James Potter: Character Analysis

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.

I think this line of thought is inherently faulty. If what people said was so totally biased
then what would be the point of the story? Half of how the entire series is written is communicated by what people remember and say to one another. If James hadn't changed the story would not be what it was. The Potter's deaths would not have been as tragic. If James hadn't changed he would not have gotten Lily, he would not have become an Order member, he would not have remained Harry's patronus after OoTP.

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.

Hagrid once said in GoF after Harry saves Ron and Gabrielle in the lake. "You did no more than your father would have done and their ain't no higher compliment I can give you." Hagrid went to school with Voldy not James. His only point of reference is the adult James as they were in the Order together. ETA: must correct this. Hagrid was gamekeeper during James's term. However there has been no indication that James and Co. were as friendly with him as Harry and Co were.



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.

Really? "Don't tell his son." Snape does not want Dumbledore to tell Harry what Snape is doing for the Order because he is James's son. I mean what's up with that?

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.

James isn't a person, he is a character in a book, and his actions, unlike real peoples, are devised to provide sense to the plot. Freud isn't used when analysing modern novels (or the characters in them), only Victorian ones, as his theories are very much a product of the thinking of the times (although he lived for more then thirty years after the end of the Victorian era).

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.

In England that way of behaving was pretty common among the aristocratic until very recently in human history (servants, everyone related by marriage, snobbiness against marrying 'commoners'). In fact in some aristocratic families it is still the case. In England generally, the class system is a rather absolute way of defining people. The rest I really think is just part of the fantasy of the series.

I find it hard to even think of any reputable psychologist who would dispute it.

Psychological theories are never absolute and everything is disputed, it merely depends on which side of the fence you decide to sit on: The current debate about Nativism being a prime example.

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 don't think they would have ever become bosom buddies. Too much had passed between them for them to let bygones be bygones. Its like imagining Draco as Harry's best man... :lol:. How can they even stand each other when both were in love with the same woman. At best they would have ignored each other to death. But Sirius and James don't seem the forgiving types and we can say for certain that Snape definitely isn't!

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.

Really? "Don't tell his son." Snape does not want Dumbledore to tell Harry what Snape is doing for the Order because he is James's son. I mean what's up with that?

Crow, what we are saying is that Snape's treatment of Harry was all about James Potter. Harry was made to pay for being James Potter's son by the man who was secretly sworn to protect him from Voldemort. There just isn't anything in Snape's treatment of Harry at Hogwarts that can be attributed to Lily. It's all about Snape's hatred of James.

Jo has told us that Snape died loathing Harry. It wasn't fair, she agreed, but there it is. He loathed Harry just as he loathed James. Or, to put it into context with an earlier quote, Snape loathed the fact that Harry existed.

I don't think they would have ever become bosom buddies. Too much had passed between them for them to let bygones be bygones. Its like imagining Draco as Harry's best man... :lol:. How can they even stand each other when both were in love with the same woman. At best they would have ignored each other to death. But Sirius and James don't seem the forgiving types and we can say for certain that Snape definitely isn't!

Ah, I think James was the forgiving type. Remember Dumbledore's words about James doing what Harry did in saving Pettigrew's life? I don't think the adult James would have particularly liked Snape - who could, apart from Voldemort? - but I also don't think he would have obsessed over Snape as Snape obsessed over him.

Snape's treatment of Harry at Hogwarts, however, would almost assuredly have gotten a rise out of James - and certainly from Lily. They would have been justified in pitching a fit about it.

Crow, what we are saying is that Snape's treatment of Harry was all about James Potter. Harry was made to pay for being James Potter's son by the man who was secretly sworn to protect him from Voldemort. There just isn't anything in Snape's treatment of Harry at Hogwarts that can be attributed to Lily. It's all about Snape's hatred of James.

Jo has told us that Snape died loathing Harry. It wasn't fair, she agreed, but there it is. He loathed Harry just as he loathed James. Or, to put it into context with an earlier quote, Snape loathed the fact that Harry existed.



Ah, I think James was the forgiving type. Remember Dumbledore's words about James doing what Harry did in saving Pettigrew's life? I don't think the adult James would have particularly liked Snape - who could, apart from Voldemort? - but I also don't think he would have obsessed over Snape as Snape obsessed over him.

Snape's treatment of Harry at Hogwarts, however, would almost assuredly have gotten a rise out of James - and certainly from Lily. They would have been justified in pitching a fit about it.
Yeah I guess you are right. Sometimes I think if James had lived and Sirius had never gone to Azkaban they probably would have forgotten all about Snape and would have gotten on with their lives. You know just like Harry and Ron did... But I still don't think Snape would have ever stopped hating them

Yeah I guess you are right. Sometimes I think if James had lived and Sirius had never gone to Azkaban they probably would have forgotten all about Snape and would have gotten on with their lives. You know just like Harry and Ron did... But I still don't think Snape would have ever stopped hating them

I think they would have. They weren't bothered about Snape when they left school. Snape, on the other hand, was quite incapable of setting aside old hatreds and would have carried the old grudge until he died - as happened in Deathly Hallows.

And if there was ever a James-hating duck on the planet, it was Severus Snape.

Love that, funny.

Actually I was thinking, if any of them gave a biased view of James and co. it was Snape. In HBP (during his flight) Snape shouted at Harry that he was just like his father and would never attack unless it was with his friends (four on one). We know that that wasn't strictly true as Lupin was an inactive bystander and Peter would just get all excited as he looked on.

It wasn't really four on one because Lupin and Peter were only guilty of inaction and many others seemed to be guilty of that too (from the worst memory scene).

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 didn't reply to this, I'm sorry, so I will now.

Lily may have always felt a twinge for Snape, and what became of him, but friendships breakdown all the time and people move on. She may have always felt a slight pang of regret about Snape and what he became (so ideologically different from her) but I doubt it was something she cried over, or even thought much about.

I had a rather nasty falling out, with the person who had been my best friend, at school. I don't see her anymore, but I know (through others) that she hasn't always made the right choices and has never put the past behind her, and I feel sorry for her occasionally, but a whole year can go by and I never think about her.

Love that, funny.

Actually I was thinking, if any of them gave a biased view of James and co. it was Snape. In HBP (during his flight) Snape shouted at Harry that he was just like his father and would never attack unless it was with his friends (four on one). We know that that wasn't strictly true as Lupin was an inactive bystander and Peter would just get all excited as he looked on.

It wasn't really four on one because Lupin and Peter were only guilty of inaction and many others seemed to be guilty of that too (from the worst memory scene).

Well said my friend... Seeing James through Snape's eyes is like seeing Harry through Draco or even Snape's eyes. Snape often says that Harry is supremely arrogant and is constantly looking for ways to up his celebrity status... We know that it is anything but true.....:lol: Remember Snape in the fourth book says "Potter has to keep up with his press cuttings...", it makes you laugh but it also makes you see that he is hardly a good judge of character.

We know that that wasn't strictly true.

Not a whole lot of what Snape said about James was "strictly true." The malice in his words was so thick most reasonable people would have been at least a bit wary of taking him at face value.

Well said my friend... Seeing James through Snape's eyes is like seeing Harry through Draco or even Snape's eyes. Snape often says that Harry is supremely arrogant and is constantly looking for ways to up his celebrity status... We know that it is anything but true.....:lol: Remember Snape in the fourth book says "Potter has to keep up with his press cuttings...", it makes you laugh but it also makes you see that he is hardly a good judge of character.

Snape was too eaten up by malice and jealousy to accurately judge Harry's character.

It wasn't really four on one because Lupin and Peter were only guilty of inaction and many others seemed to be guilty of that too (from the worst memory scene).

But he had them to keep his back. That's quite important, and that's what Snape said, actually - that he would never attack him unless it was four on one - unless he had all of them with him.

And once again - we didn't see James through Snape's eyes. We saw his actual real actions in the Pensieve and can draw our conclusions from that.

But he had them to keep his back. That's quite important, and that's what Snape said, actually - that he would never attack him unless it was four on one - unless he had all of them with him.

And once again - we didn't see James through Snape's eyes. We saw his actual real actions in the Pensieve and can draw our conclusions from that.

Yeah but neither of them did anything, and from the worst memory scene, there seemed to be loads of people who just stood there, looked on and did nothing. It was probably like that a lot, loads of people used to watch on and do nothing; it wasn't just Lupin and Peter. He could have just said your father would never attack unless there was a whole audience there to watch. That would seem to be a more accurate statement to describe the way James and Sirius behaved when they were young teenagers and Peter and Lupin did nothing when James was hit by Sectumsempra. Lupin didn't seem to want to get involved at all and Peter was just a fan - boy.

And once again - we didn't see James through Snape's eyes. We saw his actual real actions in the Pensieve and can draw our conclusions from that.

We don't have any memories of Snape cursing James; yet we know it was an ongoing thing throughout their years together at Hogwarts. We also have a trove of examples of Snape's continuing malice toward James throughout the years Harry was at Hogwarts.

SWM is rather like a vacuum. We see James in a bad light, certainly, but the reason that scene is deemed SWM is the slur Snape hurled at Lily, which effectively ended their friendship. It had little to do with James' jinxes unless Snape blames James for what came out of his own mouth.

I think this line of thought is inherently faulty. If what people said was so totally biased
then what would be the point of the story? Half of how the entire series is written is communicated by what people remember and say to one another.

We may simply favor different kinds of novels. I prefer novels which keep to a more realistic method of communication between characters-where we can never trust anyone, even the protagonist, to tell us the absolute truth. Where part of the story is figuring out why and how people think the way they do. This is not the way everyone sees stories, I realize.

James isn't a person, he is a character in a book, and his actions, unlike real peoples, are devised to provide sense to the plot.

This is one style of writing: it is not the only style of writing. Look to, for example, how authors such as Steven Brust write. They create the characters, and the psychology of the characters, and sometimes the characters seem to have lives of their own-they do not 'behave' as they were originally intended. Something about the character the author has come to envision no longer would ring true were it forced into such a slot. While the character is not a real person, it has to have an internal consistency, and I think the possibility of applying real psychology to fictional characters is indeed very real. Many authors (though I admittedly am not sure if JKR is one) strive for psychological realism in their books, and give their protagonists and antagonists very real human problems, feelings, and motivations.

Freud isn't used when analysing modern novels (or the characters in them), only Victorian ones, as his theories are very much a product of the thinking of the times (although he lived for more then thirty years after the end of the Victorian era).

While Freud was the first one to originate the theory, it hardly died with him, and this theory is still a large factor in psychopathology of children, which I think would apply as at the years we are looking at, we would be dealing with children and adolescents. There are also some other interesting things we could look into along with that: such as attachment theory as applied to Snape, but that is hardly for the James thread.




Psychological theories are never absolute and everything is disputed, it merely depends on which side of the fence you decide to sit on: The current debate about Nativism being a prime example.

This I will certainly agree with, which is why to the best of my knowledge I said 'generally' or 'widely' accepted or not in dispute, rather than 'Everyone accepts this as absolute truth'.

This is one style of writing: it is not the only style of writing. Look to, for example, how authors such as Steven Brust write. They create the characters, and the psychology of the characters, and sometimes the characters seem to have lives of their own-they do not 'behave' as they were originally intended. Something about the character the author has come to envision no longer would ring true were it forced into such a slot. While the character is not a real person, it has to have an internal consistency.

James is hardly such a character; he is such a tiny presence in the books, as to be minuscule. What we are told does have internal consistency.

While Freud was the first one to originate the theory, it hardly died with him, and this theory is still a large factor in psychopathology of children, which I think would apply as at the years we are looking at, we would be dealing with children and adolescents. There are also some other interesting things we could look into along with that: such as attachment theory as applied to Snape, but that is hardly for the James thread.

Did a masters in developmental psychology and Freud was never really considered and neither was attachment theory really (although obviously I know the basics on this). European psychology has always had a different emphasis and point of concern then American. Freud was never as successful here as he was in America and nativism, for example, is generally widely criticised here but I know that many American psycholoists promote it heavily.

SWM is rather like a vacuum. We see James in a bad light, certainly, but the reason that scene is deemed SWM is the slur Snape hurled at Lily, which effectively ended their friendship. It had little to do with James' jinxes unless Snape blames James for what came out of his own mouth.

I know. My point is that what we saw in the Pensieve was real, and not a biased account of the situation. From what I saw in that Pensieve, I acn conclude James acted cruelly and arrogantly, and from what he said to Sirius and Lily, it seemes it wasn't an isolated occasion. Then Sirius and Lupin confirm he was an idiot at 15 and that Sirius wasn't proud of what they did. I think that is sufficient to say that James was indeed an arrogant bully at 15. The he changed and grew up, we know that as well.

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...

Excellent, excellent point! Justification. Maybe Snape's motivation for the poor decisions he made really was engendered by his feelings for James, and maybe not...but he can always pretend to himself that it was, as long as he harbors that enmity. To grow out of his hatred would mean having to admit his monumental mistakes were baseless and without justification.

And that leads to another dichotomy between the two men's characters: James doesn't seem to have needed to justify himself or his actions. He was who he was and did what he did, no excuses.


On a slightly different note, while rereading the series after Book 7 I was struck by the perfect bookending moments when in Book 1 Malfoy tells Harry at Madam Malkins' he'll probably leave school if he's not sorted into Slytherin...and in Book 7 Snape sneers when he overhears James saying he'll leave if he DOES end up in Slytherin. We've got the Draco/Harry and the Snape/James relationships laid out succinctly with their attendant biases and predilections. These paired relationships neatly mirror each other, so this could be a further clue that we are to look on James as a positive figure even though we know so little about him. We do know a great deal about Harry, his mirror image in the pairings, and Harry is good. And as enigmatic as Snape is, we clearly see how his own mirror image, Draco, was a nasty little critter until he started to realize how drastic and dangerous his choices were...but by then it was too late. He was stuck and had to let his fate play out, much as Snape did. Snape's end was certainly ignominious, his lifeblood and memories just leaking away, and Draco's portrayal in the story just sort of fizzles out, too. After all their craftiness and cleverness and the driving force of their envy and animosity, neither one goes out with a bang (as James did) or a sense of fulfillment (like Harry). These parallels may be a further hint to how we should view James' character.

On a slightly different note, while rereading the series after Book 7 I was struck by the perfect bookending moments when in Book 1 Malfoy tells Harry at Madam Malkins' he'll probably leave school if he's not sorted into Slytherin...and in Book 7 Snape sneers when he overhears James saying he'll leave if he DOES end up in Slytherin. We've got the Draco/Harry and the Snape/James relationships laid out succinctly with their attendant biases and predilections. These paired relationships neatly mirror each other, so this could be a further clue that we are to look on James as a positive figure even though we know so little about him. We do know a great deal about Harry, his mirror image in the pairings, and Harry is good. And as enigmatic as Snape is, we clearly see how his own mirror image, Draco, was a nasty little critter until he started to realize how drastic and dangerous his choices were...but by then it was too late. He was stuck and had to let his fate play out, much as Snape did. Snape's end was certainly ignominious, his lifeblood and memories just leaking away, and Draco's portrayal in the story just sort of fizzles out, too. After all their craftiness and cleverness and the driving force of their envy and animosity, neither one goes out with a bang (as James did) or a sense of fulfillment (like Harry). These parallels may be a further hint to how we should view James' character.Actually, the pairing in that scene is James/Draco and Snape/Harry. James says he'd leave, if he were in Slytherin, using the same words Draco used to say he'd leave, if he were in Hufflepuff. James and Draco were the privileged boys, while Snape and Harry were the neglected ones. James shows his prejudice as clearly as Draco does. And, it's not that Snape sneers when he "overhears" that James will leave if he ends up in Slytherin. It's James who butts in and is unpleasant to Snape when he overhears Snape telling Lily that she should be in Slytherin. James may have grown to be a good person, but the Pensieve memories we see don't show him in a good light.

On a slightly different note, while rereading the series after Book 7 I was struck by the perfect bookending moments when in Book 1 Malfoy tells Harry at Madam Malkins' he'll probably leave school if he's not sorted into Slytherin...and in Book 7 Snape sneers when he overhears James saying he'll leave if he DOES end up in Slytherin.

In fairness James had looked at Snape first and gone: 'who wants to be in slytherin'. Lupin (or Sirius can't remember) were certainly accurate when they said James and Snape hated eachother from the first moment they met. They literally did, just two completely different people in every respect.

We've got the Draco/Harry and the Snape/James relationships laid out succinctly with their attendant biases and predilections. These paired relationships neatly mirror each other, so this could be a further clue that we are to look on James as a positive figure even though we know so little about him. We do know a great deal about Harry, his mirror image in the pairings, and Harry is good. And as enigmatic as Snape is, we clearly see how his own mirror image, Draco, was a nasty little critter until he started to realize how drastic and dangerous his choices were...but by then it was too late. He was stuck and had to let his fate play out, much as Snape did. Snape's end was certainly ignominious, his lifeblood and memories just leaking away, and Draco's portrayal in the story just sort of fizzles out, too. After all their craftiness and cleverness and the driving force of their envy and animosity, neither one goes out with a bang (as James did) or a sense of fulfillment (like Harry). These parallels may be a further hint to how we should view James' character.

Completely agree with that, Harry and Draco's relationship started out as one picking on the other (Draco on Harry) but it developed into something much more mutual and complex, and in the end they seemed to have a mutual understanding for one other, although obviously they were never going to sit down and have a drink together. However at different times in that relationship Harry seems to have been more like Snape and James like Draco.

If Lily hadn't been involved maybe James and Snape relationship would have gone the same way: she obviously perpetuated the acrimonious behaviour there, through no fault of her own.

We don't have any memories of Snape cursing James; yet we know it was an ongoing thing throughout their years together at Hogwarts. We also have a trove of examples of Snape's continuing malice toward James throughout the years Harry was at Hogwarts.

SWM is rather like a vacuum. We see James in a bad light, certainly, but the reason that scene is deemed SWM is the slur Snape hurled at Lily, which effectively ended their friendship. It had little to do with James' jinxes unless Snape blames James for what came out of his own mouth.

[removed] Without getting both sides of the story its wrong to judge James and Sirius...

If what Remus and Sirius say is unbiased then SWM is also unbiased,as it is provided by a magical object.So most conclusions from that are canon,just wanted to say that.

You can't compare harry/Draco to James/Snape in my opinion.Correct me if I'm wrong but after the initial encounter between Harry and Draco,most confrontations are started by Draco with reference to Harry being the 'boy who lived' or Ron being a weasley and his families financial situation(and later Hermione non-magical heritage).If Draco hadn't continued I doubt the trio would have been bothered.they wouldn't be friends but the enmity wouldn't have been that severe.
James and Snape,we'll never know who was the constant instigator.I personally can't see popularity and skill a reason for their on-going enemity.

But you judge Snape through a story told only through Harry's eyes.

This is not an accurate statement. We judge the story through what happens around Harry. While Harry may have prejudices (sp?) one can certainly choose whether or not to accept his POV. However, Harry does not make the charcters do or say anything. The charcters themselves (or JKR thorough them to be literal) speak for themselves and their own experience.

The story is told through Harry's POV. Harry and Snape don't get along so it is always Snape's fault. Regardless of how many times Snape saved Harry's life throughout the series it is diminished as Harry's POV is "bad" Snape.

James anyone?

The story is told through Harry's POV. Harry and Snape don't get along so it is always Snape's fault. Regardless of how many times Snape saved Harry's life throughout the series it is diminished as Harry's POV is "bad" Snape.

I think you missed my point. Much of the book is Harry's speculation. No one is denying that. However, you yourself stated that the evidence of Harry being saved is right in front of us. Harry did not make anybody save him. He never asked to be saved. He doesn't make people do and say things that are not true. His interpretation is up for debate , obviously, but the why and how of what is said and done around Harry is not determined by Harry. A perfect example of this is Dumbledore. Harry wants Dumbledore not to trust Snape. Dumbledore does anyway. Dumbledore is not basing his actions on what Harry wants or percieves. Dumbledore knows more. The same can be true of any other character that interacts with Harry. Things are said and done, decisions are made, all without Harry's input. Those facts can't be changed just because of Harry's interpretation.

