James Potter: Character Analysis

I do think James was an arrogant teenager, and bullying seems an accurate description of what he did to Snape. The scene we are shown through Snape's memories can only be described as ugly. However, I also accept that James matured to be a very brave man and a loving husband and father. We are told this by Lupin (who is, I think, presented as a fair assessor of people's characters) and we witness James's bravery in standing up to Voldemort.

My problem is that, while I accept that James grew to be very different from the arrogant teenager we see, I can't quite feel it. Perhaps this is because the scene with James bullying Snape is so well drawn by Rowling. My impression of James the teenager is far more vivid than James the man.

The fact is that we really don't see any change in James.
You don't think that the transition from a 15 year old toerag to a responsible husband and father is change? :huh:

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.

We have loads of canon that he outgrew it, at least in the remarks made by those who knew him best: Dumbledore, Sirius and Lupin. I wonder if James could better be described as self-confident and comfortable inside his own skin?

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.

I agree with you there. I've wished many times that James had just accepted Dumbledore's offer.

Just because someone bullies others at one point in their life, doesn't make them a bad person for the rest of their life.

I agree with you, of course assuming they outgrow being bullies. James it seemed whether because of time or because of his feelings for Lily or both did out grow it and only attacked when he was attacked first which would have been self defense.

My problem is that, while I accept that James grew to be very different from the arrogant teenager we see, I can't quite feel it. Perhaps this is because the scene with James bullying Snape is so well drawn by Rowling. My impression of James the teenager is far more vivid than James the man.

Yes, that's my problem with his description, too. We have 'first-hand' information on him as a kid, but only other people, friends testifying on him as an adult. Mind you, everything Sirius and Remus have ever said might be absolutely true, but seeing that they're his best friends and talking to his orphaned son, it gives me a 'yeah, whatever' feeling. Why, I'd feel better about it if Bellatrix, or Lucius were overheard saying something about him like 'You remember what a snotnosed little toerag that one was in school? Who'd have thought he'd once become so sensible and dauntless'. Let them say it in disdain, for all I care. If we can't get any 'first-hand' (Pensieve, portrait, etc), I'd be happy with a less benevolent 'second-hand', too, but as it is, he leaves me feeling nothing about him at all.

he leaves me feeling nothing about him at all.

You know, we have tons of canon on Snape and that jaw-dropper of a chapter in DH... but he leaves me feeling empty, just as James does you. I used to hate Snape with a passion. Now I just hate him. No passion whatsoever.

James, on the other hand, has always struck me as a nice guy, funny, witty, and just plain good people.

You know, we have tons of canon on Snape and that jaw-dropper of a chapter in DH... but he leaves me feeling empty, just as James does you. I used to hate Snape with a passion. Now I just hate him. No passion whatsoever.

James, on the other hand, has always struck me as a nice guy, funny, witty, and just plain good people.

Yeah I know what you mean... After the seventh book I tried my level best to fall for Snape. But the truth is I never doubted his allegiance so my perspective of him hasn't changed that much... I love James as a character. The best of us make the worst of mistakes and James is the perfect example for that. He made his fair share of mistakes but he matured... he grew up. He made sacrifices and he loved his family (in the normal sort of the way.. he's not obsessed with any one in particular). He's a good guy... he's most definitely an idiot but his heart is at the right place...

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?
I think that James, the person who was fun loving, loyal to his friends, hater of the Dark Arts and member of the Order of the Phoenix was a very good man. This is a man who managed to thawt Voldemort 3 times along with his wife. I think he would have been an awesome father, as he was already starting to show before he died. I think that he is a source of strength for Harry.

2. Why did James chose Sirius over Dumbledore as Secret Keeper? Didn’t he trust Dumbledore with his life?
I think it was partly because it was a complete dishonour for him to think that he could be wrong in trusting his friends with his life. I also am warming to the idea that maybe he had started to believe the stories regarding Dumbledore and Grindelwald, but mostly because he trusted his friends, with his, his wife and his son's lives.

3. James made Sirius Harry’s godfather. Was this a good decision?
If James and Lily hadn't of died, Sirius would have been a great Godfather, he would have been the one giving the noisy toys to annoy James and Lily and excite Harry.

4. We got bits and pieces of James’ life. Has he matured over the years and become a better person?
Without a doubt! He joined the Order of the Phoenix... He was against the Dark Arts. I really don't think there can be ANY doubt as to whether he was a good man or not. It may not be as simple as good people and Death Eaters, but there is certainly two sides good and evil. Evil being the Death Eaters, and good being those who don't support Death Eaters.

5. What was James’ relationship to Lily Evans
Husband and friend. I don't think that Lily was the reason for James's transformation from the 15 year old who hung Snape in the air. Largely because I think Snape's Worst Memory is hard for us to put into comparision to the muggle world. This is a world where you can make people's leg's go like jelly... That's a little different to a wedgie... How horrid SWM is, is relative to the world that they live in. Considering one of Snape's friends had we can only assume tortured in some way, one of Lily's friends, I think turning someone upside down and showing their underwear isn't actually that bad...

Sirius Black
Loyal best friend. Sirius would have done anything for James, and James would have for him. James' family taking Sirius in after he ran away from his family is a pretty good sign of this...

Peter Pettigrew
I think that James trusted Peter as a friend. Clearly the trust was misplaced.

Remus Lupin
I've always conscribed to the theory that Peter had helped "sow the seeds of doubt" so to speak for James and Sirius not trusting Remus. Otherwise I think he and James were good friends. I doubt becoming an animagus was as much of a thrill as people sometimes portray it. It took them several years to learn, and if Sirius and James did it purely for the thrill of being an illegal animagus than the thrill would have dwindled over time.

Albus Dumbledore
I really don't know how close James was to Albus. I think they may have been family friends given that they both lived at Godrics hollow at one time or another.

Minerva McGonagall
I like to think that Minerva was as hard and stern on James as she was with Harry, but with the softish affection that she so rarely shows.

Frank and Alice Longbottom
I've always been intregued as to whether or not James, Lily, Frank and Alice were actually good friends or not. I'm uncertain.

6. How much of James' hatred of Snape do you think was jealousy over his friendship with Lily? Do you think he redeemed himself by saving his life in spite of this jealousy?
I don't think James' hatred of Snape was purely because of Lily. There may have been a little bit, but largely I think it was because Snape was aligning himself with future death eaters and as such James didn't like him. Plus Snape did seem to try and get James and his friends expelled at every chance...

Clearly he was a good husband and father, Lily sounded quite content in her letter to Sirius despite the fact that the family had been in hiding long enough for James to be getting tired of it. And I do find Harry's wondering whether James forced Lily to marry him quite ironic, considering that by HBP it was Voldemort who turned out to be the product of a marriage that wouldn't have taken place had Tom Riddle Senior been in his right mind.

While we're describing feelings towards characters, I've never understood the fascination with James. He's only ever seen as the bullying, arrogant student. His adult life is a mystery, save for a few passages. Perhaps if we had been allowed to actually see him as an adult, rather than rely on second-hand information....I find that information Harry gets from others is often tainted.

Clearly he was a good husband and father, Lily sounded quite content in her letter to Sirius despite the fact that the family had been in hiding long enough for James to be getting tired of it.

If Lily had been discontent (and I'm not saying she was) she would be unlikely to tell Sirius about it, given the relationship between Sirius and James.

As far as them having been in hiding long enough for James to get tired of it, that could have been two weeks. :lol: I rather think it had been longer, given Harry's broomstick (which I would imagine a child would need to be old enough to walk before they could ride), but there is little evidence to say how long it actually was.

....I find that information Harry gets from others is often tainted.
It's only tainted if we subsequently get new information to counter what he has previously heard. For instance, in PoA, he overhears that Peter Pettigrew was dead and Sirius betrayed his parents. We subsequently find out that was wrong. Or in CoS, Riddle leads Harry to believe that Hagrid opened the Chamber. We subsequently learn that was wrong.

Or in HBP it certainly looks like Snape has killed Dumbledore on Voldemort's orders. Harry actually witnessed the murder. However, in DH, we learn that Dumbledore asked Snape to do it since he was dying anyway.

But if nothing has been subsequently learned or revealed to counter earlier comments by any character, then it is simply backstory relayed to us by one of the characters.

The series is over. The time for concealed information has passed.

It's only tainted if we subsequently get new information to counter what he has previously heard. For instance, in PoA, he overhears that Peter Pettigrew was dead and Sirius betrayed his parents. We subsequently find out that was wrong. Or in CoS, Riddle leads Harry to believe that Hagrid opened the Chamber. We subsequently learn that was wrong.

Or in HBP it certainly looks like Snape has killed Dumbledore on Voldemort's orders. Harry actually witnessed the murder. However, in DH, we learn that Dumbledore asked Snape to do it since he was dying anyway.

But if nothing has been subsequently learned or revealed to counter earlier comments by any character, then it is simply backstory relayed to us by one of the characters.

The series is over. The time for concealed information has passed.

I would agree with this. I think it would be very important information for the reader to know if James Potter was a horrible father and adult who had forced his wife to marry him and bullied every person he ran into.

JKR made an issue of this in POA. She had Harry actually believe his father to have been a terrible person as described above - and Harry believed it of the adult James despite the fact that he saw a 15 year old child in the pensive (he forced my mum to marry him - she hated him yet she married him - that speaks of the adult James).

JKR addressed this issue through Harry speaking with James friends; through Lily speaking to Snape in DH; during the scene where James came out of Voldemort's wand; during the reunion scene in DH and through the little fragments of memory we have during Voldemort's attack on the Potters. In none of those scenes is their anything to indicate that James grew up to be a bully, nasty or otherwise inept adult figure.

I believe that since she herself raised the issue, JKR would have certainly made it clear that James was a horrible adult if it were true - but she did just the opposite in all of the scenes shown of him as an adult and where adults (Dumbledore, Hagrid and his friends) spoke of him. One notes too that other members of the Order did not speak of James in terms that would indicate they disliked him (Moody, Kingsley, etc.). They said 'oh he looks just like James' and their tones were not disparaging as if the memory of the father was a bad thing.

While we're describing feelings towards characters, I've never understood the fascination with James. He's only ever seen as the bullying, arrogant student. His adult life is a mystery, save for a few passages.

We see him as a loving father in Godric's Hollow who plays with his son. We see him running out of the room, trying to hold Voldemort off in order to protect his family, knowing full well that "holding him off" meant his death. And we have Lily's letter, in which she describes James favourably. I'm as disappointed as most posters here that we do not have more information and that we do not actually see James in the process of changing into a responsible husband and father. But what we have supports Sirius', Remus', Dumbledore's, McGonagall's and Hagrid's statements.

A few disturbing things I noticed about James: his comments on the Hogwarts Express in Snape's memory strongly echoed Draco's in Madam Malkin's (PS/SS), and his mistrust of Remus when choosing the Secret Keeper reeks of anti-werewolf prejudice.

Saying that, however, he seemed to be a good father, a brave man and deserving enough of lily's love from what we saw at Godric's Hollow.

His comments also reminds me of the comments Ron makes about Slytherin in the train to Hogwarts. Why not talk about that. James looks at Sirius and says "Who wants to be in Slytherin? I think I'd leave wouldn't you"... He acts like a kid and surprise! he is a kid... ....:lol:

The scene in the Hogwarts Express shows three teenage boys all trying to show off by insulting each other. It only shows three boys acting like boys.

A few disturbing things I noticed about James: his comments on the Hogwarts Express in Snape's memory strongly echoed Draco's in Madam Malkin's (PS/SS), and his mistrust of Remus when choosing the Secret Keeper reeks of anti-werewolf prejudice.

Saying that, however, he seemed to be a good father, a brave man and deserving enough of lily's love from what we saw at Godric's Hollow.

yeah, basically James=Draco as a kid. But I don't think James mistrusted Remus. Lupin himself said that james considered mistrusting your frends a dispicable deed.

yeah, basically James=Draco as a kid. But I don't think James mistrusted Remus. Lupin himself said that james considered mistrusting your frends a dispicable deed.
Yeah, that's a little confusing, especially coming from Lupin. If James never "mistrusted" a friend, then why does Sirius apologize because he and James believed that Lupin was a spy? :huh: That is a contradiction, no? Wasn't Lupin shut out of the whole SK thing? And yet they were "friends."

I know Sirius misttrusted him, but I don't think he mentioned that James did. I think that James with held the information because Sirius' adviced him to do so.

A few disturbing things I noticed about James: his comments on the Hogwarts Express in Snape's memory strongly echoed Draco's in Madam Malkin's (PS/SS), and his mistrust of Remus when choosing the Secret Keeper reeks of anti-werewolf prejudice.
I don't think so, really. If inter-House relations were anything like what they were in Harry's time, the statement is understandable- Ron echoes it the very first time he meets Harry on the Hogwarts Express. That scene in the compartment was very much a 'boys will be boys' (all three of them) situation, the way I read it.
And nowhere in the books is it hinted that James suspected Remus, it was Sirius who did that and I don'tthink it was because Remus was a werewolf, they just don't seem to be that sort- nothing about their characters as far as we know, suggests it.

If Lily had been discontent (and I'm not saying she was) she would be unlikely to tell Sirius about it, given the relationship between Sirius and James.
Yeah, but she could have sounded much more unhappy and put it down to being in hiding...which is why I think the Potters had a happy marriage, for as long as it lasted anyway :(

As far as them having been in hiding long enough for James to get tired of it, that could have been two weeks. :lol:
You're right :lol:, James wasn't exactly Prince of Patience and certainly doesn't sound like he was, but I still think the Potters had been on the run/in hiding ever since they were warned about the prophecy and that it meant a potential attack on Harry. Which would be about a year ago.

I think both james and snape were jealous of each other because of lily, snape had a close relationship with lily, james obvioulsy didnt like his. James was one of the most popular lads in the school and made it obvious he liked lily, so snape might have seen this as a big threat to his realtionship with lily.

A few disturbing things I noticed about James: his comments on the Hogwarts Express in Snape's memory strongly echoed Draco's in Madam Malkin's (PS/SS), and his mistrust of Remus when choosing the Secret Keeper reeks of anti-werewolf prejudice.

.

Actually Remus knew that Sirius was the secret keeper. At that point, both Remus and Sirius mistrusted eachother equally. It was likely James found out information from. Remus later says James trusted his friends completely. So I would have to respectfully disagree that James did not trust Remus. I would also have to respectfully disagree that there was any type of anti-werewolf prejudice in James' character whatsoever. IMO he proved that as a youngster supporting Remus by becoming an animagi.

I also feel that Remus or Sirius would have mentioned it if that had been the case. Neither ever indicated or even hinted that James mistrusted Remus. Sirius spoke only of himself in that regard.

I think that is a fundamental characteristic of James, his trust of his friends to the bitter end.

Actually Remus knew that Sirius was the secret keeper. At that point, both Remus and Sirius mistrusted eachother equally. It was likely James found out information from. Remus later says James trusted his friends completely. So I would have to respectfully disagree that James did not trust Remus. I would also have to respectfully disagree that there was any type of anti-werewolf prejudice in James' character whatsoever. IMO he proved that as a youngster supporting Remus by becoming an animagi.

I also feel that Remus or Sirius would have mentioned it if that had been the case. Neither ever indicated or even hinted that James mistrusted Remus. Sirius spoke only of himself in that regard.

I think that is a fundamental characteristic of James, his trust of his friends to the bitter end.

i wouldn't say that Sirius and Remus were equell convinced that they were spies. If Sirius didn't think Remus was the spy then he would have told him, so much is made clear in PoA. If Remus was that convinced that Sirius was the spy then I would have very doubted that Remus would allow Sirius to become Secret Keeper.

i wouldn't say that Sirius and Remus were equell convinced that they were spies. If Sirius didn't think Remus was the spy then he would have told him, so much is made clear in PoA. If Remus was that convinced that Sirius was the spy then I would have very doubted that Remus would allow Sirius to become Secret Keeper.

I think you bring up an excellent point. I too got the impression that while both mistrusted each other (felt the other was a spy) Remus, who had few true friends, would likely be more reluctant to act on his mistrust. That is why I feel he would not try to blacken Sirius' name before James. Sirius might have done so with respect to Remus, so from that point of view, I agree, the issue of mistrust was likely handled distinctly by Sirius and Remus.

However, the fact remains they did both feel that the other was a spy and regardless how they acted on it, I feel James continued to trust them both completely.

Of course it is all conjecture since we don't really know all of the ends and outs, lol. But that was my impression of it all as well.

Isn't it just possible that none of them told Remus about the Keeper-swapping to better maintain the deception? The more people knew, the higher the risk that one of them was caught and forced to spill the secret, via Veritaserum or so. Sirius and Peter HAD to know, but there was no need to inform anyone else, not even Dumbledore.

Dumbledore himself didn't 'put all his secrets into one basket' for similar reasons.

I always got the feeling that the Potters were killed the day after the switch was made. So there was no time to tell Remus was there?

I always got the feeling that the Potters were killed the day after the switch was made. So there was no time to tell Remus was there?

Yes within a week after the switch. But it would appear that Remus was away on Order business because it doesn't make sense that he would not show up at their house when the Potters were killed. He did love them both. James might have told him, but Sirius would not have.

I think Remus was in and out of town and Sirius had the opportunity to tell him at some point because Remus says "that is why you didn't tell me" (because you thought I was the spy) and Sirius says 'yes'. Then Sirius discovers Remus felt the same way and a ghost of a smile appears across his features. My impression was, I don't think Sriius expected it of Remus because of Remus' strong love for his friends. It was brought home to Sirius in that moment just how much independence Remus had back in those days (if you know what I mean).

But at no time did they intimate that James was in on any of this, so I still believe that James' trust in his friends remained in tact to his death (although right before he would know Peter had betrayed him - sad).

You know, we have tons of canon on Snape and that jaw-dropper of a chapter in DH... but he leaves me feeling empty, just as James does you. I used to hate Snape with a passion. Now I just hate him. No passion whatsoever.


But hate is a feeling, isn't it? ;)

I don't hate James, I don't like him either. He is like a complete stranger to me that some acquaintances of me have mentioned here or there. My reaction to his violent death is like my normal reaction when I read about anyone's unnatural death in the newspaper, 'oh, that was wrong'. But it doesn't affect me other than that, and I think it's a pity, because in a series of so many characters, not one of them, and certainly none of the main cast, left me so thoroughly indifferent.

But hate is a feeling, isn't it? ;)

I don't hate James, I don't like him either. He is like a complete stranger to me that some acquaintances of me have mentioned here or there. My reaction to his violent death is like my normal reaction when I read about anyone's unnatural death in the newspaper, 'oh, that was wrong'. But it doesn't affect me other than that, and I think it's a pity, because in a series of so many characters, not one of them, and certainly none of the main cast, left me so thoroughly indifferent.

I can understand what you are saying. I think each of us read and take from the books different things, all respectable interpretations. Myself I found I could gain an impression of James character wise through his friends speaking about him, Dumbledore, Hagrid and through the small glimpses we saw of him in memories and when he came out of the wand and reunion scenes.

But another huge impression of James was given to me by Harry himself. Snape claimed Harry embodied James, Lupin and Sirius often said Harry reminded them of his father; Dumbledore and Hagrid indicated the same. Thus I think a lot of Harry's characteristics are very much like James' characteristics. In light of the fact that I thought Harry was a great kid all around character-wise, I feel that his father was the same.

I know everyone won't agree with my opinion on that, but it seemed to follow very logically for me.

I always got the feeling that the Potters were killed the day after the switch was made. So there was no time to tell Remus was there?
In PoA, Cornelius Fudge says it was about a week after the switch was made.

Sirius says in PoA that they thought Lupin was a spy, so of course they weren't going to tell him about switching SK's.

While we're describing feelings towards characters, I've never understood the fascination with James. He's only ever seen as the bullying, arrogant student. His adult life is a mystery, save for a few passages. Perhaps if we had been allowed to actually see him as an adult, rather than rely on second-hand information....I find that information Harry gets from others is often tainted.

This arguement simply holds no water for me. Being realistic, I would have to say that of course your friends are going to say favorable things and your enemies are not. That is a fact of life. But the fact of the matter is, you don't make friends the caliber of Lily, Dumbledore, Hagrid, Sirius, Lupin and others without being a good person. His friends may exagerate, on occasion, his good qualities (friends do that) but if their was nothing there to begin with then they wouldn't have been his friends in the first place.

It's only tainted if we subsequently get new information to counter what he has previously heard.

...

The series is over. The time for concealed information has passed.

I agree completely. Before Dh was out, I thought there was something more to James finally starting to go out with Lily, because the rushed manner in which Sirius waved Harry's worries away seemed very suspicious to me. I was almost sure something about that was coming. But now, when we have the book, and there is no mention of that, I think it's solid fact that they just fell in love and got married, and that James did indeed deflate his head.

Yeah, that's a little confusing, especially coming from Lupin. If James never "mistrusted" a friend, then why does Sirius apologize because he and James believed that Lupin was a spy? :huh: That is a contradiction, no? Wasn't Lupin shut out of the whole SK thing? And yet they were "friends."

That was there purely for logical purposes, if you ask me. A reason was needed for james and Sirius NOt to pick Lupin, since the Secret Keeper had to be a traitor, and Jo provided it that way. Otherwoise there would have been a huge logical hole there, and everyone would be asking, "But why not do it with Remus?". The fact that that mistrust wasn't even mentioned in DH means that there was nothing more to it.

In PoA, Cornelius Fudge says it was about a week after the switch was made.

Sirius says in PoA that they thought Lupin was a spy, so of course they weren't going to tell him about switching SK's.

