The Marauders: Group Character Analysis

James and Sirius were poor friends?

This is something I've thought about a lot while thinking about writing a Marauder story. How was the friendship between Peter and the other Marauders? I came to a conclusion that Peter was the "younger brother" type in the group, the one they joked about, but in good humour. I have a friend like that - I constantly pick on him, but he knows I'm joking and he picks on me, too. But see, if it gets hurtful, we tell one another and then we stop kidding around. I see the three other Marauders doing that (mostly James and Sirius) to Peter, but I get the impression that if it all bothered Peter, he wouldn't have the nerve to tell them. He would be too shy and just take it all in, and all the while the others would assume he knew it was all in good fun.

I can't see it as mean-spirited at all. Sirius said, and Jo confirmed his words, that they all would have died for Peter. I got the impression that their friendship with Peter was very strong and very meaningful to them, as it must have been to Peter (just not enough for him to die for them, evidently). The kind of trust involved with the werewolf secret would've created a very strong bond between them, and I doubt they thought petty jokes here and there would bother him.

And I don't think Peter's changing of sides had anything to do with bitterness towards his friends. I don't think he wanted to "prove them wrong" about him. I think he was just that much of a coward that he ran to the biggest bully in the playground, and at the time, Voldemort was winning control, and Peter freaked out and switched sides. He said it himself; "what was there to be gained in denying Voldemort?" or something along those lines, to which Sirius replied, "Only innocent lives, Peter."



Where did that judgment come from? Peter wasn’t as strong as the Marauders I agree, but are you suggesting that they should have judged their friend for not being nearly as capable as they are? To not trust him based on his inferior intelligence?

And that's the exact reason the betrayal was so horrible - Peter was a great friend to all of them; he was a co-writer of the Marauders Map, he was part of Remus's secret, he took loads of time out of his life to become an animagus for Remus, and he stuck with the others for seven years at Hogwarts, and a couple outside of school, too. His lesser talent meant nothing to the Marauders; they might have teased him here and there, but they did not think any less of him for it, because they did, in the end, put their lives in his hands. And frankly, as I see it, Peter did earn that trust. He kept a huge secret for years, for one, not to mention all the other little secrets that would go along with being a Marauder. IMO, he earned the trust, and that's what makes his betrayal all the more disgusting.

This post was originally in the Harry Potter: Character Analysis thread.

[QUOTE]James and Sirius were poor friends? Where did that judgment come from? Peter wasn’t as strong as the Marauders I agree, but are you suggesting that they should have judged their friend for not being nearly as capable as they are? To not trust him based on his inferior intelligence?

Well zgirnius has answered that in the Harry thread itself. In what manner do you say they were good friends to Peter? By mocking him and making fun of him? I did not see that as being a good friend.

Lily had bad judgment when she dated James? I don't understand what you're trying to say, could you please clarify? :)

And where did I say that? I wrote that in response to this::

posted by wwb
Imo, it would be difficult to find someone who was not superior to Peter.

my reply
All the more reason IMO for the Marauders to be careful. But for 7 years they are remarkably thick headed and I include Lily in this as well, once she started going out with James, and this reflects their poor judgement and sadly they face the effects of that bad judgement IMO.

I will answer the rest in the Lily thread. :)

Well zgirnius has answered that in the Harry thread itself. In what manner do you say they were good friends to Peter? By mocking him and making fun of him? I did not see that as being a good friend.

They were good friends to him in the simple fact that they accepted him as he was, and stood by him for over seven years until he betrayed them all. They let him in on all their secrets and activities. How is the simple fact that they teased him proof that they were bad friends? As I posted above, I have that kind of relationship with a friend. We're very, very close and very good friends. The evidence in the books suggests that The Marauders were all very close and very good friends. It would seem ridiculous for them to trust him with their lives and their secrest so readily if they thought him worthless.

I feel people have a tendency to dehumanize Peter Pettigrew because he wasn't particularly brave or talented as the other Marauders. The fact is Peter betrayed his friends and people judge him harshly for that and blindly cast all of the blame on Peter but as everything in HP, there is always a reason people do the things they do. Rowling does not write simple good and evil. Her world and her characters are very complex (which is one of the many reasons I love the series). Jo makes the point with Kreacher was that Sirius's contempt and abuse of Kreacher molded the elf into the miserable creature he was and was what led to him betraying his master leading to his death. Now, I think using the evidence she gives us in Snape Worst Memory, we can see that Peter seemed to be a tag along. A kind of little brother you bring along to tease and make fun. Yes, they might have loved him but they still treated him very poorly and never took him seriously. People who go by the logic of Peter being in the blame never have anything to back up the reason why Peter would betray his friends. If his friends were so loving and supportive of him, why would he betray them? Is it just because he was a coward? I'm in that camp that believes Peter was alot like Neville. He was sorted into Gryffindor for a reason in my opinion. Everyone always thinks this is a mistake. I don't. I feel if Peter had a friend like Hermione or Harry or Ron or Ginny or Luna, he might have turned out more like Neville. The sad truth is that he fell in with James and Sirius for protection and goggled in awe at their skills, particularly James, and James never stopped him. Never told him to get a grip on himself. Never told him he had to start standing up to people (like Harry told Neville), never supported him, or cared to really get to know him, in my opinion. He was just the funny fat kid who was fun to have around to help pump his ego. This is James fatal flaw. He had an enormous ego and a big head. I understand why since he was a pampered rich only child and a star Quidditch player. James never had Harry's empathy or humility. Now, I feel Lily really changed James and deflated his head and molded him into a better man who died for his family, but still I don't think he ever thought he was mistreating Peter because as someone said before, Peter had not the confidence or self-esteem to ever voice his feelings, something Sirius and James never helped along. They just scoffed at his blunders and teased him. I could never imagine Harry or Ron laughing at Neville.

So in my opinion, it was James hubris and arrogance by blindly trusting Peter but never truly getting to know him enough that led to the Potter's betrayal.

I believe Peter had it in him to grow into a more confident and braver man had he better friends, just like Neville.

You can never forgot the fact that he was sorted into Gryiffindor. I just wish Jo gave us more background on Peter. He's the most under-developed Marauder and I attribute this as part of the reason why many fans tend to demonize him and refuse to acknowledge that there might have been a reason he betrayed the Potters. He was never treated as an equal. Voldemort probably used this, promising him power, respect and grandeur. The things the Marauders always denied him. Quite similar to Ron's temptation by the locket in DH.

I hope Jo tells us more about Peter in the future. His life, his family, his blood status, etc etc.

They were good friends to him in the simple fact that they accepted him as he was, and stood by him for over seven years until he betrayed them all. They let him in on all their secrets and activities. How is the simple fact that they teased him proof that they were bad friends? As I posted above, I have that kind of relationship with a friend. We're very, very close and very good friends. The evidence in the books suggests that The Marauders were all very close and very good friends. It would seem ridiculous for them to trust him with their lives and their secrest so readily if they thought him worthless.

Stood by him, when he did what? They allowed him to tag along IMO. He was not James, Sirius or Remus in intelligence, magical power, alertness, everything actually. He was not their equal. To be a friend, the first requirement I think is equality and respect. Peter did not get both from the other three IMO. He was tolerated in that group, because he fawned all over them and did not let go of them. Peter clutched the other 3; the other three just let him be. We see that in SWM. They would not have cared had Peter made other friends and gone away. While James, Sirius and Remus actually belonged to each other as friends, so much that Sirius and Remus were prepared to kill Peter after 13 years.

He was the weak link in their friendship; his animagus form proved that as well. The other 3 Marauders did not think much of Peter's intelligence, his powers and his anything and that was their down fall. Their inability to see through their friends not for one year but until he betrayed them. Remus did not have a clue until some 13 years after James and Lily died. Surely that is poor judgement and that came because of their arrogance and their thinking that *weak little Peter* could not be the traitor.

I included Lily as also having this poor judgement, because she too is taken in by Peter, afetr she starts going out with James and becomes friendly with James's friends.

Surely that is poor judgement and that came because of their arrogance and their thinking that *weak little Peter* could not be the traitor.
Why is it arrogance to trust an old friend? They had to respect him or they wouldn't have placed their trust in him.

Why is it arrogance to trust an old friend? They had to respect him or they wouldn't have placed their trust in him.

It wasn't arrogance for trusting an old friend but for trusting a friend you don't really care to understand. Friend by title and history. Not by personality.

It wasn't arrogance for trusting an old friend but for trusting a friend you don't really care to understand. Friend by title and history. Not by personality.
Where's the canon for not really caring to understand?

Where's the canon for not really caring to understand?

The only real scene we get between the Marauders is Snape's Worst Memory where James and Sirius treat Peter as little more than a clown, a joke. Someone that amuses them. James doesn't even stop peter fawning over him.

Since this is really the only time we see the Marauders when they were young interacting with each other, one can only gleam that this was how things were between them all the time. Peter was undermined by his brighter, greater friends and they never seemed to care enough to inspire him to not be so dependent on them leaving Peter ripe for Voldemort's manipulations.

The only real scene we get between the Marauders is Snape's Worst Memory where James and Sirius treat Peter as little more than a clown, a joke. Someone that amuses them. James doesn't even stop peter fawning over him.
Look friends tease each other all the time. That's all we saw. He wasn't fawning; he was just being over-enthusiastic. By teasing him about his reaction, they were trying to give him a hint to settle down. If they didn't respect him as a friend, they could have just issued an insulting order to calm down. But they didn't, they just teased him which was a hint to a friend. As to being recruited by Voldemort, that happened all the time. Snape was subject to that too.

Look friends tease each other all the time. That's all we saw. He wasn't fawning; he was just being over-enthusiastic. By teasing him about his reaction, they were trying to give him a hint to settle down. If they didn't respect him as a friend, they could have just issued an insulting order to calm down. But they didn't, they just teased him which was a hint to a friend. As to being recruited by Voldemort, that happened all the time. Snape was subject to that too.

I didn't see teasing. I saw neglect and patronizing. It would have been friendly had Peter laughed along.

People are responsible for their own mistakes. We can't blame Lily for Snape's mistakes and we can't blame the Marauders for Pettigrew's mistakes.

It would have been friendly had Peter laughed along.
He played a minor role in that scene, we can't even know if he was or wasn't laughing. He wasn't the focus.

People are responsible for their own mistakes. We can't blame Lily for Snape's mistakes and we can't blame the Marauders for Pettigrew's mistakes.

But the book tells us to blame Sirius for Kreacher's betrayal..

You have to understand, people influence other people too. Not everyone is confident enough to be responsible for every decision they make. Every decision most people make are influenced by someone else, at least partially. I'm not saying the Potters deserved it or it was all their fault, I'm just saying there was a reason why Peter betrayed them and I feel it could have been avoided had James truly honored Peter as a friend like Harry and Neville.

I feel it could have been avoided had James truly honored Peter as a friend like Harry and Neville.
We have no idea how they treated Peter. We saw one scene. We do know that he visited the Potters frequently enough for Lily to be worried about him.

And I don't think that Sirius could have made Kreacher behave differently. Kreacher had long-standing issues with Sirius (as a supposed traitor to the family). I thought the personality turnaround that Kreacher had was unrealistic.

You know, the Marauders went to the trouble to help Peter become an animagus. They didn't have to invest that effort. They could have left him out.

We have no idea how they treated Peter. We saw one scene. We do know that he visited the Potters frequently enough for Lily to be worried about him.

And I don't think that Sirius could have made Kreacher behave differently. Kreacher had long-standing issues with Sirius (as a supposed traitor to the family). I thought the personality turnaround that Kreacher had was unrealistic.

You know, the Marauders went to the trouble to help Peter become an animagus. They didn't have to invest that effort. They could have left him out.

Look I'm not saying they weren't good friends, I'm just saying I don't think they took him very seriously. He was only there to amuse them and boost their ego. He was part of their group and they tolerated him, yes but I only think they admired his loyalty to them. Little did they know the loyalty was only because they were the strongest kids in the schoolyard. They never cared about him enough to help build up his self-esteem.

Peter was sorted into Gyffindor. The sorting hat saw something admirable in him. Just like Neville. Peter who seemed to be a very uncertain boy with low self esteem needed good friends to inspire and support him to become a more confident young man.

He was only there to amuse them and boost their ego.
How can you possibly know this?They never cared about him enough to help build up his self-esteem.How can you possibly know this too?

How can you possibly know this?How can you possibly know this too?

I think it's clear from reading SWM alone. James and Sirius even talk about Peter as if he is not there.

"Put that away before Wormtail wets his paints" or something like that.

They insult him for not being as bright as them when they are talking about the exams. Something Peter doesn't laugh along to.

James doesn't stop Peter from ogling over him.

Rowling is very descriptive and if Wormtail was in on the jokes I'm sure she would have mentioned him grinning or something.

I think peter was too dimwitted to think the Marauders were doing anything but teasing him. He put up with them because he felt himself lucky enough to even be involved with this group.

Rowling is very descriptive and if Wormtail was in on the jokes I'm sure she would have mentioned him grinning or something.
He wasn't the focus in that scene. The most important thing we did see from that scene about Peter was his underlying sadistic tendencies.

We did get told that the Marauders helped him become an animagus. They cared enough to help him. They could have left him behind.

Harry and Ron have called each other thick. Friends do that.

He wasn't the focus in that scene. The most important thing we did see from that scene about Peter was his underlying sadistic tendencies.

We did get told that the Marauders helped him become an animagus. They cared enough to help him. They could have left him behind.

Peter was no more sadistic than James. Peter was just a follower who supported his leader no matter what. Of course he was cheering James on when James was humiliating Snape. If you think Peter was sadistic for enjoying Snape's torture than so were James and Sirius sadistic.

They helped him became an animagi. They needed a rat to touch the switch under the Womping Willow. ;)

But Harry and Ron were equals and knew each other really well and had a true connection. Now James and Sirius, I could see but the way they treat Peter would be like Harry telling Neville he's thick or calling Luna mental. They are close but there not that close.

They needed a rat to touch the switch under the Womping Willows.
They had no idea what kind of animagus he would become.

James was being an insensitive bully. Peter was looking on hungrily, like he liked the suffering.

They had no idea what kind of animagus he would become.

James was being an insensitive bully. Peter was looking on hungrily, like he liked the suffering.

Peter is what you call a frightful panicky person who is so paranoid and insecure that when someone else is in a bad situation, it makes them feel superior and secure and safe and they relish that.

IMO, Master of Death has presented here a psychologically convincing and plausible character analysis of Peter and his motives.

Peter's betrayal is horrendous. It's one of the worst acts in the series. Yet JKR never presents us with a convincing enough motive for the gravity and monstrousness of his betrayal. The 'he was scared of Voldemort' thing doesn't wash with me. However scared you are, you just don't do that to people you care about!!!

Well, OK ... maybe you would if you were frightened enough of being tortured. But if you did betray your friends in such a way, the hatred and self-loathing you would feel afterwards would be devastating. Well, we never see that in Pettigrew. And he goes back to Voldy 14 years later. And what of his behaviour after the murders of James and Lily? - the callous way he taunts Sirius after Sirius confronts him in the street, his shocking murder of 13 Muggles (or however many it was).

My assessment of Peter is that he is one seriously disturbed individual. I wonder if something was eating away at him for years before he decided to turn traitor: maybe a deep-seated resentment at James that he might not even have been aware of before Voldemort came along. Honestly, it's the only way I can possibly make sense of this character and his hidden motivations.

And count me in as one of those distinctly unimpressed by the behaviour of the 'senior' Marauders towards Peter in Snape's Worst Memory. I definitely interpreted Peter's behaviour towards James as fawning. Harry watches this scene with a sort of fascinated revulsion - why on earth didn't James or Sirius tell Peter to get a grip on himself, he wonders - and Harry's reaction exactly reflected my own. And yes, that is practically the only time in canon we see the teenage Marauders interacting with each other. But that scene was included for a reason. :cool:

And there is a reason why I love this whole Marauders backstory: it is so incredibly dark, Gothic and twisted. :lol: Seriously: it's the dark heart of Jo's saga, and I love it. :tu:

I'm not sure I see Peter as another potential Neville. There is a duplicity in his character that we never see in Neville (whom I love :love: ).

But I do agree that it was not a mistake for Peter to be sorted into Gryffindor. I can't see him in any of the other Houses - except perhaps Hufflepuff.

Peter was recruited because he was the weak link in the Marauders. Snape could have very well been the one who suggested the recruitment. Pettigrew chose saving his own skin over that of James and Lily, and I don't care what resentment he had toward James, but he also doomed Lily and Harry. That indicates a deeply sick person.

Why would Snape help Voldemort find the Potters? The moment he discovered Voldemort thought the prophecy meant the Potters, he desperately pleaded with Voldemort to spare Lily and then ran off to Dumbledore and pleaded with him to hide them all. Snape would never have helped Voldemort along with finding LILY.

Voldemort may have asked whether there was a Marauder that could be recruited, without saying the Potters were his target. Jo recently told us that he had tried to recruit the Potters.

Oh come on, Snape is not stupid. Why would he suggest to his master to recruit someone like Pettigrew? No, I think it's implied Snape knew right away when Voldemort targeted the Potters. Why would Voldemort lie to him? It was common knowledge how much Snape hated James and no one knew Snape loved Lily, not even the Marauders themselves.

No one knew that Voldemort wanted the Potters for any reason. Recruiting a Marauder would just be a way to get an angle on the Order.

We're getting off topic but I think in POA it's been said that most Death Eaters knew Voldemort was after the Potters. This is why Pettigrew is in hiding for 13 years from the death eaters because he was the one that gave the location of the Potters and it was at this location that Voldemort met his downfall. I think many death eaters thought Peter had set up a trap for Voldemort so by this we can assume it was common knowledge among the death eaters that their master had targeted the Potters. They might not have known WHY, but they knew WHO. Snape knew why because he's the one who told him about the prophecy in the first place.

Also, by your logic then, when DID Snape find out he targeted the Potters? He had to have known at some point if he pleaded with both Voldemort and Dumbledore to spare Lily and hide them.

I think they knew when he went after the Potters. They wouldn't have known the year before when Peter was recruited.

I'm getting confused now...what's your point again?

It wasn't arrogance for trusting an old friend but for trusting a friend you don't really care to understand. Friend by title and history. Not by personality.

:tu:

That's what I think too. For supposedly clever and really intelligent guys, and Lily too, after her 7th year, never understood human character and weakness. How could they place their trust in a boy who was by their own admission weak? I just don't get that. Sirius says, no one will suspect Peter and James and Lily agree and they make a switch, when they are in hiding for the better part of 2 years and when Dumbeldore has told them someone very close to them was reporting on their movements to Voldemort and that there was a traitor in the Order?

Even if I were not to take the SWM, I think this carelessness and I can only call it arrogance of James that he categorically believes his friends are not traitors, and he can trust them with not only his life, but that of his wife and child even when Dumbledore who is head of the Order and who has infromation contrary to James's opinion, from his spies? But still James and Lily would choose not to believe.

And, that choice cost them IMO.

Their friendship with Peter; well I cannot even understand it during their School years; such a weak man; he would not last a minute under torture and Voldemort knew he was close to them; why did not James and Sirius tell Peter that they could not tell him where the Potters were hiding , because it would place Peter in danger. That was one way of looking at it.

The other way was never to trust in a man who was weak. What if Voldemort captured him, found out the Potters hiding place. Wittle Peter was so weak, a look from Voldemort would have him spilling everything. And they thought he was the best guy for the secret keeper thingy?

What they had with Peter IMO was no friendship. Friends are not like that. What they had with Peter was a ready made fan club that performed 24/7 and amused the other three no end when they were bored. JMHO

What they had with Peter IMO was no friendship. Friends are not like that. What they had with Peter was a ready made fan club that performed 24/7 and amused the other three no end when they were bored. JMHO

Well if that is true, at least James, Sirius and Remus got something good out of it. :)

Even if I were not to take the SWM, I think this carelessness and I can only call it arrogance of James that he categorically believes his friends are not traitors, and he can trust them with not only his life, but that of his wife and child even when Dumbledore who is head of the Order and who has infromation contrary to James's opinion, from his spies? But still James and Lily would choose not to believe.

Well, I don't think it's arrogant to want to trust one's friends, T_G_W. :)

I do agree there's a puzzling plot discrepancy here. If Dumble had told James and Lily there was a traitor within their ranks, why didn't they make him their Secret Keeper? :huh: I guess that's a question for the 'plot holes and discrepancies' thread though. :)

But, really: if James and Lily couldn't trust Remus or Sirius 100%, then what made Peter such an attractive alternative???? :huh:

Their friendship with Peter; well I cannot even understand it during their School years; such a weak man; he would not last a minute under torture and Voldemort knew he was close to them; why did not James and Sirius tell Peter that they could not tell him where the Potters were hiding , because it would place Peter in danger. That was one way of looking at it.

Well, to be fair, T_G_W_ ... I've always doubted that I would last a minute under torture. ;) One doesn't know until one is put to the test, of course. (Hopefully I will never have that opportunity!)

What they had with Peter IMO was no friendship. Friends are not like that. What they had with Peter was a ready made fan club that performed 24/7 and amused the other three no end when they were bored. JMHO

:lol::lol::lol:

Oh, that really amused me. :tu:

But, seriously: that really is the way the Marauders' friendship with Peter comes across to me. And I find that quite believable too: that a person as insecure and weak as Peter would cling to a gang of people who really, when all was said and done, didn't actually like him that much. Because Peter's weakness as a character is obvious from the get-go.

Well, I don't think it's arrogant to want to trust one's friends, T_G_W. :)

Yes, I agree. :) I don't think its arrogant to trust a friend either. But was Peter a friend? He wasn't and 3 boys and one girl, could not see it. And 3 boys could not see through his weakness for some 10 years???? That's what I cannot get. I have no problems in James trusting Sirius or Remus; but when they think that Peter was weak themselves, when they know Peter would not last a minute, they still go ahead. That's what I cannot understand.

But, really: if James and Lily couldn't trust Remus or Sirius 100%, then what made Peter such an attractive alternative???? :huh:

I think James and Sirius did not trust Remus. I have no canon for this, except Lily's letter where she does not mention Remus. But James trusted Sirius and Peter, simply because they IMO decided Remus as the possible traitor. We have words to that effect in POA, where Sirius and Remus talk in a partial sign language about how they each thought the other was the traitor all those years ago.

It was I think James's desire to tell the world that Sirius was not a traitor, just because he came from a dark family with a brother who was a DE, he went ahead and signed up Peter for the switch.

Well, to be fair, T_G_W_ ... I've always doubted that I would last a minute under torture. ;) One doesn't know until one is put to the test, of course. (Hopefully I will never have that opportunity!)

Sure I won't either, but when I am going to choose a person who is going to be incharge of my wife and baby, I think I would choose a man or woman who is strong physically, mentally and magically. I would never ever place my faith in a person whom I know is weak and one who would blabber everything at the first sign of danger. I would make the best possible protection for my family; I would not compromise. After that, I would hope for the best and prepare for the worst. But I would have done the best I could in that situation; I would have no regrets I could have done better; that I should have done better. :)

Because Peter's weakness as a character is obvious from the get-go.

All the more reason not to choose him for anything at all. :)

Well if that is true, at least James, Sirius and Remus got something good out of it. :)

Yes wwb, but at what cost? The adoring boy who was in danger of wetting his pants to see James play around with the snitch or something like that, destroyed that quartet in the end.

Yes, I agree. :) I don't think its arrogant to trust a friend either. But was Peter a friend? He wasn't and 3 boys and one girl, could not see it. And 3 boys could not see through his weakness for some 10 years???? That's what I cannot get. I have no problems in James trusting Sirius or Remus; but when they think that Peter was weak themselves, when they know Peter would not last a minute, they still go ahead. That's what I cannot understand.

OK, gotcha. :tu: And I don't understand it either. :hmm:

I think James and Sirius did not trust Remus. I have no canon for this, except Lily's letter where she does not mention Remus. But James trusted Sirius and Peter, simply because they IMO decided Remus as the possible traitor. We have words to that effect in POA, where Sirius and Remus talk in a partial sign language about how they each thought the other was the traitor all those years ago.

I really am going to have to reread PoA ...

Sure I won't either, but when I am going to choose a person who is going to be incharge of my wife and baby, I think I would choose a man or woman who is strong physically, mentally and magically. I would never ever place my faith in a person whom I know is weak and one who would blabber everything at the first sign of danger. I would make the best possible protection for my family; I would not compromise. After that, I would hope for the best and prepare for the worst. But I would have done the best I could in that situation; I would have no regrets I could have done better; that I should have done better. :)

Very well argued. :tu:

Yes wwb, but at what cost? The adoring boy who was in danger of wetting his pants to see James play around with the snitch or something like that, destroyed that quartet in the end.