I for one would be glad to judge James without having it revolve around Snape. This thread isn't about proving that James was better than Snape. Only that James grew from a prat to a brave member of the Order. To base the rest of his life on this incident with Snape is to disregard everything else he ever did.

But we can't wholly discuss the things we never saw him do and barely heard about either.

But we can't wholly discuss the things we never saw him do and barely heard about either.

This is true to a certain extent. But what about things that we know that he did do? He defied Voldemort, not once, or twice, but three times (only Harry has done it more). I believe it is even stated somewhere that people wondered why the dark lord never tried recruiting him since he exemplified all the qualities Voldy held so dear. I wonder what it was that he did? Was it by using his animagus ability, the cloak? The why's and hows of it are of extrem interest to me, after all it made him a target of one of the most evil wizards in the world. It has often been said how powerful he was i his magical ability. He was fifteen when he turned himself into a stag! That's pretty impressive! He was a natural at Quidditch-which implies athletisism and quick reflexes. He was vain--he messed up his own hair---quite a difference from Harry who couldn't keep his hair straight if his life depended on it. He came from a wealthy family and and was an only child yet he did not fall into the same trap as the Draco and the other Malfoys--he did not give in to the dark side. He was wealthy. He didn't have to work, but he did, anyway--which shows a desire to make something good of himself--that he didn't think he was above working for a living. He was a great father to Harry, I don't think their can be any denying that...there is much to talk about--to make him one dimensional--on a thread that is supposed to discuss his charcter in full seems futile.

He didn't have to work, but he did, anyway--which shows a desire to make something good of himself--that he didn't think he was above working for a living.
What makes you think that he worked? I don't remember ever hearing that.

I
I for one would be glad to judge James without having it revolve around Snape. This thread isn't about proving that James was better than Snape. Only that James grew from a prat to a brave member of the Order. To base the rest of his life on this incident with Snape is to disregard everything else he ever did.

But that's not actually the point of the thread. The point of the thread is to discuss James, not to agree that James grew from a prat to a brave member of the Order. Not everyone agrees with that, and that's why we discuss these things.


Did a masters in developmental psychology and Freud was never really considered and neither was attachment theory really (although obviously I know the basics on this). European psychology has always had a different emphasis and point of concern then American. Freud was never as successful here as he was in America and nativism, for example, is generally widely criticised here but I know that many American psycholoists promote it heavily.

Ah, okay! Yeah, I can easily see that. We have such different opinions, across our pond! Though do you take issue with the theory that individuals have a tendency to suppress or alter or justify unpleasant memories? (Mind you, I'll admit it's been carried to a bit of a mania over here sometimes, but I think the underlying theory is sound) Also, we should definitely debate this on the Snape thread when I get back from more work. :)

The point of the thread is to discuss James, not to agree that James grew from a prat to a brave member of the Order. Not everyone agrees with that, and that's why we discuss these things.
Unfortunately for those who disagree, that is what JKR says about James. So basically canon. But of course we are all free to form our own opinions.

What makes you think that he worked? I don't remember ever hearing that.

In an interview JKR said that James didn't need a well paying profession because he inheirited enough money.
I doubt he continued to work while he was under the Fidelius Charm.

In an interview JKR said that James didn't need a well paying profession because he inheirited enough money.
I doubt he continued to work while he was under the Fidelius Charm.
Yes, that's the only time I remember him being mentioned in relation to work. She didn't actually say that he worked, though.

Yes, that's the only time I remember him being mentioned in relation to work. She didn't actually say that he worked, though.

I guess you could say that, but it was implied....
If he did have a job, he didn't have a job that made him very busy. At the time, James was really busy with the Order.

I guess you could say that, but it was implied....I never felt it was implied.
If he did have a job, he didn't have a job that made him very busy. At the time, James was really busy with the Order.That's the main reason I doubt he actually had a job: he didn't need one to support his family and he was working for the Order.

Though do you take issue with the theory that individuals have a tendency to suppress or alter or justify unpleasant memories?

No I think in some cases, where terribly bad experiences occur, that it is pretty common. I for instance have no memory whatsoever of one particular experience. As regards Sirius, Lupin and James, I don't really think that this is at play. Snape, to me, seems a much more likely candidate for something like this, then Lupin would.

I wonder whether James suspected Lupin of being the spy (as Sirius seemed to)? And what exactly Peter said to them to ensure that he was made secret keeper? Do people think that James just under - estimated his intelligence? Lupin seemed to think that it was because he was too trusting, if that is true then why Peter?

That's the main reason I doubt he actually had a job: he didn't need one to support his family and he was working for the Order.

JK said he didn't need a well paying job. As you said he didn't need one to support his family. However, if he didn't actually have a job then why not say so? Why would she not say that James forwent a career to focus full-time on the Order? The chances are that James (as nearly everyone else inside the Order) had a life outside of work. Perhaps he was a budding chef, or wrote articles freelance for the Daily Prophet, maybe he was writing a novel, or did something boring (ala Percy and cauldron bottoms) during the day and got his thrills at night with the Order. Even if the Order was his job that still speaks well of his character that he wasn't a complete diletante... the fact that he was risking his life instead of living the easy life when he could have shows great character.

If he did have a job, he didn't have a job that made him very busy. At the time, James was really busy with the Order.That's the main reason I doubt he actually had a job: he didn't need one to support his family and he was working for the Order.And we have the clue that Vernon (or really his sister) saw James as unemployed.

That's the main reason I doubt he actually had a job: he didn't need one to support his family and he was working for the OrderJK said he didn't need a well paying job. As you said he didn't need one to support his family. However, if he didn't actually have a job then why not say so? Why would she not say that James forwent a career to focus full-time on the Order? The problem is that the whole interview where she was asked about 'what James and Lily 'did'' came up relatively soon after GoF/bk4 was finished - BEFORE bk5/OotP - so she couldn't discuss the Order or that the Potters were devoting their time entirely to it, because we did not know about the Order yet.

America Online chat transcript, AOL.com, 19 October 2000

What did James and Lily Potter do when they were alive?
Well, I can't go into too much detail, because you're going to find out in future books. But James inherited plenty of money, so he didn't need a well-paid profession. You'll find out more about both Harry's parents later

...Even if the Order was his job that still speaks well of his character that he wasn't a complete diletante... the fact that he was risking his life instead of living the easy life when he could have shows great character.I don't believe anyone said he WAS a diletante. Just that they did not believe he had a job.

Considering Lucius seemed to take the Potters' 'sticking their noses where they didn't belong' somewhat 'personally' - I've always wondered whether James was using HIS money in a similar way to we see Lucius do. James as political funder and influencer. He apparently had the charm for it. Or possibly as a speaker for the Order (they don't seem to have been nearly as secretive in VW1) He was good at playing to the crowd.

But he could hardly do much of a job (as in 9-5) once they went into hiding - which we can NOW deduce was at least a FEW months BEFORE the Fidelius (based on Lily's letter). I still favor their going into hiding within a month or two of Harry's birth (based on the interviews tying going into hiding with Harry's Christening and the unlikelihood that Voldy needed a spy at all before the Potters went into hiding).

I'm going to chime in here...so far I've stayed out of this thread (heard scary things about it!) but want to just jump in with my opinion of James.
Like almost every teenage boy I have ever known, James was a prat who thought pretty highly of himself at fifteen. And like most of those boys, he grew up. Did he do things that were bullyish and mean as a kid? In my opinion, yes. Does that mean he was doomed to never change? No.
I am a firm believer that Lily would never, ever have married the James we saw in the Pensieve from Snape's memories. That means he had to have changed and become a better person. There is no other alternative, because of who Lily was and the things that mattered to her. If she could let go of her childhood friend because he wouldn't grow up and be the good person she knew he could be, she wouldn't have married James, who started with much less credit in her book.

The problem is that the whole interview where she was asked about 'what James and Lily 'did'' came up relatively soon after GoF/bk4 was finished - BEFORE bk5/OotP - so she couldn't discuss the Order or that the Potters were devoting their time entirely to it, because we did not know about the Order yet.
Yes, and as she said we'd find out what James and Lily did, I assume she meant their work in the Order - nothing else was ever revealed. Therefore, I assume that James never had a job, since he didn't need one.

I'm going to chime in here...so far I've stayed out of this thread (heard scary things about it!) but want to just jump in with my opinion of James.
Like almost every teenage boy I have ever known, James was a prat who thought pretty highly of himself at fifteen. And like most of those boys, he grew up. Did he do things that were bullyish and mean as a kid? In my opinion, yes. Does that mean he was doomed to never change? No.
I am a firm believer that Lily would never, ever have married the James we saw in the Pensieve from Snape's memories. That means he had to have changed and become a better person. There is no other alternative, because of who Lily was and the things that mattered to her. If she could let go of her childhood friend because he wouldn't grow up and be the good person she knew he could be, she wouldn't have married James, who started with much less credit in her book.
As far as I am concerned that is a perfect assessment of the situation. :tu:

Yes, and as she said we'd find out what James and Lily did, I assume she meant their work in the Order - nothing else was ever revealed. Therefore, I assume that James never had a job, since he didn't need one.
Then why didn't JKR simply say that he was wealthy and didn't need to work. What she did say was that he didn't need a high-paying job, not that he didn't have a job.

Unfortunately for those who disagree, that is what JKR says about James. So basically canon. But of course we are all free to form our own opinions.

SWM is also canon,but people question it because it's given by Snape,and some consider it unfair to judge by it.
I wonder whether James suspected Lupin of being the spy (as Sirius seemed to)? And what exactly Peter said to them to ensure that he was made secret keeper? Do people think that James just under - estimated his intelligence? Lupin seemed to think that it was because he was too trusting, if that is true then why Peter?

I never believed that James suspected Remus,seeing as it was never confirmed,but I noticed in the letter Lily sends Sirius,theres no mention of him.Maybe it just wasn't relevant to mention him.Could there's be another reason?I'd hate to think James suspected Remus.

I'm going to chime in here...so far I've stayed out of this thread (heard scary things about it!) but want to just jump in with my opinion of James.

Oh dear have we become notorious?:lol:

I stand by the fact that at 15(maybe even 16) James and Snape were not better then each other.They were on the same level.Yes James became a better person later.

I stand by the fact that at 15(maybe even 16) James and Snape were not better then each other.They were on the same level.Yes James became a better person later.

I figure that is a pretty logical and seemingly accurate assumption, given the facts we have. I agree I think that that was the way things were.

[QUOTE][QUOTE]Actually, the pairing in that scene is James/Draco and Snape/Harry.
James says he'd leave, if he were in Slytherin, using the same words Draco used to say he'd leave, if he were in Hufflepuff. James and Draco were the privileged boys, while Snape and Harry were the neglected ones. James shows his prejudice as clearly as Draco does.

Absolutely, Draco/James vs Harry/Snape is one way to compare & contrast the four and it's valid. In fact, it makes for further richness and complexity in the story. But I was talking more about the equally valid allusions we can make to James/Harry vs Snape/Draco as a way of discerning JKR's intent, ie, clues to what can be deduced about James' true character. I rely heavily on such hints because as I've said before, James is a bit of a cypher to me.

And, it's not that Snape sneers when he "overhears" that James will leave if he ends up in Slytherin. It's James who butts in and is unpleasant to Snape when he overhears Snape telling Lily that she should be in Slytherin.

Not necesarily. I thought so, too, at first until I looked at that scene very carefully. (And I apologize in advance for the length of the explanation coming up!) Right after Snape mentions Slytherin to Lily, James looks over at him but continues talking to Sirius, saying he'd rather leave than be in Slytherin. He had shown no interest at all in Snape or Lily until his attention was arrested at the word "Slytherin" but he just as quickly turned back to Sirius. He may have seized on this as an opportunity to bait Snape, but from the way the scene is written it could as easily be that he and his "group of rowdy boys" just incorporated the word into their ongoing conversation--which may have been about the Houses to begin with, for all we know. After all, it was a hot topic for first years, as we've seen repeatedly. But we definitely know that James hates the Dark Arts, for which Slytherin is famous, and that alone could be why he looked over when he heard it mentioned.

He and Sirius continue talking about Sirius' family tradition and about Gryffindor without involving Snape or Lily in the conversation. James isn't being overtly unpleasant to Severus at all here. What James said about Slytherin could have been deliberate rudeness, or it might have been a typically thoughtless remark of an 11 yr old with no intention behind it at all, but either way it wasn't spoken to Snape. The conversation may be intentional for Snape's benefit, but it may not. If you're always-on-the-defensive Snape, you probably think it is.

Then Snape makes an insulting noise at James' mention of his father and Gryffindors being brave at heart and THAT'S when James zeroes in on Snape. Prior to this, he's either aware of Snape and Lily and purposely ignoring them, or he's aware but has no further interest in them beyond the word Slytherin. That is, until Snape mocks Gryffindor, and James challenges that.

Now Snape sneers and insults James directly (brawny-brainy) and Sirius retaliates with a comment, at which James laughs. James and Sirius both respond to Lily's "lofty voice" and James tries to trip Snape, and someone--we don't know who--calls Snape "Snivellus." In other words, the whole situation falls apart. But it was Snape who was the first to get personal, equating Gryffindors (and James' father) with mindless physicality. I hadn't picked up on it at first, probably because I was seeing the scene from Snape's point of view. But if you check it out, there's nothing to prove outright that James was the instigator. It's very open to interpretation, and we have been prepared to accept Snape's.

[QUOTE]James may have grown to be a good person, but the Pensieve memories we see don't show him in a good light.QUOTE]

Too true that the Pensieve memories don't show him off well! I don't think anything we see of James at school shows him in a very rosy light. I wasn't trying to imply that they do. I was describing the (to me, anyway) fascinating parallel between James' comments and Draco's, and how one views induction into Slytherin as grounds for leaving while the other indicates NOT getting into Slytherin could be grounds for leaving. (And yes, I'm aware Draco specifically referred to Hufflepuff but I knew people would get the point :)).

Then why didn't JKR simply say that he was wealthy and didn't need to work. As far as I'm concerned, that's what she did say.

Quote:

Then why didn't JKR simply say that he was wealthy and didn't need to work.
As far as I'm concerned, that's what she did say.
I agree, and I don't recall that she ever said the Potter's jobs would be "important" either. That was just alot of wild speculation.

I remember theories that James was going to be a scientist in the hidden room of the DoM, a famous quidditch player, an auror, or a joke shop owner like Fred/George. Any or all of those things could be true, but only JKR can tell us now, since it isn't in the canon.

I believe James's main importance is that he was Harry's father and he died young. He never really had much time to do anything except become a Dad.

We never even learned the "three ways" that Harry's family defied Voldemort! What was all that about? :rolleyes: Maybe it just doesn't matter.

I agree, and I don't recall that she ever said the Potter's jobs would be "important" either. That was just alot of wild speculation.
Well I didn't think it would be important. I figured he might have been an auror, but there didn't seem to be quite enough time for it, unless they had accelerated admittance then (and that isn't too far-fetched since it was a time of war). I didn't assume Quidditch player for him since that would pay well. Lots of people put Lily in the DoM so that they could claim she learned a secret to keep Harry alive, and I always reminded them that the protection was completely accidental.

I agree that his role was to die young (and bravely). Jo disposed of him, like she did his parents. Another role that could have been expanded was Ginny's. She really existed to be Harry's love interest. She could have done more during the fight at Hogwarts since we had been told that being a seventh daughter and the first one in generations meant she was powerful. But, instead, she kept getting shunted out of the way.

But we did see characteristics of his end up in Harry: the almost foolhardy bravery (which was actually needed if Harry were to be able to face up to his deadly challenges). The loyalty to friends helped Harry build strong relationships. The saving people thing of Harry's was part of that foolhardy bravery. But if Harry hadn't had that, he might not have walked barehanded to Voldemort to accept his fate (and again trigger the love protection). Even the flying skill saved Harry's life on several occasions.

So James didn't have a large role, but he passed important traits on to Harry. And I think we can assume he was an attentive and loving father, based on the two scenes we've been given (the smoke rings prior to the attack, and the baby broom photo). Jo has always been sparing with her backstory, and this is another case of that. And of course, James's other role was to be the focal point for Snape's animosity that unfortunately got transferred to Harry.

Right after Snape mentions Slytherin to Lily, James looks over at him but continues talking to Sirius, saying he'd rather leave than be in Slytherin. He had shown no interest at all in Snape or Lily until his attention was arrested at the word "Slytherin" but he just as quickly turned back to Sirius. He may have seized on this as an opportunity to bait Snape, but from the way the scene is written it could as easily be that he and his "group of rowdy boys" just incorporated the word into their ongoing conversation--which may have been about the Houses to begin with, for all we know. After all, it was a hot topic for first years, as we've seen repeatedly. But we definitely know that James hates the Dark Arts, for which Slytherin is famous, and that alone could be why he looked over when he heard it mentioned.

He and Sirius continue talking about Sirius' family tradition and about Gryffindor without involving Snape or Lily in the conversation. James isn't being overtly unpleasant to Severus at all here. What James said about Slytherin could have been deliberate rudeness, or it might have been a typically thoughtless remark of an 11 yr old with no intention behind it at all, but either way it wasn't spoken to Snape. The conversation may be intentional for Snape's benefit, but it may not. If you're always-on-the-defensive Snape, you probably think it is.

Then Snape makes an insulting noise at James' mention of his father and Gryffindors being brave at heart and THAT'S when James zeroes in on Snape. Prior to this, he's either aware of Snape and Lily and purposely ignoring them, or he's aware but has no further interest in them beyond the word Slytherin. That is, until Snape mocks Gryffindor, and James challenges that.

Now Snape sneers and insults James directly (brawny-brainy) and Sirius retaliates with a comment, at which James laughs. James and Sirius both respond to Lily's "lofty voice" and James tries to trip Snape, and someone--we don't know who--calls Snape "Snivellus." In other words, the whole situation falls apart. But it was Snape who was the first to get personal, equating Gryffindors (and James' father) with mindless physicality. I hadn't picked up on it at first, probably because I was seeing the scene from Snape's point of view. But if you check it out, there's nothing to prove outright that James was the instigator. It's very open to interpretation, and we have been prepared to accept Snape's.I agree that the reader has been prepped to accept Harry's interpretation of these events (as even the Prince's tale is from Harry's point-of-view), which is closer to Snape's perspective than James's in this chapter. However, I don't think it was just that James subconsciously incorporated "Slytherin" into his ongoing conversation with Sirius. The text says: One of the boys sharing the compartment, who had shown no interest at all in Lily or Snape until that point, looked round at the word...(UK ed, p. 538). So James hears them mention "Slytherin," looks to see who is was, and then makes the remark that shows his prejudice against Slytherin. No, he doesn't make his comment to Snape and Lily, but he'd involved them by responding to the word and looking at them. Snape clearly has prejudices against Gryffindor, as well, but, if James was talking about the Houses with Sirius before responding to the mention of Slytherin, Snape and Lily didn't involve themselves in it. It was James who intruded upon Snape's conversation with Lily.

After hearing James talk about Gryffindor in such a reverent way, Snape makes a "small, disparaging noise" (UK ed, p. 539), which probably would have gone unnoticed, if James really hadn't been paying attention to him. "James turned on him" and said: "Got a problem with that?" James is on the offense here. Snape reveals his own prejudice with a "slight sneer" and says, "No. If you'd rather be brawny than brainy -" Interestingly, Sirius cuts across it to ask what House Lily preferred, which I would interpret as an attempt to lower hostilities; but, James "roared with laughter" at that point, which made Lily feel as if she was being insulted. When she and Snape go to leave, James tries to trip Snape and one of the boys calls him "Snivellus." I don't see Harry ever doing anything like that to anyone, not even in his moody OotP days. As a boy, James is much more like Draco than Harry.