I would respectfully disagree that "they" thought Lupin was a spy according to POA. In that book, Sirius said he alone thought Lupin was the spy and Lupin said he thought Sirius was the spy. James is not mentioned. James trusted all of his friends without waiver - this we have for Lupin. My impression is that Lupin would not say that about James if James had not trusted him at the end.

I don't believe Remus saw James after the switch because Sirius didn't tell Remus about the switch and he didn't know where to find them.

But hate is a feeling, isn't it? ;)

I don't hate James, I don't like him either. He is like a complete stranger to me that some acquaintances of me have mentioned here or there. My reaction to his violent death is like my normal reaction when I read about anyone's unnatural death in the newspaper, 'oh, that was wrong'. But it doesn't affect me other than that, and I think it's a pity, because in a series of so many characters, not one of them, and certainly none of the main cast, left me so thoroughly indifferent.

That's a good way to describe how I feel about him too.
I certainly don't think it was good that Harry (or anyone anyway) lost his parents at such a young age, but to look at the fact alone of, 'James Potter is dead' - I'm not bothered by that at all.

The way you wrote, "He is like a complete stranger to me that some accquaintances of me have mentioned" - That's a great way to describe it.
He's like someone I've heard about but haven't thought very fondly of.
I wouldn't tut about him and talk about him though. If someone asked me what I thought of him, I'd say something like, "Hmm, from what I've heard he didn't sound too great. I don't really know about now though".
'He didn't sound too great' - Meaning like, from what I've heard of his younger years, he didn't seem too nice. But, 'I don't really know about him now' - Because, well, all I basically know is, when grown up, he was married and had a kid.

A few disturbing things I noticed about James: his comments on the Hogwarts Express in Snape's memory strongly echoed Draco's in Madam Malkin's (PS/SS), and his mistrust of Remus when choosing the Secret Keeper reeks of anti-werewolf prejudice.

James's comments on Slytherin are very similar to Draco's in Madam Malkins. But many say similar things are said at that age. Ron says in CoS that if the Sorting Hat put him in Slytherin, he'd take the train back home.

And James wasn't the one who was suspicious of Remus, Sirius was. Remus says in DH that James would never mistrust his friends. Sirius was the one who was suspicious of Remus. Sirius was aware that someone in the Order was being a spy, and Remus looked like a much more likely spy for Voldemort because of his intelligence. I don't know if Sirius ever spoke of his suspicions out loud, but there isn't proof that James didn't trust Remus.

And, anyway, if he was feeling anti-werewolf, how come he embraced Remus as one of his best friends and worked years in order to become an unregistered Animagus?

I also feel that Remus or Sirius would have mentioned it if that had been the case. Neither ever indicated or even hinted that James mistrusted Remus. Sirius spoke only of himself in that regard.
Exactly, he does say that he convinced James and Lily to agree to the Secret-Keeper switch and didn't tell Remus/anyone else because he, Sirius, thought Remus was the spy. I don't think he even hints that James thought one of his friends was betraying him.

I think that is a fundamental characteristic of James, his trust of his friends to the bitter end.
Lupin says as much.

You know, we have tons of canon on Snape and that jaw-dropper of a chapter in DH... but he leaves me feeling empty, just as James does you. I used to hate Snape with a passion. Now I just hate him. No passion whatsoever.
I don't feel empty about Snape, and I don't hate him either. His actions in HBP and DH simply take my breath away! It's marvellous stuff! But he's still Snape. He's still who is always has been - a "cruel bully" in the words of his creator. James, on the other hand, has his flaws, but the lasting impression I have of him is of a loving husband and father, who would have done anything for his wife and child. They are two very different people, who fought and died for the same cause, and who happened to love the same woman.While we're describing feelings towards characters, I've never understood the fascination with James. He's only ever seen as the bullying, arrogant student. His adult life is a mystery, save for a few passages. Perhaps if we had been allowed to actually see him as an adult, rather than rely on second-hand information....I find that information Harry gets from others is often tainted.


We did see him as an adult. We saw him playing with Harry (the broomstick and the smoke rings), read a letter in which Lily speaks fondly of him, and saw him cornered by Voldemort, wandless, defenceless, yet physically blocking Voldemort's way to give Lily and Harry a tiny, tiny chance to escape. I'd love to see more, but other than that, we have nothing, and I think that's because James isn't a complicated character - a hero is often much less interesting than an anti-hero! We have all we need to know about him.

But the fact of the matter is, you don't make friends the caliber of Lily, Dumbledore, Hagrid, Sirius, Lupin and others without being a good person. His friends may exagerate, on occasion, his good qualities (friends do that) but if their was nothing there to begin with then they wouldn't have been his friends in the first place.

Definitely. While the world may not be divided into good people and Death Eaters, there are a number of characters in the Potterverse who are absolutely and unequivocally good (although not necessarily flawless). Dumbledore, Hagrid, Lily, Lupin, and McGonagall fall into this category (as do Harry, Ron, and Hermione), and when they praise James and Lily they can be trusted.

I agree completely. Before Dh was out, I thought there was something more to James finally starting to go out with Lily, because the rushed manner in which Sirius waved Harry's worries away seemed very suspicious to me. I was almost sure something about that was coming. But now, when we have the book, and there is no mention of that, I think it's solid fact that they just fell in love and got married, and that James did indeed deflate his head.
Thank you. That's is the point entirely. There could have been a big surprise or reversal, but we didn't even get a hint. That was there purely for logical purposes, if you ask me. A reason was needed for james and Sirius NOt to pick Lupin, since the Secret Keeper had to be a traitor, and Jo provided it that way. Otherwoise there would have been a huge logical hole there, and everyone would be asking, "But why not do it with Remus?". The fact that that mistrust wasn't even mentioned in DH means that there was nothing more to it.Again, exactly the point. All of us, as fans, speculated all kinds of reasons and off-page events for things that were never dealt with again. And that means that there wasn't any hidden meaning in those events, or that there was nothing else to know about it besides what Jo provided.

I don't feel empty about Snape, and I don't hate him either. His actions in HBP and DH simply take my breath away! It's marvellous stuff! But he's still Snape. He's still who is always has been - a "cruel bully" in the words of his creator. James, on the other hand, has his flaws, but the lasting impression I have of him is of a loving husband and father, who would have done anything for his wife and child. They are two very different people, who fought and died for the same cause, and who happened to love the same woman.

Okay, Snape's part of DH also took my breath away. I've already said that chapter knocked my socks off and I read it three times in succession before finishing the rest of the book. Is it one of my favorite chapters? No. Did it change my opinion of James, which has always been positive? Not in the least. Did it persuade me to like Snape any better? Yes, but only for about five minutes. Then I remembered how awful he remained to Harry till the very end.

It didn't help that Jo validated that memory by acknowledging that Snape loathed Harry to the end of his life. I know some people want to mitigate the word "loathe" into something else, but loathe is intense hatred by definition and no other word can better describe Snape's treatment of Harry and Neville.

You know, I once made several posts about a man I called my "Unneighborly Neighbor." I complained about him a lot because he was just plain mean to me, my husband, my grandchildren and the other neighbors. Especially to the neighborhood kids. In personality, he and Snape had a lot in common... eaten up inside with bitterness and taking it out on any convenient target. We all staged a block party to celebrate when he sold his house and moved.

I am never going to like or go along with anyone who abuses kids. Period.

Okay, Snape's part of DH also took my breath away. I've already said that chapter knocked my socks off and I read it three times in succession before finishing the rest of the book. Is it one of my favorite chapters? No. Did it change my opinion of James, which has always been positive? Not in the least. Did it persuade me to like Snape any better? Yes, but only for about five minutes. Then I remembered how awful he remained to Harry till the very end.

It didn't help that Jo validated that memory by acknowledging that Snape loathed Harry to the end of his life. I know some people want to mitigate the word "loathe" into something else, but loathe is intense hatred by definition and no other word can better describe Snape's treatment of Harry and Neville.

You know, I once made several posts about a man I called my "Unneighborly Neighbor." I complained about him a lot because he was just plain mean to me, my husband, my grandchildren and the other neighbors. Especially to the neighborhood kids. In personality, he and Snape had a lot in common... eaten up inside with bitterness and taking it out on any convenient target. We all staged a block party to celebrate when he sold his house and moved.

I am never going to like or go along with anyone who abuses kids. Period.

Ear! Ear! I once had a teacher (ironically she was my chemistry teacher) who bullied me endlessly. She hated everything about me and every time she came to class she made it a point to make fun of my earrings or my appearance or pass a very rude comment that would usually land me in tears. She was horrible to all students but with me she took it to new level. She made me cry every week and if I didn't cry then she make a horrible comment about that as well. When I broke my leg she said I was faking it. She actually once told me that I deserve the Oscar award because I can start crying at the drop of the hat (in fact I am not an emotional person at all and I never cry so imagine how horrible she was). Its taken me three years to realize that she is the foul one and I am great just the way I am but before that I had major self esteem problems. She has been sacked from my old school because some others kids she used to bully filed a case against her in the court... This is why I can never like Snape because I have been there, I have seen that and it's painful... Even if that teacher cures cancer someday I will still hate her and she will always remain a vile horrible woman... I was Neville and she was my Snape... So sometimes I don't understand how people can brush aside everything Snape's done in such cavalier manner...

And now back to our previously scheduled discussion of James.

Everyone's known someone like Snape. I am someone like Snape. yet they still let me out. And so we deal.


James was the topic, yes? I'm afraid that since OotP, James has not been much more than the arrogant bully we saw. He played with his son! Joy. I'll bet Lucius Malfoy did too. Why, he's a pureblood too. One year of playing with his son makes up for seven years of being a jerk. OK then.


Jumping back a bit now:

A few disturbing things I noticed about James: his comments on the Hogwarts Express in Snape's memory strongly echoed Draco's in Madam Malkin's (PS/SS)



Draco, speaking to Harry, says if he were sorted into Hufflepuff, "I think I'd leave, wouldn't you?"

James, speaking of being sorted into Slytherin, says, "I think I'd leave, wouldn't you?"

That's a blatant parallel if I've ever seen one.

He played with his son! Joy. I'll bet Lucius Malfoy did too. Why, he's a pureblood too.But not many of the Order, including, Dumbledore and McGonagall, speak of Malfoy in warm affectionate terms, nor do they hold Malfoy in high respect.

While we're happy to see everyone's opinion on a character please make sure that your critiques are constructive. It also helps to let others see the reasons for your judgement. Please stay away from statements on a character as a whole. For reference (http://www.cosforums.com/showthread.php?t=101982&highlight=bashing).

Everyone's known someone like Snape. I am someone like Snape. yet they still let me out. And so we deal.


James was the topic, yes? I'm afraid that since OotP, James has not been much more than the arrogant bully we saw. He played with his son! Joy. I'll bet Lucius Malfoy did too. Why, he's a pureblood too. One year of playing with his son makes up for seven years of being a jerk. OK then.


Jumping back a bit now:




Draco, speaking to Harry, says if he were sorted into Hufflepuff, "I think I'd leave, wouldn't you?"

James, speaking of being sorted into Slytherin, says, "I think I'd leave, wouldn't you?"

That's a blatant parallel if I've ever seen one.


Ron too made such a comment about Slytherin. In my opinion it was quite a common thing said among children on the way to wizarding school if their families had pre-determined house loyalties that they agreed with.

I think it merely shows Jame's characteristics of pride. At 11 years old, that charactertistic would still be developing so I am not sure I could reach any real conclusions about it .

But not many of the Order, including, Dumbledore and McGonagall, speak of Malfoy in warm affectionate terms, nor do they hold Malfoy in high respect.

That's just it, isn't it? If James had been a Death Eater, no one would remember the funny, charming boy they once taught. They'd see only the evil he'd been, wondered where they'd gone wrong.


But since they liked James, he was seen in a good light. I seem to recall McGonagall saying James and Sirius were like the forerunners to the Weasley twins, whom Harry himself says he couldn't see attacking a student like James and Sirius attacked Snape in SWM. Well, unless the deserved it, like Malfoy.

Didn't Lily ask what Snape had done to James? He said Snape "exists." Ooh, really deserved it. Reading that test paper by himself. Walking on their grass. The fiend.

That's just it, isn't it? If James had been a Death Eater, no one would remember the funny, charming boy they once taught. They'd see only the evil he'd been, wondered where they'd gone wrong.


But since they liked James, he was seen in a good light. I seem to recall McGonagall saying James and Sirius were like the forerunners to the Weasley twins, whom Harry himself says he couldn't see attacking a student like James and Sirius attacked Snape in SWM. Well, unless the deserved it, like Malfoy.

Didn't Lily ask what Snape had done to James? He said Snape "exists." Ooh, really deserved it. Reading that test paper by himself. Walking on their grass. The fiend.

Well I think James as a youngster had the characteristics of being arrogant and somewhat impetuous at times - much like Harry who was often cited in the book as being 'like James'.

Snape and James were school boy enemies like Draco and Harry (who we know more about). Whenever the trio saw Malfoy, they were not overjoyed and I think it was the same thing when the Marauders met up with Snape and his friends.

That said, I think James was easily provoked by Snape (like Harry with Draco) and visa versa. In that sense, there would always be tension between them.

James' characteristics of arrogance and impetuousness would come into play at those times. As well as his wont to show off to Lily if she was around and yet another characteristic: that of being a good friend (trusting and standing up for his friends) would likely come into play as well.

since you're bringing up that parallel already - Draco, too, shows how much he actually cares for his friends. When the RoR is going up in flames, he doesn't run for it like Crabbe. He tries to drag the unconscious Goyle with him. He could have died in there, like Crabbe eventually does. Even unpleasant people MIGHT care for their friends.

That said, I'd like to point out that I don't think James was just a dark-haired version of Draco, even though at the point where their age-wise parallels end in the series (at seventeen), they could be buddies if it weren't for the Dark Arts.

since you're bringing up that parallel already - Draco, too, shows how much he actually cares for his friends. When the RoR is going up in flames, he doesn't run for it like Crabbe. He tries to drag the unconscious Goyle with him. He could have died in there, like Crabbe eventually does. Even unpleasant people MIGHT care for their friends.

That said, I'd like to point out that I don't think James was just a dark-haired version of Draco, even though at the point where their age-wise parallels end in the series (at seventeen), they could be buddies if it weren't for the Dark Arts.


Well I was paralling James/Harry v. Snape/Draco, meaning I think James characteristically was a lot like Harry from the little we saw of him. Snape, Lupin, Black, Dumbledore, Hagrid and others claimed that Harry was a 'little James' and I think although I didn't have much to go on, what I did see of James seemed to support that.

But you make a very good point. I also don't feel Snape was a dark haired version of Draco or that Harry and his father were exactly the same characteristically. James' background was not frought with a poor home life and Voldemort trying to kill him from a young age, so he would have characteristics of being a freer spirit: more carefree, more lighthearted, more prone to pranking and playing around and such like an average kid. Unlike Harry who was immediately dealing with the Stone in the first book.

I think that is why we see James in a more frivolous light in memories and in details from others. However, underneath all of that, I think his character was likely very like Harry's.

Well I think James as a youngster had the characteristics of being arrogant and somewhat impetuous at times - much like Harry who was often cited in the book as being 'like James'.

Snape and James were school boy enemies like Draco and Harry (who we know more about). Whenever the trio saw Malfoy, they were not overjoyed and I think it was the same thing when the Marauders met up with Snape and his friends.

That said, I think James was easily provoked by Snape (like Harry with Draco) and visa versa. In that sense, there would always be tension between them.

James' characteristics of arrogance and impetuousness would come into play at those times. As well as his wont to show off to Lily if she was around and yet another characteristic: that of being a good friend (trusting and standing up for his friends) would likely come into play as well.

Which brings us too Valkonde's point, James finds himself provoked by.. people reading in his general vicinity.

Which brings us too Valkonde's point, James finds himself provoked by.. people reading in his general vicinity.

I would respectfully disagree with the idea that James became provoked by people reading in his general vincinity. In my opinion, he became provoked by Snape's presence, no matter what Snape was doing. But I believe the opposite was true as well. There was simply tension between them.

I don't get the idea that James had a characteristic of being quick to anger in general. But I do get the feeling that he was quick to retaliate when anyone molested he or his friends.

When Lupin expresses that James "hexes for the fun of it" I looked at those particular hexes as George and Fred like; making people's heads grow or jelly legs and the such. I doubt James and his friends were the only ones involved in such things, but they clearly enjoyed doing it to a great extent. That is characteristic of a mischeif-making and good time fun nature in my opinion.

But that is distinct from what went on between James and Snape because there was dislike/tension between them. The characteristics of James in his dealings with Snape were more arrogance, pride, trust in his friends, a grudge holding which seemed specific to Snape (so I would hesitate to call it characteristic) and showing off to Lily. Very much like Harry (James) to Draco (Snape) for a characteristic similarity.

Going back to the question - why did James choose Sirius as Harry's Godfather over Dumbledore? - Well I've always felt that this was simply beacuse he trusted Sirius above all others, he was his best friend through and through. But I think it's even more important to think about the idea of James and Sirius as like brothers.

It's only just really hit me that at the time of their deaths Lilly and James were both orphans themselves - at the age of 21. Neither had any family left (I don't count Petunia.) They just had each other and of course Sirius - who also had no family left (well, they had disowned him). So I think the three of them saw each other as true family and relied on each other far more than usual friends. Sirius had ran away to the Potter's house at the age of 16 and had pretty much become a member of the family. We don't know exactly when Mr and Mrs Potter died but it must have been within the next few years (roughly the same time that Lilly lost her Parents.) Think about the effect this would have had on both James and Sirius. I imagine they grieved together as brothers and Sirius was an enormous comfort to James at this time. I also see the deaths of both sets of Parents as being a huge factor in brining Lilly and James closer together. These young people who should be having the time of their lives were forced to grow up very quickly and cruely as they became orphans in the middle of wartime. This also helps to explain to me the change in the character of James from arrogant school boy bully, to brave Father and Husband.
At the time he went in to hiding he was terrified for the lives of his new young family and it seems only natural that the only person he would truly have trusted with their lives would be his soul brother - Sirius.

I would respectfully disagree with the idea that James became provoked by people reading in his general vincinity. In my opinion, he became provoked by Snape's presence, no matter what Snape was doing. But I believe the opposite was true as well. There was simply tension between them.

I don't get the idea that James had a characteristic of being quick to anger in general. But I do get the feeling that he was quick to retaliate when anyone molested he or his friends.

When Lupin expresses that James "hexes for the fun of it" I looked at those particular hexes as George and Fred like; making people's heads grow or jelly legs and the such. I doubt James and his friends were the only ones involved in such things, but they clearly enjoyed doing it to a great extent. That is characteristic of a mischeif-making and good time fun nature in my opinion.

But that is distinct from what went on between James and Snape because there was dislike/tension between them. The characteristics of James in his dealings with Snape were more arrogance, pride, trust in his friends, a grudge holding which seemed specific to Snape (so I would hesitate to call it characteristic) and showing off to Lily. Very much like Harry (James) to Draco (Snape) for a characteristic similarity.

Alright sorry, Snape was molesting them by walking away. I forgot.

Alright sorry, Snape was molesting them by walking away. I forgot.

I was actually agreeing with you on that front. :) It wasn't Snapes reading or walking away or anything else. It was simply his presence. Just as it was simply James (and friends) presence that molested Snape in my opinion.

I think all parties, including James had a characteristic of grudge holding when it came to one another. Again, because it is directed so specifically, I don't know if you can call it a character trait, perhaps merely a temporary one in James' case.

Well, I can't say I agree with you assessment. I find that James resembles Draco more then Harry. Off course their reason are completely opposite but Harry was never the aggressor and didn't think cursing Draco was a way of showing of. Granted, neither, I think did James. What's more I'm certain that after that episode we have been discussing James backed off, having succesfully driven Snape over the edge and gotten Lily and Snape to break their friendship.

But not many of the Order, including, Dumbledore and McGonagall, speak of Malfoy in warm affectionate terms, nor do they hold Malfoy in high respect.

Also, in conjunction with the above I would like to point out that Lucius taught (if he did it himself, he probably hired a tutor)his son how to fly because he wanted Draco to be the best at Quidditch. He certainly used his power and influence to get Draco on the Slytherin team as soon as possible. In fact it was probably a prerequisite that Draco be a Seeker because Harry was a Seeker, even though Draco would have probably been better at Chaser. In other words for Draco, flying and Quidditch were a matter of prestige and competitiveness. Contrast that to James and Harry who were sharing quality time together doing something that James enjoyed and that Lily wrote lovingly of it in her letter to Sirius. It wasn't win at all cost for James, it was introducing his son to what he considered to be a great sport. Harry had a natural aptitude for it from the very beginning and so it was something they could enjoy together. The fact that Sirius sent the toy broom means the bond between Sirius and James was as strong as ever. (Did anyone notice the paralell of Sirius sending the toy broom to baby Harry as a baby, and sending the Firebolt to Harry in PoA as soon as he had reestablished his godfatherhood? aannd back to topic... :) )

There are so many other differences between James and Lucius...Lucius joined the Death Eaters. Lucius actually risked peoples lives in giving Ginny the diary in the hopes to unleash a monster on the school that would kill those that were unworthy and elevate his family's stature. James joined the Order, he defended his family from a tyrant, wandless, in Order to save his family's life. To intimate that James and Lucius are anything alike is taking things to extreme, imho.

I disagree, in CoS Lucius urged Draco not to make an enemy out of the boy that people think vanquised the dark Lord. Setting them up against each other doesn't into that now, does it?

What's more I'm certain that after that episode we have been discussing James backed off, having succesfully driven Snape over the edge and gotten Lily and Snape to break their friendship.