T_G_W, you're on a roll!

And I agree. It is really so amazingly horrible that the lives of those four people - James, Lily, Sirius and Remus - were blown apart by Peter's betrayal. Well, make that five people: Harry. :(

And I agree. It is really so amazingly horrible that the lives of those four people - James, Lily, Sirius and Remus - were blown apart by Peter's betrayal. Well, make that five people: Harry.
That was the core of the plot of the book. It had to happen that way. And Jo chose betrayal by a close friend to make it more painful.

That was the core of the plot of the book. It had to happen that way. And Jo chose betrayal by a close friend to make it more painful.

Sure. :tu:

And, from a literary POV, I would have preferred to have a stronger motivation for the gravity of the betrayal.

And, from a literary POV, I would have preferred to have a stronger motivation for the gravity of the betrayal.
I think it could have been done differently too. In fact, as much as I love the series, there are quite a few places where the characters are jerked around to service the plot.

In fact, as much as I love the series, there are quite a few places where the characters are jerked around to service the plot.

Yes, I agree! :tu:

And it's an AWESOME plot, really, the story of Peter's betrayal and the whole Marauders backstory. The Gothic tragedy of it all! - no complaints from me on the dark grandeur of JKR's vision here, just quibbles about the execution of it.

:)

And it's an AWESOME plot, really, the story of Peter's betrayal and the whole Marauders backstory. The Gothic tragedy of it all! - no complaints from me on the dark grandeur of JKR's vision here, just quibbles about the execution of it.
The real problem is how little we saw of that generation. So any of the motives and core behaviors are examined like tea leaves in a cup. I don't think we can successfully extrapolate anything with so little canon. The little we did see was there primarily to service the Lily/Snape dynamic, even SWM.

But as much as we obsessed fans want to know more about that era, Jo stayed focused on the present.

Well zgirnius has answered that in the Harry thread itself. In what manner do you say they were good friends to Peter? By mocking him and making fun of him? I did not see that as being a good friend.

Okay, I don't see anything wrong with the way they joked around with him. Maybe you interpreted it differently, but I saw it as playful humor. I do that often - actually, I do that on a daily basis. :lol: It's one of those kind of jokes that occurs between close friends, and that's how I interpreted it.

And where did I say that? I wrote that in response to this

I was curious as to why you said that Lily was foolish when she dated James. I don't see how that ties in with her trust with Peter.

Now, I think using the evidence she gives us in Snape Worst Memory, we can see that Peter seemed to be a tag along. A kind of little brother you bring along to tease and make fun. Yes, they might have loved him but they still treated him very poorly and never took him seriously.

Joking around with someone isn't cruel, IMO. If they seriously meant it, I'd understand. But nothing even indicates that. As I said above, I do things like that all the time, but I still love people to death that I use that humor on.

I'm in that camp that believes Peter was alot like Neville.

And I'm one of those people that sees the two characters as hard to compare. Sure, Harry used Neville as a substitute once in PoA, and that's as much as we know. Neville never wanted to befriend the strongest people around so he could protect himself. I do not see that quality in Peter.

I feel if Peter had a friend like Hermione or Harry or Ron or Ginny or Luna, he might have turned out more like Neville.

And what canon do you have that makes you think that way? It'd be easier to know where this statement is coming from if there were facts provided. :)

The sad truth is that he fell in with James and Sirius for protection and goggled in awe at their skills, particularly James, and James never stopped him.

That's a poor way to treat a friend. :hmm: Peter admired James. James didn't do anything about it. What was he supposed to do - hex him?

Never told him he had to start standing up to people (like Harry told Neville), never supported him, or cared to really get to know him, in my opinion.

Okay, first of all, they did support him when they helped him with becoming an animagi. And as for the rest of those qualities, we only see one scene with them in it. There is nothing that even hints that they didn't care about him or tell him to stand up for himself. How can a person be criticized based on scenes we have never even seen? It doesn't make sense, IMO.

So in my opinion, it was James hubris and arrogance by blindly trusting Peter but never truly getting to know him enough that led to the Potter's betrayal.

I believe Peter had it in him to grow into a more confident and braver man had he better friends, just like Neville.

It was in Peter's nature to desire to be protected by people that were powerful. That is canon - Sirius said so himself. Nothing in canon says that that the Marauders were the cause for his desire to join the Death Eaters.

I think peter was too dimwitted to think the Marauders were doing anything but teasing him. He put up with them because he felt himself lucky enough to even be involved with this group.

So if Peter was too "dimwitted" to think the Marauders were teasing him, why are James and Sirius blamed for a misunderstanding? And also, as I said previously, Peter desired to be protected by those in power and that's why he befriended the Marauders. It had nothing to do with him thinking he was lucky, it was just his inherent desire to be protected.

Even if I were not to take the SWM, I think this carelessness and I can only call it arrogance of James that he categorically believes his friends are not traitors, and he can trust them with not only his life, but that of his wife and child even when Dumbledore who is head of the Order and who has infromation contrary to James's opinion, from his spies? But still James and Lily would choose not to believe.

That isn't arrogance, that's being naive. I still don't get why James is called arrogant and Lily isn't. It isn't as if he alone made the decision to go along with Sirius' plan, Lily agreed, too.

Their friendship with Peter; well I cannot even understand it during their School years; such a weak man; he would not last a minute under torture and Voldemort knew he was close to them; why did not James and Sirius tell Peter that they could not tell him where the Potters were hiding , because it would place Peter in danger. That was one way of looking at it.

The other way was never to trust in a man who was weak. What if Voldemort captured him, found out the Potters hiding place. While Peter was so weak, a look from Voldemort would have him spilling everything. And they thought he was the best guy for the secret keeper thingy?

Er, what indicates that Peter was weak enough to not last torture? Just wondering. And SIrius and James and Lily arranged for Peter to be a Secret Keeper because he was less likely to be suspected. It's a really intelligent plan, except Peter fooled them all. It's not as if he wasn't protected, either; Sirius said he arranged to check up on Peter, meaning that Peter was somewhere hidden and Sirius was periodically checking up on him.

What they had with Peter IMO was no friendship. Friends are not like that. What they had with Peter was a ready made fan club that performed 24/7 and amused the other three no end when they were bored. JMHO

So deciding to not trust a friend because he is weak is a good way to treat a friend? I beg to differ. Trust is one of the most important factors in a relationship - platonic or not.

So how do you explain Peter being sorted into Gryffindor? How do you explain Peter betraying the Potters? If they were such wonderful friends, why would he do this?

I'm not blaming the Marauders for how Peter turned but they certainly never help him solve his inferiority issues.

So how do you explain Peter being sorted into Gryffindor?

I have no idea why Peter was in Gryffindor, and that's irrelevant to the topic I was discussing.

How do you explain Peter betraying the Potters? If they were such wonderful friends, why would he do this?

We know too little about this, and I really do want to know. But there is one thing in PoA and JKR's comment.

"Innocent, but scared!" squealed Pettigrew. "If Voldemort supporers were after me, it was because I put one of their best men in Azkaban - the spy, Sirius Black!"

Black's face contorted.

"How dare you, " he growled, sounding suddenly like the bear-sized dog he had been. "I, a spy for Voldemort? When did I ever sneak around people who were stronger and more powerful than myself? But you, Peter - I'll never understand why I didn't see you were the spy from the start. You always liked big friends who'd look after you, didn't you? It used to be us . . . me and Remus . . . and James. . . . "

[. . .]

"There!" said Pettigrew shrilly, pointing at Ron with his maimed hand. "Thank you! You see, Remus? I have never hurt a hair of Harry's head! Why should I?"

"I'll tell you why," said Black. "Because you never did anything for anyone unless you could see what was in it for you. Voldemort's been in hiding for fifteen years, they say he's half dead. You weren't about to commit murder right under Albus Dumbledore's nose, for a wreck of a wizard who'd lost all of his power, were you? You'd want to be quite sure he was the biggest bully in the playground before you went back to him, wouldn't you? Why else did you find a wizarding family to take you in? Keeping an ear out for news, weren't you, Peter? Just in case your old protector regained strength, and it was safe to rejoin him. . . . "

Nithya: Lily detested mulciber,averyif snape really loved her,why didnt he sacrifice their company for her sake
J.K. Rowling: Well, that is Snape's tragedy. Given his time over again he would not have become a Death Eater, but like many insecure, vulnerable people (like Wormtail) he craved membership of something big and powerful, something impressive.

I have no idea why Peter was in Gryffindor, and that's irrelevant to the topic I was discussing.



We know too little about this, and I really do want to know. But there is one thing in PoA and JKR's comment.

"Innocent, but scared!" squealed Pettigrew. "If Voldemort supporers were after me, it was because I put one of their best men in Azkaban - the spy, Sirius Black!"

Black's face contorted.

"How dare you, " he growled, sounding suddenly like the bear-sized dog he had been. "I, a spy for Voldemort? When did I ever sneak around people who were stronger and more powerful than myself? But you, Peter - I'll never understand why I didn't see you were the spy from the start. You always liked big friends who'd look after you, didn't you? It used to be us . . . me and Remus . . . and James. . . . "

[. . .]

"There!" said Pettigrew shrilly, pointing at Ron with his maimed hand. "Thank you! You see, Remus? I have never hurt a hair of Harry's head! Why should I?"

"I'll tell you why," said Black. "Because you never did anything for anyone unless you could see what was in it for you. Voldemort's been in hiding for fifteen years, they say he's half dead. You weren't about to commit murder right under Albus Dumbledore's nose, for a wreck of a wizard who'd lost all of his power, were you? You'd want to be quite sure he was the biggest bully in the playground before you went back to him, wouldn't you? Why else did you find a wizarding family to take you in? Keeping an ear out for news, weren't you, Peter? Just in case your old protector regained strength, and it was safe to rejoin him. . . . "

Nithya: Lily detested mulciber,averyif snape really loved her,why didnt he sacrifice their company for her sake
J.K. Rowling: Well, that is Snape's tragedy. Given his time over again he would not have become a Death Eater, but like many insecure, vulnerable people (like Wormtail) he craved membership of something big and powerful, something impressive.

It's funny that Sirius understands all this now but never saw it before when they were young.

It's funny that Sirius understands all this now but never saw it before when they were young.

Of course, we were given only one scene. It's hard to analyze Peter when he was barely given any lines as a teenager. But, IMO, Sirius comments should be important to our discussion because it's canon and nothing contradicts his statements.

Of course, we were given only one scene. It's hard to analyze Peter when he was barely given any lines as a teenager. But, IMO, Sirius comments should be important to our discussion because it's canon and nothing contradicts his statements.

Yes, we don't have much of Peter when he was a teen but what we do have support what I've been saying about him being little more than a tag along joke to the other Marauders. Sirius even says this in that transcript you posted:

"It was always me Remus and James!"

Peter was always just there. Friend in name alone really.

Peter is mentioned in Lily's letter to Sirius, too. Lily and James still felt affection towards him after school ended, and I think that the other 3 marauders may have misread Peter a bit. There could be an issue of perception vs reality with them - the way each of them perceived things may have different from how it truly was (ie, Peter may have felt teased when his friends thought it was just in pure fun; or vice versa).

Sorry I didn't get to read your post earlier. I barely noticed it right now, haha.

This is something I've thought about a lot while thinking about writing a Marauder story. How was the friendship between Peter and the other Marauders? I came to a conclusion that Peter was the "younger brother" type in the group, the one they joked about, but in good humour. I have a friend like that - I constantly pick on him, but he knows I'm joking and he picks on me, too. But see, if it gets hurtful, we tell one another and then we stop kidding around. I see the three other Marauders doing that (mostly James and Sirius) to Peter, but I get the impression that if it all bothered Peter, he wouldn't have the nerve to tell them. He would be too shy and just take it all in, and all the while the others would assume he knew it was all in good fun.

That's exactly how I am! I'm always joking around with my friend - I don't think I've gone a day without making fun of her. :lol: And same with another and another. . . . It's just a different type of sense of humor. I am so used to it because my family does it and some of my friends do it, so I understood that when reading SWM. Most people don't take it seriously, but when they do, usually the person stops.

And I don't think Peter's changing of sides had anything to do with bitterness towards his friends. I don't think he wanted to "prove them wrong" about him. I think he was just that much of a coward that he ran to the biggest bully in the playground, and at the time, Voldemort was winning control, and Peter freaked out and switched sides. He said it himself; "what was there to be gained in denying Voldemort?" or something along those lines, to which Sirius replied, "Only innocent lives, Peter."

That's how I see it too! :agree: I didn't see bitterness there, I only saw Peter's desire to save himself. He wanted to be protected as Sirius so rightly said in PoA, and he didn't seem to understand the value in standing up to Voldemort. It isn't the Marauder's fault that he made the choices he did. It was his choice alone to go on and join Voldemort and hand over the family of the friends that trusted him with their lives. It's really tragic, actually. :(

Yes, we don't have much of Peter when he was a teen but what we do have support what I've been saying about him being little more than a tag along joke to the other Marauders. Sirius even says this in that transcript you posted:

"It was always me Remus and James!"

Peter was always just there. Friend in name alone really.

But what makes him "just a friend"? In all friendships there is the leader and the follower. Peter was the follower. He admired them and they took care of him, as Sirius said. But they would have died for Peter. They trusted him with their lives. They had to have cared about him, nothing indicates they didn't.

So how do you explain Peter being sorted into Gryffindor? How do you explain Peter betraying the Potters? If they were such wonderful friends, why would he do this?

I'm not blaming the Marauders for how Peter turned but they certainly never help him solve his inferiority issues.

Some people will do anything to avoid death - like Voldemort. Voldemort wasn't weak, he wasn't socially awkward; but he was terribly afraid of death, and he went to such extreme measures to avoid it. Peter was willing to live twelve years as a rat to evade death or prison. Is it completely out of the realm of possibilities that his fear was so strong, it would lead him to betray his friends? He wanted security. He wanted his own life, whether it meant sending his friends to their deaths. That's how I see it. Fear can drive people to do horrible things they would never think of doing normally - much like the vast majority of humans are capable of committing torture whether they think they could or not; put in a situation, people act differently.

Peter was presented with a life or death situation - he never stood a chance against Voldemort, and so he joined him instead. His instinct for self-preservation outweighed his love for his friends, and he committed the atrocities that lead to the deaths of the Potters. This kind of thing does happen in real life, just less dramatic. Draco, for one, attempted murder several times in HBP out of fear for the lives of his family and his own life - but when it came time to doing the deed in the tower, he couldn't, no matter how afraid he was. And that's why I have some respect for Draco, whereas I have none for Peter.


And I have a hard time seeing Peter as this bitter man wishing death upon his friends because he was teased in school. If it were so, wouldn't he mention any of this in PoA in the Shack, instead of blubbering about being confronted by Voldemort? He just sounded like a coward, too afraid of Voldemort (i.e., death) to do the right thing.

Great post, LilyDreamsOn but I think your missing my point.

I'm not saying Peter betrayed his friends because he was teased. I'm saying it's been established that Peter has always had these massive inferiority complexes which is partially why he wanted to be friends with the Marauders in the first place. Now here's where the flaws of the Marauders kicks in. Sirius seems to know Peter pretty well in the shack scene in POA, but yet he and James never even tried to help him shape up and overcome his issues. They never looked at Peter beyond the cowardly funny tag along friend; Never thought of him as an equal, as a person. Peter was sorted into gryiffindor. I think he really had potential to become a braver man. I think the point Rowling tried to make is how the son overcomes the flaws of the parents. Harry is very much like James and we see this in the begining of DH where he scoffs at the idea of anyone betraying him including Mundungus. This kind of simple nai've view of life is how James saw his friends. Not as complex people but as loving friends who would never dared betray him, while this is all well and sweet, it's very nai've and a bit arrogant. James thought he knew Peter, but it turns out he didn't understand him.

Harry though is different and we can see this when you compare Peter and Neville who are not VERY MUCH alike but do have their similarities.

Peter betrays James to Voldemort, Neville is the only one who stands up to Voldemort and risks his life to defend Harry's honor. Harry believed in Neville. He helped Neville grow and overcome his insecurities to become the wonderful man and brave Griffindor the sorting hat always saw in him.

James laughed and scoffed at his weaker friend and Peter never changed from that scared, insecure little boy who befriended stronger people to protect him when he was seduced to join Voldemort.

*hops in*

There does seem to be a bit of inequality among the Marauders. James asks Peter "how thick are you?" after the O.W.L. exam and from Sirius' comments in PoA about using Wormtail because he was "weak", "talentless" and unremarkable, it seems that James and Sirius considered Peter beneath them, even if they did not exactly dislike him.
IMO, for someone like Pettigrew, when a person like Voldemort comes along and offers you the power that people did not think you could ever have, it's tempting.

*hops out*

but yet he and James never even tried to help him shape up and overcome his issues. They never looked at Peter beyond the cowardly funny tag along friend; Never thought of him as an equal, as a person
I don't see how any of these sweeping assumptions can be supported in canon. We don't exactly have details on every moment of the ten years of freindship. We do know that they worked to help him become an animagus, and they didn't have to. So they were supportive of him.

I don't see how any of these sweeping assumptions can be supported in canon. We don't exactly have details on every moment of the ten years of freindship. We do know that they worked to help him become an animagus, and they didn't have to. So they were supportive of him.

So they helped him become an animagus, big deal. Why was he still that same insecure scared little boy when he grew up had his friends truly loved him and supported him and help him, as true friends do?

What we have in canon is how Peter turned out and you could either take the easy path and say oh look how EVIL Peter is but you don't just throw away years and years of friendship away just like that had you truly loved and honored your friends. Peter was never made to be an equal among the Marauders, he was the 'rat'. The silly younger brother who was amusing to have around.

There does seem to be a bit of inequality among the Marauders. James asks Peter "how thick are you?" after the O.W.L. exam
Friends tease each other like that all the time. Harry and Ron did it several times.and from Sirius' comments in PoA about using Wormtail because he was "weak", "talentless" and unremarkable, Well by the time Sirius addressed Pettigrew he had spent 12 years in prision, knowing that Peter betrayed them. He wasn't going to say anything nice to him.

Friends tease each other like that all the time. Harry and Ron did it several times.

Harry and Ron are happy, well-rounded boys. Pettigrew obviously wasn't. If either Ron or Harry had said something like that to Neville, it would hurt Neville more than if they had said it to each other. The same can be said of Pettigrew.

Friends tease each other like that all the time. Harry and Ron did it several times.Well by the time Sirius addressed Pettigrew he had spent 12 years in prision, knowing that Peter betrayed them. He wasn't going to say anything nice to him.

I've said this last night and I'll say it again.

Teasing is all well and good but when you are clearly not equals in strength or intelligence, teasing is very different. Harry and Ron saw each other as equals. James and Sirius saw each other as equals. Teasing was nothing brutal between them. Teasing someone who is below you in terms of skills and talents and who already has such a low self-esteem and so many insecurities, not mention a person you claim to be your friend and someone who probably does not get that you are only playing around is completely different.

So they helped him become an animagus, big deal. Why was he still that same insecure scared little boy when he grew up had his friends truly loved him and supported him and help him, as true friends do?

Because friends don't heal insecurity. I dealt with insecurity that was pretty extreme, and I know a lot of people that are or have dealt with it. Having friends doesn't heal that. Insecurity is rooted in many factors, and friendship - regardless of how loving it may be - is not the solution. To find the strength to stand up for oneself and love oneself is related to the person rather than the friendships that rae made.

What we have in canon is how Peter turned out and you could either take the easy path and say oh look how EVIL Peter is but you don't just throw away years and years of friendship away just like that had you truly loved and honored your friends. Peter was never made to be an equal among the Marauders, he was the 'rat'. The silly younger brother who was amusing to have around.

But Peter isn't like everyone else. He put his desire to be protected above everything else. He had friends that he turned his back on because he was scared of death. There isn't much canon that suppots that he wasn't an equal or that he was simply a friend of the Marauders out of amusement.

Actually, the latter makes the least sense to me. James and Sirius were at "the height of cool" and were revered amongst the students their age. They could have chosen anyone to be in their close group, but why Peter? There were plenty more intelligent people they could have hung out with, but they chose him. I don't see how they could have only seen him as a joke when they clearly said they would have died for him. People just don't go around saying they would have risked their lives for another for no reason, IMO.

So they helped him become an animagus, big deal. Why was he still that same insecure scared little boy when he grew up had his friends truly loved him and supported him and help him, as true friends do?They didn't have to help him. They could have just left him out of their plans, but they did help him. That is clear evidence of them trying to support and help him. We don't have ten years of detail to know what they did or didn't do for him. So sweeping statements like they never did anything for him are devoid of support.

Maybe he was just rotten to the core. I get rather tired of blaming the victims for the bad behavior of others. His animagus form was that of a rat. That echoes his core personality.

Harry and Ron are happy, well-rounded boys. Pettigrew obviously wasn't. If either Ron or Harry had said something like that to Neville, it would hurt Neville more than if they had said it to each other. The same can be said of Pettigrew.
Actually Ron is quite insecure.

No, friends don't heal insecurity but true real friends do help it along. Influence is a strong theme in HP as well as choice.

There's always a reason people do things. Jo Makes this point with Kreacher as well.

Now, of course James and Sirius took Peter on as their friend. Here was a funny kid who adored them. If Harry had less humility he would have enjoyed Colin Creevey's fan boy obsession of him and kept along as his lap dog and Colin would never have broken away from harry to become the brave little Gryiffindor boy who laid down his life for Hogwarts.

EDIT: It is true that Ron is very insecure but Harry and Ron never do really tease each other do they? Didn't it mention the strength of their friendship in HBP that Ron did NOT laugh at Harry when he told him about Malfoy stamping on his face?

Now, of course James and Sirius took Peter on as their friend. Here was a funny kid who adored them.
We do not know that they kept him around because he was a funny kid that adored them. We know that they were friends and would have laid down their lives for him. That shows true caring.

We do not know that they kept him around because he was a funny kid that adored them. We know that they were friends and would have laid down their lives for him. That shows true caring.

They would have laid down their lives for him, ok, they had a huge macho sense of honor. But you can't expect or force anyone to die for you. That point is made with Mundungus.

No, friends don't heal insecurity but true real friends do help it along. Influence is a strong theme in HP as well as choice.

But influence isn't always strong enough. Ron was insecure, but he was friends with Ron and had a family that supported him. Neville was insecure and Harry and Ron supported him, too. Sometimes in order to overcome insecurity, personal effort is required.

Now, of course James and Sirius took Peter on as their friend. Here was a funny kid who adored them. If Harry had less humility he would have enjoyed Colin Creevey's fan boy obsession of him and kept along as his lap dog and Colin would never have broken away from harry to become the brave little Gryiffindor boy who laid down his life for Hogwarts.

Peter is funny?

And Colin is a different story. He was a true Gryffindor. He chose to fight for Hogwarts because he was part of Dumbledore's Army. His admirance of Harry had little to do with it, IMO. But we're getting off topic. . . .

EDIT: It is true that Ron is very insecure but Harry and Ron never do really tease each other do they? Didn't it mention the strength of their friendship in HBP that Ron did NOT laugh at Harry when he told him about Malfoy stamping on his face?

How many friends laugh at being physically injured?

They would have laid down their lives for him, ok, they had a huge macho sense of honor. But you can't expect or force anyone to die for you. That point is made with Mundungus.

No, they had a heart. They were loyal, and a lot of canon supports that. You're right, not everyone dies for everyone. And that just adds to the fact that Peter wasn't just a person that made them laugh, he was someone they obviously cared about.

Tensions seem to be running a bit high, eh? Time to calm down and take a few deep breaths people.
Cute pics to break tension:
kittens:
http://www.petafoo.com/files/images/funny-kittens.preview.jpg




Or, if you prefer puppies:
http://nuclear.ucdavis.edu/~rpicha/sample/puppies.jpg

But you can't expect or force anyone to die for you.
No you can't. And that's why the willingness of the other Marauders shows their caring.

Actually Ron is quite insecure.

And jealous as well. And let Harry down at 2 most important times in his life. And I have not read about Harry speak of Ron as a weak thing or even call on him about his jealous fits or his envy. Harry was a friend. A good one who accepted and loved Ron for what he was and benefitted by that. They had a healthy friendship that lasted through Ron's jealousy, insecurity, envy and a whole lot of other stuff, all because Harry was such a good friend. :love:

James and Sirius IMO called on Peter's weakness one times too many. We see that in SWM and its always *little Peter*, *weak Peter*, *Poor Peter* that accompanies his name all the time. That IMO is not the sign of equality among friends. James, Sirius and Remus were a world apart from Peter and let let him know it on a regular basis. I would not call this being good friends or anything. To me, it looks like they simply tolerated him and allowed him to tag along, because he would not leave them and go.

