Chamber of Secrets

Chamber of Secrets (http://www.cosforums.com/index.php)
-   Legilimency Studies (http://www.cosforums.com/forumdisplay.php?f=163)
-   -   Peter Pettigrew: Character Analysis (http://www.cosforums.com/showthread.php?t=107881)

luvlunalovegood August 22nd, 2009 12:15 pm

Re: Peter Pettigrew: Character Analysis
 
Bravery involves the daring and tackling the risks. Courage is the act of devotion to what's right no matter what the danger. Peter Pettigrew was a brave man, but he was not courageous.

Tenshi August 23rd, 2009 12:12 am

Re: Peter Pettigrew: Character Analysis
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Pearl_Took (Post 5399111)
Except that we don't actually see that in canon. There is not one single recorded incident anywhere of canon of Peter doing any of this. We know he was part of the Order. That's it. There's nothing else to go on.

Exactly, we don't even know when he joined. Maybe he was brought in by the other Marauders and didn't do anything at all, but backstabbing his "best friends".

Now I wonder, did he become a follower of Voldemort after or during the joined the Order? What made him change the sites anyways?

wickedwickedboy August 23rd, 2009 1:02 am

Re: Peter Pettigrew: Character Analysis
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Pearl_Took (Post 5399111)
OK. I'll go along with that, although I would say that also pointed to Peter's desperate desire to be accepted.

I agree; I think it was definitely both also.

Quote:

Except that we don't actually see that in canon. :huh: There is not one single recorded incident anywhere of canon of Peter doing any of this. We know he was part of the Order. That's it. There's nothing else to go on.

My golden rule for reading literature is: if it's not written down, it doesn't exist. ;)
I respect your view. I am just going on the fact that there was a war with the Order members and others fighting against the Death Eaters and Peter was in on it as an Order member. We didn't hear about anyone fighting, Dumbledore, Moody, Kingsley, etc., unless you count the prequel, but even then, you'd have only two fighters :lol:. So assuming the Order members were all fighting together and noting the canon doesn't discount Peter's contribution, I assume he too was fighting.

Quote:

For me the treachery simply cancels out the bravery. :shrug:
Well I see what you mean and I think it is a valid way to look at it. But I don't look at it that way. There are many characters who I feel were treacherous, but I still think their spying or other acts took bravery. Darth Vader comes to mind - I simply can't call his air strikes anything but brave, despite the fact that his acts were totally treacherous and not in the least bit admirable to me. He literally flew into the wings of death to pull off his goals. So I look at it as bravery is possible, even in the face of the individual's deed being a dastardly one.

Quote:

His action when Sirius caught up with him -- sobbing out "James! Lily! How could you!" so as to frame Sirius -- reveal a depth of cunning and duplicity that must have shaken Sirius to the core, when he realised at last what kind of a 'friend' they'd had beside them all those years.
Oh I agree, he behaved in a cunning and duplicitious manner, and he garnered no sympathy from me. But I think it showed guts on his part to do some of the stuff he did nonetheless. But then again, I think Voldemort showed bravery too - and he behaved in an even worse manner. :lol: So this is in no way indicative of my showing admiration for Peter's deeds, but just recognizing that he was brave at times, imo.

Quote:

Poor Peter, his life really is just one long epic Fail. :lol:
Well when younger he had his good moments, but after joining up with Voldemort, I agree it was all downhill from there.

snapes_witch August 23rd, 2009 4:13 am

Re: Peter Pettigrew: Character Analysis
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Pearl_Took (Post 5399111)
My golden rule for reading literature is: if it's not written down, it doesn't exist. ;)

:clap:
Absolutely, anything else is simply speculation.

silver ink pot August 23rd, 2009 4:43 am

Re: Peter Pettigrew: Character Analysis
 
Quote:

I respect your view. I am just going on the fact that there was a war with the Order members and others fighting against the Death Eaters and Peter was in on it as an Order member. We didn't hear about anyone fighting, Dumbledore, Moody, Kingsley, etc., unless you count the prequel, but even then, you'd have only two fighters . So assuming the Order members were all fighting together and noting the canon doesn't discount Peter's contribution, I assume he too was fighting.
To that I would just say that in VoldieWar II, many of the people weren't fighting daily. Mrs. Figg only beat up Mundungus Fletcher with some catfood cans. Yes she was brave to face the dementors for Harry and Dudley, but no she wasn't fighting every day. Mundungus is another good example. He wasn't fighting at all unless someone caught him slacking.