Had Snape not positioned himself so close to the edge, James wouldn't have been able to push him over it. In fact, I wonder, what exactly did James do to break their friendship? If anything his continual attacks on Snape would have driven Lily away from James and more towards Snape. Snape can't blame James for his friendship dissolving---that was strictly between him and Lily. I am of the firm mind, especially after the werewolf incident, that James was like "Is it really worth getting expelled or put in prison to continue this stupd adolescent feud?" The answer was apparently no.

I disagree, in CoS Lucius urged Draco not to make an enemy out of the boy that people think vanquised the dark Lord. Setting them up against each other doesn't into that now, does it?

And Lucius is great at putting a public face on, and doing nasty horrible things in private. I am positive that he would have told Draco to best that Harry Potter at all costs.

Snape's Worst memory took place after the werewolf scene and why would Lucius put up a public face for the likes of Borgin while selling poisons to the man?

Well, I can't say I agree with you assessment. I find that James resembles Draco more then Harry. Off course their reason are completely opposite but Harry was never the aggressor and didn't think cursing Draco was a way of showing of. Granted, neither, I think did James. What's more I'm certain that after that episode we have been discussing James backed off, having succesfully driven Snape over the edge and gotten Lily and Snape to break their friendship.

Nah, Draco was intended to represent Snape to Harry in a generational replay of Snape and James. I saw the parallels in Snape-James and Draco-Harry almost from the start. Dumbledore told us to think that in his conversation with Harry in the hospital wing after the episode with the sorcerer's stone.

"Well they did rather detest each other. Not unlike yourself and Mr. Malfoy."

That was the idea, it was also intended for Harry to realise how arrogant James trully was.

That was the idea, it was also intended for Harry to realise how arrogant James trully was.

JKR did tell us that one of Harry's characteristics was arrogance, so it is quite possible that DD would point out to Harry that he, like his father, carried this trait. However, I don't think it was an overwhelming factor in either of their characters. That is, I believe James (like Harry) turned out to be a good person depsite that character trait. It can bring some people down, but in my opinion it didn't with the Potters.

Well you can't deny that James, like Draco, was the aggressor in their respective fued's.

Well you can't deny that James, like Draco, was the aggressor in their respective fued's.

I would respectfully disagree that James was always the agressor in his hex battles with Snape. Remus tells us that in 7th year, Snape instigated the hexes. While he didn't indicate that James never instigated any, he did say Snape did. JKR generally will let the audience know if something Harry heard from another is untrue, and in this case she didn't, so since there are no more books, I take it as true. I think that because JKR made Harry have such an issue over James' character in OOTP, she definitely would have corrected Harry and our belief on this point if it were not true (beyond the fact that she generally does anyway).

Thus, the hex battling in my opinion was mutual with respect to instigation between Snape and James.

The idea that Snape was doing most of the instigating during 7th year fits right in line with my impression of James character as a maturing person during 7th year when he won Lily's heart. This further verified this issue for me personally.

Well you can't deny that James, like Draco, was the aggressor in their respective fued's.

Some of the time, probably; all of the time, definitely not. We are told in 5, that it progressed to a complicated mutual hatred, and that both hexed eachother.

Nah, Draco was intended to represent Snape to Harry in a generational replay of Snape and James. I saw the parallels in Snape-James and Draco-Harry almost from the start. Dumbledore told us to think that in his conversation with Harry in the hospital wing after the episode with the sorcerer's stone.

"Well they did rather detest each other. Not unlike yourself and Mr. Malfoy."

yes, that was a clever trick, because we readers immediately sprang to the conclusion that Severus would equal Draco in that simile and Harry would resemble James, so that OotP could hit us over the head and confront us with our own bias, and premature judgement based on hear-say :p

Some of the time, probably; all of the time, definitely not. We are told in 5, that it progressed to a complicated mutual hatred, and that both hexed eachother.

Exactly! We are told that both James and Snape hexed each other regularily, we are not told who always started it. In one single memory (SWM) we are shown that it was James who started it, but we are never shown any of the other memories were hexing went on so we can't say for certain if James or Snape started it more or less.

yes, that was a clever trick, because we readers immediately sprang to the conclusion that Severus would equal Draco in that simile and Harry would resemble James, so that OotP could hit us over the head and confront us with our own bias, and premature judgement based on hear-say :p

I retained the interpretation that James and Harry were characterized together. Everyone from Snape, Sirius, Remus to Dumbledore, Hagrid and more said that Harry reminded them of James - and many times they were not speaking in terms of looks. My impression was (and remains) that Snape was the 'Draco' proposed.

IMO it was in a way immaterial as the main point was that antagonizing feelings can prevail between students. I don't truly believe DD was making in depth character analogies - merely superficial ones (i.e. he was not saying Snape was never into the dark arts; DD comparing him to Harry and James was; DD comparing him to Draco).

yes, that was a clever trick, because we readers immediately sprang to the conclusion that Severus would equal Draco in that simile and Harry would resemble James, so that OotP could hit us over the head and confront us with our own bias, and premature judgement based on hear-say :p

I love that way of looking at it :)

I personally don't see all that many paralells between James and Harry, except in their looks, and the House they were in. Compare Harry on his first Hogwarts Express trip - they are nothing like one another. The other two glimpses of James we have - one of them, when he's with his family right before he dies, I suppose Harry was like that too with his family, so that one, yes. But the other one - the Pensieve memory, he's as far from how Harry was at his age as could be. So, from the three situations that we actually see James in, in two of them he is not like Harry at all, in any aspect you choose to compare them by. Harry doesn't flirt, he's not bold with girls, he wouldn't ask a girl out in that manner, he doesn't show off for girls, he was quiet on his first time on the Express, he wouldn't scourgify people's mouths - even Draco's - or show their underwear in public just to entertain his friends and himself. The third memory, I'm willing to bet Harry is just as loving and attentive a father as James is shown to be - but then, I'm sure Mr. Weasley is one, too, and Remus would have been, had he lived. So it's not an actual parallel between Harry and James. So, overall, I would say that the differences outnumber and surpass the resemblance, which has stayed, as far as I have seen, on physical level mainly.

All of this doesn't mean that James was 'bad' in some way, it just means that Harry was different in temperament, behaviour and expression from his father. Which is precisely what Snape fails to see. I love that line from Dumbledore, when he says that Snape sees in him what he expects to see, but Harry's real nature is a lot more like his mother's. I love that, and I believe it's 100% true. Harry was like Lily, and he understands it, I think, in the end, when he asks her to stay close to him as he approaches death. Incidentally, that aspect of DH is one of the things I loved most - that Harry may look like his father, and be like him, on first sight, but deeply and truly, he's like Lily.

I love that way of looking at it :)

I personally don't see all that many paralells between James and Harry, except in their looks, and the House they were in. Compare Harry on his first Hogwarts Express trip - they are nothing like one another. The other two glimpses of James we have - one of them, when he's with his family right before he dies, I suppose Harry was like that too with his family, so that one, yes. But the other one - the Pensieve memory, he's as far from how Harry was at his age as could be. So, from the three situations that we actually see James in, in two of them he is not like Harry at all, in any aspect you choose to compare them by. Harry doesn't flirt, he's not bold with girls, he wouldn't ask a girl out in that manner, he doesn't show off for girls, he was quiet on his first time on the Express, he wouldn't scourgify people's mouths - even Draco's - or show their underwear in public just to entertain his friends and himself. The third memory, I'm willing to bet Harry is just as loving and attentive a father as James is shown to be - but then, I'm sure Mr. Weasley is one, too, and Remus would have been, had he lived. So it's not an actual parallel between Harry and James. So, overall, I would say that the differences outnumber and surpass the resemblance, which has stayed, as far as I have seen, on physical level mainly.

All of this doesn't mean that James was 'bad' in some way, it just means that Harry was different in temperament, behaviour and expression from his father. Which is precisely what Snape fails to see. I love that line from Dumbledore, when he says that Snape sees in him what he expects to see, but Harry's real nature is a lot more like his mother's. I love that, and I believe it's 100% true. Harry was like Lily, and he understands it, I think, in the end, when he asks her to stay close to him as he approaches death. Incidentally, that aspect of DH is one of the things I loved most - that Harry may look like his father, and be like him, on first sight, but deeply and truly, he's like Lily.

I respect your opinion, I think it is valid. However I disagree, respectfully, that Harry's personality being akin to Lily's would provoke DD to compare Harry/Snape with James/Draco. That would mean that Harry's characteristics (temperament, behaviour and expression) were akin to Snape's if I am understanding correctly. My impression is that Snape and Harry's characteristics in that regard could not be more distinct. I would suppose we would discuss that in the Harry or Snape thread tho.

James character is also shown when he returns from Voldemort's wand; in the Boggart Memories as well as in SWM. I see a lot of Harry in James, however, I do think that they were two different people based on what they were going through at the time. Harry would naturally be more mature as he was up against Voldemort and had to deal with the Dursley's by 15.

I would respectfully disagree that Harry's comment while looking at his mother in the reunion scene "stay close to me" was meant only for her. The next bit down it says that Harry found courage to take each step because of the four people around him, not just from Lily - so that gave me the impression that he wanted them all close. James (and the others) had a characteristic of courage that Harry could draw on, plus of course he knew they all loved him mutually. I don't think James (or Lily) had the characteristic trait of being an egoist and I don't think Harry did either - I don't think he would be thinking about who was closest to him in character and ask that person to stay near merely for that reason as if it was the greatest character of all or even that his walk would be more copacetic that way somehow. Just like his comment "you'll stay with me" - while answered by James (and likely meant Harry was looking at James) was not meant only for James. Just my opinion of course.

I respect your opinion, I think it is valid. However I disagree, respectfully, that Harry's personality being akin to Lily's would provoke DD to compare Harry/Snape with James/Draco. That would mean that Harry's characteristics were akin to Snape's if I am understanding correctly.

I'm afraid you're not. Where did I say that Dumbledore meant to compare Harry with Snape and James with Draco?! I haven't even thought of that, and I certainly don't think Dumbledore saw those parallels. All I said was that Dumbledore thought Harry was much more like his mother than like his father, and, given the glimpses we have of James, I have to agree. They were very different in temperament and expression, at the very least.

My impression is that Snape and Harry's characteristics could not be more distinct. I would suppose we would discuss that in the Harry or Snape thread tho.

But I didn't even mention Snape in comparison with Harry!

James character is also shown when he returns from Voldemort's wand; in the Boggart Memories as well as in SWM. I see a lot of Harry in James, however, I do think that they were two different people based on what they were going through at the time. Harry would naturally be more mature as he was up against Voldemort and had to deal with the Dursley's by 15.

That was what i was saying too. Hey, just because we usually disagree, doesn't mean that we do so on principle! :) Harry was more mature than James both at 11 and at 15, and that is very plainly seen. He's just a different type of person.

I would respectfully disagree that Harry's comment while looking at his mother in the reunion scene "stay close to me" was meant only for her.

I think it was. There is a remark that he looks at her and then says it. If that's not clear enough an indication that he was talking to her, I don't know what would have been.

I'm afraid you're not. Where did I say that Dumbledore meant to compare Harry with Snape and James with Draco?! I haven't even thought of that, and I certainly don't think Dumbledore saw those parallels. All I said was that Dumbledore thought Harry was much more like his mother than like his father, and, given the glimpses we have of James, I have to agree. They were very different in temperament and expression, at the very least.



But I didn't even mention Snape in comparison with Harry!



That was what i was saying too. Hey, just because we usually disagree, doesn't mean that we do so on principle! :) Harry was more mature than James both at 11 and at 15, and that is very plainly seen. He's just a different type of person.



I think it was. There is a remark that he looks at her and then says it. If that's not clear enough an indication that he was talking to her, I don't know what would have been.

Ah! I apologize, I thought your initial statement indicating that you were agreeing to the post you quoted meant that you drew the same comparisons that were made in that post. Sorry about that. :) Nice we agree sometimes - I agree!

I respect your opinion and interpretation of the reunion scene. But as I edited to add: Harry also says you'll stay with me?" - while answered by James (and likely meant Harry was looking at James) was not meant only for James in my opinion. So I took all of his comments in that regard to mean everyone.

I don't think Harry's looking at Lily when he made the comment meant: Stay with me mom and the rest of you can go. That was my take on it - that all of his comments in that regard were for everyone. Otherwise the later statement indicating that the 4 people were giving him courage wouldn't make much sense to me.

Everyone's known someone like Snape. I am someone like Snape. yet they still let me out. And so we deal.
I'm not sure what you mean, could you explain please?

I'm afraid that since OotP, James has not been much more than the arrogant bully we saw. He played with his son! Joy. I'll bet Lucius Malfoy did too. Why, he's a pureblood too. One year of playing with his son makes up for seven years of being a jerk.
But he wasn't just a jerk for those seven years, I honestly think you're being too harsh on James. He was a loyal friend to Sirius, Remus and Peter, the first two of whom he could have easily had nothing to do with if he was a prejudiced git- against people from pureblood supremacist families and werewolves, respectively. And as for the hexing other people...well, Fred and George do the same at school, slipping Bulbadox powder in people's pyjamas and suchlike. And we sort of shrug it away, though heaven knows how it might have been had one of them liked a girl who disapproved of their antics- someone like Hermione, for instance.
I also think dismissing the fact of James having been an affectionate father is doing him a great disservice, the Potterverse shows us all over the place how children can suffer in the absence of a good father figure (look at Voldemort, Snape, even Harry himself once he came to live with the Dursleys) and I've always felt that it was Lucius and Narcissa's concern for Draco that eventually led them to abandon full pursuit of Voldemort's agenda. So it's quite a big deal, a HUGE deal in fact.




Draco, speaking to Harry, says if he were sorted into Hufflepuff, "I think I'd leave, wouldn't you?"

James, speaking of being sorted into Slytherin, says, "I think I'd leave, wouldn't you?"

That's a blatant parallel if I've ever seen one.

Ron says nearly the same thing the very first time he meets Harry, talks of catching the train back home in fact- and we don't disparage Ron for it, do we? If relations between the Houses were anything like what they were in Harry's day, James's statement is fairly understandable, if he was an eleven-year-old who'd spent his life hearing about how Dark wizards came from Slytherin House.

I don't think Harry's looking at Lily when he made the comment meant: Stay with me mom and the rest of you can go. That was my take on it - that all of his comments in that regard were for everyone. Otherwise the later statement indicating that the 4 people were giving him courage wouldn't make much sense to me.

No, but he said "Stay close to me", which I took to mean that he wanted to make sure his mother was close to him.

No, but he said "Stay close to me", which I took to mean that he wanted to make sure his mother was close to him.

Ah...well I think we are in agreement then again :) I too felt he wanted Lily, together with all of the others to stay close to him. He repeated that twice "you'll stay with me?" (a plea) and "stay close to me" (demanding the promise gained from his first request). Lily had not spoken in a while and I feel Harry may not have been looking at her since she last said anything - which would have been quite some time based on the writing. My impression was that he looked at her finally after concentrating on Remus, his Dad and Sirius so much - they had kind of coveted the conversation to that point.

No, but he said "Stay close to me", which I took to mean that he wanted to make sure his mother was close to him.
I thought it was addressed to all four of them- Remus, Sirius, James and Lily. And he might well have looked from Lily to James as he said it, or around to include the other two Marauders in his request.

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?
I think Lily made him less arrogant and probably a much better role model and father than before. Harry thought he was a good man and followed an enhanced version of his father. He probably would've been a really good father. He influenced Harry by making him brave and kind.
2. Why did James chose Sirius over Dumbledore as Secret Keeper? Didn’t he trust Dumbledore with his life?
I'm sure he did, but he trusted Sirius more, his best friend who he was absolutely sure would die to save him, which is probably true, but I would've trusted Dumbledore more. I think he thought Voldemort would expect him to entrust dumbledore, and he thought that Dumbledore was the only one he ever feared, like everyone else, so he would be in no danger, I'm not making any sense, am I, lol.
3. James made Sirius Harry’s godfather. Was this a good decision?
Definitely
4. We got bits and pieces of James’ life. Has he matured over the years and become a better person?
Definitely
5. What was James’ relationship to Lily Evans/Sirius Black/Peter Pettigrew/Remus Lupin/Albus Dumbledore/Minerva McGonagall/Frank and Alice Longbottom?
Friends and in the case of Lily, first enemy, then the person he loved the most.
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?
Probably a small amount of it. He proabably redeemed himself a little in Lily's eyes, I'm sure if he wasn't thinking about it, he would've just let Snape die.

originally posted by Drusilla
But he wasn't just a jerk for those seven years, I honestly think you're being too harsh on James. He was a loyal friend to Sirius, Remus and Peter, the first two of whom he could have easily had nothing to do with if he was a prejudiced git- against people from pureblood supremacist families and werewolves, respectively. And as for the hexing other people...well, Fred and George do the same at school, slipping Bulbadox powder in people's pyjamas and suchlike. And we sort of shrug it away, though heaven knows how it might have been had one of them liked a girl who disapproved of their antics- someone like Hermione, for instance.
I also think dismissing the fact of James having been an affectionate father is doing him a great disservice, the Potterverse shows us all over the place how children can suffer in the absence of a good father figure (look at Voldemort, Snape, even Harry himself once he came to live with the Dursleys) and I've always felt that it was Lucius and Narcissa's concern for Draco that eventually led them to abandon full pursuit of Voldemort's agenda. So it's quite a big deal, a HUGE deal in fact.


I agree. James wasn't prejudiced overall, it was just towards Slytherins, just like Ron. Ron is a pureblood like James, who has spent most of his life before Hogwarts hearing about how Slytherins are evil. He doesn't want to try to unite with Slytherins when the Sorting Hat tells them too. But we don't get mad at Ron. It's like Lupin said, James hated the Dark Arts and there was Snape who was immersed in it. James was a good friend, and grew up to be a good husband and father.

And as to being a loving father, I agree with you. It makes all the difference in Potterverse. Mr. Weasley, James, and Lucius were all loving, pureblood fathers. And all chose, eventually, to put their family first and not follow Voldemort.

Yeah, James was never given a reason to dispute his parents word that Slytherin was made solely for the bad guys. It was the recruiting phase of the war on Voldemort.

Nah, Draco was intended to represent Snape to Harry in a generational replay of Snape and James. I saw the parallels in Snape-James and Draco-Harry almost from the start. Dumbledore told us to think that in his conversation with Harry in the hospital wing after the episode with the sorcerer's stone.

"Well they did rather detest each other. Not unlike yourself and Mr. Malfoy."


I'd refute this: James is shown to be an arrogant bulyl not unsimilar to Malfoy, whereas Harry and Snape are portrayed as the innocent parties. the fact that Both James Potetr and Draco Malfoy came from loving, privalaged backgrounds also shows this point, in the same was Snape and Harry came from apparently less satisfactory childhoods.

Yeah, James was never given a reason to dispute his parents word that Slytherin was made solely for the bad guys. It was the recruiting phase of the war on Voldemort.

I agree. I do think though that if a major portion of the Slytherins (back in James day) had actually been wonderful, loving, kind, and hated the dark arts as much as James, he would have been intelligent enough to dispute his parents word himself. Unfortunately, as you indicate, it was the recruiting phase and most of those interested in the dark arts were Slytherins.

originally posted by DhA
I'd refute this: James is shown to be an arrogant bulyl not unsimilar to Malfoy, whereas Harry and Snape are portrayed as the innocent parties. the fact that Both James Potetr and Draco Malfoy came from loving, privalaged backgrounds also shows this point, in the same was Snape and Harry came from apparently less satisfactory childhoods.

But there's also the fact that Malfoy and Snape are very prejudiced where James and Harry are not. James and Harry are biased towards Slytherins, but they both accepted friends who would normally have been on the outside of the cool circle. Snape attempts to hide his prejudice from Lily, but he calls all the other muggle-borns mudbloods just like Malfoy does. So there are similarities and differences both ways.
Also, James and Harry both tried to save their enemy, when it could be almost certain their enemy wouldn't have done it back. James saved Snape from a vicious prank, Harry rescued Malfoy from the Fiendfire. But I think the difference is that at the end of the epilouge, Harry and Malfoy seem to...respect the other, they may not be friends but they are no longer enemies. But James and Snape never ended their feud. I think the parallel shows that the new generation is really moving on and building a better world then the previous generation.

but I digress.

Also, James and Harry both tried to save their enemy, when it could be almost certain their enemy wouldn't have done it back. James saved Snape from a vicious prank, Harry rescued Malfoy from the Fiendfire. But I think the difference is that at the end of the epilouge, Harry and Malfoy seem to...respect the other, they may not be friends but they are no longer enemies. But James and Snape never ended their feud. I think the parallel shows that the new generation is really moving on and building a better world then the previous generation.

Good point! However, I see no reason to think James wouldn't have ended the feud, had he lived long enough. Snape never ended it, but we can't know what James would have done.

James saved Snape from a vicious prank, Harry rescued Malfoy from the Fiendfire.

I think it's unfair to Harry to compare these two incidents. James did save Severus, but if it was pure goodness of heart prompting him there is at least debatable. One of his best friends had sent Severus into his certain death first, which would have been executed by his other best friend, though unwittingly. If James hadn't acted like he did, not only Severus' life would have been destroyed - so would Remus' and Sirius' lives have been.

One of his best friends had sent Severus into his certain death first, which would have been executed by his other best friend, though unwittingly.

I feel this is an over exageration. Nothing is was certain. Sirius did not know what the outcome would be, Sirius didn't tell Snape point blank to stop the tree and follow Lupin down the tunnel on a full moon, Snape didn't have to go, Remus may have only bit him, Snape may have gotten cold feet and turned back, Remus might have left the shack..a million things could have happened so certain death is a litte extreme...

