James Potter: Character Analysis

That pole is off - James didn't mistrust Remus, it shouldn't be phrased: "james was wrong to mistrust Remus" because it assumes he did. And Canon does not tell us that at all, it insinuates the opposit. According to Remus himself James would have felt it dishonorable to not trust his friends always. Sirius mistrusted Remus and visa versa because they were the only two smarties who could have been the Spy. James likely felt it was someone outside of the Marauders. Very bad phrasing of a pole question in this thread.

I tend to think the opposite. If Snape felt humiliated by James and co, Lily is the last person he'd want to know about it.notorious bullies who everyone is afraid of usually bully more than one person. So unless they were only bullying Snape, then Snape probably would have mentioned it.

notorious bullies who everyone is afraid of usually bully more than one person. So unless they were only bullying Snape, then Snape probably would have mentioned it.

I didn't get the impression that they were notorious bullies or that they were picking on anyone other than Snape. But it would make sense for Snape to feel ashamed about it and not to want to talk about it with Lily.

I didn't get the impression that they were notorious bullies or that they were picking on anyone other than Snape. But it would make sense for Snape to feel ashamed about it and not to want to talk about it with Lily. Yeah, I hear that. Also, Lily just saw, that afternoon what was probably the worst of the bullying, so there was really no need to bring it up.

While I don't necessarily agree with the characterization of all three, that is the best description of why Wormtail turned that I have ever, ever heard.

They did become admirable and brave; they worked and put themselves in mortal peril for the order, fought for what they believed in and freedom for many that had not even been born yet. They were admirable unless you view those in resistance movements during WWII not worthy of admiration, and that was the comparison JKR was making. Here in Europe people who worked for the resistance during WWII are viewed with awe like admiration. Sure they had flaws but who doesn't.

That was probably hindsight, though.

Course it was, but he was obviously seeing the same warning signs in Harry's trusting nature that resulted in James and Lily's death.

Good point. You'd think he'd mention it if they were notorious bullies who everyone was afraid of, wouldn't you?

Of course he wouldn't! He had to swallow enough humiliation without Lily knowing about it as well, and from his mouth on top of it! Do you think he would have wanted her to think he's weak or can't defend himself?

Lupin said that James stopped jinxing people on sight. So at some point, he must have been picking on people for the sheer fun of it.

Think a moment... how many curses, jinxes, and hexes do we read about during Harry's years at Hogwarts? There are literally dozens of them. Does that mean Hogwarts is populated by bullies? Of course, not.

Lupin told Harry in HBP that "levicorpus" was very popular during his years at Hogwarts. We know that Snape invented the spell. Is it that difficult to see how so many other students learned it?

Ah and lest we forget, James had a sense of humour! Recall in the pensive Sirius asking Remus about the werewolf traits and Remus' funny answer (he had a sense of humor too) and James and Sirius laughed...Peter didn't (that should have been a clue, LOL)

Another fine trait which likey attracted people like Lily to him and drove people like Snape who seemed to be fairly humorless away (although his snide/mean comments to students do make readers laugh at times!)

Oh yeah, and about Sirius calling Harry, James. Never happened in the book. Molly and Hermione say that Sirius sometimes seems to consider Harry a replacement for James. It is also hinted that Remus thinks this about Sirius too, but he never says it, in front of Harry at least.

I liked that addition to the film; it said so much with just one word that would have otherwise taken a whole scene: that Sirius never got over James death and considered Harry a replacement.

I liked that addition to the film; it said so much with just one word that would have otherwise taken a whole scene: that Sirius never got over James death and considered Harry a replacement.

I didn't care for it. It takes away from Dumbledore's comment that Harry was coming to consider Sirius as both father and brother. The same would be true on the reverse side of the coin: Sirius saw Harry as both son and brother. There is nothing wrong with that!

I didn't care for it. It takes away from Dumbledore's comment that Harry was coming to consider Sirius as both father and brother. The same would be true on the reverse side of the coin: Sirius saw Harry as both son and brother. There is nothing wrong with that!

Not at all. Sirius was still "godfather" when he needed to be. He was a bit reckless at times, but he was still just a lad of 21 in some ways, quite understandable after Azkaban. But Azkaban likely matured him in ways beyond any other main character in the story. He loved James and he loved Harry; he saw a lot of James in Harry because that was the case, like father like son...like it or not, that's just genetics!

I didn't care for it. It takes away from Dumbledore's comment that Harry was coming to consider Sirius as both father and brother. The same would be true on the reverse side of the coin: Sirius saw Harry as both son and brother. There is nothing wrong with that!

I actually never got this impression of Sirius, merely from Harry's side. Of course Sirius loves Harry and desperately wanted to be a good parental figure to him, but I think he was too damaged, and haunted by ghosts, to truly separate Harry from James. He seemed quite developmentally stunted after Azabahan, which is incredibly sad, because given Sirius talent and intelligence; he could probably have been brilliant and who knows what he may have done with his life.

I actually never got this impression of Sirius, merely from Harry's side. Of course Sirius loves Harry and desperately wanted to be a good parental figure to him, but I think he was too damaged, and haunted by ghosts, to truly separate Harry from James. He seemed quite developmentally stunted after Azabahan, which is incredibly sad, because given Sirius talent and intelligence; he could probably have been brilliant and who knows what he may have done with his life.

I don't think so. The side of Sirius we see in Goblet of Fire potrays a parental figure. We see a philosiphical and wise Sirius. He's worried about Harry. He's being extremely practical about the whole situation. He listens to Harry complain bitterly about how Ron had stopped speaking to him and the rest of the world had turned his life into some sort of mockery. He doesn't tease or mock Harry about this. Sirius might have teased James, if James had been in a similar situation. Not that he wouldn't support James. But he might have got a laugh out of it. But with Harry, he takes it very seriously.
He's always warning Harry and asking him to stay alert and keep himself safe.
In short Sirius acts exactly like a responsible father.
In the beginning of GOF Harry writes to Sirius about his dream and his scar hurting and not Ron or Hermione.
Sirius' restlesness in OOTP is more to do with Sirius feeling cooped up and useless. Ofcourse Sirius wants nothing more than to be with the marauders again and having Harry around does give him snatches of the life he once lived. But when it came to things that matter Sirius was there for Harry in the same way that James would have been there for his son.

I actually never got this impression of Sirius, merely from Harry's side. Of course Sirius loves Harry and desperately wanted to be a good parental figure to him, but I think he was too damaged, and haunted by ghosts, to truly separate Harry from James. He seemed quite developmentally stunted after Azabahan, which is incredibly sad, because given Sirius talent and intelligence; he could probably have been brilliant and who knows what he may have done with his life.

Well I agree Sirius would have gone on to be brilliant in everyday life. But he was far from damaged. He came out of Azkaban in miraculously good shape considering what he went through. He spent a lot of time with Lupin and I am sure Lupin helped center him because that is just the type of person Lupin is (consoling Tonks, Harry, Neville, etc...).

I think Sirius bounced back well and acted more and more mature as the days passed. He was still somewhat recklessness which was likely the part of him that was still 21, but he was also matured by azkaban in ways - anyone
would be.

In ways, everyone in JKR's book was "damaged" and because the word is used so liberally, I don't like to use it. It sounds like the person got hit by a car and is walking around with half a body and brain or something. I rather like to use descriptive words that are more in line with a person's character.

Sirius was like James in many good ways and we can see the kindness, love, caring and friendliness that was a part of James' character in Sirius.

I've always felt that being locked up in Grimmaud Place, after 12 years at Azkaban, was a sore trial for Sirius. Having to listen to Snape's taunts didn't help matters either - after all, it was Snape who snatched Sirius' chance of freedom away from him. Snape's hissy fit in the Shrieking Shack was abominable.

...after all, it was Snape who snatched Sirius' chance of freedom away from him.

That's a rather bold statement to make. From what I gathered of Dumbledore's words, nothing anybody said would have made any difference to Sirius' sentence. Plus if it had been Snape, somebody would have made a point of it, wouldn't they?

That's a rather bold statement to make. From what I gathered of Dumbledore's words, nothing anybody said would have made any difference to Sirius' sentence. Plus if it had been Snape, somebody would have made a point of it, wouldn't they?
Well Snape was the reason Lord Voldemort found out about the prophesy. Therefore he was the reason James and Lilly died and their subsequent deaths... Which also led to Sirius's imprisonment... Snape is one of my favorite characters, has been since day one but I see the point made by purplehawk...

I don't think so. The side of Sirius we see in Goblet of Fire potrays a parental figure. We see a philosiphical and wise Sirius. He's worried about Harry. He's being extremely practical about the whole situation. He listens to Harry complain bitterly about how Ron had stopped speaking to him and the rest of the world had turned his life into some sort of mockery. He doesn't tease or mock Harry about this. Sirius might have teased James, if James had been in a similar situation. Not that he wouldn't support James. But he might have got a laugh out of it. But with Harry, he takes it very seriously.
He's always warning Harry and asking him to stay alert and keep himself safe.
In short Sirius acts exactly like a responsible father.
In the beginning of GOF Harry writes to Sirius about his dream and his scar hurting and not Ron or Hermione.
Sirius' restlesness in OOTP is more to do with Sirius feeling cooped up and useless. Ofcourse Sirius wants nothing more than to be with the marauders again and having Harry around does give him snatches of the life he once lived. But when it came to things that matter Sirius was there for Harry in the same way that James would have been there for his son.
Ear! Ear!

I've always felt that being locked up in Grimmaud Place, after 12 years at Azkaban, was a sore trial for Sirius. Having to listen to Snape's taunts didn't help matters either - after all, it was Snape who snatched Sirius' chance of freedom away from him. Snape's hissy fit in the Shrieking Shack was abominable.

Yes well, from Snape's perspective, Sirius took everything he ever wanted away from him.

Well Snape was the reason Lord Voldemort found out about the prophesy. Therefore he was the reason James and Lilly died and their subsequent deaths... Which also led to Sirius's imprisonment... Snape is one of my favorite characters, has been since day one but I see the point made by purplehawk...

Well, by the same logic, Sirius was also responsible for his own imprisonment, as he proposed the switch, and so is JAmes, as he agreed, and so is Trelawney, without whom there would be no prophecy and no chosen one. That's a very weak point, in my opinion, because neither of those knew what was going to happen, and it's quite a stretch to suggest Snape was responsible for Sirius' imprisonment because he retold a prophecy. I mean, the Fidelius wasn't even proposed then, how was Snape to know it would be, and that Sirius would be Secret Keeper and then not, but accused all the same?! This just doesn't make any sense.

Yes well, from Snape's perspective, Sirius took everything he ever wanted away from him.
I am just curious but what did Sirius take away from Snape? I mean James took from Snape the one person he cared about the most but what in name merlin's pants did Sirius do? I always felt the Snape didn't give two cents about Sirius....:rockon:

Can we try and bring this more on James?

I see James as one of the many characters where we can only see him in shades of grey, not black and white. On one side we have SWM and Snape's viewpoint. On the other side we have Sirius, Lupin, and Dumbledore. I'm inclined to think that James wasn't a perfect child - he didn't wear a halo or anything - but he was not the person that SWM makes him appear to be. It's just like Harry isn't the person that DWM (Draco's worst memory) makes him look like. In the end I believe that James was a honorable man who valued loyalty but had his faults and mistakes in his past.

Why are we discussing Sirius so much in the James Potter Analysis thread? Topic, people! :lol:

Good point. You'd think he'd mention it if they were notorious bullies who everyone was afraid of, wouldn't you?

Not unless he wanted Lily to point out to him that he was guilty of the same thing. Snape did find what Mulciber did to Mary funny, and that what was they were arguing about. There's also the issue of appearing less than manly to Lily, as Yoana pointed out.

I think the point was that James was both a bully at school and a good man. This seems to be a key theme in HP - that the best of people can do horrible things. I found the characterisation of Dumbledore much more successful though - we got to see him as a rounded and complex human being. But with James, we heard about his loyalty, courage and love from other people but we only got to see him being bullying and arrogant...

I think I like James better because he actually managed to turn over a new leaf and become a better person. Like Dumbledore, actually. But I have to disagree that we only saw him as bullying and arrogant. He certainly was brave, courageous and loving when he ran in to face Voldemort, so that Lily could try to escape with Harry. Somehow, I doubt that this was the only act of bravery on James's part though. We're forgetting that James and Lily defied Voldemort thrice, a feat that only them and the Longbottoms managed.

Lupin said that James stopped jinxing people on sight. So at some point, he must have been picking on people for the sheer fun of it.

Of course. James was an arrogant prat when he was a kid. Sirius and Remus admit as much, and the detention slips confirm it. It was a bad phase in his life.

Of course he wouldn't! He had to swallow enough humiliation without Lily knowing about it as well, and from his mouth on top of it! Do you think he would have wanted her to think he's weak or can't defend himself?

I agree about Snape not wanting to appear weak and defenseless.

It was Sirius that was responsible or the death of James and Lily. Now we know that Snape wanted too kill James badly and his entire adult life was driven by his love for Lily.

Do you mean to say that Snape believed Sirius, not Wormtail, was responsible for James and Lily dying?

And, although James and Snape were like Draco and Harry (but worse), I don't think that Snape wanted James dead. He just wanted James out of the way, so that he could try and win Lily's affections.

Ur...James thread, right? I posted my defense of james up above :).

I've deleted some posts not about James.

Yeah sure Voldemort is to blame given the fact he did actually kill them. But if Snape had not snitched none of this would have happened anyway.
But can we get back to discussing James? What kind of bond did he have with all his friends?

Somehow, I doubt that this was the only act of bravery on James's part though. We're forgetting that James and Lily defied Voldemort thrice, a feat that only them and the Longbottoms managed.


While I don't doubt James did many brave things, I hardly think he's the person who has defied Voldemort the most except for the Longbottoms...just that he has the requisite three times, and has a child born at the right time. There are probably lots of people who have three times of defiance, but no child, or a child, but four times..etc etc.

The thing with James is that he being Harrys father has quite an impact on the character and the story, but on the same hand we have only very few first hand information about him, therefore we have to rely often on what others said or his relations to others.

But actually we have one very important first hand adult James reference that sadly tends to be forgotten: the appearance of his soul or essence in GoF, which helped Harry to escape.
I believe that this is what adult James was, a protector and a good father and advisor.

His flaws are well known and thoroughly discussed. But also remember that Lily, a woman who disliked arrogance and show-offs chose him as the love of her life. She must have seen something in him. :)

I'm going to move away from current discussion to ask a question:

WHY did James run out to meet Voldemort without a wand? He should've realized his mistake halfway and run back in to get it.

WHY did James run out to meet Voldemort without a wand? He should've realized his mistake halfway and run back in to get it.

James probably didn't think about what he was doing since he was so caught up in the situation. And running back after seeing Voldemort wouldn't be a smart idea either because Voldemort could easily kill him while his back is turned.
Lily and James trusted Wormtail too much to think that he'd betray them. Both Lily and James didn't have their wands on them when they faced Voldemort!

WHY did James run out to meet Voldemort without a wand? He should've realized his mistake halfway and run back in to get it.

I think he knew there wasn't time. He wasn't going to be able to stop Voldemort no matter what, but I think by standing up to him wandless he thought he was giving Lily time to escape.

I think he knew there wasn't time. He wasn't going to be able to stop Voldemort no matter what, but I think by standing up to him wandless he thought he was giving Lily time to escape.
I agree. There simply wasn't time to do anything at all. It was hopeless no matter how you look at it.

I think he knew there wasn't time. He wasn't going to be able to stop Voldemort no matter what, but I think by standing up to him wandless he thought he was giving Lily time to escape.

Here's a real question based on that: if James was doing that, why don't we see Harry's mother trying to get away? Why didn't she grab her wand and simply Apparate away if necessary, or even just try to go out the window? Was she unaware of what was going on outside? Didn't James try to warn her?

Here's a real question based on that: if James was doing that, why don't we see Harry's mother trying to get away? Why didn't she grab her wand and simply Apparate away if necessary, or even just try to go out the window? Was she unaware of what was going on outside? Didn't James try to warn her? I'm just speculating here, but I think that there were probably a lot of charms put on the house, and perhaps apparition was disabled so that no one could apparate in. Also, I would think it difficult to apparate with a baby.

