#hp close reading

[wisteria-lodge]

The Harry Potter Pretty People's Club

I’ve always been kind of fascinated by how and why *attractiveness* is used in the HP books. So, I’ve decided to play a little game, and score up characters based on how often their prettiness is brought up. Here’s my scoring system:

(1 point) - We are straight-up told that this character (or some aspect of this character) is attractive. The word beautiful, handsome, attractive, elegant, pretty, lovely, good-looking, good looks, nice-looking, curvy, or gorgeous is used.

(.5 points) - We are specifically told the character has nice hair, or nice teeth. (JKR describes teeth a lot, it’s a thing.) 

(.5 points) - The character is described as moving in an attractive way. The word lounging, lolling, graceful, posing, or haughty (so lounging/posing, but more evil coded) is applied to them

In terms of the ranking, sibling and and parent+child duos get to compete together, because how common “they looked exactly like their family member” type descriptions are in these books.

No points for “they used to be beautiful” or “they would be beautiful if...” Also no points if someone is described as attractive specifically by Rita Skeeter. We are clearly not supposed to take her as a reliable source. Also not counting the times Petunia calls Dudley “handsome,” or the time when Slughorn calls Ron handsome while trying to cheer him up after the love potion, for the same reason.

(if you’re curious, Rita does describe Hermione as “stunningly pretty,” Pansy as “pretty and vivacious,” herself as “attractive blonde, forty-three” and Harry as “the most beautiful thing she had ever seen” when he’s giving the interview about Voldemort’s return.) So let's get to the top 26 most attractive (?) characters in Harry Potter.

#26 - WILKIE TWYCROSS (.5) 

“Graceful” apparition instructor. Unfortunately the rest of his description stresses that he’s practically see-through.

#25 - MADAM PUDDIFOOT  (.5) 

Has shiny hair. Unfortunately also “very stout” (and unfortunately we we know how JKR feels about fat people  : / )

#24 - HORACE SLUGHORN (.5)

Young Horace has “thick, shiny, straw-colored hair.” He’s also rocking embroidered waistcoats with golden buttons. Idk, I bet Horace was kind of dishy back in the day. Heck, I bet he still is. He’s well dressed, charismatic, charming. Someone has a crush on him. JKR is just mean and wrong about fat people

#23 - ROMILDA VANE (1)

Has hair that is “black and shiny and silky.” Of course Ron does say that while zoinked out his mind on love potion, so not sure how reliable his report is. 

#22 - NEARLY HEADLESS NICK (1) 

Has “elegant” hands. So, if you’re into that…

#21 - ANGELINA JOHNSON (1) 

“Rather attractive” according to Lee Jordan. Seems to wear micro box-braids, which Pansy says look like “worms.” Boo Pansy (who is not on this list.) 

#20 - PERCIVAL, KENDRA & ALBUS DUMBLDORE (2) 

Percival is “good-looking,” Albus has shiny hair, and Kendra is “haughty.” I’ll buy that the Dumbledores were a pretty striking family, that makes sense . But they rank a little low because they all only have one attractive descriptor apiece. 

#19 - OLYMPE MAXIME (2) 

She’s an elegant frenchwoman. The only lady on this list described as “handsome.” Also graceful, has shiny hair, and Hagrid is very into her. 

#18 - PARVATI & PADMA PATIL (2)

Both of them look “very pretty” in their Yule Ball dress robes, and are quickly snapped up by Beauxbatons boys when Harry and Ron ignore them.  

#17 -  FIRENZE (2) 

The “handsome centaur.” Also the only character described as “gorgeous” (by Parvati.) At which point Hermione scoffs and says that he’s got four legs. By which we can deduce that Hermione is a bit vanilla for this conversation.

#16 - BILL WEASLEY (2) 

Described as “good-looking” and “handsome” by Mrs. Weasley, and of course FLEUR is very into him very quickly. I considered adding “cool” to my list of words connoting attractiveness, which would have bumped Bill higher… but JKR seems to associate “cool” more with personality. Like Mad-Eye and Hagrid are “cool” without being especially pretty.

#15 - GELLERT GRINDELWALD (2) 

Briefly seen in a memory and a photograph, described as “handsome” both times.

#14 - LILY POTTER (2) 

A “very pretty woman” and a woman with a “kind, pretty face.” JKR throws in “kind” to make sure we know this is good-pretty, one step up from the Patil twins who are girly-pretty (sorry Patil twins.) 

#13 - LUCIUS & DRACO MALFOY (2.5) 

They have super sleek hair. It’s brought up a lot. Pansy likes to pet it. 

#12 - BLAISE’S MOM & BLAISE ZABINI (2.5) 

Blaise’s mom is a “famously beautiful witch,” who “had been married seven times, each of her husbands dying mysteriously and leaving her mounds of gold.” Fanon needs to decide on a name for her, and I think Clytemnestra is the right amount of on-the-nose. Blaise himself is described as haughty, and picky, and tends to “pose” and “loll against pillars.” 

#11 - MADAM ROSMERTA (3) 

Attractive, pretty, and the only character who is “curvy.” (I think she might have the boobs of Harry Potter universe.) Also wears sparkly turquoise heels, which is cute. Ron is into her, and so (I think) is Cornelius Fudge. I mean -  “Rosmerta, m’dear… lovely to see you again, I must say. Have one [drink] yourself, won’t you? Come and join us.” Like, that’s flirty, right? 

#10 - BELLATRIX & ANDROMEDA BLACK (3.5)

So... their sister Narcissa is actually not actually going to make the list, because she falls in the “beauty potential” category. Narcissa “would have been nice-looking if she hadn’t been wearing a look that suggested there was a nasty smell under her nose,” and the “long blonde hair streaming down her back gave her the look of a drowned person.” I love Narcissa... but that framing isn’t especially flattering.

BUT in GENERAL the Blacks seem like a pretty good-looking family. Bellatrix had "thick, shining dark hair" and "great good looks" at her trial, which Harry does remember later on, comparing the hair "he had seen... sleek, thick, and shining," to her more scraggly, post-Azkaban look. We're told that that “something — perhaps Azkaban — had taken most of her beauty.” But most of her beauty does imply some beauty, so that description gets half a point. Then Andromeda looks enough like Bellatrix to give Harry a double-take, but a Bellatrix with “wider, kinder eyes” who hasn’t been to Azkaban... so she more than earns her place on the pretty list. Also described as “haughty.”

#9 - ROWENA & HELENA RAVENCLAW (4) 

Surprising that they rank so high, but every time we see an image of them they are described as beautiful. Usually with a qualifier like “austere” or “intimidating.” Beautiful is a word with a little bit of an edge to it in this universe. Beautiful people are just… a little suspect. 