Please, that scene just showed several kids all jockeying for self-importance. James, Sirius, and Snape all acted somewhat rude and insulting to each other. Lily, being a muggleborn had no idea which houses had what characteristics. And it really wouldn't be like her to try to out trash-talk the others, so she decided to leave.

If you think about the atmosphere in the wizarding world at the time, Slytherin House had a less than sterling reputation.

Maybe so, but it certainly settles the matter of "who was in instagater".

Something else. Why would James be showing his prejudice against Slytherin when Voldemort and most of his followers were from Slytherin. There was a war on, and pureblood prejudice was a serious problem. Slytherin house was on the wrong side of all those issues.

After hearing James talk about Gryffindor in such a reverent way, Snape makes a "small, disparaging noise" (UK ed, p. 539), which probably would have gone unnoticed, if James really hadn't been paying attention to him. "James turned on him" and said: "Got a problem with that?" James is on the offense here. Snape reveals his own prejudice with a "slight sneer" and says, "No. If you'd rather be brawny than brainy -" Interestingly, Sirius cuts across it to ask what House Lily preferred, which I would interpret as an attempt to lower hostilities; but, James "roared with laughter" at that point, which made Lily feel as if she was being insulted. When she and Snape go to leave, James tries to trip Snape and one of the boys calls him "Snivellus." I don't see Harry ever doing anything like that to anyone, not even in his moody OotP days. As a boy, James is much more like Draco than Harry.
"Big Head Boy" - that's what I thought when I read that.
Something else. Why would James be showing his prejudice against Slytherin when Voldemort and most of his followers were from Slytherin. There was a war on, and pureblood prejudice was a serious problem. Slytherin house was on the wrong side of all those issues.

Was the war already going on when they were eleven? And if these were just kids being kids, why would James be making some political point?

Besides, it "is" the purebloods who are showing their prejudice - James and Sirius. Only it is Draco in reverse.

Snape is a half-blood and Lily is a Muggleborn. Also, Snape's reason for wanting to be in Slytherin had nothing to do with Voldemort.

We never even learned the "three ways" that Harry's family defied Voldemort! What was all that about? :rolleyes: Maybe it just doesn't matter.

Honestly, I really think that was not anything particularly important. It was simply another way to choose which baby precisely was being referenced. Dumbeldore had by that time defied Voldemort far, far more times than three...as had various other members of the Order, especially folks like Mad-Eye Moody. James and Lily were simply one of the only two couples with a child of the right age who had done it precisely three times. Or perhaps one of the only two who had done it /as/ a couple. I don't think it's particularly important.

Something else. Why would James be showing his prejudice against Slytherin when Voldemort and most of his followers were from Slytherin. There was a war on, and pureblood prejudice was a serious problem. Slytherin house was on the wrong side of all those issues.

I imagine that James was more removed from his pureblood parents than other families were from their own. We know that James' parents were elderly, and thus I think it would have only exaggerated the gulf between them. Many children believe their parents are 'old fogies', 'out of touch'. How much more would it be easy for James to believe that when his parents were actually of a generation where they could be his grandparents? His parents may well have expressed prejudiced views, or their relatives might, but there would be no reason for James to pick up on that.

I agree that the reader has been prepped to accept Harry's interpretation of these events
We were seeing a pensieve memory. The is no interpretation from Harry. Actually, everything we've seen in the books is completely straightforward. This is strictly narrative provided by JKR. There is nothing distorted or subjective in those scenes and most scenes we view.

Only when Harry and his friends draw conclusions or try to guess or interpret events can there be a misinterpretation. But that doesn't mean the event didn't happen, it only means that they guessed wrong about what it meant. Nothing we see or hear is changed, only the reason for it may differ, since the narrative does provide description and dialog that remains unchanged. So when Hermione decided that Snape was trying to jinx Harry in SS/PS, she came to the wrong conclusion. But the events happened right before our eyes. Snape was muttering under his breath, only they guessed wrong what it meant, since knocking over Quirrell stopped the jinx. Setting Snape on fire had nothing to do with ending the jinx. That's where they guessed wrong. But later on we were shown that clarification.

Hagrid guessed wrong about why Snape was arguing with Dumbledore in HBP. But the argument happened with the exact words Hagrid thought he heard. There is a big difference been what is provided to the reader in narrative description, and what character sometimes wrongly think. And unless we see something like Harry thought, or Harry decided, or it seemed to Harry like... then the scene is just author provided narrative, where we sit on the character's shoulder and see the events.

To use Jane Austen's Emma as an example, Emma is mistaken throughout the book about people's motives and interpersonal interests and loves. But the events unfolded exactly as portrayed, only Emma's interpretation (her running dialog of her impressions and plans) presented to the reader was incorrect. And at the end, Austen, like all good authors who use misdirection, made sure the reader knew the correct interpretation by showing the true intent of all the characters, and the proper interpretation of the scenes Emma misconstrued. But the scenes and events and dialog did not change, only the true intent was revealed.

JKR does the same thing. Every time she has used misdirection she has clarified what really happened. And in every case, the scenes, description, dialog, and events are unchanged, only the intent or true meaning is revealed.

It makes no sense to claim that the pensieve scenes were distorted by Harry. We didn't see them through his eyes. We saw them the same time he did. We literally jumped into the pensieve with Harry.

We were seeing a pensieve memory. The is no interpretation from Harry. Actually, everything we've seen in the books is completely straightforward. This is strictly narrative provided by JKR. There is nothing distorted or subjective in those scenes and most scenes we view.

Only when Harry and his friends draw conclusions or try to guess or interpret events can there be a misinterpretation. But that doesn't mean the event didn't happen, it only means that they guessed wrong about what it meant. Nothing we see or hear is changed, only the reason for it may differ, since the narrative does provide description and dialog that remains unchanged. So when Hermione decided that Snape was trying to jinx Harry in SS/PS, she came to the wrong conclusion. But the events happened right before our eyes. Snape was muttering under his breath, only they guessed wrong what it meant, since knocking over Quirrell stopped the jinx. Setting Snape on fire had nothing to do with ending the jinx. That's where they guessed wrong. But later on we were shown that clarification.

Hagrid guessed wrong about why Snape was arguing with Dumbledore in HBP. But the argument happened with the exact words Hagrid thought he heard. There is a big difference been what is provided to the reader in narrative description, and what character sometimes wrongly think. And unless we see something like Harry thought, or Harry decided, or it seemed to Harry like... then the scene is just author provided narrative, where we sit on the character's shoulder and see the events.


While I do not agree with you that JKR always clarifies every scene or every wrong thought a character has, I agree with you about narrative vs spoken/thoughts/etc. This is why I argue that people may be biased, but events never are. People get things wrong. People misremember. People have motivations. The narrative has no such things attached to it.

Sirius cuts across it to ask what House Lily preferred, which I would interpret as an attempt to lower hostilities; but, James "roared with laughter" at that point, which made Lily feel as if she was being insulted.

Actually he says' where're are you hoping to go,seeing as your neither',he was replying to Snapes 'brawny over brainy comment',it was an insult directed at Snape,implying he was neither.Thats how I understood it.

Something else. Why would James be showing his prejudice against Slytherin when Voldemort and most of his followers were from Slytherin. There was a war on, and pureblood prejudice was a serious problem. Slytherin house was on the wrong side of all those issues.

The thing is children,especially pure-blood children,see their parents house as the best.They usually know all the houses and it's no small fact that slytherins are more towards the dark arts.That and also I think the competition between Gryffindor and Slytherin had been going on for a long time.Wanting to be in Gryffindor,he'd think little of Slytherin.

Has they're been a mention about James parents house?He says his father was in Gryffindor,would this imply his mother was from another house?It's just he could have said 'my parents',unless being a boy,he was aspiring to be like his father and only saw fit to mention him.

Now that we've had this lovely chat on literary analysis any chance we could get back on James? Preferably without ripping each others throats out. :lol:

"Big Head Boy" - that's what I thought when I read that.

Was the war already going on when they were eleven? And if these were just kids being kids, why would James be making some political point?

Yeah the war was in full flight when James/Snape and co. were children. I have no idea how long it had actually been going on for, however Molly and Arthur were a good many years older then them and the war had been ongoing when they got married (which I believe Ginny/Molly said was when they were straight out of school).

Now that we've had this lovely chat on literary analysis any chance we could get back on James? Preferably without ripping each others throats out. :lol:

*laughs*

'Does anyone think James engaged in literary analysis while at Hogwarts'? *runs away quickly and ducks* :)

In all seriousness, though, I do have a question about James, though it may not be answerable, as it's all speculation.

We know that James' parents were extremely wealthy, in the wizarding world. We see this especially with how very much gold was left to Harry in Gringott's. Do we think that Harry also inherited other property? It seems strange that Harry inherited 12 Grimmauld Place from Sirius, but no property from his father. While one could argue that James and Lily's 'little house' was destroyed by Voldemort, what about his parent's house? He was their privileged only son, and I think we would have seen them around if they had been alive by the time Harry was born. Why doesn't Harry have a house full of Potter family heirlooms?

Has they're been a mention about James parents house?He says his father was in Gryffindor,would this imply his mother was from another house? It's just he could have said 'my parents', unless being a boy,he was aspiring to be like his father and only saw fit to mention him.
We don't know the house of James's mother. :) So I think he was trying to be like his father. I'm sure someone will ask JKR now, lol.

I think it's interesting that James already seemed to know about the sword of Gryffindor, though.

Can someone make a thread for this in Discussion? I think Jessica would rather if we're going to have a really long and drawn out conversation about this, we take it elsewhere, as the mod-cough to bring things back towards James seemed to say.

I've deleted some off topic posts, post my warning. I'm leaving the ones before my warning with the request that we keep this on James.

We don't know the house of James's mother. :) So I think he was trying to be like his father. I'm sure someone will ask JKR now, lol.

I think it's interesting that James already seemed to know about the sword of Gryffindor, though.

You think?I thought it was just a logical motion to make with being brave,you knowhaving a sward in your hand.If he did then he was from a wizarding family,maybe stories about Gryffindor and other famous wizards were frequently told(like Dumbledore defeating Grindelwald)

Then why didn't JKR simply say that he was wealthy and didn't need to work. What she did say was that he didn't need a high-paying job, not that he didn't have a job.
That rather implies James may have done voluntary work or something idealistic with a low wage. Of course, dedicating himself full-time to the Order would fall into that category too. I hope Jo hasn't forgotten her promise to tell us what James and Lily did. Since it wasn't in the book, she'll have to put it on the website!

You think?I thought it was just a logical motion to make with being brave,you knowhaving a sward in your hand.If he did then he was from a wizarding family,maybe stories about Gryffindor and other famous wizards were frequently told(like Dumbledore defeating Grindelwald)
You're probably right. :)

[QUOTE]Actually he says' where're are you hoping to go,seeing as your neither',he was replying to Snapes 'brawny over brainy comment',it was an insult directed at Snape,implying he was neither.Thats how I understood it.

Yes, this is what the US version says. Perhaps the UK version is different in this scene. Just the slightest change such as what the other poster indicates--James insulting Lily instead of Snape--might alter things a bit. I'd be interested to know how the UK text goes.

That and also I think the competition between Gryffindor and Slytherin had been going on for a long time.Wanting to be in Gryffindor,he'd think little of Slytherin.

Yes, that competition had been going on since just a few years after Hogwarts was founded "over a thousand years ago," according to Professor Binns. In Book 2 he relates how there was "a serious argument" between Salazar and Godric over whether Muggleborns should be admitted to the school, and Salazar left as a result. There was a rift between him and the other three founders already but the serious argument is attributed to him and Godric specifically.

If James was enamored of his father's House, and modern Gryffindors do seem to have their founder's attitude of openness about blood status for the most part, he'd be unlikely, don't you think, to have a prejudice against non-Purebloods? Another poster said something about James and Sirius as Purebloods picking on Severus and Lily as a Halfbood and a Muggleborn. But the fact he's a Pureblood himself doesn't automatically make James prejudiced. And since he has no idea who Severus or Lily are at this point, I doubt their blood status could have much to do with his initial reaction to them. It's more likely he's responding to the mention of Slytherin than to them personally, much the way someone from our world might be disparaging at the mention of a white supremacy group.

That's the impression I get from that scene, anyway. James is spoiled and pretty full of himself but he has no beef with Snape until the moment Slytherin is brought up, and Snape gives as good as he gets. It starts with the Slytherin/Gryffindor rivalry, then Snape's natural charm :rolleyes: combined with James' natural arrogance do the rest.

Do we have any information about James' attitude toward other Slytherins?

James hated the Dark Arts so you can figure how he'd be to Mulciber and Lucius and such.

Yes, this is what the US version says. Perhaps the UK version is different in this scene. Just the slightest change such as what the other poster indicates--James insulting Lily instead of Snape--might alter things a bit. I'd be interested to know how the UK text goes.The UK and US editions are identical at that part, except James's words about Gryffindor are italicized in the UK edition.That's the impression I get from that scene, anyway. James is spoiled and pretty full of himself but he has no beef with Snape until the moment Slytherin is brought up, and Snape gives as good as he gets. I don't really see it that way. James makes it clear that he finds Slytherin House inferior. Snape responds about Gryffindors being stupid. Sirius implies that Snape is both stupid and weak. James laughs at Sirius's insult. Lily says that they should go and, as they do, James tries to trip Snape and one of them calls him "Snivellus." How does Snape "give as good as he got?" :huh: It's like a less violent version of SWM.

Yes, this is what the US version says. Perhaps the UK version is different in this scene. Just the slightest change such as what the other poster indicates--James insulting Lily instead of Snape--might alter things a bit. I'd be interested to know how the UK text goes.


What I posted was from a U.K version.

Actually he says' where're are you hoping to go,seeing as your neither',he was replying to Snapes 'brawny over brainy comment',it was an insult directed at Snape,implying he was neither.Thats how I understood it.
Yes, this is what the US version says. Perhaps the UK version is different in this scene. Just the slightest change such as what the other poster indicates--James insulting Lily instead of Snape--might alter things a bit. I'd be interested to know how the UK text goes.
"Where're you hoping to go, seeing as you're neither?"Sirius (not James) was addressing Snape in both editions.

The UK and US editions are identical at that part, except James's words about Gryffindor are italicized in the UK edition.


Thank you!

[QUOTE]I don't really see it that way. James makes it clear that he finds Slytherin House inferior. Snape responds about Gryffindors being stupid. Sirius implies that Snape is both stupid and weak. James laughs at Sirius's insult. Lily says that they should go and, as they do, James tries to trip Snape and one of them calls him "Snivellus." How does Snape "give as good as he got?" :huh: It's like a less violent version of SWM.

Here's what I meant: first James says he doesn't want to be in Slytherin, which is definitely rude since he's sitting near a Slytherin hopeful when he says it, but it's not a personal attack and doesn't list any specifics about Slytherin House. Then he says he does want to be in Gryffindor, and Snape issues a comment that could be construed personally (especially by 11 yr olds) and with a specific reference about Gryffindors. Snape's not just holding his own, he's actually going one better!

It's after that when the situation devolves completely, because others get involved. And we do see James and Sirius ganging up on Snape, who can dispute that? But prior to that, when it was just James and Snape, which is the point I'm trying to make, it was Snape who was actually having more of a go at James than James had at him. That's all I've been trying to say.

I think I had missed that fine point at first because I had been set up since SWM to view them as James-the-Bully and Snape-the-Victim. In retrospect I have to conclude that they share equal responsibility for their feud. James, for providing the opening, Snape for jumping in with both feet, and both of them for allowing it to continue.

Afterwards the power was more on James' side, mainly because he had more backup. If Snape had been as popular in Slytherin as James was in Gryffindor, it probably would have been more equal, don't you think?

Thanks for your contributions to the discussion, by the way. I really enjoy analyzing a situation or a character, and your input has certainly made me look twice!

Here's what I meant: first James says he doesn't want to be in Slytherin, which is definitely rude since he's sitting near a Slytherin hopeful when he says it, but it's not a personal attack and doesn't list any specifics about Slytherin House. Then he says he does want to be in Gryffindor, and Snape issues a comment that could be construed personally (especially by 11 yr olds) and with a specific reference about Gryffindors. Snape's not just holding his own, he's actually going one better!I see James's and Snape's initial comments each on par with the other. James's "who wants to be in Slytherin?" sounds like asking why anyone would want to be in Slytherin, which is confirmed by his feeling that being put in Slytherin would be bad enough for him to leave Hogwarts. Snape's retort is that someone would only want to be in Gryffindor and not Slytherin, if they cared about brawn and not brains. To me, this retort is not quite as biting because it does imply that Gryffindor has a raison d'être, just not one that Snape finds important.If Snape had been as popular in Slytherin as James was in Gryffindor, it probably would have been more equal, don't you think?I assume you mean later in their school years and not on the train? If so, then, yes.Thanks for your contributions to the discussion, by the way. I really enjoy analyzing a situation or a character, and your input has certainly made me look twice!
Thank you! :blush:

Oh, geez, the trouble we go to to find something bad enough about James to get Snape's less than sociable ways off the hook!

I just listened to SWM again. A crowd gathers when James and Sirius light into Snape, many of them laughing and egging them on. Snape was "clearly unpopular" according to the text.

James disarmed Snape with "Expelliarmus!" Sirius stopped him with "Impedimenta!". Snape "let out a stream of mixed swear words and hexes, wandless, at which point James washed out his mouth with "Scourgify!"

Lily intervenes at that point and trades insults with James. Snape, recovered from Sirius' hex, uses "Sectumsempra!" on James, who, though bleeding, whirls around and used "Levicorpus!" on Snape. Upside down in the air, robes over his face, Snape's "skinny, pallid legs" and his "pair of graying underpants" bring cheers from the crowd.

My point is that the question we ought to be considering is what Snape had done to make himself so universally unpopular with the students at Hogwarts? It clearly wasn't just James and Sirius, although I suspect those two were among the few who could toe up with Snape in a duel.

It's a bit odd: I had never paid much attention to what was going on in the background during SWM. It surely sounds like Our Boy Snape had made himself persona non grata around the Hogwarts campus.

I see James's and Snape's initial comments each on par with the other. James's "who wants to be in Slytherin?" sounds like asking why anyone would want to be in Slytherin, which is confirmed by his feeling that being put in Slytherin would be bad enough for him to leave Hogwarts. Snape's retort is that someone would only want to be in Gryffindor and not Slytherin, if they cared about brawn and not brains. To me, this retort is not quite as biting because it does imply that Gryffindor has a raison d'être, just not one that Snape finds important.
I think this echos Harry's first train journey to Hogwarts. Let's compare:"Goodness, didn't you know, I'd have found out everything I could if it was me," said Hermione. "Do either of you know which house you'll be in? I've been asking around and I hope I'm in Gryffindor, it sounds by far the best, I hear Dumbledore himself was one, but I suppose Ravenclaw wouldn't be too bad ... Anyway, we'd better go and look for Neville's toad. You two had better change, you know, I expect we'll be there soon."

And she left, taking the toadless boy with her.

"Whatever house I'm in, I hope she's not in it," said Ron. He threw his want back into his trunk. "Stupid spell - George gave it to me, bet he knew it was a dud."

"What house are your brothers in?" asked Harry.

"Gryffindor," said Ron. Gloom seemed to be settling on him again. "Mum and Dad were in it too. I don't know what they'll say if I'm not. I don't suppose Ravenclaw would be too bad, but imagine if they put me in Slytherin."

"That's the house Vol- I mean You-Know-Who was in?"

"Yeah," said Ron. He flopped back into his seat, looking depressed.It seems that Slytherin house really does have a very bad reputation. In the final battle of Hogwarts, we saw that the house deserved that reputation, when most of the older Slytherins returned to join the battle on Voldemort's side. I'm not saying this justifies James and Sirius in being rude to Snape, but it does explain their attitude.