^Why doesn't anyone apparate? The whole family could've apparated away.

Hmmm. I seem to recall Side-Along Apparition being mentioned for the very young, I'm not sure how old someone would have to be for that, but it seems to be done by the person actually apparating-I seem to recall Dumbledore using the spell on Harry without him knowing much about the details.

It makes sense to ensure no one could apparate in, but it also seems foolish to have a house that's a hideaway with only one exit-and then why wouldn't James run back to the house and try to combine his forces with Lily? I do find it hard to believe that someone like James, who hated being cooped up, would choose to be cooped up in a house with no exits.

It makes sense to ensure no one could apparate in, but it also seems foolish to have a house that's a hideaway with only one exit-and then why wouldn't James run back to the house and try to combine his forces with Lily? I do find it hard to believe that someone like James, who hated being cooped up, would choose to be cooped up in a house with no exits. There was a secret keeper, they weren't planning on Voldemort walking up to the front door. Actually, I wouldn't be surprised if there were some sort of charm disabling apparition for quite a radius around the house. We saw Voldemort's memories in DH, and in them he is walking for quite a few minutes towards the house - why didn't he apparate closer?

I would imagine there was a good bit of panic and a lot less thinking going on. They had trusted that they were safe and were suddenly confronted with the thing they feared most. James' immediate reaction was action. I would think Lily reacted like a doe in headlights. Just kind of froze. Maybe she didn't think of apparition, I mean one minute they're playing with their kid, the next minute Voldemort is there. I just think it was so unexpected they didn't know how to react.

There is no great answer because James and Lily Potter had to die for the story line. So it didn't matter if James had had a DeVoldemizer, he still would have died with Lily.

James' character is reflected in Harry in many ways as we are told by his friends. Thus I would say he was trustworthy, trusting, had a huge capacity to forgive, he was honorable, arrogant, firmly against dark arts and he loved red heads. It sounds like Harry, but from other sources we have learned it also sounds like James.

why wouldn't James run back to the house and try to combine his forces with Lily?
Run back to the house? He was in the house. He didn't carry his wand from room to room. I hope we aren't going to start blaming him for their deaths. They had to die for the entire story to work. So the only person to blame is Jo.

Run back to the house? He was in the house. He didn't carry his wand from room to room. I hope we aren't going to start blaming him for their deaths. They had to die for the entire story to work. So the only person to blame is Jo.

God I hope not. Hagrid said in the first book that no one lived when Voldemort decided to kill them. I figure James was just trying to buy time for his wife and child in case they could get away.

I would imagine there was a good bit of panic and a lot less thinking going on. They had trusted that they were safe and were suddenly confronted with the thing they feared most. James' immediate reaction was action. I would think Lily reacted like a doe in headlights. Just kind of froze. Maybe she didn't think of apparition, I mean one minute they're playing with their kid, the next minute Voldemort is there. I just think it was so unexpected they didn't know how to react.

I don't know if that was intentional or not, Jessica, but nice on the doe-I wonder if people absorb slight characteristics of their patronus as well?

Run back to the house? He was in the house. He didn't carry his wand from room to room. I hope we aren't going to start blaming him for their deaths. They had to die for the entire story to work. So the only person to blame is Jo.


I don't think anyone is thinking of trying to blame James for their deaths. I'm just trying to figure out a little more about the character, and How Everything Happened. And I can't recall who said it or in which thread, but the entire plot needs to have internal consistency. It's not enough to simply say that 'they had to die for the story to happen'. There has to be a reason they died, and the characters need to have been as consistent there as they are in the rest of the story.

I'm also puzzled why James didn't carry a wand around in his back pocket, rather like Harry does most of the time. Perhaps James took too strongly to heart Moody's words about the danger to derrieres in doing such a thing!

It's not enough to simply say that 'they had to die for the story to happen'. There has to be a reason they died, and the characters need to have been as consistent there as they are in the rest of the story.


Maybe James had a wand and Voldemort simply didn't see it.

I'm also puzzled why James didn't carry a wand around in his back pocket, rather like Harry does most of the time. Perhaps James took too strongly to heart Moody's words about the danger to derrieres in doing such a thing!

James was at home though and in hiding. He probably didn't think that anyone who wasn't close to them would be able to see the house. He probably didn't see the need to carry his wand everywhere. Hadn't he just put the wand down before Voldemort attacked?

And I can't recall who said it or in which thread, but the entire plot needs to have internal consistency.
I think that Jo wanted to show James in a selfless act of sacrifice. Lacking a wand, he still tried to delay Voldemort somehow, knowing he would probably die. I doubt that someone just relaxing on their sofa would be carrying a wand in their back pocket. It would probably be uncomfortable. They thought they were perfectly safe under Fidelius.

I don't necessarily mean for defense, either. It just seems that most of the time, when we see wizarding families at home, they always have their wands around to do everything. Molly cooks with hers, parents amuse their children, angsty teenagers zap flies...it just seems strange that it would be so far away from him, though it may have just been hidden, as wickedwickedboy suggests.

Or he just set it down for a second.

Maybe James had a wand and Voldemort simply didn't see it.

I don't think he did. The scene, as we saw it, was that of a couple playing with their baby. They believed they were safe, protected by the fidelius charm. They were happy.

I think that Jo wanted to show James in a selfless act of sacrifice. Lacking a wand, he still tried to delay Voldemort somehow, knowing he would probably die. I doubt that someone just relaxing on their sofa would be carrying a wand in their back pocket. It would probably be uncomfortable. They thought they were perfectly safe under Fidelius.

Agreed.

@ thoughts about apparating out; first, Lily must not have had the time to get out of the house - James didn't last nearly as long as Voldemort had implied back in GoF. Nothing against James, but he didn't stand a chance. He may have dodged an AK or two, but I imagine it took less than 30 seconds.

Second, I imagine the anti-apparition charm being like a bubble. Can't go in...can't go out. Unless they had a house-elf there who could tear a hole in the anti-apparition ward, Lily would have had to force open a second floor window, grab Harry, jump, dodge a few AK's, and outsprint Voldy to the spot where she could apparate. And she'd need to be able to do the 3 D's while gasping for breath and panicking...she was a talented witch, but that isn't easy!

:hmm:...why do I always end up off-topic in the James thread?

Second, I imagine the anti-apparition charm being like a bubble. Can't go in...can't go out. Unless they had a house-elf there who could tear a hole in the anti-apparition ward, Lily would have had to force open a second floor window, grab Harry, jump, dodge a few AK's, and outsprint Voldy to the spot where she could apparate. And she'd need to be able to do the 3 D's while gasping for breath and panicking...she was a talented witch, but that isn't easy!

:hmm:...why do I always end up off-topic in the James thread?

I don't know, but the vision of UberElite Secret Ninja Lily is so very, very worth it. I'm picturing Bourne Ultimatum style tactics from Lily, but with magic.

I don't know if that was intentional or not, Jessica, but nice on the doe-I wonder if people absorb slight characteristics of their patronus as well?




I don't think anyone is thinking of trying to blame James for their deaths. I'm just trying to figure out a little more about the character, and How Everything Happened. And I can't recall who said it or in which thread, but the entire plot needs to have internal consistency. It's not enough to simply say that 'they had to die for the story to happen'. There has to be a reason they died, and the characters need to have been as consistent there as they are in the rest of the story.

I'm also puzzled why James didn't carry a wand around in his back pocket, rather like Harry does most of the time. Perhaps James took too strongly to heart Moody's words about the danger to derrieres in doing such a thing!

JK said that James' reation was purely instinctual and animalistic. I believe that he didn't really think about defending himself against Volemort, the only thing he wanted to do was buy Lily and Harry some time to escape. It was extremely brave and noble to face the most feared Dark wizard of all time without a wand. As I said in a previous thread James rushed in without thinking because seriously, it was very unexpected because they would never have thought their friend would betray them, and all of a sudden having your door blasted in? Who wouldn't rush out without thinking? I found it very sad that he didn't have a wand, but I guess if he did he would have put up a really good fight (I mean, he had thrice defied Voldemort) and Lily and Harry would have had time to escape and then the Harry Potter saga would not have been the same. Also, about your question as to why he didn't carry his wand about in his back pocket, well he was just finished playing with Harry and using his wand to make smoke rings, when Lily took Harry to put him to bed and James laid down his wand. Immediately after his door was blasted open and his first instinct was to run out to confront the intruder and his wand lay forgotten. Even Lily in her panic forgot to pick up her wand. I think she had a Hermione moment and forgot she was a witch.

You know, I think it's another mark of James' trust in his friends that they didn't have a backup plan in case Voldemort managed to get in. He really believed that his friends would die before giving up his location to Voldemort.

Lily, like James, didn't have a wand on her at the time when Voldemort entered the house. I think a wand is necessary in order to apparate. Ron tried to apparate in the Malfoy Mansion but he couldn't because he didn't have one on him.

Lily, like James, didn't have a wand on her at the time when Voldemort entered the house. I think a wand is necessary in order to apparate. Ron tried to apparate in the Malfoy Mansion but he couldn't because he didn't have one on him.

Wow, excellent point.

Right, but to give a nod to Sirius...he wouldn't have thought he was sending Snape to his death. Worse case scenario he would have been sending him to become a werewolf. Werewolves don't kill, they bite and turn their prey into werewolves.

Being a werewolf not any better.A life of painful transformations and being a social outcast.I think Remus would have found turning Snape into a werewolf just as bad.

Sadly even if James did have a wand it might not have made much of a difference.

Being a werewolf not any better.A life of painful transformations and being a social outcast.I think Remus would have found turning Snape into a werewolf just as bad.

Sadly even if James did have a wand it might not have made much of a difference.

That is the whole point. James thought of Remus and his being a werewolf in total contrast to what society thought. That is another great aspect of James' character. Sirius thought the same way. Remus' opinion on his werewolfness was naturally all mussed because of the way he had always been treated by society (except 3 friends and mum and dad). But his friends showed him how society should think (well their version included some immature aspects, but the basic idea is clearly there).

That was a very wonderful aspect of James' character. And I think it was an important point that JKR was trying to make by giving him this characteristic. Prejudice that leads to shunning and outcasting is not a good thing. James was not prejudice. A great Characteristic and one he passed to his son as we see Harry had the same outlook and one of the few to get close to Remus throughout the series.

That is the whole point. James thought of Remus and his being a werewolf in total contrast to what society thought. That is another great aspect of James' character. Sirius thought the same way. Remus' opinion on his werewolfness was naturally all mussed because of the way he had always been treated by society (except 3 friends and mum and dad). But his friends showed him how society should think (well their version included some immature aspects, but the basic idea is clearly there).

That was a very wonderful aspect of James' character. And I think it was an important point that JKR was trying to make by giving him this characteristic. Prejudice that leads to shunning and outcasting is not a good thing. James was not prejudice. A great Characteristic and one he passed to his son as we see Harry had the same outlook and one of the few to get close to Remus throughout the series.

I think you've missed my point.It's not about James view.
That was how James might have seen it,but he did grow up in the wizarding world and he knew how werewolves were treated.Listen to Remus in PoA when he describes his tranformation.Its still horrible,and in the end it is Remus who goes through the transformation.And there's not getting past how Remus has been effected by his condition.Being a werewolf is not a pleasent thing(more worse to some then others),I can't see it in the way you do,sorry.

Sadly even if James did have a wand it might not have made much of a difference.
I tend to believe that James would have pulled a good fight. After all he did defy Voldemort three times before reaching the age of 22 and like Amelia Bones or other victims of Voldemort he would have fought. He would have lost too of course, but maybe not in 5 seconds but 5 minutes.

I tend to think that it was a narrative tool to kill James quick, because it didn't fit in the dynamic of the scene to have a huge fight between James and Voldemort and later the sacrifice of Lily.

That is the whole point. James thought of Remus and his being a werewolf in total contrast to what society thought. That is another great aspect of James' character. Sirius thought the same way. Remus' opinion on his werewolfness was naturally all mussed because of the way he had always been treated by society (except 3 friends and mum and dad). But his friends showed him how society should think (well their version included some immature aspects, but the basic idea is clearly there).

That was a very wonderful aspect of James' character. And I think it was an important point that JKR was trying to make by giving him this characteristic. Prejudice that leads to shunning and outcasting is not a good thing. James was not prejudice. A great Characteristic and one he passed to his son as we see Harry had the same outlook and one of the few to get close to Remus throughout the series.
I agree with that. I also think that it's thanks to James, Sirius and Peters friendship that Remus turned out to be the man he was. Without support he might have been another Fenrir supporter.

I tend to believe that James would have pulled a good fight. After all he did defy Voldemort three times before reaching the age of 22 and like Amelia Bones or other victims of Voldemort he would have fought. He would have lost too of course, but maybe not in 5 seconds but 5 minutes.

I tend to think that it was a narrative tool to kill James quick, because it didn't fit in the dynamic of the scene to have a huge fight between James and Voldemort and later the sacrifice of Lily.


I agree with that. I also think that it's thanks to James, Sirius and Peters friendship that Remus turned out to be the man he was. Without support he might have been another Fenrir supporter.

Fair point.I can't find the scene in my book(can't even remember where it was).He might have lasted a little longer.

Remus definatly would have been different ,but I'm sure he would neverr have joined Fenrir.His parents also loved him greatly and treated him no differently.

Fair point.I can't find the scene in my book(can't even remember where it was).He might have lasted a little longer.

Remus definatly would have been different ,but I'm sure he would neverr have joined Fenrir.His parents also loved him greatly and treated him no differently.

I do understand you Ifink and I totally relate to what you are saying and can respect your thoughts.

My point was that Remus' viewpoint is "a werewolf trying to deal with society; and undergoing the pain of being a werewolf in the current society".

James view represents how society should think. If they thought that way, they would take the time to find potions that not only help keep the werewolf's mind, but also ease the pain of transformation, etc. They would let them into society to work and go to school, etc.- no more shunning and outcasting.

So you see, if everyone had James non prejudice characteristic, Remus would be a happier living in society and society would not look upon his werewolfishness as monstrous and neither would he. It would literally become his furry little problem.

Whereas if wizards take the view that it is painful, dangerous and let's keep away from them and keep them away from us viewpoint, then nothing gets resolved. Society and the werewolves remain damaged.

I do understand you Ifink and I totally relate to what you are saying and can respect your thoughts.

My point was that Remus' viewpoint is "a werewolf trying to deal with society; and undergoing the pain of being a werewolf in the current society".

James view represents how society should think. If they thought that way, they would take the time to find potions that not only help keep the werewolf's mind, but also ease the pain of transformation, etc. They would let them into society to work and go to school, etc.- no more shunning and outcasting.

So you see, if everyone had James non prejudice characteristic, Remus would be a happier living in society and society would not look upon his werewolfishness as monstrous and neither would he. It would literally become his furry little problem.

Whereas if wizards take the view that it is painful, dangerous and let's keep away from them and keep them away from us viewpoint, then nothing gets resolved. Society and the werewolves remain damaged.

I'm not doubting that changing people views would make it easier for Remus and other werewolves.My point was even that aside,I don't see 'at worst snape would have become a werewolf' as much better then being dead.Snape ending up as a werewolf would have been a terrible way for the prank to end.Even if the attitude towards being a werewolf was removed there's still the physical pain,which when described by Remus,is downright horrible.
Ah all this make me feel even more sorry for Remus.:(

I'm not entirely sure when transformed werewolves never kill. I mean, judging by the way he smashed up the Shrieking Shack, he woudn't have just given Sape a little bit, now would he.

I'm not entirely sure when transformed werewolves never kill. I mean, judging by the way he smashed up the Shrieking Shack, he woudn't have just given Sape a little bit, now would he.

That was explained. When caged, the werewolves tend to destroy the rooms around them and scratch themselves up. When they go out, they bite. I checked, even Greyback wanted to bite not kill. He asked to bite Hermione in DH, bit/scratched Bill and bit Remus and wanted to turn as many wizards into werewolves as possible. The only time he wanted to kill was DD, and that is because he was on orders to do so by Voldy and he was NOT a wolf at that time, but a man. (for bill too)

That is why James characteristic of non-prejudice is so important to the story.