There are many different motives for James to save Snape and only one requires him to do it for selfish reasons----the odds are in James's favor on this one. Also I wonder what James would have done had he known in advance that Snape would be the one to set Voldemort on his family? Would he have encouraged Snape to his death? Would he have killed Snape himself to spare his family in the future? Would James have backed off Snape in the hopes that Snape would get over things?

I feel this is an over exageration. Nothing is was certain. Sirius did not know what the outcome would be, Sirius didn't tell Snape point blank to stop the tree and follow Lupin down the tunnel on a full moon, Snape didn't have to go, Remus may have only bit him, Snape may have gotten cold feet and turned back, Remus might have left the shack..a million things could have happened so certain death is a litte extreme...

There are many different motives for James to save Snape and only one requires him to do it for selfish reasons----the odds are in James's favor on this one. Also I wonder what James would have done had he known in advance that Snape would be the one to set Voldemort on his family? Would he have encouraged Snape to his death? Would he have killed Snape himself to spare his family in the future? Would James have backed off Snape in the hopes that Snape would get over things?


Well in a rare defense of Snape on my part, I would say that he did not know that he was actually designating the Potters as the victim family when he gave Voldemort the prophecy - so James backing off and him getting over their animosity would not have helped IMO. That in answer to your quesiton.

But I do agree with your point; in JKR's world, werewolves usually bite and don't kill except under rare and extreme circumstances. Nonetheless, Snape would have likely been harmed in some fashion (like Bill for instance). James had show a characteristic of "care for others" (for example: becoming an animagi for Remus, etc.) I think that is the characteristic that came out here in a general way. He rescued Snape IMO because he did not want to see someone come to possible misfourtune (being turned into a werewolf in that day and age was not pleasant - he had 1st hand knowledge of that - nor would scars and scratches be good as Bill had - and the rare possibility of death). I think James would have done the same for anyone that had walked into the tunnel, friend or foe. That just seems to be his nature in my opinion.

I am sure his 'care' was extended to thoughts of Remus and Sirius and the repurcussions they would face; however, I don't think that was his principle reason for following Snape.

I am sure his 'care' was extended to thoughts of Remus and Sirius and the repurcussions they would face; however, I don't think that was his principle reason for following Snape.

I think it was, otherwise I can't see him going back to the same old routine of bullying Snape with Sirius. I don't think Snape believing that James did it for his friends only drove James to continue the bullying (I also think the continued bullying is the reason Snape suspects that James did it for his friends).

Instead, I think that attitude would turn James against Sirius, at least a little, in the respect that he'd try and cool down their 'pranks'.

Well in a rare defense of Snape on my part, I would say that he did not know that he was actually designating the Potters as the victim family when he gave Voldemort the prophecy - so James backing off and him getting over their animosity would not have helped IMO. That in answer to your quesiton.

I would agree with your point about Snape not knowing that the Potter's specifically would be targeted. However I wanted to move away from Snape with my proposed question, believe it or not. In actuality I was trying to draw a paralell to Harry and his prophecy with Voldemort and with Harry and the prophecy concerning Peter.

What if James had heard a prophecy saying that Snape would help the Dark Lord defeat the Potters. Would James assume that Snape willingly helped Voldemort after them on purpose given their history together? How would this foreknowlege, at the age of seventeen, effect his actions concerning Snape at the Shrieking Shack? Would he still have saved Snape (as he did)? Would he have recognized that by acting on the prophecy he was actually making the prophecy come true? Harry had Dumbledore to guide him in regards to such a prophecy and the ramifications of acting on it. Dumbledore offere dto be the Potter's SK but does that mean that James and Dumbledore shared the same sort of comradeship that Harry and Dumbledore did? We know that James could be rash. Would he have even realized that the shrieking shack moment was even related to such a prophecy. (Harry didn't seem to recognize that Wormtail was the servant spoken of earlier by Trelawny.)

I know this line of questioning requires alot of assumptions, but I wondered based on what we know of James if he still would have done what he did...

I think it was, otherwise I can't see him going back to the same old routine of bullying Snape with Sirius. I don't think Snape believing that James did it for his friends only drove James to continue the bullying (I also think the continued bullying is the reason Snape suspects that James did it for his friends).

Instead, I think that attitude would turn James against Sirius, at least a little, in the respect that he'd try and cool down their 'pranks'.


I apologize, I was possibly unclear. I did not mean to indicate that James cared about Snape as an individual at all. I think he had very little respect for Snape's character and interests in life. However, what I meant was that I feel a basic characteristic of James is an ability to 'care' in general that goes beyond the lines of enemy/friend.

For example, I do not believe that he would hit a dying DE with an AK curse to finish the job. I think he would pack the person up and send them off to the Ministry for prosecution. I don't think he would let stand by the lake shore and watch Snape drown, even if he had no part in getting Snape into such a predicament. I was speaking of his nature - something DD addressed when speaking of Harry letting Pettigrew live - he agreed James would have done so also.

There are people in high school who I bullied, but that does not mean I would leave them to die. That is all I was saying. I think that was a principle reason that James went after Snape, not because he cared for the lad, just the principle of the whole thing.

The reprecussions would concern him of course, but even if there were none, I still think he would have gone. After all, he could have gone in, changed to a stag and together with Remus made sure Snape died and then gotten rid of the body. Then he'd get rid of Snape and stave off all repercussions. He didn't do that.

So that was what I was trying to say.

Yeah, James was never given a reason to dispute his parents word that Slytherin was made solely for the bad guys. It was the recruiting phase of the war on Voldemort.

No kidding! :lol: We, the readers, have never been given a reason to dispute Slytherin's bad reputation.

...What if James had heard a prophecy saying that Snape would help the Dark Lord defeat the Potters. Would James assume that Snape willingly helped Voldemort after them on purpose given their history together? How would this foreknowlege, at the age of seventeen, effect his actions concerning Snape at the Shrieking Shack? Would he still have saved Snape (as he did)? Would he have recognized that by acting on the prophecy he was actually making the prophecy come true? First - it wasn't at the age of '17' The Werewolf Incident apparently took place during 5th year. At a point when Snape was still Lily's friend. There is no 'certainty' that Snape WOULD become a DE yet.

So - am I understanding you correctly IF I interpret your words to suggest that James SHOULD have let Remus kill Snape so his future family with Lily (who still thought of him as a toerag at the time) would not be endangered? Because that is how it came across to me - I hope I am misunderstanding you.

...I know this line of questioning requires alot of assumptions, but I wondered based on what we know of James if he still would have done what he did...Well, we could also wonder whether this non-existent prophecy might have suggested to James that it wasn't a great idea to tell a kid whose life had been endangered by his friends during the Werewolf Incident that his very existence is your problem with him. Not unless you want him to really believe that you saved your friends - not him. Snape made the logical leap there.

There are MANY different ways that could have led to a different outcome for the Potters. Letting Snape be killed by WerewolfRemus WOULD have changed everything. Remus would have been expelled, possibly imprisoned - maybe even 'put down'. Presumably, Sirius would have also been expelled - if not imprisoned.

And most importantly to the James/Lily relationship - Lily would never have seen anything admirable in James and never would have gone out with him. Nor would they ever have married.

So - yes - allowing Snape to be killed in the Werewolf Incident would have changed this non-existent prophecy. Lily and James would not have been together to even BE parents. The hope of Sybil's prophecy would have been dependent upon Neville only. And Voldy would have never heard the prophecy - never done anything that ended up 'mark'ing the child. And so, apparently, Voldy would have been invincible.

originally posted by hwyla
Well, we could also wonder whether this non-existent prophecy might have suggested to James that it wasn't a great idea to tell a kid whose life had been endangered by his friends during the Werewolf Incident that his very existence is your problem with him. Not unless you want him to really believe that you saved your friends - not him. Snape made the logical leap there.

I thought the werewolf incident was in the 6th year. So it would've been after the SWM.

originally posted by wickedwickedboy
For example, I do not believe that he would hit a dying DE with an AK curse to finish the job. I think he would pack the person up and send them off to the Ministry for prosecution. I don't think he would let stand by the lake shore and watch Snape drown, even if he had no part in getting Snape into such a predicament. I was speaking of his nature - something DD addressed when speaking of Harry letting Pettigrew live - he agreed James would have done so also.

There are people in high school who I bullied, but that does not mean I would leave them to die. That is all I was saying. I think that was a principle reason that James went after Snape, not because he cared for the lad, just the principle of the whole thing.

The reprecussions would concern him of course, but even if there were none, I still think he would have gone. After all, he could have gone in, changed to a stag and together with Remus made sure Snape died and then gotten rid of the body. Then he'd get rid of Snape and stave off all repercussions. He didn't do that.


I agree. It's just part of his nature. And it's part of Harry's nature too. He's said many times that he wouldn't wish certain horrible fates on his worst enemy, not even Malfoy or Snape. James wouldn't have let Snape die or come to real injury if he could stop it.

originally posted by anabel
Good point! However, I see no reason to think James wouldn't have ended the feud, had he lived long enough. Snape never ended it, but we can't know what James would have done.

True, but my point was that Malfoy and Harry did get the chance to move on and build a better life. The older generation never got that chance. Would James have ever tried to bury the hatchet? We'll never know, but Snape never tried, and so for the previous generation, the grudge remained alive. Malfoy and Harry's relative peace was proof that the new generation had moved on and built a better society.

First - it wasn't at the age of '17' The Werewolf Incident apparently took place during 5th year. At a point when Snape was still Lily's friend. There is no 'certainty' that Snape WOULD become a DE yet.

So - am I understanding you correctly IF I interpret your words to suggest that James SHOULD have let Remus kill Snape so his future family with Lily (who still thought of him as a toerag at the time) would not be endangered? Because that is how it came across to me - I hope I am misunderstanding you.

Well, we could also wonder whether this non-existent prophecy might have suggested to James that it wasn't a great idea to tell a kid whose life had been endangered by his friends during the Werewolf Incident that his very existence is your problem with him. Not unless you want him to really believe that you saved your friends - not him. Snape made the logical leap there.

There are MANY different ways that could have led to a different outcome for the Potters. Letting Snape be killed by WerewolfRemus WOULD have changed everything. Remus would have been expelled, possibly imprisoned - maybe even 'put down'. Presumably, Sirius would have also been expelled - if not imprisoned.

And most importantly to the James/Lily relationship - Lily would never have seen anything admirable in James and never would have gone out with him. Nor would they ever have married.

So - yes - allowing Snape to be killed in the Werewolf Incident would have changed this non-existent prophecy. Lily and James would not have been together to even BE parents. The hope of Sybil's prophecy would have been dependent upon Neville only. And Voldy would have never heard the prophecy - never done anything that ended up 'mark'ing the child. And so, apparently, Voldy would have been invincible.

I understand we all appreciate the various characters to different degrees, but I would ask, respectfully, that we try to remain respectful to them all. Remus is a wizard and a human being he is not "put down". That is what you do with an animal or monster (non-human being) and it devalues the character. He is a wolf 1 day a month not of his own volition, just as McGonagall, Sirius, James and Peter are cats, stags, rats or dogs 1 time a month - or more and by choice - and we don't speak of putting them down. So Anyway, if we could just be a little more sensitive about that, I would greatly appreciate it. We are speaking of book characters, but there are principles behind our statements... I understand it was likely an oversight :) thanks

First - it wasn't at the age of '17' The Werewolf Incident apparently took place during 5th year. At a point when Snape was still Lily's friend. There is no 'certainty' that Snape WOULD become a DE yet.

So - am I understanding you correctly IF I interpret your words to suggest that James SHOULD have let Remus kill Snape so his future family with Lily (who still thought of him as a toerag at the time) would not be endangered? Because that is how it came across to me - I hope I am misunderstanding you.

Well, we could also wonder whether this non-existent prophecy might have suggested to James that it wasn't a great idea to tell a kid whose life had been endangered by his friends during the Werewolf Incident that his very existence is your problem with him. Not unless you want him to really believe that you saved your friends - not him. Snape made the logical leap there.

There are MANY different ways that could have led to a different outcome for the Potters. Letting Snape be killed by WerewolfRemus WOULD have changed everything. Remus would have been expelled, possibly imprisoned - maybe even 'put down'. Presumably, Sirius would have also been expelled - if not imprisoned.

And most importantly to the James/Lily relationship - Lily would never have seen anything admirable in James and never would have gone out with him. Nor would they ever have married.

So - yes - allowing Snape to be killed in the Werewolf Incident would have changed this non-existent prophecy. Lily and James would not have been together to even BE parents. The hope of Sybil's prophecy would have been dependent upon Neville only. And Voldy would have never heard the prophecy - never done anything that ended up 'mark'ing the child. And so, apparently, Voldy would have been invincible.

So this is what happens when one carries an unlikely scenario out to a logical conclusion. :p

So this is what happens when one carries an unlikely scenario out to a logical conclusion. :p

I respectfully disagree, only because there are a number of outcomes. James could have decided that he didn't care about Snape at all and along with Sirius, changed to his animagus form and gone in the S. Shack and ensured Snape died via a 3 way mauling. Then get rid of the body and Snape disappears forever. No one knows what happened so James and his friends get off scot free.

The thing is, if you take James character into account, that scenario does not stand up. James IMO does not have the characteristic of being murderous or torturous (in the sense of a mauling). To say he saved Snape from possible harm or worse merely to save the reputations and possible repercussions for himself and his friends would mean that if there were no repercussions he wouldn't have done anything. But we have no canon to show that James is either murderous or would torture someone to the degree of a mauling - or even attempt to get someone bitten by a werewolf. That does not fit his character IMO.

The thing is, if you take James character into account, that scenario does not stand up. James IMO does not have the characteristic of being murderous or torturous (in the sense of a mauling). To say he saved Snape from possible harm or worse merely to save the reputations and possible repercussions for himself and his friends would mean that if there were no repercussions he wouldn't have done anything. But we have no canon to show that James is either murderous or would torture someone to the degree of a mauling - or even attempt to get someone bitten by a werewolf. That does not fit his character IMO.


No, it doesn't stand up to James as we know him. James pulling Snape out of that tunnel is an exquisite parallel to Harry refusing to let Pettigrew be killed a few years later. For all his kiddy faults, James Potter was just decent.

I also think it's a parallel to Harry saving Draco from the Fiendfire.

I also think it's a parallel to Harry saving Draco from the Fiendfire.

I agree and foreshadowed by DD's assertion that James would have saved Pettigrew just as Harry had, despite Pettigrew's betrayal.

Hm.

If James did indeed save Snape primarily because he truly cared for his existence as a fellow human being, why would he turn around later and bully that same person and say that they're doing it because that person exists?

Hm.

If James did indeed save Snape primarily because he truly cared for his existence as a fellow human being, why would he turn around later and bully that same person and say that they're doing it because that person exists?

In my opinion (in answer to your question), I would say that James' saving Snape did not make them 'friends'. They continued to be enemies. James didn't care about Snape at all on a personal level. Only on a 'human level' and then, only in terms of not wanting to see a human being killed or harmed to the extent that was possible in the S. Shack. As I say, I was a bully, but I would have never let my enemies die. (horrors - seeing as one of them is my best friend now 8 years later, lol). But it is really two separate issues.

I do not think he wouldn't want to stave off repercussions that might befall his friends; but my point is, he would have saved Snape even if there were no repercussions because that is just his character (as pointed out by DD when Harry saved Pettigrew).

I mean realistically, he could have let Snape walk in because if he really cared nothing for Snape, a lad with a evil torturous or murderous intent as wise as James would have had no problem getting rid of the body. DD didn't know James was an animagus - why couldn't they pull another over on DD? It just doesn't add up. It is not James character being described in this last paragraph IMO.

So - am I understanding you correctly IF I interpret your words to suggest that James SHOULD have let Remus kill Snape so his future family with Lily (who still thought of him as a toerag at the time) would not be endangered? Because that is how it came across to me - I hope I am misunderstanding you.

No, that is not what I am saying at all. I'm not saying what he should have done. I am asking what his reaction would be to such a prophecy considering his young age (like Harry) and lack of Dumbledore's involvement (unlike Harry) I asked specific questions of James that Harry had to answer with the two properties that he overheard. Would James have put his friends in jeopardy to save his future family (whether it be with Lily or someone else.)? Harry puts Hermione and Ron in jeopardy by allowing them to come with him--but arguably he was saving the world according to his prophecy. Would James have realized, during the shack incident, that he had the opportunity to change the future (ala Voldemort thinking that he could circumvent the prophecy by killing/horcruxing Harry). Would James even put two and two together?

Remember James was hot headed. He did not have a Hermione to help think through consequences like Harry did. Hermione often encouraged Harry to talk to an adult in charge. He was brave, there is no denying that, so would he might save Snape anyway knowing that it might mean his future doom. He was arrogant so he may decide to save Snape anyway because he thought maybe he could handle Voldemort.

I'm not asking what he should have done, I'm asking what he would havedone.

Well, we could also wonder whether this non-existent prophecy might have suggested to James that it wasn't a great idea to tell a kid whose life had been endangered by his friends during the Werewolf Incident that his very existence is your problem with him. Not unless you want him to really believe that you saved your friends - not him. Snape made the logical leap there.

This is closer to what I had in mind with my post although I feel that there is no need to automatically paint James in a negative light...would James have backed off Snape? Would James have heard the prophecy and assumed that Snape turned them over on purpose? We know Snape had no idea who was going to be targeted, but would James think of that considering his history with Snape? Would he have tried to talk to Snape about such a prophecy.


The thing is, if you take James character into account, that scenario does not stand up. James IMO does not have the characteristic of being murderous or torturous (in the sense of a mauling). To say he saved Snape from possible harm or worse merely to save the reputations and possible repercussions for himself and his friends would mean that if there were no repercussions he wouldn't have done anything. But we have no canon to show that James is either murderous or would torture someone to the degree of a mauling - or even attempt to get someone bitten by a werewolf. That does not fit his character IMO.

I so agree with you here. Snapethinks that James only did it to save his own skin, but Snape is in no position to know exactly what James is thinking. James has never been shown physically harming anyone or anything (i.e breaking bones, cutting people up, punching, slapping, pinching, pulling hair, monkey bites, nugies (:P) or in anyway causing permanent bodily injury. I don't think he would stand idly by and watch it happen. He in fact joined the Order to prevent things like that from happening to people.

Someone can dislike a person but not want them dead. I could point out a bunch of examples, but I'll refrain :p.

Thinking about things a bit more I still place my faith in James on events that we have to infer, and on the word of Lupin and DD. I think James matured rapidly sometime after SWM, and as a result he obtained Head Boy and Lily stopped disliking him. It's not that unusual in real life for this to happen, too - and right around that age, if not a bit older - and I see James having been like this.

Idle thought...I wonder if DD or MM sat him down and read him the riot act? I think it more likely that DD would have done this; if MM was James' head-of-house James would probably have tuned her out by then in regards to behaving.

:hmm: The way James and Sirius behave toward Snape doesn't strike me as dislike as much as disregard. His status as an equal is disregarded. James and Sirius speak quite casually as they taunt Snape, as though he's just a toy or something. They don't seem very angry at first.

Idle thought...I wonder if DD or MM sat him down and read him the riot act? I think it more likely that DD would have done this; if MM was James' head-of-house James would probably have tuned her out by then in regards to behaving.

I agree that if James would listen to someone, Dumbledore is a good bet. I can imagine young!James wanting very badly to join the Order. If the leader of the Order gave him advice, I suppose he may have been eager to try to follow it. He would want to look worthy enough to join, and it's best to start at the top.

:hmm: The way James and Sirius behave toward Snape doesn't strike me as dislike as much as disregard. His status as an equal is disregarded. James and Sirius speak quite casually as they taunt Snape, as though he's just a toy or something. They don't seem very angry at first.

I agree with you. However, Lupin did say that they all disliked one another and Sirius agreed. Plus Snape clearly held onto that dislike throughout his life as did Sirius in further proof that they had held onto something - after all James was dead, Remus was treating Snape cordially (although he said they could never be actual buddies due to the dislike in the past) and nothing that we saw happened between them in their adult life to cause the animosity. So I would believe that there was actual dislike between them all - on the parts of all parties - during their youth IMO.

But dislike aside, I don't think James' character would allow him to let a person die, whatever his emotions toward that person IMO.

I agree that if James would listen to someone, Dumbledore is a good bet. I can imagine young!James wanting very badly to join the Order. If the leader of the Order gave him advice, I suppose he may have been eager to try to follow it. He would want to look worthy enough to join, and it's best to start at the top.

I agree that James expressing an interest in the Order's work (or fighting Voldemort - the OoTP may not have been a well-known enterprise) may have been the catalyst for this. James may have went to DD, and DD may have said "sure...but behave at Hogwarts first. I can't trust anyone who acts of their own accord without thinking of the overall plan". In fact, I sort of like this idea. And, in true DD fashion, being appointed Head Boy may have been James "training run".

I agree that James expressing an interest in the Order's work (or fighting Voldemort - the OoTP may not have been a well-known enterprise) may have been the catalyst for this. James may have went to DD, and DD may have said "sure...but behave at Hogwarts first. I can't trust anyone who acts of their own accord without thinking of the overall plan". In fact, I sort of like this idea. And, in true DD fashion, being appointed Head Boy may have been James "training run".

I think the incentive idea is an interesting speculation and could possibly be the case. I would point out tho, that one does not need incentive to grow out of childish ways. I never had any incentive to stop bullying and playing pranks, I just got tired of it. Grow up, mature and things like bullying, finding girls icky, making your friend drink soda with salt in it and the like all just become things of the past.

No kidding! We, the readers, have never been given a reason to dispute Slytherin's bad reputation.