It seems that Slytherin house really does have a very bad reputation. In the final battle of Hogwarts, we saw that the house deserved that reputation, when most of the older Slytherins returned to join the battle on Voldemort's side. I'm not saying this justifies James and Sirius in being rude to Snape, but it does explain their attitude.

It sure does. I don't think there can be any questioin that Slytherin earned its bad reputation. The same is true of Snape. Anyone who expressed a keen interest in being sorted into Slytherin was going to be looked at askance.

Has anyone counted the number of lines we've heard from James, or the number of mentions he garners in the text? I have to think that it would only take a post or two to show everything he's ever said in HP-land. I just find it curious how we've managed to make so much of someone who appears so little :).

Then again...I'm as guilty of it as the next person :lol:

I'm a believer that James the 11-15 or so year old kid wasn't an angel; but he was quite popular, in part because he "stood up to" (insert own description here) the Slytherins and Snape. Sometime post-SWM he matured rapidly (someone like Lily would do this :lol:) and secured himself head boy, Lily, and DD's esteem, which counts for something in my book.

My point is that the question we ought to be considering is what Snape had done to make himself so universally unpopular with the students at Hogwarts?
That's not really something for the James thread, though. Besides, Snape didn't have to do anything to be unpopular. Plenty of average teenagers are unpopular at school because of their appearances and Snape was less blessed in that area than average.It seems that Slytherin house really does have a very bad reputation. In the final battle of Hogwarts, we saw that the house deserved that reputation, when most of the older Slytherins returned to join the battle on Voldemort's side. I'm not saying this justifies James and Sirius in being rude to Snape, but it does explain their attitude.I don't think we can assume that Slytherin had the same reputation in James's time as it did in Harry's. Voldemort had not yet risen to his full power and would not have been so associated with Slytherin. Sirius didn't seem to think anything was wrong with Slytherin House on that initial meeting - he volunteers that all his family have been in Slytherin and it didn't sound like he'd considered anything else until that point. Certainly, that none of the Slytherins would help at the Battle of Hogwarts 20 years later could not have been known in James's time.

I don't think we can assume that Slytherin had the same reputation in James's time as it did in Harry's. Voldemort had not yet risen to his full power and would not have been so associated with Slytherin. Sirius didn't seem to think anything was wrong with Slytherin House on that initial meeting - he volunteers that all his family have been in Slytherin and it didn't sound like he'd considered anything else until that point. Certainly, that none of the Slytherins would help at the Battle of Hogwarts 20 years later could not have been known in James's time.

I think we can. Voldemort left school in the 1940's. I don't think he stayed quiet long enough to avoid being negatively associated with Slytherin during the Marauders' years at Hogwarts. Hagrid said in SS that Voldemort began to amass power "about twenty years ago," which would have been nine years before Harry was born: roughly 1970. But that doesn't mean he was being a good boy and not causing trouble in the interim years between 1945 and 1970. Moreover, Slytherin's reputation for turning out dark wizards precedes Voldemort coming to Hogwarts.

I reposted in the Snape thread but there's already another conversation going there and the post was ignored.

[QUOTE=Chievrefueil;4713772]The UK and US editions are identical at that part, except James's words about Gryffindor are italicized in the UK edition.


Thank you!



Here's what I meant: first James says he doesn't want to be in Slytherin, which is definitely rude since he's sitting near a Slytherin hopeful when he says it, but it's not a personal attack and doesn't list any specifics about Slytherin House. Then he says he does want to be in Gryffindor, and Snape issues a comment that could be construed personally (especially by 11 yr olds) and with a specific reference about Gryffindors. Snape's not just holding his own, he's actually going one better!

It's after that when the situation devolves completely, because others get involved. And we do see James and Sirius ganging up on Snape, who can dispute that? But prior to that, when it was just James and Snape, which is the point I'm trying to make, it was Snape who was actually having more of a go at James than James had at him. That's all I've been trying to say.

I think I had missed that fine point at first because I had been set up since SWM to view them as James-the-Bully and Snape-the-Victim. In retrospect I have to conclude that they share equal responsibility for their feud. James, for providing the opening, Snape for jumping in with both feet, and both of them for allowing it to continue.

Afterwards the power was more on James' side, mainly because he had more backup. If Snape had been as popular in Slytherin as James was in Gryffindor, it probably would have been more equal, don't you think?

Thanks for your contributions to the discussion, by the way. I really enjoy analyzing a situation or a character, and your input has certainly made me look twice!

I agree with what you're saying.

I think we can. Voldemort left school in the 1940's. I don't think he stayed quiet long enough to avoid being negatively associated with Slytherin during the Marauders' years at Hogwarts. Hagrid said in SS that Voldemort began to amass power "about twenty years ago," which would have been nine years before Harry was born: roughly 1970. But that doesn't mean he was being a good boy and not causing trouble in the interim years between 1945 and 1970.That's not consistent with what Sirius says:'Were - were your parents Death Eaters as well?'

'No, no, but believe me, they thought Voldemort had the right idea, they were all for the purification of the wizarding race, getting rid of Muggle-borns and having pure-bloods in charge. They weren't alone, either, there were quite a few people, before Voldemort showed his true colours, who thought he had the right idea about things... they got cold feet when they saw what he was prepared to do to get power, though. But I bet my parents thought Regulus was a right little hero for joining up at first.'So, it sounds like Voldemort had still a reputation just for pureblood beliefs, but not such Dark methods, by the time Regulus joined him at 16. Since Regulus was younger, when James was a first year there's no reason Slytherin should have had such a reputation for Dark Magic.Moreover, Slytherin's reputation for turning out dark wizards precedes Voldemort coming to Hogwarts.Really? Could you provide a quote? I don't remember reading that. Grindelwald was out of Durmstrang.

Really? Could you provide a quote? I don't remember reading that. Grindelwald was out of Durmstrang.
Hagrid to Harry: There hasn't been a dark wizard who hadn't been in slytherin. (paraphrased, don't have the book with me)

Anyway, I fail to see the James connection.

I'm a believer that James the 11-15 or so year old kid wasn't an angel; but he was quite popular, in part because he "stood up to" (insert own description here) the Slytherins and Snape. Sometime post-SWM he matured rapidly (someone like Lily would do this ) and secured himself head boy, Lily, and DD's esteem, which counts for something in my book.
I think the latter is a very good point. Dumbledore and Lily both are references we can trust regarding James, given that we have such little first hand information about him.
(before the Snape fans jump on me): I do not disregard SWM. It existed and is a clear proof of James flaws. Nonetheless the posterior change of mind of Lily and Dumbledores, Minervas, Hagrids, Lupins, etc judgements of James might indicate that he did change and was a good person.

Just a random thought about James...

I was flipping through GOF, and noticed during the Priori Incantatem sequence that its James that instructs Harry on what to do, and when to do it, and he seems to be the "leader" of the apparitions, or whatever you'd call them.

Not sure where I'd go with this, maybe just something that shows James' capacity as a leader which he would eventually pass on to his son, be it of the Marauders, as Head Boy, or as a prominent member of the Order.

Hagrid to Harry: There hasn't been a dark wizard who hadn't been in slytherin. (paraphrased, don't have the book with me).Hagrid says that to Harry, though, and I was talking about the time James entered Hogwarts. I agree that by the time Harry entered Hogwarts, Slytherin had a very bad reputation because of Voldemort. I would also point out that Hagrid is wrong. Just like everyone else, he believed that Sirius, a Gryffindor, had gone bad and betrayed the Potters. It seems to me, then, that Hagrid's comment just displays the hyperbole of prejudice against Slytherin House.

[QUOTE=NutmegNevis;4713836]

I agree with what you're saying.

Thanks for that. :love:

I love how that scene is so ambiguously written. It really can be looked at either way (ie, from a James bias or a Snape bias) because it's so spare and open to interpretation. I can understand why proponents of either side feel as they do. Do you think JKR very carefully crafted it that way or it came about by accident?

Did she deliberately set out to make James a mystery or is that merely the result of her feeling she'd already shown enough, considering his limited involvement in the stories, and more was unnecessary? I know I've felt a little frustrated, right along with Harry, in wanting to know more about him.

So, it sounds like Voldemort had still a reputation just for pureblood beliefs, but not such Dark methods, by the time Regulus joined him at 16. Since Regulus was younger, when James was a first year there's no reason Slytherin should have had such a reputation for Dark Magic.Really? Could you provide a quote? I don't remember reading that. Grindelwald was out of Durmstrang.

I don't think so. Dumbledore's lessons with Harry in HBP describe a gang of kiddy death eaters led by Riddle. The Chamber of Secrets was opened during Riddle's time at Hogwarts. I'm pretty certain that's when the Slytherin reputation really went down the drain. Think of Sirius' parents, or Lucius Malfoy's family history. Slytherin straight down the line and all turned out to be dark wizards. Not necessarily warriors, mind you, but definitely dark.

IMO the Slytherin House began to go down hill when Slytherin himself made the fuss about only allowing pure bloods and then left the school. From that point on it just got worse and worse leading up to Deathly Hallows. I am sure by the time James started at Hogwarts Slytherin already had a negative reputation which just got worse and Voldemort grew in his powers. As James, Lily and Snape and the rest where at Hogwarts it is clear that the Death Eaters were becoming well known since Lily tried to get Snape to stop being frineds with Mulciber and Avery and she called them Snapes Death Eater friends.

Regardless of what James did as a teenager to me it is clear that he did grow up and he was well on his way if not already a completely responisble Husband and Father. Also no matter what James did bad to Snape to my knowledge he never once used Dark Magic to attack Snape but the same can not be said about Snape when he attacked James, now can it?

I think it's a shame that Jo showed us more of James' bad moments then his good.

Dumbledore's lessons with Harry in HBP describe a gang of kiddy death eaters led by Riddle. That may be, but there's no indication it was well known at the time James first went to Hogwarts.

We do not know exactly WHEN in 1970 VW1 begins. Remus said it lasted 11 years, so it would seem the war had been 'on' for about a year by the time they all go on their first train ride to Hogwarts (Sept. '71). That does not mean it was terribly 'noticeable' during that first year - only that it was at least noticeable that the war had begun in 1970 when looking back on it from 1981 - or possibly only from looking back on it from Remus' viewpoint in 1995. Hard to tell. It isn't as if James said something about Slytherin House being the cause of the war that was going on. IF he had, then I would believe that the war (and the part Slytherins played in it) would have been known - but he doesn't say so, so I tend to think not.

About James' job:
So, from the time James left Hogwarts until he died was about three to four years. One of those years was spent in hiding. That's barely enough time to train for a job, let alone have a major career. I would assume that James was still studying or training for a job (especially if he had money that allowed him to take this time), and planned to work after finishing. Also, he would have been kept busy doing things like defying Voldemort all those times.
I am a firm believer that Lily would never, ever have married the James we saw in the Pensieve from Snape's memories. That means he had to have changed and become a better person. There is no other alternative, because of who Lily was and the things that mattered to her. If she could let go of her childhood friend because he wouldn't grow up and be the good person she knew he could be, she wouldn't have married James, who started with much less credit in her book. That's the impression I got from Lily as well - she was too sure of herself and emotionally healthy (from the little that we saw) to have a relationship
with someone she deemed to be a "toerag" I can only assume that James changed his attitude.
edit sorry for bringing up things from a few pages back - I didn't realize I was a few pages back :lol:

James's profession: Doubtful he had one. He was described as having elderly, wealthy parents that doted on him. I'd imagine that shortly after he left school, they died and he was left everything.

Lily's feelings towards him: I think he'd have changed. As was pointed out, Lily thought very little for him at 15.

Pity that adult James is never shown. We see enough of young James in the Penseive; he's always shown to be arrogant and bullying. Adult James has never been shown the same courtesy; it's always a guessing game. We see him twice, for about four pages, as a ghost. It's not a lot to go on. Was he as wonderful as everyone said he was? Or was he as big an idiot as the Secret Keeper switch suggests?

Or was he as big an idiot as the Secret Keeper switch suggests?
That's not really needed as a comment. The Secret Keeper switch would have worked perfectly if Peter hadn't been a rat.

Is your commenting on my comment necessary? You've succeeded in getting us both off topic now.


The Secret Keeper switch would've worked if Peter hadn't been a rat. True. But would James have still chosen Peter if he knew what the rat was capable of? Would Sirius? Or should they have played it safe and gone with Dumbledore, who they know wouldn't betray them?

Ah, wait, I think I've hit it. It would've been safe to choose Dumbledore. Didn't Sirius say something like "The risk is what would've made it fun for James"?
Risking his own life for fun, I could see. But that of his wife and child? Wouldn't James have seen this as a bad idea? One of the Marauders is a traitor; who isn't known. Let's pick one to safeguard our whole family! There's a game called Russian Roulette that employs a similar principle, I think.

Maybe I overesimated him. It appears he didn't grow up.

Is your commenting on my comment necessary? You've succeeded in getting us both off topic now.


The Secret Keeper switch would've worked if Peter hadn't been a rat. True. But would James have still chosen Peter if he knew what the rat was capable of? Would Sirius? Or should they have played it safe and gone with Dumbledore, who they know wouldn't betray them?

Ah, wait, I think I've hit it. It would've been safe to choose Dumbledore. Didn't Sirius say something like "The risk is what would've made it fun for James"?
Risking his own life for fun, I could see. But that of his wife and child? Wouldn't James have seen this as a bad idea? One of the Marauders is a traitor; who isn't known. Let's pick one to safeguard our whole family! There's a game called Russian Roulette that employs a similar principle, I think.

Maybe I overesimated him. It appears he didn't grow up.


James would not see it as a risk. He believed that he could trust all his friends with his life. With hindsight, chosing Wormtail was the wrong decision. But, IMO, this just shows how loyal James was, and how much he believed and trusted in his friends.

Also, I don't believe that Lily didn't know about the switch. In the letter Harry found at Grimmauld Place, she addresses Sirius as Padfoot. This was the major secret of the Maurauders and for Lily to tell that is prove to me that James told her everything. I also think that Lily is not the sort of person to sit back and let her husband make all the decisions on how to keep save. She was a very independant woman and so I believe that James was not gambling with the life of his child and wife, but instead made a mature and well thought out decision. With their child in danger Lily and James would make the best desicion on the information they had on their friends and the plan is a good one,

There is a clear link here between James and Harry in DH.

[Harry said]'We've got to trust each other. I trust all of you, I don't think anyone in this room would ever sell me out to Voldemort.'
More silence followed his words. They wer all looking at him; Harry felt a little hot again, and drank some more firewhiskey for something to do...Lupin was wearing an odd expression as he looked at Harry: it was close to pitying.
'You think I'm a fool?' Demanded Harry.
'No, I think you are like James,' said Lupin, 'who would have regardered it as the height of dishonour to mistrust his friends.
Harry knew what Lupin was getting at: that his father had been betrayed my his friend, Peter Pettigrew. He felt irrationally anger. He wanted to argue, but Lupin turned away from him, set down his galsses and addressed Bill.

Here Harry is reminded that there is most probably a traitor in the group. Like his after, he refuses to believe it, even with the reminder of what happened to James. Neither thinks their friends would betray them and so trust them. James had no hindsight, like Harry does, and so trusts his friends, yet James is accused of being immature and slightly stupid in making that desicion.

I actually think that chosing to go into hiding to protect his child (and possibly wife) is a very mature think to do, especially as he knows he would not like the be cooped up. He just showed his trust in his friend, and made a mature decision with, IMO, the full support and help of his wife. This does not show that he still hadn't grown up- IMO it shows his maturity and the fact that he has grown-up.

Hmm. Still don't see it.

There's a traitor in the group. In Harry's case, it was brought up as a possibility after they were attacked. In James's case, he knew about it. And he still picked one of them over Dumbledore.

Obviously it's not out of mistrust for the man. In Lily's letter to Sirius, she easily dismisses the notion he could've been friends with Grindelwald.

Rowling once said they underestimated Wormtail. It took his betrayal and twelve years in prison for Sirius to see this. I could see James, still with some ego, thinking his little friend could keep his mouth shut.

Raises another question: the switch was Sirius's idea. Why wasn't he the Secret Keeper? Did he really think the weakest member of their group wouldn't give in to Voldemort, were he found? Sirius proudly said he'd have died for his friends, rather than betray them. So why didn't he?

Perhaps I'll bring this up on his respective thread.

Hmm. Still don't see it.

There's a traitor in the group. In Harry's case, it was brought up as a possibility after they were attacked. In James's case, he knew about it. And he still picked one of them over Dumbledore.

Obviously it's not out of mistrust for the man. In Lily's letter to Sirius, she easily dismisses the notion he could've been friends with Grindelwald.

Rowling once said they underestimated Wormtail. It took his betrayal and twelve years in prison for Sirius to see this. I could see James, still with some ego, thinking his little friend could keep his mouth shut.

Raises another question: the switch was Sirius's idea. Why wasn't he the Secret Keeper? Did he really think the weakest member of their group wouldn't give in to Voldemort, were he found? Sirius proudly said he'd have died for his friends, rather than betray them. So why didn't he?

Perhaps I'll bring this up on his respective thread.

Hindsight is 20/20. If someone told me that one of my best friends betrayed me to an extent that endangered my life I would have a hard time believing it. James knew his friends since first year and he trusted them. Dumbledore only knew that someone close to the Potters spied for Voldemort. We know that James' trust in Peter was misplaced but they were convinced that the traitor was Remus. My theory is that Peter made certain remarks to make Remus look suspicious.

As to why they picked Peter, well, even for you he is the unlikeliest choice. Why would anyone suspect Peter? Additionally, Peter could transform into a rat, live in a hole for a year and nobody would be any wiser. If Peter had been loyal the plan would have worked because nobody would even think of little Peter.

For me it shows that James trusted Peter completely and that he considered him to be more than just a tag-along.

Actually, after I read DH, I admired James and Harry (and was a bit surprised to hear thta from harry who was on the opposite pole in HBP) for trusting their friends completely because they would have considered it the height of dishonour not to. In my opinion, it was a very good explanation why James chose Peter after all, one that I had been struggling to find pre-DH, as the whole switch business and turning down Dumbledore really bothered me. But now that I have that explanation, I can honestly say I'm satisfied. It does explain things, to me. It was the kind of man James was, and that determined his actions and decisions - mostly for the better, I presume, but this particular case, for the worse. Which, of course, he couldn't have predicted, precisely because of his sense of honour. I don't even think it was underestimation on his part anymore. Sometimes people do fall victims of their own admirable qualities, and I don't think they should be blamed for that.

And there is, of course, that fact that the Secret Keeper had to be a traitor, for the plot's sake. Sometimes the plot is the main motivation, you know?

Oh, geez, the trouble we go to to find something bad enough about James to get Snape's less than sociable ways off the hook!

The same could be said about the lengths people will go to to justify James actions in his youth.

I know you don't mean to offend but can you avoid comments like that.I've almost left this thread a number of times becasue anyone who says anything negative about James(and gives points to support)in instantly seen as someone who's a James hater with judgment issues.Some people just might not find him that likable,it's allowed.
That's not really something for the James thread, though. Besides, Snape didn't have to do anything to be unpopular. Plenty of average teenagers are unpopular at school because of their appearances and Snape was less blessed in that area than average.I don't think we can assume that Slytherin had the same reputation in James's time as it did in Harry's. Voldemort had not yet risen to his full power and would not have been so associated with Slytherin. Sirius didn't seem to think anything was wrong with Slytherin House on that initial meeting - he volunteers that all his family have been in Slytherin and it didn't sound like he'd considered anything else until that point. Certainly, that none of the Slytherins would help at the Battle of Hogwarts 20 years later could not have been known in James's time.

Slytherin was always associated with pure-blood status.Maybe they were famous for their hard line pure-blood views.How was Salzar Slytherins reputation?