I think Harry and Co. are in every way better than the previous generation IMO.

I would not call them deliberately cruel or unkind with intention to hurt with regard to Peter. But I think it is apparent that they saw Peter as weak and they were uncaring about his feelings when they mocked him. They also never thought about why they were friends with him, when they did not have anything in common with him. In fact I think they never thought of Peter at all. That was what I think cost them.


EDIT :: Awwww! How cute is that? :love:

We see that in SWM and its always *little Peter*, *weak Peter*, *Poor Peter* that accompanies his name all the time.
All the time? Every time they interacted over a ten year period? We don't have that information.

Cute puppy! :love:

James and Sirius IMO called on Peter's weakness one times too many. We see that in SWM and its always *little Peter*, *weak Peter*, *Poor Peter* that accompanies his name all the time.

:huh: All the time? We never see them use any one of those words, unless you count Sirius' rage in PoA (which is understandable seeing as he was yelling at the person that caused the death of the people he cared about most and landed him in Azkaban for a crime he never committed). But I might have missed something . . . can you provide something?

James and Sirius IMO called on Peter's weakness one times too many. We see that in SWM and its always *little Peter*, *weak Peter*, *Poor Peter* that accompanies his name all the time. That IMO is not the sign of equality among friends. James, Sirius and Remus were a world apart from Peter and let let him know it on a regular basis. I would not call this being good friends or anything. To me, it looks like they simply tolerated him and allowed him to tag along, because he would not leave them and go.

I think Harry and Co. are in every way better than the previous generation IMO.

I would not call them deliberately cruel or unkind with intention to hurt with regard to Peter. But I think it is apparent that they saw Peter as weak and they were uncaring about his feelings when they mocked him. They also never thought about why they were friends with him, when they did not have anything in common with him. In fact I think they never thought of Peter at all. That was what I think cost them.




I sort of agree. Except that IMO Sirius, in PoA says something to the effect of (sorry no book on me) "The you should have died! Died rather betrayed your friends! As we would have done for you!". Sirius and Remus are outraged, betrayed and hurt to the point that you have to presume they cared for Peter in some small way. And were personally hurt by his betrayal. Sirius claims, sure in the heat of the moment, and to prove a point, but he says he would have died for Peter...I think that Peter was just an easy victim for Sirius and James's to soundboard their arrogance. I don't think they meant harm, and I think they considered him a dear and important friend. And I just remembered, Sirius even made him secret keeper! he would not have dont that had he thought Peter was just bearly tolerable. He must have really trusted and valued Peter. Even if he didn't hold in as high esteem as he did Remus and James ... IMO They saw him as weak, but still as a close friend.

I sort of agree. Except that IMO Sirius, in PoA says something to the effect of (sorry no book on me) "The you should have died! Died rather betrayed your friends! As we would have done for you!". Sirius and Remus are outraged, betrayed and hurt to the point that you have to presume they cared for Peter in some small way. And were personally hurt by his betrayal. Sirius claims, sure in the heat of the moment, and to prove a point, but he says he would have died for Peter...I think that Peter was just an easy victim for Sirius and James's to soundboard their arrogance. I don't think they meant harm, and I think they considered him a dear and important friend. And I just remembered, Sirius even made him secret keeper! he would not have dont that had he thought Peter was just bearly tolerable. He must have really trusted and valued Peter. Even if he didn't hold in as high esteem as he did Remus and James ... IMO They saw him as weak, but still as a close friend.

Sirius also says that they never noticed that Peter was the weak link in the chain or something like that.

Thay may have died for Peter as Sirius said, but IMO that Peter existed only in their imagination; they thought of Peter as a weak thing, not looking beneath the surface for about 10 years. That tells me thay were all of them including Lily were pretty poor judges of character. They were taken in by a sycophant because they thought he was weak or they were so superior that Peter was not even in the running so as to speak. As I said before they may not have been deliberately unkind, but I do believe they were cruel without meaning to be so, not realizing that Peter was simply stroking their egos and he would sell them out for free if he was asked by someone more powerful then the Marauders. And that is exactly what happened.

And he would have sold out Voldemort if someone more powerful than him came on the scene; no one did, and he just could not run back to Dumbledore or Harry because both would not accept him; he went to seek Voldemort in POA, because he was found out by Sirius, otherwise I think he would have lived a rat's life all his life.

They should have seen through him; perhaps it was their youth, perhaps arrogance or perhaps carelessness that they did not.

But one thing is clear for me. It was poor judgement IMO.

Sirius also says that they never noticed that Peter was the weak link in the chain or something like that.

Thay may have died for Peter as Sirius said, but IMO that Peter existed only in their imagination; they thought of Peter as a weak thing, not looking beneath the surface for about 10 years. That tells me thay were all of them including Lily were pretty poor judges of character. They were taken in by a sycophant because they thought he was weak or they were so superior that Peter was not even in the running so as to speak. As I said before they may not have been deliberately unkind, but I do believe they were cruel without meaning to be so, not realizing that Peter was simply stroking their egos and he would sell them out for free if he was asked by someone more powerful then the Marauders. And that is exactly what happened.

And he would have sold out Voldemort if someone more powerful than him came on the scene; no one did, and he just could not run back to Dumbledore or Harry because both would not accept him; he went to seek Voldemort in POA, because he was found out by Sirius, otherwise I think he would have lived a rat's life all his life.

They should have seen through him; perhaps it was their youth, perhaps arrogance or perhaps carelessness that they did not.

But one thing is clear for me. It was poor judgement IMO.


I agree in theory. I think though that it was slightly different or Peter would not have been sulky and moody when he was betraying them. I think he did feel the brunt of being the runt of the group. I don't think the other 3 regarded him with as much respect as they did one another. But I think there had to of been times when they were just four friends hanging out and having fun. Those memories would perhaps leave Peter sulky during the betrayal.

We don't have any canon on the relationship of the four when they were older - but apparently the other 3 trusted Peter with their lives. They were not stupid, so I don't buy the arrogance or ignorant theories. What I do wonder is why they didn't get a clue way back at Hogwarts when his animagus form turned out to be a RAT! :lol:. It was apparently in Peter's character to be a rat all along - but it is one thing to be a rat and another to be a ratfink and betray your friends.

I think the war time circumstances also played into it. Sirius said that no one trusted anyone else. So I would imagine that the only people that were trusted were family members. Unfortunately, the 3 marauders looked upon Peter as family.

People are often very close friends and recognize the weaknesses and failings of their friends. They may have felt Peter was less talented, but that doesn't mean they held in less regard. Nor would it mean they wouldn't or shouldn't trust him.

I had a very close friend who was very musically talented, while I was practically tone deaf. She could play several musical instruments and sing beautifully, and I couldn't even hum on key. She'd tease me about it. I didn't mind, since it was true. That didn't mean she thought less of me, or that I thought she was superior to me. It just meant that was a talent I lacked. And when I admired her singing or music playing, I wasn't sucking up, but rather I was merely appreciating what she could do.

The same would be true for the Marauders. They may have been more magically talented than Peter, but that wouldn't mean they didn't care about him as a friend. Nor would his appreciation of their abilities mean that he was sucking up. I frequently see that as an assumption describing his behavior, but we have no canon actually stating that he was sucking up. Nor would there be any reason for them not to trust him. They had shared secrets and adventures for 10 years.

People are often very close friends and recognize the weaknesses and failings of their friends. They may have felt Peter was less talented, but that doesn't mean they held in less regard. Nor would it mean they wouldn't or shouldn't trust him.

I had a very close friend who was very musically talented, while I was practically tone deaf. She could play several musical instruments and sing beautifully, and I couldn't even hum on key. She'd tease me about it. I didn't mind, since it was true. That didn't mean she thought less of me, or that I thought she was superior to me. It just meant that was a talent I lacked. And when I admired her singing or music playing, I wasn't sucking up, but rather I was merely appreciating what she could do.

The same would be true for the Marauders. They may have been more magically talented than Peter, but that wouldn't mean they didn't care about him as a friend. Nor would his appreciation of their abilities mean that he was sucking up. I frequently see that as an assumption describing his behavior, but we have no canon actually stating that he was sucking up. Nor would there be any reason for them not to trust him. They had shared secrets and adventures for 10 years.

You are talking about a particular branch of knowledge or capability. If she would mock you seriously and look down upon you because you cannot do something she does, I think that friendship would fade away real fast. Teasing is fine; friends do that all the time, but looking down upon will not be okay IMO.

When we take the three Marauders; one of them was a werewolf, one came from a DE background and one was from a Light family like Ron's. But they were all equals and they never allowed Remus's problem or Regulus's death eatership and their backgrounds that was so very different to come between them.

That was never the case with Peter IMO. He was not their equal and I think he knew it and they knew it and they also let him know it by the way we see Sirius and James treat him in the SWM.

They never judged him correctly at all and like wickedwickedboy says, they never even spared a thought about it when his animagus form revealed he was a rat. They probably made more fun of him for that.

Well come to think of it...they may just have spoken to one another like that all the time. Sirius' final statement to James in SWM was a pretty cutting remark and Remus had some pretty slam dunk words for Sirius as well. I just think we don't have enough canon to make a good judgment on the issue.

I just think we don't have enough canon to make a good judgment on the issue.

I don't understand this statement. We have wht we have, and we build our view and opinion on that. There's nothing more out there. The Marauders aren't real people and they never actually talked to each other. They exist - and communicate, act, etc. - only on those pages. So a guess based on what is in the book is the best guess we can make.

Well come to think of it...they may just have spoken to one another like that all the time. Sirius' final statement to James in SWM was a pretty cutting remark and Remus had some pretty slam dunk words for Sirius as well.

I was left with the impression that the respect towards Peter was rather lacking, while the mutual respect between Sirius and James was quite evident. That's what I gathered from the text.

I don't understand this statement. We have wht we have, and we build our view and opinion on that. There's nothing more out there. The Marauders aren't real people and they never actually talked to each other. They exist - and communicate, act, etc. - only on those pages. So a guess based on what is in the book is the best guess we can make.

Yes. That is what I meant. We have just a couple of pages of interaction and dialogue which is not enough to make a proper judgment on the Marauders four way relationship. I mean it isn't like groundhog day where that scene we saw repeated itself everyday for 7 years. :lol:. That day they had just come out of an exam, they are wound up, so we can't even know if it is a typical day. There was no quidditch match, no following the Marauder's Map, no werewolf excursion, no changing to animagi, no sincere talks about Sirius' home life or Remus' life as a wolf - all things we know they participated in from canon, but were not shown. So we don't know how they interacted during those times or any other time except the one day we saw.

In my opinion, that is not enough to go on to make a firm judgment about anything. I respect your view if you feel otherwise. :)

I was left with the impression that the respect towards Peter was rather lacking, while the mutual respect between Sirius and James was quite evident. That's what I gathered from the text.

Yeah I hadn't read it in a while and based on my memory and what people were saying, I recalled it that way too. Then I re-read it. I had a hard time making an argument for them being disrespectful to Peter. Remus makes a joke about being a werewolf and Peter doesn't laugh because he is considering his exam and we find he is seriously unintelligent - he ran with a werewolf once a month and couldn't name 5 signs of one? Well, if he were my best buddy, I'd of said a lot worse than 'how thick are you, Wormtail?'

The only other comment made about Peter was when he was alone gasping and applauding James' catching the snitch. 'Put that away before he wets himself' - well once more, Peter was acting like a bit of a dense fellow and Sirius just called him on it. Peter blushed; hopefully he got the message (although that was a slight error on JKR's part in my view - I think that was more of a girl's reaction). Even Harry wanted his dad to tell Peter to "get a grip." :lol: But anyway - this is how some dudes speak to one another and actually a lot ruder, so I don't see disrespect, I see friends.

So in that particular scene, I would say that Peter was treated like any friend who acted the way he did. And if he acted that way all the time, then I would say it would grow extremely exasperating.

That was never the case with Peter IMO. He was not their equal and I think he knew it and they knew it and they also let him know it by the way we see Sirius and James treat him in the SWM.

I respect your view, but that doesn't suffice as enough canon to support that James and Sirius were poor friends to Peter. We get two comments, which I always thought of as jokes. They might have taken him as a friend in an arrogant way, but I don't see any canon that supports that they continuously mocked him throughout the books. They might have teased him, from what I understood of SWM.

They probably made more fun of him for that.

Could you please provide canon that they made fun of him for being a rat? I was under the impression that they were grateful he was a small animal because he could press the knot in the tree.

Ahem, canon is our bread and butter in here but a wee bit of speculation and interpretation is also desirable - as long as it doesn't cross the line to character bashing. :rockon:

They never judged him correctly at all and like wickedwickedboy says, they never even spared a thought about it when his animagus form revealed he was a rat. They probably made more fun of him for that.

That was a joke - hence the bit about the distinction between a rat and a ratfink. :lol:. Imo, the animagus form can be interpreted in many ways - Not always as a traditional stereotypical view of the behavior and/or personality of the animal itself. And I do feel the Marauders appreciated that Peter was small enough to stop the tree. But more importantly, they helped him to become an Animagus because he was their friend. Finally, our science class adopted a pet Rat, years back now, just to study its day to day activities and behavior within the confines of the enviornment we provided. I can tell you first hand that some rats at least are quite intelligent, resourceful and - well that particular one liked to eat a lot! :)

We don't have any canon on the relationship of the four when they were older - but apparently the other 3 trusted Peter with their lives. They were not stupid, so I don't buy the arrogance or ignorant theories. What I do wonder is why they didn't get a clue way back at Hogwarts when his animagus form turned out to be a RAT! :lol:. It was apparently in Peter's character to be a rat all along - but it is one thing to be a rat and another to be a ratfink and betray your friends.

Personally I would find it pretty unfair to judge anybody's character on what animagus form they happened to take. :)

Rats are supposed to be very intelligent: let's not stereotype the creatures. ;)

I was left with the impression that the respect towards Peter was rather lacking, while the mutual respect between Sirius and James was quite evident. That's what I gathered from the text.

That is totally the impression I got from Snape's Worst Memory. And among the many negative things that showed, it hardly showed Peter in a good light ... his "avid" expression when he realises that James and Sirius are gearing up (unprovoked) to attack Severus, for example. There is ample canon in that chapter to show Peter in a very unfavourable light.

We can only assume - since it is not shown to us - that his relationship with the other Marauders had more positive aspects as they grew up together.

That is totally the impression I got from Snape's Worst Memory. And among the many negative things that showed, it hardly showed Peter in a good light ... his "avid" expression when he realises that James and Sirius are gearing up (unprovoked) to attack Severus, for example. There is ample canon in that chapter to show Peter in a very unfavourable light.
It's the behaviour and character of him that drags him in the bad light. Even without the whole allusions of the others did he look like the one everybody makes fun of. The subservient behaviour, the squeeky anxious voice, all signs of low self esteem, so it's no wonder when other start to pick on him. Actually I always wondered why he was accepted in their rows at all and whether he wanted to be part of the group to look cool and to finally get the attention he desires, or if the "friendship" was the others idea. From their behaviour I think it's the first one, they didn't talk to him like it's their best friend, just that they accept him.

I found it a bit strange how JKR decided to portray Peter's relationship with the marauders in SWM. I don't think there was anything wrong with how James, Sirius, and Remus were treating him, in fact, I'm surprised he was even so welcomed in the group. I thought JKR would have showed him to be more of an equal in the group, which wasn't really portrayed in my opinion. And this makes me want to know more about Peter's friendships with Sirius, James, Lily, and Remus because I felt we weren't shown the Peter James and Lily trusted with their lives.

How did James' and Sirius' particularly close friendship influence Remus and Peter? Did they feel left out or inferior?
I think Peter and Remus were so happy to be part of the group, they weren't bothered at all by the fact Sirius and James were so close.

James, Sirius and Peter became Animagi for Remus. Was this noble or adventurous?
Very noble. It was adventurous as well, but I doubt they realised this as much when they were studying so hard to become animagus in the first place. That takes a lot of hard work, study, and time that could have been spent marauding and having adventures anyway.

What did the other Marauders think about James' obsession with Lily?
How did Lily influence the dynamics within the Marauders?
I doubt it was an obsession. Snape was the one with the obsession and I wouldn't like to think that the only men serious about Lily were completely obsessed with her. Imo, James just had a crush, which Sirius and the others might have found amusing, but other than than that, didn't think much of it. I think that when Lily did become part of the group she fit in very well. She was funny and according to JKR, she was never adverse to breaking a few rules. Her letter to Sirius shows that they were on good terms and she trusted Peter with her life.

Peter betrayed his friends. Was he ever happy with this decision and do you think that his friends would be able to forgive him if they had the chance?
I don't think Peter was happy with the decision. But he was scared and in a tough position. Before DH came out I speculated that Peter was the one to have loved Lily. I thought it highly probable, since JKR stated that Lily was a very popular girl and she had been friends with Peter enough to trust him with her life. I think it would have made an interesting plot twist and would have been better then what actually occured in DH. But that's merely opinion. I would have wanted Peter's character to be a bit more fleshed out.

That was never the case with Peter IMO. He was not their equal and I think he knew it and they knew it and they also let him know it by the way we see Sirius and James treat him in the SWM
How do you know what they felt? All we saw was a little teasing during SWM.

I respect your view, but that doesn't suffice as enough canon to support that James and Sirius were poor friends to Peter. We get two comments, which I always thought of as jokes. They might have taken him as a friend in an arrogant way, but I don't see any canon that supports that they continuously mocked him throughout the books. They might have teased him, from what I understood of SWM.

With all characters we have only so much and we have to go along and make our opinions and dissect and assess their character with what we have. While we don't have enough background on Peter, like his family and stuff, we do have enough as we do with almost all characters to try and form a sort of opinion at least.

Peter we see as a snivelling git who after killing his best friend and his wife and sending another friend to Azkaban for 13 years, still suns away to Voldemort and kills another student on Voldemort's orders (Cedric) and takes the blood from Harry's hand conveniently forgetting that had it not been for this boy, he would havve been dead by Sirius and Remus's hands that night at the Shack.

Yet we see no gratitude from him, and even in Malfoy Manor, we see him startled for a minute and it is Harry's reflexes defeat Peter and not his own concience.

I based my opinions on all this and realized that for Peter's character to be so steady, whithout change and evolution, it must have been there since childhood. It is the beliefs we are ingrained into as a child that we find most hard to dismiss, because we dismiss our security and our roots as it were when we do that. But most times we must, if we are to evolve. Snape did that; sadly it took him Lily's death to see the error of his ways; for Peter he never evolved; he never changed because IMO he was either by himself and no one noticed it and offered help or because of poor family circumstances, was a weak boy who clamoured for strength and did anything to latch himself to whoever was strong.

That was why he was placed in Gryffindor; his mind must have singlemindedly prayed for Gryffindor that Hat may not have placed him anywhere else. In Gryffindor were the brave and the strong; Peter wanted to get there; and once inside Gryffindor, he attached himself to a group of boys who were according to him the strongest, the other 3 Maraders.

When Voldemort came on the scene, the terror he inspired in others must have made Peter feel that he was stronger and when he was approached or did he go on his own? he joined Voldemort without any fuss, whatsoever. That action however burnt his bridges as far as the Light was concerned and so he stayed on; otherwise I am sure he would have come like the rat (sorry Pearl_Took :) I am cursing rats because of Peter) he was and stuck to Harry and the Light.

The other three Marauders should have seen through him and so should have LIly. If not in the seven years, they were friends, then at least when they decided to make the switch in SK IMO.

posted by Tenshi
It's the behaviour and character of him that drags him in the bad light. Even without the whole allusions of the others did he look like the one everybody makes fun of. The subservient behaviour, the squeeky anxious voice, all signs of low self esteem, so it's no wonder when other start to pick on him. Actually I always wondered why he was accepted in their rows at all and whether he wanted to be part of the group to look cool and to finally get the attention he desires, or if the "friendship" was the others idea. From their behaviour I think it's the first one, they didn't talk to him like it's their best friend, just that they accept him.

All the more I feel that the other 3 should have seen through them. They accepted him, mainly because I think he would not go away and they let him be, because he was in their eyes a weak, harmless thing. Of course I don't have canon for this, but I cannot really think of another reason.

The other three Marauders should have seen through him and so should have LIly. If not in the seven years, they were friends, then at least when they decided to make the switch in SK IMO.
If people didn't understand and accept the flaws in friends, there would be no friendships. There was no reason they could or should suspect he would betray them that way. They had been friends for 10 years, and had shared their deepest secrets with him, and he had never betrayed that trust. I'm basing this on the fact that he never revealed their monthly romps, or that they were animagi, or that Remus was a werewolf. He would not seem untrustworthy to them, despite any perceived insecurities he might display.

If people didn't understand and accept the flaws in friends, there would be no friendships. There was no reason they could suspect he would betray them that way. They had been friends for 10 years, and had shared their deepest secrets with him, and he had never betrayed that trust. I'm basing this on the fact that he never revealed their monthly romps, or that they were animagi, or that Remus was a werewolf. He would not seem untrustworthy to them, despite any perceived insecurities he might display.

Not 10 years; I think that was more like 7 years, for seven years the Marauders were his best friends; he would not betray them, because they were the strongest in his mind and they were his protectors. The moment he went to VOldemort he simpered and suck up to him and betrayed his friends, because he needed to be in VOldemort's good books all the time, only that he may have felt would protect him.

Peter was the weak link and I wonder how he concealed his true traits for such a long time, it is not usually possible when you move so closely as the four Marauders did. That's why I felt the Marauders were not sensitive or shrewd enough to really see Peter and his true character; to their loss sadly.

Realistically, the betrayal was central to the storyline. They weren't supposed to realize he was a traitor.

He didn't go to Voldemort right after graduation. The unknown traitor had been revealing their movements for a year prior to their death, so we can make it nine years instead of ten. I don't think that changes the importance of the friendship, loyalty, and trust.

With all characters we have only so much and we have to go along and make our opinions and dissect and assess their character with what we have. While we don't have enough background on Peter, like his family and stuff, we do have enough as we do with almost all characters to try and form a sort of opinion at least.

I agree: the scenes that JKR includes in the main body of the narrative are there for a reason. :) Of course readers' interpretations of those scenes will vary. :cool:

I based my opinions on all this and realized that for Peter's character to be so steady, whithout change and evolution, it must have been there since childhood. It is the beliefs we are ingrained into as a child that we find most hard to dismiss, because we dismiss our security and our roots as it were when we do that. But most times we must, if we are to evolve. Snape did that; sadly it took him Lily's death to see the error of his ways; for Peter he never evolved; he never changed because IMO he was either by himself and no one noticed it and offered help or because of poor family circumstances, was a weak boy who clamoured for strength and did anything to latch himself to whoever was strong.

I find that a plausible portrayal of Peter.

When Voldemort came on the scene, the terror he inspired in others must have made Peter feel that he was stronger and when he was approached or did he go on his own? he joined Voldemort without any fuss, whatsoever. That action however burnt his bridges as far as the Light was concerned and so he stayed on; otherwise I am sure he would have come like the rat (sorry Pearl_Took :) I am cursing rats because of Peter) he was and stuck to Harry and the Light.

Heh, T_G_W. :D I don't have a particular fondness for rats. :lol: But they do get a terrible press, like snakes, and I never quite feel that is fair. ;)

All the more I feel that the other 3 should have seen through them. They accepted him, mainly because I think he would not go away and they let him be, because he was in their eyes a weak, harmless thing. Of course I don't have canon for this, but I cannot really think of another reason.

I agree with this in respect to the Marauders' teen years, T_G_W. I don't see much respect in the attitudes of James and Sirius to Peter in SWM. James and Sirius come over in that scene as the top dogs - the Alpha males ;) - with Remus as an uncomfortable bystander (distancing himself from their attack on Snape) and Peter in the role as the awestruck hanger-on.

As they all grew up, though, Peter may have presented as a much more mature sort of person whom James in particular felt he could trust.

My underlying impression of Peter's true character, however, is the same as yours, I think.

Peter was the weak link and I wonder how he concealed his true traits for such a long time, it is not usually possible when you move so closely as the four Marauders did. That's why I felt the Marauders were not sensitive or shrewd enough to really see Peter and his true character; to their loss sadly.

I am sympathetic to this view, because it is the only way I can make sense of this storyline. It does NOT make sense to me that Peter was this thoroughly nice, decent guy wholly deserving of James Potter's trust, until he had a Sudden Personality Transplant and became a craven coward overnight. That does not make any kind of credible sense to me in terms of believable characterisation. I tend to think of Peter as having a fatal flaw in his character from the get-go. Few things could be more despicable than what he did, and it was premeditated.

When it comes to Peter's credibility with James, I can only assume - as I say above - that Peter knew how to present a good front.