So true! And I think we're starting at the wrong end when we blame the Sorting itself for the way the kids turn out. The Sorting Hat takes a good look at them and Sorts them according to their personalities, wishes, and potential. Sometimes it hesitates, others it yells out the house straight away (as it did with Snape, Lily, Draco, and the Creevy brothers). So when a child gets sorted into Slytherin, it's because the child has a Slytherin personality. Perhaps with the right care and therapy, these kids might be able to become better people, but unfortunately, by putting them all together in one house with a Slytherin teacher in charge of them, they are allowed to develop to the worst of their potential! But they already have that potential - if Harry, Hermione, Ron, Fred, George, Luna, Neville, Lily or James, to name but a few, were accidentally Sorted into Slytherin, they would still never become Death Eaters!

(Harry, btw, was an exception - it was the part of Voldemort's soul that the Hat wanted to put in Slytherin - Harry himself is a true Gryffindor.)

I so agree with you here. Snape thinks that James only did it to save his own skin, but Snape is in no position to know exactly what James is thinking. James has never been shown physically harming anyone or anything (i.e breaking bones, cutting people up, punching, slapping, pinching, pulling hair, monkey bites, nugies (:P) or in anyway causing permanent bodily injury. I don't think he would stand idly by and watch it happen. He in fact joined the Order to prevent things like that from happening to people.
That's right. Even at the worst of his bullying, James didn't cause physical harm to Snape. (There was an incident with another boy and a magically swollen head, but that was easily fixed - a bit like the canary creams Fred and George invented!)

Good point! However, I see no reason to think James wouldn't have ended the feud, had he lived long enough. Snape never ended it, but we can't know what James would have done.
I suspect James might have gotten over it, marriage and fatherhood have a way of mellowing people out a fair bit- and they're both things Snape never got the benefit of. Though what James would have thought had he known that Snape was the one who endangered his family in the first place, I can't really tell...

I suspect James might have gotten over it, marriage and fatherhood have a way of mellowing people out a fair bit- and they're both things Snape never got the benefit of. Though what James would have thought had he known that Snape was the one who endangered his family in the first place, I can't really tell...I agree, I think once they left Hogwarts there wouldn't have been a need for James to bother with Snape. I keep connecting Snape/James to Harry/Draco, but it appears Draco and Harry after 19 years can finally acknowledge each other without wanting to curse the other, and I think James would have come to the same understanding with Snape, whether or not Snape would have accepted it is for another thread.

But once Hogwarts wasn't a part of his life anymore I can't see James worrying about Snape, maybe he wanted to be the one to land him in jail being a member of the Order and Snape a Death Eater, but thats all I can see.

I suspect James might have gotten over it, marriage and fatherhood have a way of mellowing people out a fair bit- and they're both things Snape never got the benefit of. Though what James would have thought had he known that Snape was the one who endangered his family in the first place, I can't really tell...
Yes, I think James would have gotten over it simply because he had a life and a family, and schoolboy feuds would have been left behind as James got on with his adult life. He certainly didn't seem the type to brood on things.

originally posted by Lord_Godric
I agree, I think once they left Hogwarts there wouldn't have been a need for James to bother with Snape. I keep connecting Snape/James to Harry/Draco, but it appears Draco and Harry after 19 years can finally acknowledge each other without wanting to curse the other, and I think James would have come to the same understanding with Snape, whether or not Snape would have accepted it is for another thread.

But once Hogwarts wasn't a part of his life anymore I can't see James worrying about Snape, maybe he wanted to be the one to land him in jail being a member of the Order and Snape a Death Eater, but thats all I can see.

I can see James wanting to be the one to bring Snape in, but did he ever know about Snape's change of heart? We know it was before Lily and James died, so did Dumbledore tell them that Snape was no longer a DE, but not tell them why? I bet Snape would've wanted Lily to know that he had a change of heart, even if he couldn't bear to tell her why.

originally posted by wickedwickedboy
But dislike aside, I don't think James' character would allow him to let a person die, whatever his emotions toward that person IMO.

I totally agree with that. James never caused physical harm to Snape or any one else, just like the twins. They pulled pranks, but they were never vicious or harmful.

I think the phrase 'never caused physical harm' should be reworded to 'permanent physical harm'. We have canon that he at least swelled some kid's head up to twice it's size - that seems to me to be considered 'physical'. He apparently (according to Lily) hexed an awful lot of people who just annoyed him - most hexes appear to have SOME physical affect.

James never caused physical harm to Snape or any one else

hwyla covered the "everyone else" category, but to add: IMO, choking someone with a scourgify spell in the mouth is physical harm.

Obviously, James valued Lily's and Harry's lives above his own. Without thinking about it, he rushed to buy them more time. He also must have valued Sirius' friendship if their bond was as close as we are led to believe. James cared deeply for the people he loved. James did not love Snape.

Obviously, James valued Lily's and Harry's lives above his own. Without thinking about it, he rushed to buy them more time. He also must have valued Sirius' friendship if their bond was as close as we are led to believe. James cared deeply for the people he loved. James did not love Snape. This is definitely true. I don't think they ever would have liked each other had james lived. There was too much bad history between them.

hwyla covered the "everyone else" category, but to add: IMO, choking someone with a scourgify spell in the mouth is physical harm.

Obviously, James valued Lily's and Harry's lives above his own. Without thinking about it, he rushed to buy them more time. He also must have valued Sirius' friendship if their bond was as close as we are led to believe. James cared deeply for the people he loved. James did not love Snape.

I completely agree with your analysis of James Character and I don't think he loved Snape. But I do think he valued human life and that is why he kept Snape from being harmed in the S. Shack.

I also agree that hexing (most of it) causes some kind of physical change - wizards are not comparable to muggles in that way though. If some kid doubled the size of my head, I would likely die. But in wizard school that is not the case, hexing is what they learn and practice. They grew up with it (most of them) or they get to Hogwarts and quickly understand what hexing is all about. Doubling the size of one's head w/ magic does not cause death as it would if a muggle devised a means to do it. Like when Harry blew up his aunt, she survived.

Worse case scenario is that the kids don't know the counter spell and they go to Madam Pomfrey to be rectified. In rare cases (sectumspectra) they require special healing like Draco (and likely James after SWM). Nonetheless, it is magic and hexes are popular from year to year and the kids use um against one another like many of us did with muggle pranks in school (put salt in soda/ unscrew sugar cap so tons fall in coffee instead of sprinkles, etc).

Looking at things from the magical point of view, hexing is not something dreadful at all. Dark hexes that physically harm a person, well yes - and that is what Snape and his friends used. James used non dark hexes.

I know some people think Snape didn't hex, but JKR in interview said Lily left Snape because of his dark arts and acts - well I don't know what acts she means if not dark acts - dark hexes. I doubt Snape only used dark hexes, I am sure he used normal non dark ones as well like all of the other kids (probably mostly used those).

But hexing is a way of life at magical school so I don't see it as being any big deal unless harmful dark magic is used.

Just my opinion of course :)

It's only just really hit me that at the time of their deaths Lilly and James were both orphans themselves - at the age of 21. Neither had any family left (I don't count Petunia.) They just had each other and of course Sirius -

You're right! I hadn't really thought about it before. The fact that James and Lily had to rely so much on each other as young adults and new parents, without the wisdom, experience, and assistance that extended family can provide, argues for a "changed, mature" James. Even though we don't see much of James as a grownup, we can speculate about how the loss of his parents and his wife's parents affected his outlook.

I wonder if the deaths of the Evanses and the senior Potters (perhaps before Lily and James left school?) is what ultimately brought Lily and James together. Each of them losing their parents around the same time could be a strong force in opening up communication and mutual understanding between them. They could have consoled one another better than their other friends who didn't have the experience of becoming orphans, even though they'd had little in common prior to that.

I think the phrase 'never caused physical harm' should be reworded to 'permanent physical harm'.

I believe I said almost exactly that:

i.e breaking bones, cutting people up, punching, slapping, pinching, pulling hair, monkey bites, nugies (:P) or in anyway causing permanent bodily injury.

Of course the monkey bite/hairpulling thing is directly related to:


also agree that hexing (most of it) causes some kind of physical change - wizards are not comparable to muggles in that way though. If some kid doubled the size of my head, I would likely die. But in wizard school that is not the case, hexing is what they learn and practice. They grew up with it (most of them) or they get to Hogwarts and quickly understand what hexing is all about. Doubling the size of one's head w/ magic does not cause death as it would if a muggle devised a means to do it. Like when Harry blew up his aunt, she survived.


I wonder if the deaths of the Evanses and the senior Potters (perhaps before Lily and James left school?) is what ultimately brought Lily and James together. Each of them losing their parents around the same time could be a strong force in opening up communication and mutual understanding between them. They could have consoled one another better than their other friends who didn't have the experience of becoming orphans, even though they'd had little in common prior to that.

I love that! What a strong bond to share in the face of their own parenthood.

Many people suddenly change when they have a child. Their basic characters don't, but their ideas about responsibility often do and that starts them on the road to maturity. I don't speak of broken homes and other situations where children come unexpectedly or through traumatic circumstances. But like Lily and James, where they apparently wanted the child they had and loved the child.

In my experience, when there is a happy couple with a wanted child, even very young parents become a little stuffy all of the sudden. Your buddy makes all kinds of excuses not to go out, they start throwing boring dinners you are obliged to go to (and while there you have to look at a trillion pictures of the kid in every position possible) and the talk seems to turn from cars, girls and good times to lack of sleep, late night visits to the pharmacy and 'I had no idea' statements. Even if you get your buddy alone and start in on cars, suddenly you find you are talking about the best position for baby car seats in a ferrari...

Well as boring as James might have become to Sirius in this regard, it does speak of a level of maturity when one's scope opens up and all that boring stuff I said above is suddenly very pertinent in one's life. In ways it is a character change and I think Lily's letter bespoke of this idea in relation to her and James life. Like Sirius, me and others give in and buy flying brooms (baseball mitts) that the child is too young to use, because deep down we recognize that it is still our beloved friend, only with a maturing character. I got the impression from my reading that is what happened with James.

James, despite being largely absent in the book, has quite a presence, it seems.

I'm going to give these questions some thought and post later :)

Welcome to the post-DH discussion of James Potter. Previous discussion without spoilers can be found here:James Potter: Character Analysis (http://www.cosforums.com/showthread.php?t=101942)

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?

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

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

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

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

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?

1. I think adult James was a good role model, but definitely not 15-year old James. Though he was arrogant (as a teen) he was a very good friend. And, he would have grown to be a good father, and husband. We see that he risked his life to save his family. And he did save Snape's life, even though Snape describes it as him just getting cold feet. I feel that him saving Snape's life was proof that James did know right from wrong, and in the end, he'd chose to do the right thing. He influences Harry's life because through James, Harry learns that nobody is perfect, and that even good people do bad things. He learns that people can change for the better and can redeem themselves. Thus, Harry loves his father, though he never knew him, and respects him greatly, as he names his first child after him.

2. He chose Sirius because Sirius was his best friend. Yes, he trusted Dumbledore, but the fact remains that Sirius was indeed his best friend, while Dumbledore was more like a mentor than a friend. Suppose Harry was in a situation where he needed a secret keeper (pre DH). Yes, Harry trusts Dumbledore, but more than likely he would have chosen Ron or Hermione. Same with James; best friends come first.

3. Yes, it was a good decision. Though Lupin and Pettigrew too were his best friends, he was closer with Sirius. So it was only natural that he made Sirius the godfather. And this was fine because Sirius cared tremendously for Harry.

4. Yes, he matured over the years. He had to in order for him to land Lily as his wife. There's no way she would have married him if he hadn't changed.

5. James' relationship with:
Lily Evans - Starts as a crush and grows into love. He was in love with Lily and put his life on the line to save her and Harry.

Sirius Black - best friend in the world; like a brother. Very similar to Harry and Ron.

Peter Pettigrew - good friend. It seems that he liked Peter because Peter was sort of like his 'cheerleader'. Pettigrew helped swell James head, adding to his teen arrogance...

Remus Lupin - best friend. I think James was really close with Lupin. Him becoming friends with Lupin was one of James' more admireable qualities as a kid/teen. It shows that James was not at all prejudice. While others would have shunned Lupin for being a werewolf, James welcomed him right into his circle of friends with open arms and tried to make Lupin feel better about himself (e.g. telling him he has a "furry little problem").

Albus Dumbledore - I think he looked up to Dumbledore. He was his mentor and a father-figure. He trusts Dumbledore with his life...(too bad it didn't work...)

Minerva McGonnagal - From how McGonnagal speaks James, I think they were pretty close too. His relationship with her was probably a lot like Harry's with her.

Frank and Alice Longbottom - I imagine they were good friends; fighting together in the Order.

6. I think ALL of James' hatred towards Snape was out of jealously over Lily. Had Snape and Lily not been so close, James would have not hated Snape. He saw Snape as his main rivalry. And being a teenage boy who doesn't make the best decisions, the only way he knew how to cope with Snape was to pick on him. I think he was so jealous of Snape that he had to find a way to somehow make himself feel superior to him, and he did this by teasing and picking on him. I'm not sure if his saving Snape can be called redeeming. It was just him acknowledging that what he did to Snape was wrong.

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

I wouldn't say we got enough bits and pieces of James's life to be sure he matured and became a better person. We saw almost nothing. We saw him clearly in SWM an utterly ruthless bully who abuses Snape for the entertainment of his best friend. In DH we saw him as a pampered brat on the Hogwarts Express, choosing to pick on child Snape at age 11.

We hear that he saves Snape's life when Sirius tricks Snape into going to the Shrieking Shack while Lupin is transformed. We do not hear from James what his motive was for this, but given his well-known devotion to Sirius, I can't help but think he did it to save his impulsive best friend from committing murder at 15.

We don't see James behaving in a generally benevolent way toward people. He's loyal to his own gang, but known for hexing people whenever he wants to. He and Sirius seem to do quite a few detentions during their time at Hogwarts.

Then, we get a glimpse of James going to defend Lily and Harry when Voldemort shows up. James doesn't even have his wand, but he puts himself on the line one more time, giving his life to allow his own, Lily and Harry, time to escape. And he's killed.

I see the James who died that night at Godric's Hollow as exactly the same person who at 15, protected his own.

For the rest of it, we hear descriptions, some from his best friends, some from people who were not aware of his bullying behavior during his school years. We hear from his victim, Severus Snape. But we see very little, and if we judge simply by what we see, I have to say that I'm not impressed.

I think a big clue left us about James' character was this: James' friends, mentors and enemies a like all said the same thing: Harry reminds us of James. Thus I think we can look to Harry's character to better fathom James' character, I feel that was the author's attention.

Snape, James' own enemy does not ever say that Harry looks like his father; he says Harry's characteristics are like his fathers. Trusting, Independent, Arrogant, a bit Impetuous and a Mischeif maker (Harry had no qualms using the map to go to hogsmeade/James too). Whereas from James' friends (Remus/Sirius) we hear that James was loving, kind, trusting, arrogant, a berk when he was young, but matured by 7th year. But they also would point out characteristics that Harry had which reminded them of James. Dumbledore, Minerva and Hagrid did the same thing as James' friends, remarking on similarities between James and Harry with respect to their characters.

Just my opinion of course, but I think that it was the authors intent that we see many of James characteristics in Harry. We don't get many glimpses of James, but it becomes unnecessary because we see him in his son as so many, friends, mentors and enemies alike, point out to us during the series. An interestingly, these people turned out to have a similar relationship with both James and Harry. (DD, Minerva and Hagrid as mentors; James' friends as both friends and mentors to Harry; and Harry's enemy was also his father's during the series.)

We saw him clearly in SWM an utterly ruthless bully who abuses Snape for the entertainment of his best friend.

Utterly ruthless? Whose the one that walked away with gash in his face? I don't deny that Snape had the right to defend himself, however, he was the one that did bodily damage when he could have done something equally humiliating to James instead. Unless Snape healed James himself, James probably ended up with some sort of scar since sectumsempra is dark magic and cannot be fully healed. It was Snape who used ruthless magic, not James.

We don't see James behaving in a generally benevolent way toward people.

Mmmm, because joining the Order to save the lives of people he didn't even know, and defying Voldemort three times in the process is not benevolent?
We hear that he saves Snape's life when Sirius tricks Snape into going to the Shrieking Shack while Lupin is transformed. We do not hear from James what his motive was for this, but given his well-known devotion to Sirius, I can't help but think he did it to save his impulsive best friend from committing murder at 15.

Honestly, what kind of friend would James have been if he let that happen? He would have been a horrible friend, indeed. There is nothing wrong with saving your own. In fact I am sure that was part of the reason, but that more than likely wasn't the whole reason. He probably had many other reasons to go along with it. JKR didn't write this scene to demonize James, she wrote it to humanize James, and James has certainly shown that he is more than a one-dimensional cardbord cut out bully.


Then, we get a glimpse of James going to defend Lily and Harry when Voldemort shows up. James doesn't even have his wand, but he puts himself on the line one more time, giving his life to allow his own, Lily and Harry, time to escape. And he's killed.

I see the James who died that night at Godric's Hollow as exactly the same person who at 15, protected his own.

I am, quite frankly, at a loss to understand this view. Is there something wrong with protecting your own? Wouldn't he have been a poor husband and father if he had not? He attempted to stop Voldemort without a wand! He knew it was futile and he did it anyway. He wasn't trying to save his own skin. This view you presented makes it sound as if he would have let anyone else die. If that was the case that is certainly a characteristic that people wouldn't fail to notice, especially Dumbledore.
For the rest of it, we hear descriptions, some from his best friends, some from people who were not aware of his bullying behavior during his school years. We hear from his victim, Severus Snape. But we see very little, and if we judge simply by what we see, I have to say that I'm not impressed.

I doubt that Dumbledore or Hagrid or Mcgonagall were unaware of James bullying. SWM was in the middle of a crowded courtyard, yet still they had nothing but praise for James, so that really isn't a valid arguement in my honest opinion. We see SWM, but we only have Snape's word for James's motives in the shack, and do you really think Snape is going to partial?

We have ample evidence of Snape's abuses and bad decisions throughout the series, at a time long past when one could make excuses for his behavior. I must say that I am hardly impressed with him. But he did have his positive moments and to claim that James did not is not very even handed in my opinion.

Hm.

If James did indeed save Snape primarily because he truly cared for his existence as a fellow human being, why would he turn around later and bully that same person and say that they're doing it because that person exists?

Here's a today's world parallel: I despise George Bush and never miss a chance to complain about his presidency. I can't wait for the last 521 days of his term in office to be over. That doesn't mean I wish him dead.

I think a big clue left us about James' character was this: James' friends, mentors and enemies a like all said the same thing: Harry reminds us of James. Thus I think we can look to Harry's character to better fathom James' character, I feel that was the author's attention.

I'm sorry, but I don't see it that way. What we really have is people saying that Harry looks like his father physically. (Yes, we have two instances of Lupin telling him he reminds him of James - then he did, but that's just one person's opinion, and not everybody.) Then they add that he has his mother's eyes. We know that eyes are the windows to the soul. And I take it to mean that, even though he looks like his father, he is really more like his mother, which is also what Dumbledore says in DH.

Isn't Harry's difference from his father that Snape fails to see all these years?

Snape, James' own enemy does not ever say that Harry looks like his father; he says Harry's characteristics are like his fathers. Trusting, Independent, Arrogant, a bit Impetuous and a Mischeif maker (Harry had no qualms using the map to go to hogsmeade/James too).

Exactly. And he is wrong.

Whereas from James' friends (Remus/Sirius) we hear that James was loving, kind, trusting, arrogant, a berk when he was young, but matured by 7th year. But they also would point out characteristics that Harry had which reminded them of James. Dumbledore, Minerva and Hagrid did the same thing as James' friends, remarking on similarities between James and Harry with respect to their characters.

They didn't. Hagrid said once that Harry did what his father would have done, which is telling him he had the same courage. When did Dumbledore or McGonagall say Harry was like his father in character? I don't recall, please give some quotes, I may be wrong, of course.

The thing is, James apparently was both - he was arrogant and a mischief maker and very confident, etc. etc., and he was also a loyal friend, a man of honour and courgae and a devoted husband and father (as per his friends). But Harry is like him only on the things that define a true Gryffindor - bravery, faithfulness, honour. His specific characteristsics, however, turned out to be more like his mother's.

The thing is, James apparently was both - he was arrogant and a mischief maker and very confident, etc. etc., and he was also a loyal friend, a man of honour and courgae and a devoted husband and father (as per his friends). But Harry is like him only on the things that define a true Gryffindor - bravery, faithfulness, honour. His specific characteristsics, however, turned out to be more like his mother's.

I think that the whole point of Harry's character is to show that he had physical characteristics of both his parents AND that he had many personal characteristics (ethically, morally, and personality) of both his parents. And given that he was similar to both of his parents on that level, having not been raised by them, is quite remarkable.

James was an arrogant person and he was self-centred,at least during the years at Hogwarts.I think after rescued Snape in their sixth year he maybe found it a bit unreasonable to torture people just for fun,but I don't think he hence became a model student immediately.He was popular,and people liked him,except the Slytherins.As for Lily,I think after the Snape stuff she might feel a bit...strange,and James just appeared at the right moment as a headboy.After all,he could be described as upright,intelligent and humorous even during his school years,and he disliked Dark Arts at all.Maybe something happened(it might be trivial,and I think JKR really doesn't intend to write a James/Lily fiction),and Lily found out James was some kind of responsible or reliable or somesuch,girls may be a bit bizarre when they fall in love,after all.
And I think the secret keeper thing has very little to do with 'trust'.people are tend to rely on their best friends which they had known for years rather to trust a person who is great but you never understand him.It's spontaneous that he chose Sirius.And they later chose Peter because he was weak,and they thought Voldmort thought they wouldn't choose him because of his weakness.Sirius and Remus are far more outstanding.Sirius suggested Peter because he thought Voldmort might be after him and tortured something out (?).
And,I really can't blame James in the slighest way after reading about how he defend his loved ones at the cost of his own life.
Maybe a bit imprudent,but definitely a true Gryffindor.