That is why James characteristic of non-prejudice is so important to the story.
I agree that this is the main importance to the James-Remus friendship, to
1) show James loyalty to his friends, no matter how they are
2) to show that James, coming from a traditional pure blood family, does not adopt the traditional wizarding pure blood mentality.

He could have turned out like Draco. But he didn't.

JK said that James' reation was purely instinctual and animalistic. I believe that he didn't really think about defending himself against Volemort, the only thing he wanted to do was buy Lily and Harry some time to escape. It was extremely brave and noble to face the most feared Dark wizard of all time without a wand.
In this instance James reminds me of Harry as he walked into the forest to face Voldemort unarmed and defenceless.
In the Forest Harry says that it would have been easier to fight. That facing Voldemort knowing that he was going to die and not being able to defend himslef was the hardest thing he had ever done.
When James sees Voldemort he knows that he's going to die. He knows that he does't have a wand to protect himself or his family. But instead of running and hiding or even trying to locate his wand he stands there and chooses to embraces death. He acts on instinct. But just like Harry he was brave enough to stand infront of Voldemort and face death defenceless so that he could give his wife and son time to escape.

In this instance James reminds me of Harry as he walked into the forest to face Voldemort unarmed and defenceless.
In the Forest Harry says that it would have been easier to fight. That facing Voldemort knowing that he was going to die and not being able to defend himslef was the hardest thing he had ever done.
When James sees Voldemort he knows that he's going to die. He knows that he does't have a wand to protect himself or his family. But instead of running and hiding or even trying to locate his wand he stands there and chooses to embraces death. He acts on instinct. But just like Harry he was brave enough to stand infront of Voldemort and face death defenceless so that he could give his wife and son time to escape.

Nicely put! :tu:

That was explained. When caged, the werewolves tend to destroy the rooms around them and scratch themselves up. When they go out, they bite. I checked, even Greyback wanted to bite not kill. He asked to bite Hermione in DH, bit/scratched Bill and bit Remus and wanted to turn as many wizards into werewolves as possible. The only time he wanted to kill was DD, and that is because he was on orders to do so by Voldy and he was NOT a wolf at that time, but a man. (for bill too)

That is why James characteristic of non-prejudice is so important to the story.

Ron said that werewolves can kill when they get out of control. Not just Fenrir spesifically.

In this instance James reminds me of Harry as he walked into the forest to face Voldemort unarmed and defenceless.
In the Forest Harry says that it would have been easier to fight. That facing Voldemort knowing that he was going to die and not being able to defend himslef was the hardest thing he had ever done.
When James sees Voldemort he knows that he's going to die. He knows that he does't have a wand to protect himself or his family. But instead of running and hiding or even trying to locate his wand he stands there and chooses to embraces death. He acts on instinct. But just like Harry he was brave enough to stand infront of Voldemort and face death defenceless so that he could give his wife and son time to escape.

I know and it makes me so sad. James epitomised bravery and even Voldemort acknowledged that when he told Harry to stand up and face death, straight-backed and proud, as your father died. (Graveyard scene rom Book 4)

I was always confused by this and if anyone has the quotes I'd be appreciative. But didn't Voldy tell Harry once that he put up a fight? How did hie do that without his wand, as we find out in HBP?

I was always confused by this and if anyone has the quotes I'd be appreciative. But didn't Voldy tell Harry once that he put up a fight? How did hie do that without his wand, as we find out in HBP?

Yup, Voldy did say that and when I got to the scene where James was killed at first I was disappointed that he didn't put up a fight. JKR was inconsistent there because I distinctly remember Voldemort telling Harry that James fought bravely.

Yup, Voldy did say that and when I got to the scene where James was killed at first I was disappointed that he didn't put up a fight. JKR was inconsistent there because I distinctly remember Voldemort telling Harry that James fought bravely.

Maybe Voldemort was talking generally: as in James had fought bravely for the order. Seriously there are so many inconsistencies on plot points like this that it is just best to let it go, or you would get a headache. The tiny plot inconsistencies between the books mean they really wouldn't survive any kind of attack.

Maybe Voldemort was talking generally: as in James had fought bravely for the order. Seriously there are so many inconsistencies on plot points like this that it is just best to let it go, or you would get a headache. The tiny plot inconsistencies between the books mean they really wouldn't survive any kind of attack. I agree. And surely James fought bravely the other three times he "defied" voldemort. This with the fact that He was definitely brave the night he died, even though he didn't fight, is enough for me.

I agree. And surely James fought bravely the other three times he "defied" voldemort. This with the fact that He was definitely brave the night he died, even though he didn't fight, is enough for me.

Plus, Voldemort isn't exactly the most truthful source. James was brave the night he died, yes, but Voldemort was manipulating the GoF graveyard scene in order to get Harry to fight.

Still, we have the prophecy and Dumbledore's word that the Potters "thrice defied" Voldemort... and their sad ending at Godric's Hollow.

I wasn't dispariging (sp?) James but I felt that JKR missed a good opportunity to show us James in his element in this instance. We never saw James' role in the "prank", we never learned what he did to defy Voldy, we never learned what he did to earn Lily's trust. JKR made James' family negligible by making James' parents die of old age. James was a talented seeker, which Harry takes after, but JKR made quidditch and flying nonexistent in the last few books. Harry patronus is a stag, after his dad, Harry looks like James, and he was part of the Marauders but of all the Marauders we probably know the least about him....

I distinctly remember Voldemort telling Harry that James fought bravely.
Voldemort is an evil character. Nonetheless he appreciates bravery where he sees it.
To face Voldemort unarmed is brave. Very brave.

*realizes I may have made it sound like I didn't think James was brave

James definately was brave. My LV comment is merely to note that Voldemort may have said what he said in order to get Harry to fight. Just like when he told the Hogswart fighters that Harry had died running away, when he'd done quite the opposite.

I think Harry is our window into the person James was.

*realizes I may have made it sound like I didn't think James was brave

James definately was brave. My LV comment is merely to note that Voldemort may have said what he said in order to get Harry to fight. Just like when he told the Hogswart fighters that Harry had died running away, when he'd done quite the opposite.

Yeah, but I don't think you have to see it as Voldy being less than truthful in this case because facing anyone who has a wand, without one of your own, is brave - assuming you don't have a choice in the matter which James didn't.

So rather than "run", James stayed and tried to do something, at least give Lily and Harry a chance.

The inconsistency I mentioned was about James putting up a fight, not about him being brave. I don't care one way or the other because I think it was still immensely brave that he went out there without a wand, but when I saw that scene I remembered it being said that he put up a fight, when he clearly was not able to.

The inconsistency I mentioned was about James putting up a fight, not about him being brave. I don't care one way or the other because I think it was still immensely brave that he went out there without a wand, but when I saw that scene I remembered it being said that he put up a fight, when he clearly was not able to.

Yeah you are right in that respect. We were lead to believe there was a sweet duel...but it appears that was not the case. Maybe JKR figured it would have given Lily too much time to get away? Time to find her wand and clear the wards and apparate or something?

Yeah you are right in that respect. We were lead to believe there was a sweet duel...but it appears that was not the case. Maybe JKR figured it would have given Lily too much time to get away? Time to find her wand and clear the wards and apparate or something?

That's what I figured too. James would have put up a good fight, Lily would have had time to escape and the entire plot would have been undermined.

In this instance James reminds me of Harry as he walked into the forest to face Voldemort unarmed and defenceless.
In the Forest Harry says that it would have been easier to fight. That facing Voldemort knowing that he was going to die and not being able to defend himslef was the hardest thing he had ever done.
When James sees Voldemort he knows that he's going to die. He knows that he does't have a wand to protect himself or his family. But instead of running and hiding or even trying to locate his wand he stands there and chooses to embraces death. He acts on instinct. But just like Harry he was brave enough to stand infront of Voldemort and face death defenceless so that he could give his wife and son time to escape.
That's a great observation. I hadn't recognized what must have been a deliberate parallel.

That's what I figured too. James would have put up a good fight, Lily would have had time to escape and the entire plot would have been undermined
I figured that was why too. There are quite a few tiny inconsistencies throughout the series. Sometimes I let them make me go wild. Other times, I just shrug. I've been having fits over the change in the way Fidelius works. But I think the way we were told in JKR's FAQ answer does have serious problems, like house permanently disappearing with no way to change that. Of course, I think the way she changed it in DH sucks too, but it fit several plot requirements (fear that Snape had revealed GP, and Yaxley accidentally being given the secret by Hermione). Otherwise they could have stayed indefinitely at GP.

Now back to James. I was disappointed at first when he didn't put up a fight. But then I realized that it needed to be quick, or Lily could have escaped. And it did show outstanding bravery to just face Voldemort that way unarmed. It also paralleled Lily's bravery in standing in front of Harry.

Now back to James. I was disappointed at first when he didn't put up a fight. But then I realized that it needed to be quickI don't think less of him for it. In the time it woudl have taken for James to go and get his wand, Voldemort would have already gotten to Harry. The only thing he could do to protect his wife and son was to give them time. And that's what he tried to do.

I don't think less of him for it. In the time it woudl have taken for James to go and get his wand, Voldemort would have already gotten to Harry. The only thing he could do to protect his wife and son was to give them time. And that's what he tried to do.
That's how I saw it too. I didn't fault him for it. He really did want to lay down life to buy her time.

How much of James' hatred of Snape do you think was jealousy over his friendship with Lily? Do you think he redeemed himself by saving his life in spite of this jealousy?

I think it's more likely the reverse--that James' interest in Lily started with the feeling that he could take something away from his enemy. James and Snape already disliked each other on the train, and I don't think they had hit puberty yet.

As for redemption, we now know that James and his friends carried on attacking and bullying Snape after the rescue, (SWM was afterward) so it's difficult to credit James as much of a hero or as having had any sort of awakening or epiphany. Personally, you'd think they'd hesitate to assault someone who was currently keepng Lupin's werewolfism secret...you'd think the truth might just slip out while they're being dangled upside down and threatened with underwear removal.

All the same, we are TOLD that James improved over time, but are not shown or given much of a clue how it happened.

I don't think James wanted Lily because she was Snape's friend. Generally, you hate your enemies friends. I think he just wanted her.

Snape might have been under magical constraint by DD not to reveal Remus' secret. As we see in the Shrieking Shack scene in POA, Snape as an adult was asked by DD to keep that same secret and didn't do so - and in fact revealed the secret publicly. DD was wise, he knew Snape would likely rat Lupin out - I am almost certain he placed a 'silent' charm on Snape about the issue. He had more faith in Severus the adult - but as we saw on at least two occassions, that trust was betrayed by Snape.

Yet a question: if James had a choice, and deliberately chose to face Voldemort wandless and die to protect Lily and Harry, then why did Lily Potter have to die? Wouldn't both of them have been protected by the sacrificial power of love?

Yet a question: if James had a choice, and deliberately chose to face Voldemort wandless and die to protect Lily and Harry, then why did Lily Potter have to die? Wouldn't both of them have been protected by the sacrificial power of love?

Apparently not. Lily knew of old folk lore magic DD told Harry. So she was able to use that somehow in her protection of him.

Also, some suggest that she would have not protected her child in that way if Snape had not asked Voldemort to spare Lily - I don't understand that. If that is what you are referring to, I have no idea what they are talking about.

Snape might have been under magical constraint by DD not to reveal Remus' secret. As we see in the Shrieking Shack scene in POA, Snape as an adult was asked by DD to keep that same secret and didn't do so - and in fact revealed the secret publicly. DD was wise, he knew Snape would likely rat Lupin out - I am almost certain he placed a 'silent' charm on Snape about the issue. He had more faith in Severus the adult - but as we saw on at least two occassions, that trust was betrayed by Snape.

There is absolutely nothing in the books that indicates there is a charm to force someone to keep a secret.

As or Lily, 'knowing' the magic and not James, Lily didn't know anything,nor did she need to know anything. All she had to do was willingly sacrifice her life to try and protect Harry.

James didn't have a choice: Voldemort never meant to give him a chance.

But it's also true that no decent father would have run when it was his child and wife's lives that were at stake.

^You'd be surprised.

All she had to do was willingly sacrifice her life to try and protect Harry.

You know, I don't think Lily would be too happy left alive after both her son and husband are killed.

She'd probably hunt Voldemort down.

It's hard to tell. We have pitifully little information about the adult James Potter, which is what makes it hard for me to understand the amount and hfanaticism of James-worshipping I see around. From Lily's letter, it sounded like he was being a good father for at least one sentence, anyway.
Nothing compared to other worshipping we see around though...

We have a clear reference of adult James in the GoF graveyard scene. He is the one advising Harry how to escape Voldemort. The one Harry had been waiting for.
I think that shows pretty much that he was a good father, ort at least that he could have been a good father if he hadn't been killed.

I think it's more likely the reverse--that James' interest in Lily started with the feeling that he could take something away from his enemy. James and Snape already disliked each other on the train, and I don't think they had hit puberty yet.
:huh: I'd like to think that it's something much more simple: that Lily was James true love and vice versa. Simple as that.
We don't need a childhood enemisty for developing true love stories.

Yet a question: if James had a choice, and deliberately chose to face Voldemort wandless and die to protect Lily and Harry, then why did Lily Potter have to die? Wouldn't both of them have been protected by the sacrificial power of love?
As Inkwolf says, it's the possibility of surviving that activated the protection spell. James, wandless or not, hiding or standing up to Voldemort was never meant to survive.
Also JKR says that James never would have run, so in fact he had no choice due to his personality. He was dead the moment Peter revealed the secret.

:huh: I'd like to think that it's something much more simple: that Lily was James true love and vice versa. Simple as that.
We don't need a childhood enemisty for developing true love stories.

I think so, too. There is too much effort being placed into intruding Snape into every aspect of Lily's (and thus James') life. Snape loved Lily in a romantic way, but there is absolutely nothing - nothing - to suggest that she ever returned that kind of devotion. James couldn't take what Snape never had.

James didn't have a choice: Voldemort never meant to give him a chance.
No, but he did just run out to challenge Voldemort without a wand. His only thought was to buy Lily a few moments. He could have run to try to aid her, but I think he decided that this would give her the best chance.

I think so, too. There is too much effort being placed into intruding Snape into every aspect of Lily's (and thus James') life. Snape loved Lily in a romantic way, but there is absolutely nothing - nothing - to suggest that she ever returned that kind of devotion. James couldn't take what Snape never had.
Exactly. I think Lilly loved Snape as a friend if he had remained an honorable man (ie not a deatheater), then sure something might have happened between them. But I think Lilly was attracted to James right from the beginning and didn't know what to do about them and was confused about them as well. Seriously on one hand there was a marauder totally cool, brave, loyal and basically a good guy (sure he was an idiot but thats what makes him more appealing!) and on the other hand there was a slimy, greasy haired kid who knew more dark magic than anyone and wasn't above hitting your sister with a tree branch. Hm... thats a conundrum...

I think so, too. There is too much effort being placed into intruding Snape into every aspect of Lily's (and thus James') life. Snape loved Lily in a romantic way, but there is absolutely nothing - nothing - to suggest that she ever returned that kind of devotion.

Rowling said she loved him as a friend and could have loved him romantically so ,yes there was something to suggest.
I keep thinking about this,and I keep coming back to the fact that James and Snapes enemity was about Lily,.Snape was into the dark arts,so were alot of people.James was popular,but I really don't see this concering Snape(he didn't seem to be bothered by what people though of his appearance).Even when you just don't like somone,ther has to be some small reason.I can't see anything other then Lily.

A question about Lilys protection.She died protecting Harry,but alot of people die protecting others,why is this protection then not created for others?All I can think is that she died so willingly for him,knowing she had no hope(and without a wand).If that's true,then James needed a quick death to add to her desperation.

:huh: I'd like to think that it's something much more simple: that Lily was James true love and vice versa. Simple as that.
We don't need a childhood enemisty for developing true love stories.


I think perhaps I resist the 'True Love' explanation, partially because it seems almost too easy a fix. Why did the characters fall in love? True Love. It seems like, with apologies to JKR if that is what she was intending, lazy writing. You don't have to bother with characterization if you're just throwing True Love into the mix.