The majority of Order members were engaged in having meetings or basically hiding with their families up until the Battle of Hogwarts. So I truly doubt that Peter was fighting very much. Sirius's motorcycle could only hold two people, and Peter certainly wasn't anywhere around in JKR's Prequel.

Peter's only real job was to hide from Voldemort as the Secret Keeper for the Potters - and that was an Epic Fail.

wickedwickedboy August 23rd, 2009 5:35 am

Re: Peter Pettigrew: Character Analysis
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by silver ink pot (Post 5399699)
To that I would just say that in VoldieWar II, many of the people weren't fighting daily. Mrs. Figg only beat up Mundungus Fletcher with some catfood cans. Yes she was brave to face the dementors for Harry and Dudley, but no she wasn't fighting every day. Mundungus is another good example. He wasn't fighting at all unless someone caught him slacking.

I hadn't thought Mrs. Figg and Mundungus were official Order members - at least not at that time. They were not in the picture, and although I doubt everyone was, I imagined those who were in it, were among those who were actually fighting for the Order. That is how I view it.

Quote:

The majority of Order members were engaged in having meetings or basically hiding with their families up until the Battle of Hogwarts. So I truly doubt that Peter was fighting very much. Sirius's motorcycle could only hold two people, and Peter certainly wasn't anywhere around in JKR's Prequel.
Well we were discussing the first war when the Order members were getting killed left and right. That is when the Order members were actually out and had to take on the role of warrior, imo, fighting the Death Eaters. I agree that Peter was likely on missions with different members, I imagined they all were from time to time.

Quote:

Peter's only real job was to hide from Voldemort as the Secret Keeper for the Potters - and that was an Epic Fail.
I would have to disagree based on JKR saying that Peter fell from hero when he betrayed his friends. To me, that meant that Peter was fighting for the Order with the others. I don't feel Peter was hiding from Voldemort, he supposedly met with him for a year prior to serving as secret keeper according to the canon as I recall. But even during that time I feel he kept up his work for the Order under cover; he was only hiding as secret keeper for a less than a week. But I was referring to the period prior to that actually, before his fall.

silver ink pot August 23rd, 2009 7:29 am

Re: Peter Pettigrew: Character Analysis
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by WWB
I hadn't thought Mrs. Figg and Mundungus were official Order members - at least not at that time. They were not in the picture, and although I doubt everyone was, I imagined those who were in it, were among those who were actually fighting for the Order. That is how I view it.

They were just as much Order members during both Wars as Peter was, according to the books. In GoF, Dumbledore mentions both of them on the same level with Sirius as Lupin as "the old crowd."

From GoF (after Sirius and Severus shake hands):

"That will do to be going on with," said Dumbledore, stepping between them once more. "Now I have work for each of you. Fudge's attitude, though not unexpected, changes everything. Sirius, I need you to set off at once. You are to alert Remus Lupin, Arabella Figg, Mundungus Fletcher - the old crowd. Lie low at Lupin's for a while; I will contact you there."

And my point is that while some members of the Order may have been fighters and rebels, others were not. Since Sirius had such a low opinion of Peter's abilities, and Minerva says in PoA that he was hopeless at dueling, then my guess is that Peter was about as much help to the Order as Figgy and Dung. Just my opinion.

wickedwickedboy August 23rd, 2009 7:56 am

Re: Peter Pettigrew: Character Analysis
 
Ah, didn't recall that passage - still Mrs. Figg being a squib and Mundungus predominatly a go-man, wouldn't be expected to be engaged in the fighting, imo. However, since no other role was given for Peter and JKR indicated he was a hero that betrayed and fell, I just go with the idea that he was engaged with the other Order members in fighting Death Eaters, because I don't really see another opportunity for him to have been termed a hero in the canon.

Yoana August 23rd, 2009 7:59 am

Re: Peter Pettigrew: Character Analysis
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by wickedwickedboy (Post 5399767)
Ah, didn't recall that passage - still Mrs. Figg being a squib and Mundungus predominatly a go-man, wouldn't be expected to be engaged in the fighting, imo.