Utterly ruthless? Whose the one that walked away with gash in his face? I don't deny that Snape had the right to defend himself, however, he was the one that did bodily damage when he could have done something equally humiliating to James instead. Unless Snape healed James himself, James probably ended up with some sort of scar since sectumsempra is dark magic and cannot be fully healed. It was Snape who used ruthless magic, not James.

But if James hadn't attacked him in the first place then he wouldn't have got scarred.He bound him,rid him of his wand and humilated him.Snape used ruthless magic but it was James who acted ruthless.

Ready to give this a shot :D

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?

One of the things that really confused me about the books is why it is that so many people are so quick to mention Harry's resemblance to his father, but so slow to give him information about James. What Harry finds out proves to be somewhat disappointing because it comes from Snape- a source not likely to be flattering considering his relationship with James as a student.

I think the implication is that he became a good father, and he's referred to as a good man.

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

I don't recall. I thought he'd chosen Lupin :huh:

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

It was a good idea at the time, but given the way things turned out in his life, I'd have to say no. I like Sirius, but his arrested maturity made him a less than idea possible guardian for a child.

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

It sounded like he did- other remarked on the change in him between 5th year (specifically) and fatherhood.

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

Not sure, but I'd say Lily was the love of his life and the person he changed for, Sirius was his buddy and the guy he could relive his schooldays with, Peter was a hanger-on, Lupin was his conscience, and I'm really not sure abou the rest. I'd have to reread.

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

I didn't get that feeling- that James hated Snape because of Snape's friendship with Lily- but it's interesting now that you mention it. I'm not sure. I think James sort of did it to get/stay on Lily's good side, since around that time he was (I think) starting to form an interest in her.

Isn't Harry's difference from his father that Snape fails to see all these years?

For me, what I thought Snape failed to see was that Harry wasn't James himself. That is, that Harry was an individual. Not that he didn't share James' characteristics and looks.


They didn't. Hagrid said once that Harry did what his father would have done, which is telling him he had the same courage. When did Dumbledore or McGonagall say Harry was like his father in character? I don't recall, please give some quotes, I may be wrong, of course.

Quotes asked for:

Dumbledore: 'it was your father in you that you saw last night, Prongs road again' - when Harry shares his father's stag patronus (JKR interview James patronus was also a stag). And actually the fact that they share the same inner animal would seem to indicate that they shared many of the same characteristics.

Dumbledore: 'your father would have done the same thing you did in saving Pettigrew' Meaning they would have both felt similarly based on their characters.

Those are the types of quotes that lend credence to the idea that Harry and James are a lot alike in character. I believe Harry does differ - he is an individual w/ different experiences and he also has characteristics of his mother and in fact her disposition as well (which DD told Snape).


The thing is, James apparently was both - he was arrogant and a mischief maker and very confident, etc. etc., and he was also a loyal friend, a man of honour and courgae and a devoted husband and father (as per his friends). But Harry is like him only on the things that define a true Gryffindor - bravery, faithfulness, honour. His specific characteristsics, however, turned out to be more like his mother's.


Well I think the characteristics that you mention James having are all shared by Harry: Harry was a loyal friend, a man of honour and courage and later a devoted husband/father. I don't know what you mean by "specific characteristics" but I do think he had Lily's disposition if that is what you mean. It almost seems as if we are in agreement. But I respect your opinion and hope I have not misconstrued it.

For me, what I thought Snape failed to see was that Harry wasn't James himself. That is, that Harry was an individual. Not that he didn't share James' characteristics and looks.

But he never said Harry was his father. He said Harry was just like his father. And he was wrong in what he meant, wasn't he?

Quotes asked for:

Dumbledore: 'it was your father in you that you saw last night, Prongs road again' - when Harry shares his father's stag patronus (JKR interview James patronus was also a stag). And actually the fact that they share the same inner animal would seem to indicate that they shared many of the same characteristics.

Dumbledore: 'your father would have done the same thing you did in saving Pettigrew' Meaning they would have both felt similarly based on their characters.

Those are the types of quotes that lend credence to the idea that Harry and James are a lot alike in character. I believe Harry does differ - he is an individual w/ different experiences and he also has characteristics of his mother and in fact her disposition as well (which DD told Snape).


OK, OK, I stand corrected :) Seems Harry IS like his father then. I wonder if I had been reading different books, because I never got the idea he was like James :shrug:

But he never said Harry was his father. He said Harry was just like his father. And he was wrong in what he meant, wasn't he?

Well I think Snape felt he was right. I think Snape saw James standing before him in miniature. He saw characteristics that were the same and concluded that Harry and James were the same animal. Harry was an individual tho...and he had his mum's disposition, so in that way Snape was wrong, but not about some of the characteristics.

OK, OK, I stand corrected :) Seems Harry IS like his father then. I wonder if I had been reading different books, because I never got the idea he was like James :shrug:

lol. Well I think maybe if one looks at Harry's disposition rather than mere characteristics, they will see more of Lily than James. Characterwise, Harry shares many with both his mum and dad (and James and Lily share some also). But Harry's softer, more forgiving and more-mature for his age nature was, IMO more like his mother.

I think it is possible to read the series and come out with many interpretations, I wouldn't say your opinion was ever invalid, it just depends on how you interpret the events. That makes your interpretation as valid as anyone else's.

lol. Well I think maybe if one looks at Harry's disposition rather than mere characteristics, they will see more of Lily than James. Characterwise, Harry shares many with both his mum and dad (and James and Lily share some also). But Harry's softer, more forgiving and more-mature for his age nature was, IMO more like his mother.

Now watch - I actually agree :lol: Yes, that's what I meant about Harry being more like his mother. I just feel that in his core, he is like her, whatever that may mean :)

Unless Snape healed James himself, James probably ended up with some sort of scar since sectumsempra is dark magic and cannot be fully healed. It was Snape who used ruthless magic, not James.
That never occurred to me before, but of course you are right!OK, OK, I stand corrected Seems Harry IS like his father then. I wonder if I had been reading different books, because I never got the idea he was like James

:lol: Harry isn't a carbon copy of James, but he has inherited a lot of James's good qualities!

I had a thought on my most recent re-read about the tomb message "The last enemy to be conquered is death" - did James choose that or did Dumbledore?

I'm curious because I'm wondering if James knew about the Hallows. He had the cloak. Likely he knew he was descended from the Peverells. Did he suspect his cloak was the Hallow? Did he know that was why Dumbledore was borrowing it?

I had a thought on my most recent re-read about the tomb message "The last enemy to be conquered is death" - did James choose that or did Dumbledore?

I'm curious because I'm wondering if James knew about the Hallows. He had the cloak. Likely he knew he was descended from the Peverells. Did he suspect his cloak was the Hallow? Did he know that was why Dumbledore was borrowing it?

That's interesting. I'd think Dumbledore, because he was the one who possessed the two Hallows at the time of Lily and James' death. And James never had the Elder Wand.

It would've been on Dumbledore's mind at the time: he lacked the one Hallow that could've brought them back (even if it couldn't truly).

Here's a today's world parallel: I despise George Bush and never miss a chance to complain about his presidency. I can't wait for the last 521 days of his term in office to be over. That doesn't mean I wish him dead.

I think there is something of a difference here. I mean, with the James/Snape relationship. If James came with any intention of saving Snape for Snape himself, because he valued his life, why would he go on to say 'he exists' as the reason for being bullied?

And when one considers it, something that big, a life or death situation, usually produces a bigger hint of comaradarie than is being shown here. Perhaps not friendship, but a mutuall understand at the very least. And, if I was in Snape's position, after going through that, only to be bullied again, I would grow up thinking that James did it to save his friends, rather than my life, as well.

It is also interesting that they are doing this to him shortly after he has learned Lupin's secret. Its a wonder he didn't get his vengence by telling the whole school about Sirius' plot and Lupin's condition.

I had a thought on my most recent re-read about the tomb message "The last enemy to be conquered is death" - did James choose that or did Dumbledore? I'm curious because I'm wondering if James knew about the Hallows. He had the cloak. Likely he knew he was descended from the Peverells. Did he suspect his cloak was the Hallow? Did he know that was why Dumbledore was borrowing it? I suspect that the quote was Dumbledore's - it seems like something he would say, and it seems like something that Dumbledore would feel characterized James and Lily.

As for the Deathly Hallows. So few people believed in them, that I doubt James did. If he had, I assume he would have consulted Dumbledore, yet Dumbledore makes no mention of that.

As for the Deathly Hallows. So few people believed in them, that I doubt James did. If he had, I assume he would have consulted Dumbledore, yet Dumbledore makes no mention of that.

I dunno, he must have said something to Dumbledore that made Dumbledore investigate the cloak. He'd grown up in the wizarding world so he would have known the cloak was special and in Godric's Hollow, home of the Peverells. It seems possible that he suspected the possiblity even if he didn't believe.

I dunno, he must have said something to Dumbledore that made Dumbledore investigate the cloak. He'd grown up in the wizarding world so he would have known the cloak was special and in Godric's Hollow, home of the Peverells. It seems possible that he suspected the possiblity even if he didn't believe.

And the Peverell crest was the symbol of the Hallows. I do think he may have known about them, not just from Dumbledore but considering where he lived and his ancestry.

I think there is something of a difference here. I mean, with the James/Snape relationship. If James came with any intention of saving Snape for Snape himself, because he valued his life, why would he go on to say 'he exists' as the reason for being bullied?

And when one considers it, something that big, a life or death situation, usually produces a bigger hint of comaradarie than is being shown here. Perhaps not friendship, but a mutuall understand at the very least. And, if I was in Snape's position, after going through that, only to be bullied again, I would grow up thinking that James did it to save his friends, rather than my life, as well.

It is also interesting that they are doing this to him shortly after he has learned Lupin's secret. Its a wonder he didn't get his vengence by telling the whole school about Sirius' plot and Lupin's condition.

I respect your opinion, but we did not see the rescue scene. I would speculate that after being dragged out of the tunnel by James, Snape didn't fall on his knees thanking James or tell him he was the greatest thing since spilt milk. Later Snape derides James' motives for saving him, so I would imagine he was none too nice to James after he'd just saved Snape's life. Thus, nothing would change between them. Why would James be nice if Snape wasn't?

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?
We really can't say. We really only saw him as a teenager before he matured a little bit. We never saw him as a father except for him telling Lily to take Harry while he held off Voldemort.

2. Why did James chose Sirius over Dumbledore as Secret Keeper? Didn’t he trust Dumbledore with his life?
He didn't choose Sirius over Dumbledore as Secret Keeper, that was Peter, but I think James didn't choose Dumbledore because he felt it would be disloyal to his friends. I'm sure he did trust Dumbledore with his life though.

3. James made Sirius Harry’s godfather. Was this a good decision?
Sirius was his best friend. How could he not choose him? I don't think it was a bad decision though. I think he wanted Harry to have fun with Sirius as James himself did.

4. We got bits and pieces of James’ life. Has he matured over the years and become a better person?
It said he matured and that he was a good person, so I have no reason to believe otherwise. I'm sure he did. Sirius didn't like him either and he managed to restrain himself from cursing Snape to death.

5. What was James’ relationship to Lily Evans/Sirius Black/Peter Pettigrew/Remus Lupin/Albus Dumbledore/Minerva McGonagall/Frank and Alice Longbottom?
Lily Evans-husband/friend/classmate/protector
Sirius Black-best friend/brother/classmate/partner in crime
Peter Pettigrew-friend/classmate/latched onto by Peter
Remus Lupin-friend/classmate/company keeper at that time of the month...:lol:/Remus kept him in line
Albus Dumbledore-student/friend/club member...if you want to call the Order a club
Minerva McGonagall-student
Frank and Alice-classmate/friends/partners in pregnancy...meaning they were both expecting at the same time

6. How much of James' hatred of Snape do you think was jealousy over his friendship with Lily? Do you think he redeemed himself by saving his life in spite of this jealousy?
I think that it had a great deal to do with it. He would have treated anybody who he thought was a threat to his potential relationship with Lily badly, Snape just got it worse because he happened to be a Slytherin--a clever one interested in the Dark Arts. I don't think he would have redeemed himself in Snape's eyes, but it shows that was a better person than Snape claimed and that he had the ability to put their differences aside.

I dunno, he must have said something to Dumbledore that made Dumbledore investigate the cloak. He'd grown up in the wizarding world so he would have known the cloak was special and in Godric's Hollow, home of the Peverells. It seems possible that he suspected the possiblity even if he didn't believe.Did it say somewhere that the Peverell family was from Godric's Hallow? I missed that - could someone point it out for me, please!

ETA - DOH!!!! I completely ditzed on the graveyard! But wasn't that only ONE Peverell grave? Not sure that qualifies Godric's Hollow as ancestral home of the Peverells.

Also - note that in the past it was assumed that James grew up in Godric's Hollow because that was where they hid. But we can now see that Godric's Hollow was actually Albus' hometown. We really don't have any canon as to where James grew up.

But since Ignotus Peverell was the one with the cloak, and it was passed down the female line since the male line died out and James inherited the cloak and then passed it down to Harry who was born in Godric's Hollow, it seems rather logical that James was born there. They didn't finish looking at the entire graveyard and many headstones were covered in snow. And maybe it was Harry's grandmother who inherited the cloak, anyway. "My mum told Sirius that Dumbledore borrowed the Cloak! This is why! He wanted to examine it, because he thought it was the third Hallow! Ignotus Peverell is buried in Godric’s Hollow. . . ” Harry was walking blindly around the tent, feeling as though great new vistas of truth were opening all around him. “He’s my ancestor. I’m descended from the third brother! It all makes sense!” “The Cloak, as you know now, traveled down through the ages, father to son, mother to daughter, right down to Ignotus’s last living descendant, who was born, as Ignotus was, in the village of Godric’s Hollow.” Dumbledore smiled at Harry.
“Me?”
“You.Harry was born into some ancestral home of the Potters (or his maternal grandmother). It was interesting that Dumbledore was also from the village, but they didn't have the baby in Dumbledore's home.

Problem is that we don't KNOW where Harry was born. We know he spent his first birthday in Godric's Hollow (in hiding) and we know that once the Potters went under the Fidelius charm they hid in Godric's Hollow. But we do NOT have canon that Harry was BORN there, nor that James grew up there. Many people THOUGHT it before DH, but we now have Harry thinking they hid there because it was the town Albus had lived in. And really - does it make sense for them to hide in Godric's Hollow NOT under the Fidelius (Lily's letter about Harry's birthday) IF it had been James' hometown?

And the Peverell crest was the symbol of the Hallows. I do think he may have known about them, not just from Dumbledore but considering where he lived and his ancestry.I don't think the Peverell 'crest' is the symbol of the Hallows - I think Marvello just didn't have any idea what the symbol meant and so assumed it was the crest. That doesn't mean it actually WAS. It certainly doesn't take the form of a usual 'coat-of-arms'.

That said - I have always said that the ring reminded me of a signet ring. Which WAS used as an identifier - imprints in wax seals. etc. So - it MIGHT not be an 'official' 'crest', but it still might be signet.

Problem is that we don't KNOW where Harry was born. We know he spent his first birthday in Godric's Hollow (in hiding) and we know that once the Potters went under the Fidelius charm they hid in Godric's Hollow. But we do NOT have canon that Harry was BORN there, nor that James grew up there. Many people THOUGHT it before DH, but we now have Harry thinking they hid there because it was the town Albus had lived in. And really - does it make sense for them to hide in Godric's Hollow NOT under the Fidelius (Lily's letter about Harry's birthday) IF it had been James' hometown?Please read the quote I provided from Dumbledore to Harry from the King's Cross chapter. He tells Harry he was born in Godric's Hollow.

“The Cloak, as you know now, traveled down through the ages, father to son, mother to daughter, right down to Ignotus’s last living descendant, who was born, as Ignotus was, in the village of Godric’s Hollow.” Dumbledore smiled at Harry.
“Me?”
“You."Harry was born into some ancestral home of the Potters (or his maternal grandmother). It was interesting that Dumbledore was also from the village, but they didn't have the baby in Dumbledore's home. As for where they were hiding: we have seen examples of Hermione's ability to conceal their location from Death Eaters. Surely, James and Lily could do the same.

In the chapter "In the Forest Again" in DH it says that James was wearing the robes he had been wearing when he had died. His glasses were a bit lopsided like Mr. Weasley's.
Maybe I'm reading into this a bit too much, but somehow I think that Jo was giving us a definite parallel between Arthur and James. We know that Arthur was one of the best fathers in the book. Maybe it was her way of saying that had James been alive, he would have been an equally capable parent.
The fact that even in death James has always been one of the strongest influences and source of support and inspiration in Harry's life speaks for itself.

[I'm so glad to be back. My comp crashed. I was going crazy. Need to read all the posts that have been made in the past week.]

But since Ignotus Peverell was the one with the cloak, and it was passed down the female line since the male line died out and James inherited the cloak and then passed it down to Harry who was born in Godric's Hollow, it seems rather logical that James was born there. They didn't finish looking at the entire graveyard and many headstones were covered in snow. And maybe it was Harry's grandmother who inherited the cloak, anyway. "My mum told Sirius that Dumbledore borrowed the Cloak! This is why! He wanted to examine it, because he thought it was the third Hallow! Ignotus Peverell is buried in Godric’s Hollow. . . ” Harry was walking blindly around the tent, feeling as though great new vistas of truth were opening all around him. “He’s my ancestor. I’m descended from the third brother! It all makes sense!” “The Cloak, as you know now, traveled down through the ages, father to son, mother to daughter, right down to Ignotus’s last living descendant, who was born, as Ignotus was, in the village of Godric’s Hollow.” Dumbledore smiled at Harry.
“Me?”
“You.

There might have been more than one female descendant to whom the Cloak was passed down, given that the names Ignotus, Antioch and Cadmus sound like they belong to Roman Britain, which was long before the time of even the Hogwarts founders. Which means, if we can account for exactly how old the name 'Peverell' itself is, James Potter came from a very ancient line of wizards indeed- so ancient that he might not have known that the Peverell brothers of the tale included one of his ancestors.
And as for not having Harry born in Dumbledore's home, it's quite possible that Dumbledore didn't keep a home in Godric's Hollow- I suppose he'd been living at Hogwarts ever since he began teaching there, and returning would have been too painful. Aberforth was living at the Hog's Head by then, I suppose. And it wouldn't really have made much sense to move Lily there just for the birth..

Which means, if we can account for exactly how old the name 'Peverell' itself isIn the real world, the Peverell name enters the 'records' after the Norman conquest of England...so after 1066.

Thanks for that information, but in conjunction with the Roman-sounding names, it's quite confusing for me. But it'd definitely qualify as ancient, wouldn't it?

But it'd definitely qualify as ancient, wouldn't it?Depends on definition, I suppose. It's just after the founding of Hogwarts and there is no definite date given for that event, nor for the birth and death dates of the Founders. It was certainly old enough that James was never considered anything but a pureblood and at least as ancient as the Black family seems to have been (maybe even older).

Information from James about his family is extremely limited (maybe even non-existent in the books), do you think he knew about his descent from the Peverells (ie, did his family have a book or tapestry that traced their ancestry)?

Depends on definition, I suppose. It's just after the founding of Hogwarts and there is no definite date given for that event, nor for the birth and death dates of the Founders.
Well, the dates given as info on the school founders when they appear as Wizard of the Month on jkrowling.com (http://www.jkrowling.com) say that they're medieval, so maybe the Peverells predate that.


It was certainly old enough that James was never considered anything but a pureblood and at least as ancient as the Black family seems to have been (maybe even older).
It's certainly likely, given that Ernie tries to use nine generations of wizard descent as a defence against the Heir of Slytherin...and a thousand years is defintely more than nine generations' worth of people..


Information from James about his family is extremely limited (maybe even non-existent in the books), do you think he knew about his descent from the Peverells (ie, did his family have a book or tapestry that traced their ancestry)?
I don't think he really knew about his descent from Ignotus, not many people believed in the Deathly Hallows and Dumbledore only knew because he'd been researching them in his youth. To James, it might have just been a cloak that was a family heirloom, he probably never thought about tracing its origins.

Information from James about his family is extremely limited (maybe even non-existent in the books), do you think he knew about his descent from the Peverells (ie, did his family have a book or tapestry that traced their ancestry)? The information was probably available in geneology books, so if James happened to have been interested, he probably would have been able to trace back his family line. But, I don't think he would have considered it to be so significant - probably lots of wizards were distant descendents of famous people.

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?
I believe he would have been a good father. I'm sure he wouldn't have discouraged Harry from getting into mischief, but if Harry crossed any real lines I'm sure he'd have disciplined him. I do believe would have been a good role model, but I'm sure Lily wouldn't have allowed Harry to get into anything too dangerous or too mischievous. James has had quite an influence over Harry's present life already, since Harry sees him as his protector. And in truth, he was one of Harry's protectors when Voldemort came that fateful night.

2. Why did James chose Sirius over Dumbledore as Secret Keeper? Didn’t he trust Dumbledore with his life?
I've always wondered that myself. There could have been a number of reasons, such as not wanting to make it seem too obvious as to who was the secret keeper (which could have been why he allowed the switch from Sirius to Peter). Or maybe there was some kind of disagreement or difference of opinion between James and Dumbledore. But that begs the question as to why Lily would have gone along with it, since she was obviously involved in the decision just as much as James.