I am sympathetic to this view, because it is the only way I can make sense of this storyline. It does NOT make sense to me that Peter was this thoroughly nice, decent guy wholly deserving of James Potter's trust, until he had a Sudden Personality Transplant and became a craven coward overnight. That does not make any kind of credible sense to me in terms of believable characterisation. I tend to think of Peter as having a fatal flaw in his character from the get-go. Few things could be more despicable than what he did, and it was premeditated

Betrayal is a common theme in fantasy of all kinds. Brothers, husbands, wives, lovers, best friends, Parents - everyone betrays. Rarely is the betrayer of a 'good character' done with the express purpose of showing the person betrayed to be dull witted and arrogant.

In this case, we have vulnerable and insecure Peter who was always one of the 4 Marauders, and they were all best friends. One standard year prior to the Potter's death, Peter began his association with Voldemort. According to Peter, he was threatened into it (death, torture?). According to Sirius, Peter was just looking for the next 'big cheese'. But Dumbledore was a 'big cheese' too, so I don't think that Sirius was correct. Peter was likely threatened into it by Voldemort - he was easy pickings due to his character.

That took away Peter's option of going for help to Dumbledore - his life may have been threatened if he did so - or perhaps his mother, relatives, who knows. In any case, Voldemort was not stupid, I am certain he did not tell Peter right off the bat that he would be betraying his friends. Peter was passing information for a year before that, so Voldemort started ingrating him into his fold with less mind blowing acts and nearing a year later, he hits him with the big news. Time to betray your friends. Peter is moody and sulky then because he is truly upset, he does not want to do this. But he is too far gone at this point, he has done too much to come clean. He loses his friends either way.

So he does it. And after doing it, he realizes his own neck is in jeopardy - so he does it again, this time to Sirius - likely a plan that Voldemort had worked out for him ahead of time - but he took credit for it. Now he has no one. He cannot go to Dumbledore of course, he doesn't have Voldemort and the DEs figure that he got Voldemort killed. So he takes off.

That is more realistic than Peter running off to Voldemort after fighting against him in a war for several years under the 'big cheese' Dumbledore, and surrendering himself to Evil on some oddball notion that Voldemort was the biggest cheese. As we saw in POA, Peter had waited 12 years in Ron's household to "see which way the wind blew". So he would have done the same back in the day, imo. He would not go to Voldemort "hoping he would win" - he would go when he knew he had won.

This also doesn't leave us with an Instant Transplanted Personality - which would be the case if he had run off to Voldemort OR immediately and happily accepting an offer from Voldemort when it was presented. Peter was not evil, he did not have an interest in the dark arts in school, he did not hang around Slytherins or eagerly speak about joining Voldemort's troops, there was nothing that would make him want to follow evil unless he was drawn into it by Voldemort - under threat, imo. Unlike Regulus, Draco or Snape - there was no early tendency that we know of that would lead him down that path of his own accord.

Heh, T_G_W. :D I don't have a particular fondness for rats. :lol: But they do get a terrible press, like snakes, and I never quite feel that is fair. ;)

I am not very sympathetic to rats, mainly because I am terrified of them. :D Snakes I supose are okay, but from very much afar. :D

I agree with this in respect to the Marauders' teen years, T_G_W. I don't see much respect in the attitudes of James and Sirius to Peter in SWM. James and Sirius come over in that scene as the top dogs - the Alpha males ;) - with Remus as an uncomfortable bystander (distancing himself from their attack on Snape) and Peter in the role as the awestruck hanger-on.

In the SWM I thought they were pretty careless with Peter. Otherwise I was pretty much generalizing.

As they all grew up, though, Peter may have presented as a much more mature sort of person whom James in particular felt he could trust.

I think this was more of *Peter is just not capable of betrayal* more than anything else and in a war and in a situation where not just James's life was on the line but that of his wife and child, I find it unacceptable really. Just my personal opinion, but there it is. His trust of Sirius was because he knew, that of Peter was he was not capable; that's the way IMO the switch was made.

I think this was more of *Peter is just not capable of betrayal* more than anything else and in a war and in a situation where not just James's life was on the line but that of his wife and child, I find it unacceptable really.

Perhaps it is only fair to look at it as Lily made that decision as well, with the lives of her husband and child on the line. Sirius also made it, with the lives of his beloved family on the line. It would have been a great plan if Peter had not been drawn in by Voldemort - but that was something unexpected, unforeseeable and completely outside of the possible reality of his best friends. (see my above post) :)

Betrayal is a common theme in fantasy of all kinds. Brothers, husbands, wives, lovers, best friends, Parents - everyone betrays. Rarely is the betrayer of a 'good character' done with the express purpose of showing the person betrayed to be dull witted and arrogant.

Despite my love of Tolkien, I have not read an awful lot of fantasy. I am not familiar with the Betrayer as Archetype that you describe here.

Peter is moody and sulky then because he is truly upset, he does not want to do this.

Where does canon show that he was 'moody and sulky'? Moody and sulky ... good gracious, that would be the least of it. He was about to sign his friends' death warrants!

This also doesn't leave us with an Instant Transplanted Personality - which running off to Voldemort OR immediately and happily accepting an offer from Voldemort when it was presented. Peter was not evil, he did not have an interest in the dark arts in school, he did not hang around Slytherins or eagerly speak about joining Voldemort's troops, there was nothing that would make him want to follow evil unless he was drawn into it by Voldemort - under threat, imo.

WWB ... one does not need to be attracted to the Dark Arts in order to be evil!!! :) Or, at least, to do something that is evil. And what Peter did was evil.

Unlike Regulus, Draco or Snape - there was no early tendency that we know of that would lead him down that path of his own accord.

I totally disagree with this. :) That Regulus, Draco and Snape all made moral choices (both good and bad), choices that determined their characters and their paths in life, is completely in accord with how JKR writes her moral saga. We can all see the various strengths and weaknesses of these three characters and that is why readers like them so much: they all ring true, psychologically, as convincing character portraits.

I can make no possible sense, in a literary or moral sense, of the fatal moral weakness that Peter displays unless I think that this fatal moral weakness was inherent in his character, a dark seed that bore fruit in his adult life. Of course he didn't have to act on it! - that is the whole point of the HP saga. Our choices determine who we are, as Albus Dumbledore says. And that is really, no less, how I understand the human condition and how I relate to the power of storymaking. HP may be a children's fantasy but it says something really important to me about the moral choices that humans make.

So, in a modern, character-driven fantasy like JKR's, characters must make sense and not just be two-dimensional archetypes. That is true even of Tolkien, and his characters are much more archetypal and mythical than Rowling's! That is because he - like JKR - is a darned good writer who understands the human condition, its scope and its tragedy.

Judas Iscariot's betrayal didn't come out of nowhere, and neither does Peter Pettigrew's.

I believe it was brewing for a long time ... the moral weakness that ate away at his moral foundation and paved the way for his fall.

JMO, of course. :) But I do like characters to be believable.

The_Green_Woods ... I haven't more time to respond to the James trusting Peter thing. I do think that Peter must have presented a pretty convincing front. :)

Despite my love of Tolkien, I have not read an awful lot of fantasy. I am not familiar with the Betrayer as Archetype that you describe here.

Ah...well it is so overdone it is almost getting old - but it is a convenient plot device with built in unexpected angst, so it is used quite often.

Where does canon show that he was 'moody and sulky'? Moody and sulky ... good gracious, that would be the least of it. He was about to sign his friends' death warrants!

The letter Lily wrote to Sirius - the one in Snape's memory that he stole half of.

WWB ... one does not need to be attracted to the Dark Arts in order to be evil!!! :) Or, at least, to do something that is evil. And what Peter did was evil.

That wasn't my point. My only point was that it was more likely that Peter was telling the truth in POA than not. Sirius was guessing and I don't believe he had it correct.

I totally disagree with this. :) That Regulus, Draco and Snape all made moral choices (both good and bad), choices that determined their characters and their paths in life, is completely in accord with how JKR writes her moral saga. We can all see the various strengths and weaknesses of these three characters and that is why readers like them so much: they all ring true, psychologically, as convincing character portraits.

That wasn't my point either. My only point there was that Snape, Draco and Regulus all showed interest in the dark arts, had friends with a similar interest and also expressed a desire to serve Voldemort. We did not see this from Peter, so there is no reason he would summarily seek out Voldemort. Again, just another clue that Voldemort likely sought him out - because he was the weak one close to the family of the baby he wished to murder.

I can make no possible sense, in a literary or moral sense, of the fatal moral weakness that Peter displays unless I think that this fatal moral weakness was inherent in his character, a dark seed that bore fruit in his adult life. Of course he didn't have to act on it! - that is the whole point of the HP saga. Our choices determine who we are, as Albus Dumbledore says. And that is really, no less, how I understand the human condition and how I relate to the power of storymaking. HP may be a children's fantasy but it says something really important to me about the moral choices that humans make.

But that assumes Peter went to Volemort willingly or that he willingly agreed to work for him when he was approached. Why would he do that? He was fighting on the other side and he already had a "big cheese" in Dumbledore. We have no evidence that he would suddenly run to Voldemort for no reason or because he suddenly thought Volemort was a bigger cheese than Dumbledore. That was all Sirius' idea. I believe Peter when he says that he was threatened. I also believe he was weak enough to make the wrong choice and give in to the threats.

So, in a modern, character-driven fantasy like JKR's, characters must make sense and not just be two-dimensional archetypes. That is true even of Tolkien, and his characters are much more archetypal and mythical than Rowling's! That is because he - like JKR - is a darned good writer who understands the human condition, its scope and its tragedy.

I agree. But it makes no sense for Peter to have run to Voldemort willingly or happily accepted his terms if he was offered. How realistic is it that Peter gets home from fighting with the Order one day and says to himself, 'gee, I think I'll go work for Voldemort'?

Judas Iscariot's betrayal didn't come out of nowhere, and neither does Peter Pettigrew's.

I totally agree. I just don't believe in the "dark seed in his youth" theory because we have absolutely no canon that even hints at such a thing. That is what I was saying before. If we only saw Draco at Hogwarts, and after that he was never in the story again - but later JKR told us he ended up a death eater, no one would be surprised. Same with Snape, same with Regulus or Lucius. But not Ron or Neville, or Peter - that would be surprising. And it was. Because there was no trace of anything like that in his background.

I believe it was brewing for a long time ... the moral weakness that ate away at his moral foundation and paved the way for his fall.

Imo, it is more unrealistic to imagine that every single person that joined Voldemort did so because they had a dark seed planted in them that grew as they matured and as a result they chose evil. Imo, Peter fell without that, he was not shown to have a dark seed. It seems more likely to me that he just gave in to pressure.

Ah...well it is so overdone it is almost getting old - but it is a convenient plot device with built in unexpected angst, so it is used quite often.

Well ... without my 'dark seed' theory, that is exactly what JKR presents us with, in Peter. And I must confess that I find it very unsatisfying. :shrug:

The letter Lily wrote to Sirius - the one in Snape's memory that he stole half of.

She said that 'Wormy seemed a bit down'. (That is a perfectly dreadful nickname, by the way. Lily seemed to specialise in them, bless her. 'Tuney'. :whistle: ) You infer 'moody and sulky' from that, I would infer 'downright depressed because he's just sold out his best friends'.

That wasn't my point either. My only point there was that Snape, Draco and Regulus all showed interest in the dark arts, had friends with a similar interest and also expressed a desire to serve Voldemort. We did not see this from Peter, so there is no reason he would summarily seek out Voldemort. Again, just another clue that Voldemort likely sought him out - because he was the weak one close to the family of the baby he wished to murder.

Oh, I see what you mean. It's a long time since I read PoA and I'm not that invested in the hows of Peter's betrayal, more in the whys.

So why did Voldy think Peter was the weak one, eh? That in itself is intriguing and lends a clue to Peter's character, surely.

But that assumes Peter went to Volemort willingly or that he willingly agreed to work for him when he was approached. Why would he do that? He was fighting on the other side and he already had a "big cheese" in Dumbledore. We have no evidence that he would suddenly run to Voldemort for no reason or because he suddenly thought Volemort was a bigger cheese than Dumbledore. That was all Sirius' idea. I believe Peter when he says that he was threatened. I also believe he was weak enough to make the wrong choice and give in to the threats.

Sure. And that is a weakness in his character that canon DOES show us, IMO.

Imo, it is more unrealistic to imagine that every single person that joined Voldemort did so because they had a dark seed planted in them that grew as they matured and as a result they chose evil. Imo, Peter fell without that, he was not shown to have a dark seed. It seems more likely to me that he just gave in to pressure.

What kind of person gives into pressure to betray their friends - and their baby son - to be murdered???? :huh:

I'm not getting my point across, I think, about my 'dark seed'. :lol: Movie Sirius said it very well on my behalf: 'it's not like the world is divided into two camps, those who are Death Eaters and those who are not. We all have light and dark within us: what matters is the part we choose to act on.'

Peter, IMO, had a terrible weakness in his character, which he chose to act on, when the pressure was on.

I based my opinions on all this and realized that for Peter's character to be so steady, whithout change and evolution, it must have been there since childhood. It is the beliefs we are ingrained into as a child that we find most hard to dismiss, because we dismiss our security and our roots as it were when we do that. But most times we must, if we are to evolve. Snape did that; sadly it took him Lily's death to see the error of his ways; for Peter he never evolved; he never changed because IMO he was either by himself and no one noticed it and offered help or because of poor family circumstances, was a weak boy who clamoured for strength and did anything to latch himself to whoever was strong.

That's exactly how I see him. I'm not sure if he didn't change - it's only natural to, but he probably didn't have any drastic ones - but he was the one who always craved being around the ones that were strong.

The other three Marauders should have seen through him and so should have LIly. If not in the seven years, they were friends, then at least when they decided to make the switch in SK IMO.

But that's the thing: they were friends for ten years. I have been betrayed by a friend that I'd known for years (thankfully it wasn't nearly as extreme as the betrayal in HP), but I never thought she'd do anything to hurt me. Once people become close friends - as was with the case with the Marauders and the friend I had - they begin to trust that person. Most best friends don't go running around in fear that the friend may do something horrible to them, it simply doesn't occur to them. That's how I always saw friendships, anyway. :)

All the more I feel that the other 3 should have seen through them. They accepted him, mainly because I think he would not go away and they let him be, because he was in their eyes a weak, harmless thing. Of course I don't have canon for this, but I cannot really think of another reason.

Okay, we don't know anything about why they took him in, but we do have a quote from JKR, if you are one of those that trusts her word.

ES: When Sirius was framed for the death of Pettigrew and the Muggles, did he actually laugh or was that something made up to make him look even more insane?

[. . .]

He was unhinged. Yes, he laughed. He knew what he'd lost. It was a humorless laugh. Pettigrew, who they, in a slightly patronizing way - James and Sirius at least - who they allowed to hang round with them, it turned out that he was a better wizard than they knew. Turned out he was better at hiding secrets than they knew.

So, they took him in a patronizing way. But he couldn't have been simply their friends, IMO, because he was weak. That doesn't seem like a strong friendship to me, but we do know that they cared about him. They were loyal to him - enough so that they would die for him - and they trusted him with their lives. There has to be something there other than Peter's need for company that made them friends, but we don't have any canon that hints at that.

So, they took him in a patronizing way. But he couldn't have been simply their friends, IMO, because he was weak. That doesn't seem like a strong friendship to me, but we do know that they cared about him. They were loyal to him - enough so that they would die for him - and they trusted him with their lives. There has to be something there other than Peter's need for company that made them friends, but we don't have any canon that hints at that.

I think you made an important point. The other Marauders would have died for Peter. I don't take Sirius' statement as lip service only. At least Sirius had a strong moral code he lived or tried to live by. I assume that it was similar with James and - to a certain extent - with Remus. They may have made fun of Peter and patronised him frequently but at the end of the day they had his back and he could count on them.

It's very important to remember they would have died for him. That shows how much loyalty they felt and how much they did care for him...and how much they assumed he would be loyal and would care for them in return.

Regardless of whether they did patronize him, that would hardly justify condemning three people to death. He could have just stopped associating with them if he didn't like the way they treated him.

What kind of person gives into pressure to betray their friends - and their baby son - to be murdered???? :huh:

That is why I believe Voldemort didn't approach Peter immediately with that plan. That didn't occur until a year after Peter was in his service. Giving in to threat of torture or death is easier when all Voldemort is asking of Peter is to pass a bit of information back from the Order.

I'm not getting my point across, I think, about my 'dark seed'. :lol: Movie Sirius said it very well on my behalf: 'it's not like the world is divided into two camps, those who are Death Eaters and those who are not. We all have light and dark within us: what matters is the part we choose to act on.'
Peter, IMO, had a terrible weakness in his character, which he chose to act on, when the pressure was on.

I agree. I thought you meant that he was like young Draco or Snape, both of whom had shown outward and overt signs of ending up death eaters early on. But if the 'dark seed' you are talking about is just "we all have light and dark inside," then I agree entirely.

Remus is my favorite Marauder. I think it’s because he’s the quieter of the four. I’m really glad he got married and had a son, even if he did die a few days later. Only two Marauders had a kid and a wife (unless the other two did something we don’t know about).

I wish we could have seen more of James. For a long time we get an unfair picture of him due to Snape’s memory.

I would love to know exactly what made Peter turn to Voldemort’s side.

I don't think Peter was as close to James and sirius as Lupin was. There isn't any proof of this in the books, it's just the impression i get. I think that at the beginning when the four were in first year Peter probably just decided to hang around with the other three because (as it has been said) they were the cool kids! I think he was seen as more of a side kick than as a friend. When Sirius gives out to Peter for applauding James as he plays with his snitch he says "Put that away, will you before Wormtail wets himself with excitment". I believe this line was included not only to highlight the significant understanding between James and Sirius but also to show that Peter did irritate the others to some extent. He never really fit in with them. I agree. I do think they were close with Peter. They wait for him to learn how to turn into an Animagus and all that, but I do think he the least closest in the group, if you know what I mean. I think there has to be something said for Sirius not cutting Peter out of the group picture. James and Lily must have thought something of him to make him their Secret Keeper.

Remus is my favorite Marauder. I think it’s because he’s the quieter of the four. I’m really glad he got married and had a son, even if he did die a few days later. Only two Marauders had a kid and a wife (unless the other two did something we don’t know about).
No the others had no wife. JKR said that Sirius had no girlfriend when he was younger and while being in Azkaban and in hidding it's unlikely that he got one. Peter's not the guy for a girlfriend in school years or in general and later he had to play "rat", so no chance either for a girl.

I agree. I do think they were close with Peter. They wait for him to learn how to turn into an Animagus and all that, but I do think he the least closest in the group, if you know what I mean. I think there has to be something said for Sirius not cutting Peter out of the group picture. James and Lily must have thought something of him to make him their Secret Keeper.
I never had the feeling that Peter was accepted by James and Sirius like Remus was and hence I'm not sure either if they liked it to wait for him till he managed to transform properly or even if it they supported the idea that he becomes an animagus too. At times it seems that they accept his presense but that they are not really happy about it. They make a lot of fun about him and his character. If they were really friends, would they do that?

Peter's not the guy for a girlfriend in school years or in general and later he had to play "rat", so no chance either for a girl.
Did JKR ever mention Peter not having a girlfriend in his school years? I don't remember. I just remember her saying Sirius never did. I don't see why Peter couldn't have had a girlfriend - he was part of the marauders afterall.

I never had the feeling that Peter was accepted by James and Sirius like Remus was and hence I'm not sure either if they liked it to wait for him till he managed to transform properly or even if it they supported the idea that he becomes an animagus too. At times it seems that they accept his presense but that they are not really happy about it. They make a lot of fun about him and his character. If they were really friends, would they do that?
Well, Sirius and James would have died for Peter. It seemed they cared about him a lot. And friends tease friends all the time. So yes, if they were really friends, they'd make comments like they did to Peter in SWM. It's just friendly teasing - Sirius did the same to James after Lily shouted at him. I never got the impression from SWM that James, Sirius, and Peter were unhappy with Peter's presense.

Did JKR ever mention Peter not having a girlfriend in his school years? I don't remember. I just remember her saying Sirius never did. I don't see why Peter couldn't have had a girlfriend - he was part of the marauders afterall.

We don't have any canon either way. :)


Well, Sirius and James would have died for Peter. It seemed they cared about him a lot. And friends tease friends all the time. So yes, if they were really friends, they'd make comments like they did to Peter in SWM. It's just friendly teasing - Sirius did the same to James after Lily shouted at him. I never got the impression from SWM that James, Sirius, and Peter were unhappy with Peter's presense.

Peter was accepted, definitely. I remember in PoA, Remus said that Peter had a lot of trouble trying to become an Animagus, so Sirius and James being much more talented helped him. If they hadn't cared for him, they would've left him to deal with the problem by himself. True friends help true friends. And James trusted Peter enough to make him Secret Keeper. To trust someone you must first accept them. :)

Peter was accepted, definitely. I remember in PoA, Remus said that Peter had a lot of trouble trying to become an Animagus, so Sirius and James being much more talented helped him. If they hadn't cared for him, they would've left him to deal with the problem by himself. True friends help true friends. And James trusted Peter enough to make him Secret Keeper. To trust someone you must first accept them. :)
:agree: Peter was an accepted member of the marauders. As you said, James and Sirius helped him when he needed help, they trusted him with their lives, and they would have died for him. James, Sirius, and Remus had a strong bond with Peter.

I wish JKR had shown us Peter in a favorable light just once within the series, because it's hard to create a well rounded opinion on a one dimensional character. But I see how that wasn't vital to the plot.

I would love to know exactly what made Peter turn to Voldemort’s side.

We have some canon on this.

"Innocent, but scared!" squealed Pettigrew. "If Voldemort supporers were after me, it was because I put one of their best men in Azkaban - the spy, Sirius Black!"

Black's face contorted.

"How dare you, " he growled, sounding suddenly like the bear-sized dog he had been. "I, a spy for Voldemort? When did I ever sneak around people who were stronger and more powerful than myself? But you, Peter - I'll never understand why I didn't see you were the spy from the start. You always liked big friends who'd look after you, didn't you? It used to be us . . . me and Remus . . . and James. . . . "

[. . .]

"There!" said Pettigrew shrilly, pointing at Ron with his maimed hand. "Thank you! You see, Remus? I have never hurt a hair of Harry's head! Why should I?"

"I'll tell you why," said Black. "Because you never did anything for anyone unless you could see what was in it for you. Voldemort's been in hiding for fifteen years, they say he's half dead. You weren't about to commit murder right under Albus Dumbledore's nose, for a wreck of a wizard who'd lost all of his power, were you? You'd want to be quite sure he was the biggest bully in the playground before you went back to him, wouldn't you? Why else did you find a wizarding family to take you in? Keeping an ear out for news, weren't you, Peter? Just in case your old protector regained strength, and it was safe to rejoin him. . . . "

Nithya: Lily detested mulciber,averyif snape really loved her,why didnt he sacrifice their company for her sake
J.K. Rowling: Well, that is Snape's tragedy. Given his time over again he would not have become a Death Eater, but like many insecure, vulnerable people (like Wormtail) he craved membership of something big and powerful, something impressive.

Hope that helped! :)

I never had the feeling that Peter was accepted by James and Sirius like Remus was and hence I'm not sure either if they liked it to wait for him till he managed to transform properly or even if it they supported the idea that he becomes an animagus too. At times it seems that they accept his presense but that they are not really happy about it. They make a lot of fun about him and his character. If they were really friends, would they do that?

I never felt that way about how Sirius and James treat Peter. Yes, they insult him in SWM, but I saw that as playful teasing, a common occurrence between friends. Fred and George have said many things along those lines to Ron, but in the end they love him. I never got the impression they weren't happy to have Peter in their presence. IMO, even though they joked around with Peter, they still cared about him. Sirius confirmed their loyalty to Peter when he said that they would have died for Peter. People don't usually say throw those things around, so it is pretty clear, IMO, that the other Marauders cared about him enough to risk their lives for him.

I never had the feeling that Peter was accepted by James and Sirius like Remus was and hence I'm not sure either if they liked it to wait for him till he managed to transform properly or even if it they supported the idea that he becomes an animagus too. At times it seems that they accept his presense but that they are not really happy about it. They make a lot of fun about him and his character. If they were really friends, would they do that?

:tu:

The strangest thing for me is all three of them and later Lily were not dunderheads; they were brilliant students who knew enough about the world to refuse Voldemort's offer and also fight against the death eaters. But still they are unable to see through Peter in the 10 years the other 3 know him and the 3 years Lily knew him. Unlike Dumbledore or others in the Order, they moved very closely with Peter and yet none of them read him correctly. Also they go ahead and suspect Remus, mainly because he was a werewolf IMO. It was probably a toss between Sirius from a dark family with a death eater brother and Remus who was a dark creature.