In the same way that Peter being hopeless at fighting (as per Macgonagall), he wouldn't be expected to engage in fighting either.

wickedwickedboy August 23rd, 2009 8:14 am

Re: Peter Pettigrew: Character Analysis
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Yoana (Post 5399770)
In the same way that Peter being hopeless at fighting (as per Macgonagall), he wouldn't be expected to engage in fighting either.

I see what you are saying, but I think her opinion was of a boy at Hogwarts in dueling club - and I have to imagine that all of the Order members were given some training - those who were not Aurors. Perhaps JKR felt that everyone dedicating time to the Order was a hero, and Peter was shuffling papers and was included, but, based on my interpretation of the canon, I feel he had to have been in on the fighting. In later life, he whipped out the AK curse on Cedric and I think that takes practice, independent of what side a person is on in the war. So based on my view of the canon, it makes more sense that he'd of learned this as an Order member, as they were using them against DEs back then I believe, as a special designation by the ministry. So for me, in light of everything, it just makes more sense that he was a fighting Order member. I don't think he was likely a very good one, but he did what he was able to do in that regard, imo, what for him would be brave and admirable.

But my overall idea of Peter is not of an admirable character - I think his characterization was highly negative overall. But I do believe that JKR wanted to show in Peter a man who actually fell in the opposite direction than others in the canon, from an actual fighting Order member to the dark path - he is really our only example, if I recall correctly. And to me, if he was a highly negative character from beginning to end, it rather kills that storyline, imo. Then it would appear that no one on the good side ever actually fell, which would be rather unrealistic in my view. :shrug:

silver ink pot August 23rd, 2009 8:23 am

Re: Peter Pettigrew: Character Analysis
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by wickedwickedboy (Post 5399767)
Ah, didn't recall that passage - still Mrs. Figg being a squib and Mundungus predominatly a go-man, wouldn't be expected to be engaged in the fighting, imo. However, since no other role was given for Peter and JKR indicated he was a hero that betrayed and fell, I just go with the idea that he was engaged with the other Order members in fighting Death Eaters, because I don't really see another opportunity for him to have been termed a hero in the canon.

I must have missed something. Where is he termed a hero in the canon? :huh:

Quote:

Originally Posted by WWB
But I do believe that JKR wanted to show in Peter a man who actually fell in the opposite direction than others in the canon, from an actual fighting Order member to the dark path - he is really our only example, if I recall correctly. And to me, if he was a highly negative character from beginning to end, it rather kills that storyline, imo. Then it would appear that no one on the good side ever actually fell, which would be rather unrealistic in my view

To me, the storyline is that Peter had bad traits all along, but he was sorted into Gryffindor and his group of friends overlooked anything negative because he was one of the in-crowd.

I agree that he fell in the opposite direction of his friends, but he was always a good follower and even Sirius in the Shack questioned why they had never seen his true colors long before he betrayed them. The fact he was a rat animagus should have been a big clue, but they just thought of him as a useful small animal instead of the traditional negative connotation of a rat.

wickedwickedboy August 23rd, 2009 8:41 am

Re: Peter Pettigrew: Character Analysis
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by silver ink pot (Post 5399781)
I must have missed something. Where is he termed a hero in the canon? :huh:

I meant that there was no other point in the canon except when Peter was an Order member, imo, where I would see him as being a hero. The comment was made by JKR in an interview.

Quote:

To me, the storyline is that Peter had bad traits all along, but he was sorted into Gryffindor and his group of friends overlooked anything negative because he was one of the in-crowd.

I agree that he fell in the opposite direction of his friends, but he was always a good follower and even Sirius in the Shack questioned why they had never seen his true colors long before he betrayed them. The fact he was a rat animagus should have been a big clue, but they just thought of him as a useful small animal instead of the traditional negative connotation of a rat.
I respect your view, but I wasn't really referring to his traits or what others thought of him, but rather Peter's viewpoint. I was referring to his truly dedicating himself to the good side and its goals, then rejecting them and fully embracing the opposing viewpoint. We have examples going the other way, but Peter alone stands for this scenario, imo.

silver ink pot August 23rd, 2009 9:31 am

Re: Peter Pettigrew: Character Analysis
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by WWB
I respect your view, but I wasn't really referring to his traits or what others thought of him, but rather Peter's viewpoint. I was referring to his truly dedicating himself to the good side and its goals, then rejecting them and fully embracing the opposing viewpoint. We have examples going the other way, but Peter alone stands for this scenario, imo.