Aside from that, though, I really don't think JKR intended True Love to be the answer for James and LIly, or she would never have suggested that Lily could in fact have romantically loved Snape if he had had nicer friends and not been attempting to become a Death Eater to impress her. True Love is not alterable for external influences, and thus the fact it is even a possibility suggests that is not what she is doing. In fact, I don't see any True Love throughout the entire series with regards to marriages-Molly and Arthur clearly love each other, but he is still veela-affected slightly; Tonks and Lupin love each other, but not enough to avoid misunderstandings. 'True Love' is often seen as having no such misunderstandings and quarrels, which is why I'm really glad she seemed not to include it!

I think perhaps I resist the 'True Love' explanation, partially because it seems almost too easy a fix. Why did the characters fall in love? True Love. It seems like, with apologies to JKR if that is what she was intending, lazy writing. You don't have to bother with characterization if you're just throwing True Love into the mix.
And I think that no matter what JKR might have said posteriorily, no matter how much Snape loved Lily, one fact remains, that Lily fell in love with James, that James fell in love with Lily, that they were happy together, had a child together and made a great couple, as both of their patronusses suggest.

I think it doesn't add much to the discussion of James character to speculate weather Snape would have made a better boyfriend for Lily. Besides, it's a poor judgement of Lilys choices. She chose James, and seeing how demanding she is with people, I might adventure to say that he really deserved her love.

I might also add that JKR created James and Lily as the parents of our hero. I might speculate here that James is Harrys father for good reasons.

And I think that no matter what JKR might have said posteriorily, no matter how much Snape loved Lily, one fact remains, that Lily fell in love with James, that James fell in love with Lily, that they were happy together, had a child together and made a great couple, as both of their patronusses suggest.

I think it doesn't add much to the discussion of James character to speculate weather Snape would have made a better boyfriend for Lily. Besides, it's a poor judgement of Lilys choices. She chose James, and seeing how demanding she is with people, I might adventure to say that he really deserved her love.


You may certainly say and believe those things, but I do believe that examination of James' character as it relates to Lily is certainly worthy of discussion, and whether or not James and Lily's relationship was hand-waved with the simple explanation of 'true love' or a more complicated explanation is, I think, not only a fascinating discussion, but also an important conversation to have on the subject of James, who clearly changed to be with Lily.

Returning to earlier discussions about James' character as an adult, I am disappointed that we didn't really get to see whether he had changed. I assume that he had - that he matured and became less arrogant, and that he was a wonderful husband and father. I was very pleased to note his line in 'The Forest Again' chapter - that he was so proud of Harry. I think that showed the love he felt for his son and his maturity as an adult.

I think, not only a fascinating discussion, but also an important conversation to have on the subject of James, who clearly changed to be with Lily.
Oh I quite agree that their relationship is interesting and certainly relevant for James character discussion. I only say that this discussion can do without dragging Snape in every 5 minutes.

In fact we know that:
- Lily disliked arrogance
- Lily disliked bullies
- Lily disliked show-offs

We also know that James had 'defleated' his head, and stopped hexing people for the fun of it, so he started to become 'dating material' for Lily.

Lily herself was very brave and kind and loving. After James correcting his teenager flaws, she might have started to appreciate his good sides, like his bravery, and his love and support for his friends (specially Peter and Remus). We also know that the theory of Remus being a werewolf was there all the time, she might have found out and really appreciated how James stood by his friend.
James became Headboy. I sort of assume that he got to show his more responsable sides there, specially working together with Lily.
And well, one thing came to the next and finally she fell in love with him. Because his good sides were more important and pronounced than his flaws.

Oh I quite agree that their relationship is interesting and certainly relevant for James character discussion. I only say that this discussion can do without dragging Snape in every 5 minutes.

In fact we know that:
- Lily disliked arrogance
- Lily disliked bullies
- Lily disliked show-offs

We also know that James had 'defleated' his head, and stopped hexing people for the fun of it, so he started to become 'dating material' for Lily.

Lily herself was very brave and kind and loving. After James correcting his teenager flaws, she might have started to appreciate his good sides, like his bravery, and his love and support for his friends (specially Peter and Remus). We also know that the theory of Remus being a werewolf was there all the time, she might have found out and really appreciated how James stood by his friend.
James became Headboy. I sort of assume that he got to show his more responsable sides there, specially working together with Lily.
And well, one thing came to the next and finally she fell in love with him. Because his good sides were more important and pronounced than his flaws.

Now we kinda have too bring Snape back into the picture just for the sake of having something to discuss.

Lily might have loved Snape if he had not been so attracted to the dark arts.
Agreed.
But that is also a bit like saying that we would have discussed LOTR and Eragon on the Forums if HP had never been written.
The point is Snape was a selfish bully. He was attracted to the Dark Arts. He chose to become a death eater out of sheer hunger for power.
Had he not been all this Snape would have been a completely different person all together.
At the age of 15, James was a bit of an idiot.
But even then we seen streaks of his true charecter.
For one, James never attacked people from behind their backs. He attacked Snape, but never got him when he wasn't looking. Whereas Snape cursed James the moment James turned his back on him.
When Snape lets out a string of swear words and abuses James immediately adopts a cold and digusted attitude.
"Wash your mouth", said James coldly.(OOTP-SWM).
I think the fact that James was cold is slightly important.
It tells us that for all the immaturity James wasn't someone who found his refuge in foul language.
To my mind these two charecteristics would have mattered a great deal to Lily.

For one, James never attacked people from behind their backs. He attacked Snape, but never got him when he wasn't looking. Whereas Snape cursed James the moment James turned his back on him.
When Snape lets out a string of swear words and abuses James immediately adopts a cold and digusted attitude.
"Wash your mouth", said James coldly.(OOTP-SWM).
I think the fact that James was cold is slightly important.
It tells us that for all the immaturity James wasn't someone who found his refuge in foul language.
To my mind these two charecteristics would have mattered a great deal to Lily.

Those two points don't really say much.They had body bound him so there was no way he could put up a fight.He had no access to his wand.That's not a fair fight is it?Again he attacked James while his back was turned,but that was the instance he got his wand back.James didn't give him a chance.
As for foul language,it's okay to call someone greasy and degrad their appearance and publically humiliate them,but he shouldn't say anything back?I'm against profanity but how many people in Snape position wouldn't have shouted back?That's all he could do.He didn't find his refuge in foul language,just in two against one fight?

Rowling said she loved him as a friend and could have loved him romantically so ,yes there was something to suggest.

Could have isn't the same as something that actually happened. It might have happened had Snape wised up and sworn off his death eater power fantasies. As far as the canon on their history is concerned, though, Lily never considered Snape in a romantic sense.


I keep thinking about this,and I keep coming back to the fact that James and Snapes enemity was about Lily,.Snape was into the dark arts,so were alot of people.James was popular,but I really don't see this concering Snape(he didn't seem to be bothered by what people though of his appearance).Even when you just don't like somone,ther has to be some small reason.I can't see anything other then Lily.

I sure can. Snape was not exactly a likeable person. The fact that he was also a death eater groupie would be enough to earn James' enmity, let alone the fact that Snape never missed a chance to curse James.

Could have isn't the same as something that actually happened. It might have happened had Snape wised up and sworn off his death eater power fantasies. As far as the canon on their history is concerned, though, Lily never considered Snape in a romantic sense.

Should have finshed my sentence,somthing to suggest that there could have been something.Not was,could have been.



I sure can. Snape was not exactly a likeable person. The fact that he was also a death eater groupie would be enough to earn James' enmity

There were probably lots of non-likable people.And a good number of wannabe deatheaters too.Why just Snape?

let alone the fact that Snape never missed a chance to curse James

Which again brings us to who started it,theres not canon so no answer(we've been through this).They both hexed each other,its wasn't one sided.Also that line was specifically in refernce to seventh year.

There were probably lots of non-likable people.And a good number of wannabe deatheaters too.Why just Snape?

Because we see only glimpses of James through Snape's memories.

Which again brings us to who started it,theres not canon so no answer(we've been through this).They both hexed each other,its wasn't one sided.Also that line was specifically in refernce to seventh year.

It doesn't matter who started it. They hated each other. End of argument.

In fact we know that:
- Lily disliked arrogance
- Lily disliked bullies
- Lily disliked show-offs

We also know that James had 'defleated' his head, and stopped hexing people for the fun of it, so he started to become 'dating material' for Lily.

Lily herself was very brave and kind and loving. After James correcting his teenager flaws, she might have started to appreciate his good sides, like his bravery, and his love and support for his friends (specially Peter and Remus). We also know that the theory of Remus being a werewolf was there all the time, she might have found out and really appreciated how James stood by his friend.
James became Headboy. I sort of assume that he got to show his more responsable sides there, specially working together with Lily.
And well, one thing came to the next and finally she fell in love with him. Because his good sides were more important and pronounced than his flaws.

We have heard that James stopped being so arrogant, but that was only from Sirius if I recall. We do know for a fact that he was a great loyal friend, and disliked anyone who hated those of non-magical blood or associated with the Dark Arts. I would love to see evidence he became less arrogant, and not that Lily loved him because he treated her badly.

We have heard that James stopped being so arrogant, but that was only from Sirius if I recall. We do know for a fact that he was a great loyal friend, and disliked anyone who hated those of non-magical blood or associated with the Dark Arts. I would love to see evidence he became less arrogant, and not that Lily loved him because he treated her badly.

We don't see any evidence whatsoever that he treated Lily badly. Where on earth did that come from? :wow:

Should have finshed my sentence,somthing to suggest that there could have been something.Not was,could have been.
There were probably lots of non-likable people.And a good number of wannabe deatheaters too.Why just Snape?

I think Snape and James hated each other because they were exactly alike in the completely opposite ways. They were both equally brilliant and were equals at everything (maybe except quidditch). But James was the more popular one, he was the more likable one. I really think Snape was jealous of him. James saw Snape as an equal, a rival. Hence I can see why they hated each other sooo much. James and Sirius saw what they could have been in Snape and couldn't take it. Their ideologies were just too different, I can see them hating each other intensely.

We cannot discuss whther or not James matured his seventh year without discussing Snape. It's simply not possible: because James continued to hex Snape his seventh year. And we have to ask: what constitutes maturity? Was he more mature? Possibly, or possibly he simply became more circumspect. We only have the word of Lupin, one of James' friends, to speak to the fact that Snape and James hexed each other. Honestly, his words sound more like an attempt at defense of a beloved memory than anything else.

I believe that while James matured slightly, it was not enough: that he hid his negative qualities from Lily, and Lily did not have enough experience with the dark side of life to know the difference.

Hearsay is not evidence. Nor is evidence from highly biased witnesses taken as completely beyond suspicion-not if you want to get to the truth of the matter.

I think Snape and James hated each other because they were exactly alike in the completely opposite ways. They were both equally brilliant and were equals at everything (maybe except quidditch). But James was the more popular one, he was the more likable one. I really think Snape was jealous of him. James saw Snape as an equal, a rival. Hence I can see why they hated each other sooo much. James and Sirius saw what they could have been in Snape and couldn't take it. Their ideologies were just too different, I can see them hating each other intensely.

I don't think James saw Snape as a rival in any sense of the word. I think he saw Snape as just a greasy-haired oddball Slytherin who was up to his ears in the dark arts. That description was enough to earn James' dislike.

Because we see only glimpses of James through Snape's memories.
I'm sorry,I don't understand your point.


It doesn't matter who started it. They hated each other. End of argument.

It is relevent but we'll leave that.End of argument?That's a matter of opnion.There had to be some reson,that's why I think it's Lily.But we'll leave that also.

I really think Snape was jealous of him. James saw Snape as an equal, a rival. Hence I can see why they hated each other sooo much. James and Sirius saw what they could have been in Snape and couldn't take it. Their ideologies were just too different, I can see them hating each other intensely.
Equal rivals in what?Lilys affection is all I can see.There were other people who they could have seen themselves in.Snape wasn't even a pureblood or well off.

I think he saw Snape as just a greasy-haired oddball Slytherin who was up to his ears in the dark arts. That description was enough to earn James' dislike.

As people have said james doesn't have a problem with appearnces.And Snapes not the only into darks arts.

I don't think James saw Snape as a rival in any sense of the word. I think he saw Snape as just a greasy-haired oddball Slytherin who was up to his ears in the dark arts. That description was enough to earn James' dislike.

James took a dislike to Snape when Snape expressed a desire to be a Slytherin on the train. That was when all he knew about Snape was that he was a greasy -haired oddball in hand-me-down clothes.

The dark arts was in the future.

As far as the canon on their history is concerned, though, Lily never considered Snape in a romantic sense.

'Tis usually the case with childhood friendships. And it's usually the girl who recognises this first.

I'm sorry,I don't understand your point.

You asked why Snape when there were other non-likeable people who were wannabe death eaters. We see James' dislike of Snape because we are viewing things through Snape's memories.

We cannot discuss whther or not James matured his seventh year without discussing Snape. It's simply not possible: because James continued to hex Snape his seventh year. And we have to ask: what constitutes maturity? Was he more mature? Possibly, or possibly he simply became more circumspect. We only have the word of Lupin, one of James' friends, to speak to the fact that Snape and James hexed each other. Honestly, his words sound more like an attempt at defense of a beloved memory than anything else.

The charge that James continued to hex Snape in his seventh year also came from Lupin and Sirius, and from the same conversation in which Lupin and Sirius also said that Snape never missed a chance to curse James.

Why do you consider them reliable in saying James continued to hex Snape, but biased when they say Snape never missed a chance to curse James?

We see James' dislike of Snape because we are viewing things through Snape's memories.

Ah. But JKR herself in an interview (http://mugglenet.com/jkrinterview3.shtml) has revealed that memories revealed in the pensieve are reality unsullied by subjectivity.

Ah. But JKR herself in an interview (http://mugglenet.com/jkrinterview3.shtml) has revealed that memories revealed in the pensieve are reality unsullied by subjectivity.

That's true - but we're seeing only Snape's unsullied memories. What if there was another memory of James' or Sirius' in which Snape was acting up? See what I mean? The memories from the pensieve are accurate, but they are still just one person's memories.

And that still doesn't answer this:

We cannot discuss whther or not James matured his seventh year without discussing Snape. It's simply not possible: because James continued to hex Snape his seventh year. And we have to ask: what constitutes maturity? Was he more mature? Possibly, or possibly he simply became more circumspect. We only have the word of Lupin, one of James' friends, to speak to the fact that Snape and James hexed each other. Honestly, his words sound more like an attempt at defense of a beloved memory than anything else.

The charge that James continued to hex Snape in his seventh year also came from Lupin and Sirius, and from the same conversation in which Lupin and Sirius also said that Snape never missed a chance to curse James.

Why do you consider them reliable in saying James continued to hex Snape, but biased when they say Snape never missed a chance to curse James?

We don't see any evidence whatsoever that he treated Lily badly. Where on earth did that come from? :wow:

Not treated her badly in a physical way obviously. But his arrogance was such that he could have treated her in a teasing, annoying way. For some, bizarre, yet legitimate reason, many psychoanalysists agree that when men show a certain women nothing but arrogance and act in a very narcissistic manner, that woman becomes attracted to him. We haven't seen anything but arrogance from James, except from the moment he told Lily to run in Godric's Hollow.

I still hold that James was as much a sinner as sinned against. (Probably more because, like it or not, one of the advantages of a privileged background is tolerance when breaking the rules.)

They had body bound him so there was no way he could put up a fight.He had no access to his wand.That's not a fair fight is it?Again he attacked James while his back was turned,but that was the instance he got his wand back.James didn't give him a chance.
In this instance Snape was cornered. But somehow it gives you the feeling that Snape was the type of person who never hesitated when it came to attacking people from behind their backs.
Atleast that's the impression I got, when I read the chapter.
As for foul language,it's okay to call someone greasy and degrad their appearance and publically humiliate them,but he shouldn't say anything back?I'm against profanity but how many people in Snape position wouldn't have shouted back?That's all he could do.He didn't find his refuge in foul language,just in two against one fight?

Snape never stooped himself from insulting James. He never lost out on an oppurtunity to call him a strutting arrogant git. He used sectumsempra on James. It's bound to have hurt. But James doesn't resort to swearing.
And I just feel that Lily would have noted the fact that James didn't use foul language. It seems like the sort of thing that would have mattered to her.