Did JKR ever mention Peter not having a girlfriend in his school years? I don't remember. I just remember her saying Sirius never did. I don't see why Peter couldn't have had a girlfriend - he was part of the marauders afterall.
Like said there is no canon for either way, it's what I think. Yes he was part, but from his character I don't see girls fancying him.

We have some canon on this.

"Innocent, but scared!" squealed Pettigrew. "If Voldemort supporers were after me, it was because I put one of their best men in Azkaban - the spy, Sirius Black!"

Black's face contorted.

"How dare you, " he growled, sounding suddenly like the bear-sized dog he had been. "I, a spy for Voldemort? When did I ever sneak around people who were stronger and more powerful than myself? But you, Peter - I'll never understand why I didn't see you were the spy from the start. You always liked big friends who'd look after you, didn't you? It used to be us . . . me and Remus . . . and James. . . . "

[. . .]

"There!" said Pettigrew shrilly, pointing at Ron with his maimed hand. "Thank you! You see, Remus? I have never hurt a hair of Harry's head! Why should I?"

"I'll tell you why," said Black. "Because you never did anything for anyone unless you could see what was in it for you. Voldemort's been in hiding for fifteen years, they say he's half dead. You weren't about to commit murder right under Albus Dumbledore's nose, for a wreck of a wizard who'd lost all of his power, were you? You'd want to be quite sure he was the biggest bully in the playground before you went back to him, wouldn't you? Why else did you find a wizarding family to take you in? Keeping an ear out for news, weren't you, Peter? Just in case your old protector regained strength, and it was safe to rejoin him. . . . "

Nithya: Lily detested mulciber,averyif snape really loved her,why didnt he sacrifice their company for her sake
J.K. Rowling: Well, that is Snape's tragedy. Given his time over again he would not have become a Death Eater, but like many insecure, vulnerable people (like Wormtail) he craved membership of something big and powerful, something impressive.

Hope that helped! :)



I never felt that way about how Sirius and James treat Peter. Yes, they insult him in SWM, but I saw that as playful teasing, a common occurrence between friends. Fred and George have said many things along those lines to Ron, but in the end they love him. I never got the impression they weren't happy to have Peter in their presence. IMO, even though they joked around with Peter, they still cared about him. Sirius confirmed their loyalty to Peter when he said that they would have died for Peter. People don't usually say throw those things around, so it is pretty clear, IMO, that the other Marauders cared about him enough to risk their lives for him.
I understand why people disagree with me, there are things like the dying for each other things that go against my theory. I just have the feeling that there was something wrong in the relationship between Peter and the others. Maybe it's just me though.

Thanks for the quotes above. Isn't it strange that Sirius told about the bad characteristic of Peter and explicit pointed out the fact that Peter sneaked around people who were stronger and better than him, which was also confirmed by McGonagall earlier. Sirius seemed to hold that against him in the discussion and yet that's how the relationship was between them.

:tu:

The strangest thing for me is all three of them and later Lily were not dunderheads; they were brilliant students who knew enough about the world to refuse Voldemort's offer and also fight against the death eaters. But still they are unable to see through Peter in the 10 years the other 3 know him and the 3 years Lily knew him. Unlike Dumbledore or others in the Order, they moved very closely with Peter and yet none of them read him correctly. Also they go ahead and suspect Remus, mainly because he was a werewolf IMO. It was probably a toss between Sirius from a dark family with a death eater brother and Remus who was a dark creature.
I always had the impression that nobody thought that poor little Peterkins would be able to do such things. Peter was the weakest in their eyes and not the person who would be capable of doing such things IMO, but they underestimated him.

I don't think that they suspected him because he was a werewolf. But I think that they rather did it, because they ruled about Peter for the reasons above. If Sirius had a problem with the fact that Remus is a werewolf, because of his relationship with his family and what they support, I don't think he would have become friend with him in the first place.

I just have the feeling that there was something wrong in the relationship between Peter and the others. Maybe it's just me though.

I also think there was something wrong because it was IMO NOT a friendship among equals. Sirius, Remus and James were equal. Sirius and Remus had problems and they had a past, but still they were at the same level IMO. Peter was waaaay below them. That is why it is surprising to me they trusted him.

I always had the impression that nobody thought that poor little Peterkins would be able to do such things. Peter was the weakest in their eyes and not the person who would be capable of doing such things IMO, but they underestimated him.

I don't think that they suspected him because he was a werewolf. But I think that they rather did it, because they ruled about Peter for the reasons above. If Sirius had a problem with the fact that Remus is a werewolf, because of his relationship with his family and what they support, I don't think he would have become friend with him in the first place.

I cannot think of any other reason they should suspect Remus. If it weren't for the werewolf then it reflects even more poorly on James and Sirius, because they suspewct Remus without any reason.

I think it was because he was a dark creature, they suspected him, and added to that was the fact that they all thought Peter was a sweet boy who did not know how to even go about the traitor thing IMO.

I also think there was something wrong because it was IMO NOT a friendship among equals. Sirius, Remus and James were equal. Sirius and Remus had problems and they had a past, but still they were at the same level IMO. Peter was waaaay below them. That is why it is surprising to me they trusted him.

But why would friends think of their friends as being beneath them? :shrug: There are plenty of friendships that include people who are more and less intelligent than the others. They trusted Peter because they thought he was on the right side, they thought he was a person that would remain as loyal to them as they were to him. Intelligence had nothing to do with it - it was their trust and love for him as a friend that didn't make them realize that Peter only wanted to be around people who had power.

I'll respond to the rest of your post when I write up the essay I have planned for the Marauders. :)

I also think there was something wrong because it was IMO NOT a friendship among equals. Sirius, Remus and James were equal. Sirius and Remus had problems and they had a past, but still they were at the same level IMO. Peter was waaaay below them. That is why it is surprising to me they trusted him.
Exactly that's how I see it as well.

I cannot think of any other reason they should suspect Remus. If it weren't for the werewolf then it reflects even more poorly on James and Sirius, because they suspewct Remus without any reason.

I think it was because he was a dark creature, they suspected him, and added to that was the fact that they all thought Peter was a sweet boy who did not know how to even go about the traitor thing IMO.
Oh I think I understand you now. When you mean that they suspected him because they thought he as a "dark creature" would join the bad guys, then yes that could be the reason, but still I think other things added to it, like him being smart enough to create such plans.



But why would friends think of their friends as being beneath them? :shrug: There are plenty of friendships that include people who are more and less intelligent than the others. They trusted Peter because they thought he was on the right side, they thought he was a person that would remain as loyal to them as they were to him. Intelligence had nothing to do with it - it was their trust and love for him as a friend that didn't make them realize that Peter only wanted to be around people who had power.
All those teasing which goes beyond friendship level IMO, which I'd consider hurtful. James enjoyed the attention he got from him during SWM and continued playing with the Snitch just to see Peter kinda worshipping him. Their both behaviour, Peter looking up at James and James down on Peter, suggests that they are not on the same level.

All those teasing which goes beyond friendship level IMO, which I'd consider hurtful. James enjoyed the attention he got from him during SWM and continued playing with the Snitch just to see Peter kinda worshipping him. Their both behaviour, Peter looking up at James and James down on Peter, suggests that they are not on the same level.

I agree. That's why I find the switch story arch quite weak. It's left me wondering why on earth would James then trust this guy with his wife's and child's lives, and his own. I don't really buy the underestimation explanation, because you don't usually entrust your family's lives to someone on the basis of underestimation, thinking, "Oh, he's doesn't have the guts to go to Voldemor/he's not smart enough to think of a plan to betray us" or whatever they underestimated him for. You don't do that when you life is at stake. I think it would have been far more believable, and dramatic, too, if Peter had been presented as their equal friend with equal respect and regard, but just sightly edgy - then it would have made sense - both why they trusted him and how come he turned around and betrayed them. Portraying him as a complete loser undermined the whole story arch, in my opinion.

I agree. That's why I find the switch story arch quite weak. It's left me wondering why on earth would James then trust this guy with his wife's and child's lives, and his own. I don't really buy the underestimation explanation, because you don't usually entrust your family's lives to someone on the basis of underestimation, thinking, "Oh, he's doesn't have the guts to go to Voldemor/he's not smart enough to think of a plan to betray us" or whatever they underestimated him for. You don't do that when you life is at stake. I think it would have been far more believable, and dramatic, too, if Peter had been presented as their equal friend with equal respect and regard, but just sightly edgy - then it would have made sense - both why they trusted him and how come he turned around and betrayed them. Portraying him as a complete loser undermined the whole story arch, in my opinion.

First of all, there is nothing in the text which indicates that they chose Peter by underestimating him and assuming he was too gutless or dumb to go to Voldemort. The text says they felt Voldemort would not seek out Peter, because he was less talented than the others and thus Voldemort wouldn't believe they would use him as secret keeper. But the mere fact that they did proves that they thought more highly of Peter than they believed Voldemort did (in terms of trustworthiness).

Secondly James and Sirius should not have trusted one another either based on what you've said because Sirius' sarcastic remark he made to James in front of the crowd of people was equally cutting. That is how dudes talk, especially good buddies, sarcastic, put downs, etc., but it is not hurtful. It would be very strange to hear a dude say something comforting and pleasant when their mate (who has been around a werewolf on a zillion full moons) says he couldn't think of five attributes. :lol: Jo was simply trying to write a realistic portrayal of how these mates relate and she did a good job. I don't know what two girls would say to each other in that situation - but she hit the group dynamic of four mates right on.

All those teasing which goes beyond friendship level IMO, which I'd consider hurtful. James enjoyed the attention he got from him during SWM and continued playing with the Snitch just to see Peter kinda worshipping him. Their both behaviour, Peter looking up at James and James down on Peter, suggests that they are not on the same level.

James was showing off because Lily was around, not so Peter would worship him. And Lily was watching James too because he had just gotten the snitch he told Sirius (who hadn't seen it before) and yet Lily accuses him later of 'playing with his snitch to show off'. Well he was showing off, for her and she noticed. :lol:. Sirius told Harry that James always showed off when Lily was around. James didn't have a crush on Peter after all, he wouldn't feel a need to impress him.

First of all, there is nothing in the text which indicates that they chose Peter by underestimating him and assuming he was too gutless or dumb to go to Voldemort.

Sorry, I was referring to the explanation often given on these boards, that the reason he screwed them up was that they underestimated them. For it doesn't work.

The text says they felt Voldemort would not seek out Peter, because he was less talented than the others and thus Voldemort wouldn't believe they would use him as secret keeper. But the mere fact that they did proves that they thought more highly of Peter than they believed Voldemort did (in terms of trustworthiness).

Actually, if they did choose him on this basis, it shows that they did believe he was a talantless thing. That's the brilliant part of the plan, isn't it? It's all based on their low opinion of Peter and hence issuing hope that Voldemort wouldn't suppose them capable of trusting someone so untalanted.

Secondly James and Sirius should not have trusted one another either based on what you've said because Sirius' sarcastic remark he made to James in front of the crowd of people was equally cutting. That is how dudes talk, especially good buddies, sarcastic, put downs, etc., but it is not hurtful.

The difference is that Sirius was not staring at James in admiration, and James knew it. Harry even remarks that it seems that Sirius is the only one his father doesn't make a display for. Which indicates a higher level of respect, quite clearly.

I cannot think of any other reason they should suspect Remus. If it weren't for the werewolf then it reflects even more poorly on James and Sirius, because they suspewct Remus without any reason.

I think it was because he was a dark creature, they suspected him, and added to that was the fact that they all thought Peter was a sweet boy who did not know how to even go about the traitor thing IMO.

That was how Snape thought, not the Marauders, who had changed to animagi for their friend Remus. There is absolutely nothing in all of canon to support the idea that Remus' friends would mistrust him because he was a werewolf. And to even suggest that they would think of him as a "dark creature" is, so contrary to canon, you need to provide some type of support for your statement, imo, because it sounds like you are merely intending to incite an argument.

James was showing off because Lily was around, not so Peter would worship him. And Lily was watching James too because he had just gotten the snitch he told Sirius (who hadn't seen it before) and yet Lily accuses him later of 'playing with his snitch to show off'. Well he was showing off, for her and she noticed. Sirius told Harry that James always showed off when Lily was around. James didn't have a crush on Peter after all, he wouldn't feel a need to impress him.

The fact that Peter was gaping at him in admiration sets an hierarchy, as far as I can see. And I got the impression James did enjoy that admiration.

There is absolutely nothing in all of canon to support the idea that Remus' friends would mistrust him because he was a werewolf.

Wow, wickedwickedboy, we agree!!

And to even suggest that they would think of him as a "dark creature" is, so contrary to canon, you need to provide some type of support for your statement, imo, because it sounds like you are merely intending to incite an argument.

She could be basing it on the fact that they didn't trust him to make him Secret Keeper or to even tell him about the switch. I think The_Green_Woods may just be looking for a reason for this mistrust. Although I personally believe there was no istrust whatsoever, just a necessary exclusion of Remus for plot reasons. But I can see why The-Green_Woods would feel that way.

Actually, if they did choose him on this basis, it shows that they did believe he was a talantless thing. That's the brilliant part of the plan, isn't it? It's all based on their low opinion of Peter and hence issuing hope that Voldemort wouldn't suppose them capable of trusting someone so untalanted.

It is one thing to consider your friend has less talent than the rest of you (which Peter had realistically showed up to that point) and another to assume he is gutless and dumb. You inferred the latter with no support from the text.

The difference is that Sirius was not staring at James in admiration, and James knew it. Harry even remarks that it seems that Sirius is the only one his father doesn't make a display for. Which indicates a higher level of respect, quite clearly.

That makes no difference whatsoever to my point. Sirius put James down in front of a crowd of people - that is embarrassing. That just proves the way this group spoke to one another. And Harry's impression was that he "felt" that Sirius was the only one his dad would listen to - but what does Harry know? He wasn't in their group and he had no idea. Harry's "impression" can no more support your inference than whether or not Sirius was staring in admiration. As it turned out, Remus had quite a bit of power if he exerted himself which he later informed Harry of and Sirius admitted to. That is in the canon. (OOTP)

She could be basing it on the fact that they didn't trust him to make him Secret Keeper or to even tell him about the switch. I think The_Green_Woods may just be looking for a reason for this mistrust. Although I personally believe there was no istrust whatsoever, just a necessary exclusion of Remus for plot reasons. But I can see why The-Green_Woods would feel that way.

The reason is because having Remus would be the same as having Sirius, from Voldemort's perspective. That was all they were concerned about. Sirius and Remus were both talented, smart, etc., and Voldemort would be likely to go after one of them before Peter. Proven by the fact that Voldemort DID go after Peter as the least talented one in order to turn him.

*Glad we agreed on something. :lol:*

And as an aside, guess what I have next term? "Literature and the Law" - using the greats to analyse what they have to say about legal issues. I thought about you when I signed up for it. :)

It is one thing to consider your friend has less talent than the rest of you (which Peter had realistically showed up to that point) and another to assume he is gutless and dumb. You inferred the latter with no support from the text.

No, I did not. As I explained in my previous post, by this I was referring to the explanation I had often read on these boards given by readers (he betrayed them because they underestimated him), AND I specifically said I did not agree with it.

And Harry's impression was that he "felt" that Sirius was the only one his dad would listen to - but what does Harry know? He wasn't in their group and he had no idea.

Having Harry feel that is one of the devices used in that scene, which is very short and has to betray too many things. I don't think Harry feeling that would be there if it were false or redundant.

Harry's "impression" can no more support your inference than whether or not Sirius was staring in admiration.

Yes it can, because it's on page for a reason.

As it turned out, Remus had quite a bit of power if he exerted himself which he later informed Harry of and Sirius admitted to. That is in the canon. (OOTP)

I lost you here.

The reason is because having Remus would be the same as having Sirius, from Voldemort's perspective. That was all they were concerned about. Sirius and Remus were both talented, smart, etc., and Voldemort would be likely to go after one of them before Peter. Proven by the fact that Voldemort DID go after Peter as the least talented one in order to turn him.

Actually Peter went to him.

This still doesn't explain why they didn't tell him about the switch.

No, I did not. As I explained in my previous post, by this I was referring to the explanation I had often read on these boards given by readers (he betrayed them because they underestimated him), AND I specifically said I did not agree with it.

Ah, sorry, I misunderstood. :)

Having Harry feel that is one of the devices used in that scene, which is very short and has to betray too many things. I don't think Harry feeling that would be there if it were false or redundant.

Well it failed as a device becuase of Harry's lack of knowledge of the group and also because Harry misinterpreted many things about that scene afterward (his mum and dad hated one another; James forced Lily to marry him, etc.). And also because later Sirius admitted that Remus often did speak to them and left them feeling ashamed of themselves. So apparently Remus did carry weight with James.

Actually Peter went to him.

That is what Sirius accused him of. Peter said Voldemort came to him - which makes more sense actually.

This still doesn't explain why they didn't tell him about the switch.

Think about it. The switch was made at the last minute they said. There was only 1 week during which there was a secret keeper at all and all week it was Sirius until the last minute. Peter would not tell Remus; Sirius would not tell Remus - both for their very own good reasons. Remus could not access James and Lily and so they could not tell him either.

Well it failed as a device becuase of Harry's lack of knowledge of the group and also because Harry misinterpreted many things about that scene afterward (his mum and dad hated one another; James forced Lily to marry him, etc.).

The difference is those things were refuted later. Harry feeling his Dad enjoyed the attention of Peter and that Sirius was the only one he didn't show off for was there, it was on page, it had a purpose, and it was not refuted later by anything. From a literary standpoint, it means it is to be taken as a true feeling. Otherwise it makes no sense to be even included. Like Harry feeling Hermione did snog Krum. Why the internal assertion of not to prompt the readers to the right answer?

And also because later Sirius admitted that Remus often did speak to them and left them feeling ashamed of themselves. So apparently Remus did carry weight with James.

I don't understand what you're talking about. I never said he didn't.

Peter would not tell Remus; Sirius would not tell Remus - both for their very own good reasons.

What reasons?

Oh I think I understand you now. When you mean that they suspected him because they thought he as a "dark creature" would join the bad guys, then yes that could be the reason, but still I think other things added to it, like him being smart enough to create such plans.

I think it was the dark creature along with his magical ability that made Sirius suspect Remus and James and Lily agreed with them.

All those teasing which goes beyond friendship level IMO, which I'd consider hurtful. James enjoyed the attention he got from him during SWM and continued playing with the Snitch just to see Peter kinda worshipping him. Their both behaviour, Peter looking up at James and James down on Peter, suggests that they are not on the same level.

:tu:

Actually, if they did choose him on this basis, it shows that they did believe he was a talantless thing. That's the brilliant part of the plan, isn't it? It's all based on their low opinion of Peter and hence issuing hope that Voldemort wouldn't suppose them capable of trusting someone so untalanted.

:tu:

She could be basing it on the fact that they didn't trust him to make him Secret Keeper or to even tell him about the switch. I think The_Green_Woods may just be looking for a reason for this mistrust. Although I personally believe there was no istrust whatsoever, just a necessary exclusion of Remus for plot reasons. But I can see why The-Green_Woods would feel that way.

You are spot on, Yoana. :) I am looking for reasons to see why they would exclude Remus from the whole SK thing. And I also think the plot did not need it. Jo could have just made Peter the SK doing the switch with Remus's knowledge. As long as Peter was alive and well, Remus could not betray the secret, because he was not the SK. So Jo did not need Remus to be out of the issue IMO.

Both Sirius and Remus were suspect IMO by Dumbledore and the otehrs in the Order who knew about the traitor. Sirius because he came from the Black family that also gave the wolrd Bellatrix, Narcissa who married Lucius another DE adn Regulus. I don't know if Sirius's father was also a DE. So Sirius was under suspicion as the perosn close to the Potters.

The other would have been Remus because he was a werewolf. We see the prejudice and the fear surrounding them and also the fact they lose control over their minds during the full moon and with all this bakground, he, too would have been suspect when Dumbeldore came with the traitor infromation.

So James had to choose. He chose Sirius over Remus IMO. Because none of them thought Peter was good enough to work for Voldemort. So Sirius became the SK and that was James telling the world he trusted Sirius. Then without anybody's knowledge they made the switch, so that Remus would not come and attack the Potters by himself. He cannot bring Voldemort, but he could get into GH. And even if he wanted to take the SK to Voldemort, so that Voldemort could break him and get the information, he would take Sirius, and Peter would be safe; no one in their right minds would ever suspect that Peter would be made SK. He was a weak, talentless thing after all. JMO

This is what I infer from the books. :)

WWB:: I have given what I infer from the Books. :)

The difference is those things were refuted later. Harry feeling his Dad enjoyed the attention of Peter and that Sirius was the only one he didn't show off for was there, it was on page, it had a purpose, and it was not refuted later by anything. From a literary standpoint, it means it is to be taken as a true feeling. Otherwise it makes no sense to be even included. Like Harry feeling Hermione did snog Krum. Why the internal assertion of not to prompt the readers to the right answer?

Harry didn't say that he felt James didn't show off for Sirius - where did you get that? Harry said he felt Sirius was the only one who could get his father to stop playing with the snitch. As if Sirius was the only one who could 'tell James anything and James would listen'. That is what was refuted when it was evident that Remus too carried weight in that regard.


What reasons?

Sirius did not trust Remus and Remus did not trust Sirius because based on the fact that they were both talented wizards and smart, etc., they felt one another had to be the traitor, so Sirius wouldn't tell Remus of the switch. Peter of course had plans to tell Voldemort of the switch and then set up Sirius afterward as the betrayer (I am thinking Voldy likely had a hand in this plan). He had no intention of telling anyone, least of all Remus that he had been the secret keeper.

**I added a note for you above Yoana, I dont know if you saw it, but have a look...I have decided to broaden my scope. :)

And I also think the plot did not need it. Jo could have just made Peter the SK doing the switch with Remus's knowledge. As long as Peter was alive and well, Remus could not betray the secret, because he was not the SK. So Jo did not need Remus to be out of the issue IMO.

But if Remus knew, Sirius wouldn't have been in prison and the whole third book couldn't have happened.

*Glad we agreed on something. :lol:*

Me too. It may not seem so, but I love to agree.

And as an aside, guess what I have next term? "Literature and the Law" - using the greats to analyse what they have to say about legal issues. I thought about you when I signed up for it.

I'm honoured. :)

But if Remus knew, Sirius wouldn't have been in prison and the whole third book couldn't have happened.

:tu:

You are correct, but there is a contradictory point in POA. Sirius says he suspected Remus and Remus in turn says he also thought Sirius was the traitor for 13 years. That conversation would not have been there at all IMO.

While yes, the third book could not have happened if Remus knew, there were other ways JKR could have excluded Remus from not knowing about the switch. He could have gone on a long trip for work for the Order; he could have been injured and in St. Mungo's. But we are not told Remus was not suspected. We are told Remus was suspected and I feel Sirius would have told James. That's how I arrived at my theory.

'Remus!' Pettigrew squeaked, turning toupin instead, writhing imploringly in front of him. "You don't believ this...Wouldn't Sirius have told you they'd changed the plan?'

'Not if he thought I was the spy Peter', said Lupin, 'I assume that's why you didn't tell me Sirius?' he asked casually over Peter's head.

'Forgive me, Remus' said Black.

'Not at all, Padfoot, old friend', said Lupin, who was now rolling up his sleeves. 'And you will in turn, forgive me for believeing you were the spy?'

'Of course', said Black, and the ghost of a grin flitted across his guant face. Bold Mine

Think about it. The switch was made at the last minute they said. There was only 1 week during which there was a secret keeper at all and all week it was Sirius until the last minute. Peter would not tell Remus; Sirius would not tell Remus - both for their very own good reasons. Remus could not access James and Lily and so they could not tell him either.

This is not how we are told in POA. We are told that Sirius suspected Remus and Remus, Sirius. I presume Sirius would have shared his suspicions with James.

James was showing off because Lily was around, not so Peter would worship him. And Lily was watching James too because he had just gotten the snitch he told Sirius (who hadn't seen it before) and yet Lily accuses him later of 'playing with his snitch to show off'. Well he was showing off, for her and she noticed. Sirius told Harry that James always showed off when Lily was around. James didn't have a crush on Peter after all, he wouldn't feel a need to impress him. The fact that Peter was gaping at him in admiration sets an hierarchy, as far as I can see. And I got the impression James did enjoy that admiration.
To quote the book:

Every time James made a particularly difficult catch, Wormtail gasped and applauded. After five minutes of this, Harry wondered why James didn't tell Wormtail to get a grip on himself, but James seemed to be enjoying the attention.
...
"Put that away, will you," said Sirius finally, as James made a fine catch and Wormtail let out a cheer, "before Wormtail wets himself with excitement."
So yes it maybe was done to show-off to Lily, but you can't deny that he also enjoyed it that Wormtail was worshiping him.