1) I think the whole Slytherin discussion is off topic. There is a Slytherin discussion thread right here in legilimens. :)

2) I think that everybody has to accept to a certain point that James was a jerk at 15 and that he was a good man as an adult. That he deserved Lilys love and the appreciation of those who surrounded him.

C'mon he was Harrys father! Bashing him is showing a poor respect to Lilys love and Harrys dad.

1) I think the whole Slytherin discussion is off topic. There is a Slytherin discussion thread right here in legilimens. :)

2) I think that everybody has to accept to a certain point that James was a jerk at 15 and that he was a good man as an adult. That he deserved Lilys love and the appreciation of those who surrounded him.

C'mon he was Harrys father! Bashing him is showing a poor respect to Lilys love and Harrys dad.
Ear! Ear! My fingers were getting tired of typing the same thing over and over again-"James is a good guy... Sirius is a good guy and snape turned out to be a brave dude" Man why can't we all just accept that all of them are good and live happily ever after?:lol::love: Of course then these threads won't be nearly as fun...:lol:

I don't think we can assume that Slytherin had the same reputation in James's time as it did in Harry's. Voldemort had not yet risen to his full power and would not have been so associated with Slytherin. Sirius didn't seem to think anything was wrong with Slytherin House on that initial meeting - he volunteers that all his family have been in Slytherin and it didn't sound like he'd considered anything else until that point. Certainly, that none of the Slytherins would help at the Battle of Hogwarts 20 years later could not have been known in James's time.
I think the criteria for house selection have been the same for 1000 years, though, so Slytherins have been the way they are ever since the day of Salazar himself. I don't think their bad reputation stems purely from Voldemort, nor do I think that blood-supremacism is a new thing. And as others have pointed out, Voldemort had indeed risen to power when the Marauders were at school, and there was already a group of Young Death Eaters in Slytherin by the time (if not before) they reached 5th year (as pointed out by Lily).

That may be, but there's no indication it was well known at the time James first went to Hogwarts.

That may be, but there's no indication it wasn't, either! It seems a fair assumption to me that Slytherin's reputation was a long-standing one.

James would not see it as a risk. He believed that he could trust all his friends with his life. With hindsight, chosing Wormtail was the wrong decision. But, IMO, this just shows how loyal James was, and how much he believed and trusted in his friends.

Also, I don't believe that Lily didn't know about the switch. In the letter Harry found at Grimmauld Place, she addresses Sirius as Padfoot. This was the major secret of the Maurauders and for Lily to tell that is prove to me that James told her everything. I also think that Lily is not the sort of person to sit back and let her husband make all the decisions on how to keep save. She was a very independant woman and so I believe that James was not gambling with the life of his child and wife, but instead made a mature and well thought out decision. With their child in danger Lily and James would make the best desicion on the information they had on their friends and the plan is a good one,

There is a clear link here between James and Harry in DH.
I actually love that James's downfall was his own good nature and refusal to accept that someone he loved as a brother could betray him. Being honourable is outdated now - an old-fashioned notion no one bothers about any more, and I think that's a shame!

Has anyone considered the possibility that James knew something of Dumbledore's past? Did he suspect that Dumbledore was a bit too fascinated by his Invisibility Cloak? James grew up in Godric's Hollow, and must have had contact with Bathilda Bagshot - did he know about Ariana? Did he know about Grindelwald? Did he know about the Deathly Hallows? Is this why he declined Dumbledore's offer to be Secret-Keeper?

Ah, wait, I think I've hit it. It would've been safe to choose Dumbledore. Didn't Sirius say something like "The risk is what would've made it fun for James"?
Risking his own life for fun, I could see. But that of his wife and child? Wouldn't James have seen this as a bad idea? One of the Marauders is a traitor; who isn't known. Let's pick one to safeguard our whole family! There's a game called Russian Roulette that employs a similar principle, I think.

Maybe I overesimated him. It appears he didn't grow up.
Are you suggesting that James deliberately risked Lily and Harry's lives for fun? I have to say that I disagree very strongly with that suggestion. There is nothing to suggest that James wasn't a loving husband and father who did everything he could to keep his family safe, including going into hiding, which wasn't "fun" at all - Lily's letter stated that James was frustrated by being shut up in the house, but tried not to show it. Is this a parallel to Sirius staying shut up at Grimmauld Place? However, James's "imprisonment" was made much more fun by the presence of his wife and baby, and I refuse to believe that he would have deliberately risked their lives. There is a huge difference between teenagers taking risks and adults gambling with the lives of their families. James Potter was a good and brave man.

Are you suggesting that James deliberately risked Lily and Harry's lives for fun? I have to say that I disagree very strongly with that suggestion. There is nothing to suggest that James wasn't a loving husband and father who did everything he could to keep his family safe, including going into hiding, which wasn't "fun" at all - Lily's letter stated that James was frustrated by being shut up in the house, but tried not to show it. Is this a parallel to Sirius staying shut up at Grimmauld Place? However, James's "imprisonment" was made much more fun by the presence of his wife and baby, and I refuse to believe that he would have deliberately risked their lives. There is a huge difference between teenagers taking risks and adults gambling with the lives of their families. James Potter was a good and brave man.


Ear' Ear'!
<3

2) I think that everybody has to accept to a certain point that James was a jerk at 15 and that he was a good man as an adult. That he deserved Lilys love and the appreciation of those who surrounded him.

C'mon he was Harrys father! Bashing him is showing a poor respect to Lilys love and Harrys dad.

I really find that offensive as well. It is rude to suggest that other posters have to come around to your viewpoint. Not everyone agrees that he deserves Lily's love, and I don't think it's very courteous of you to suggest that we have to. Also, it is not bashing him to find flaws, nor is it disrespectful to a fictional character to say so.



Now, back onto James himself...

Do we think James and Sirius knew each other before getting on the train together? They are both purebloods, and it would make sense if their parents introduced them, but then, James and Sirius strike me also as the sort who could strike up fast friendships..

Bathilda was already considered a little "gaga", Lily didn't believe her. Whether James suspected something... I dunno, 'course Jammes was so trust worthy he would gladly give him his Invisibilty Cloak without explanation.

Please let us leave out the thread logistics in here. If you have an issue with how the discussion goes, please contact any Staff member online. Thanks. :)

I really find that offensive as well. It is rude to suggest that other posters have to come around to your viewpoint. Not everyone agrees that he deserves Lily's love, and I don't think it's very courteous of you to suggest that we have to. Also, it is not bashing him to find flaws, nor is it disrespectful to a fictional character to say so.
'Ear 'ear!



Now, back onto James himself...

Do we think James and Sirius knew each other before getting on the train together? They are both purebloods, and it would make sense if their parents introduced them, but then, James and Sirius strike me also as the sort who could strike up fast friendships..
It didn't seem that they were friends before they are shown on the Hogwarts Express, did it?

It didn't seem that they were friends before they are shown on the Hogwarts Express, did it?

No, I think seeing as James didn't know anything about Sirius family that they had just met. I guess it was like Ron and Harry: they met for the first time on the train and became best friends for life.

I really find that offensive as well. It is rude to suggest that other posters have to come around to your viewpoint. Not everyone agrees that he deserves Lily's love, and I don't think it's very courteous of you to suggest that we have to. Also, it is not bashing him to find flaws, nor is it disrespectful to a fictional character to say so.



Now, back onto James himself...

Do we think James and Sirius knew each other before getting on the train together? They are both purebloods, and it would make sense if their parents introduced them, but then, James and Sirius strike me also as the sort who could strike up fast friendships..
Chill... GUAD was only trying to post her own veiwpoint I don't think she trying to be offensive or anything... but if you have a problem with one of the posters then you could talk about it to the moderators... they are really nice and will sort the situation out:love:

I don't think Sirius and James knew about one another before getting on the train. They probably knew of one another (like Draco and Ron) and like Harry and Ron they hit it off. I can see them going to classes together, doing detentions together and being naughty together...:lol:

Neither could I, But you have my support crowheart. So... Let's get back to bashing James, shall we?

I don't think Sirius and James knew about one another before getting on the train. They probably knew of one another (like Draco and Ron) and like Harry and Ron they hit it off. I can see them going to classes together, doing detentions together and being naughty together...:lol:
I can easily see James and Sirius having a virtually instant meeting of true minds, since they had really a lot in common. But James obviously had less in common with Remus and Peter. He seems to have felt that he knew them as well as he knew Sirius, and that seems to be a mistake. How well do you think he really knew the 'lesser Marauders?'

Neither could I, But you have my support crowheart. So... Let's get back to bashing James, shall we?


*Ahem*

No one's going to be bashing anyone thanks!

Neither could I, But you have my support crowheart. So... Let's get back to bashing James, shall we?

There's not much to bash, so that should make a fairly brief conversation. :lol:

As for when Voldemort conducted War Number One, Fudge tells the Prime Minister in HBP that Voldemort was a wizard that had eluded capture for three decades. That would suggest that the Ministry of Magic was chasing him in the late 1960's - before James, Sirius, and Snape were old enough to attend Hogwarts.

For those suggesting that James chose Pettigrew as secret-keeper for the risk factor:

"... I thought it was the perfect plan... a bluff... Voldemort would be sure to come after me, would never dream they'd use a weak, talentless thing like you... "

So there you have it. Pettigrew was a bluff, a distraction. Sirius was going into hiding - as any secret-keeper in that situation would surely have done - increasing the odds that Voldemort would come after him for the information he needed to get at the Potters.

I think it's a shame that Jo showed us more of James' bad moments then his good.

Until the last part of book 5 all we heard was that James was a perfect character. The only dissenter was Snape who was presented as having a vague unfocussed and unjustified dislike.

My major problem with James is that we see nothing of him, as an adult. We hear that he was in the Phoenix Order and that he died defending his family. Well, just my opinion, but I think every 'real' father would have done the same.

Maybe it would have been good to insert some 'first-hand' information on James after getting together with Lily, some stray Pensieve memory, some letter of his, anything to connect to. The way he's been shown in the books leaves me with nothing but reluctant indifference. He was the same sort of snobby brat like Draco in his teens, I can live with that, but giving me ONE SCENE to find out why Lily would find him the opposite of what she thought before might have endeared him to me. Now there's nothing at all. Even Charity Burbage got more than this.

Maybe it would have been good to insert some 'first-hand' information on James after getting together with Lily, some stray Pensieve memory, some letter of his, anything to connect to. The way he's been shown in the books leaves me with nothing but reluctant indifference.I believe the reason why JK never included such is that there's not so much doubt in her story that James was an exceptional character. With the pensieve scene showing him acting arrogant and rude as a fifteen-year-old I always got the impression she wanted to show us that even the best had some flaws in their life (or might still have). But I do not think she wanted to make us doubt as half as much as we do now on his integrity.
He's in no way perfect and Harry had to learn this about his parents like all children might have to. But I do not believe this was included to make us assume James was a different person to what we had been told by Hagrid, McGonagall, Madame Rosmerta ect. before.

We hear that he was in the Phoenix Order and that he died defending his family. Well, just my opinion, but I think every 'real' father would have done the same.

Exactly. I even posted that a few pages back. what he did was very brave indeed, but it was the natural instinct of a father to protect his child, and no decent father would have run for his life in that situation.

After DH, I think we do have a bit more information on James - especially what Remus said about him in the Burrow - that he would have considered it the height of dihonour not to trust his friends. I was very impressed with that, to be honest, especially since it finally satisfied my burning discomfort with the [mildly put] stupid choice of making Peter the Secret Keeper. But now I think I can understand why he agreed to that. That was the kind of person he was, and that determined his decisions. People sometimes fall victim to their own admirable qualities. I personally find that piece of information on James a lot more revealing of his character than his dying to protect his wife and son.

My theory is that Peter made certain remarks to make Remus look suspicious.

That has always been my theory as well. I also think Peter made sure to make Remus suspiscious of Sirius. It would be so easy for Wormtail to say to Sirius or James "Isn't Remus acting strange? You don't think he is the one betraying you/James/the Order?" Then to Remus he could say "I don't think James should trust him, look at who his family is. How do we know he isn't spying on us for You-Know-Who?" Or stuff along those lines. Everyone was looking over their shoulders already that I think it would have been easy for Wormtail to make them even more paranoid about themselves.

Do we think James and Sirius knew each other before getting on the train together? They are both purebloods, and it would make sense if their parents introduced them, but then, James and Sirius strike me also as the sort who could strike up fast friendships..

Just because they are pure bloods doesn't mean they have to either know each other or even like each other, I mean the Black's and the Potter's not James and Sirius per say. James grew up in Godric's Hollow and Sirius in London, so they didn't even live in the same town. Then factor in that the Black were into pure blood dominance and it didn't sound like the Potter's were that's another reason for the Black's and the Potter's not to be friendly. And if the Black's were into dark magic like Sirius said and the Potter's sounded like they were completely opposed to it that would be another reason for them to avoid each other. IMO James and Sirius had never met before that first day on the Hogwarts Express.

Maybe it would have been good to insert some 'first-hand' information on James after getting together with Lily, some stray Pensieve memory, some letter of his, anything to connect to. The way he's been shown in the books leaves me with nothing but reluctant indifference. He was the same sort of snobby brat like Draco in his teens, I can live with that, but giving me ONE SCENE to find out why Lily would find him the opposite of what she thought before might have endeared him to me. Now there's nothing at all. Even Charity Burbage got more than this.
That's exactly why I am breathlessly waiting for the encyclopedia! I bet that will answer all our questions and quench all our thirsts. It might even have the accounts depicting the fight between Voldemort and the original order of the phoenix.... And I can bet anything any fight between the deatheaters and James would have included a lot of action and spells.... you know spells other than "expelliarmus"...:lol: I think Sirius and James would have been great warriors and I want to know more about their fights,their lives and well everything!

*Ahem*

No one's going to be bashing anyone thanks!

Ear! Ear!...

I believe the reason why JK never included such is that there's not so much doubt in her story that James was an exceptional character. With the pensieve scene showing him acting arrogant and rude as a fifteen-year-old I always got the impression she wanted to show us that even the best had some flaws in their life (or might still have). But I do not think she wanted to make us doubt as half as much as we do now on his integrity.
He's in no way perfect and Harry had to learn this about his parents like all children might have to. But I do not believe this was included to make us assume James was a different person to what we had been told by Hagrid, McGonagall, Madame Rosmerta ect. before.

Brilliant! Ear! Ear! James Potter for President!

James really has remained an enigma, even after DH. We only have solid proof of two things: That he was a bully at age 15, and that he died to give his wife and son time to escape Voldemort. These facts are indisputable because we've seen them with our own eyes.
Everything else is word-of-mouth from both reliable sources and unreliable ones. This is pretty much why readers are not going to come to a consensus about James' character. No two readers are the same. Some may accept information from, say, Sirius or Hagrid, while others may not.

I believe the reason why JK never included such is that there's not so much doubt in her story that James was an exceptional character. With the pensieve scene showing him acting arrogant and rude as a fifteen-year-old I always got the impression she wanted to show us that even the best had some flaws in their life (or might still have). But I do not think she wanted to make us doubt as half as much as we do now on his integrity.

He's in no way perfect and Harry had to learn this about his parents like all children might have to. But I do not believe this was included to make us assume James was a different person to what we had been told by Hagrid, McGonagall, Madame Rosmerta ect. before.

I so agree with you, Gertie! Gads, do I agree...

The books are full of warm remembrances of James Potter. Too full, in fact, for one memory to completely destroy all the canon attesting to something completely different, something really special, during James' brief manhood.

James really has remained an enigma, even after DH. We only have solid proof of two things: That he was a bully at age 15, and that he died to give his wife and son time to escape Voldemort. These facts are indisputable because we've seen them with our own eyes.
Everything else is word-of-mouth from both reliable sources and unreliable ones. This is pretty much why readers are not going to come to a consensus about James' character. No two readers are the same. Some may accept information from, say, Sirius or Hagrid, while others may not.

There is enough word-of-mouth to make the case, as it has with many of us. Maybe even most of us. Those who revere Snape are never going to come around and will forever be looking for excuses to dislike James, or otherwise deem him unworthy of the positive remembrances we have in abundance.

I believe the reason why JK never included such is that there's not so much doubt in her story that James was an exceptional character. With the pensieve scene showing him acting arrogant and rude as a fifteen-year-old I always got the impression she wanted to show us that even the best had some flaws in their life (or might still have). But I do not think she wanted to make us doubt as half as much as we do now on his integrity.
He's in no way perfect and Harry had to learn this about his parents like all children might have to. But I do not believe this was included to make us assume James was a different person to what we had been told by Hagrid, McGonagall, Madame Rosmerta ect. before.

Well, we were told nothing if not great, wonderful things of Dumbledore for six solid books, too, still there was more to him than his friends would have ackowledged, or known. I thought that his was a bit of a message - there's always more than meets the eye, and one does good to keep on wondering about the other side as well. Like I said, I don't blame James that much for being an idiot at fifteen, but to care for him as a character in any small way, I'll need more than Madam Rosmerta's word for it. (Now this was a phrase, please don't answer me by saying that Lupin and Sirius talked well of him, too - I mean more than other characters talking). For all I care, Petunia could have shown Harry some letter from his father before parting. James' portrait could have turned up out of nothingness.

There is just such a strong imbalance between the impressive Pensieve scene from OotP (and Sirius' and Remus' feeble reaction to it) and the mere oral testimony of his friends to claim that he had made such a U-turn. It's a bit like trying to imagine that Draco had suddenly turned fluffy, and invited Hermione's parents over for tea. One illustration of him would have sufficed for me - heck, I care a whole lot more for Ted Tonks than for Harry's own father, simply because I've seen him, heard him, because I connected to him (as opposed to: some fictional character telling me how great he was).



After DH, I think we do have a bit more information on James - especially what Remus said about him in the Burrow - that he would have considered it the height of dihonour not to trust his friends. I was very impressed with that, to be honest, especially since it finally satisfied my burning discomfort with the [mildly put] stupid choice of making Peter the Secret Keeper. But now I think I can understand why he agreed to that. That was the kind of person he was, and that determined his decisions. People sometimes fall victim to their own admirable qualities. I personally find that piece of information on James a lot more revealing of his character than his dying to protect his wife and son.

Yeah, well, even before DH, I kinda implied that - absolutely admirable - attitude in James, simply because of Remus, Sirius and their take on the matter. I agree with you absolutely on the 'value' of that sentiment, it's just that it didn't come as a surprise, and didn't fill the void (for me) as far as James Potter, the adult, is concerned.

So there you have it. Pettigrew was a bluff, a distraction. Sirius was going into hiding - as any secret-keeper in that situation would surely have done - increasing the odds that Voldemort would come after him for the information he needed to get at the Potters.

Shouldn't Peter have gone into hiding anyway, too? For the risk of the Dark Order singling him out to squeeze out Sirius' whereabouts? I really don't see the merit of the changed plan. (not to say that I thought they had plotted it for the fun of it, I don't believe they did anything like that. But the plan was flawed right from the beginning, that's rather my point, even if Peter had NOT been a traitor)

As was pointed out, Lily thought very little for him at 15.
She liked him more than she cared to admit, if that twitch at the corner of her mouth when he was hanging Snape upside down was anything to go by.


Pity that adult James is never shown.
But he is, actually- as an affectionate father puffing smoke rings out of his wand for Harry's amusement, and bounding out to defend his family even though the attempt was certain death. Quite a change from post-OWL James, I should say.


Was he as wonderful as everyone said he was? Or was he as big an idiot as the Secret Keeper switch suggests?
As Lupin said, James's trust in his friends- by which I mean the Marauders, who'd been closest to him at school, was absolute. If James and Lily knew there was treachery afoot, they (the Marauders) were actually the family's last hope, and trusting your best friends, from a common-sense point of view, isn't exactly an illogical thing to do. EDIT: I also think the decision wasn't made unilaterally by James, if Lily's addressing Sirius as Padfoot and Peter as Wormy is anything to go by, she was clearly aware of the fact that her husband and two of his friends were unregistered Animagi and any decision they took regarding their protection (as I recall, Sirius said something about suggesting the Secret-Keeper switch to Lily and James, rather than just James) seems likely to have been made by them jointly.