In this instance Snape was cornered. But somehow it gives you the feeling that Snape was the type of person who never hesitated when it came to attacking people from behind their backs.
Atleast that's the impression I got, when I read the chapter.


Snape never stooped himself from insulting James. He never lost out on an oppurtunity to call him a strutting arrogant git. He used sectumsempra on James. It's bound to have hurt. But James doesn't resort to swearing.
And I just feel that Lily would have noted the fact that James didn't use foul language. It seems like the sort of thing that would have mattered to her.

[personal to other posters] For the first bit of the memory, all the while, James, Sirius, Remus and Peter all had their backs turned to Snape. What does Snape do? He reads. Eventually Snape leaves and turns his back on them: They attack. Snape swears, James starts making him eat soap. You think that in this scenerio, James is the good guy?

I think you need to reread that chapter. For the first bit of the memory, all the while, James, Sirius, Remus and Peter all had their backs turned to Snape. What does Snape do? He reads. Eventually Snape leaves and turns his back on them: They attack. Snape swears, James starts making him eat soap. You think that in this scenerio, James is the good guy?


James was an idiot and shouldn't have done what he did.
But James did not attack Snape without warning him.
He calls out to Sirius and they make fun of Snape before they raise tehir wands.
Infact Snape even reaches for his wand but the marauders are too fast for him.
Snape probably didn't attack the marauders at that point of tiem beceause he knew he would lose. Losing infront of the whole school would be too much of humiliation for him to deal with.
But we know that Snape never let go of an oppurtunity to get to James. This obviously means that he attacked Jame's on the sly.
Thats what gives me the impression that attacking people from behid their backs didnt trouble Snape's conscience.

James doesn't do much physical harm to Snape. There are no cuts or bruises. But Snape uses sectumsempra. This does warrant a certain amount of swearing from James. BUt he doesn't swear. I was just pointing out the difference.

I've always wondered why Snape chose to go and seat himself so close to the marauders. He's obviously got bullied by them before. Why didn't he go and sit somehwere they couldn't see him or reach him?
Snape deliberately sat next to the marauders.
Maybe he was purposely tring to needle them.

Snape never stooped himself from insulting James. He never lost out on an oppurtunity to call him a strutting arrogant git. He used sectumsempra on James. It's bound to have hurt. But James doesn't resort to swearing.
And I just feel that Lily would have noted the fact that James didn't use foul language. It seems like the sort of thing that would have mattered to her.

To me James does come off as someone who would swear.If he acted as he did in the memory ,then I wouldn't put foul language past him.But my point is people give reason why James acts better then Snape,maybe he's not worse but his behaviour towards Snape is not better.Not at least to me.If James was any better then he would attack Snape,but not when he was out numbered and he wasn't really doing anything.

I've always wondered why Snape chose to go and seat himself so close to the marauders. He's obviously got bullied by them before. Why didn't he go and sit somehwere they couldn't see him or reach him?

So Snape should avoid them so he won't be attacked,or so his presence won't provoke them(not that it seemed to take much).Isn't that how to avoid bullying?

I've always wondered why Snape chose to go and seat himself so close to the marauders. He's obviously got bullied by them before. Why didn't he go and sit somehwere they couldn't see him or reach him?
Snape deliberately sat next to the marauders.
Maybe he was purposely tring to needle them.

It says quite clearly in OotP that he was consumed by his exam paper and hardly saw where he was going. Unless of course that was a misleading comment and the author actually wanted us to assume he was purposefully trying to needle them.

James was an idiot and shouldn't have done what he did.
But James did not attack Snape without warning him.
He calls out to Sirius and they make fun of Snape before they raise tehir wands.
Infact Snape even reaches for his wand but the marauders are too fast for him.
Snape probably didn't attack the marauders at that point of tiem beceause he knew he would lose. Losing infront of the whole school would be too much of humiliation for him to deal with.
But we know that Snape never let go of an oppurtunity to get to James. This obviously means that he attacked Jame's on the sly.
Thats what gives me the impression that attacking people from behid their backs didnt trouble Snape's conscience.

James doesn't do much physical harm to Snape. There are no cuts or bruises. But Snape uses sectumsempra. This does warrant a certain amount of swearing from James. BUt he doesn't swear. I was just pointing out the difference.

I've always wondered why Snape chose to go and seat himself so close to the marauders. He's obviously got bullied by them before. Why didn't he go and sit somehwere they couldn't see him or reach him?
Snape deliberately sat next to the marauders.
Maybe he was purposely tring to needle them.

I agree thatJames is just fifteen in that memory... So is Snape.

Not treated her badly in a physical way obviously. But his arrogance was such that he could have treated her in a teasing, annoying way. For some, bizarre, yet legitimate reason, many psychoanalysists agree that when men show a certain women nothing but arrogance and act in a very narcissistic manner, that woman becomes attracted to him. We haven't seen anything but arrogance from James, except from the moment he told Lily to run in Godric's Hollow.

I've seen those studies. I don't think Lily would have been impressed by any of that. Pansy Parkinson is the one example we have in canon. She fits the bill pretty neatly. Lily does not.

I've seen those studies. I don't think Lily would have been impressed by any of that. Pansy Parkinson is the one example we have in canon. She fits the bill pretty neatly. Lily does not.

I'd really hate to see that she did but then there was...

MA: How did they get together? She hated James, from what we've seen.

JKR: Did she really? You're a woman, you know what I'm saying.

I don't think anyone is blaming Snape or turning this thread into a James appreciation thread. We are simple saying that its hard to judge James when we see him through Snape. I am sure Snape "got him" countless times as well. So without any sufficient back story one can't say that James was a bully. We can't say much of anything. Even someone who loves the marauders like me can't say they were saints in the same way some one who loves Snape can't say he was a hero. I don't think anything is in black and white as far as Harry Potter is concerned. But we are fools in love... :lol:

I don't think anyone is blaming Snape or turning this thread into a James appreciation thread. We are simple saying that its hard to judge James when we see him through Snape. I am sure Snape "got him" countless times as well. So without any sufficient back story one can't say that James was a bully. We can't say much of anything. Even someone who loves the marauders like me can't say they were saints in the same way some one who loves Snape can't say he was a hero. I don't think anything is in black and white as far as Harry Potter is concerned. But we are fools in love... :lol:

I swear posting in these thread is great exercise for the brain. :lol:

It's a shame we have such little to go on.I suppose I just think that the one memory can't be discarded just because it's the only one.It's all a bit of a sticky wicket.

I don't think anyone is blaming Snape or turning this thread into a James appreciation thread. We are simple saying that its hard to judge James when we see him through Snape. I am sure Snape "got him" countless times as well. So without any sufficient back story one can't say that James was a bully. We can't say much of anything. Even someone who loves the marauders like me can't say they were saints in the same way some one who loves Snape can't say he was a hero. I don't think anything is in black and white as far as Harry Potter is concerned. But we are fools in love... :lol:

But that's the point. we can only discuss what was shown, because this was the final book. The things that were left out of the series obviously weren't that important. So I guess this thread is for discussing james as he was written, not wondering what else there might have been to him but was left out of the book.

James as he was written was arrogant and a bully at 15. Indirect evidence suggests he grew out of it and became a great person and a devoted family man. Whatever he might have suffered at the hands of Snape is quite out of place, in my opinion, since it's not in the story we have.

Not treated her badly in a physical way obviously. But his arrogance was such that he could have treated her in a teasing, annoying way. For some, bizarre, yet legitimate reason, many psychoanalysists agree that when men show a certain women nothing but arrogance and act in a very narcissistic manner, that woman becomes attracted to him. We haven't seen anything but arrogance from James, except from the moment he told Lily to run in Godric's Hollow.

That may be true for some women, but I never got the impression that Lily was attracted to James' arrogance. When James bullied other students, he did it mainly to impress Lily, but she despised what he was doing. (Very similar to Snape's attempts to impress Lily.) If James did treat Lily in an annoying, teasing manner, it was - as I said earlier in this paragraph - an attempt to flirt/impress Lily. But in SWM, Lily made it clear that she despised James' behavior and actions.

I'd really hate to see that she did but then there was...

MA: How did they get together? She hated James, from what we've seen.

JKR: Did she really? You're a woman, you know what I'm saying.

JKR does imply that Lily was attracted to James, but - in my opinion, of course - it's more likely that Lily was drawn to James' intelligence and charisma.

I swear posting in these thread is great exercise for the brain. :lol:

I couldn't agree more... We could all become analysts of the HP books. Any takers?:lol:

JKR does imply that Lily was attracted to James, but - in my opinion, of course - it's more likely that Lily was drawn to James' intelligence and charisma.

Yeah, I think so. When the side of him she disliked disappeared, they started to go out and we know the rest. It seems like a perfectly natural progression to me.

JKR does imply that Lily was attracted to James, but - in my opinion, of course - it's more likely that Lily was drawn to James' intelligence and charisma.

I still find that a bit strange,that she was able to overlook the other qualities.They were equally(if not more)important to her.

I couldn't agree more... We could all become analysts of the HP books. Any takers?:lol:

Be a great way to make a living wouldn't it?Mind you there's a chance I'd end up as a nutter. :lol:

I still find that a bit strange,that she was able to overlook the other qualities.They were equally(if not more)important to her.

It does seem a bit strange. I guess Lily saw some of the good qualities in James and admired him for it. Maybe she knew that James wasn't a horrible guy and was just waiting for him to mature before seriously considering him as a potential boyfriend? (Just like how Hermione had to wait for Ron to mature.)
It isn't out of the question that she would like James despite his unlikable behavior at the time. I knew a guy who was a complete jerk, but I still was attracted to him. His confidence was what attracted to me most.
Lily probably liked James even though she really didn't want to. I definitely felt the same way when I was in a similar position!

We only have the word of Lupin, one of James' friends, to speak to the fact that Snape and James hexed each other. Honestly, his words sound more like an attempt at defense of a beloved memory than anything else.

And that would involve the assumption that Lupin was a liar. Now Lupin had faults, and if he didn't want to talk about things he didn't; he also emitted telling Harry about the Snape/Lily friendship. However for most of the books, Lupin and Harry have an adult/child relationship. Lupin, as a responsible adult, could not confide in Harry as he would to an adult. No one else, who ever knew Lily, ever mentioned the friendship either. The conversation in OOTP reads to me as, a very frank one between Harry/Sirius/Lupin, they appeared honest and not to sugar coat anything for Harry.

I believe that while James matured slightly, it was not enough: that he hid his negative qualities from Lily, and Lily did not have enough experience with the dark side of life to know the difference.

She wasn't blinded to Snape and the carryings on of his friends, and I would argue that she seemed to regard that as worse, then what James and his mates did. She says it herself, they were idiots but the never used dark magic.

We haven't seen anything but arrogance from James, except from the moment he told Lily to run in Godric's Hollow.

And that is the only first hand view we ever have of the adult James. We have no evidence that he was arrogant or narcissistically inclined in his behaviour towards Lily as an adult. In fact I get the impression he was a rather, worship the ground she walks on, boyfriend and husband.

James as he was written was arrogant and a bully at 15. Indirect evidence suggests he grew out of it and became a great person and a devoted family man. Whatever he might have suffered at the hands of Snape is quite out of place, in my opinion, since it's not in the story we have.

I agree completely, that is all we are told and why on earth would we continue to be lied to for the entire series. Even Hagrid held Lily and James in the highest regard. and he was no biased observer.

I've always wondered why Snape chose to go and seat himself so close to the marauders. He's obviously got bullied by them before. Why didn't he go and sit somehwere they couldn't see him or reach him?
Snape deliberately sat next to the marauders.
Maybe he was purposely tring to needle them.

While I do not want to overdramatize the point (nor could I on a family-friendly board), this seems very much like the 'she was wearing a short skirt' defense. That Snape was somehow asking for what happened to him, by not being modest enough, not keeping his head down low enough, not hiding himself from the view of the exalted Marauders. This, to me, is not really a reasonable answer. Snape should not have had to hide: the Marauders should have treated him with decency.

I still hold that James was as much a sinner as sinned against. (Probably more because, like it or not, one of the advantages of a privileged background is tolerance when breaking the rules.)

Oh, come now ;)Isn't the opposite of Snape true as well? That he should have known what it was like coming from an under privilidged background so he shouldn't have done it to anyone else. One could say no excuses just becuse a person comes from a poor upbringing....

Snape and James were no better than each other at fifteen. James went on to become a member of the Order and sacrificed himself for his family. In the same time period Snape became a DE and gave a prophecy that put six people in danger and got two of them killed and at the end he only showed remorse for one of those deaths and showed that he cared little for the orphan boy. Snape only begins "redeeming" himself after Jame'ss death. James didn't have nearly the same amount to be redeemed from but it is too bad that he never got another chance because his life was cut short too soon. James never got any other chances while Snape got seventeen years worth of chances and wasted them by being bitter....

I've always wondered why Snape chose to go and seat himself so close to the marauders. He's obviously got bullied by them before. Why didn't he go and sit somehwere they couldn't see him or reach him?
Snape deliberately sat next to the marauders.
Maybe he was purposely tring to needle them.

Snape wasn't looking where he was going: he was absorbed in his exam. It was completely James and Sirius fault because they were 'bored' and if they hadn't been little toe - rags they would have left him alone.

Snape wasn't looking where he was going: he was absorbed in his exam. It was completely James and Sirius fault because they were 'bored' and if they hadn't been little toe - rags they would have left him alone.

We have no way of knowing what interaction there may have been before the exam, or the day before or after the exams. We do know - although some of us prefer not to consider this point - that Snape gave as good as he got with the Marauders. We are told he never missed a chance to curse James in particular.

We have no way of knowing what interaction there may have been before the exam, or the day before or after the exams. We do know - although some of us prefer not to consider this point - that Snape gave as good as he got with the Marauders. We are told he never missed a chance to curse James in particular.

Oh yeah I know and I agree, I am just saying, that in that one particular instance James and Sirius went spoiling for a fight, and Snape had done nothing to provoke them; in the immediate time that preceded that.

And that is the only first hand view we ever have of the adult James. We have no evidence that he was arrogant or narcissistically inclined in his behaviour towards Lily as an adult. In fact I get the impression he was a rather, worship the ground she walks on, boyfriend and husband.


I'm sure he did. Men will act however they want in order to get something they desire. I'm not believing that his arrogant behaviour suddenly stopped though. There is no evidence to prove that Lily didn't just like James because he was arrogant, but there isn't any evidence to the contrary either, in fact more resides in the former. We don't know Lily wasn't this kind of person, any more than we know Pansy Parkinson was.

I'm sure he did. Men will act however they want in order to get something they desire. I'm not believing that his arrogant behaviour suddenly stopped though. There is no evidence to prove that Lily didn't just like James because he was arrogant, but there isn't any evidence to the contrary either, in fact more resides in the former. We don't know Lily wasn't this kind of person, any more than we know Pansy Parkinson was.

You are rather pessimistic about the male race. That makes it sound that it was all so manipulated by James. Maybe Lily was attracted to arrogance, not a crime, lots of people are. If that’s what she liked, that’s what she liked. However we are led to believe that she was exceptionally fair minded, so I doubt she would have married a man who had remained a bully. If he was always a little over impressed with himself, well so are lots of people. I have had plenty of boyfriends who were.

However, the only evidence that we might have, that James remained an arrogant pup, is from someone who never really knew him as an adult, Snape. Hagrid, Dumbledore, McGonnegall, Lupin, Sirius, all knew him as an adult and never thought that he remained arrogant. However that he believed his friends would never betray him was perhaps arrogance (of loyalty) or perhaps it was just fate, or naivety or something else. We are told that Dumbledore volunteered for the job of secret keeper, but he was turned down because James believed his friends incapable of betraying him.