I agree. That's why I find the switch story arch quite weak. It's left me wondering why on earth would James then trust this guy with his wife's and child's lives, and his own. I don't really buy the underestimation explanation, because you don't usually entrust your family's lives to someone on the basis of underestimation, thinking, "Oh, he's doesn't have the guts to go to Voldemor/he's not smart enough to think of a plan to betray us" or whatever they underestimated him for. You don't do that when you life is at stake. I think it would have been far more believable, and dramatic, too, if Peter had been presented as their equal friend with equal respect and regard, but just sightly edgy - then it would have made sense - both why they trusted him and how come he turned around and betrayed them. Portraying him as a complete loser undermined the whole story arch, in my opinion.
I actually think the plan itself wasn't so bad. To choose the one people wouldn't suspect is not a bad idea in general, but in this case to chose someone like Peter I don't understand as well.

I agree. That's why I find the switch story arch quite weak. It's left me wondering why on earth would James then trust this guy with his wife's and child's lives, and his own. I don't really buy the underestimation explanation, because you don't usually entrust your family's lives to someone on the basis of underestimation, thinking, "Oh, he's doesn't have the guts to go to Voldemor/he's not smart enough to think of a plan to betray us" or whatever they underestimated him for. You don't do that when you life is at stake. I think it would have been far more believable, and dramatic, too, if Peter had been presented as their equal friend with equal respect and regard, but just sightly edgy - then it would have made sense - both why they trusted him and how come he turned around and betrayed them. Portraying him as a complete loser undermined the whole story arch, in my opinion.

I agree with this. I find the whole Peter thing really, really unsatisfactory. :shrug:

I see nothing in this character, as he is presented to us in canon, that explains to me why on earth the other three Marauders would ever have liked and respected him as one of their own. I accept that they would be kind to him and tolerate him. But to trust him to that extent ... I see nothing in canon that even hints at Peter warranting such trust.

I've said this before: I adore JKR's characters, I really do, but sometimes she uses them just to serve the plot. Peter is the outstanding example of this. He has no motive for betraying James and Lily. Not one that flies with me. I don't buy that he was so scared of Voldemort that he felt he had no other choice. I know that's what the text says but it's a wafer-thin reason when one takes all of Peter's behaviour into account. It's not just the sheer monstrosity and enormity of his betrayal, but the utterly calculated and callous way in which he then frames Sirius, and , what's more, his continued service to Voldemort! I mean, Peter actually ties Harry up in the graveyard and offers him up to be tortured by Voldemort -- the son of his best friend. :wow: :(

Is this guy really as scared as he claims to be or just a really shrewd little tactician?

I really wish the text provided us with a convincing motive for Peter's betrayal. Because it's such an amazingly dark story and it lies at the heart of the saga, of course.

I have my own theories of a malevolent Peter privately nursing an intense jealousy of James for years, a growing resentment against the two glamorous Marauders who were superior to him ... :wow: :( Now, that's dark ... :evil:

... but there's nothing whatsoever in canon to back my theory up. ;) :lol:

It would make great fanfiction though. :D

That was how Snape thought, not the Marauders, who had changed to animagi for their friend Remus. There is absolutely nothing in all of canon to support the idea that Remus' friends would mistrust him because he was a werewolf. And to even suggest that they would think of him as a "dark creature" is, so contrary to canon, you need to provide some type of support for your statement, imo, because it sounds like you are merely intending to incite an argument.
I don't think it's too far fetched to suspect Remus because he's a werewolf. You see traitors can are are among people who know eachother for years. Furthermore are werewolves "officially" dark creatures and Wizards hardly treated them in a good way. Voldemort gathered around him dark creatures and even if Remus was shown as a good guy, you cannot see in his mind and see if he wouldn't join him in the end. After all no explanations were given why he was suspected and it's again such thing were everybody can make up their own opinion about it.

To quote the book:

Every time James made a particularly difficult catch, Wormtail gasped and applauded. After five minutes of this, Harry wondered why James didn't tell Wormtail to get a grip on himself, but James seemed to be enjoying the attention.
...
"Put that away, will you," said Sirius finally, as James made a fine catch and Wormtail let out a cheer, "before Wormtail wets himself with excitement."
So yes it maybe was done to show-off to Lily, but you can't deny that he also enjoyed it that Wormtail was worshiping him.

But that ignores the fact that Harry was an onlooker. James appears to be enjoying himself - we don't know why, anymore than Harry does. He is guessing - but he has no idea that Lily is just down the way watching. Would not that make James enjoy himself? We know she watched, she commented about him showing off with the snitch and he had just gotten it, so she saw him doing it. Later we are told by Sirius that James always showed off when Lily was around - not when Peter was there to admire him (which would be near always).


I actually think the plan itself wasn't so bad. To choose the one people wouldn't suspect is not a bad idea in general, but in this case to chose someone like Peter I don't understand as well.

It is a great plan, unless your friend is out to betray you.


This is not how we are told in POA. We are told that Sirius suspected Remus and Remus, Sirius. I presume Sirius would have shared his suspicions with James.

Well you are of course free to guess anything you like, I am just saying that it is not canon. But you also said you guess that James agreed with Sirius - that is two guesses, one based on the other. Then you guess that either Remus was lying in DH (and making James look bad with his lie) or that Remus didn't know James didn't trust him) which is a third guess. Then you chastise him based on those three guesses and that is what I don't understand.

I agree with this. I find the whole Peter thing really, really unsatisfactory. :shrug:

I see nothing in this character, as he is presented to us in canon, that explains to me why on earth the other three Marauders would ever have liked and respected him as one of their own. I accept that they would be kind to him and tolerate him. But to trust him to that extent ... I see nothing in canon that even hints at Peter warranting such trust.

I've said this before: I adore JKR's characters, I really do, but sometimes she uses them just to serve the plot. Peter is the outstanding example of this. He has no motive for betraying James and Lily. Not one that flies with me. I don't buy that he was so scared of Voldemort that he felt he had no other choice. I know that's what the text says but it's a wafer-thin reason when one takes all of Peter's behaviour into account. It's not just the sheer monstrosity and enormity of his betrayal, but the utterly calculated and callous way in which he then frames Sirius, and , what's more, his continued service to Voldemort! I mean, Peter actually ties Harry up in the graveyard and offers him up to be tortured by Voldemort -- the son of his best friend. :wow:

I completely agree with that. :tu:

Perhaps reasons for their trust in Peter was never hinted at because there wasn't really any reason for it. They just did. Maybe all of them just made a group mistake of trusting him?

But that ignores the fact that Harry was an onlooker. James appears to be enjoying himself - we don't know why, anymore than Harry does. He is guessing - but he has no idea that Lily is just down the way watching. Would not that make James enjoy himself? We know she watched, she commented about him showing off with the snitch and he had just gotten it, so she saw him doing it. Later we are told by Sirius that James always showed off when Lily was around - not when Peter was there to admire him (which would be near always).
You're right that it's what Harry saw and what HE thought, but then Sirius made that remark, which I also quoted for that purpose. And he's James friend and at that time he knew James better than his own son did. Sirius was also stating that James did it to please Peter. If it was for Lily only, why should he tell James to stop because Peter will wet himself?

I completely agree with that. :tu:

Thanks. :D

Maybe all of them just made a group mistake of trusting him?

That is honestly what I think.

I see no point in blaming James for making Peter the SK ... the plot demands it, among other things. :p

Besides, I don't believe people are to blamed for trusting other people they think are their friends.

But, yep ... I think the trouble between Peter and the other Marauders goes way, way back. That is the only way I can possibly make sense of his incredible duplicity and his cleverness in pulling it off. What antipathy was fuelling all of that, we wonders, yes we wonders?

I'm back to my fanfic again. :D

You're right that it's what Harry saw and what HE thought, but then Sirius made that remark, which I also quoted for that purpose. And he's James friend and at that time he knew James better than his own son did. Sirius was also stating that James did it to please Peter. If it was for Lily only, why should he tell James to stop because Peter will wet himself?

Because Peter was clapping and cheering? He was going to wet himself, lol. Harry even wanted to tell him to get a clue. But that was not for James' sake, that was for Peter's sake. James' motive was what we were speaking of. Whenever Lily was around he couldn't help himself but showoff. She was around, that is what he was doing. That it also thrilled Peter was coincidental. I don't think James "didn't like it" because Peter clapping or whatever he was doing would only add to James' showing off to Lily. Plus, he had just gotten the thing, he was likely just eager to try it out also - but with Lily around, it make it all the better.

Can we agree to disagree on this matter? :err:

Someone pointed out before that Sirius was an Auror. Do I miss something? I can't remember reading about it.

Can we agree to disagree on this matter? :err:

Someone pointed out before that Sirius was an Auror. Do I miss something? I can't remember reading about it.


An Auror? I'm pretty sure JK Rowling said Sirius was a full time Order fighter, along with James and Lily and Remus.

James, Lily, Remus, and Sirius were all full time fighters in the Order of the Phoenix; they didn't have paying occupations, being people of moral courage and conviction, and James supported all of them with his ample inheritance. :)

As for the current debate, I would agree that James was showing off with the stolen snitch because Lily was around, and he wanted to impress her because of his crush on her, not merely because he wanted Peter to stroke his ego; James never asked Peter to drool over him, and I have a feeling that he enjoyed praise and attention from everyone, so I don't feel it had anything to with Peter personally. Peter himself may have chosen to ostentatiously "hero-worship" James and Sirius, but there is nothing in canon to suggest that they ordered him around like an inferior, the way, say, Draco did to Crabbe and Goyle. James and Sirius included Peter, the chubby, less talented, outcast boy in all of their activities and assisted him in becoming an animagus; they were hardly poor friends to him because they made some off-hand, teasing remarks to him, IMO.

I see no point in blaming James for making Peter the SK ... the plot demands it, among other things. :p

It is Remus saying he was suspected in POA, which makes me think that Sirius told James and they made the switch. The problem was not suspecting Remus; there is not enough reason for them to IMO; it looks to me as if they used the process of elimination to make the switch more than anything else. Sirius could not be, (how James and Lily decided that I don't know; perhaps James was as sure of Sirius as he was of himself) and then that left Remus and Peter IMO. Peter was chosen because no one would eve think to suspect him; and so that left Remus.

The plot demands that Remus did not know. That I feel could have been handled in many ways, as I wrote in a previous post. :)

It is canon that Sirius and Remus suspected each other; it is also canon Remus did not know about the switch. I interpreted it this way. I am willing to be convinced otherwise, if I have missed somthing in the books as that happens frequently. :)

Besides, I don't believe people are to blamed for trusting other people they think are their friends.

James trusted Sirius so much that I think he went along with Siirus's suspicions that Remus was the traitor and switched. I also don't think people are to be blamed for trusting their friends, unless they have information that one friend is the enemy as did the Potters here.

But, yep ... I think the trouble between Peter and the other Marauders goes way, way back. That is the only way I can possibly make sense of his incredible duplicity and his cleverness in pulling it off. What antipathy was fuelling all of that, we wonders, yes we wonders?

Peter was inherently weak and a coward IMO. It is a wonder no one saw through him. For over 10 years he managed to put on an act that fooled the other three Marauders IMO. And Lily, too, seems to be taken in by Peter.

Well you are of course free to guess anything you like, I am just saying that it is not canon. But you also said you guess that James agreed with Sirius

Sure! Sirius and James are shown to be brothers in the books. From what I read, I felt that both of them were very, very close; almost like brothers. That's the impression Sirius gives me about James anyway. Such an important thing like switching SK would not be taken by Siius alone is another thing I understood from the books. So from that I presumed Sirius would have told James about his suspicion, and James agreed becuase they make the switch and Remus did not know. That's canon. And Sirius says he suspected Remus and Remus says he suspected Sirius. That's also canon.

- that is two guesses, one based on the other. Then you guess that either Remus was lying in DH (and making James look bad with his lie) or that Remus didn't know James didn't trust him) which is a third guess.

I don't think I said anything like this.

Perhaps reasons for their trust in Peter was never hinted at because there wasn't really any reason for it. They just did. Maybe all of them just made a group mistake of trusting him?

I agree there seems to be no reason. I think the sole reason was the plot. But in my humble opinion, Jo could have made it a bit more believable by providing an actual reason for it.

I think it was a plot device, too. A lot of PoA had troublesome plot devices. For instance: Lupin not telling Harry about how close he was with James for quite some time; Lupin, not telling Dumbledore that Sirius was a animagus; Lupin forgetting his potion; Fred and George never noticing Pettigrew sleeping with Ron when they used the map--they had two previous years to notice him; Snape, getting hysterical and literally foaming at the mouth so the kids couldn't explain about Sirius and Pettigrew.

Actually, I see reasons for them to trust Peter. They were with him for seven years at school, and a few outside of school. In all that time, he appeared to have been a loyal friend. He stood out from the crowd when he didn't recoil from Remus for what he was, and he kept the secret all those years. He worked really hard to become an animagus, which is really difficult, even for an adult, and it was said he wasn't nearly as talented as James and Sirius were, but he still tried enough to make it work. And then pitch in all the pranking and sneaking around - that kind of thing draws people together, makes them trust each other. I mean, look at that picture in Sirius's room in DH - he was a part of the group, a true Marauder (at the time :/).

So there was all that, and generally he truly didn't seem the type to be a Death Eater, when compared to people like Lucius. I don't think it was unfounded, or just trust for the sake of trust.

I think it was a plot device, too. A lot of PoA had troublesome plot devices. For instance: Lupin not telling Harry about how close he was with James for quite some time; Lupin, not telling Dumbledore that Sirius was a animagus; Lupin forgetting his potion; Fred and George never noticing Pettigrew sleeping with Ron when they used the map--they had two previous years to notice him; Snape, getting hysterical and literally foaming at the mouth so the kids couldn't explain about Sirius and Pettigrew.

This is a major criticism that non-Potterites have with the books. My lecturer for example thinks they are 'badly written' because of all the troublesome plotholes. :sigh:

This is a major criticism that non-Potterites have with the books. My lecturer for example thinks they are 'badly written' because off all the troublesome plotholes. :sigh:

Well, you could say s/he has a point. There are plotholes, and PoA displays some pretty obvious ones. Surely there are ways to excuse them and find way around them, but they fact that we need to fill the holes testified to the existence fo such holes.

Well, you could say s/he has a point. There are plotholes, and PoA displays some pretty obvious ones. Surely there are ways to excuse them and find way around them, but they fact that we need to fill the holes testified to the existence fo such holes.

Agreed. :)

But nevertheless I still love HP, just hate the fact that there are so many plotholes!

How did James' and Sirius' particularly close friendship influence Remus and Peter? Did they feel left out or inferior? Yeah, I think Remus felt like the outside guy looking in. Though when it came to bullying Snape, he drew the line and separated himself from James and Sirius. Peter didn't really have the marbles to get that James and Sirius often made a mockery of him. If he did, I think he would have stuck up for himself.
Why was Remus the main suspect in 1981? Maybe because of his being a Werewolf and Harry being a defenseless baby. Did Peter have a walk-over to discredit Remus if he did so at all? Oh yeah, definitely.
James, Sirius and Peter became Animagi for Remus. Was this noble or adventurous? I honestly think James and Sirius did it to make Remus feel like less of an outcast. Plus there was that "what does it feel like" "this is so cool" aspect influencing them. As for Peter, Monkey See Monkey Do. What James did, Peter did. If James wore florescent Purple hair, leggings and talked like a Valley Gurl, Peter would.
What did the other Marauders think about James' obsession with Lily? "James is in love with Lily". "And they Call it Puppy Love". I honestly think they thought of him as having a huge crush and would never get noticed by Lily.
How did Lily influence the dynamics within the Marauders? Maybe her presence made them act more like gentlemen. However, at first I think James acted like a love crazed Puppy. I don't think he would have been able to put two words together. Maybe she calmed them down somewhat. I really don't know.
James chose Sirius as godfather. Were Remus and Peter understanding or hurt by this decision? Remus would have been delighted for Sirius. In his mind he didn't need to be Harry's Godfather to love him like a Son. He didn't need a title(though it speaks volumes about how close James and Sirius were) to feel important. As for Peter, I don't think he really cared as long as he was looked out for and catered to.
Peter betrayed his friends. Was he ever happy with this decision and do you think that his friends would be able to forgive him if they had the chance? Peter was a cowardly little rat. Sorry, but it's true. He did what suited Peter. If it meant betraying The Marauders, he did it. Yeah, so one of them was killed, oh well, at least he wasn't hurt in the process. Peter was happy as long as people catered to his every little whim. A prime example of this was when he was Snape's "Servant". He was livid at being treated worse than a House Elf. I don't think Peter gave a Rat's tush about his decision until Crookshanks hunted him down and cornered him. He didn't care until Sirius demanded that Ron hand over "Scabbers" and revealed him for the Rat he was. He was caught, he was going to pay. People were mad at him, they weren't taking care of that poor "little lump" Peter. His true colours shined when he transformed into a Rat and fled from the Shrieking Shack. As for James, Sirius and Remus forgiving him, I highly doubt it. If James had survived, I know he wouldn't be able to forgive Peter for betraying him. This isn't a "oops, I kinda let it slip you do a really bad Karaoke version of Journey while wearing underwear on your head" I'm so embarassed stuff. Peter left bread crumbs leading Voldemort to the Potter's doorstep. Lily died because of him. The only thing Peter was sorry about was being caught. I highly doubt Sirius would forgive him. He was labelled a Criminal and had a death sentence hanging over his head because of Peter. If Peter had REALLY cared, he would have turned himself in and confessed. As for Remus, it's kind of a hard call to make. He wasn't in any physical danger because of Peter's actions. However, James and Lily were dead, Harry an Orphan and Remus was in Azkaban with a Life Sentence because of Peter. Again, he forgave Snape for "letting it slip" he was a Werewolf. Even if it was to protect the Students, it was pretty selfish of Snape to turn Remus in. Either way, Remus did forgive Snape. Now that speaks volumes about him. However, in this case because Peter's actions affect people he loved and cared about, I doubt it. He was the kind of Character who didn't care what happened to him as long as his Family was safe. You could say practically anything about him and he might be insulted, but if you were to harm his Family, look out!! Again, I'm NOT trying to minimize anyone's actions. I'm just trying to make a comparison here.
Was joining the Order a joint decision or was peer pressure involved?For instance, did James and Sirius lead the way and Remus and Peter follow? I definitely see Peter joining ONLY because James and Sirius (his body guards) had joined The Order. Peter was a Coward and hid behind James and Sirius, so whatever they did, Peter did. Honestly, I don't even think there was any thought to it at all. He kind of did that MSMD(Monkey See, Monkey Do) thing. As for Remus, he probably was asked to join and did so, even if James or Sirius hadn't.
The Marauders had a very hostile relationship with Snape. Would this have been different if Snape had been sorted into Gryffindor? Oh God, it would have been worse. Severus was doomed the moment he entered their CabinDid the Marauders antagonise other students that were into the Dark Arts as well or did they single out Snape from the start? Sirius told Harry that James made Snape his special project. Even without Sirius saying this, you can tell Severus was singled out to be bullied. If other Students were bullied, there would have been much more severe consequences for their actions. When it's one Student, they're often told to "Ignore it", "Walk Away" and to stop doing the stuff they're doing. If any action is taken, it's kind of like an "Ok, we spoke to the Boys, gave them Detention" to give the impression the Teachers aren't just sitting on their hands. However, if there had been other Students, I feel their parents would have complained and raised %#@*. The Staff would have taken a much more serious approach to have made it known bullying would NOT be tolerated. Snape wouldn't have felt the same amount of rage he still feels years later. To be bullied and know there are others is one thing. At least you don't feel like you're the only one because you're different. You realize they're a bunch of arrogant jerks and think they're better than everyone else. But to be the ONLY one being bullied is horrible.
How do the Marauders compare to Fred and George? Do you think that they, and especially James and Sirius, were worse or just as funny as the Weasley twins? They were worse than Fred and George. Fred and George never humiliated anyone like James and Sirius did with Snape. They didn't seek out to ostricize another Student, hunt them down on a daily basis and didn't thrive off making their life a living hell. Okay, so they did terrorize Umbridge with the dragon firework, but she'd been physically abusive to Harry and other Students and enjoyed it. Even then, they didn't lay a hand on her or really humiliate her.
Did Deathly Hallows change your mind about the Marauders? Not really no. There Do you think that they were portrayed favourably or came out badly? As Adults, very favourably. Again, as kids, not so much.
Which Marauder do you like best and what are the traits that endear him to you? My favourite Marauder was Remus Lupin. It was the fact he was so physically different from others which endeared him to me. His Werewolf disorder was like a Disability to him. Because he was PHYSICALLY different, people didn't take the chance to get to know him, except Lily. Because of this, he knew how it felt to be ostricized and didn't judge people for who they were. His opinion of Severus Snape is a great example. He tells Harry in HBP that he neither likes or dislikes him. Did the other Marauders appreciate these traits? Yes, I think James and Sirius regarded Remus as the older Brother they never had. Even though he was a member of the Marauders, he backed off when it came to bullying Snape. He also didn't high tail it and pretend he wasn't there to avoid getting in trouble.

Why was Remus the main suspect in 1981? Maybe because of his being a Werewolf and Harry being a defenseless baby.
I would definitely disagree here-- I don't think there's any canon to suggest that Sirius mistrusted Remus because of his status as a werewolf, and there's none to suggest that James and Lily even suspected him at all, or wanted him to stay away from Baby Harry.

But nevertheless I still love HP, just hate the fact that there are so many plotholes!
Me too. Jo spins a great imaginative tale, but there are writing flaws. I think the story is so compelling that we can overlook the flaw.

Now on to Peter. He had been their very close friend for 10 years. He had shared their deepest secrets and they (all the Marauders) had been able to rely upon each other for everything. There would have been no reason to mistrust him.

It is canon that Sirius and Remus suspected each other; it is also canon Remus did not know about the switch. I interpreted it this way. I am willing to be convinced otherwise, if I have missed somthing in the books as that happens frequently. :)
Did Remus suspect Sirius before James and Lily's deaths? All that's on the text is Lupin asking Sirius's forgiveness for believing (not thinking/suspecting) him to be the spy. That sounds as if Remus didn't suspect Sirius, but believed it when he was offered proof of it by others, possibly after the incident. IMO, Lupin would have said 'thinking' or 'suspecting' if he had done so before the deaths.

James trusted Sirius so much that I think he went along with Sirius's suspicions that Remus was the traitor and switched. I also don't think people are to be blamed for trusting their friends, unless they have information that one friend is the enemy as did the Potters here.
Wouldn't they have been right to trust Sirius, then? Sirius didn't betray them, after all. And Dumbledore's information could just as well be a plan by Voldemort to cause mistrust and discord among them. That was the way Voldemort worked, after all. Not to mention, Peter would have worked hard to either dismiss that notion altogether, or to ensure that Remus was suspected. It might be little things, like say, letting Remus be seen talking to other werewolves known to be sympathising with Voldemort, setting things up so that it looks like Remus is mysteriously absent etc. Things that mean little on their own, but when added up, make Remus look guilty.

Peter was inherently weak and a coward IMO. It is a wonder no one saw through him. For over 10 years he managed to put on an act that fooled the other three Marauders IMO. And Lily, too, seems to be taken in by Peter.
But, he was sorted into Gryffindor, which makes me think that the hat saw potential in him. He could have exhibited that potential occasionally, that gained the others' trust. There's also the possibility that Voldemort could have helped him gain their trust later on, perhaps by staging fights so he could win in front of them.

How did James' and Sirius' particularly close friendship influence Remus and Peter? Did they feel left out or inferior?
It's possible. I don't think that they meant for Remus or Peter to feel left out though. The way I see it, James and Sirius understood each other so well that they couldn't help but be close. I don't think they became close to Remus and Peter until later. By then, they had been accepted as the 'double-act'. I think that Remus and Peter understood that.

Why was Remus the main suspect in 1981? Did Peter have a walk-over to discredit Remus if he did so at all?
I think Peter did play a role in it.

James, Sirius and Peter became Animagi for Remus. Was this noble or adventurous?
It was both. The results were adventurous, like exploring the grounds and Hogsmeade with a werewolf, but the learning process itself should have been hard, because there are so few animagi. That they would keep at it for two years, all the while keeping it a secret from Remus, does sound noble. It wasn't something they were obligated to do.

What did the other Marauders think about James' obsession with Lily?
Was James 'obsessed' with Lily? From what we see, he acts silly around her, and asks her out once. They would have made fun of his antics, like Ron does when Harry gets flustered by Cho's presence. Only, they would have been more bosterous about it, Sirius at least. James seems the kind to take it all in good spirit. I don't think that he would hide his interest in Lily either.