I'll have to disagree with that because I doubt that Peter was ever truly dedicated to the good side. JMO

CrimsonZephyr August 23rd, 2009 3:14 pm

Re: Peter Pettigrew: Character Analysis
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by silver ink pot (Post 5399793)
I'll have to disagree with that because I doubt that Peter was ever truly dedicated to the good side. JMO

Well, obviously not. He hung around whoever he thought was the biggest man with the most powerful group. In that respect, Voldemort clearly outshone the Marauders. He followed Voldemort out of pure fear, and a desire for self-preservation. We know nothing of how he ended up in the Order, but given his personality, it's likely (but not absolutely certain) that he followed his friends. There really was nothing brave about his betrayal. It was calculated, silent, and underhanded to a staggering degree. It was a result of his spinelessness, in my view, and nothing more.

wickedwickedboy August 23rd, 2009 7:03 pm

Re: Peter Pettigrew: Character Analysis
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by CrimsonZephyr (Post 5399880)
Well, obviously not. He hung around whoever he thought was the biggest man with the most powerful group.

I would disagree; I feel Dumbledore was the biggest man at the Order, not the Marauders - in fact, Kingsley, Moody and other tried and true Aurors were the most likely leaders on a smaller scale, taking the newbies in hand, helping them train and such in my opinion. I would agree that Peter didn't seem to like to be on his own, but I don't feel he was shown to be incapable of making decisions, even if he was weak. It is possible that Peter joined in light of Dumbledore and the other strong figures who were a part of the Order, however, I feel he actually wanted to do the right thing at that time and did want to work in the Order to further its cause. I think there was some truth to Sirius' statement (albeit it was likely exaggerated at the time due to the fact that Sirius was fit to be tied and ready to kill Peter), but the Order wasn't the most powerful group at the time according to the canon, so I don't feel that was his initial motivation. However, to be safer, I could see him gravitating toward the stronger individuals - but that would be those already in the Order, imo, or Dumbledore.

Quote:

In that respect, Voldemort clearly outshone the Marauders.
Voldemort certainly outshone the Marauders in strength and power, and perhaps even the more skilled Kingsley and Moody too; however, I feel it is questionable as to whether or not he outshone Dumbledore - although under Dumbledore's leadership, the Order members were in a losing stretch which may have made Peter believe he was. It was Dumbledore that would serve to protect Peter at the level of Voldemort in Peter's mind, imo, not his friends or the more experienced Order members - just as the DEs wouldn't be able to protect him either once he joined up with Voldy, imo. So in my opinion, if Peter thought about this, he would not make the comparison with his friends and Voldemort - just as he didn't in POA, he compared the regimes.

Quote:

He followed Voldemort out of pure fear, and a desire for self-preservation.
I feel that is true, and I think Voldemort did threaten Peter as Peter said in POA - but he also said that he reasoned out his choice - that Voldemort was winning and he foresaw only losing unless he joined him. So I do feel that Peter made a comparative decision, but he wasn't comparing Voldemort to the Marauders; rather Voldemort to Dumbledore, imo.

To me, Peter did some brave things and I include his fighting in the Order (during the period it was legitimate) as well as his spying and some confrontations - especially in light of his weak character (like Mundungus even agreeing to try to do the 7 Potters deal was brave for him, even though he ended up chickening out in the end). As a spy, Peter would have had to face Dumbledore, Moody (and his all knowing eye), Kingsley and others - not just his friends - and he had no skills as provided in canon to hide his lies and such, so I think it would be brave on his part to undertake that action against the Order. It would be way easier to lie to his friends who trusted him, but the other Order members and Dumbledore would be a different matter, imo. Also I feel that for Peter, a decision to fight for the Order, legitimately, in the first place would be brave - even if he was following his friends - much like his agreeing to become an animagus, imo. He was characterized as weak, and this type of thing would take bravery on his part to even agree to, much like Mundungus, imo. I agree with you that there was no bravery associated with his betrayal in and of itself - it was spineless and so forth, but I was referring to some of the other things he did when speaking about his bravery.