#8 - GILDEROY LOCKHART (5.5) 

Very handsome, good hair, good teeth. The teeth are honestly brought up enough to feel a little off-putting and predatory, which I think is exactly the point. Lockhart is a very 90s-Disney-movie queer-coded villain. But, he is extremely good looking (or at least very well put-together.) Mrs. Weasley and Hermione both have crushes on him, and he continues to get fan mail into his St. Mungo’s days. 

#7 - GINNY WEASLEY (5.5) 

Ginny’s an odd one. She’s described as “graceful,” popular, and “a lot of boys like her,” (according to Pansy.) Honestly, that’s mostly how we experience her beauty. Krum thinks she’s attractive, Blaise thinks she’s attractive, Amycus addresses her as “Pretty” in a creepy way, and so does some random Diagon alley amulet salesman. Both Harry and the narrative voice stay pretty quiet when it comes to thirsting over Ginny. We get the honestly very conflicted description “Ginny gave Harry a radiant smile: He had forgotten, or had never fully appreciated, how beautiful she was, but he had never been less pleased to see her” and then “Ginny and Gabrielle, both wearing golden dresses, looked even prettier than usual [at Fleur’s wedding].” Which isn’t even completely about Ginny! Maybe you could count the romantic descriptions of her hair being flamelike or on one occasion “dancing,” but that’s really it. I am doing my very best, and scraping the bottom here. 

#6 - HERMIONE GRANGER (7.5) 

Hermione seems to fall firmly into the “cleans up nice” category. She is the “pretty girl in blue robes” at the Yule Ball, looking good enough that Pansy gapes and Malfoy “didn’t seem to be able to find an insult to throw at her.” She’s also looking good at Fleur’s wedding, when Viktor and Ron are definitely interested. Her hair can look elegant and shiny if she puts in effort - otherwise it’s bushy, and Pansy compares her to a chipmunk. We also know she has large front teeth, before she gets them fixed. She occasionally gets a “graceful” or “haughty" description, and Greyback does creep on her (again with the creeping!) calling Hermione Harry’s “pretty little friend.” I also gave her half a point for the description of Horcrux!Hermione, who is “more beautiful and yet more terrible than the real Hermione.” That’s another good example of how JKR uses the word “beautiful,” and like with Bellatrix's "most of her beauty," “more beautiful” does imply some existing beauty.

#5 - CHO CHANG (8)  

Cho is very pretty. She’s often described that way, and she has long shiny black hair. She naturally pairs up with Cedric, who also scored an 8. I wish I had more to say about her, I really do. 

#4 - CEDRIC DIGGORY (8)

Our first “pretty boy" - he’s described that way by both Harry and Seamus. Seamus actually seems to kind of have a thing about Cedric. He doesn’t believe Cedric put his name in the Goblet of Fire because “I wouldn’t have thought he’d have wanted to risk his good looks.” And true, Cedric is “exceptionally handsome, with his straight nose, dark hair, and gray eyes.” Angelina and Katie think he’s hot, Myrtle creeps on him - although, honestly - Myrtle creeps on everyone, and the text doesn’t take it very seriously. Interestingly in the film we get a moment of Voldemort turning over Cedric’s head with his bare foot, saying “Oh, such a handsome boy” - to which Harry replies “Don’t touch him!”  That’s a subtle difference - in the books it’s only threatening when girls get creeped on, the movies are a little more equal opportunity. 

#3 - SIRIUS & REGULUS BLACK (11) 

Sirius (young Sirius) is hot. He’s “carelessly handsome,” his “dark hair fell into his eyes with a sort of casual elegance neither James’ nor Harry’s could ever have achieved.” He rolled out of bed looking this good. Sirius is graceful and lounging and bored as hell, but you know “handsomely so.” Even after Azkaban, when he falls through the Veil it’s a “graceful,” beautiful death. Regulus gets a shout-out too, because he “had the same dark hair and slightly haughty look of his brother, though he was smaller, slighter, and rather less handsome than Sirius had been.” But, as is mentioned nearly every time he appears on the page, Sirius is extremely handsome. Less handsome than Sirius is still handsome. 

I think it’s actually important to Sirius’ character that he is THAT beautiful. Sirius is a kid from a very bad environment who’s one bad day away from just snapping… but you’d never know it. He’s so attractive, he’s so effortlessly talented, he hides everything so well. Of course none of the adults in his life would be worried about him. 

#2 - FLEUR, GABRIELLE & APPOLINE DELACOUR (12.5) 

Fleur almost seems like a cheat, because she is supernaturally beautiful. She is “a woman of such breathtaking beauty that the room seemed to have become strangely airless. She was tall and willowy with long blonde hair and appeared to emanate a faint, silvery glow.” Even Aunt Muriel thinks she’s beautiful. (We also do get told that Fleur has nice teeth.)

But again, she’s beautiful. She’s that slightly threatening, too-feminine beauty. Until she gets married… and has a kid… which redeems her. “While [Fleur’s] radiance usually dimmed everyone else by comparison, today [at her wedding] it beautified everybody it fell upon.” 

#1 - TOM RIDDLE SR. & TOM RIDDLE JR. (14) 

Our clear winner, and also our second “pretty boy.” (Marvolo calls Tom Sr. “pretty,” and Tom Jr. is “his handsome father in miniature.” so yes, Voldemort does count as a pretty boy.) Poor Tom Sr. - the text frames the aftermath of his sexual assault as him “abandoning” his wife, but unfortunately that falls into the wider trend of only girls being victims of creeps in the HP books. It’s like the weird detail about the stairs to the dormitories - the girls can go to the boys dormitory, but not vice-versa. 

But yeah. Tom Riddle’s attractiveness is brought up almost every time he is. We even get details - we specifically know he lost weight and grew his hair out after he left school, and it looked super good on him. Hepzibah Smith is very into him, Bellatrix is very into him. (Although I do wonder just how snakey he looked when they met.) Adult Voldemort doesn’t treat the loss of his looks as any kind of sacrifice, he seems well rid of them. They’re just another annoying aspect he wants to shed on his quest for transhumanism. He gets rid of his father’s name, it only makes sense he would want to get rid of his looks as well. I do like the detail that his original eyes live inside the Locket, that is cool and creepy. 

(but, logically, I can only assume that means his original nose lives inside the Cup.) 

[wisteria-lodge]

JK Rowling & the Color Pink

So I'm working on a thing about queer coding in the Harry Potter books... and first I needed to do a sidebar on how the color pink is used. I’ve made a list of every time a character either wears pink, or is heavily associated with a pink object. We actually get some pretty clear categories that are unintentionally very revealing, and say a lot about how JKR sees "girly" femininity.