How did Lily influence the dynamics within the Marauders?
The marauders were already a pretty tight group by the time James and Lily start dating. They all knew about James liking her. I think they accepted her into the group. But, I can't see Lily running around pulling pranks though. I think that she got on tegether very well with all of them, and accepted their friendship.

James chose Sirius as godfather. Were Remus and Peter understanding or hurt by this decision?
I see no reason for them to be hurt by it. James and Sirius were closer than brothers for years, and they had accepted it. In fact, I think that they would expect it.

Peter betrayed his friends. Was he ever happy with this decision and do you think that his friends would be able to forgive him if they had the chance?
I don't think Peter was ever truly happy after he turned spy. He would have been terrified of what would happen if they found out. And no, I don't think his friends would have forgiven him. They would have given their lives to save him, after all. I don't think they'd have killed him, but they wouldn't have just let him go free either.

Was joining the Order a joint decision or was peer pressure involved? For instance, did James and Sirius lead the way and Remus and Peter follow?
I don't think that James and Sirius even considered not joining, once they'd been invited by Dumbledore. Remus would have joined up on his own too. As for Peter, I think he joined due to peer pressure, and because it would mean that he was protected by Dumbledore.

The Marauders had a very hostile relationship with Snape. Would this have been different if Snape had been sorted into Gryffindor? Did the Marauders antagonise other students that were into the Dark Arts as well or did they single out Snape from the start?
Since James hated the Dark Arts, I think that he would have been hostile to Snape irrespective of the house he was in. I don't think they singled out Snape. However, we don't know the exact circumstances, only bits and pieces. We know that James and Sirius hexed Bertram Aubrey, for example, but we don't know why they did it. It could be that they did it simply for fun, or it could be that Aubrey had done or said something to deserve it. It could be that there was only evidence for what Sirius and James had done. I think that it would be unfair to judge them solely on the little information that we have. It would be like saying that Harry was dark, because he'd used Sectumsempra on Malfoy. We know that Malfoy was about to use the Cruciatus, and Harry panicked.

How do the Marauders compare to Fred and George? Do you think that they, and especially James and Sirius, were worse or just as funny as the Weasley twins?
Based on how the teachers and Rosmerta remember them so fondly, I'm inclined to think that they were like the twins, maybe even better. Of course, Fred and George have their own brand of humour, but James and Sirius do seem to be quite the double act.

Did Deathly Hallows change your mind about the Marauders? Do you think that they were portrayed favourably or came out badly?
I think that they were portrayed favourably in DH, overall. James's actions in SWM seem more understandable, now that we know that Snape was actively trying to discredit them every chance he got.

Which Marauder do you like best and what are the traits that endear him to you? Did the other Marauders appreciate these traits?
I like James the best. I appreciate his loyalty, courage and his selfless commitment to the fight against the Dark Side.

Did Remus suspect Sirius before James and Lily's deaths? All that's on the text is Lupin asking Sirius's forgiveness for believing (not thinking/suspecting) him to be the spy. That sounds as if Remus didn't suspect Sirius, but believed it when he was offered proof of it by others, possibly after the incident. IMO, Lupin would have said 'thinking' or 'suspecting' if he had done so before the deaths.
What the great difference between "believing" and "knowing" here anyway? The fact that they even thought about that their best friend is a traitor is aweful enough. From what you say I also think that Remus believed the others that Sirius was the spy. But why wasn't he going and figure it out himself instead of trusting on the opinion of others?

James trusted Sirius so much that I think he went along with Sirius's suspicions that Remus was the traitor and switched. I also don't think people are to be blamed for trusting their friends, unless they have information that one friend is the enemy as did the Potters here.
But why would the fact that they believed Remus to be the traitor make them change the Secret Keeper plan? I mean what has James' trust in Sirius to do with the Non-trust in Remus?

What I find feeble and hard to believe is how come they suspected each other but no-one suspected Peter. This bit just mystifies me.

What I find feeble and hard to believe is how come they suspected each other but no-one suspected Peter. This bit just mystifies me.
That's because the entire betrayal plot could have been better written.

But to pull myself back into the role of reader instead of critic, I think it's easy to assume that Wormtail spread dissension among them by sneaking in comments to make them distrust each other. I think he also convinced them to make the Secret Keeper switch. Of course there's no canon on this.

That's because the entire betrayal plot could have been better written.

I couldn't agree more.

But to pull myself back into the role of reader instead of critic, I think it's easy to assume that Wormtail spread dissension among them by sneaking in comments to make them distrust each other. I think he also convinced them to make the Secret Keeper switch. Of course there's no canon on this.

That's precisely why it bothers me and why I find it weak - the plot provides no explanation for this absolute trust and the Sirius/Remus mutual mistrust. What you suggested is a very good guess, in my opinion, and if it were hinted at somehow in the text, it would have made a huge difference in terms of plausibility and consistence of the plot. As it is, there's a blank and it does irritate me to think about it :shrug:

Yes but if Sirius picked Peter precisely because he was the least likely among them for Voldemort to go after - wouldn't it stand to reason that the reason Remus and Sirius distrusted one another was because either would be the "most" likely for Voldemort to go after? Maybe the next to last move was only known to them, Dumbledore and the Potters, so it narrowed it down. I speculate James suspected Dumbledore due to the invisibility cloak borrowing and the relevant news they heard about him afterward. Sirius and Remus trusted Dumbledore at the time. That would also explain why Sirius was mistrustful of Dumbledore when he got out of Azkaban (among a couple of other reasons).

Did Remus suspect Sirius before James and Lily's deaths?

I think so, but I don't have any canon on that. Perhaps he did not suspect Sirius and only Sirius suspected him. That could also be the case IMO.

But why would the fact that they believed Remus to be the traitor make them change the Secret Keeper plan? I mean what has James' trust in Sirius to do with the Non-trust in Remus?

Remus would not be able to reveal the secret as long as the SK was alive; and so he could not bring Voldemort into Godric's Hollow IMO; but he could attack James or Lily or even kidnap Harry away to Voldemort; that was why I felt they did not tell Remus about the switch.

Remus would not be able to reveal the secret as long as the SK was alive; and so he could not bring Voldemort into Godric's Hollow IMO; but he could attack James or Lily or even kidnap Harry away to Voldemort; that was why I felt they did not tell Remus about the switch.
Remus could have done nothing about anything unless the Secret Keeper told him where the Potters are. It's not enough to know who is the SK, he also needs to know the secret itself. There was no reason to switch because of Remus.

Remus could have done nothing about anything unless the Secret Keeper told him where the Potters are. It's not enough to know who is the SK, he also needs to know the secret itself. There was no reason to switch because of Remus.

I agree. But I made my theory on the basis that Remus was aware of Sirius being the SK and he also knew the secret when Sirius was made the SK. I thought Dumbledore knew the secret of Godric's Hollow too. What none of them knew was when Sirius, James and Lily made the switch from Sirius to Peter. That was why I thought Dumbledore and Remus and others so readily believed Sirius to be the traitor and betrayer for all those years and also why Dumbledore did not fight for a trial for Sirius or try and hide him like he did after POA.

When Sirius was SK, Remus also knew the secret and he could have walked in at any time and attacked Harry or the others; that what I meant. In POA we are told that within a week or so of Sirius being made SK, the Potters were killed. So I felt Remus knew about Sirius being the Sk; if he also knew the secret then he could have walked into GH any time.

If he did not know the secret then there was a chance he would try and attack Sirius and get the information from him. I think it was for this reason, perhaps the switch was made.

My favorite was Sirius I mean I absolutly loved him. He was a great godfather! Plus a great wizard and very charming and funny. I was surprised that Remus is actually more liked than Sirius.

My favorite was Sirius I mean I absolutly loved him. He was a great godfather! Plus a great wizard and very charming and funny. I was surprised that Remus is actually more liked than Sirius.
My opinion of Remus really dropped after DH. He really seemed like a jerk to me. He never showed any sort of love towards Tonks and was always letting himself be pushed around...

Sirius and James are my two favorite marauders. I voted for James though, because he's less reckless and is able to settle down, getting bonus points as a wonderful husband and father :p He was my favorite ever since SWM (oddly enough :p).

I agree. But I made my theory on the basis that Remus was aware of Sirius being the SK and he also knew the secret when Sirius was made the SK. I thought Dumbledore knew the secret of Godric's Hollow too. What none of them knew was when Sirius, James and Lily made the switch from Sirius to Peter. That was why I thought Dumbledore and Remus and others so readily believed Sirius to be the traitor and betrayer for all those years and also why Dumbledore did not fight for a trial for Sirius or try and hide him like he did after POA.

When Sirius was SK, Remus also knew the secret and he could have walked in at any time and attacked Harry or the others; that what I meant. In POA we are told that within a week or so of Sirius being made SK, the Potters were killed. So I felt Remus knew about Sirius being the Sk; if he also knew the secret then he could have walked into GH any time.

If he did not know the secret then there was a chance he would try and attack Sirius and get the information from him. I think it was for this reason, perhaps the switch was made.
I understand, but the Fidelius Charm it too complex for this to work. There must happen a lot of things that it turns out like this. It only could have worked if it was Sirius himself who hold him where the Potters were hidden. Do you remember when Jo said that Voldemort could have pressed his nose against the window and he still wouldn't see the Potters there? That's because even if you guess or get know where the hidding place and people are from another source than the Secret Keeper, you still wouldn't be able to see them. And as Sirius mistrusted Remus, I doubt he would tell him anything.

(no idea if that makes sense) :scared:

What I find feeble and hard to believe is how come they suspected each other but no-one suspected Peter. This bit just mystifies me.

I think this is just to serve the plot. I find no other reason really.

My opinion of Remus really dropped after DH. He really seemed like a jerk to me. He never showed any sort of love towards Tonks and was always letting himself be pushed around...


Yes I agree with this. I think Sirius would have been disgusted at Remus' behaviour in DH; abandoning his wife and unborn child. Loyalty was something that Sirius felt very strongly about; as we all know.

My only guess, beside that it was for the plot, is that they thought that Peter was too stupid to do it. I see no other reason either. Maybe someone else does. :lol:

My only guess, beside that it was for the plot, is that they thought that Peter was too stupid to do it. I see no other reason either. Maybe someone else does. :lol:

:lol: That made me laugh actually, I don't know why. I also still don't understand why James, Sirius, and even Remus would be friends with Peter. He really doesn't fit in with the group at all IMO.

:lol: That made me laugh actually, I don't know why. I also still don't understand why James, Sirius, and even Remus would be friends with Peter. He really doesn't fit in with the group at all IMO.


The Peter we see as an adult in comparison to all the other Marauder's as an adult doesnt fit in. But we really dont get to know what he was like during his Hogwarts years. Although I'm sure it also suited the plot :)

What the great difference between "believing" and "knowing" here anyway? The fact that they even thought about that their best friend is a traitor is aweful enough.
The way I see it, 'believe' as it was used there implies that it was not a conclusion that he had arrived at by himself.

From what you say I also think that Remus believed the others that Sirius was the spy. But why wasn't he going and figure it out himself instead of trusting on the opinion of others?
It's not as if he had many opportunities, IMO. Who would have believed a werewolf? Besides, he trusted Dumbledore, and it was Dumbledore who gave evidence that Sirius was indeed the secret keeper.

But why would the fact that they believed Remus to be the traitor make them change the Secret Keeper plan? I mean what has James' trust in Sirius to do with the Non-trust in Remus?
the non-trust was their not telling Remus about the switch.

That's because the entire betrayal plot could have been better written.
I agree. I'm fervently hoping that it will all be made clear in The Scottish Book. :lol: Most importantly, I'd like to know why not even Dumbledore was told of the SK switch. It could be because they were disillusioned after hearing about him from Bagshott, or it could be that they thought that Dumbledore was a primary target, and thus, unsafe, but I'd still like to know for sure.

But to pull myself back into the role of reader instead of critic, I think it's easy to assume that Wormtail spread dissension among them by sneaking in comments to make them distrust each other. I think he also convinced them to make the Secret Keeper switch. Of course there's no canon on this.
I agree. Voldemort worked by spreading mistrust and discord. Something like this would be right up his alley. Peter was never considered to be a threat, after all, and I also get the feeling that they thought him naive. If so, his opinions might be accepted by them as being unbiased.

I think this is just to serve the plot. I find no other reason really.

That's what I thought as well. I've never been able to find another textual reason for that. Sure, I can come up with a lot of explanations, some of them will make good sense, but the point is, there is nothing in the text designating a possible explanation.

Oh, and if I haven't mentioned it in the thread yet, my favourite Marauder is Sirius - I think he has more flesh than the others, somehow. Remus was also great until DH where he made a rather odd turn, I thought, from being consistent, mature and wise to being completely lost and, frankly, stupid. Sirius, with the exception of a few lines thrown in OotP to enhance the believability of a specific plot twist (Sirius's recklessness=death), is a great character, in my opinion - consistent, fleshed out, individual. I liked him best in PoA.

Remus was also great until DH where he made a rather odd turn, I thought, from being consistent, mature and wise to being completely lost and, frankly, stupid.
I think that Jo decided that some of the characters needed to be "dirtied up" a bit. So she made Dumbledore into a Machiavellian manipulator and Remus into a someone completely unidentifiable.

I think that Jo decided that some of the characters needed to be "dirtied up" a bit. So she made Dumbledore into a Machiavellian manipulator and Remus into a someone completely unidentifiable.

I suppose that's true, but while with Dumbledore it was very well done, believable and consistent with the plot and his previous actions and even character (there were many hints about the power behind the benevolence), I thought, I was at a loss of what to think of that Remus business. I didn't find much sense or plausibility in it. :shrug:

I think that Jo decided that some of the characters needed to be "dirtied up" a bit. So she made Dumbledore into a Machiavellian manipulator and Remus into a someone completely unidentifiable.

I agree. I think JKR went out her way to smear her characters a bit here and there to perhaps give us all something to discuss :lol:.

Fron Dumbledore, Remus to James and Snape I think there is enough within the text to see either way. the only persons who are uniformly good among the main characters about whom there iare furious discussions are Harry and Neville IMO.

the only persons who are uniformly good among the main characters about whom there iare furious discussions are Harry and Neville IMO.

I don't know about Harry. He was downright annoying to me throughout OotP and in some scenes of DH. I think he's a tad too presumptuous, which is quite a flaw. For Neville, well, to be honest, I do think Jo overdid it. It was like all she could think about to recoup the universal underdog. I don't think it was all that necessary, and I do believe it was a bit over the top.

Anyway, that's off topic, so - yes, all the Marauders did have their flaws before DH, even Remus (being to scared to tell Dumbledore a mass murdered knew ways inside a castle full of children? really?), so I didn't see the need to make that soapish subplot about him leaving his pregnant wife.

so I didn't see the need to make that soapish subplot about him leaving his pregnant wife.He had always been my favorite character and I was very upset when he did that.

I don't know about Harry. He was downright annoying to me throughout OotP and in some scenes of DH. I think he's a tad too presumptuous, which is quite a flaw. For Neville, well, to be honest, I do think Jo overdid it. It was like all she could think about to recoup the universal underdog. I don't think it was all that necessary, and I do believe it was a bit over the top.

Anyway, that's off topic, so - yes, all the Marauders did have their flaws before DH, even Remus (being to scared to tell Dumbledore a mass murdered knew ways inside a castle full of children? really?), so I didn't see the need to make that soapish subplot about him leaving his pregnant wife.

That I thought was Voldemort in his head in OOTP and in DH he had quite a job of Voldemort, horcruxes and camping. :lol: And I was fine with Neville. I only thought she should have shown the change gradually. Neville IMO was suddenly capable of destroying Nagini.

Among the Marauders Remus is my favourite. Or I should say I like him compared to the others.

I also don't get why Lupin had to leave Tonks; was it to show us Remus's fear or was it to show us Harry had matured I wonder.

I also don't get why Lupin had to leave Tonks; was it to show us Remus's fear or was it to show us Harry had matured I wonder.
I didn't like the fact that Remus was written the way he was in DH, either. But it does give us a glimpse into how the wizarding world viewed werewolves. We also see how much Lupin hates being different, defective in a way. I think he missed being part of the Marauders and being able to be himself, in any form he took.

I also don't get why Lupin had to leave Tonks; was it to show us Remus's fear or was it to show us Harry had matured I wonder.

Yes, maybe it did serve this purpose as well, which makes it even less attractive in my eyes, if it were just a plot device for Harry's character's sake.

That whole Remus leaving Tonks was not necessary to the plot IMO. There were other ways to show how Harry matured or Remus's fear IMO. Suddenly having Remus waltz into Grimmauld Place and wanting to go with Harry did not fit his character as we have seen him for all these years IMO; Jo could have made Remus want to help Harry and also have a private moment where he confides in Harry about his fear.

Instead we got a fight where once again Harry's words must have hurt Remus like anything; he wants to know if Remus was trying to take Sirius's place. That was very much out of character for Harry who never speaks like that and Remus leaving a person who accepted him curse and all and loved him truly and madly was also way out of character for Remus IMo.

That whole Remus leaving Tonks was not necessary to the plot IMO. There were other ways to show how Harry matured or Remus's fear IMO. Suddenly having Remus waltz into Grimmauld Place and wanting to go with Harry did not fit his character as we have seen him for all these years IMO; Jo could have made Remus want to help Harry and also have a private moment where he confides in Harry about his fear.

I agree. It felt so out of character of what we had seen of Remus so far in the series. It wasn't necessary, and as you said, Remus could have confided in Harry in a more private way. However, we hadn't really seen an angry side to Remus before, and I believe that he was very worried and anguished and had just lost control of himself. He wasn't himself, and that was the point that had been made. He hadn't been himself at the wedding either - not as chatty or happy. He was worried about his unborn child, and offering help to Harry seemed the only thing to do, no matter how silly he was being.

If that made any sense...:whistle:.

That whole Remus leaving Tonks was not necessary to the plot IMO. There were other ways to show how Harry matured or Remus's fear IMO. Suddenly having Remus waltz into Grimmauld Place and wanting to go with Harry did not fit his character as we have seen him for all these years IMO; Jo could have made Remus want to help Harry and also have a private moment where he confides in Harry about his fear.

Instead we got a fight where once again Harry's words must have hurt Remus like anything; he wants to know if Remus was trying to take Sirius's place. That was very much out of character for Harry who never speaks like that and Remus leaving a person who accepted him curse and all and loved him truly and madly was also way out of character for Remus IMo.

Yes, I remember reading this scene and not understanding one bit what was going on and how I was supposed to take it. I remember re-reading to. I couldn't get Harrys reaction at all. His anger seemed to suddenly come from nowhere. I would have expected him to talk him out of it or express disapproval in some way, but not that aggressively. Well, Innever expected Remust to that in the first place, so I started out sufficiently confused.

I didn't get what was going on earlier either, when Remus and Nymphadora came to Harry's wedding and he was miserable - I was wondering if it held any meaning for the plot, if Remus was Imperiused or someone was impersonating him - I was really befuddled. i think his character was a bit of a mess in DH which wasn't really necessary.

I agree. It felt so out of character of what we had seen of Remus so far in the series. It wasn't necessary, and as you said, Remus could have confided in Harry in a more private way. However, we hadn't really seen an angry side to Remus before, and I believe that he was very worried and anguished and had just lost control of himself. He wasn't himself, and that was the point that had been made. He hadn't been himself at the wedding either - not as chatty or happy. He was worried about his unborn child, and offering help to Harry seemed the only thing to do, no matter how silly he was being.

If that made any sense...:whistle:.

Yes it did. Very much. :)

Remus being worried I can understand. Remus being angry was also fine; but the reason could have been handled better IMO. And I don't really blame him for leaving Tonks as such, because I can understand what he must have been going through, but well...I only feel it could have been handled better IMO.

I couldn't get Harrys reaction at all. His anger seemed to suddenly come from nowhere. I would have expected him to talk him out of it or express disapproval in some way, but not that aggressively.

ETA :: I agree. At that point I also don't think Harry was mature enough to talk Remus out of anything. Harry just shouts down Remus and Remus hexes Harry.

I too was upset and deeply troubled when Remus tried to leave the expectant Tonks, and criticized him heavily for doing so, but, in retrospect, I understand how and why this incident was key in the way Jo fleshed him out as a human character, because his essential flaw was his inferiority complex, and that led him to continually thinking of himself as a loser, who wasn't worthy to be a husband and father, so he wanted to make himself useful in the only way he knew how-- by fighting the Dark Arts. To say that he "just wanted to run out on his wife" is to leave behind all of the reasons he felt she truly would be better of without him. :(

However, had James and Sirius been alive to witness Remus' weakest moment, I believe that they too would have been angered, as Harry was, but might have reacted in a more mature fashion.

I too was upset and deeply troubled when Remus tried to leave the expectant Tonks, and criticized him heavily for doing so, but, in retrospect, I understand how and why this incident was key in the way Jo fleshed him out as a human character, because his essential flaw was his inferiority complex, and that led him to continually thinking of himself as a loser, who wasn't worthy to be a husband and father, so he wanted to make himself useful in the only way he knew how-- by fighting the Dark Arts.
Me too. At frst, I thought that Remus got what he deserved from Harry for deserting a woman who had risked the wrath of the society by marrying a werewolf she loved. But looking at it again, we see Remus, normally the unflappable one, actually looking deranged and emotional.
“Don’t you understand what I’ve done to my wife and my unborn child? I should never have married her, I’ve made her an outcast!”
“You have only seen me amongst the Order, or under Dumbledore’s protection at Hogwarts! You don’t know how most of the Wizarding world sees creatures like me! When they know of my affliction, they can barely talk to me! Don’t you see what I’ve done? Even her own family is disgusted by our marriage, when parents want their only daughter to marry a werewolf? And the child—the child—”
Lupin actually seized handfuls of his own hair; he looked quite deranged.
Throughout it, Lupin's concern is about how he has endangered Tonks and his child. I don't think that anyone else can empathise with Lupin, who knows first-hand how people treat him. We see that even Ron, who had thought him to be a good teacher, asks him to get away from him after learning that he was a werewolf. Yet, Lupin doesn't even flinch at the time. Imagine how much persecution he must have had to endure, that he becomes used to being treated so.

I don't think that Lupin should be judged by his actions during that period, because he was well and truly deranged, and in no condition to think about it rationally. He really did what he thought was in his wife's and child's best interest. But, he does come to his senses soon enough, as is made clear later on, and most importantly, he is quick to acknowledge that Harry was right and he was wrong.

Another thing that struck me was how serious an issue being a werewolf was for him. In the scene where he identifies himself to Harry, he says his name, and then, the first thing he says is that he's a werewolf.
“I am Remus John Lupin, werewolf, sometimes known as Moony, one of the four creators of the Marauder’s Map, married to Nymphadora, usually known as Tonks, and I taught you how to produce a Patronus, Harry, which takes the form of a stag.”
However, had James and Sirius been alive to witness Remus' weakest moment, I believe that they too would have been angered, as Harry was, but might have reacted in a more mature fashion.
:lol: They might have been a bit more gentle about it too, I think. I don't think that Remus was there looking for adventure. I think that he offered to join them because he needed to do something, anything, to keep himself from thinking about how he had endangered his wife and child, to keep himself from going insane with worry. It was also about self-justification, to some extent. To convince himself that he was not abandoning his family, but helping his friend's son. It wasn't the right thing to do, of course.

I think that Remus's insecurity about himself might also have been a factor in Sirius and possibly James suspecting him. They'd only seen him so far at school, where no one knew he was a werewolf, and where they were able to take care of him. I'd also say that Remus was more open around them.

Upon leaving school though, Remus is thrown into the cruel, cold world, where prospective employers do not care how skilled he is, or what he's like as a person, but judge him solely on his curse. It must have been quite a shocking change from his school years. I do think that Remus must have tried to get a job to support himself, before resigning himself to the fact that no one was going to give him a job, and that he was going to have to live off his friends or turn dark like the others of his kind.

Naturally, he would be severely depressed about it, but I imagine he would be too proud and too grateful to his friends to complain to them about it. Of course, his friends would sense that something was off with Moony, and they would try and probe him to no avail. If that condition continued for some time, and Dumbledore told them that there was a traitor in their midst, it's somewhat understandable that Sirius might think that Remus is feeling guilty about something, something that he brushes off when confronted. That might be why he suspected that Remus was the spy.

I always figured that it came down to the point where the four Marauders had to face the fact that one of them was the betrayer. Perhaps the last whereabouts of the Potters had been revealed and only they and Dumbledore knew of it. Sirius and Remus trusted Dumbledore not to be the betrayer and both felt Peter was too dense to be the one. That left only the two of them to suspect one another. James, I think, suspected Dumbledore and tried to convince Lily of it (hence her letter to Sirius). Dumbledore had borrowed James' cloak and had a rather tarnished past. Plus the secretive way Dumbledore operated would make anyone suspicious. :lol:

They were all mean when they where young. (exept Lupin, he was nice). But, that does not exuse there childness with Snape, etc. I wish that they where nicer to Snape, it would have made his life soo muck easier.