She liked him more than she cared to admit, if that twitch at the corner of her mouth when he was hanging Snape upside down was anything to go by.

But really, we have one twitch of the mouth against a genuine annoyance with him, insults, open disapproval of his behaviour and storming off because of that. I'd say she definitely disliked him at that point, in that moment. It's clear as day from what she said, unless she was lying or pretending.

There is enough word-of-mouth to make the case, as it has with many of us. Maybe even most of us. Those who revere Snape are never going to come around and will forever be looking for excuses to dislike James, or otherwise deem him unworthy of the positive remembrances we have in abundance.

The only problem I have is that we never actually get to see if James really grew up. His continuing to hex Snape in seventh year, and Sirius' himself not growing up (even between him being 15 and being thrown into Azkaban, we see no real growth) makes me wonder about James.

I really would like to see him truly feel bad about his actions, not only to Snape but the other people he was supposed to have hexed throughout his schoolyear. But I really haven't seen anything to show this.

In fact, we see that even after the werewolf 'prank' James is still picking on Snape! No wonder why Snape thought he was just out to protect his friends, the guys still bullying him. (And I think it is interesting to note that Snape still kept Remus' secret, even after they continued to bully him)

I really want to see him redeemed, but unless Jo says that he was, I'll have to assume otherwise from the canon indicated. People can say all the nice things they want about him, but his actions will speak louder than their words ever can.

But really, we have one twitch of the mouth against a genuine annoyance with him, insults, open disapproval of his behaviour and storming off because of that. I'd say she definitely disliked him at that point, in that moment. It's clear as day from what she said, unless she was lying or pretending.

Sometimes, what isn't said is more important than what is. She almost laughed when Snape's underpants were on display. She was standing amid a crowd of people who were cheering.

Sometimes, what isn't said is more important than what is.

And how do we determine if that was the case?

Even if she was on the verge of smilingm that doesn't negate all the words she said against James after that and all the things she called him. She obviously didn't like him then.

Shouldn't Peter have gone into hiding anyway, too? For the risk of the Dark Order singling him out to squeeze out Sirius' whereabouts? I really don't see the merit of the changed plan. (not to say that I thought they had plotted it for the fun of it, I don't believe they did anything like that. But the plan was flawed right from the beginning, that's rather my point, even if Peter had NOT been a traitor)

But Peter did go into hiding. Sirius says so in the third book. "The night they died, I'd arranged to check on Peter, make sure he was still safe, but when I arrived at his hiding place, he'd gone. Yet there had been no sign of struggle. It didn't feel right. I was scared. I set out to your parent's house straight away. And when I saw their house, and their bodies -I realised what Peter must have done. What I'd done".....
Oh god now I need tissues...Sirius why do have to make me cry?:upset:. Anyway back to the point... Peter did go into hiding.... Sirius arranged it...

Sometimes, what isn't said is more important than what is. She almost laughed when Snape's underpants were on display. She was standing amid a crowd of people who were cheering.

I agree that she liked him during their fifth year, despite his actions. Which is why its not too hard to believe that she could date him without him really having to change much, only really having to hide it from Lily.

And how do we determine if that was the case?

Even if she was on the verge of smilingm that doesn't negate all the words she said against James after that and all the things she called him. She obviously didn't like him then.

Maybe she disliked him for real. Maybe she was putting up an act. What difference does it make? She saw something in him a few years later; enough to persuade her to marry him.

I agree that she liked him during their fifth year, despite his actions. Which is why its not too hard to believe that she could date him without him really having to change much, only really having to hide it from Lily.

I take note of Lupin's statement that "Snape was a special case." Maybe James wasn't really that much of a jerk normally. Maybe Snape was just so universally unpleasant and had made himself so unpopular, and was so quick to curse James at every possible opportunity, that we simply caught a glimpse of James and Sirius in "Snape-Mode."

It's possible to like someone while finding them maddeningly annoying, too- I strongly suspect she really wasn't admitting anything to herself at that point.
Back on the subject of James, I don't think he himself was suspicious of Lupin- we're never told that, only Sirius was the one who suspected things and got Peter to be Secret Keeper, possibly telling James nothing of why exactly they weren't giving Moony the secret.

But Peter did go into hiding. Sirius says so in the third book. "The night they died, I'd arranged to check on Peter, make sure he was still safe, but when I arrived at his hiding place, he'd gone. Yet there had been no sign of struggle. It didn't feel right. I was scared. I set out to your parent's house straight away. And when I saw their house, and their bodies -I realised what Peter must have done. What I'd done".....
Oh god now I need tissues...Sirius why do have to make me cry?:upset:. Anyway back to the point... Peter did go into hiding.... Sirius arranged it...

Mh-mh (approving hum), yes, but didn't think any of them that Peter, once he was found and forced to talk (Veritaserum, anyone?) wouldn't be capable of putting up half as much of a fight as Sirius anyway? I'm sorry, I just never understood the plan in itself, not for being deliberately risk-taking, but for being bound to fail right from the start. Because I can actually imagine Sirius to be ready to kill himself before the bad guys could get him and force the truth out of him, but never Peter.

The only problem I have is that we never actually get to see if James really grew up. His continuing to hex Snape in seventh year, and Sirius' himself not growing up (even between him being 15 and being thrown into Azkaban, we see no real growth) makes me wonder about James.

I really would like to see him truly feel bad about his actions, not only to Snape but the other people he was supposed to have hexed throughout his schoolyear. But I really haven't seen anything to show this.

In fact, we see that even after the werewolf 'prank' James is still picking on Snape! No wonder why Snape thought he was just out to protect his friends, the guys still bullying him. (And I think it is interesting to note that Snape still kept Remus' secret, even after they continued to bully him)

I really want to see him redeemed, but unless Jo says that he was, I'll have to assume otherwise from the canon indicated. People can say all the nice things they want about him, but his actions will speak louder than their words ever can.

We know Sirius, his best friend, and he certainly never seemed to feel remorse for the bullying and the hexing they did as kids.

Bullies can be very charming and personable, to anyone except their victims, so the fact that there are people who speak well of James means to me that they weren't on the receiving end of his hexes.

I really wanted to see something, for Harry's sake, because I wanted to feel that the poor kid had a wonderful father. Sadly, I never saw that remorse and personal growth I hoped for in DH, or anywhere else in the series. I did read that James went on hexing Snape behind Lily's back, so he wasn't honest with her. That made me sad.

James loved his son, there's no doubt about it, but we see that other fathers in the series love their kids too.

wimblemimble, even if JKR now James was redeemed, I can't buy it, because if it happened, it should have been in canon. If it's not in the books, I can't quite get myself there.

Yes, but Snape went right on hexing James too, it was quite a reciprocal thing.

Exactly! Snape hexed James just as much as James hexed him. You know in the second book Harry and his friends secretly feed Crabbe and Goyle with sleep potion. Then they take bits of their hair and stuff them in a broom closet... Sure we all got a good chuckle out of those passages but how is that any different from what James and Sirius did? Plus I know I have mentioned this before but Snape was a bully as an adult. What's his excuse?

I agree that she liked him during their fifth year, despite his actions. Which is why its not too hard to believe that she could date him without him really having to change much, only really having to hide it from Lily.We have no proof to this statement though. The only canon we have says that she didn't like him in their 5th year, but liked him in their 7th year. Also ALL of our canon says he did change. We can't just throw canon out the window and make our own assumptions, whether or not you believe his changes were for the better, little or big, he did change, and that was what made Lily like him.

EDIT: My point was to say that James did change and you can't deny that. I don't understand why people are making these assumptions.

Lily has a thread of her own here, hasn't she?

So, stay on topic please!

We know Sirius, his best friend, and he certainly never seemed to feel remorse for the bullying and the hexing they did as kids.

Bullies can be very charming and personable, to anyone except their victims, so the fact that there are people who speak well of James means to me that they weren't on the receiving end of his hexes.

I really wanted to see something, for Harry's sake, because I wanted to feel that the poor kid had a wonderful father. Sadly, I never saw that remorse and personal growth I hoped for in DH, or anywhere else in the series. I did read that James went on hexing Snape behind Lily's back, so he wasn't honest with her. That made me sad.

James loved his son, there's no doubt about it, but we see that other fathers in the series love their kids too.

wimblemimble, even if JKR now James was redeemed, I can't buy it, because if it happened, it should have been in canon. If it's not in the books, I can't quite get myself there.I am assuming then, that you believe Snape's account on the werewolf incident and James was just doing it to save his own neck. Not because he realized that the bullying was about to go too far and he knew he couldn't let Snape come face-to-face with a real werewolf.

Although we didn't see much of redemption from James, we also didn't see much of the bullying. Of course it went on, I am not denying that, and of course it happened a lot, my point is that we never saw a lot of canon scenes, so we can't make a whole lot of judgments from 2 or 3 scenes about if he ever felt remorse.

We do have canon that she liked him (James) in the fifth year as well.. Here's an excerpt from JK's interview after the sixth book
"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". [Laughter]

We do have canon that she liked him (James) in the fifth year as well.. Here's an excerpt from JK's interview after the sixth book
"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". [Laughter] I think the keyword here is hated, she didn't hate James. But we have nothing suggesting she wanted anything more than a friendship, even if that, with James.

But we were told to be on-topic.

I'd have thought the twitch (there I go again!) is canon, too :)
And how does it take away from James's later character development, the fact that he was a father? The line of argument followed seems to be that all fathers would die for their families, so James doing so was nothing exceptional (Then by that logic, even what Lily did- die for trying to stop Voldemort mudering Harry- wasn't so great). And Potterverse fathers aren't always perfect, look at Tom Riddle and Barty Crouch Senior, or even poor Percival Dumbledore, who unlike the previous two acted out of love for his child but still did something that was patently wrong. Saying that James's later character development is somehow belittled by the fact that he was a father seems a bit of a strange train of thought to me..

I think the criteria for house selection have been the same for 1000 years, though, so Slytherins have been the way they are ever since the day of Salazar himself. I don't think their bad reputation stems purely from Voldemort, nor do I think that blood-supremacism is a new thing. And as others have pointed out, Voldemort had indeed risen to power when the Marauders were at school, and there was already a group of Young Death Eaters in Slytherin by the time (if not before) they reached 5th year (as pointed out by Lily).
Right, the criteria have been the same for 1000 years. And, what are those criteria that have been used to sort kids into Slytherin? Ambition. Cunning. A thirst to prove oneself. And, Salazar Slytherin wanted purity of blood, which obviously didn't disqualify anyone from belonging to Slytherin House because we know half-bloods are assigned there. I didn't dispute that Slytherin House was known for ideals of pureblood supremacy, but I don't remember the Sorting Hat ever singing about a strong interest in Dark Magic and general evil as a criteria for ending up in Slytherin House. So, to get back to the original point, there's no evidence that Slytherin had a bad reputation for being Dark at the time James entered Hogwarts and his desire not to be in Slytherin is based on very different knowledge than Harry's desire not to be in Slytherin.

James grew up in Godric's Hollow, and must have had contact with Bathilda Bagshot - did he know about Ariana? We don't know where James grew up. He hid in Godric's Hollow.

I am assuming then, that you believe Snape's account on the werewolf incident and James was just doing it to save his own neck. Not because he realized that the bullying was about to go too far and he knew he couldn't let Snape come face-to-face with a real werewolf. Well, we know James is loyal to his friends the Marauders, so I don't think it's a bad thing for him to try to save his own and his friends' necks. But we see that SWM happened very close to this time, and James justifies his attack on Snape by telling Lily that "he exists." So I do think it's more likely that James was worried about his friends than about Severus Snape.

Although we didn't see much of redemption from James, we also didn't see much of the bullying. Of course it went on, I am not denying that, and of course it happened a lot, my point is that we never saw a lot of canon scenes, so we can't make a whole lot of judgments from 2 or 3 scenes about if he ever felt remorse. There are the detention cards that Snape has Harry copy out, where he sees James and Sirius often enough that he's made uncomfortable by their antics.

There are the detention cards that Snape has Harry copy out, where he sees James and Sirius often enough that he's made uncomfortable by their antics.
I honestly didn't read that scene as meaning that Harry was made uncomfortable by the fact that his dad was in detention so often, especially when he himself spent as much time in it. He just reacts that way when confronted with any tangible evidence of his parents' lives (witness his reaction to the letter Lily wrote Sirius).

Trust me she liked James....:lol:God knows why. James didn't seem any better than Snape by 5th year, which always seemed to be Snape's point when she chastised him about his friends bullying other students. James didn't hold bloodist ideals, but there didn't seem to be anything else that she would have admired in his personality. Unlike Snape, James was obviously very arrogant, which I would think would have been a turn-off.

God knows why. James didn't seem any better than Snape by 5th year, which always seemed to be Snape's point when she chastised him about his friends bullying other students. James didn't hold bloodist ideals, but there didn't seem to be anything else that she would have admired in his personality. Unlike Snape, James was obviously very arrogant, which I would think would have been a turn-off.

I just posted an excerpt of an interview of JK.... She says "come you're a girl..." and then laughs... that laugh and that line speak volumes.... Plus everyone knows JK is a huge fan of Jane Austen... Elizabeth Bennet hated Mr Darcy and fell madly in love with him at the same time.... So I can see what JK means by this...

We don't know where James grew up. He hid in Godric's Hollow.

Yes, we do. It's covered in DH in discussions about Dumbledore's family... that whole Ignotus Peverell thing.

God knows why. James didn't seem any better than Snape by 5th year, which always seemed to be Snape's point when she chastised him about his friends bullying other students. James didn't hold bloodist ideals, but there didn't seem to be anything else that she would have admired in his personality. Unlike Snape, James was obviously very arrogant, which I would think would have been a turn-off.

Lily may have begun to like James once she found out he saved Snape down in the tunnel. Though he continued to bully and have a large ego, she may have seen that he does have some good qualities in him. She didn't act on her feelings because she knew he was a jerk then. It's pretty normal. I mean, Hermione had to wait a while before she knew that Ron had matured enough for her.

wimblemimble, even if JKR now James was redeemed, I can't buy it, because if it happened, it should have been in canon. If it's not in the books, I can't quite get myself there.

IMO we do have canon that James was redeemed. Lily married him that to me proves he was redeemed and grew up and wasn't the 'toe rag" he had been at 15.

Yes, but Snape went right on hexing James too, it was quite a reciprocal thing.

Exactly! The only memories we have been show came from Snape and of course his would be about James hexing him or making fun of him. I would bet that for every memory Snape has of James doing stuff to him James has just as many memories of Snape hexing him or whatever.


I honestly didn't read that scene as meaning that Harry was made uncomfortable by the fact that his dad was in detention so often, especially when he himself spent as much time in it. He just reacts that way when confronted with any tangible evidence of his parents' lives (witness his reaction to the letter Lily wrote Sirius).

I read it as Harry once again being shown that his father was real and was well a toe rag during his time at Hogwarts. It was to further show that James was not the perfect person Harry had built him up to be and that Harry did often act reckless like his father. Thing is though the best thing about childhood is that is when you are supposed to make those mistakes and learn from them. James IMO is a perfect example of that.

God knows why. James didn't seem any better than Snape by 5th year, which always seemed to be Snape's point when she chastised him about his friends bullying other students. James didn't hold bloodist ideals, but there didn't seem to be anything else that she would have admired in his personality. Unlike Snape, James was obviously very arrogant, which I would think would have been a turn-off.

Actually the point Lily was making was that Snape's friends were using dark magic against people which is greatly different then what James was doing to others. James' attacks/pranks compared to those of Mulciber, Avery and even Snape were much more harmless. And how do we know there wasn't anything else in James personality that she wouldn't have liked? She seemed to think it was good that he stopped Snape from being hurt even if it was only to save his friends. That shows he was loyal to his friends and wanted to help them out, that is a plus in his personality isn't it? Also we don't know how he was with other students. Maybe he helped someone with their homework if they needed it? Surely Lily saw more in James then you are giving her or James credit for.

That has always been my theory as well. I also think Peter made sure to make Remus suspiscious of Sirius. It would be so easy for Wormtail to say to Sirius or James "Isn't Remus acting strange? You don't think he is the one betraying you/James/the Order?" Then to Remus he could say "I don't think James should trust him, look at who his family is. How do we know he isn't spying on us for You-Know-Who?" Or stuff along those lines. Everyone was looking over their shoulders already that I think it would have been easy for Wormtail to make them even more paranoid about themselves.

I pretty much think that is what must have happened. Sirius said himself that everyone was paranoid and everyone suspected each other.

James grew up in Godric's Hollow and Sirius in London

Yes, we do. It's covered in DH in discussions about Dumbledore's family... that whole Ignotus Peverell thing.

I don't think we were actually told that James was from Godric's Hollow's, were we? We are told that both Harry and a Peverell descendant were born there (and Ignotus died there) but Voldemort was also descended from that family and his mothers family weren’t from there. May have just been a coincidence for literary purposes.

I care a whole lot more for Ted Tonks than for Harry's own father, simply because I've seen him, heard him, because I connected to him (as opposed to: some fictional character telling me how great he was).

Which is really our, and indeed, Harry's central problem regarding James. James is more of a presence in the books. Harry, and as an extension we, never know a flesh and blood character (in a literary sense) because well, you can never know the dead and as result Harry and we (except for like 2 exceptions) have only other peoples recollections to go on

James might have been arrogant while at school, but Snape wasn't exactly a fluffy little bunny either- he did invent and use the Sectumsempra curse after all, and it's clearly Dark magic, if George's ear couldn't be regrown after getting cursed off. Whatever else we might say about James, he did stick to his beliefs, he's not the one you see using Dark curses, is he?

i don't think it was Wormtail in particaluar that instagated the mis trusting of Remus. yeah everyone was suspecting everyone but James, Sirius and Peter were such good friends that they knew they could trust each other. I can defintally see Remus alianating himself from the rest: That's just what he does.

And, it's not unlikely that Remus had been with the werewolves the entire time. Dumbledore must have needed a spy back then too.

Whatever else we might say about James, he did stick to his beliefs, he's not the one you see using Dark curses, is he?

No he never did. Lily says to Snape: that for all that James and his friends were idiots, that they never used dark magic.

Well, Lupin seems to think that in time of war, dark curses are just neccesary.

Lots of things are necessary in war, which would never be considered by a person in normal situations. Harry and McGonnegal use unforgivables. I think it is more the fact that Snapes friends were using dark magic in school and James and his friends never did anything like that.


In dark times, one of the appalling facts of life is that you have to violate your own morals to achieve an end. Lupin was being realistic and Harry was still clinging to his ethical beliefs (nothing wrong with that of course).
However, Lupin was just illustrating for Harry that it wasn't child's play, that it is either you or them in the survival stakes.

i don't think it was Wormtail in particaluar that instagated the mis trusting of Remus. yeah everyone was suspecting everyone but James, Sirius and Peter were such good friends that they knew they could trust each other.

I don't think Remus was left out of that trust: as he himself said sixteen years later, James would have regarded it as the height of dishonour to mistrust his friends- including himself. I suspect that Sirius was a bit suspicious of Remus at least in part thanks to Peter, but didn't say anything to James because of this very trait of James's. Nowhere in the books is there the suggestion that James or Lily suspected Remus of being the spy, as far as I recall.