Let’s start off with the obvious: 

PINK = VILLAIN (FEMME) 

Petunia Dursley: “salmon-pink cocktail dress," "neat salmon-colored coat." Also paints her walls "a sickly peach color."

Gilderoy Lockhart: “lurid pink robes to match the decorations” 

Pansy Parkinson: “very frilly robes of pale pink” 

Rita Skeeter: “long nails were painted shocking pink” 

Aunt Muriel: “feathery pink hat gave her the look of a bad-tempered flamingo.” 

(Aunt Muriel only shows up briefly at Bill and Fleur’s wedding, but then proceeds to insult pretty much every other character, and give Harry an existential crisis by spilling the tea on Dumbledore)

Dolores Umbridge: “a horrible pink Alice band that matched the fluffy pink cardigan.” 

(Also: has pink stationary, and her pamphlet MUDBLOODS and the Dangers They Pose to a Peaceful Pure-Blood Society has a pink cover) 

Cho Chang

(Okay. Not a villain per se, BUT. Cho is the reason the mole gets into the DA in the books (and just is the mole in the films.) And given that she is a sort of Umbridge-aligned sub villain in book 5, at least structurally... it IS interesting that the place she brings Harry for a date has this very pink, Umbridge-coded description. 

It was a cramped, steamy little place where everything seemed to have been decorated with frills or bows. Harry was reminded unpleasantly of Umbridge’s office. “Cute, isn’t it?” said Cho happily. “Er . . . yeah,” said Harry untruthfully. “Look, she’s decorated it for Valentine’s Day!” said Cho, indicating a number of golden cherubs that were hovering over each of the small, circular tables, occasionally throwing pink confetti over the occupants.

Fleur Delacour: “[her wand] emitted a number of pink and gold sparks.” 

(Also not quite a villain, and I adore Fleur BUT… she’s written hyper-femme in an intimidating, borderline threatening way. She’s very opinionated, bordering on rude. She’s “full of herself” as Ginny puts it. And when she gets engaged to Bill and becomes an unambiguously good guy, she has this interesting moment of ~Pink Rejection~)

“. . . Bill and I ’ave almost decided on only two bridesmaids, Ginny and Gabrielle will look very sweet togezzer. I am theenking of dressing zem in pale gold — pink would of course be ’orrible with Ginny’s ’air —”

Hermione Granger: “Wearing a pink bathrobe and a frown”

(Hermione wears pink exactly one time, and it is at her most villainous… during Book 1, when she tries to stop Harry and Ron leaving in the middle of the night to go duel Malfoy.)

A voice spoke from the chair nearest them, “I can’t believe you’re going to do this, Harry.” A lamp flickered on. It was Hermione Granger, wearing a pink bathrobe and a frown. “You!” said Ron furiously. “Go back to bed!” “I almost told your brother,” Hermione snapped, “Percy — he’s a prefect, he’d put a stop to this.” Harry couldn’t believe anyone could be so interfering.

(She literally does the sitting-in-the-dark, villain-lamp thing. Also, in case you were wondering, yes Hermione DOES get a moment of ~Pink Rejection~)

Near the window was an array of violently pink products around which a cluster of excited girls was giggling enthusiastically. Hermione and Ginny both hung back, looking wary.

Which brings us too: 

PINK = SILLY/FRIVOLOUS (FEMME) 

Sybill Trelawney: “after you’ve broken your first cup, would you be so kind as to select one of the blue-patterned ones? I’m rather attached to the pink.”

(She’s a fraud. Also hides empty bottles of sherry in the room of requirement. (I’m going to have to be uncharitable in this section, so am sorry.) 

Parvati Patil: “robes of shocking pink"

(Often described as “giggling,” thinks Professor Trelawney is amazing, the real deal.)

The Fat Lady: “a very fat woman in a pink silk dress.” 

(Often described as giggling. Drinks too much during the holidays. JRK is unfortunately well known for being fatphobic. Also the Fat Lady has a friend named Violet, and Parvati has a friend named Lavender. Not really going anywhere with that, just funny that they’re both shades of purple.)

Hepzibah Smith: “an immensely fat old lady wearing an elaborate ginger wig and a brilliant pink set of robes.” 

(So… almost identical description to the Fat Lady. And I think we should maybe talk about her more, maybe? Because the way she’s framed… I think she might be Tom Riddle’s sugar mamma?)

“I brought you flowers,” he said quietly, producing a bunch of roses from nowhere. “You naughty boy, you shouldn’t have!” squealed old Hepzibah, though Harry noticed that she had an empty vase standing ready on the nearest little table. “You do spoil this old lady, Tom. . . .” 

(Or maybe we… shouldn’t talk about that. Either way, Tom Riddle does kill her, steal her stuff, and frame her house elf so thats… not great.)

PINK = EMBARRASSING 

“Everyone take a pair of earmuffs,” said Professor Sprout. There was a scramble as everyone tried to seize a pair that wasn’t pink and fluffy.

(Pink fluffy earmuffs are adorable.)

“Wash out your mouth,” said James coldly. “Scourgify!” Pink soap bubbles streamed from Snape’s mouth at once; the froth was covering his lips, making him gag.

(The next two example are 'pranks' as well, I think the pink-colored soap is there to add a kind of insult to injury.)

Shocking-pink Catherine wheels five feet in diameter were whizzing lethally through the air like so many flying saucers. 

(This is a bit from Fred and George’s farewell firework show, it's funny that they’re specifically pink fireworks that Umbridge can’t get rid of.)

“Headless Hats!” shouted George, as Fred waved a pointed hat decorated with a fluffy pink feather at the watching students. “Two Galleons each — watch Fred, now!” Fred swept the hat onto his head, beaming. For a second he merely looked rather stupid, then both hat and head vanished.

(also just, pumping up an embarrassing moment)

PINK = OUTSIDER, WEIRDO

Hagrid

Hagrid’s flowered pink umbrella, which contains his broken wand, is brought up a lot. In this case I think we’re meant to see it as a joke. Hagrid’s so big, and so masc, but the pink umbrella makes him non-threatening. However… the pink umbrella, it’s not a totally positive thing, is it? It doesn’t match, it isn’t *him.* Hagrid wouldn't have chosen to carry this around, totally on his own, if he'd had any other choice. It sets him apart, both visually and socially (because it's a constant reminder that he doesn't have a wand.)

