Peter Pettigrew: Character Analysis

[wickedwickedboy]

Originally Posted by The_Green_Woods

Peter IMO ran to Voldemort because he wanted to save his life. He ran away from being Kissed. I don't think Peter did any one thing that was not for himself, his well being and his safety.

Right, but it was a risk nonetheless, imo.

Snape would have been alert so that he does not give away anything of his true loyalties to Peter. That IMO is not being afraid of him. Since Snape had to watch his step with all DEs at that time (seeing Bella's questions in Spinner's End) I think Snape had to take care when he spoke and acted like a DE with everyone. Snape was certainly not scared of the rat, when we see him in Spinner's End. He is actually mocking him and treating him as his servant.

Well we don't have canon on Snape's inner thoughts. However, underestimating Peter would have been a mistake on his part. So in my view, since Snape knew what Peter was capable of, he would be frightened that Peter might discover his loyalty or do something underhanded to him while staying at his home. It would not be beyond Peter to poison the wine, etc. And he would only be estopped for the same reason Snape was - fear of Voldemort's wrath, imo.

[The_Green_Woods]

Some how, I just can't see Snape's actions towards Peter as frightened. He was frightening Peter like anything though. He showed no respect, no cordiality, nothing for a rat who was with Snape in his home. He treated Peter like the Malfoys treated Dobby IMO.

[wickedwickedboy]

Originally Posted by The_Green_Woods

Some how, I just can't see Snape's actions towards Peter as frightened. He was frightening Peter like anything though. He showed no respect, no cordiality, nothing for a rat who was with Snape in his home. He treated Peter like the Malfoys treated Dobby IMO.

And that is a good thing? Peter wasn't a rat, Peter was a human being. But I don't know what that has to do with the fact that Snape would be wary of what he might try to do and what he might be able to discover. Peter was dangerous in that way, imo, and I feel Snape would have anxiety related to Peter in that regard.

[halfbloodsnape]

Originally Posted by wickedwickedboy

And that is a good thing? Peter wasn't a rat, Peter was a human being. But I don't know what that has to do with the fact that Snape would be wary of what he might try to do and what he might be able to discover. Peter was dangerous in that way, imo, and I feel Snape would have anxiety related to Peter in that regard.

Yes, probably, but if we consider the Severus-Lily part of the story he probably hated Wormtail just as much as the Marauders did. Even with him telling the Dark Lord about the prophecy Lily wouldn't have died if Wormtail wasn't a traitor.

Incidentally, I have always wondered what was the Gryffindor in Wormtail... He had to have 'something' that made the Hat place him there, but what he does and how he acts has nothing to do with bravery, chivalry or anything of the kind... He is always on the run from one powerful friend to the other...

[wickedwickedboy]

Originally Posted by halfbloodsnape

Yes, probably, but if we consider the Severus-Lily part of the story he probably hated Wormtail just as much as the Marauders did. Even with him telling the Dark Lord about the prophecy Lily wouldn't have died if Wormtail wasn't a traitor.

Yes, and while Snape does at times allow hatred to rule his judgment, and thereby underestimate people, I don't think he would do so with someone who was living with him. .

Incidentally, I have always wondered what was the Gryffindor in Wormtail... He had to have 'something' that made the Hat place him there, but what he does and how he acts has nothing to do with bravery, chivalry or anything of the kind... He is always on the run from one powerful friend to the other...

We saw so little of Peter - maybe 5 or 6 incidents in which he was involved. In all of those he was a Death Eater. The only other one we have is about 20 minutes of one day -and the focus was not upon him in that scene - I believe he was highlighted twice, once being rather slow and another time being rather obnoxious. So I don't think we have the canon to make any judgments about his young character at he time he was sorted.

[FurryDice]

Originally Posted by wickedwickedboy

I suppose he could have tried to be the pet rat of Draco - or some other Death Eater's child. However, that would have been a bit dangerous since they all wished to kill him. But he could have chosen a Ravenclaw or Hufflepuff as well. Instead he chose a Gryffindor family at Hogwarts. Perhaps to the end he always thought of it as home and wished to be there. Neville didn't seem much like the Gryffindor type either - imagine we'd only seen 1 scene of him when he was shivering in his lessons - we'd wonder the same thing. So I say Gryffindors come in all types, sizes, etc. He just made a lot of bad choices like others in the series.