3. James made Sirius Harry’s godfather. Was this a good decision?
Yes, I believe so (though I'm sure Remus would have done an excellent job too). Sirius truly cared for Harry, and even though he may not have been a perfect parental figure, his heart was in the right place when it came to Harry. Also, we see how much Harry cared for Sirius - so much so that it saved him from Voldemort's possession.

4. We got bits and pieces of James’ life. Has he matured over the years and become a better person?
Yes I believe he did, or else Lily wouldn't have fallen in love with him and married him. James went from arrogant prat at 15 who had a very large ego, to a husband and father who was willing to sacrifice himself so that his wife and child could escape (as his last words are "take Harry and go").

5. What was James’ relationship to Lily Evans/Sirius Black/Peter Pettigrew/Remus Lupin/Albus Dumbledore/Minerva McGonagall/Frank and Alice Longbottom?
James would have had a tight bond of friendship with Sirius and Remus (they were shown to be his "equals" among the Marauders), and a "hero-worshipper" relationship with Peter (though this could have changed once they got out of school). I always thought he must have had a good relationship with Albus, but perhaps there was trouble with that relationship during the time when they needed a Secret Keeper. With Alice and Frank Longbottom, I'm sure the Potters knew them as fellow Order members, and perhaps they knew them better because they also had a small son Harry's age.

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?
In the beginning I think it had more to do with Snape's entanglement in the Dark Arts, but once James got to liking Lily the reason for his jealousy might have switched gears. Yes I think he redeemed himself by saving Snape's life.

The information was probably available in geneology books, so if James happened to have been interested, he probably would have been able to trace back his family line. But, I don't think he would have considered it to be so significant - probably lots of wizards were distant descendents of famous people.


Well, I'm not sure that James would be interested in that stuff. Nor do I think any geneology books would be able to tell him easily that he was related. That stuff gets really confusing, especially when you go back really far.

I just don't think he'd take the time to look that sort of thing up. Harry went seven years without questioning his cloak, I don't see why James wouldn't do the same.

Dumbledore, on the other hand, does strike me as the sort of person who could patiently wade through a list of name branching off in a hundred different directions, so that may be why he knew Harry was related.

It's common behaviour, accepting something as a family heirloom without question. And young James doesn't really seem to be all that interested in wizarding genealogy, to be honest- and he didn't seem like he would be.

I suspect that the quote was Dumbledore's - it seems like something he would say, and it seems like something that Dumbledore would feel characterized James and Lily.

Dumbledore may have chosen to use it but it didn't originate with him. It is from the New Testament. I was a little surpised that Harry didn't recognize the phrase. I seem to recall a mention of him attending church or Sunday School with the Dursleys.

Talking about Godric's Hollow...what I want to know is, where were the Muggles when the house in Godric's Hollow was blasted apart and where was baby Harry in all this? We have Hagrid arriving to collect him, we have Sirius showing up on his motorcycle, we have DD...all this must have taken some time. Was an injured infant just lying there with his dead mother in the smoking ruins until Hagrid appeared? I've never quite understood the time-frame of events between when James and Lily were killed and DD arrives at Privet Drive to await Harry.

Also, do you think there was a funeral for the Potters, or were the times so dangerous that wizards couldn't congregate together for events like that? Maybe DD had to quietly see to their interment and they never got a proper goodbye. Perhaps the adult Harry could hold a memorial service for them, but by then all the people who knew and loved them best were gone.

How very sad. Without the Potters, there would have been no Harry to vanquish VM, yet there's no one left who really knew them. Their lives were so short, and their names would probably not be well-known at all in the magical community were it not for The Boy Who Lived, yet they provided the means for the liberation of that community (and the world).

Whether you like James or not, it is at least fitting that he is memorialized in his grandson. Without James there would be no Harry, and without the qualities James passed to Harry like the value he placed on friendship, his loyalty, daring, and courage (for how else did Harry get these traits but from his parents, he certainly didn't acquire them from the Dursleys), there would be no foil to defeat VM.

Whatever his faults, James passed enough good traits to his son that Harry was able to accomplish what was needed.

And, most importantly of all, James and Lily must have loved that little boy so much in the one year they spent with him, it was enough to counterbalance what he endured for the next ten years with the Dursleys. Harry's great capacity to feel love and compassion despite being mistreated all through childhood are the real tribute to his parents' depth of character. One year of being cared for by them was enough to insulate him against the ensuing decade of abuse and neglect by the Dursleys.

I found James Potter to be one of the most curious elements in the series. One of its major themes was disillusionment with father figures, which is an important part of growing up. The people Harry idolised - James, Sirius, Dumbledore - were all shown to be flawed. But while the assessments of Sirius and DD were ultimately positive, there was no new redeeming information about James. In fact, it was almost implied that James was a mistake for Lily, and Harry's father should really, if life were fair, have been Snape. Of course it's not very fair to judge people on how they behaved aged 15, but when James and Lily were married, had Harry for a year and then killed by 21, it can't be ignored either. Had the epilogue been set 1 year on, rather than 19, it would have been interesting to see Harry reflecting on this.

I had a thought on my most recent re-read about the tomb message "The last enemy to be conquered is death" - did James choose that or did Dumbledore?

I'm curious because I'm wondering if James knew about the Hallows. He had the cloak. Likely he knew he was descended from the Peverells. Did he suspect his cloak was the Hallow? Did he know that was why Dumbledore was borrowing it?
I suppose it could have been a family motto. I did wonder before whether James knew about the Hallows, and was suspicious of Dumbledore wanting to examine the Cloak, and whether this was a factor in declining Dumbledore's offer to be Secret-Keeper. It's possible that the family had a motto but none of the younger generations knew where it originated, though.I dunno, he must have said something to Dumbledore that made Dumbledore investigate the cloak. He'd grown up in the wizarding world so he would have known the cloak was special and in Godric's Hollow, home of the Peverells. It seems possible that he suspected the possiblity even if he didn't believe.
That seems possible!

I found James Potter to be one of the most curious elements in the series. One of its major themes was disillusionment with father figures, which is an important part of growing up. The people Harry idolised - James, Sirius, Dumbledore - were all shown to be flawed. But while the assessments of Sirius and DD were ultimately positive, there was no new redeeming information about James. In fact, it was almost implied that James was a mistake for Lily, and Harry's father should really, if life were fair, have been Snape. Of course it's not very fair to judge people on how they behaved aged 15, but when James and Lily were married, had Harry for a year and then killed by 21, it can't be ignored either. Had the epilogue been set 1 year on, rather than 19, it would have been interesting to see Harry reflecting on this.

I believe that JKR was attempting to show Harry's reflections on his father when he named his first child after him. That was my impression.

I would respectfully disagree that canon implied James was a mistake for Lily and Harry's father should really, if life were fair, have been Snape. But I am always ready to admit I am mistaken. Could provide some of the portions of the book that implied that ?

Thanks for that information, but in conjunction with the Roman-sounding names, it's quite confusing for me. But it'd definitely qualify as ancient, wouldn't it?
A lot of wizards have odd, old-fashioned names, so I don't think we can date Ignotius Peverell back to Roman times, especially not since he was buried in the village graveyard. Believe me, there are no Roman graves in English churchyards!

Thanks for that information, but in conjunction with the Roman-sounding names, it's quite confusing for me. But it'd definitely qualify as ancient, wouldn't it?

Actually, there are Roman gravesites all over Britain and alot of websites about that. The Romans were there back when the Druids still ruled, so that was back in ancient times. But there are still Roman roads and walls, and even Roman sites in London, which was called "Londinum" in Roman days.

Latin was the language of the church in Britain going back to Roman times, but especially due to the Roman Catholic Church. It was the only written language that really mattered for legal reasons, and births and deaths were recorded with Latin forms of Celtic names. For instance, "Nigellus" is the Latin form of "Black."

Most of the family names, including Nigellus and Peverell, as well as Neville, Gaunt, Snape, Wulfric, Percival, Prince etc, can be traced back to the Norman Conquest in 1066 when the French took over England through William the Conqueror.

Peverell Family History: Starting with William Peverel (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Peverel)

William's mother seems to have been a Saxon named Maud, daughter of the noble Ingelric. She was married to one Ranulph Peverel, from whom William took his name, although rumors persist that he was the illegitimate son of William the Conqueror.

Holdings in England

Whatever his paternity, William Peverel was a favorite of the Conqueror. He was greatly honoured after the Norman Conquest, receiving over a hundred holdings in central England from the king. In 1086, the Domesday Book records William as holding substantial land (162 lordships), collectively called the Honour of Peverel, in Nottinghamshire and Derbyshire, including Nottingham Castle.[2][3]

William's wealth and power increased through his marriage to Adelina, daughter of Roger of Poitou, Earl of Lancaster. When Roger died heirless, William inherited his Lancashire lordships through his wife. On William's death, control of his lands passed to his son, also named William.

Other family

Maud and Ranulph's known legitimate son, also Ranulph, was almost as well favored by the king as William was. He was granted 64 manors in Nottingham, although these were later taken from his family by Henry II for their support of Stephen against the Empress Matilda. The baronial family of the Peverels descend from Ranulph, not William.

Beryl Platts has suggested that the Peverels in Normandy derive in fact from Flanders.[4]

The Peverel name was later spelled "Peverell", and it appears in both forms in town names across England, e.g., Peverell, Sampford Peverell, Hatfield Peverel, etc.



So, Roger of "Poitou" is where the "Potter" name comes into the family. :)

I suppose it could have been a family motto. I did wonder before whether James knew about the Hallows, and was suspicious of Dumbledore wanting to examine the Cloak, and whether this was a factor in declining Dumbledore's offer to be Secret-Keeper. It's possible that the family had a motto but none of the younger generations knew where it originated, though.
That seems possible!
It was my thought that Dumbledore wrote the inscription, and that it was both appropriate for James as a descendent of Peverell, and a message for Harry. I think Dumbledore knew that Harry would eventually go to Godric's Hollow, and it was a clue, just as giving Hermione the Runes book of children's tales, and giving Harry the resurrection stone in the snitch.

wickedwickedboy, this theory is certainly no more than my opinion, and yours is equally valid. I just thought the books left it surprisingly open.

Consider: aged 15/16 or so, Lily was very close with Snape, and had been for many years, and couldn't stand James. Not long after, she was married to James. Snape, we understand, chose the Dark Arts over her, and later greatly regretted it. But we never really found out what James did. He could have become a whole new person, but if so we don't know how or why.

The impression I got (and you may well disagree) is that James was a nice enough guy, but was a bit one-dimensional, like the boyfriend the heroine of a story often has before she meets the real hero. But as LV was on the rampage and Lily knew her time might be short, she decided to marry him. Yet this would never have happened without LV and the Dark Arts.

It could be just a slightly naive attitude, that JK perhaps puts in for her younger readers, that the person you like aged 17 is bound to be your ideal life partner. But I'd like to think it's a bit more subtle, a sign of the wider havoc that LV caused.

Consider: aged 15/16 or so, Lily was very close with Snape, and had been for many years, and couldn't stand James.

She didn't like a lot of things he did. But she was attracted to him. She does not degrade James infront of Snape (who is supposed to be her best friend.) Every time Snape starts on the marauders Lily refuses to continue to talk on the subject and dismisse sit fairly quickly.



The impression I got (and you may well disagree) is that James was a nice enough guy, but was a bit one-dimensional, like the boyfriend the heroine of a story often has before she meets the real hero. But as LV was on the rampage and Lily knew her time might be short, she decided to marry him. Yet this would never have happened without LV and the Dark Arts.

Lily was not the sort of person who would marry someone without putting her whole heasrt into the relationship. She would nor marry someone just because she knew she might die soon. Besides her patronus was the symbol of her love for James. Patronuses are made up of our innermost wishes and desires. The fact that Lily's patronus was a doe proved that she trully loved James.

Fair point about the Patronus. I'm sure enough that they did love each other, and they certainly both loved Harry. But that still doesn't mean they were the ideal couple, as Harry (understandably) always thought they were.

It's quite natural at that age to be attracted to the most popular student in the year, as Harry was with Cho and then Ginny, and Lily (apparently) was with James. But I'm sure JK doesn't want her message to be "always go for the popular one"...

Conveniently, Snape went for the Dark Arts, so Lily didn't have to make a direct choice between them. But if she had, who would she have gone for? If Snape, then James was only ever second best. If James, that suggests popularity and success mattered more to her than years of friendship. Tricky, no?

I'm not saying James didn't become fantastic, I'm just saying we never had direct evidence for it. We believed it because it's what Harry assumed. So I then wondered if JK might have a reason for deliberately keeping that vague.

Fair point about the Patronus. I'm sure enough that they did love each other, and they certainly both loved Harry. But that still doesn't mean they were the ideal couple, as Harry (understandably) always thought they were.

It's quite natural at that age to be attracted to the most popular student in the year, as Harry was with Cho and then Ginny, and Lily (apparently) was with James. But I'm sure JK doesn't want her message to be "always go for the popular one"...

Conveniently, Snape went for the Dark Arts, so Lily didn't have to make a direct choice between them. But if she had, who would she have gone for? If Snape, then James was only ever second best. If James, that suggests popularity and success mattered more to her than years of friendship. Tricky, no?

I'm not saying James didn't become fantastic, I'm just saying we never had direct evidence for it. We believed it because it's what Harry assumed. So I then wondered if JK might have a reason for deliberately keeping that vague.

I respect your opinion, but I would have to respectfully disagree that being popular was James' overwhelming character trait. We actually know quite a lot about his character despite the fact that he appears so infrequently in the book. My opnion follows.

I think one of the best ways to see James' characteristics on a large scale is to look at his son, Harry. The two shared a patronus (the Stag), reflecting their inner animal and as Dumbledore said with respect to the patronus: 'your father is alive and in you, Harry, how else could you produce that particular patronus?...you did see your father last night Harry - you found him inside of you'

So we can look at many of Harry's characteristics and find them doubled in James. Harry had his mum's disposition, but there are many characteristics shared with his dad:

James was popular; he was a star on the Quidditch team, so we can assume he is a great athlete. He was also a bright student; we know he finished his OWL's early enough to sit scribbling a snitch and LE on the paper and of course he and Sirius together figured out how to become Animagi - extremely difficult and advanced magic and generally supervised by the Ministry itself.

James was witty - in SWM he makes a funny comment about Snape drawing on the works of a scholar to do so. He was also a good friend and unbiased in selecting his friends when it came to birthright as we see in his great friend Remus and in Sirius whose family stood for all James did not believe in - luckily Sirius too.

James hated the dark arts and was against Voldemort and his DE regime as were his friends. He was brave and dedicated to fighting against the dark arts, joining the Order and together with his wife, thwarting Voldemort thrice. We know Snape, Bella and Lucius - all intelligent - were also with Voldemort at that time; he in essence thwarted their efforts in colusion with Voldemort as well (any help they provided Voldy).

James was brave enough to stand before Voldemort, unarmed, and attempt to allow his wife and child time to get to safety. He was a trusting, caring friend and from the snapshots we saw, a loving father.

James returned in GoF from Voldemort's wand. Lily told Harry 'your father wants to talk to you' and James did - spoke to Harry giving him confidence, advice and courage to face this awesome villan at his young age. James also returned in DH to again encourage Harry at a crucial moment of walking to his death. Harry called those back who could do this for him, James, Lily, Remus and Sirius.

Overall, we can see a lot about James through Harry and in snippets throughout the book. Certainly he had flaws as does everyone, but in general, I think there is overwhelming evidence that he was a loving husband and father, as well as a brave warrior in the Order.

I respectfully disagree that Lily married James because it was convenient. Lily was a very popular girl. Many young men liked her and her choice was not limited to James and Snape. She could have likely had her pick of a number of men. She selected James because his above characteristics were what she liked. And of course because she fell in love with him.

I was hoping in the last book if we did get any added information about James Potter as an adult, it would show he had matured. Unfortunately, the letter Lily wrote to Sirius heavy hints had Dumbledore not taken James's cloak, he would have gone sneaking out to 'play Marauders' as it were. Leaving Lily alone with Harry, this implies his recklessness is still strong.

However, I really hope he no longer hurt people simply because they existed or he felt he was above them. I would imagine working with the Order against Death Eaters etc when put this view into prospective. Unfortuanetly mostly it's me just me hoping.

I was hoping in the last book if we did get any added information about James Potter as an adult, it would show he had matured. Unfortunately, the letter Lily wrote to Sirius heavy hints had Dumbledore not taken James's cloak, he would have gone sneaking out to 'play Marauders' as it were. Leaving Lily alone with Harry, this implies his recklessness is still strong.


Lily didn't seem to be complaining about James' urge to sneak out in the letter. Infact she seems to empathise with James. I don't think James wanted to sneak out to 'play marauder'. The situation must have been very similar to Sirius' in OOTP. Both James and Sirius were brave and daring. They believed in defeating Voldemort and were ready to die fighting him. They were not the kind of people who could sit around while other people risked their lives. While James was stuck in the house Sirius and other memebers of the Order were out on missions and Order work. It was only natural for James' to get restless. He wanted to do the protecting. He didn't want to be protected. He died to save his wife and son. He would have never risked Lily and Harry's safety only to satisfy his petty whims.

Lily didn't seem to be complaining about James' urge to sneak out in the letter. Infact she seems to empathise with James. I don't think James wanted to sneak out to 'play marauder'. The situation must have been very similar to Sirius' in OOTP. Both James and Sirius were brave and daring. They believed in defeating Voldemort and were ready to die fighting him. They were not the kind of people who could sit around while other people risked their lives. While James was stuck in the house Sirius and other memebers of the Order were out on missions and Order work. It was only natural for James' to get restless. He wanted to do the protecting. He didn't want to be protected. He died to save his wife and son. He would have never risked Lily and Harry's safety only to satisfy his petty whims.

I agree one hundred percent with you. I think we get a lot of insight of James's character through Sirius's character. Both were the restless type. Both had to do "something". Both wanted to be out there fighting and defeating the big bad evil...:lol: But they would never do so at the cost of someone they love. Sirius did not like being cooped up in #12 but he did not sneak out because he knew that put Harry in danger. He did not like it but he still stuck to one place... Same way James did not like being cooped up but he would have never ever put Lily or Harry in danger.... And I don't think Lily was complaining, it seemed like she was feeling sorry for James and was sympathetic towards him...:love::rockon:

Fair point about the Patronus. I'm sure enough that they did love each other, and they certainly both loved Harry. But that still doesn't mean they were the ideal couple, as Harry (understandably) always thought they were.

Tonks loved Remus. Thats why her patronus took the form a werewolf. Her patronus was Remus.
Whereas Lily's patronus was a doe. The female counterpart of a stag. It seems to me that this symbolises the fact that James and Lily complemented each other. It might sound a bit cliche but they were each other's better halves.

It's quite natural at that age to be attracted to the most popular student in the year, as Harry was with Cho and then Ginny, and Lily (apparently) was with James. But I'm sure JK doesn't want her message to be "always go for the popular one"...

No her message definitely isn't "Go for the popular one".
But did Lily did resist his charm till he proved himself worthy of her.
Like many people have pointed out before, Lily was popular and much admired. She had a lot of people trying to win her over. It wasn't a choice between James and Snape. She could have had anyone. But she chose James.
James as the age of 15 had his faults. But he was an exceptional human being.

In HBP Remus says that there was a time during their school years when you couldn't move an inch without getting yourslef hoisted into the air. This gives you the impression that everyone was using Levicorpus. It wasn't just the marauders. It was standing joke between the entire batch.
The marauders did take things too far when it came to Snape. But they weren't the only ones who did the hexing.
Besides don't the marauders remind you of peeves at times? Their pranks however immature never brought any serious harm to anyone. They were laughable and enjoyable. They remind me of Peeves' constant pranks. You couldn't possibly hate Peeves could you?
The case with Snape was slightly different. But the enmity was mutual. James and Sirius resorted to the ordinary hexes and jinxes used by everybody. They did publicly humilaite him. I'm not condoning what they did. But they never crossed a certain line.
Snape on the other hand used Sectumsempra without the slightest hesitation.

Conveniently, Snape went for the Dark Arts, so Lily didn't have to make a direct choice between them. But if she had, who would she have gone for? If Snape, then James was only ever second best. If James, that suggests popularity and success mattered more to her than years of friendship. Tricky, no?

Thanls padfootrules :)

Lily didn't seem to be complaining about James' urge to sneak out in the letter. Infact she seems to empathise with James. I don't think James wanted to sneak out to 'play marauder'. The situation must have been very similar to Sirius' in OOTP. Both James and Sirius were brave and daring. They believed in defeating Voldemort and were ready to die fighting him. They were not the kind of people who could sit around while other people risked their lives. While James was stuck in the house Sirius and other memebers of the Order were out on missions and Order work. It was only natural for James' to get restless. He wanted to do the protecting. He didn't want to be protected. He died to save his wife and son. He would have never risked Lily and Harry's safety only to satisfy his petty whims.

James was very noble and brave dying to protect Lily and Harry - totally agree. Yes, Lily does empathise with, I didn't say she did not. Unfortunately, the situation you compaired it to with Sirius in Ootp is also and example of how someone being daring can also go very wrong.

Ginny must have felt terrible being left behind, while Harry, Ron and Hermione went Horcrux hunting. She also understand sometimes these things had to be done.

James was very noble and brave dying to protect Lily and Harry - totally agree. Unfortunately, the situation you compaired it to with Sirius in Ootp is also and example of how someone being daring can also very wrong.



I am sorry I am not able to follow you but what exactly do you mean by your post?:love::love::love: I didn't quite get that Sirius reference...:love:

I was hoping in the last book if we did get any added information about James Potter as an adult, it would show he had matured. Unfortunately, the letter Lily wrote to Sirius heavy hints had Dumbledore not taken James's cloak, he would have gone sneaking out to 'play Marauders' as it were. Leaving Lily alone with Harry, this implies his recklessness is still strong.