Dobby

Dobby, once he is freed, gets pink-and-orange striped socks, and they’re meant to communicate that he’s… kind of a lot. “Yeh get weirdos in every breed,” as Hagrid puts it. JKR has a very strange, honestly antagonistic relationship with Dobby. He’s the victim of book 2, but structurally kind of the villain? He describes the house-elves situation as “enslavement,” but Hermione’s treated as overdramatic for calling house-elves slaves two books later. And then everything is ret-conned and Dobby is… just kind of weird for liking freedom (and socks) as much as he does.

Tonks

Book!Tonks defaults to “bubblegum-pink” hair. Her hair is described as pink a lot. (Movie!Tonks defaults to purple hair, because they were worried that pink would visually align her with Umbridge.) And this is the oddest one on the list to me, because Tonks is such a universally beloved, fan favorite character. But I really do think that *as written*... we’re supposed to put her in a category with Dobby. The two of them leave (unintentional) destruction in their wake. They’re loud, they’re a lot, they take up too much space. Harry thinks they’re both kind of annoying. (and yeah, Harry 100% thinks  Tonks is “a little annoying at times.”)

[wisteria-lodge]

What do you think about the take that Lucius is a little neglectful towards Draco?

It comes from how 1. When Harry and Draco met, Draco is by himself in a street, feeling bored. 2. Lucius scolds Draco about his grades and complaining about Harry yet seemingly failed to get a tutor or therapist or consider Draco’s feelings. 3. During Hogwarts Mystery, Lucius often leaves Draco in the Hands of others or by himself. (Even During a Christmas event, Draco is found on the streets by himself, upset and annoyed because he felt Lucius was not spending enough time with him.)

Okay, I'll play.

1 ~ Draco and Harry meet in a clothes shop, not the street, and here's the quote:

“My father’s next door buying my books and Mother’s up the street looking at wands,” said the boy. He had a bored, drawling voice. “Then I’m going to drag them off to look at racing brooms. I don’t see why first years can’t have their own. I think I’ll bully Father into getting me one and I’ll smuggle it in somehow.”

I actually don't think Draco's bored at all. I think he's having a good time being independent and showing off in front of the new kid. He's got a bored-sounding voice, which is different. A bored-sounding voice is low energy, too-cool-for-school, which is very Draco. And apparently, Lucius is running Draco's errands, and Draco thinks he can get him to buy him an extra present. That seems the opposite of being neglectful.

2 ~ Therapists aren't a thing in the wizarding world, and mind-healers are fanon, so I don't expect that would be on Lucius' radar. But here's the complaining about Harry bit:

“. . . everyone thinks he’s so smart, wonderful Potter with his scar and his broomstick —” “You have told me this at least a dozen times already,” said Mr. Malfoy, with a quelling look at his son. “And I would remind you that it is not — prudent — to appear less than fond of Harry Potter, not when most of our kind regard him as the hero who made the Dark Lord disappear —"

I wouldn't describe this as scolding. If anything, this is just advice. Yes, Lucius is clearly pretty done with the subject - and if this is indeed the twelfth time Draco has brought it up, I get that. But just the fact that Draco has been able to complain about Harry Potter so much to his father does mean that he had to have been around his father a lot in order to do it. And Lucius wasn't completely zoning out. So, that also does not read as neglectful to me.

“Ah, the Hand of Glory!” said Mr. Borgin, abandoning Mr. Malfoy’s list and scurrying over to Draco. “Insert a candle and it gives light only to the holder! Best friend of thieves and plunderers! Your son has fine taste, sir.” “I hope my son will amount to more than a thief or a plunderer, Borgin,” said Mr. Malfoy coldly, and Mr. Borgin said quickly, “No offense, sir, no offense meant —” “Though if his grades don’t pick up,” said Mr. Malfoy, more coldly still, “that may indeed be all he is fit for —" “It’s not my fault,” retorted Draco. “The teachers all have favorites, that Hermione Granger —” “I would have thought you’d be ashamed that a girl of no wizard family beat you in every exam,” snapped Mr. Malfoy.

This is the angriest Lucius ever gets with Draco, and I think it's an interesting snippet. Yes, Lucius is embarrassing Draco by bringing up his grades - but in a way that seems to be intended to correct or undercut Borgin's attempt to flatter Draco and butter him up. Lucius has also switched out of the more respectful "Mr. Borgin" he was using earlier in the scene to just "Borgin" - communicating to Draco that Borgin isn't actually important (unlike Draco, who is.)

Draco then talks back a little, comes up with an excuse which is - a lie. Hermione is a muggleborn, which Lucius comments on, so she's unlikely to be every teacher's favorite. Especially since one of those teachers is Snape, Lucius' buddy, and he knows for a fact that Draco is Snape's favorite.

This whole scene is really about Lucius telling Draco that he needs to be more tactical, and check his privilege. Lucius is in this shop because he's selling dark artifacts - he's powerful, but he's worried. He's not so powerful that no one can touch him. Draco's the same. Lucius is telling him he can't afford to make an enemy of Harry Potter, and he can't afford to just coast through his classes and blame bad grades on teachers playing favorites. Draco's catchphrase at this point is "Wait Till My Father Hears About This," and I think that's slightly worrying to Lucius. He *can't* swoop in and solve all Draco's problems.

(although he does try - buying the Slytherin team brooms is basically just a way to buy Draco friends, and when Draco says he's been mauled by a hippogriff, Lucius does everything he can to get rid of it. And Hagrid says, "’Spect Lucius Malfoy would’ve come marchin’ up ter school if yeh’d cursed his son [to vomit slugs]. Least yer not in trouble.” If anything, Lucius is slightly overprotective.)

Like, it's a plot point in Book 6 that Lucius cares so much about Draco that Voldemort is able to punish (and control) him through Draco. Also, just a detail I like - in Books 2 and 5, Lucius sends Draco newspaper clippings about the Weasleys getting in trouble because he (correctly) thinks that Draco will find them funny. I think that's kind of cute, in a very Malfoy sort of way.

3 ~ I've never played Hogwarts Mystery, and don't consider it canon. But honestly I just find it adorable that Lucius is taking Draco with him on errands? It's very bring-your-kid-to-work.

And getting your co-workers/employees to look after your kid on a bring-your-child-to-work day is pretty normal. In my experience anyway.

Draco "Wait Till My Father Hears About This" Malfoy is... kind of a daddy's boy, so it doesn't surprise me at all that he's kinda clingy and needy as a kid.

[wisteria-lodge]

Very interested in you calling Draco femme coded. Is it just because of how he is described physically or something more?

I've got a post called "Gendered Bullying in Harry Potter" in drafts... but the short answer is that Draco bullies like a mean girl, not a mean boy. (And there are plenty of both in this series to compare him to.) He is very much an intentional pair with Pansy. He's never physical or violent, and it's actually highligted that he backs down from fights (or is flattened, usually by Ron.) Instead, Draco spreads rumors and embarrassing stories, he baits/tricks people into breaking the rules, runs smear campaigns, flashes his wealth and his *stuff,* and does a lot of pointing and sniggering from within a group of people.