I just posted an excerpt of an interview of JK.... She says "come you're a girl..." and then laughs... that laugh and that line speak volumes.... Plus everyone knows JK is a huge fan of Jane Austen... Elizabeth Bennet hated Mr Darcy and fell madly in love with him at the same time.... So I can see what JK means by this...I know. That was the post to which I responded. What I'm saying is that JKR didn't give any good reason for Lily to like James by that point. So, I can accept that Lily did like James then and that JKR intended it to be the case, but I don't see what there was to like. Mr Darcy had motivations for doing things that were unknown to Elizabeth Bennett and made her reevaluate her opinion of him. Unlike Elizabeth Bennett and Mr Darcy, then, it doesn't seem that Lily ever had any notion of James's true motivations for his actions other than what's apparent to her in SWM - bullying Snape - because James had no other motivations.
Yes, we do. It's covered in DH in discussions about Dumbledore's family... that whole Ignotus Peverell thing.Perhaps you could provide a quote (or a page number) because I just looked at that section and didn't see any confirmation that James had grown up in Godric's Hollow - only that he had died and was buried there. There was no mention of graves for other Potters in the cemetery. Also, it seems kind of stupid for James and Lily to have hidden where James grew up, even with the Fidelius Charm - as a mirror to Harry's situation, he is discouraged from going there because that's where the Death Eaters expect him to go.
Lily may have begun to like James once she found out he saved Snape down in the tunnel. Though he continued to bully and have a large ego, she may have seen that he does have some good qualities in him. She didn't act on her feelings because she knew he was a jerk then. It's pretty normal. I mean, Hermione had to wait a while before she knew that Ron had matured enough for her.So, you think that impressed her enough to react differently toward him during SWM than she might otherwise have? It's possible.
Actually the point Lily was making was that Snape's friends were using dark magic against people which is greatly different then what James was doing to others. James' attacks/pranks compared to those of Mulciber, Avery and even Snape were much more harmless. I don't agree with that at all. I think they were just as bad as each other, which is what Lily says to James during SWM. Either way, hurting someone with Light Magic or with Dark Magic, with the intention of hurting that person, isn't admirable. I doubt the person hurt cares what type of magic was used.

I think they were just as bad as each other, which is what Lily says to James during SWM.
But she tells Snape something quite different, doesn't she? Specifically mentioned that the Marauders don't use Dark magic, while his friends do?

Either way, hurting someone with Light Magic or with Dark Magic, with the intention of hurting that person, isn't admirable. I doubt the person hurt cares what type of magic was used.

Absolutely. Dark magic is such because it does harm. The harm is the bad part, not the type of magic used. The pain you cause to others.

But she tells Snape something quite different, doesn't she? Specifically mentioned that the Marauders don't use Dark magic, while he does?

Lily says that: for all James and co. are idiots that they never use dark magic. I figure for her, the type of magic used was important.

The harm is the bad part, not the type of magic used. The pain you cause to others.
But some kinds of harm can be undone by magic, while serious injuries caused by Dark magic, usually can't (George Weasley's ear, for instance). So yeah, the kind of magic used is important, I'd say.

I honestly didn't read that scene as meaning that Harry was made uncomfortable by the fact that his dad was in detention so often, especially when he himself spent as much time in it. He just reacts that way when confronted with any tangible evidence of his parents' lives (witness his reaction to the letter Lily wrote Sirius).

He's uncomfortable about that letter because she mentions Dumbledore and at the time Harry is feeling bad about the Rita Skeeter article, and he thinks that Dumbledore hid too much from him.

How could one not read that scene to mean that Harry was upset by the number of times, and the reasons, that the Marauders were in detention? Harry really isn't in detention that often.

But she tells Snape something quite different, doesn't she? Specifically mentioned that the Marauders don't use Dark magic, while he does?

It doesn't matter if the magic is "Dark" or "light', but rather the intent behind it. James and Sirius meant to humilate Snape, and it worked. That Scorgify is no longer a simple little cleaning spell, but rather a tool with which James insults Snape and chokes him. Obviously certain spells, like Crucio, are non-negotiable, but other than that I think the intentions behind the spell mean everything.

James might have been arrogant while at school, but Snape wasn't exactly a fluffy little bunny either- he did invent and use the Sectumsempra curse after all, and it's clearly Dark magic, if George's ear couldn't be regrown after getting cursed off. Whatever else we might say about James, he did stick to his beliefs, he's not the one you see using Dark curses, is he?

First, we don't actually know if Snape invented that spell. As it not only had a note (for enemies) which the inventor of the spell probably wouldn't need, and it is only written once, there is no crossing off the spells that don't work.

Again, it doesn't matter how Dark a curse may be or not, it is how you use the spell.

I don't think Remus was left out of that trust: as he himself said sixteen years later, James would have regarded it as the height of dishonour to mistrust his friends- including himself. I suspect that Sirius was a bit suspicious of Remus at least in part thanks to Peter, but didn't say anything to James because of this very trait of James's. Nowhere in the books is there the suggestion that James or Lily suspected Remus of being the spy, as far as I recall.

Which is why i think Remus was away at the time, they never had the chance to confide in him.

It was difficult to choose because I've never been fond of James at all, but I don't actually hate him and I do think he seemed to end up a good father and husband.
In the end, I chose "He was an arrogant prat at 15" (Or whatever it was! *lol*).


Basically, I saw James as someone who (for lack of a better phrase) looked down on most - not in a snobby, posh way. Just the way he seemed to only be with Sirius etc - it's like he barely "saw" anyone else around him.
I definitely felt the way he bullied Snape was "proof" he looked down on others. (I know Snape was into the dark magic and all, I'm not blindly devoted to him or anything! *lol*).
When James picked on Snape, all I saw was how James considered Snape lower than himself - he thought he was better than Snape and that Snape could be used for his amusement and to make himself feel better or bigger or whatever about himself.

But yeah, James did seem to be a decent father and husband in the end, he just never grew on me, I never took to him at all.

So, you think that impressed her enough to react differently toward him during SWM than she might otherwise have? It's possible.

I think it impressed her that he actually saved Snape, so she knew he had some good qualities inside him. She may have begun to develop feelings for him because of that, but never acted on it until seventh year because of his behavior.
In SWM, Lily goes off on a rant about everything wrong with James, which - to me - sounded like she had feelings for him. I mean, how many people are that observant?

It was difficult to choose because I've never been fond of James at all, but I don't actually hate him and I do think he seemed to end up a good father and husband.
In the end, I chose "He was an arrogant prat at 15" (Or whatever it was! *lol*).


Basically, I saw James as someone who (for lack of a better phrase) looked down on most - not in a snobby, posh way. Just the way he seemed to only be with Sirius etc - it's like he barely "saw" anyone else around him.
I definitely felt the way he bullied Snape was "proof" he looked down on others. (I know Snape was into the dark magic and all, I'm not blindly devoted to him or anything! *lol*).
When James picked on Snape, all I saw was how James considered Snape lower than himself - he thought he was better than Snape and that Snape could be used for his amusement and to make himself feel better or bigger or whatever about himself.

But yeah, James did seem to be a decent father and husband in the end, he just never grew on me, I never took to him at all.
He loved Lily and he loved Harry, definitely. He was completely loyal to his Marauder friends too. But I agree with your description of him above. James was definitely arrogant, and we don't have canon for him ever outgrowing that. Arrogant people can love their spouses and children as well as humble people can, I suppose.

James thought the world of Sirius, so much that he turned down Dumbledore's offer to be the Secretkeeper in favor of another brilliant idea brought to him by Sirius. Sorry, but I question his judgment, since using his friends instead of Dumbledore turned out disastrously. They were definitely hampered by Groupthink, understandable in time of war, but unfortunate in such clever guys.

We have no proof to this statement though. The only canon we have says that she didn't like him in their 5th year, but liked him in their 7th year. Also ALL of our canon says he did change. We can't just throw canon out the window and make our own assumptions, whether or not you believe his changes were for the better, little or big, he did change, and that was what made Lily like him.

EDIT: My point was to say that James did change and you can't deny that. I don't understand why people are making these assumptions.

I don't believe that we do have canon that says he did change. We have canon that other people thought or said that he did change, but that's an entirely different story. We're not throwing canon out the window and making our own assumptions when we say that any change made was not enough to make up for the bad things he continued doing.

I do believe that James changed slightly and stopped hexing everyone..but I think he was still a prat, even seventh year. Lily didn't know the whole of it, and I think that Lily was also affected by the fact the war was so close. We can't really take Lily as an omniscient character, where the fact that she marries James means by the time of their marriage he must have been sainted. Remember, JKR does not write perfect characters-she simply doesn't. Even Dumbledore, who a lot of people thought would be sainted, ended up being flawed. Thus, while it's fine to have the Perfect-Lily-Thought-James-Was-Perfectly-Good idea, it can't be said to be without any doubt whatsoever.

I do believe that James changed slightly and stopped hexing everyone..but I think he was still a prat, even seventh year. Lily didn't know the whole of it, and I think that Lily was also affected by the fact the war was so close. We can't really take Lily as an omniscient character, where the fact that she marries James means by the time of their marriage he must have been sainted. Remember, JKR does not write perfect characters-she simply doesn't. Even Dumbledore, who a lot of people thought would be sainted, ended up being flawed. Thus, while it's fine to have the Perfect-Lily-Thought-James-Was-Perfectly-Good idea, it can't be said to be without any doubt whatsoever.
I also believe that once he left school James stopped hexing people. But that could be that outside the wild and woolly grounds of Hogwarts, it's really not appropriate to hex people for the fun of it. But he still enjoyed taking risks.

Lily wrote in her letter how James wished for his Invisibility Cloak so he could get out of the house, since they were in hiding. If he didn't mind endangering himself, that's his choice, but what if he'd gone on a jaunt and Lily and Harry were attacked in his absence? It would be a drag to be in hiding, but there was a very good reason for it.

I still think if James is to be considered reformed or redeemed for the really nasty, hateful things he did as a student, we needed to see the remorse. We never did, so I must assume he never felt any. He certainly never confessed to Lily the extent of his dealings with Snape, did he? So he wasn't completely honest with his own wife. I wish I could see James becoming a better person, but there's just no sign of it.

I still think if James is to be considered reformed or redeemed for the really nasty, hateful things he did as a student, we needed to see the remorse. We never did, so I must assume he never felt any. He certainly never confessed to Lily the extent of his dealings with Snape, did he? So he wasn't completely honest with his own wife. I wish I could see James becoming a better person, but there's just no sign of it.

We don't know any of that, he might have, he may not have, we just don't know.

We don't know any of that, he might have, he may not have, we just don't know. I'm judging by what I saw and failed to see in canon. If it was in the books, but I missed it, please let me know where I can read it.

Lily wrote in her letter how James wished for his Invisibility Cloak so he could get out of the house, since they were in hiding. If he didn't mind endangering himself, that's his choice, but what if he'd gone on a jaunt and Lily and Harry were attacked in his absence? It would be a drag to be in hiding, but there was a very good reason for it.

It's the same with how Remus was in DH, wasn't it? James - like Sirius - didn't like to be sitting around doing nothing. He'd rather be out there fighting against Voldemort. James's intentions for trying to be in the midst of the action was the same as Remus's: he wanted to create a better world for his family.

It's the same with how Remus was in DH, wasn't it? James - like Sirius - didn't like to be sitting around doing nothing. He'd rather be out there fighting against Voldemort. James's intentions for trying to be in the midst of the action was the same as Remus's: he wanted to create a better world for his family.


This isn't really the thread to discuss Lupin but IMO he didn't want to go off with Harry because he didn't like to be sitting around with nothing to do. He felt he had made a mistake in marrying Tonks and now getting her pregnant. He felt that because of his furry little problem he was making her and would make their child an outcast in the traditional wizarding world. He was trying to run away from his own guilt and fears. Harry is the one who assumed he wanted to be like Sirius and have a bit of fun or excitement by doing something dangerous. Yes Lupin died in battle to make the world a better place for Teddy but he didn't do it because he was bored and sitting around doing nothing.

James IMO was likely restless but I doubt he would have done anything that would put Lily and Harry in jeopardy. He might have snuck out but once outside I would bet anything he would have been to worried about Lily and Harry to have gone far.

James IMO was likely restless but I doubt he would have done anything that would put Lily and Harry in jeopardy. He might have snuck out but once outside I would bet anything he would have been to worried about Lily and Harry to have gone far. Also, in her letter, Lily did not seem to be concerned about James leaving - her tone suggested to me that she wanted James to move around a little. They both trusted Peter, and they were both sure that Voldemort was not coming to attack as long as Peter was around.

Well, we know James is loyal to his friends the Marauders, so I don't think it's a bad thing for him to try to save his own and his friends' necks. But we see that SWM happened very close to this time, and James justifies his attack on Snape by telling Lily that "he exists." So I do think it's more likely that James was worried about his friends than about Severus Snape. But they are 15 year old boys with a school-age feud, they do not like each other. The fact that James went to save Snape shows that he realized what was happening, and that it was going to get out of hand. Sirius and James could have brushed it off saying that Snape took it upon himself to go down there, that they had nothing to do with it, and whatever happened to Snape happened to him. There would have been no way to prove that Sirius and James caused it. But James stopped it, because he didn't want Snape to get seriously injured or die. I would think that it is evident in the manner we see this incident discussed that Snape is biased when he talks about it. Lily (the all-perfect one in the eyes of some) says that James saved Snape's life as well. It is only Snape who sees James saving his own neck.

There are the detention cards that Snape has Harry copy out, where he sees James and Sirius often enough that he's made uncomfortable by their antics.Think of all the things Harry and Ron have done to Draco: have we ever seen them show remorse toward Draco? I believe the last scene we have (before the Epilogue) is Ron punching Draco from under the invisibility cloak. Why do people think that James was gutless, and a horrible person, because he had a schoolyard feud, very similar to the one Harry has with Draco.

I agree that James didn't think Lily and Harry were in jeopardy. I was just trying to say in my earlier post that, if James was going out, he was probably doing it because he wanted to help the Order fight Voldemort.

I don't believe that we do have canon that says he did change. We have canon that other people thought or said that he did change, but that's an entirely different story. We're not throwing canon out the window and making our own assumptions when we say that any change made was not enough to make up for the bad things he continued doing. I have yet to see anyone come up with anything that contradicts the canon that James changed. Sure it was from Lupin who was biased, but since the books are over, and we have no contradictions on the subject then we have to take it as fact. Jo let us see parts of these characters lives that she picked for us to see, she told us what we need to be told about these characters, and since nothing more was told to us about James changing other than Lupin's statements we have to take them as fact and go along with them.

I do believe that James changed slightly and stopped hexing everyone..but I think he was still a prat, even seventh year. Lily didn't know the whole of it, and I think that Lily was also affected by the fact the war was so close. We can't really take Lily as an omniscient character, where the fact that she marries James means by the time of their marriage he must have been sainted. Remember, JKR does not write perfect characters-she simply doesn't. Even Dumbledore, who a lot of people thought would be sainted, ended up being flawed. Thus, while it's fine to have the Perfect-Lily-Thought-James-Was-Perfectly-Good idea, it can't be said to be without any doubt whatsoever.I have never seen the words "James" and "perfect" used in the same sentence, the only things I have seen is James' changes in life, are what made Lily fall for him.

I'd like to see you all take a deep breath and stop directly or indirectly accusing each other of either glorifying or demonising James. Thanks.

I'd like to see you all take a deep breath and stop directly or indirectly accusing each other of either glorifying or demonising James. Thanks.

To make sure everyone sees this message of hope and love I'm closing the thread for a couple hours.

Think happy thoughts until we come back.

I agree that James didn't think Lily and Harry were in jeopardy. I was just trying to say in my earlier post that, if James was going out, he was probably doing it because he wanted to help the Order fight Voldemort.

Well, Lily does mention 'little excursions', which don't sound like Order work to me, more like James wanted to stretch his legs a bit and a stag prancing around the village isn't exactly inconspicuous, is it? The letter made it sound like James and Lily were confined to their house, and had been for a while, much like Sirius in Grimmauld Place.

Well, Lily does mention 'little excursions', which don't sound like Order work to me, more like James wanted to stretch his legs a bit and a stag prancing around the village isn't exactly inconspicuous, is it? The letter made it sound like James and Lily were confined to their house, and had been for a while, much like Sirius in Grimmauld Place.
Exactly! I bet James was going as crazy in there as Sirius did in Grimmauld Place. The only difference is he had to stay confined because he couldn't put Lily and little Harry in any more danger than they already were in... He probably felt like he should be "out there" with Sirius fighting against other deatheaters....
I am glad the thread is back in business again.... YAY!

Originally Posted by anabel
James grew up in Godric's Hollow, and must have had contact with Bathilda Bagshot - did he know about Ariana?
We don't know where James grew up. He hid in Godric's Hollow.Well, his ancestor Ignotus Peverell, from whom he inherited the Cloak, was buried there, and Dumbledore said Harry was born there, and we know the Potters didn't go into hiding until after Harry was born, so it does look as if James had roots in Godric's Hollow and that the house he died in was probably the family home. Fidelius is such a perfect protection that it doesn't matter if the house is already known - cf 12 Grimmauld Place. Of course that doesn't prove that he lived all his life there, but it does seem likely in the absence of any other evidence. James had elderly parents, so I'm betting they were friends with Bathilda Bagshot. It's not certain exactly how old they were - probably younger than Dumbledore himself, so they probably didn't know his mother, but given Jo's difficulties with numbers and dates it's impossible to say what her intention was in this case. However, there is a very strong link between James Potter and Godric's Hollow, and we know that James and Lily socialised with Bathilda Bagshot, so it's not that much of a stretch to suggest that James knew something of Dumbledore's backstory.

I'd be surprised if James hadn't lived in Godric's Hollow. I've never given it a second thought. There's too much likeliness that he lived there.

So, does James know about the Deadly Hallows? Or suspected something of the like? Seeing as he did entrust his cloak too Dumbledore to examine it.

So, does James know about the Deadly Hallows? Or suspected something of the like? Seeing as he did entrust his cloak too Dumbledore to examine it.

I don't believe James or Lily knew about the Deathly Hallows (or believed in them). If they had; they likely would have questioned Dumbledore a bit more. James may have known by that point what DD's weakness was, too - so a request to "check if your cloak is a Deathly Hallow" may not have gone so well, if James knew that.

That just triggered a thought in my brain...do you think the reason James didn't trust DD with being secret-keeper is that James did know that DD had a weakness for power? Growing up in Godric's Hollow (presumably), he had a better chance of knowing about DD's family.

He certainly never confessed to Lily the extent of his dealings with Snape, did he? So he wasn't completely honest with his own wife. I wish I could see James becoming a better person, but there's just no sign of it.

What makes you say this? She saw him at his worst, called him a toe rag, listed his faults for all and sundry to hear. I think that Lily had the measure of James Potter. As to his extent of dealing with Snape...don't you think it would look odd if James just randomly picked Snape out of a crowd and hung him upside down? Obviously there was animosity between them leading up to that. As far as the wereworlf "prank" is concerned, even Lily says that James saved him. Dumbledore later says the same in SS, claiming that Snape tried so hard to save Harry because of it so he could go back to hating James in peace. Only Snape of the three (Snape, Lily, and Dumbledore) people seem to think that James had ulterior motives, but his actions in SS seem to indicate that he knew that James did was right.

The letter made it sound like James and Lily were confined to their house, and had been for a while, much like Sirius in Grimmauld Place

I've often wondered about this. I believe that Lily cast the Fidelius Charm, and the reason that they chose someone other than Dumbledore for Secret Keeper is because they were afraid that Dumbledore would force them to stay inside against their will. (Much as he did with Sirius) It appears to me that James and Lily wanted a life independent of Dumbledore's oversight. (Actually in this respect, Peter was a good choice, because if James and Lily wanted the secret revealed to someone for some reason, Peter would not argue with them. Where as Dumbledore might override their wishes.) I certainly thought that James would not leave Lily and Harry unprotected. With the Fidelius Charm in place, they were protected. In fact, we must remember that the Charm was there to protect James as well as Lily and Harry. But he was also protected by his cloak (which as we know was impervious to all spells) so his leaving the protection of the house, under the cloak, was not as fool hardy as one might think. Perhaps his little excursions were trying to locate Voldy and launch a preemptive strike, and not put the Charm to the test...


