent, overweight, and implied to need draco’s help with her homework in order to avoid flunking out.)
canon pansy is a poorly constructed caricature of a Mean Girl who readers are meant to find abhorrent. all the ingredients for a spectacularly unlikeable character are there. it’s like rowling had a checklist.
that said, pansy’s role as hermione’s social foil gives her slightly more of a personality than the majority of the other slytherins. pansy is shown to be friendly with blaise zabini, who is, canonically, arrogant and enigmatic and disdainful of draco malfoy. pansy wears a pink dress to the yule ball. she likes unicorns. she possesses leadership qualities—she’s a prefect, she has a “gang” of slytherin girls—and is, by virtue of that, at the very least an above average student. she’s loyal to the people she’s shown to be close to. she cries when draco is hurt. her political affiliations, parentage, and blood status are categorically unknown. we can assume she’s probably a pureblood, and that she chose not to fight against the death eater regime at hogwarts, but she wasn’t a death eater. her dialogue with draco and blaise zabini about the war in HPB was ambiguously supportive, at worst.
(important note—one of the major themes in the books is redemption. see: severus snape. regulus black. the malfoys. rowling’s world building was full of lofty, often convoluted metaphors for racism and homophobia, which had the unfortunate side-effect of humanizing a lot of actively, violently racist characters who would have otherwise been unpalatable to any reasonably self-aware reader. the notion that grand gestures of bravery and self-sacrifice are necessary for redemption—again, see: severus snape, regulus black, the malfoys—is, however, repulsive to me, especially when the argument of worthiness is centered on a teenage girl who has, canonically, spent her formative years hanging around actively, violently racist people. And that’s not even delving into the numerous instances of benign racism perpetrated by characters who aren’t vile slytherin blood supremacists. see: the weasleys. albus dumbledore. rufus scrimgeour. the text goes out of its way to emphasize that combating internalized prejudices is an ongoing battle that has to be consciously fought. it’s a choice. but i digress.)
canon pansy =/= fanon pansy.
fanon pansy =/= canon pansy.
i see a lot of discourse about pansy being an inappropriate “feminist icon"—she’s a bully, she’s mean to other girls, et cetera, et cetera—and the irony of passing that kind of judgment on a female character whose entire narrative existence is predicated on her ability to compare unfavorably to, you know, all the good female characters; it is staggering.
i have loved characters like hermione granger and ginny weasley and fleur delacour since i was a child. they are smart and brave and interesting and Not Like Other Girls. their flaws are considered socially acceptable. hermione is bossy and narrow-minded; but she’s also usually right. ginny is outspoken and reactionary and obstinate; but she’s also pretty and popular and good at sportball. fleur is vain and self-absorbed; but she’s also beautiful and brilliant and fiercely loyal.
not like pansy parkinson, for example, who is, almost unapologetically, exactly the kind of girl no one ever wants to be.
she likes pink. she giggles. she cries. she chases after a boy who, at best, seems mostly indifferent to her presence. she’s self-conscious enough about her nose that it’s a well-known sore spot for other students to maliciously poke at. i don’t think we ever get a description of what her voice sounds like, but i instinctively associate her with a high-pitched, nasally whine. she’s petty—see: her interview with rita skeeter in GoF—and she’s narcissistic—see: her stint with the inquisitorial squad—and she’s a cliché, of course, just not an especially creative one.
there are obvious, valid criticisms to be made about how people interact with characters like pansy parkinson. and draco malfoy. and severus snape. but there is a huge difference between blindly excusing or romanticizing those characters’ actions and trying to humanize them.
bad people are not bad characters.
dailybridgerton
turnnoffyourmind
discoholicmusic
kianamaiart