He also gets beats like "crying in the bathroom" (otherwise seen with girls like Myrtle and Hermione) and "poisoning" (otherwise only seen from Nagini - very specifically a girl giant snake. and arguably Romilda Vane (spiking food with love potion) and Umbridge (spiking tea with Veritaserum.)

Also, yeah, it might be kind of an accident, but both he and Lucius get femme-coded descriptive language.

[wisteria-lodge]

And now for a HP fandom question - do you have any thoughts on queercoding in the series and if JKR ever actually intended it, and then backtracked, or if it was always completely unintentional? I'm thinking specifically about Lupin and Tonks (as individuals, not as a ship) Inspired by your post about the intention vs how fans perceived Draco Malfoy. Thanks!

So the first thing I want to do is make a distinction between femme-coding and queer-coding. They're tropes with very similar histories, and a lot of works treat them as the same thing. But Harry Potter doesn’t, and I think we can chalk this one up to JK Rowling’s habit of grabbing aesthetics and visuals without really thinking through the history behind them. 

(Like - the goblins. She says she didn’t mean to write an antisemitic thing, and I actually do believe her. But did she use a lot of tropes and images with a long history of being tied to antisemitism? yes.)

So when I say “femme” I mean giving a male character traits stereotypically associated with femininity. Heightened sensitivity/emotionality, an interest in hair, clothes and being attractive, a love of lace/pink/frills, a dislike of violence and physical confrontation, and a preference for the soft power of manipulation, character assassination and poison - versus the hard power of direct confrontation and physical prowess. Are these things super stereotypical? Yes. But they’re ALSO traits you see all the time on male villains, especially ones that you don’t want to seem that threatening. Femme-coded villains show up a lot in children’s media, or as the Big Bad’s #2. They’re not meant to be heroic or sympathetic (since all these feminine traits are not desirable, especially for guys.) But they also aren’t scary, and you can pretty much always play them for comedy. 

For example: see almost every male Disney villain. And JKR was writing children’s literature in the 90s, so of course she’s pulling from the same zeitgeist as the Disney Renaissance. 

JKR loves herself a femme villain. The absolute gold standard is of course Lockhart - who wears pink, wants to start his own line of hair care products, is self-centered, vain, obsessed with popularity… but he sucks in a fight. His entire MO involves manipulating people into thinking he has these traditional masculine qualities when he just doesn’t. But there’s also fussy, prissy Percy wearing his prefect badge on his pajamas. Bitchy, emotional mean-girl poisoners Draco and Snape (especially early book Snape - which is Snape at his most villainous.) Draco, Percy and Snape are also unusual for being male characters who we see crying for reasons other than grief. 

Lucius Malfoy is an interesting case because he starts off quite masc. He’s threatening to curse people, the governors are scared of him, etc. But, as the books go on… and he gets less powerful… he also gets more femme. When we meet him in Book 5 he’s no longer threatening people, but bribing them, spreading rumors, and giving interviews to the Prophet casting Arthur Weasley in a negative light. He's also getting really into peacocks. In Book 2 he was a major threat, but as he gets recast as Voldemort’s #2 he becomes a more femme, soft-power villain. When he leads the attack on the Department of Mysteries, he absolutely bungles it, which defines his character (and relationship with Voldemort) for the rest of the series. And it makes sense that Lucius is given this kind of treatment! It’s a way of communicating that there's a new villain in town, a real villain. 

So, are any of these femme-coded villains additionally queer-coded? I’m actually going to say no. Queer-coding is (like it says on the tin) finding ways to imply that your character is specifically gay. Like maybe giving them a same-sex relationship that is written romantically, but not explicitly called out by the text. Or pairing up all of the characters except them. Maybe have other characters joke about them being gay, and use that as a way to talk about the subject with some plausible deniability. Or they could just play suggestively with a cigar, or a walking stick. There are different strategies.  

But Lockhart doesn't get any of that. Honestly, I think that if JKR actually thought of him as gay, she would have been a lot more wary about a scene where he keeps Harry alone with him in his office for way longer than he’s supposed to. And she might have skipped this joke: 

“Harry was hauled to the front of the class during their very next Defense Against the Dark Arts lesson, this time acting a werewolf (...) “Nice loud howl, Harry — exactly — and then, if you’ll believe it, I pounced — like this — slammed him to the floor — thus — with one hand, I managed to hold him down — with my other, I put my wand to his throat (...) he let out a piteous moan — go on, Harry — higher than that — good —” 

Like. At least she would have picked a different word than “moan,” right? Which unfortunately has slightly sexual connotations. Especially if she wanted to keep Lockhart a buffoon, to properly set up the twist at the end. 

Slughorn also gets femme-coded in a similar way: he loves his candy, his parties, his smoking jackets, his lilac silk pajamas, his web of connections he can use to get stuff (Lucius style.) We are introduced to him squatting in specifically a “fussy old lady’s” house. He’s also unusually emotional, getting weepy at Aragog‘s funeral. But I don’t think we’re meant to read him as actually gay, or else his relationship with Tom Riddle might’ve read a little too close to Tom seducing/trying to seduce him. Which is a beat JKR does subtly play out with Hepzibah Smith, but idk. by that point at least Tom is a legal adult.

(As a side note - the Harry Potter series got so lucky that all of its adult characters are played by absolutely top-shelf actors who are aware of the connotations and history behind various symbols, and do consider these things in their performances. Kenneth Brannagh and Jim Broadbent are good enough to make sure there’s not even a hint of iffy subtext when they play Lockhart and Slughorn.)

Draco, Snape, and Percy all have a case of the not-gays. Percy has a girlfriend (we don’t really see her or anything, but we’re told she’s there.) Snape of course gets his whole thing with Lily, and Draco… after one too many beats where it’s clear that Pansy is into him, but he’s not into Pansy…  gets a scene where he’s talking to his buddies with his head in her lap. (JKR uses “no one‘s good enough for me” beats with Blaise, Draco and Sirius, and the idea there seems to be more that they have undeservedly high opinions of themselves, and less that they don’t like girls.)

But, I do agree that a lot of JKR's characters do come across as a little more queer than intended. It boils down, I think, to the general lack of any kind of romance in the Harry Potter books and JKR being generally bad at/uncomfortable with writing male attraction directed at women, BUT being perfectly happy writing attraction directed at pretty guys. And because of that… yeah, it can sometimes feel like maybe Harry has a thing for Cedric. Especially when Dudley goes on to tease him about Cedric being his boyfriend, which I believe is the only actual mention of gay people in the entire series.  