Well, his ancestor Ignotus Peverell, from whom he inherited the Cloak, was buried there, and Dumbledore said Harry was born there, and we know the Potters didn't go into hiding until after Harry was born, so it does look as if James had roots in Godric's Hollow and that the house he died in was probably the family home. Fidelius is such a perfect protection that it doesn't matter if the house is already known - cf 12 Grimmauld Place. Of course that doesn't prove that he lived all his life there, but it does seem likely in the absence of any other evidence. James had elderly parents, so I'm betting they were friends with Bathilda Bagshot. It's not certain exactly how old they were - probably younger than Dumbledore himself, so they probably didn't know his mother, but given Jo's difficulties with numbers and dates it's impossible to say what her intention was in this case. However, there is a very strong link between James Potter and Godric's Hollow, and we know that James and Lily socialised with Bathilda Bagshot, so it's not that much of a stretch to suggest that James knew something of Dumbledore's backstory.

I agree with this wholeheartedly! :tu:

I have yet to see anyone come up with anything that contradicts the canon that James changed. Sure it was from Lupin who was biased, but since the books are over, and we have no contradictions on the subject then we have to take it as fact. Jo let us see parts of these characters lives that she picked for us to see, she told us what we need to be told about these characters, and since nothing more was told to us about James changing other than Lupin's statements we have to take them as fact and go along with them.
Well, I’ll just re-post my previous post for you:


The only problem I have is that we never actually get to see if James really grew up. His continuing to hex Snape in seventh year, and Sirius' himself not growing up (even between him being 15 and being thrown into Azkaban, we see no real growth.) makes me wonder about James.

I really would like to see him truly feel bad about his actions, not only to Snape but the other people he was supposed to have hexed throughout his school year. But I really haven't seen anything to show this.

In fact, we see that even after the werewolf 'prank' James is still picking on Snape! No wonder why Snape thought he was just out to protect his friends, the guys still bullying him. (And I think it is interesting to note that Snape still kept Remus' secret, even after they continued to bully him)

I really want to see him redeemed, but unless Jo says that he was, I'll have to assume otherwise from the canon indicated. People can say all the nice things they want about him, but his actions will speak louder than their words ever can.


The fact is that we really don't see any change in James. And just because Lupin said he did, and that was the last we heard of it, doesn't mean that Lupin must therefore be right. The logic is flawed, we may have never heard anyone mention James' redemption, but we did see his actions. As noted above, even after the werewolf prank they are still picking on Snape, which makes me question the 'growth' he had supposedly undergone when he saved Snape.

All in all we have nothing to indicate that James truly ever felt remourse for what he did to Snape. And unless he did I can never feel as if he was redeemed.

Well, Lily does mention 'little excursions', which don't sound like Order work to me, more like James wanted to stretch his legs a bit and a stag prancing around the village isn't exactly inconspicuous, is it? The letter made it sound like James and Lily were confined to their house, and had been for a while, much like Sirius in Grimmauld Place.

Even if James only desired to get out of the house, I can imagine him wanting to go out and do something.
But the letter is a bit confusing. Lily thanks Sirius for the birthday gift, but it makes it sound like the Potter family were in hiding. I thought the Fidelius charm was cast a week before Halloween?

Even if James only desired to get out of the house, I can imagine him wanting to go out and do something.
But the letter is a bit confusing. Lily thanks Sirius for the birthday gift, but it makes it sound like the Potter family were in hiding. I thought the Fidelius charm was cast a week before Halloween?

I guess that JKR made another error there.

^They could have been in hiding before they took the extreme measures of the fidelius charm.

I find it odd, that people believe that James needs to have performed some kind of momentous, heroic, selfless (pick out any other adjectives you might need) act for him to get on the way to changing from being the bully that he was during SWM, to the man that was absolutely revered by all who spoke of him save for Snape.

Whats wrong with the possibility that James came around to thinking "all this stuff I'm doing to people and have done to people, I'm better than that, I'm going to be better than that" and gone forth a better man. Its called growing up, most characters managed to do that.

I think it makes it more interesting, and adds an interesting little dimension to James to where it didn't have to be the Werewolf Caper to propel him to mature, he did it because he wanted to. (I guess I'll touch on this a little more in Question 6)

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?

As a 15 year old boy, no I don't think James was a good role model, but as the 21 year old man that had thrice defied Voldemort, and died without remotely hesitating in an attempt to give his wife and child time to escape yes I think absolutely James is a good role model.

I think he'd have been an excellent father as well, everything we've ever been shown showed he loved Harry dearly and would have done anything for him.

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

The idea that James chose to listen to Sirius because of some inherent disrespect for Dumbledore has always sat strangely with me. I think James simply thought that it was something that he, his wife and the rest of the Marauders could handle, he didn't think he'd get betrayed.

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

Absolutely. Sirius was a good man, and like James would have done absolutely anything for Harry.

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

Once again, seems pretty obvious to me that he did. You put the 15 year old bully, next to the 21 year old man, and something has obviously changed. He grew up, he got the girl, he fought bravely for the Order, and he died trying to protect his family. He changed, and for the better

5. What was James’ relationship to

Lily Evans: Chased her around early in his tenure at school, grew up as a 7th year, won her over and became a loving husband

Sirius Black: Brother in every sense but blood

Peter Pettigrew: Guess it was more of a worshipper/worshipee

Remus Lupin: Great friends, not to the extent that he and Sirius were though

Albus Dumbledore/Minerva McGonagall: Respected teachers, and then peers in the Order. Obviously wasn't as close to Dumbledore as Harry wound up becoming

Frank and Alice Longbottom: Peers in the Order, maybe as school mates, we never really get a definitive answer

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?

An interesting question. I suppose it played a part, but I've always believed that the James/Snape conflict was a mutual one, and their first meeting where each scoffed at the other's preference of house probably spawned the mutual dislike that was only snowballed by each guy's attraction to Lily, amongst other issues.

As to whether or not saving Snape during the Werewolf Caper redeemed him, I don't know. To save a life, for whatever reason is noble, and James did that Dumbledore obviously thought it noteworthy.

The fact that the Werewolf Caper took place before SWM just shows that James' maturation, redemption or whatever you want to call it, took a little time.

Wow! This is exactly how I feel. Great post. I think people judge James to harshly sometimes, Snape to softly and don't look at the big picture. For all we know Snape may have been the Wormtail to the future death eaters. The tag along worshiper. I'm not saying this to demean Snape just to say that James' actions toward Snape weren't happening in a vacuum. It was common that kids would use spells on each other. The death eater kids were probably making some poor Gryffindor's lives hell, and even Lily expressed disgust at the company Snape kept. I think she even thought James and co. weren't as bad as many of Snape's friends.

My sister compares James and Sirius to Fred and George and I think that is accurate. LOL! I could most definitely see Fred and George pulling cruel pranks on little Slytherins.

My point is that that is only a small part of the whole of someone's character. Bullying someone in school. It's hard to come to terms with from the perspective of someone that is being bullied, but it's true.

That may all be true... expect that Harry spesifically said that Fred And George didn't do such things.

^Really? I'm reading Goblet of Fire and a little kid got sorted into Slytherin. Fred and George booed and hissed at him while Draco patted him on the back. Where does Harry say Fred and George wouldn't to it? They experimented on the little kids in their own house for the Skivving Snackboxes. I could definitely see them bullying little Slytherins. Probably not to the point of drawing blood but... they are continual pranksters.

Yeah Remus would have been a good choice. If Remus Told Harry about a time James did something, truely selfless then I would go aww. That was nice of him. It could have been right before Remus offered to help Harry. Some thing... anything. Oh and it didn't help that DD didn't defend James' character either but DD was just playing Snape at the time so he could have just be saying what Snape wanted to hear.

What about the fact that Sirius and James were the first friends Lupin ever had? When they found out he was a warewolf, instead of reviling him as all other wizards would have, they set about becoming Animagi illegally just to be with him. That's love.

The fact is that we really don't see any change in James.But the books aren't about James, we saw what we needed to about James, and we were told all we needed to. We can't make assumptions based on what wasn't there, we can only make assumptions on what was there. And since we saw so little of James to begin with it is really unfair to speculate on what we didn't see.

And just because Lupin said he did, and that was the last we heard of it, doesn't mean that Lupin must therefore be right. The logic is flawed, we may have never heard anyone mention James' redemption, but we did see his actions. As noted above, even after the werewolf prank they are still picking on Snape, which makes me question the 'growth' he had supposedly undergone when he saved Snape. The logic isn't flawed. You can't forget that these are books, and everything that was told to us was told for a reason. Lupin said James changed, there is nothing to contradict this, we have to accept it.

Also, everyone seems to be thinking of James as a prat for picking on Snape, but what about Harry being a prat for picking on Draco? Is Harry as great of a prat? Because by the logic used, he should be, Ron punched Draco during the Battle of Hogwarts, so Harry and Ron are just like James was to Snape. Correct?

All in all we have nothing to indicate that James truly ever felt remourse for what he did to Snape. And unless he did I can never feel as if he was redeemed.I am going to draw another conclusion to Harry/Draco. Again the last scene we have of them is Draco being punched out during the Battle of Hogwarts, we then get a scene 19 years later, much older and much more mature, where Draco nods to Harry on the Platform. Is that remorse? Is Harry redeemed for how he hounded on Draco for years? If Snape had nodded at James on the Platform would James be redeemed?

When drawing comparisons to things we now a lot more about, such as Draco/Harry the conclusions people are coming to about James/Snape do not make any sense.

Also, everyone seems to be thinking of James as a prat for picking on Snape, but what about Harry being a prat for picking on Draco? Is Harry as great of a prat? Because by the logic used, he should be, Ron punched Draco during the Battle of Hogwarts, so Harry and Ron are just like James was to Snape. Correct?

Actually, I tend to compare James to Draco, picking on people but only when he has others to back him up on it.

Actually, I tend to compare James to Draco, picking on people but only when he has others to back him up on it.

Oh I loved that JKR put Draco's words about Hufflepuff into James' mouth regarding Slytherin. Both Draco and James are rich, the only child, spoiled and arrogant. There the similarities end. I don't see Snape as James' social equal as Draco is to Harry in school. There is another vital difference: Enjoyment of homicidal prejudice. LOL! Ain't no way James would EVER be a death eater. He despised the dark arts. That's a big difference between himself and Snape also. It's funny that Snape probably loved the Slytherin bullies, much to Lily's disgust. Probably looked up to them. Snape probably laughed at the Gryffindor's who were bullied. Snape became a huge ADULT bully and enjoyed it. You should really know better once you're a teacher I'm thinking... and who's a bigger bully than Voldemort? I guess Snape disliked being bullied more than bullying on principal. Wasn't Draco Snape's favorite? While Snape hated Harry's guts always comparing him to James. Go figure.

On another note...

I think we are meant to see a lot of James' character in Harry. Harry is hotheaded, rushes into things and despises the dark arts. I don't think it's for nothing that Sirius and Snape compare him to James often. I think some of Harry's good qualities are shared with James. However, Sirius was a bit blinded by love and Snape a bit blinded by hatred and so didn't see a lot of the glaring differences between James and Harry. Harry isn't arrogant. James was. Harry isn't a bully. James was. Harry isn't a prankster. James was. There are lots of things. But I don't think Harry was completely wrong in being proud to be compared to his father. I don't think the comparisons with James were idle talk. When people said Harry was so like James, I don't think they just meant in looks. Since Harry doesn't have similar vices, I come to the conclusion that they have similar strenghts and maybe even a similar manner.

The problem with coloring James' whole character by his treatment of Snape is that James is ultimately the better man. Sorry, but I think he is. If Voldemort had killed Frank and Alice Longbottom and their son Neville, is there any indication that Snape would have jumped ship? If Harry had not had Lily's eyes, would Snape have continued to help Dumbledore? We don't know. But as much as James detested Snape's guts, he saved him from Sirius' trick. I think he would have saved anyone from death. The fact that he still hated him afterwards makes it even more selfless. I guess you could say that he didn't want to get in trouble. But I see it differently. I think if it were James about to be eaten, Snape would have let him die and just desserts. LOL.

Rather than the idea that James needed to be redeemed by Lily, i think James needed to be humbled by life and perspective. It is Snape who needed redemption, and he was redeemed by his love for Lily. It is unfortunate that it took her being threatened with death to make him see how much he cared for her. Above even the dark arts. *sniff, sniff*

I think James is a guy's guy. Cedric Diggory with spice, with hot sauce, a naughty streak. LOL! Good at everything he puts his mind to, but not a goody goody. I think there would be a lot of laughter around James. He was probably full of energy and fun.

Actually, I tend to compare James to Draco, picking on people but only when he has others to back him up on it.

There are other parallels between James and Draco. Both are pampered, only sons of wealthy families. They both pick on, bully, humiliate poor, badly dressed, socially unconnected classmates from another house.

Actually, I tend to compare James to Draco, picking on people but only when he has others to back him up on it.Then you would be comparing Snape to Harry? Which would show that Snape too brutally picked on James and his friends.

I saw many parallels between James and Harry. They both were Quidditch stars and either liked or disliked for it - garnering a jealous reaction at times. They both showed great trust in their close friends and went the extra mile for them; they both were arrogant (Sirius on James and JKR on Harry); they both favored good and doing the right thing (James rescued Snape/Harry rescued Draco - both working for the good cause).

Those things and other seeming likenesses between them made me think of Harry when I think of James' Character. Harry matured faster - he'd had a bitter childhood and had been dealing with evil since 11, so to me that was understandable. On the whole, for basic characteristics, I personally look to Harry to see a reflection of James.

Even if James only desired to get out of the house, I can imagine him wanting to go out and do something.
But he couldn't have wandered too far afield, not with Voldemort hunting them all down.

But the letter is a bit confusing. Lily thanks Sirius for the birthday gift, but it makes it sound like the Potter family were in hiding. I thought the Fidelius charm was cast a week before Halloween?
They were in hiding all right, or at least confined to their house, but without the Fidelius Charm. It's possible to go into hiding without that I suppose, it was only as an absolute last resort that it was used. So it doesn't really count as an error in my book.

And I do agree about James being the better man, not least because there were things in his life that he firmly believed in- like his (by all accounts) lifelong opposition to the Dark Arts, or even his outright rejection of the pureblood ideology- I mean, give him some credit for that, right? Snape might be a tragic anti-hero, but I don't see that as casting a bad light on James's own heroism.

Originally Posted by Yoana
But really, we have one twitch of the mouth against a genuine annoyance with him, insults, open disapproval of his behaviour and storming off because of that. I'd say she definitely disliked him at that point, in that moment. It's clear as day from what she said, unless she was lying or pretending.


Sometimes, what isn't said is more important than what is. She almost laughed when Snape's underpants were on display. She was standing amid a crowd of people who were cheering.

I don't understand why people are so certain that a tiny twitch of the mouth indicates amusement. It might, but it could just as easily be a twitch of disgust or dismay. I'm not convinced that Lily was restraining laughter at James' antics, or a giggle for Sev's tatty drawers.

I do think she noticed everything James did, but is it because she secretly liked him, or because her best friend was his target? If she felt some attraction to James she was also probably annoyed with herself for feeling it, and wasn't about to cut him any slack unless or until he grew up.

He either did grow up, or was able to convince her that he had. That's really all I can deduce about how they got together. I have no proof that the adult James was not a fine and admirable young man. But the only proof I do have that he was fine and admirable is his devotion to his friends and family and to the Order.

Equivocal proof, for me as well as others who brought it up,
would be a scene of him sincerely expressing regret for his wanky ways as a youth.

I don't know that he didn't feel it, just as I don't know that he did. Darn you, Jo!

Actually...I've just thought of something that may help me get a handle on James. My spouse had a friend in high school who was popular, clever, a prankster, a ringleader. He wasn't vicious (except to the extent that I think practical jokes always have some basis in malice) but he thought rather highly of himself and could never resist showing off. He was accustomed to a certain amount of hero worship. Everyone thought he was the coolest of the cool. He was slippery, too, according to all the stories I've heard of how he avoided the consequences of his exploits. I didn't know him then; I met him in his early twenties.

He grew up (miraculously without serious harm to himself or others), works as a sales rep for a big company, goes to church, has a very pretty wife and three kids of whom he is exceptionally proud...he's the picture of suburban success and decency...there's not a thing you can point to that shows otherwise...and yet I feel like I don't know this guy at all. There's nothing to indicate that he's doing anything he shouldn't but I always have this feeling that he is, or that he's about to. I'm either biased by what I've been told about him, or I'm picking up on something underneath a facade of good behavior.

Regardless, on the surface he's "a nice guy." As with James, I have no proof that this fellow as an adult isn't fine and admirable, and the only proof I do have that he is fine and admirable is his apparent devotion to his family and career.

Unless or until he does something wrong, I only have what my eyes are telling me. Just like with the adult James. What we see is his devotion to his family and friends and the Order, and that's it.

Even if James only desired to get out of the house, I can imagine him wanting to go out and do something.
But he couldn't have gone too far afield even if he wanted, and Lily's letter doesn't sound like he's itching for action, more like he's tired of being cooped up.
But the letter is a bit confusing. Lily thanks Sirius for the birthday gift, but it makes it sound like the Potter family were in hiding. I thought the Fidelius charm was cast a week before Halloween?

They could have been in hiding without the Fidelius Charm too, if their protections were anything like the ones set over the Tonks's house the night Harry crashed in their garden- Voldemort and the Death Eaters couldn't get through those. So it's not really an error.

They could have been in hiding without the Fidelius Charm too, if their protections were anything like the ones set over the Tonks's house the night Harry crashed in their garden- Voldemort and the Death Eaters couldn't get through those. So it's not really an error.

I didn't think it was an error, I was just wondering why they'd be in hiding. But thanks for clearing that up, I've been wondering.

I, like many others, see some similarities between James and Draco, particularly when James said he'd leave if he were in Slytherin. James and Draco both bullied their rivals (for James, it was Snape and for Draco it was Harry). James and Draco are both Pure-bloods and Snape and Harry were both Half-bloods. James and Draco are both from wealthy families, too.
But when Harry saved Draco in the Room of Requirement, that actually reminded me of how James saved Snape.

Yeah, but it can't ever be a straight comparison, given that James isn't into pureblood racism and Draco quite clearly was. Or quite a few other things, really.

Yes, of course. James was definitely a better man. He despised the Dark Arts, unlike Draco, and did not have the idea of pureblood superiority. Even though James grew up knowing the Wizarding World his whole life, he did not gain the prejudice against Remus as many other witches and wizards do. Draco, however, believed others such as Hermione, Hagrid and Remus to be beneath him.

That just triggered a thought in my brain...do you think the reason James didn't trust DD with being secret-keeper is that James did know that DD had a weakness for power? Growing up in Godric's Hollow (presumably), he had a better chance of knowing about DD's family.
Well, yes - that was the gist of my original post about this yesterday. I'm not sure if there's anything in it, but there must have been talk about Dumbledore in Godric's Hollow.

Well, yes - that was the gist of my original post about this yesterday. I'm not sure if there's anything in it, but there must have been talk about Dumbledore in Godric's Hollow.

I missed most of yesterday; my apologies. The threads do go by so fast :p.

My point is that that is only a small part of the whole of someone's character. Bullying someone in school. It's hard to come to terms with from the perspective of someone that is being bullied, but it's true.
I remember one particular girl who bullied me in primary school. She was older than me, but we went to the same secondary school too. She actually turned out pretty decent, but I'll never forget how empowering it was for me to point out in front of her new secondary school friends that she used to make me stand still while she whipped me around the legs with the belt of her raincoat when we were younger! She was really embarrassed! :D Just because someone bullies others at one point in their life, doesn't make them a bad person for the rest of their life.