wolfbrother August 23rd, 2009 9:09 pm

Re: Peter Pettigrew: Character Analysis
 
IMO Peter was brave even though he betrayed the right side. It would take a lot of courage to pull of the double role. I wonder at how Peter managed to hide it for over a year. He must have a become a good Occlumens or else made sure that he had the least possible interaction with Dumbledore, Moody etc.
I'm not sure but Peter being considered 'weak' by Sirius was probably in relation to himself and James. He was after all an animagus, he blasted that entire street when Sirius confronted him, brewed that potion correctly to bring Voldemort back - he couldn't have been that bad.
Also he cut of his own hand for that potion, that couldn't have been easy.

silver ink pot August 24th, 2009 2:50 am

Re: Peter Pettigrew: Character Analysis
 
I think when Peter was in the Order, he was just following a pattern formed at Hogwarts of doing whatever the other Marauders were doing. They became Animagi, and so did he. They joined the Order, and so did he.

But as they grew up and grew apart, I think Peter began to believe that he might be treated with more respect on the Dark Side if he helped Voldemort. We don't know his total motivation, but I suspect resentment and jealousy. Plus the fact that Peter probably wanted the war over with so he wouldn't be in danger and wouldn't have to fight anymore.

I don't think Peter had to be a good Occlumens to fool his friends. None of them seems to have been a Legillimens or particularly suspicious of him. He used their trusting natures as a con man would, and fooled them all. Since Peter wasn't on the Marauder's radar, he wasn't on Dumbledore's radar either. The canon is that Dumbledore suspected Sirius, and James/Sirius suspected Lupin, so they all missed the obvious culprit, which was Peter, the weak link in the chain.

JMO

CrimsonZephyr August 24th, 2009 3:21 am

Re: Peter Pettigrew: Character Analysis
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by silver ink pot (Post 5400353)
I don't think Peter had to be a good Occlumens to fool his friends. None of them seems to have been a Legillimens or particularly suspicious of him. He used their trusting natures as a con man would, and fooled them all. Since Peter wasn't on the Marauder's radar, he wasn't on Dumbledore's radar either. The canon is that Dumbledore suspected Sirius, and James/Sirius suspected Lupin, so they all missed the obvious culprit, which was Peter, the weak link in the chain.

JMO

To be honest, I don't think James explicitly suspected Remus. Sirius is the only one who's explicitly stated as distrusting him. James is referred to as considering the mistrust of one's friends the highest dishonor, so I highly doubt that he suspected Lupin, one of his closest friends. Sirius was, evidently, not the same way. He mistrusted Remus, and it cost him. Peter exploited the fraying of their friendship and made the Secret-Keeper switch between the Potters (the targets), Sirius (the fall guy), and himself. Remus would have been another variable, one that could jeopardize his plan. He used Sirius's mistrust to his advantage. As Remus was not privy to the plan, he could not vouch for Sirius to Dumbledore.

wickedwickedboy August 24th, 2009 3:48 am

Re: Peter Pettigrew: Character Analysis
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by silver ink pot (Post 5400353)
I don't think Peter had to be a good Occlumens to fool his friends. None of them seems to have been a Legillimens or particularly suspicious of him. He used their trusting natures as a con man would, and fooled them all. JMO

Moody didn't have a trusting nature, imo, yet he was also decieved. I suspect Peter was a top notch Occlumens, jmo.

We'd just have to agree to disagree on Peter's motivations for joining the Order and his bravery in that regard. :)

CrimsonZephyr August 24th, 2009 3:53 am

Re: Peter Pettigrew: Character Analysis
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by wickedwickedboy (Post 5400399)
Moody didn't have a trusting nature, imo, yet he was also decieved. Perhaps Peter was a top notch Occlumens.

Or perhaps he didn't come into contact with Peter too often. I see Moody as a guy Peter would want to surreptitiously avoid. More importantly, Snape says to Harry that eye contact is, for the most part, essential if one wanted to read one's mind through Legilimency.

Then again, Peter would have to have been a top-notch Occlumens if he hid the SK switch from Dumbledore.


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 1:34 pm.

Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

Original content is Copyright © MMII - MMVIII, CoSForums.com. All Rights Reserved.
Other content (posts, images, etc) is Copyright © its respective owners.