So is there any intentional queer-coding in the book? It’s really subtle, but yes. I think Dumbledore is queer-coded. He is unusually emotional/cries unusually often for a Rowling guy. He is also given a scene which emphasizes his “flamboyantly” cut plum-velvet suit, and his relationship with Grindelwald is implied to be romantic for one book and two movies before being actually confirmed in Fantastic Beasts 3. (With the line of dialogue “I was in love with you.” Big step up from “We were closer than brothers.” which is an odd thing to say about someone you are interested in romantically.) 

But you brought up Tonks and Lupin, two characters very commonly interpreted as queer. So let’s get into that. JKR has said that she considers Lupin’s lycanthropy to be a metaphor for stigmatized diseases like AIDS. And… as incredible as it is to say… I actually do not think that she made the jump from there to thinking that maybe the character suffering from AIDS should be gay.

Because the narrative places so much weight on Lupin being bitten young and then on maybe not being allowed to attend school, I’m pretty sure that he’s not intended to be queer so much as he’s meant to be Ryan White, the literal poster child for AIDS activism who got infected via blood transfusion when he was two. Tragic, absolutely. But not gay. Honestly, I hope JKR was thinking of ‘lycanthropy’ as a metaphor for stigmatized illness in the abstract and not as a comment on gay people specifically. Because otherwise, Greyback’s thing about biting children becomes a mash-up of two of the biggest homophobic boogeymen from the 80s: gay men infecting people with AIDS on purpose because… idk, they hate the world or something. And the influence of gay men somehow “turning” children gay. Both absolutely real, if ridiculous, moral panics.

On top of that, Remus and Sirius do get a pretty clear case of the not-gays early on (“He embraced Black like a brother.”) Buuuut Alfonso Cuarón did think through those implications for Movie 3, absolutely saw Lupin as gay, and directed David Thewlis to play him accordingly. No reports confirming or denying whether Alfonso Cuarón ships Wolfstar, but I think that if I’m an actor trying to make sense of Lupin’s motivations… and I know he didn’t show Dumbledore the Marauders’ Map and didn’t tell anyone Sirius was an animagus… and then I’m told my character is gay… well. Anyway, I think there are absolutely hints of Wolfstar in that performance. 

And there's Tonks. Tonks is introduced during a very spooky segment in Book 5: Harry has been going through it, been left alone at the Dursleys while having what sounds like a depressive episode. It’s dark, he hears intruders. It's a really good piece of writing. But JKR knows that it’s the good guys who are coming and thinks, okay. Let’s make that as clear as possible from the word go. And so the first thing Harry sees is Tonks' pink hair. And what kind of person has pink hair? A young adult. A punky young adult. And what power would a teenager think was cool? Well, the ability to change the color of their hair at will. That, by itself, would have worked perfectly fine for this character.

But then (for reasons best known to herself) JKR goes further. Even though Tonk’s hair changing color is easily 90% of the transformations we see and there is no plot reason her appearance needs to change more than that, we see her drastically change her age and body type. When you think about this power for more than five seconds, it becomes kind of OP. For worldbuilding reasons alone, my instinct would’ve been to tone it down a bit. 

But no, we have this counterculture character who seems interested in her career and not in a relationship, who can easily change anything about her body, and (if her ability works anything like Polyjuice) that means she should definitely be able to change her gender. Cool.

Then, in everyone’s least favorite romance, Tonks and Lupin are paired up. I have heard the argument that this was meant to walk back queer-coding, or to punish people who thought they were queer... but I don’t think that’s the case. I don’t think JKR expected these two to be fan favorites, and then was kind of surprised when everyone wanted to hear about their continuing adventures. 

(There are a handful of characters who JKR clearly really enjoys - and really enjoys writing - that fandom honestly could not care less about. Mundungus Fletcher and Ludo Bagman spring to mind. But the reverse is also true. She had one story for Lupin and people wanted to see more. Tonks is probably supposed to be her comment on immature young adults: she is loud, in your face, causes mild destruction and is “a little annoying at times.” But the fans fell in love with her.) 

So JKR has these two fan favorite characters and nothing for them to do. A romance is something for them to do. JKR also has a kind of weird pattern where good people need to either have kids or take care of kids. It’s not good to be a woman who isn’t involved with taking care of children in some fashion: see Rita Skeeter, Dolores Umbridge, Bellatrix Lestrange. This is also (I think) why Harry names his kids specifically after Severus, Sirius, and Albus. Since they’re good men, JKR had to find a way to give them kids after the fact. 

So yeah. I think we were meant to read Tonks and Lupin having a kid as kind of a reward, or at least as proof of their intrinsic goodness. There also just isn’t another guy in the right age range to ship Tonks with. The only other option is Sirius. 

(Harry in the books and Lupin on Pottermore both suspect that Tonks/Sirius is a thing. Completely forgetting, I guess, that they're cousins.)

[wisteria-lodge]

Upcoming Harry Potter 'Unattractiveness' Ranking - Methodology

I've been working on the companion piece to my Harry Potter Attractiveness Ranking, and... I've been wading through the muck a bit, because BOY are there a lot of these descriptions. So this is actually going to be about my methodology, both because I'm interested in what people think, and because I'm going to need something to link back to when I put put up the big list of characters.

I'm tracking every time an unflattering description is linked back to a specific character, and so far here are my rules:

Anything Rita Skeeter says doesn't count (in-universe she's lying, and contradicts herself)

Insults DO count (they reflect someone’s authentic experience, I guess)

Injuries DO NOT count (Dark Marks + Homunculus!Voldemort count as an injuries)

Disguises DO NOT count

Ugly voice/tone DOES count (.5 points) 

Ugly facial expression DOES count (.5 points)

Ugly clothes DO count (1 point)

If characters are described as looking like each other, they compete together.