I think it was quite at random that Peter became the Weasley's pet rat. I think he sought out a wizarding family- House allegiances not being particularly important, as long as it kept him in touch with what was going on in the Wizarding World. I don't think Draco would have been impressed with a pet rat somehow.

I wonder why Wormtail didn't flee abroad, somewhere he wouldn't be known or recognised - he could have avoided the whole Order,Marauders/Voldemort situation then.

[quote]

Originally Posted by hermy_weasley2

[*]Would Peter have remembered that he had a life debt to Harry if Harry had not managed to remind him?

I don't think so, he was choking Harry without thinking of the life debt until Harry reminded him. It was almost a reflex then to let go of Harry once reminded of the debt. Wormtail wouldn't have done anything for others that he didn't have to, not in a lfie or death situation.

[*]What prevented Peter from fleeing Voldemort's side? "Loyalty" or fear?

Fear, 100%. As Nokel has said, a more intelligent and skilled wizard like Karkaroff was tracked down, so Peter wouldn't have stood a chance. Not to mention that he had both sides looking for him, at least if he stayed with Voldemort, he would stay alive as long as he didn't mess up.

[*]Voldemort "gifted" Wormtail with a silver hand. How much of an impact if any did this have on him?

He seemed very impressed with it in the Graveyard and may have taken it as a token of Voldemort's appreciation of what he had done. It may have given him an inflated sense of his own importance in Voldie's eyes- as shown when Snape sneers at the idea that Peter can talk to Voldemort himself if he so wishes.
I think it's interesting that both remarks Voldemort makes to Peter about his hand are ironic in the extreme- Wormtail literally would give his right hand for Voldemort as promised and the warning that Peter should never let his loyalty waver again was likely referring to the somewhat alarm system on the new hand.

[*]Did Peter develop throughout the series?
If Wormtail liked the choices he made, why did he bite Goyle on the Hogwarts Express?

I don't see that Peter developed much, if at all. He remains the same treacherous coward in DH that we meet properly in the Shrieking Shack chapters of PoA. He may have grown revolted with what he was doing but he made no effort to act on this, at least consciously.
As for biting Golye, I reckon he was just playing the role of pet rat whose sleep had been disturbed.


I wonder who approached Peter about spying for Voldemort or how it came about. I doubt it was Snape, because had Snape known that Wormtail was the spy threat to Lily, he would have informed Dumbledore. So, how did it come about? I don't think he approached the Death Eaters himself, someone must have come to him.

[wickedwickedboy]

Originally Posted by FurryDice

I wonder who approached Peter about spying for Voldemort or how it came about. I doubt it was Snape, because had Snape known that Wormtail was the spy threat to Lily, he would have informed Dumbledore. So, how did it come about? I don't think he approached the Death Eaters himself, someone must have come to him.

In POA, Peter said Voldy came to him - I feel that is likely true because he would understand that he was approaching an Order member, someone close to the Potters and he would wish to handle it himself. As there were Gryffindor DEs, one of them may have told him about Peter originally. However, Voldy appeared to be the type to do research for himself at times, so he may have done so in this case as well.

[FurryDice]

Originally Posted by wickedwickedboy

And that is a good thing? Peter wasn't a rat, Peter was a human being. But I don't know what that has to do with the fact that Snape would be wary of what he might try to do and what he might be able to discover. Peter was dangerous in that way, imo, and I feel Snape would have anxiety related to Peter in that regard.

I agree, I think Snape would have been wary of Peter, and of what Peter saw and knew, but not scared of him. It seems Snape looked down on and despised Peter, going by Spinner's End.

Originally Posted by wickedwickedboy

In POA, Peter said Voldy came to him - I feel that is likely true because he would understand that he was approaching an Order member, someone close to the Potters and he would wish to handle it himself. As there were Gryffindor DEs, one of them may have told him about Peter originally. However, Voldy appeared to be the type to do research for himself at times, so he may have done so in this case as well.

Is there a quote for that? I don't remember him stating specifically that it was Voldemort who had approached him. That Voldemort would have killed him if he refused, yes, but not that Voldy was his first point of contact with the Death Eaters.