At the age of 15, James was a bit of an idiot.
But even then we seen streaks of his true charecter.
For one, James never attacked people from behind their backs. He attacked Snape, but never got him when he wasn't looking. Whereas Snape cursed James the moment James turned his back on him.
I think the Marauders, especially James and Sirius, had a very strong sense of honour. While they were young they misapplied this sense of honour and behaved badly towards Snape who they considered (and this was confirmed by Lily in DH) to be too fond of the Dark Arts (still not condoning). But I do believe that their code of honour was mostly a positive characteristic, since they drew the line at using the Dark Arts, and had strict notions of friendship and loyalty. They all risked their lives as members of the Order. Of course, it was James's and Sirius's downfall in the end, since they simply could not foresee Peter's betrayal, but I can't help thinking they'd rather die as honourable men, even if it left them vulnerable to betrayal.Not treated her badly in a physical way obviously. But his arrogance was such that he could have treated her in a teasing, annoying way. For some, bizarre, yet legitimate reason, many psychoanalysists agree that when men show a certain women nothing but arrogance and act in a very narcissistic manner, that woman becomes attracted to him. We haven't seen anything but arrogance from James, except from the moment he told Lily to run in Godric's Hollow.
Sorry, where is the canon for this?

You are rather pessimistic about the male race. That makes it sound that it was all so manipulated by James. Maybe Lily was attracted to arrogance, not a crime, lots of people are. If that’s what she liked, that’s what she liked.

Yeah, that's fair. If she was attracted to him for his arrogance then that's fine, but if this is what attracted her to him then why would she see it as a reason not to marry him?

Sorry, where is the canon for this?

Where is the evidence James Potter was arrogant? :huh:

I never thought I would be defending Snape over one of my favourite characters.

It does seem a bit strange. I guess Lily saw some of the good qualities in James and admired him for it. Maybe she knew that James wasn't a horrible guy and was just waiting for him to mature before seriously considering him as a potential boyfriend? (Just like how Hermione had to wait for Ron to mature.)
It isn't out of the question that she would like James despite his unlikable behavior at the time. I knew a guy who was a complete jerk, but I still was attracted to him. His confidence was what attracted to me most.
Lily probably liked James even though she really didn't want to. I definitely felt the same way when I was in a similar position!
From what we've seen of Lily, she was a sensible lass with her heart in the right place. I see no reason to doubt her judgement about James. Yes, he was a jerk when he was 15, but he wasn't the only one, and I still consider it an important "plus" that he hated the Dark Arts and never used them. He was a prat but basically a good person, and he got his act together as he grew up (as indeed many of us do).

Lily trusted and loved James.
Lily was a sensible girl.
Therefore I have to assume that James was more than just a spoiled rich kid. Apparently Dumbledore felt the same way, since he made him Head Boy and invited him to join the Order.

Where is the evidence James Potter was arrogant?

I never thought I would be defending Snape over one of my favourite characters.

No, the canon for the statement you made in this post:Not treated her badly in a physical way obviously. But his arrogance was such that he could have treated her in a teasing, annoying way. For some, bizarre, yet legitimate reason, many psychoanalysists agree that when men show a certain women nothing but arrogance and act in a very narcissistic manner, that woman becomes attracted to him. We haven't seen anything but arrogance from James, except from the moment he told Lily to run in Godric's Hollow.
There is nothing in any of the books to suggest that James ever treated Lily badly, or even that he continued to be arrogant after the age of 15. Snape believed that James remained arrogant, but Snape also believed Harry to be arrogant, so I think we can all accept that Snape was just a little biased in this case.

I'm sure he did. Men will act however they want in order to get something they desire. I'm not believing that his arrogant behaviour suddenly stopped though. There is no evidence to prove that Lily didn't just like James because he was arrogant, but there isn't any evidence to the contrary either, in fact more resides in the former. We don't know Lily wasn't this kind of person, any more than we know Pansy Parkinson was.

If James did keep his arrogance, I'm not necessarily sure that Lily thought this was an admirable quality in her eyes. She did see other characteristics in him -- such as his loyalty, courage and trusting nature -- and liked them. I'm sure if Lily fell in love with James, the arrogance would just be a flaw in James' character. If Lily loved James, wouldn't she have loved him despite his flaws?

If James did keep his arrogance, I'm not necessarily sure that Lily thought this was an admirable quality in her eyes. She did see other characteristics in him -- such as his loyalty, courage and trusting nature -- and liked them. I'm sure if Lily fell in love with James, the arrogance would just be a flaw in James' character. If Lily loved James, wouldn't she have loved him despite his flaws?

Maybe you're right, there's not enough canon I guess. I think she will have liked the arrogance but the thread is going in circles.


Snape believed that James remained arrogant, but Snape also believed Harry to be arrogant, so I think we can all accept that Snape was just a little biased in this case.

That's true. We have canon from James' own friends however, that James kept fighting with Snape rather than be the better man. I agree she did love James, but the reasons I think she fell for him are different from yours.

Yeah, that's fair. If she was attracted to him for his arrogance then that's fine, but if this is what attracted her to him then why would she see it as a reason not to marry him?

I never said it would, did I, maybe I did. However, speaking as a girl who has had many a fella who was a little, shall we say 'over impressed with himself'. I can attest, to the fact, that sooner or later you have to accept that this is potentially damaging to yourself, and acknowledge the fact that the relationship is not going to survive for the long haul because you are too Ideologically different

I've deleted a number of posts discusing other posters. If you have issues with another member's posts please use the report post function or owl a staff member. Please do not go into off topic excursions on why everyone but yourself is deluded.

We have canon from James' own friends however, that James kept fighting with Snape rather than be the better man. I agree she did love James, but the reasons I think she fell for him are different from yours.

A bit of a correction here: We have canon from James' friends that "Snape never missed a chance to curse James, and you couldn't expect James to take that lying down."

I get the feeling from that statement that Snape's animus toward James increased an awful lot when James and Lily became a couple at Hogwarts.

That's true. We have canon from James' own friends however, that James kept fighting with Snape rather than be the better man.

Neither man was the "better" man as far as their relationship is concerned. But in all other aspects James has been shown to make better choices...choices that benefited others, not just himself.

Neither man was the "better" man as far as their relationship is concerned. But in all other aspects James has been shown to make better choices...choices that benefited others, not just himself.

I dunno... I think James was indeed the better man. We have only to look at Snape's treatment of Harry to conclude that Snape never - ever - stopped battling James Potter.

I dunno... I think James was indeed the better man. We have only to look at Snape's treatment of Harry to conclude that Snape never - ever - stopped battling James Potter.

I agree with you about Snape. 16+ years and he still couldn't get over James...but I' m strictly talking about James and Snape one on one with each other and no outside factors. They were enemies. I don't see their treatment of one another specifically (and especially at age 15) as one being better than the other. It is what they do with their lives, apart from one another, that I feel is telling. James made better decisions all around. He made better decisions regarding his friends and family. He made better decisions of what to do with his life ouside of school. Snape and James brought out the worst in one another, that is true, but James, apparently did not exihibit those negatve qualities outside of that relationship, especially the older he got.

I agree with you about Snape. 16+ years and he still couldn't get over James...but I' m strictly talking about James and Snape one on one with each other and no outside factors. They were enemies. I don't see their treatment of one another specifically (and especially at age 15) as one being better than the other. It is what they do with their lives, apart from one another, that I feel is telling. James made better decisions all around. He made better decisions regarding his friends and family. He made better decisions of what to do with his life ouside of school. Snape and James brought out the worst in one another, that is true, but James, apparently did not exihibit those negatve qualities outside of that relationship, especially the older he got.

:tu:

I agree with you about Snape. 16+ years and he still couldn't get over James...but I' m strictly talking about James and Snape one on one with each other and no outside factors. They were enemies. I don't see their treatment of one another specifically (and especially at age 15) as one being better than the other. It is what they do with their lives, apart from one another, that I feel is telling. James made better decisions all around. He made better decisions regarding his friends and family. He made better decisions of what to do with his life ouside of school. Snape and James brought out the worst in one another, that is true, but James, apparently did not exihibit those negatve qualities outside of that relationship, especially the older he got.

Well, I'm sure Snape can be a nice guy... When he is not around Harry, Sirius, Lupin, James or Peter.

^He's only a nice guy around one person.

Neither man was the "better" man as far as their relationship is concerned. But in all other aspects James has been shown to make better choices...choices that benefited others, not just himself.

This to me is true.I'm not discussing Snape later character,just at his time in Hogwarts. James would have been better if his treatment of Snape would have been different,or if he never actually started and dispute.Seeing as they treated each other the same,they are on the same level

Oh, come now ;)Isn't the opposite of Snape true as well? That he should have known what it was like coming from an under privilidged background so he shouldn't have done it to anyone else. One could say no excuses just becuse a person comes from a poor upbringing....

Snape and James were no better than each other at fifteen. James went on to become a member of the Order and sacrificed himself for his family. In the same time period Snape became a DE and gave a prophecy that put six people in danger and got two of them killed and at the end he only showed remorse for one of those deaths and showed that he cared little for the orphan boy. Snape only begins "redeeming" himself after Jame'ss death. James didn't have nearly the same amount to be redeemed from but it is too bad that he never got another chance because his life was cut short too soon. James never got any other chances while Snape got seventeen years worth of chances and wasted them by being bitter....

Ear! Ear!

This to me is true.I'm not discussing Snape later character,just at his time in Hogwarts. James would have been better if his treatment of Snape would have been different,or if he never actually started and dispute.Seeing as they treated each other the same,they are on the same level

That is exactly how I feel.

A bit of a correction here: We have canon from James' friends that "Snape never missed a chance to curse James, and you couldn't expect James to take that lying down."


As the matter of what is or is not canon is a controversial topic, and discussing it can lead to mass mod-activity, could you perhaps rephrase to something less likely to get a response? I know the Snape and Lily thread has been warned previously for arguing over what constitutes canon. It seems to be fine to discuss what 'really' happened, but mentioning the word canon has seemed to be a hotbutton before.

Now, back to James:

Do we think that James was ever approached for possible DeathEaterJugen early in his Hogwarts career, and that may be why he hated the Dark Arts so much, and perhaps why he felt it was justified to bully Slytherins?

For this, I have only:


Draco Malfoy didn't go red, but a pink tinge appeared in his pale cheeks.

"I'd be careful if I were you, Potter," he said slowly. "Unless you're a bit politer you'll go the same way as your parents. They didn't know what was good for them, either. You hang around with riffraff like the Weasleys and that Hagrid, and it'll rub off on you."

Of course 'your parents' could be referring to Lily as well, but it seems like the same conversation may have been repeated to James, as though he may have been targeted, as Hagrid also says,


"Now, yer mum an' dad were as good a witch an' wizard as I ever knew. Head boy an' girl at Hogwarts in their day! Suppose the myst'ry is why You-Know-Who never tried to get 'em on his side before... probably knew they were too close ter Dumbledore ter want anythin' ter do with the Dark Side.

But if they were targeting in school, the recruiting attempt might have been at that time...can anyone imagine perhaps Voldemort coming back to the 'Slug Club' to meet new potentials, or other Death Eaters doing so?

Sirius was always honest with Harry. And Remus never sugar coated anything to Harry either.(In the third book he is very honest and upfront to Harry about the patronuses etc). If they said that Snape cursed them at every window of opportunity, then they are telling the truth (I know you think they can be biased but there is a difference between blatant lying and sugar coating stuff). I have to agree with Purplehawk that Snape did attack them just as much as they did...(Lets not forget Snape would later on go on to be a deatheater so I am pretty sure compassion is not one of his characteristics)

1. James is Harry’s father but he died before Harry had the chance to get to know him. Is he a good role model? Would he have become a good father? How has he influenced Harry’s present life?

This is a hard one, I think. In the beginning of the series, we see Harry looking up towards his parents in the highest way possible. Throughout the series, he never stops loving his parents and never stops looking up to them for how they sacrificed themselves for him, but in some ways, I think that James, although a good father, wouldn't have been the best role model. We don't really know what James did the years in between his last year at Hogwarts and his death, but we can assume he married, obviously, and worked. We don't really know if he changed his bullying antics (see Snape); if he realized what he was doing was wrong. I think that Harry has been greatly affected by his fathers past. The fact that everyone knows who his father was in the school (the professors) made him try that much harder to live up to what James was.

2. Why did James chose Sirius over Dumbledore as Secret Keeper? Didn’t he trust Dumbledore with his life?

I don't really know the answer to this one, but if i had to make an educated guess, I would say it's because James felt that Sirius should have a larger part in his life. I really don't understand why he didn't choose Dumbledore, actually, being the most powerful wizard he knew.

3. James made Sirius Harry’s godfather. Was this a good decision?

I think that it was the best decision. Sirius proved himself in his family by not being in Slytherin like his entire family was, and it was obvious that him and James were best friends. I also feel that in a way, James somehow knew that Sirius wouldn't have the same privileged as James would, and wanted to make Sirius as incoropated into a normal life as possible.

4. We got bits and pieces of James’ life. Has he matured over the years and become a better person?

Simply put, I think that everyone matures over the years, but I don't think that James will ever forget his slight immaturity, and it will always be part of him.

5. What was James’ relationship to Lily Evans/Sirius Black/Peter Pettigrew/Remus Lupin/Albus Dumbledore/Minerva McGonagall/Frank and Alice Longbottom?

I think that the most complicated relationship between James and someone else was with Peter Pettigrew. It's a story of betrayal and mistrust, and I think that James was too lighthearted when trusting Peter, though he could not have known what was to come. I think that his relationship with Lily is quite strange, as well. From all of the information that we know about James and Lily at school, it seemed like she hated him. I started to believe that their marriage might have been put together more along the lines of convenience? I don't really know why, but maybe because Lily seemed to hate James and what he did to Snape more than anything. I don't think that we know enough about Frank and Alice Longbottom to establish a good relationship between them and James, just that they were friends with him through the Order. Same with McGonagall, that she was just a professor, although I think that he may have had a bit of a closer relationship with him because of his wand and its strong abilities towards Transfiguration. With Sirius and Remus, I think that their friendship with him goes way beyond friendship and more into brotherhood. They did everything together and they sort of became a makeshift family, which is what would normally happen at a boarding school. And lastly, his relationship with Dumbledore isn't as established as others. I think that James knew that he was a powerful wizard and respected him as a wizard, but may have figured out his struggle with too much power.

6. How much of James' hatred of Snape do you think was jealousy over his friendship with Lily? Do you think he redeemed himself by saving his life in spite of this jealousy?

I think that a lot of his hated towards Snape came from jealousy. Even though he got Lily in the end, he never got to grow up with her and have that relationship that happens between people when you've been growing up together. I don't think that he ever redeemed himself, because he was probably doing it for Lily's sake, not Snapes.

As the matter of what is or is not canon is a controversial topic, and discussing it can lead to mass mod-activity, could you perhaps rephrase to something less likely to get a response? I know the Snape and Lily thread has been warned previously for arguing over what constitutes canon. It seems to be fine to discuss what 'really' happened, but mentioning the word canon has seemed to be a hotbutton before.
Since the canon Purp quoted was straight from OotP, I don't see what could be problematic with it. Lupin is generally a "reliable" character - sensible, decent and honest, and he is the only Marauder who got over the old grudges with Snape and was able to speak kindly of Snape. Lupin has never misinformed us, to the best of my knowledge.

How do people think James would have felt about Snape, had he lived? Do you think he would have remained bitter like Sirius, or grown charitable like Lupin?

How do people think James would have felt about Snape, had he lived? Do you think he would have remained bitter like Sirius, or grown charitable like Lupin? I think it's impossible to tell with the amount of information we have about James.

Since the canon Purp quoted was straight from OotP, I don't see what could be problematic with it. Lupin is generally a "reliable" character - sensible, decent and honest, and he is the only Marauder who got over the old grudges with Snape and was able to speak kindly of Snape. Lupin has never misinformed us, to the best of my knowledge.


That is actually almost exactly what got deleted all over the place in the Snape and Lily thread, to the best of my recollection. Many people (including myself) feel that canon only applies to narration, and not to the statements of possibly unreliable characters. We broke into a discussion about what is or is not canon on Snape/Lily and stuff got deleted all over the place.

Lupin I think is more reliable than the others, but still biased, due to the nature of memory (if you follow the Freudian theory of psychology). Thus I do not think we can take his statements as one hundred percent accurate-he also omitted a lot, and neglected to tell Harry that his mother and Snape were friends.

Why did James chose Sirius over Dumbledore as Secret Keeper? Didn’t he trust Dumbledore with his life?

I don't really know the answer to this one, but if i had to make an educated guess, I would say it's because James felt that Sirius should have a larger part in his life. I really don't understand why he didn't choose Dumbledore, actually, being the most powerful wizard he knew.
Actually, the question ought to say:

"Why did James choose Peter over Dumbledore" since that's what he actually did.