“Fat” by itself is a neutral descriptor. “Fat Lady” and “Fat Friar” are the characters’ names, and they’re pleasant characters. To count as negative, “fat” needs a specific qualifier, like “disgustingly fat” or “fat fingers”

And these are the words I'm going to be tracking:

General  Unattractiveness (2 points)

Ugly / uglier / ugliest

Not pretty / Not beautiful / no beauty

Unpleasant

Horrible

Plain

Grotesque

Nasty 

Foul

Permanent Characteristics (1 point)

Too Big / Too Small / Too Short

Bony

Porky

Piggy

Fat [with qualifier/intensifier] 

Stubby

Squat

Podgy

Pudgy

Doughy

Beefy

Stringy

Paunchy

Scrawny

Flabby

Weedy

Dumpy

Unflattering Animal Comparison

Horse 

Pug 

Toad

Rat

Whale

Pig

Unusual Eyes / Nose / Ears

Watery eyes

Tiny eyes

Beady eyes

Small eyes 

Bulging [eyes, nose]

Bulbous [eyes, nose]

Overlarge

Protuberant 

Bloodshot

Sunken

Jug-eared

Assorted Unflattering Descriptions

Weak chin

Hard-faced

Sour / Sour-faced / Sour-looking

Heavy-jawed

Pockmarked

Hag

Overgrown baby / babyish

Simpering

Mannish (sigh)

Non - Permanent Characteristics (.5 points)

Badly Groomed 

Filthy

Grubby

Dirty 

Greasy

Slimy

Oily

Unkempt

Matted

Stained

Yellow teeth

Brown teeth

Yellow nails

Unshaven

Straggly 

Sickly

Lank [hair]

Pallid

Sallow

Dull [hair, eyes]

Waxy

Sunken-faced

Unflattering Movement / Stance

Waddle

Hunch

Stooped / stooping

Slope-shouldered

Assorted Unflattering Descriptions

Purple-faced

Red-faced

Pimply / acne

Smells bad

Stench

Stank

Slack mouth

Off-center nose (?)

Idiosyncratic Descriptions ~

NO points, because I think these are meant to make the characters memorable and distinctive, NOT unpleasant

Bushy hair

Large front teeth

Knobbly knees

Bandy legs

Pointed face

Pointed nose

Scarred

Thickset

Lanky

Hooked nose

Shadowed eyes

Burned

Bird-like

Shabby/unfashionable clothing (originally had this as unattractive, but think that to JKR this communicates more 'humble, cute in a slightly pathetic sort of way)

Balding/receding hairline (there's an argument to put this under 'unattractive' because of the Pettigrew descriptions, but considering Arthur gets so many 'balding' descriptions, I think we're just supposed to read this as 'non-threatening.'

[wisteria-lodge]

I've always wondered why JKR decided to describe Voldemort's voice as high pitched. Cold I understand, but scary villains are generally given low voices, especially masculine ones. What kind of voice did she even have in mind for him?

JKR loves to give her characters individualized voice tags, in an almost epithet way. Sirius "barks" a lot, Peter "squeaks" (cute), "sneer" is very much a Malfoy word, Kakaroff's voice is "oily" and "unctuous." It's a good strategy to help readers keep the huge cast of supporting characters straight.

The classic Voldemort voice description is "high, cold, cruel" But doing a quick run through of the books, I'm also seeing:

hissed

breathed

murmured

a whisper that was almost a hiss

said the cold voice softly

silkily

lazily

quietly

coolly

soft, cold voice

strangely high-pitched

Which tells me that under normal circumstances, Voldemort talks in a soft, breathy sort of way. Like he's got (it seems funny to say) almost a Marilyn Monroe-ish tone? I would absolutely describe that as "high-pitched." It's also an absolute power move to talk softly in a group of people, knowing that there's going to be dead silence every time you open your mouth.

I'm going to paraphrase a Ralph Fiennes interview, where he says that the horror of Voldemort is that 90% of the time, he's actually quite calm, relaxed, pleasant. BUT. He is also, always, two seconds away from snapping. Voldemort's described as speaking softly so it creates a contrast when he gets angry, and flips immediately into:

screeched

shrieked

shouted

spat

snarled

(preserving that hissing s though, nice)

Like in this snippet, that threat of anger is being directly called out:

“Be quiet, Bella,” said Voldemort dangerously. “I shall deal with you in a moment. Do you think I have entered the Ministry of Magic to hear your sniveling apologies?”

Voldemort isn't angry yet... but he's going to be, and it makes it scarier that he's able to (and likes to) just flip that switch on purpose.

[wisteria-lodge]

wait there are no house elves in malfoy manor? i mean it's possible that during the time voldemort and the others where there the house elves could just be in prison or they are there and jkr just didn't mention them

because let's say there aren't house elves and voldemort and the death eaters are there, who would have prepared the meals or whatever things guest needs when they visit or stay in someone's house

In Harry Potter, we see a few strategies for maintaining and running a magical house. Let’s break it down.

OPTION ONE: NON-MAGIC PEOPLE vs HOUSE ELVES

Yep, we are going to be dropping some Filtch lore today.

So in canon, it’s really hard to explain why that man (who isn’t able to do magic) has that job (caretaking an entire magical castle.) But I’m going to do my best to make it work. Because pre Statute of Secrecy, it actually makes a lot of sense that old medieval buildings like Hogwarts and Malfoy Manor would have been staffed by muggles. 

I mean, the only reason you build castles (big, easily defensible fortresses) is so they can be the last line of defense if anything happens to the serfs who are renting/farming your land. The peasants supply food/clothes/weapons/luxury products to the Lord of the manor/castle, and in return they are protected (in theory.) That’s feudalism. If anything, being a wizard would just make you a better Lord. There’s no way the Malfoys or the Founders would have been sitting at the center of a community of only wizards, there aren’t enough wizards. Also, if you want someone to run/maintain your house and you’re choosing between Muggles and house-elves… in a lot of cases, muggles are actually better.

Like okay, house-elves are slaves, which means they would be cheaper than Muggle peasants, but like… not a lot cheaper. Also, there’s got to be some upfront cost of time/money/effort in order to catch a house-elf and bind them to your house. Once you start getting generations of house-elves that’s not a problem, but when you’re setting up a household… yeah I think getting in a staff of muggles would be quicker and easier.

The other thing house elves have in their favor is that they’re really really powerful. A single house-elf is much more effective than a single human servant. But… they’re also kind of too powerful? If you have a human servant who betrays you, does a bad job, or that you just don’t like… you can fire them, imprison them, and (if you’re a wizard) oblivate them so they can’t tell anyone your secrets. 

None of that works with house-elves. Unlike a human you can’t bribe them (because they have a culture that doesn’t value money.) You can’t imprison them (because whatever magic prevents wizards from apparating doesn’t work on them. Dobby gets in and out the Malfoy dungeons just fine.) I’m also assuming you can't obviate them, because if you COULD then oh my god, Barty Crouch Senior would have 1000000% obviated Winky. 

Until house-elves are freed they do seem to have some magical compulsion that prevents them from speaking ill of their masters…  but they can clearly still mess their masters up pretty badly if they want to. Dobby spends all of Book 2 undermining Lucius. Kreacher spends all of Book 5 undermining Sirius (and honestly is the catalyst for the Battle of the Department of Mysteries.) This doesn’t even seem out of the ordinary: Tom Riddle framed Hokey for Hepzibah Smith’s murder, and apparently everyone bought it. That's another reason a muggle would be a solid choice: even if they wanted to kill a wizard, it would be nearly impossible. But Kreacher and the Hogwarts house-elves actively fight wizards during the Battle of Hogwarts.