They were all mean when they where young. (exept Lupin)
What child or teenager doesn't have moments when they were acting "mean"? The point is they all grew up (except Peter) and became better men as adults. Here is where I think Lupin falls: in my opinion, he was never as noble as Sirius and James. I understand where he's coming from when he makes the horrible decision in DH, but that doesn't excuse him at all, imo.

They were all mean when they where young. (exept Lupin)

James and Sirius were three-dimensional, IMO: they were neither completely nice or completely mean, but human, and while they made mistakes, those mistakes did not define them in their entirety. James and Sirius surely had moments in which they acted in a mean-spirited manner, SWM being the one that comes to mind, and also the birth of the nickname "Snivellus" on the train (It isn't specified who said it; personally, I think it was Sirius, because he seemed to be more humored at the situation than James was, because James was angry that Snape had insulted Gryffindor, his beloved father's House), but they also had moments of deep kindness and compassion; at the age of twelve, when they discovered their friend had a condition abominated by almost all of Wizarding Society, that rendered him an outcast, they did not abandon him, they did not spurn him as he continued to undergo painful transformations, but rather decided to dedicate the next three years of their lives to helping him. Both James and Sirius came from rich families as well, but they accepted Remus despite his poverty and included Peter, even though he was considered "lesser" than them, because of his looks and apparent lack of talent (Or so McGonagall said).

Both James and Sirius too rejected the pureblood ideology, even though they were both purebloods themselves, and that shows them to be tolerant, IMO, and capable of rejecting the idea of oppression and injustice based on race. It's true that they wrongfully bullied Snape, but they came to change that behavior and, as they grew up, the good that was in them all along shone brighter and brighter all the time.

They were all mean when they where young. (exept Lupin)

I think all interpretations are valid and I respect yours. I don't see them as mean. I saw them as an average group of young kids, best buddies that liked to hang out and do things together. I think their association inspired some jealousy at their collective tightness and at times they acted rotten, but overall they were just normal kids.

What child or teenager doesn't have moments when they were acting "mean"? The point is they all grew up (except Peter) and became better men as adults. Here is where I think Lupin falls: in my opinion, he was never as noble as Sirius and James. I understand where he's coming from when he makes the horrible decision in DH, but that doesn't excuse him at all, imo.

As for Remus as an adult, I actually saw him as very noble. But I didn't see his decision in DH as horrible. I saw it as a man who truly believed that his presence in the life of his wife and child was detrimental. The DEs had specifically targeted them due to him (which they knew) and if he left them, they might go after him and leave Tonks and the child alone. Plus, without him, they would not be relegated as living as outcasts and finally he would ever pose a danger to his son if some weird circumstances found him in a situation where he transformed in his son's presence without wolfsbane.

In the end, his life had been and was going to be hell - I think the only people who ever really appreciated that were James and Sirius (perhaps Lily and Dumbledore too - and of course the other werewolves). That was why I was gratified JKR allowed him to die and it was just a bonus that she showed him young and youthful and happy again, reunited with his mates. I really couldn't care less about the whole Tonks and Teddy angle that she threw in at the last minute (or so it seemed to me).

But, I thought he dealt with that as well as could be expected - but I reckon few would agree with me, except James and Sirius. You know, I truly believe Harry had it all wrong in DH concerning Lupin - and unlike Harry, I don't think his dad would have agreed with him or chastised him for what he had done. James would have shaken his head at Harry's lack of understanding, imo, something that James really did have for his friend. James and Sirius had become an animagus for Remus' sake, and that says many things about their understanding and connection to their friend - too many things to list - but much of which Harry just didn't get.

I can't say I'm bothered about Remus's behaviour. It was out of character, yes. But I understood why he did it and I can't hold it against him.

I can't say I'm bothered about Remus's behaviour. It was out of character, yes. But I understood why he did it and I can't hold it against him.
That's how I feel about it too. :sigh: The implications of what Remus was trying to do were...disturbing, to say the least, but it was something, that, in retrospect, made sense in the context of the way his character was shaped and developed, IMO. I actually believe that it would have been out of character for Lupin to be enthusiastic about Tonks' pregnancy, because he was already apprehensive about being in a relationship with her, and he believed himself for almost the entirety of his life because of his debilitating condition, and the rejection and poverty he had suffered most of his adult life, since the Potters were killed and Sirius was sent to Azkaban; he thinks to himself "Who would want a father like me?" and he understands that Andromeda and Ted don't care for him, plus he worries about the consequences of lyncanthropic reproduction. It's a heartbreaking scene, because he loves Tonks and the baby, but he is convinced his presence will harm them, so he runs away and clings to the only strength he recognizes in himself-- his aptitude in fighting the Dark Arts. It's truly a heartbreaking scene because Remus Lupin is an amazing man, and a true hero, but he just doesn't see that in himself, and his defining flaw drives him to a behavior that appears abominable but is truly a reflection of his desire to keep his "loser" self from doing more "damage" to Tonks and the baby. :(

For the calm, gentle Remus to become so violent was out of character, but he was at his worst in that scene, he was truly hurting, and Harry, someone he cared deeply for, was yelling at him and calling him a coward. However he reacted to Harry on impulse, he came to regret it and always loved Harry, as evident through his behavior on Potterwatch, in Shell Cottage, and in the Forest Again. :)

What child or teenager doesn't have moments when they were acting "mean"? The point is they all grew up (except Peter) and became better men as adults. Here is where I think Lupin falls: in my opinion, he was never as noble as Sirius and James.

Why do you think that?

To my mind, all three men are presented in the saga as having great qualities and also a dark streak, in their various ways, which of course makes them all three-dimensional.

Remus is no better and no worse than either James or Sirius. I certainly think that his courage was equal to theirs: all three of them fought for the Order with integrity, did they not? :)

I do not find Remus lacking morally either, in comparison with James and Sirius. As I say, all three of them had fairly big faults as well as big virtues.

One of Remus's great -- and understandable -- weaknesses was that he wanted to be liked and accepted too much, to the point where he would not challenge the less admirable aspects of James and Sirius while they were teenagers. (It's a weakness I happen to share with him, so it's no wonder I share the same personality profile!)

Therefore I don't see Remus wanting to abandon Tonks and their child as out of character ... it's upsetting to read, sure it is, and it certainly took me aback the first time I read it. :( But on reflection I think it is pretty believable and consistent with the character as JKR presents him in the saga. Because this is another weakness in Remus, his dark streak, and we've seen it in canon already: it's his low self-esteem which leads him to feel that he is unworthy and which makes him want to run away. (Again, this is an impulse I recognise all too well, unfortunately -- and no, I don't like it.)

Harry was right to call him on it.

Yeah, he is somewhat clumsy about it! But the lad's only 17.

He was right to call Remus on it ... and Remus knew it.

Which is why he reacted as violently as he did. I haven't always responded very well to being told home truths by someone I love either, I'm afraid.

And it's also why he was able to forgive Harry later, and be reconciled with him (Potterwatch, The Forest Again ... waaaah).

I thought that would happen -- that Remus would reconcile with Harry, ultimately -- and I wasn't surprised. :)

I was thinking the other day about how the rest of the Marauders did not question why Peter's animagus form was a rat. Surely that reveals depths about his character? Yet as we know none of them picked up on it. I've always wondered why that was. (Unless it was just to serve the plot :( )

Why do you think that?

To my mind, all three men are presented in the saga as having great qualities and also a dark streak, in their various ways, which of course makes them all three-dimensional.

Remus is no better and no worse than either James or Sirius. I certainly think that his courage was equal to theirs: all three of them fought for the Order with integrity, did they not? :)

I do not find Remus lacking morally either, in comparison with James and Sirius. As I say, all three of them had fairly big faults as well as big virtues.

One of Remus's great -- and understandable -- weaknesses was that he wanted to be liked and accepted too much, to the point where he would not challenge the less admirable aspects of James and Sirius while they were teenagers. (It's a weakness I happen to share with him, so it's no wonder I share the same personality profile!)

Therefore I don't see Remus wanting to abandon Tonks and their child as out of character ... it's upsetting to read, sure it is, and it certainly took me aback the first time I read it. :( But on reflection I think it is pretty believable and consistent with the character as JKR presents him in the saga. Because this is another weakness in Remus, his dark streak, and we've seen it in canon already: it's his low self-esteem which leads him to feel that he is unworthy and which makes him want to run away. (Again, this is an impulse I recognise all too well, unfortunately -- and no, I don't like it.)

Harry was right to call him on it.

Yeah, he is somewhat clumsy about it! But the lad's only 17.

He was right to call Remus on it ... and Remus knew it.

Which is why he reacted as violently as he did. I haven't always responded very well to being told home truths by someone I love either, I'm afraid.

And it's also why he was able to forgive Harry later, and be reconciled with him (Potterwatch, The Forest Again ... waaaah).

I thought that would happen -- that Remus would reconcile with Harry, ultimately -- and I wasn't surprised. :)


Yes I agree with that. :tu:

I don't look down upon Remus or dislike his character because of it. Sure it was a mistake, but he is after all only human, and humans certainly make mistakes. Every human has their weaknesses, and one of Remus's is, as you said Pearl_Took, that he wants to be liked by everyone.

I was thinking the other day about how the rest of the Marauders did not question why Peter's animagus form was a rat. Surely that reveals depths about his character? Yet as we know none of them picked up on it. I've always wondered why that was. (Unless it was just to serve the plot :( )

Well, this is a part of the plot that I can accept because ... well, why stereotype the poor rat, after all? :) Rats are very intelligent creatures and get a terribly bad press! I'm sure the other Marauders didn't think anything of it or suspect anything untoward... and why should they? :) Remus was a werewolf ... that was intrinsically more alarming than Peter being a rat! :)

I don't look down upon Remus or dislike his character because of it. Sure it was a mistake, but he is after all only human, and humans certainly make mistakes. Every human has their weaknesses, and one of Remus's is, as you said Pearl_Took, that he wants to be liked by everyone.

Thank you. :tu: :)

I do think that Remus made up for his failing in DH, later on in the story.

One of Remus's great -- and understandable -- weaknesses was that he wanted to be liked and accepted too much, to the point where he would not challenge the less admirable aspects of James and Sirius while they were teenagers. (It's a weakness I happen to share with him, so it's no wonder I share the same personality profile!)

It's a flaw, but I think it's understandable considering the way society treated Remus. Remus was so used to being shunned by the world.

"But apart from my transformations, I was happier than I had ever been in my life. For the first time ever, I had friends, three great friends. Sirius Black . . . Peter Pettigrew . . . and, of course, your father, Harry - James Potter."

Sirius, Peter and James were his first friends. That, coupled with the fact that they didn't care about his monthly tranformations, most likely made him feel eternally grateful for their friendship. For the first time, he was accepted by people his own age. With the new friendship and tolerance for a condition that he has no control of him, it's natural that Remus wouldn't want to stand up to his friends. He wasn't going to forget the way society treated him once he became friends with the other Marauders. He remembered that and feared that, if he stood up to them, they would ostracize him from their group. He was so grateful for having them as friends that he feared that they would leave him. :(

Therefore I don't see Remus wanting to abandon Tonks and their child as out of character ... it's upsetting to read, sure it is, and it certainly took me aback the first time I read it. :( But on reflection I think it is pretty believable and consistent with the character as JKR presents him in the saga. Because this is another weakness in Remus, his dark streak, and we've seen it in canon already: it's his low self-esteem which leads him to feel that he is unworthy and which makes him want to run away. (Again, this is an impulse I recognise all too well, unfortunately -- and no, I don't like it.)

I completely agree, it was very in character for Remus to do that. It didn't surprise me that Remus behaved that way.

And now, my opinion on how Remus nearly abandoned his wife and son.

I don't consider it completely horrible that Remus did that. I definitely agree with Harry in that chapter, but I can understand how Remus feels at that point. As I said above, Remus had been shunned for being a werewolf all his life. The knowledge that he made his wife pregnant and that he was going to have a son, a son that has him for a father, scared him. He was terrified - he was afraid for them for what he was doing to them. He knows the wizarding world considers him to be a monster and he realized that, by having a son, he would be shunning his wife and son in the same manner.

That's not to say that it excused his behavior, it merely explains it. But, with that explanation, I can't see his actions nearly as bad as Tom Riddle Sr., the person who abandoned his family. (I can understand that the didn't want to have anything to do with Merope again, but leaving a child behind was cruel, IMO.) Remus nearly left them because of his love for them and his fear that they would be treated as horribly as he had been throughout his life.

And now I don't hold it against him at all. Thanks to Harry, he understood the importance of being by his family and learned from that. He became a great father and was euphoric over the birth of his child. The point of making blunders is to learn from them, and Remus did, and that is enough for me.

And now I don't hold it against him at all. Thanks to Harry, he understood the importance of being by his family and learned from that. He became a great father and was euphoric over the birth of his child. The point of making blunders is to learn from them, and Remus did, and that is enough for me.

I would respectfully disagree. Harry may have learned something from Remus, but it wasn't the lesson of "sticking by your family". He was trying to tell Remus to do that during their conversation - he already understood that. Harry completely and wholly ignored the fact that Remus was a werewolf and while there is absolutely a beauty in that (seeing Remus as a complete equal), he really needed to take Remus' werewolfism into account under the circumstances.

Harry's own parents didn't have to deal with that in relation to 'sticking by him'. James would have had an awful time of it when the Potters were hiding out if he had to 'hide' himself away from his family every month so he would not harm them - plus the other aspects of dealing with living as a werewolf in society. Harry never had to deal with it either during his life. Whether Harry liked it or not, it did add a huge new element to the picture that had to be taken into account and maybe later in life he understood that, but he didn't understand it at #12G. Hermione did - and she chastised Harry for it - she did not support his ignorance in that regard.

One of Remus's great -- and understandable -- weaknesses was that he wanted to be liked and accepted too much, to the point where he would not challenge the less admirable aspects of James and Sirius while they were teenagers. (It's a weakness I happen to share with him, so it's no wonder I share the same personality profile!) It's a flaw, but I think it's understandable considering the way society treated Remus. Remus was so used to being shunned by the world. Moony, Wormtail, Padfoot and Prongs[/fieldset"But apart from my transformations, I was happier than I had ever been in my life. For the first time ever, I had friends, three great friends. Sirius Black . . . Peter Pettigrew . . . and, of course, your father, Harry - James Potter."
Sirius, Peter and James were his first friends. That, coupled with the fact that they didn't care about his monthly tranformations, most likely made him feel eternally grateful for their friendship. For the first time, he was accepted by people his own age. With the new friendship and tolerance for a condition that he has no control of him, it's natural that Remus wouldn't want to stand up to his friends. He wasn't going to forget the way society treated him once he became friends with the other Marauders. He remembered that and feared that, if he stood up to them, they would ostracize him from their group. He was so grateful for having them as friends that he feared that they would leave him.
I don't agree about that he wanted to be liked that much. He liked it when he was being accepted but he didn't go and forced himself on other people. He wasn't bothered about other people hating him nor did he do anything to convince them otherwise.

IMO was the friendship between the Marauders set up from James and Sirius side, I can't imagine that Remus did the first step. And are we really sure that they didn't care about him being a werewolf in the beginning? I can imagine that it took them some time to get over their (natural) fear.

Well, this is a part of the plot that I can accept because ... well, why stereotype the poor rat, after all? :) Rats are very intelligent creatures and get a terribly bad press! I'm sure the other Marauders didn't think anything of it or suspect anything untoward... and why should they? :) Remus was a werewolf ... that was intrinsically more alarming than Peter being a rat! :)

Well I understand that yes. But I thought J.K. put this in to highlight his character and use the stereotype. I can see no other reason for Peter's animagus being a rat than for the negative connotations that go with rats, being a part of Peter's personality.

I would respectfully disagree. Harry may have learned something from Remus, but it wasn't the lesson of "sticking by your family".
I believe beatifically was saying that Remus learned the importance of sticking by his family, and then became a great father who loved and died for his child. :p

I don't agree about that he wanted to be liked that much. He liked it when he was being accepted but he didn't go and forced himself on other people. He wasn't bothered about other people hating him nor did he do anything to convince them otherwise.

Not saying that he forced himself on people, but the point that you made yourself: he wanted to be accepted. He didn't take it too seriously when people hated him, but it did hurt somewhat or else he wouldn't have had such low-self esteem. Basically, my point was that Remus wanted to be wanted and that explains why he was so lenient on Sirius and James.

And are we really sure that they didn't care about him being a werewolf in the beginning? I can imagine that it took them some time to get over their (natural) fear.

Well there's no canon that says that James and Sirius were scared when they found out Remus was a werewolf. I think Remus only says that, rather than abandoning Remus, they continued to be friends with him and tried to find a way to help him.

I believe beatifically was saying that Remus learned the importance of sticking by his family, and then became a great father who loved and died for his child. :p

That's exactly what I meant, WWB. :)

I believe beatifically was saying that Remus learned the importance of sticking by his family, and then became a great father who loved and died for his child. :p

Because of Harry's three unwise statements? Or because Hermione saying 'no child would ever be ashamed of you'? I don't think so. Remus already understood the value of sticking by his family. But Remus also knew the impact of having a werewolf husband and father in one's life. That was the balance he was trying to weigh in his mind. Tonks and Teddy were important to him, that was the whole reason he was in a quandry. If they weren't, he wouldn't have gotten upset, he'd of just said 'forget them'.

Harry's big point was that parents shouldn't abandon their children unless they absolutely have to. Well you know, biting your kid might just fit into that category - and from Remus' view, having Teddy live his life as an outcast and being made fun of just because he was the son of a werewolf was another consideration in that regard. Then Harry said that Remus should be at home with his family because the DEs were sure to attack a kid whose father was a werewolf. But think about that - would it not be better for Remus to go out and fight against those people so they are not put in a position of power to actually attack his kid? That is what Remus was trying to do. Plus, his being at the house meant that the DEs would go there to kill him and Tonks and likely kill little Teddy too (they were targeted in DH Chapter 1). So Harry was just baffling and immature sounding, even if he thought he knew what he was talking about.

In the end, Remus returned to be with Tonks and later was present when Teddy was born - but he didn't stay. He went out and continued to fight against those who would attack his son, and died doing so. Remus, kind soul that he is, told Harry his instincts were right - and that is true, but not in terms of Harry's advice to Remus - that was only slightly correct in that Remus agreed he wished to be there for Tonks and Teddy, but wrong in that is the only place he needed to be. Remus was too kind to tell Harry so, but he showed him.

Harry's big point was that parents shouldn't abandon their children unless they absolutely have to. Well you know, biting your kid might just fit into that category - and from Remus' view, having Teddy live his life as an outcast and being made fun of just because he was the son of a werewolf was another consideration in that regard. Then Harry said that Remus should be at home with his family because the DEs were sure to attack a kid whose father was a werewolf. But think about that - would it not be better for Remus to go out and fight against those people so they are not put in a position of power to actually attack his kid? That is what Remus was trying to do. Plus, his being at the house meant that the DEs would go there to kill him and Tonks and likely kill little Teddy too (they were targeted in DH Chapter 1). So Harry was just baffling and immature sounding, even if he thought he knew what he was talking about.

I agree that Harry sounds immature in his angry challenge to Remus, but his basic response is not baffling. I'm rather like 17 year old Harry in that respect: it's hard for me to understand or tolerate anyone who would abandon their children, for whatever reason.

Remus should have thought all this through before marrying Tonks.

And yet he had as much right as anyone else in the wizarding world to love and happiness, of course.

As things turned out, Rowling ensures that both he and Tonks effectively 'abandon' Teddy anyway, by being killed in battle. But I guess that's a subject for another thread!

I disagree. Remus didn't abandon his kid, he left it with Tonks and abandoned the whole family. I agree in real life one should never do that. But there are no werewolves in real life, :lol:

I disagree. Remus didn't abandon his kid, he left it with Tonks and abandoned the whole family.

Well, yeah ... same difference, really. ;)

I agree in real life one should never do that. But there are no werewolves in real life, :lol:

True enough! ;)

Well, yeah ... same difference, really. ;)

Ah I misunderstood what you meant. But abandoning his kid makes it sound as if Remus left the child in the park one day and split - leaving him an orphan. From Remus' view, he left him with his loving mother and they would both be better off without him for many reasons. :)

I have no idea how to call it, but Remus wish to leave was not based on the fact that he didn't care for his family. He wanted to leave because he did and didn't want to drag them into his problems and feared that they will have a bad life due to the fact that he's a werewolf. He wanted the best for them.

Because of Harry's three unwise statements? Or because Hermione saying 'no child would ever be ashamed of you'? I don't think so. Remus already understood the value of sticking by his family. But Remus also knew the impact of having a werewolf husband and father in one's life. That was the balance he was trying to weigh in his mind. Tonks and Teddy were important to him, that was the whole reason he was in a quandry. If they weren't, he wouldn't have gotten upset, he'd of just said 'forget them'.

The point I was trying to make is that Remus forgot all of that due to his fear for his family. He was scared of the monster he became every month and was afraid of how that would affect his wife and child and how the world would treat them because of their relation to him. Of course he cared about them, there's no doubt about that, but he didn't realize how vital it was for him to stay with his family during that time. Remus was scared and many people don't behave rationally when fear takes over, IMO. Harry didn't behave in the most mature fashion, but he was right, and Harry's words woke Remus up to his senses.

I have no idea how to call it, but Remus wish to leave was not based on the fact that he didn't care for his family. He wanted to leave because he did and didn't want to drag them into his problems and feared that they will have a bad life due to the fact that he's a werewolf. He wanted the best for them.

You summed up what I was trying to say in my three paragraph explanation. :lol: I don't think that Remus was the same as others, such as Riddle, for abandoning his family because his choice to do so was based on his love for them rather than selfishness.

This is awesome. There are a lot of really interesting ideas going on here.

Like just about everyone here, I don't see Remus' panic attack as a reason to condemn him. It's psychologically interesting, and I honestly didn't see it as out of character at all.

I think a lot of quiet, agreeable people like him have an explosive side. He doesn't get a chance to express very often. I imagine it's a kind of equal and opposite reaction to the werewolf, in a way--he's so calm and composed and decent and civilized and so on because that's everything the werewolf isn't.

I think he's had an unfairly rough life. To start off, he was cursed out of spite, which caused society to have a really extreme adverse reaction to him: people avoided him, wouldn't give him work, judged him, caused him to feel like he had no claim to happiness, etc. Years of that have got to really wear on a person. He also doesn't allow himself much in terms of emotional release. You have to wonder if he'd really allowed himself much time to grieve over Sirius, before he had to put that away and go live with Fenrir Greyback. And then Dumbledore died, and then by the time we see him at his worst in GP, one has to wonder exactly how badly things must have been going for the Order...Times were hard enough to likely push even the most balanced of people over the edge.

He also has this unworthiness complex, for lack of a better term. He loves being loved, and being happy (and who doesn't?), but he also doesn't think he deserves it, and I think that all the time he's probably been looking around out of the corners of his eyes, waiting for the other shoe to drop, so to speak. And why shouldn't it? It always has before. Suddenly, everything's too perfect. Poor Remus can't even enjoy it--it drives him to distraction.

So eventually, with everything that's built up so far, plus his anxiety and insecurity over Tonks loving him and really not caring what people say (likely an unfamiliar concept to Remus)...little wonder he eventually blew up and had a panic attack.

I think part of what made him so unstable in that scene was that he was so torn. He is, of course, madly in love with Tonks, and deeply overjoyed that they're going to have a child...but wait...he's a werewolf. Werewolves don't get to do that. He's going to ruin everything. He has to go. It's better for them. He's been miserable before, and it's just the way things are meant to be...but he loves them so much. Hence the agitation and the yelling. It's not at all because he doesn't love them. It's because he loves them too much, and he's not supposed to because of what he is, and he can't take it. It tears him up inside.

I think a lot of quiet, agreeable people like him have an explosive side.

Very, very true. :agree: I would be one of those people. :whistle:

That was a very perceptive post. :)

I was wondering how the Marauders Animagus forms worked. Did they just instantly turn into animals and suddenly turn back in to humans? Is there canon anywhere about this...maybe with Rita or Minerva?

I was thinking that it would be one way in which the Mauraders could have kept everthing secret for so long - never get caught that is. If someone was coming along, they'd just quickly become animals and gallop away into the forest (or scurry in Peter's case). Also it would seem that the Centaurs would inform Dumbledore that a werewolf was in the forsest - which Dumbledore would be able to explain...but wouldn't they also mention the other three creatures that always seemed to be with them?