James chose Peter over both Sirius and Dumbledore, which I guess proves he was loyal to a fault. He trusted the plan of Sirius and the loyalty of Peter, but Sirius was never the Secret Keeper.

That is actually almost exactly what got deleted all over the place in the Snape and Lily thread, to the best of my recollection. Many people (including myself) feel that canon only applies to narration, and not to the statements of possibly unreliable characters. We broke into a discussion about what is or is not canon on Snape/Lily and stuff got deleted all over the place.

Lupin I think is more reliable than the others, but still biased, due to the nature of memory (if you follow the Freudian theory of psychology). Thus I do not think we can take his statements as one hundred percent accurate-he also omitted a lot, and neglected to tell Harry that his mother and Snape were friends.

If Lupin is so biased, why tell Harry that James hexed Snape at all when they were 7th years?

If Lupin is so biased, why tell Harry that James hexed Snape at all when they were 7th years?

I don't want to complete repost this thing, though I may wind up doing so, but essentially, in short:

People's memories change with age, and reshape. It's a psychological premise, and while it is at root of a lot of 'blocked' memories, it is also the cause for a lot of 'shifted' memories, wherein people, while still remembering the essential facts, choose not to remember those facts which make them feel really bad. Strong feelings of guilt, or anger, or condemnation directed at a now-dead beloved friend, are the type of things that would tend not to survive too well.

I believe Lupin certainly tries to be as honest as he can, but I don't think he's really honest with himself all the time. We see it when he tries to decide what is best for Dora and Teddy. When his thoughts come to points that touch on deep emotions, he is not as rational as we see him most of the time. I think that Lupin loved James very much, and it is very hard for him to speak of James negatively. It is hard because thinking such thoughts, in other than a fond 'Ah, those were the days of our mischievous youth' sort of way, makes people feel like they are traitors to the memories of their dead friends. It is much the same reason that people do not like to speak badly of friends at funerals and the like.

I think that Lupin loved James very much, and it is very hard for him to speak of James negatively.

So, telling Harry that James kept hexing Snape when he (Harry) was upset about James hexing Snape isn't negative? Its a positive?

Harry already knew that James hexed Snape: he had just seen it in the Pensieve. It's also a memory that, to Lupin, would not have always come accompanied by shame or guilt. I think that there was a part of Lupin who admired the laughing boy.

Lupin could not simply deny the whole thing, nor would it have been realistic for her to intentionally try to deny a memory. Instead, he looked into his memory for mitigating factors: and his mind, which had already been creating this process for fifteen years, had plenty to offer him. Did Snape hex James? I believe Snape did hex James, defensively, when James was attacking him. But that's just enough truth for Lupin to have memories of Snape hexing James.

Lupin might also be referencing that James could not take the fact that Snape resisted him lying down. This would make his words factually true, but put the spin on him into an entirely different category. Many bullies are actually crueler to their victims when their victims 'dare to resist'. Can we say definitively that James had none of that mentality? I don't believe that we can. I think we have to concede the possibility that a James who was infuriated enough to hex over Snape's mere 'existence' might have been provoked further by the notion that the boy who had five years of Lily while he had only one, the boy who he felt didn't deserve anything, dared to resist him and try to defend himself against what James saw as a 'rightful justice.'

People's memories change with age, and reshape. It's a psychological premise, and while it is at root of a lot of 'blocked' memories, it is also the cause for a lot of 'shifted' memories, wherein people, while still remembering the essential facts, choose not to remember those facts which make them feel really bad. Strong feelings of guilt, or anger, or condemnation directed at a now-dead beloved friend, are the type of things that would tend not to survive too well.

Yeah that happens, but when people's specific episodic memories are tapped they can remember pretty accurately, plus Harry never asked them leading questions, so they were pretty much remembering, a given set of situations, through free recall. If Lupin was been asked a vague, overview of James he would never have mentioned, or even chosen to remember, that James could be a rather nasty bully when he was a child.

Lupin gave specific facts: James hexed Snape and Snape used to hex James too. They told Harry that: he shouldn’t judge his father on such a small segment of his life, admitted to the childhood callousness, and we even got a veiled hint, from Lupin, as to why Snape and James continued to hate each other, Lily.

Lupin and Sirius didn't appear to remember that one event, but they appeared to be under no allusions as to what the general behaviour, during that time, seemed to have been from everyone involved.

Lupin I think is more reliable than the others, but still biased, due to the nature of memory (if you follow the Freudian theory of psychology). Thus I do not think we can take his statements as one hundred percent accurate-he also omitted a lot, and neglected to tell Harry that his mother and Snape were friends.

Neither did anyone one else who would have known that fact, something tells me Dumbledore had issued a blackout on ever mentioning that to Harry. Like Freud?

A bit of a correction here: We have canon from James' friends that "Snape never missed a chance to curse James, and you couldn't expect James to take that lying down."

As the matter of what is or is not canon is a controversial topic, and discussing it can lead to mass mod-activity, could you perhaps rephrase to something less likely to get a response? I know the Snape and Lily thread has been warned previously for arguing over what constitutes canon. It seems to be fine to discuss what 'really' happened, but mentioning the word canon has seemed to be a hotbutton before.

Since the canon Purp quoted was straight from OotP, I don't see what could be problematic with it. Lupin is generally a "reliable" character - sensible, decent and honest, and he is the only Marauder who got over the old grudges with Snape and was able to speak kindly of Snape. Lupin has never misinformed us, to the best of my knowledge.

That is actually almost exactly what got deleted all over the place in the Snape and Lily thread, to the best of my recollection. Many people (including myself) feel that canon only applies to narration, and not to the statements of possibly unreliable characters. We broke into a discussion about what is or is not canon on Snape/Lily and stuff got deleted all over the place.

Lupin I think is more reliable than the others, but still biased, due to the nature of memory (if you follow the Freudian theory of psychology). Thus I do not think we can take his statements as one hundred percent accurate-he also omitted a lot, and neglected to tell Harry that his mother and Snape were friends.

The above conversation is almost certainly indicative of what makes threads go haywire. I quoted "canon" that has stood the test of time throughout my four years as a member of CoS Forums - text from one of the books.

Now we have members parsing or otherwise reinterpreting "canon" to suit individual theories. No wonder the mods were deleting posts right and left! This is starting to feel like the old divination stand-by: make it up.

Okay boys and girls. Let's drop the thread logistics here.

Quotes from characters are absolutely 100% canon but they are not necessarily right. To use an obvious example, Harry said Snape was evil and it turns out he was wrong. It's okay to question whether characters are biased but it's also okay to believe that they're telling the truth.

Thank you for playing our game.

Thanks muchly, Jessica. That was sorely needed.

That is exactly how I feel.

No it's not.

:D

Anyway, we've seen the same amount of James as Harry has. While it can be construed that James was always the arrogant toerag that Lily accused him of being since we were not privvy to the improved, non-bullying James, I think it says something that Harry was able to see James as a good person despite having seen the same negative things that we use to analyze James. I certainly wouldn't name my child after someone I don't respect, not even if that person is my own flesh and blood.

Yes, thank you also Jessica for a great (yet noncontroversial) example of when good characters can say incorrect things through their own biases.

Harry said Snape was evil and it turns out he was wrong
Please provide canon to back that up ...

Just kidding!

I do believe Lupin to be a reliable source of information, though. He's never told us anything that turned out to be untrue, or even exaggerated, as far as I can remember. (Please correct me if I'm wrong.)

Yes, thank you also Jessica for a great (yet noncontroversial) example of when good characters can say incorrect things through their own biases.

Her example is, of course, answered through canon. In other words, Harry was proved wrong by something Jo wrote. You're going to have a far more difficult time arguing against canon when Lupin told Harry that Snape never missed a chance to curse James, and that Harry shouldn't have expected his dad to take that lying down.

Honestly, what ticked me off about that line of thinking is that (a) Lupin is deemed truthful when he said James continued to jinx Snape, which suits your theory; but (b) Lupin is "biased" when he said Snape never missed his chance to have a go at James, which works against your theory. It's even stranger when one considers that the two statements are part of the same conversation.

Honestly, what ticked me off about that line of thinking is that (a) Lupin is deemed truthful when he said James continued to jinx Snape, which suits your theory; but (b) Lupin is "biased" when he said Snape never missed his chance to have a go at James, which works against your theory. It's even stranger when one considers that the two statements are part of the same conversation.
Yupp - take it or leave it. Either Lupin is truthful or he isn't (my money is on the former), but we can't pick the bits we like and disregard the rest!

I do believe Lupin to be a reliable source of information, though. He's never told us anything that turned out to be untrue, or even exaggerated, as far as I can remember. (Please correct me if I'm wrong.)

No I don't think Lupin ever lied; he was taciturn sure, but never lied.

Yupp - take it or leave it. Either Lupin is truthful or he isn't (my money is on the former), but we can't pick the bits we like and disregard the rest!

I think not. Cherry-picking never works well because someone has always read the full passage.

I think Lupin's statement: "Well, Snape was a special case. I mean, he never lost an opportunity to curse James, so you couldn't really expect James to take that lying down, could you?" does lead one to the conclusion that Snape's aggression toward James worsened after James began dating Lily.

2. Why did James chose Sirius over Dumbledore as Secret Keeper? Didn’t he trust Dumbledore with his life?
I've always wondered why, but I've come up with two ideas that may be the reason for James's choice.
James was a loyal and trusting friend. Remus says in DH that James would never grow suspicious of his friends. I'm sure he trusted Sirius just as much as he trusted Dumbledore, so he may have seen the two as being both equally to trust.
Another possibility is that James wanted Dumbledore to be safe. If James made Dumbledor Secret-Keeper, it would put Dumbledore in much more danger than he already was. If Voldemort decided to confront Dumbledore face-to-face, he may have forced it out of Dumbledore and then - just as Voldemort always does - proceed to kill him so Dumbledore is no longer a threat to Voldemort's regime. Dumbledore was, in those days, the most likely person to finish Voldemort off. If he was gone, a lot of people would lose hope, so maybe James didn't want to risk that? He may have thought Dumbledore was far too useful for the Wizarding World.

Any thoughts?

I thought of James' social side as being the reason he didn't choose Dumbledore as secret-keeper. With Dumbledore removed from the day-to-day logistics of James' life, maybe James felt it would be too difficult for friends to reach them in Godric's Hollow.

I think Lupin's statement: "Well, Snape was a special case. I mean, he never lost an opportunity to curse James, so you couldn't really expect James to take that lying down, could you?" does lead one to the conclusion that Snape's aggression toward James worsened after James began dating Lily.

It was a rather delicious veiled hint to the Snape/Lily dynamic. If I remember rightly Lupin was rather uncertain when saying this, as in he wasn't sure he should have been saying it at all. I could be very wrong about that though.

I wonder if Dumbledore had asked everyone who knew Lily, Snape and co. to stay quiet on the epic, and series defining, friendship? I mean none of them ever said anything, and sometimes they must just have been itching to. In the hospital scene, in HBP, when Harry says Snape didn't like his mother, Lupin said nothing, no one did, the comment was met with silence, even though Lupin, a few seconds earlier, had effused how much Snape hated James.

Honestly, what ticked me off about that line of thinking is that (a) Lupin is deemed truthful when he said James continued to jinx Snape, which suits your theory; but (b) Lupin is "biased" when he said Snape never missed his chance to have a go at James, which works against your theory. It's even stranger when one considers that the two statements are part of the same conversation.

Yupp - take it or leave it. Either Lupin is truthful or he isn't (my money is on the former), but we can't pick the bits we like and disregard the rest!


I've answered this, but I'll answer this again.

Firstly, if either of you know someone who tells the truth all of the time, with never a single exaggeration, omission or white lie, please let me know now. If either of you two know someone who lies all the time, with not a single word out of their mouth true, please let me know likewise.

The world is not divided into good people and Death Eaters, likewise, the world is not divided into people who tell the truth, and people who lie. Everyone lies, and everyone tells the truth. Everyone has biases. You have to interpret the words of every single person in the world, fictional or not, through the lens of their biases and their environment.

I believe that Lupin's memories which portrayed James in a negative light gradually faded or shifted so that he could remember the incidents without feeling as though he were betraying his friend. According to Freud's theories, which are generally accepted today in this area, people do not like to think about things which make them feel anxious or guilty. These are unpleasant feelings, and at people's deepest level, they do not like to feel badly about themselves-it is an act of self-protection to either wall off or transform these feelings and memories.

Thus, Lupin's original very clear memories may have shifted over time-not greatly initially, because thinking negative thoughts for a moment or two about his friends would not have been a cause for shame. But with James' early, heroic, and untimely death, thinking negatively about someone who died so tragically would be very difficult and painful. It would not make Lupin feel good about himself, to think that he could think such things about his friend. Thus, he had to find a justification.

These things are often based on truth. I do not argue that Lupin makes up a lie: after all, a deliberately invented lie in the conscious mind is not likely to salvage Lupin's ego. But I believe that his bias prevented him from making a conscious appraisal of James, and what actually happened.

I also believe that Lupin may in fact have been talking about Snape hexing James in defense-that memory might have stuck, and he might have forgotten that the original part of the memory involved James striking first. James might well have not taken his victim striking back well at all-bullies prefer to attack the powerless, helpless, and those who do not arouse feelings of sympathy, causing the audience to fight back. As previously stated, a James who felt Snape had no right to exist may well have felt that Snape's 'returning fire' was so far beyond the pale that it deserved more 'treatment' in response. James-as-bully could not, in fact, be expected to take the victim's attempt to fight back lying down, and thus, it spurred more hexes.

In such a case, Lupin is not even directly lying: he is simply taking facts and stripping them of their context. However, it preserves his memory of his heroic friend, who can't really have been such a bad guy after all? It was just adolescent pranks, after all? The adult Lupin cannot bring himself to look back at the young James with eyes of maturity, because I think he knows what he would see. Thus, he can criticize his own behavior, but not really his dead friend's.

So do you think that James always bullied Snape and that it didn't, as we are told, develop into a mutual hatred that transgressed the childhood idiocy of James?

I really don't think Freuds theories are particularly relevant. It is essentially a modern book that children can read, and Freud and his theories are much more suited to the deconstruction of characters in Victorian novels. He isn’t really used, when analysing books, outside of his historical context.

I think that James was a bully overall up to his fifth year. I am willing, in the absence of other evidence, to believe that James ceased most of his bullying, in the attempt to win Lily. I believe she was the impetus for his change, and I think that he matured greatly from what he began as. But I do not think he matured fully. He was still a teenager, and could not completely give up his irrational biases. He did not like Snape, could not comprehend Snape, and I imagine the more that James loved Lily, the more he hated Snape-just as the more Snape loved Lily, the more he hated James.

I think that James initiated the hexing and public humiliation, simply because it is much more the sort of thing that, in my opinion, is more in his character-to love an audience, to love the love of an audience, at the expense of a scapegoat. I think that it must have bothered him, on some level, that the woman he loved had a soft spot for this Death-Eater 'wannabe'. I don't think he could have understood it.

I think that their more 'adult' hatred, as adult as it was able to get, anyway (late teens, early twenties) was based on Lily. Did Snape hate James to the day the man died, and probably wished deeply in his secret heart that the man would fall under a bus? I believe that he did. I believe Snape is the type of person who would have had a very rich fantasy life involving James disappearing mysteriously. But despite his opportunities, he never took action.

The reason I feel Snape never took action is because, in my opinion, his hate was greater than James'. He hated James for his humiliation, he hated James for being the catalyst for Snape's insult to Lily which ultimately terminated their friendship, he hated James for being everything that he wished he could be for Lily but could not, and he hatd James for breaking all the rules and getting away with it. He hated James, ultimately, for taking the only woman he had ever loved away-whether rationally or irrationally.

It is my belief that Snape could not have initiated a strike on James, because I think his hatred was so intense that if he had allowed himself the luxury of initiating a strike against the object of his hatred, he would never have stopped until James was dead. And he could not kill James-could not even seriously hurt him. Because Lily would find out, and Lily would be saddened by it, and he could not bear to cause Lily pain.

This is, of course, my own opinion on the subject, and your mileage may vary.