However, I really hope he no longer hurt people simply because they existed or he felt he was above them. I would imagine working with the Order against Death Eaters etc when put this view into prospective. Unfortuanetly, there's no particular facts for this - just me hoping.

I respect your opinion, but when I considered this issue myself I felt that canon had addressed the issue. At the time of SWM, James was hexing people for fun, and hexing mutually with Snape. At that time Lily called him an arrogant toerag and would not go out with him.

The fact that by 7th year she did agree to go out with him, indicated to me that she changed her opinion about him because James had changed - maturing from an arrogant toerag to someone she could appreciate. Remus actually says this in canon in OOTP.

JKR has indicated in an interview that Harry's parents were very important to the story. She also made a point to show SWM and how James was at 15. Then she made a point to show that he had changed (Lily going out with him and Remus' statement). However, after that, she did not in any way (to my memory) have anyone counter Remus' words in any way shape or form. So it was my impression that if she wanted the audience to doubt Remus about James character, a man important to the story, she would have done so by indicating that Remus was being untruthful. But she didn't.

Thus my impression from the reading was that James had truly changed and matured, as is normal for most young men in society.

I am sorry I am not able to follow you but what exactly do you mean by your post?:love::love::love: I didn't quite get that Sirius reference...:love:

I'm sorry I wasn't clear. :). I was meaning when Sirius went to the Department of Mysteries. He was being brave trying to protect Harry and daring but it went very wrong.

James was very noble and brave dying to protect Lily and Harry - totally agree. Yes, Lily does empathise with, I didn't say she did not. Unfortunately, the situation you compaired it to with Sirius in Ootp is also and example of how someone being daring can also go very wrong.
I respect your opinion;
But I don't think the word wrong is the most appropriate word to describe the situation.
Things didn't work out they way they should have. They could have been slightly wiser. But they weren't morallly wrong.

Ginny must have felt terrible being left behind, while Harry, Ron and Hermione went Horcrux hunting. She also understand sometimes these things had to be done.

She did feel terrible being left behind. And just like Sirius and James she did everything in her power to fight. Ginny could not leave with the trio purely because she was undera age. She still had the trace on her. It would have been easy for the ministry to track her down. By going with them she would have endangered Harry, Ron and Hermione. That's she went to Hogwarts and rebelled by starting the anti Voldemort movement at Hogwarts.
Both Ginny and Tonks had been asked to remain in the room of requirement and had been told not to join the battle of Hogwarts. But neither of them stayed. They paid no heed to advice and fought against Voldemort.

The fact that by 7th year she did agree to go out with him, indicated to me that she changed her opinion about him because James had changed - maturing from an arrogant toerag to someone she could appreciate. Remus actually says this in canon in OOTP.



True, however either Sirius or Lupin also said Lily didn't know about the continued hexing between James and Snape in Seventh year.

I am not saying James didn't, I truly hope he did mature.

I'm sorry I wasn't clear. :). I was meaning when Sirius went to the Department of Mysteries. He was being brave trying to protect Harry and daring but it went very wrong.

Yeah I guess I agree with you there. But I think Sirius's greatest fear would have been sitting in his mother's house and snuffing it because Kreacher strangled him!:lol: I think that wasn't recklessness on Sirius's part and it didn't go wrong either. He died defending the one he loved and in battle and that's the way he would have wanted to die anyway... With his head held high and laughing at the face of the enemy...

But they weren't morallly wrong.



I didn't say nor imply morally wrong. I meant the situation went wrong because Sirius was killed.

Actually, there are Roman gravesites all over Britain and alot of websites about that. The Romans were there back when the Druids still ruled, so that was back in ancient times. But there are still Roman roads and walls, and even Roman sites in London, which was called "Londinum" in Roman days.
But not in ordinary churchyards. If you are lucky you'll find some graves from the 17th century or even a bit earlier, but old stones are usually moved and leaned against the churchyard walls so that the graves can be reused. There are many churches in Britain dating back to Norman times, ie as old as Hogwarts, although most of them have been rebuilt several times since then . There are no Roman grave sites that are still used for burials today. Many British cathedrals do have some very ancient graves underneath. However, the graveyard Harry and Hermione visited at Godric's Hollow was an ordinary churchyard that was either still in use, or in use very recently (16 years before). It wasn't a Roman burial site.

Very well argued above! But there was one big difference between James and Harry: until he was killed, James never really knew suffering (from what we know). He was always popular, always good at things, always loved. Whereas Harry frequently experienced being either a neglected nobody, in the Muggle world, or public enemy number one, mocked and mistrusted, as a wizard. So James was a vision of what Harry might have been if LV had never attacked the Potters: a seemingly perfect life, but with it rather harder to empathise with and so rather harder to like (my opinion!) than Harry, Dumbledore or the young Snape.

I didn't mean to imply that James-Lily was a marriage of convenience ... I just know that in wartime people are much more impulsive with romantic affairs - they don't want to take things slowly because they might be dead next week. I had a feeling that somewhere there was a passage where JK strongly implied it was the same in the wizarding world during LV's reign of terror, but I don't have the books to hand so I can't be certain...

I didn't mean to imply that James-Lily was a marriage of convenience ... I just know that in wartime people are much more impulsive with romantic affairs - they don't want to take things slowly because they might be dead next week. I had a feeling that somewhere there was a passage where JK strongly implied it was the same in the wizarding world during LV's reign of terror, but I don't have the books to hand so I can't be certain...

It comes up in regard to Bill's and Fleur's wedding. Mrs Weasley thinks they are too young and disregards the fact that she and Arthur married very young, too, because there was a war going on. However, nobody would get the idea that Molly and Arthur don't love each other very much. I think that James and Lily would not have married so early if there hadn't been a war. However, they would have married because they loved each other. James was so smitten with Lily, it's kind of cute. :lol: The way he scribbled her name in fifth year...

Very well argued above! But there was one big difference between James and Harry: until he was killed, James never really knew suffering (from what we know).

Actually we don't know a lot about James' young life, there may have been suffering involved. But we do know that when he got older he lost both of his parents and then began losing his friends in the Order 1 by 1. While they were not his closest group of friends, I am sure he suffered as much as others later indicated they had (Lupin/Moody, etc). So we know he did endure some suffering prior to his death, quite a bit in fact.

But I don't think childhood suffering is a requirement in order to end up a healthy, mature adult.

But I don't think childhood suffering is a requirement in order to end up a healthy, mature adult.

I should hope not; while I think a healthy amount of knowledge that life isn't all sunshine and roses is good for children. I would never wish anything near, Harry's young sufferings, on anyone.

I am sure James had a fairly normal childhood: death of a grandparent or two, that kind of thing.

It comes up in regard to Bill's and Fleur's wedding. Mrs Weasley thinks they are too young and disregards the fact that she and Arthur married very young, too, because there was a war going on. However, nobody would get the idea that Molly and Arthur don't love each other very much. I think that James and Lily would not have married so early if there hadn't been a war. However, they would have married because they loved each other. James was so smitten with Lily, it's kind of cute. :lol: The way he scribbled her name in fifth year...

Exactly.
Arthur and Molly are one of the happiest couples in the book. So are Bill and Fleur. The circumstances in which they got married were almost identical to those prevelant when Lily and James got married. The war might have made them marry at a younger age. But even without the war they would have married each other at some point of time.

James was a happy kid. He was cared for. But he wasn't immune to pain or suffering. He was an important memeber of the order. He had defied Voldemort three times. Lily's letter mentions the fact that she cried the whole evening because the McKinnons died. Therefore James' and Lily's lives were marred by loss and death as well. Remus tells us that the first war had taken a greater toll on the Order. They were unprepared. The death Eaters ticked them of one by one. The losses during the second war were many. But the second time around the Order was much better prepared. They knew what to expect. James and Lily were in the thick of the war. They could not have escaped the pain that comes with a war of any kind.

But I don't think childhood suffering is a requirement in order to end up a healthy, mature adult.
We'd have some seriously unhappy children around if that were the case...

Actually we don't know a lot about James' young life, there may have been suffering involved. But we do know that when he got older he lost both of his parents and then began losing his friends in the Order 1 by 1. While they were not his closest group of friends, I am sure he suffered as much as others later indicated they had (Lupin/Moody, etc). So we know he did endure some suffering prior to his death, quite a bit in fact.
That's a good point, James's parents must have died somewhere between his coming of age (when Sirius was still welcome at their house for Sunday lunch) and his death (when Petunia was left as Harry's only living relative)- and even if they were elderly, I can imagine he must have felt awful to lose them, especially in the middle of a war. So it isn't as if he really led a charmed life...maybe when he was a child, yes, but certainly not as a boy in his late teens and a member of the Order.

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

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?
4. The only evidence I see of any maturity is that he had a committed relationship with Lily. Based on Lily's reactions to James in SWM, I don't think she would have fallen for him if he didn't mature a bit. Because of this I am guessing he became a better person which is a good thing because, based on the way he treated Severus, he was not very nice or likable by my standards.

6. I'm sure a good part of his hatred was because of jealousy. There are also other things that he may not have liked such as Severus's appearance or his draw to the Dark Arts, but James wouldn't pick on him that much if it wasn't for the closeness between Severus and Lily.

He did NOT redeem himself by saving Severus's life. Just because you don't like someone does not mean you wish them to be dead. James showed that he is not an evil person because he didn't allow Severus to die. But, that in no way redeems him for his regular treatment of Severus (and I'm saying this as someone who is not a fan of Severus's).

He did NOT redeem himself by saving Severus's life. Just because you don't like someone does not mean you wish them to be dead. James showed that he is not an evil person because he didn't allow Severus to die. But, that in no way redeems him for his regular treatment of Severus (and I'm saying this as someone who is not a fan of Severus's).
I think it all comes down to how much Snape actually fought back and/or started it. Just because on the one occasion, James made an unprovoked attack on his declared enemy, doesn't mean he was always the aggressor. Lupin stated clearly that Snape "never lost an opportunity to hex James", and Snape was renowned for his knowledge of Dark curses - how would anyone know this if Snape never cursed anyone, cursing being a practical rather than a theoretical activity? He also developed his own hexes such as the toenail growing hex and Levicorpus, not to mention Sectumsempra, which we actually saw him use on James. I AM NOT WHITEWASHING JAMES HERE. James was a bullying prat. I'm questioning whether it was all one-sided. Because that really makes a difference, and I see no reason to doubt Lupin's testimony that Snape gave as good as he got.

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?
~I believe he was a good role model. He sacrificed his life for his son and wife. I think he would have been a great father. He has influenced Harry's life through Harry patronus. As James' animagus form was a stag, Harry's patronus is also one.

2. Why did James chose Sirius over Dumbledore as Secret Keeper? Didn’t he trust Dumbledore with his life?
~Im sure he trusted Dumbledore, but as Sirius was his best friend, James trusted him more.

3. James made Sirius Harry’s godfather. Was this a good decision?
~I think it was a very good decision.

4. We got bits and pieces of James’ life. Has he matured over the years and become a better person?
~ yes he has. Before he married Lily, he was a prankster and always got into trouble.

5. What was James’ relationship to Lily Evans/Sirius Black/Peter Pettigrew/Remus Lupin/Albus Dumbledore/Minerva McGonagall/Frank and Alice Longbottom?
~ He was best friends with Sirius, Remus and Peter. Dumbledore was his headmaster, McGonagell was head of the Gryffindor house and they were friends with the Longbottoms.

6. How much of James' hatred of Snape do you think was jealousy over his friendship with Lily? Do you think he redeemed himself by saving his life in spite of this jealousy?
~ I think half of it was because of Snape being friends with Lily. He was afraid that Snape and Lily would eventually get together. Yes he did redeem himself.

I think it all comes down to how much Snape actually fought back and/or started it. Just because on the one occasion, James made an unprovoked attack on his declared enemy, doesn't mean he was always the aggressor. Lupin stated clearly that Snape "never lost an opportunity to hex James", and Snape was renowned for his knowledge of Dark curses - how would anyone know this if Snape never cursed anyone, cursing being a practical rather than a theoretical activity? He also developed his own hexes such as the toenail growing hex and Levicorpus, not to mention Sectumsempra, which we actually saw him use on James. I AM NOT WHITEWASHING JAMES HERE. James was a bullying prat. I'm questioning whether it was all one-sided. Because that really makes a difference, and I see no reason to doubt Lupin's testimony that Snape gave as good as he got.
Good points! I hadn't thought of all of that.

I was re-reading parts of GoF and I noticed another character trait of James. He appeared to have had strong leadership qualities. When he came back from the wand, he was no nonsense, giving directions and encouragement to Harry from the moment he arrived. Harry's mum came first, but she merely said, 'your father wants to speak to you, he's coming'. Not that Lily wasn't a strong woman in her own right, but obviously James was very eager to direct his son and do the explaining. I guess that is also shown by he and Sirius being the ringleaders of the Marauders when they were all young.

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.

Nice to see some one finally agree with me on James's capacity as a leader.:cool:

I think it all comes down to how much Snape actually fought back and/or started it. Just because on the one occasion, James made an unprovoked attack on his declared enemy, doesn't mean he was always the aggressor. Lupin stated clearly that Snape "never lost an opportunity to hex James", and Snape was renowned for his knowledge of Dark curses - how would anyone know this if Snape never cursed anyone, cursing being a practical rather than a theoretical activity? He also developed his own hexes such as the toenail growing hex and Levicorpus, not to mention Sectumsempra, which we actually saw him use on James. I AM NOT WHITEWASHING JAMES HERE. James was a bullying prat. I'm questioning whether it was all one-sided. Because that really makes a difference, and I see no reason to doubt Lupin's testimony that Snape gave as good as he got.
'Ear, 'ear....especially about the cursing. It's the reason why Harry and Co. are so at sea in their fifth year, when they're not allowed to use spells in Defence class- it's clearly something that can only be learned through practice- and Snape does say James used his own spells against him, but where would James have picked them up if not straight from the horse's mouth? Not that they weren't both wrong to use them, but the fault lay on both sides.

I think it all comes down to how much Snape actually fought back and/or started it. Just because on the one occasion, James made an unprovoked attack on his declared enemy, doesn't mean he was always the aggressor. Lupin stated clearly that Snape "never lost an opportunity to hex James", and Snape was renowned for his knowledge of Dark curses - how would anyone know this if Snape never cursed anyone, cursing being a practical rather than a theoretical activity? He also developed his own hexes such as the toenail growing hex and Levicorpus, not to mention Sectumsempra, which we actually saw him use on James. I AM NOT WHITEWASHING JAMES HERE. James was a bullying prat. I'm questioning whether it was all one-sided. Because that really makes a difference, and I see no reason to doubt Lupin's testimony that Snape gave as good as he got.


I agree with you, anabel. I do think that Snape fought back, in fact I think it would be stupid for Snape not to fight back. I can't see Snape being the sort of student who would allow another to pick on him without doing something about it. So while I do think that Snape fought back, I think it was more of a self-defense thing.

With Lupin, again I agree, I do think Snape gave as good as he got, but that doesn't mean he always started it. Just that he hexed them many times, we did see him get some in during SWM. However, I do think he may have started it a few times. The best defense is a good offense, as the old saying goes.

Now the questions. Was he justified in this? Does this make him a bully to James? Well, I would say no to the first one. I don't think he was 'justified', but I do think it reasonable for him to feel the need to hex back. (I mean, only an absolutly perfect person would be able to take abuse without relatiation.) As for the second, I don't think so. Snape wasn't (in my opinion) hexing James or Sirius for the fun of it, or do I think he went around hexing other students (but I do not deny that his friends did, and he probably watched. But I don't think he himself did)

I agree with you, anabel. I do think that Snape fought back, in fact I think it would be stupid for Snape not to fight back. I can't see Snape being the sort of student who would allow another to pick on him without doing something about it. So while I do think that Snape fought back, I think it was more of a self-defense thing.

With Lupin, again I agree, I do think Snape gave as good as he got, but that doesn't mean he always started it. Just that he hexed them many times, we did see him get some in during SWM. However, I do think he may have started it a few times. The best defense is a good offense, as the old saying goes.

Now the questions. Was he justified in this? Does this make him a bully to James? Well, I would say no to the first one. I don't think he was 'justified', but I do think it reasonable for him to feel the need to hex back. (I mean, only an absolutly perfect person would be able to take abuse without relatiation.) As for the second, I don't think so. Snape wasn't (in my opinion) hexing James or Sirius for the fun of it, or do I think he went around hexing other students (but I do not deny that his friends did, and he probably watched. But I don't think he himself did)

I respect your opinion, but I would respectfully disagree that one memory of Snape's depicting this era of James' young life is representative of any of the parties characteristics. It just does not seem to square with later memories. Snape admittedly followed the Marauders around to see what they were up to. In my opinion, that is not something a picked on 'victim' of bullying would do - it would be tantamount to setting himself up for more bullying.

Harry did think that his father picked on Snape a lot and was therefore 'the bully' while he felt sorry for Snape who was 'the picked on kid'. However, JKR made a point to clear this up in Harry's mind, by having Remus indicate that the hexing was mutual - in 7th, when James had matured, Snape kept hexing and James only retaliated.

Every reflective scene we had with Harry following that, he thinks of his father's character in a good light. Harry was ultimately convinced without more knowledge. Many were not. However, later knowledge gave us a reason why Snape might continue to hex - jealousy - he had loved Lily his whole life. That also explains why Snape, instead of seeing James' character distinctly when he saved him in the tunnel, placed a different twist on James' actions.

So in the end, Remus' words regarding James maturity of character and his not being a bully make sense IMO. Snape kept up their old grudge which he also held for his entire life - even after playing a part in James' death. And all of that when he was last to have the role as Bully. Well now there was a reason for this - Snape's continued emotions for Lily and his continued jealousy which resulted in his continued grudge against James.

That was my impression from the reading.

I respect your opinion, but I would respectfully disagree that one memory of Snape's depicting this era of James' young life is representative of any of the parties characteristics. It just does not seem to square with later memories. Snape admittedly followed the Marauders around to see what they were up to. In my opinion, that is not something a picked on 'victim' of bullying would do - it would be tantamount to setting himself up for more bullying.

I think the problem is confusing earlier years from later ones. I have no doubt that Snape began hexing James un-provoked in later years. However, as far as earlier years go, I do think that James hexed first, and Snape only relatiated.

And Remus does not say that James suddenly 'saw the light' and stopped hexing Snape, and simply defended himself, but that Snape never missed an opportunity to hex James. This seems to imply that Snape continued into his 6th year thinking nothing had changed, and that James would still hex him, so he got to him first, which made James want to retaliate. So the rivalry continued.

I think the problem is confusing earlier years from later ones. I have no doubt that Snape began hexing James un-provoked in later years. However, as far as earlier years go, I do think that James hexed first, and Snape only relatiated.

And Remus does not say that James suddenly 'saw the light' and stopped hexing Snape, and simply defended himself, but that Snape never missed an opportunity to hex James. This seems to imply that Snape continued into his 6th year thinking nothing had changed, and that James would still hex him, so he got to him first, which made James want to retaliate. So the rivalry continued.

Well again, I respect your opinion. But it would seem that even if Snape continued into 7th year thinking nothing had changed, he would eventually see that it had...why keep taking every opportunity to strike when your opponent has clearly given that up?

I think it more likely that they were bullying one another all along. We just happened to see a time when James started it. But other times Snape started it. And at the start of 7th Snape just went on with things the way that they had been going. James wished to stop, but I doubt he liked Snape at that point, so continuing would not be that difficult. Still, starting things was no longer his thing, so he was mostly retaliator then.

I suppose it doesn't matter, it just seems more logical to me that there would be mutual hexing all along.

I don't see being a bully as one of James' general characteristics. I see him more like a prankster (making heads grow and other fred/george like stuff) and only a bully when it came to Snape and visa versa as well.

Now the questions. Was he justified in this? Does this make him a bully to James? Well, I would say no to the first one. I don't think he was 'justified', but I do think it reasonable for him to feel the need to hex back. (I mean, only an absolutly perfect person would be able to take abuse without relatiation.) As for the second, I don't think so. Snape wasn't (in my opinion) hexing James or Sirius for the fun of it,
I don't think any of them were "justified". It was just stupid schoolboy fighting.Snape admittedly followed the Marauders around to see what they were up to. In my opinion, that is not something a picked on 'victim' of bullying would do - it would be tantamount to setting himself up for more bullying. I think this is an important point. A victim avoids bullies whenever he can, but Snape was actively seeking the Marauders out and following them in an attempt to get them into trouble. Basically, he stalked them, which might explain "It's more the fact that he exists, if you know what I mean" - They knew that he followed them around, and probably wanted to "teach him a lesson". If you look at it this way, perhaps it's Snape who was passive-aggressively starting it most of the time.

I think this is an important point. A victim avoids bullies whenever he can, but Snape was actively seeking the Marauders out and following them in an attempt to get them into trouble. Basically, he stalked them, which might explain "It's more the fact that he exists, if you know what I mean" - They knew that he followed them around, and probably wanted to "teach him a lesson". If you look at it this way, perhaps it's Snape who was passive-aggressively starting it most of the time.

I agree. There are different ways to be a 'bully'. There is specific bullying which I think James did - aimed at Snape (bully meets bully). That to me does not make it a characteristic, but rather a specific driven action stimulated by a specific person. His fun hexing was fred and george like to me.

On the other hand there are those who pick on everyone that is unable to meet their challenge (not because they molest them - just because) and they do bad things to these people - hurtful and malicious - that is a classic bully. I don't see James in that light.