So if you have a house-elf that you can’t trust, basically your only option is to free them. Which is bad, because they know all your secrets and can now talk to whoever they want (Dobby absolutely bad-mouths the Malfoys after he's freed. And it’s super plausible that Winky could’ve said something about Barty Junior while she was smashed off Butterbeer.) So really… the only truly safe option is to kill them. And it seems like you have to kill them, by hand, with a sword. The Blacks did sign up for this, and we can see their wall of decapitated house-elf heads as proof. House elves do make more sense for the Blacks, because I'm thinking if they became powerful at around the same time as the Statute, they would have been setting up new muggle-less households, not adapting old ones to the new paradigm. But then, not everyone is as hard-core as the Blacks. The Malfoys, for example, actually seem quite squeamish about violence. Also, Draco is very happy to refer to what Hagrid does as "servant stuff," which means he's comfortable with that particular worldview.

Now, Hogwarts has house-elves, and they certainly don’t seem to kill them. Of course it's a school rather than a house - if one of those elves went rouge, what damage could they really do? Compare that to Dobby. Like, if he wanted to put Lucius Malfoy in Azkaban… he could've given some really damning evidence. Lucius Malfoy’s defense was that he was under the Imperius curse. Dobby knows that’s not true. Dobby knows where all the contraband in that house is, Dobby knows that diary belonged to Voldemort, he knew Lucius was threatening Hogwarts on purpose... Maybe elves aren’t allowed to testify in front of the Wizangamot, but Dobby - bring that info to Arthur Weasley. Bring it to Dumbledore. If I were Lucius Malfoy, I would be terrified. Even if I had other house elves, I don’t know if I’d keep them around after second year. Definitely not after Kreacher went rouge and betrayed Sirius, which *Narcissa* knows all about.

Hogwarts also has Filch (and Hagrid, who *also* can't do magic, at least on paper.) And I guess I could see an interpretation where if Hogwarts was initially designed to be run by Muggles, then maybe there are certain functions of the castle that can only be performed by Muggles. Like we all know there’s something weird going on with Mrs. Norris. She’s too smart, she’s the only animal who shows up on the Marauder’s map, she’s telepathically bonded with Filch. So, maybe she is the manifestation of some magical function that oversees the castle, and maybe you need someone without magic to properly access her magic. Like if a witch/wizard tried to bond with her, their magic gets in the way of the castle’s magic. I’ll buy that. 

Eventually though, Salazar Slytherin started becoming wary of Muggles, so maybe he started a process of phasing out any muggle servants working in the castle and replacing them with house-elves. That makes sense to me. And if the castle needed non-magic workers… squibs would be a good compromise. 

OPTION TWO: AUTOMATED MAGIC

So we know you can cast a spell on an object, and then that object will just sit and do nothing until the spell is triggered. Fred and George’s hats don’t do anything until you put them on - and then they turn your head invisible. You are not doing anything to cast the spell, it’s all in the hat.  Presumably their cloaks and gloves that deflect curses work the same way. 

We see a lot of this kind of delayed-action magic when it comes to magical protections for locations. Dumbledore has spelled Grimauld Place to send specters at anyone who comes through the door. Muggle-repelling charms don’t do anything until a Muggle is in proximity. Voldemort’s inferi cave is filled with magical objects that don’t activate until certain conditions are met. Also, these are not single-use protections that you need to replace every time they’re triggered. Once they're set up, it seems they keep working until they're taken down.

We also know there are plenty of spells that make running a household easier. We see Mrs. Weasley use spells to cook, to make clothes, she has whole books full of household magic. So my thought is - if you can bewitch the outside of a house to respond to certain conditions, then why not the inside of a house? How hard would it really be to bewitch a fireplace so it turns on every time someone walks into the room? I bet you could get beds that make themselves, carpets that clean themselves, make it so that certain meals are always cooked at certain times, and served in specific places. The house probably cycles through a set number of meals, and some of the food options would be slightly eccentric because that piece of food-magic was set in 1702. But it all seems very doable, in a programmable smart-house sort of way. Especially if you’re the Malfoys and have nothing but money, time, and a love of the ~*~*aesthetic*~*~ Because the aesthetic of a house like this would be absolutely peak. Very spooky fairytale, invisible servant, romantic Beauty-and-the-Beast vibes. 

I think this is the option that Malfoys would have chosen, when they no longer had access to Muggles to run their house for them. Apart from the heightened security and a cooler aesthetic, the Malfoys were very against the Statute of Secrecy, so I bet that (for a while at least) they were kind of hoping that it would be reversed and things would go back to the way they were. So, not as motivated to start building up a household staff of house-elves, which is a pretty irreversible decision. 

The Malfoy also like to keep secrets. In the present day of the book, we know they have contraband cursed objects, contraband poisons, a hidden room to keep all of their contraband in underneath the drawing room floor. I don’t think this is a particularly recent state of affairs. Going back to the 1700s, if the Malfoys were ordered to cut off all these very profitable ties with the muggle world… yeah they’re not doing that. They are definitely hiding income coming in from the muggle world, or muggle retainers that they were kind of supposed to obviate and didn’t. 

In the main timeline of the books, I think it makes a lot of sense that Dobby is a Black family house elf that came over with Narcissa when she and Lucius were first married. And I say that because… Dobby is a mess, and Lucius Malfoy puts a lot of stock in looking good while out in public. The Hogwarts house elves look neat and presentable. Winky’s tea-towel toga looks clean and neat. Dobby is shambling around in a snot-stained torn pillowcase, is Lucius not embarrassed? 

My thought is that he kind of resents Dobby: he’s the Black family passive aggressively saying that Lucius can’t take care of Narcissa, or maybe he suspects that the Blacks are sending Dobby over as a spy. But whatever the reason, he can’t get rid of him - first because he doesn’t want to offend his in-laws (Dobby as the equivalent of an ugly lamp that you keep in the closet unless the people who gave you the lamp are visiting.) Then Dobby witnesses the entire first war, which makes him way, way too much of a liability to free. 

So that’s my answer. tl;dr - the Malfoys are a very private family with a long-standing distrust of the Ministry, with a house that was set up to be run by Muggles. I think it makes the most sense that they have retrofitted that house with automated magic, until it’s basically able to run itself. And then, whenever they’re throwing an event, or something a little too complicated for the house's magic to handle… they just hire in a staff of wizards to work one or two nights.