I think that it must have bothered him, on some level, that the woman he loved had a soft spot for this Death-Eater 'wannabe'. I don't think he could have understood it.

By the time James and Lily got together, Lily didn't have a soft spot for Snape, she seems to have cut him off with a knife. Not that I blame her, after the insult.

The reason I feel Snape never took action is because, in my opinion, his hate was greater than James'. He hated James for his humiliation, he hated James for being the catalyst for Snape's insult to Lily which ultimately terminated their friendship, he hated James for being everything that he wished he could be for Lily but could not, and he hatd James for breaking all the rules and getting away with it. He hated James, ultimately, for taking the only woman he had ever loved away-whether rationally or irrationally.

It is my belief that Snape could not have initiated a strike on James, because I think his hatred was so intense that if he had allowed himself the luxury of initiating a strike against the object of his hatred, he would never have stopped until James was dead. And he could not kill James-could not even seriously hurt him. Because Lily would find out, and Lily would be saddened by it, and he could not bear to cause Lily pain.

Well it is certainly a rather psychoanalytic argument (repression and all) but Snape must have hexed people (what with levicorpus getting around) and he never appeared, shall we say reticent, in expressing his hatred for Harry (who had done nothing but exist) so I figure with James it was the same. i'd much rather believe what we are told on this, given that we have literally no concrete evidence, to go on, that Lupin and Sirius lied or that anything like this happened.

By the time James and Lily got together, Lily didn't have a soft spot for Snape, she seems to have cut him off with a knife. Not that I blame her, after the insult.

This is just my own opinion based on what we see of Lily, but I don't believe she's the type of person that can really cut someone off completely without feeling regret. I think that she let him go, that she did not seek him out again, but I can imagine her, alone, or perhaps supported by James, crying over what Snape has become. I think that Lily would not take well her friend of seven years being on the other side, far less the 'evil' side. It is hard, we see, for Gryffindors to cut off love, even when they believe themselves betrayed. They love too hard. It is what they are, more than any other house. I would think less of Lily if she could sleep easily, knowing that Snape was on the road to death-eaterdom. She may have believed he was beyond redemption, but I think she probably second-guessed it, later, especially as she came into maturity. If I'd only done this, if I'd only done that. Would he have turned bad? Was it my fault, should I have given him more chances, or should I have cut him off earlier, when it actually made a difference?


I could easily see that seeing Lily in pain would also have been hard for James, and he would have wanted to do the only thing he could-hurt the thing which caused Lily pain.



Well it is certainly a rather psychoanalytic argument (repression and all) but Snape must have hexed people (what with levicorpus getting around) and he never appeared, shall we say reticent, in expressing his hatred for Harry (who had done nothing but exist) so I figure with James it was the same.


Psychoanalysis is my friend. Then again, I may be looking too deeply into characters, and she may not have been thinking into them that much. But I try to analyze characters in books as though they were real people, and judge by that standard.

Personally, I see Snape more in the position of the procurer and facilitator. Snape, the brilliant man at potions and spells, had to have some reason for becoming popular within Slytherin, and I think that the reason is that he created spells in exchange for a modicum of popularity. I see, easily, a Severus feverishly working on just the right spell, just the right spell to show Lucius, to get the old-blood families to see him as worthy. I think for Severus, that's what was the important part of the spells-not their execution, but that they displayed his brilliance in their creation.


i'd much rather believe what we are told on this, given that we have literally no concrete evidence, to go on, that Lupin and Sirius lied or that anything like this happened.

I can certainly understand your position. I just find a lot of clues in the psychology of each character, and I react to that.

Well it is certainly a rather psychoanalytic argument (repression and all) but Snape must have hexed people (what with levicorpus getting around) and he never appeared, shall we say reticent, in expressing his hatred for Harry (who had done nothing but exist) so I figure with James it was the same.

So do I. If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it probably is a duck. And if there was ever a James-hating duck on the planet, it was Severus Snape.


i'd much rather believe what we are told on this, given that we have literally no concrete evidence, to go on, that Lupin and Sirius lied or that anything like this happened.

We have to believe what Jo has told us. Anything else and we're rewriting her story.

OOOKAAAAY! Takes a deep breath.

Where did all this talk of bias come from? Certainly everyone is biased to a certain extent. It is human nature. However, to define James by Snape is to totally disregard everything else about his (brief) life. It also would detract from Snape as a character. Snape defined his entire life by James. Not by Lily. Not by his own code of ethics. Not by Dumbledore. By James. Contrast that with James who defined his life by his own code. He was willing to break rules for a reason (much like Harry) but he did not break rules just because it was exciting (that was just an added bonus--something that pushed him over the edge when he was teetering--that's what made it fun on top of being justified.) He became an animagus for Lupin. It wasn't like he decided to become animagus and used Lupin's furry little problem as a cover. The fact that he did it illegally made it fun. The fact that Peter, Sirius, and James thought of the best animal forms to keep Lupin in check shows they put a great deal of thought into the safety of other people. He persuaded his parents to take in Sirius because Sirius was sad at Grimmauld Place--the fact that he could thumb his nose at the Black Family made it fun--but he didn't do it to just tick off the Blacks.

We have one nasty memory of James--at 15--by a man that hates him. That never accepted the fact that James was held in high regard because of his actions as a man, not because of his actions as a teenager. Perhaps Snape is the one who is biased. Perhaps he refused to see that James was a man of integrity. I find it interesting that we were supposed to learn more about the prank, but what we heard was basically the same thing that Snape said earlier---that James was saving his own skin. Perhaps James was saving his own skin--but not in the way that Snape thought--by getting out of trouble. Perhaps James was making that transition to manhood. Perhaps he ws no longer going to let his childhood enmity hinder him. Perhaps James thought to himself that he wsn't going to get into trouble over Snape anymore. Or perhaps Harry had the right of it in the Shrieking shack. "I reckon that my father wouldn't want his two best friends to become killers...." How is Snape to know anything about what James was thinking at the time? Perhaps Snape wanted to believe that James wouldn't, couldn't change, because then what would happen to Snape without someone to hate? Without someone to justify his decisions to run with the wrong crowd, to blame for taking Lily away...could possibly Snape be the biased party here?

Interestingly we see much of James away from Snape, but SWM was incredibly well written, so it tends to stick with us. Even Peter, who turned to Voldy, has nothing negative to say about James. He admits in the shack that Voldy scared him and that he was a coward. In fact, after Sirius said "I would have died for my friends!" Peter could have easily said "But were any of you ever my friends?" In SWM we can see that Sirius, James, and Lupin did not treat Peter kindly. Yet never once in the entire series does Peter say a bad word about James (or Sirius or Lupin for that matter).

What a beautifully written and well thought out post! :clap:

Where did all this talk of bias come from? Certainly everyone is biased to a certain extent. It is human nature. However, to define James by Snape is to totally disregard everything else about his (brief) life. It also would detract from Snape as a character. Snape defined his entire life by James. Not by Lily. Not by his own code of ethics. Not by Dumbledore. By James.

I believe this to be true. We have only to think of Snape's execrable treatment of Harry to recognize the truth in that. Snape betrayed no softer Lily memories in the way he harassed, humiliated and abused Harry. Snape is rather like an old 78 recording stuck on a bad spot, playing the same words over and over again and never getting the full song.

Contrast that with James who defined his life by his own code. He was willing to break rules for a reason (much like Harry) but he did not break rules just because it was exciting (that was just an added bonus--something that pushed him over the edge when he was teetering--that's what made it fun on top of being justified.) He became an animagus for Lupin. It wasn't like he decided to become animagus and used Lupin's furry little problem as a cover. The fact that he did it illegally made it fun. The fact that Peter, Sirius, and James thought of the best animal forms to keep Lupin in check shows they put a great deal of thought into the safety of other people. He persuaded his parents to take in Sirius because Sirius was sad at Grimmauld Place--the fact that he could thumb his nose at the Black Family made it fun--but he didn't do it to just tick off the Blacks.

I think James was everything Snape wanted to be - the inner person Snape fantasized himself to be. Don't get me wrong; I don't think Snape actually wanted to be James, per se, but instead longed for the plaudits and near-universal acceptance and respect James had as a Big Man on Campus. Being Snape, he wished those things to occur on his own terms: Slytherin, dark magic, promising young death eater, right-hand man of Lord Voldemort. That his cultural and ideological opposite should have attained these things - plus the girl - seems to have been a bitter pill for Snape.

Perhaps Snape is the one who is biased. Perhaps he refused to see that James was a man of integrity. I find it interesting that we were supposed to learn more about the prank, but what we heard was basically the same thing that Snape said earlier---that James was saving his own skin. Perhaps James was saving his own skin--but not in the way that Snape thought--by getting out of trouble. Perhaps James was making that transition to manhood. Perhaps he ws no longer going to let his childhood enmity hinder him. Perhaps James thought to himself that he wsn't going to get into trouble over Snape anymore. Or perhaps Harry had the right of it in the Shrieking shack. "I reckon that my father wouldn't want his two best friends to become killers...." How is Snape to know anything about what James was thinking at the time? Perhaps Snape wanted to believe that James wouldn't, couldn't change, because then what would happen to Snape without someone to hate? Without someone to justify his decisions to run with the wrong crowd, to blame for taking Lily away...could possibly Snape be the biased party here?

You're on the mark with this. Think how many times Snape attached feelings and thoughts to Harry that were nowhere near what Harry was actually thinking or trying to do. After the nose-breaking incident between Harry and Draco, Snape again assumed Harry wanted to make a Grand Entrance. Never gave a moments' thought to what might have happened to make the kid late for the Opening Feast, same as he didn't with the flying car in CoS. The same tendency was glaringly apparent in the occlumency lessons between the two, and after the mud-slinging incident in Hogsmeade in PoA, and after Harry was chosen as champion in GoF, and on so many other occasions.

In the Shrieking Shack in PoA, he shrieked "I have just saved your life!" and it apparently never occurred to him that all three kids were armed (while Lupin and Sirius were not), and thus that Harry and the others didn't need saving. The entire dismal scene was Snape playing freely with his own ambitions and attaching them to a situation he had badly misread. Not just misread: Snape refused even to hear an explanation.

I think it was like seeing James all over again - in Harry - and Snape's delicate constitution couldn't abide it.

Snape betrayed no softer Lily memories in the way he harassed, humiliated and abused Harry.

Funnily enough in legilimency/occlumency you have to make eye contact. He was looking stright into Lily's eyes and even then could not muster the strength to be civil. But since this is supposed to be about James....;)


That his cultural and ideological opposite should have attained these things - plus the girl - seems to have been a bitter pill for Snape.

Yet another thing that speaks for James integrity--James was popular and didn't really want it. Liked it, sure, but it did not seem essential to him. The Marauders were essential to him. Evrything else was fun and games. He didn't try to earn respect. Snape was ambitious, as most Slytherins are, and he had to struggle against the tidal wave of James even when James wasn't around.

Perhaps James was saving his own skin--but not in the way that Snape thought--by getting out of trouble.

I agree! A lot of people are arguing about how James's act of saving Snape isn't admirable due to his intentions. If James's intention wasn't all about saving Snape, it was definitely about saving Remus and Sirius. Can you imagine how Remus would have reacted if he found out he killed a student? And Harry says in PoA that he didn't think James would want Remus and Sirius to be killers. This was the same case with the prank. He wouldn't have wanted Remus to feel guilty over the death of someone (even if it wasn't conciously done) and wouldn't want Sirius to be the cause of Snape's death.
However, if James's main intentions for saving Snape were about his friends, I do believe that James didn't want Snape to die despite his loathing for him. I don't view James as the type of person who would watch Snape die without a blink of an eye. Harry showed this quality in DH when he tries to stop Wormtail from strangling himself (even though Wormtail betrayed his parents and framed his godfather for heinious crimes) and when he saves Draco and Goyle. Harry may have the same trait as his father.

I really don't think Freuds theories are particularly relevant. It is essentially a modern book that children can read, and Freud and his theories are much more suited to the deconstruction of characters in Victorian novels. He isn’t really used, when analysing books, outside of his historical context.

Because you added this after, I'm writing a new one for it instead of editing it into mine, or I'll start going crazy. :)

Freud is not necessarily used when analyzing books, but he is used when analyzing people-and that's what we're trying to figure out here. Not the overall book as a whole, we're not acting as critics, we're trying to understand the people in the book. And while some of his theories have fallen out of favor, the one I stated has, to the best of my knowledge, been one of the most accepted as all; I find it hard to even think of any reputable psychologist who would dispute it.

Aside from that, though, I will note that the older wizarding families do strike me as far more like Victorian novels than modern day. That is the age they seem to have stuck in-dress, servants, arranged marriages, and all. The purebloods seem very, very Victorian, at the very least, if not the whole of wizarding society. That seems to also be their general technological age, as well-we note that the children arrive at Hogwarts by train, and are ferried by spectral horses in carriages.



Where did all this talk of bias come from? Certainly everyone is biased to a certain extent. It is human nature.

Yes, exactly. I don't dispute this. I think everyone in the books is biased to some degree, which is why we cannot take anyone's words as fictional-reality truth, unless JKR has specifically told us it is.

However, to define James by Snape is to totally disregard everything else about his (brief) life. It also would detract from Snape as a character. Snape defined his entire life by James. Not by Lily. Not by his own code of ethics. Not by Dumbledore. By James.

I'm really curious where in the books you get that from? I can see saying that James was important to Snape by way of Lily and the like, but if it weren't for Lily, the last seventeen years of Snape's life would not have taken place. If James were not in the picture, I believe they still would have progressed exactly the same, as Snape's actions were aimed at Lily and protecting her son, not on James at all.

I'm really curious where in the books you get that from? I can see saying that James was important to Snape by way of Lily and the like, but if it weren't for Lily, the last seventeen years of Snape's life would not have taken place. If James were not in the picture, I believe they still would have progressed exactly the same, as Snape's actions were aimed at Lily and protecting her son, not on James at all.

Throughout the series Snape goes to great lengths to badmouth James in front of Harry and paint him as black as possible (and taking into account their history his picture of James in understandable). Until DH he does not mention Lily, it is all about his enmity with James Potter. So in a way James influenced him very much because he became a scapegoat for everything that went wrong in Snape's life.

But this thread isn't about Snape, it is about James. I think it is noteworthy that all other characters find kind words for James Potter. Of course, one could say that his closest friends are biased. Sirius certainly is. But even he admits that they were all idiots at fifteen and Remus tells the trio how dangerous their little excursions in school were and how bad he feel about it. This doesn't sound to me as if they were trying to whitewash the Marauders and especially James. They just knew a different James from the one Snape knew. They saw James as a kind and loyal person, who was a little arrogant but had his heart in the right place. Someone who did everything for his friends. As someone mentioned above, not even Peter complained about being treated badly by James although he had had the chance. So James wasn't a wholly wonderful person but he was held in great esteem by most people who knew him.

I don't think Remus is lying at all or really biased,but Remus is very careful with is words.He wants to show a situation as honestly as he can,but it's not really in him to resort to out and out bad-mouthing.Before anyone says it,no I'm not saying what he said of James was invalid,just commenting on how Remus is.

I don't think Snape really was jealous of James,I think his only problem was he saw that he might win Lily,that seemed his own concern.Just my opinion though.
As for Peter,I can't really see much in what he says and what he doesn't say.He spills alot of lies in PoA when he needs too.

Throughout the series Snape goes to great lengths to badmouth James in front of Harry and paint him as black as possible (and taking into account their history his picture of James in understandable). Until DH he does not mention Lily, it is all about his enmity with James Potter. So in a way James influenced him very much because he became a scapegoat for everything that went wrong in Snape's life.


I actually think this is evidence that James is less important to Snape than Lily-because he can still talk about James. He can't even bring himself to talk about Lily unless it is /absolutely necessary/. He will not even mention her name. It's an interesting contrast to Voldemort-many people will not speak Voldemort's name out of fear, but Snape will not speak Lily's name out of love. I think that it is the deeper pain, which is too great for him to bring out for public viewing, lest them even hearing the name and his thoughts on it might somehow contaminate it.

Thus, I really don't see James as all that important in regards to Snape as opposed to other bullies, except where he took Lily. I don't think Snape would even have cared to follow the Marauders if James hadn't been obviously interested in Lily.