[The_Green_Woods]

Originally Posted by wickedwickedboy

And that is a good thing?

I don't understand this point. Could you please expand?

Peter wasn't a rat, Peter was a human being. But I don't know what that has to do with the fact that Snape would be wary of what he might try to do and what he might be able to discover. Peter was dangerous in that way, imo, and I feel Snape would have anxiety related to Peter in that regard.

Being wary and being alert are IMO different from being frightened or scared.

Peter may have been a human being, but I am sure Snape would not have seen him as human; I think Snape would have seen him as worse than a DE, a murderer even; Snape would have seen him as a traitor, and I don't think Snape would ahve even thought to treat Peter cordially as he would other human beings. Persoanlly, I think Peter deserved that treatment and more. Downright evil is IMO better than being a bad friend, a trusted friend who betrays.

And for me it pulls down the Marauder's and Lily's intelligence and their ability to see through people.

Snape had turned his back on everything just because he felt he had betrayed his friend, even though it was not his intention to do so, particularly. Peter on the other hand had betrayed the friendship and willingly sent his friend and their family to death. I don't think Peter needs to be treated in any way better than he was.

[arithmancer]

Originally Posted by wickedwickedboy

The only other one we have is about 20 minutes of one day -and the focus was not upon him in that scene - I believe he was highlighted twice, once being rather slow and another time being rather obnoxious. So I don't think we have the canon to make any judgments about his young character at he time he was sorted.

He was being a suck up, and this is highlighted more than two times. HIs avid fanboying of James is remarked upon even by Sirius, a member of the same group. We can also conclude he vicariously enjoyed his protectors' demonstration of their relative power, in the anticipation and delight he displayed watchign the "Worst Memory" play out.

That scene is packed with good stuff.

[wickedwickedboy]

Originally Posted by The_Green_Woods

I don't understand this point. Could you please expand?

It was a question - if it was good for Snape to treat Peter like the Malfoys treat Dobby.

Peter may have been a human being, but I am sure Snape would not have seen him as human; I think Snape would have seen him as worse than a DE, a murderer even; Snape would have seen him as a traitor, and I don't think Snape would have even thought to treat Peter cordially as he would other human beings.

He didn't have to treat him cordially - just with humanity because he was a human. If he didn't treat him like a human, that is a shame.

Originally Posted by zgirnius

He was being a suck up, and this is highlighted more than two times. HIs avid fanboying of James is remarked upon even by Sirius, a member of the same group. We can also conclude he vicariously enjoyed his protectors' demonstration of their relative power, in the anticipation and delight he displayed watchign the "Worst Memory" play out.

That scene is packed with good stuff.

But again, you are mixing "young Peter" with "death eater" Peter (the vicarious enjoyment bit). In as far as young Peter, we had one scene - and everyone is free to conclude all they will. But unfortunately for Peter, it wasn't one of his best moments, so the conclusions would necessarily be negative, imo. I only recall one moment in the scene when he was shown to be a suck up - so I am not sure what you mean by 'more than twice'. Thus, I don't judge him "when young" on the basis of that one scene. However, I respect the view of those who do.

[kittling]

Originally Posted by wickedwickedboy

It was a question - if it was good for Snape to treat Peter like the Malfoys treat Dobby.

But that very clearly wasn't the point being made Wick. TGW was responding to your statemnet that Severus was afraid of Peter but provideing an example which showed behaviour that was indicative of his feeling being something different from afraid.

Whether it was good or not is another issue entirely from the point being made!

[arithmancer]

I was referring to the vicarious enjoyment by fifth year Peter of the bullying of others by his friends. Specifically (emphasis mine) here we see him anticipating the pleasure to come, andhis reaction is highlighted by contrasting it with Lupin's:

OotP, "Snape's Worst Memory" Snape was on his feet again, and was stowing the OWL paper in his bag. As he left the shadows of the bushes and set off across the grass, Sirius and James stood up. Lupin and Wormtail remained sitting: Lupin was still staring down at his book, though his eyes were not moving and a faint frown line had appeared between his eyebrows; Wormtail was looking from Sirius and James to Snape with a look of avid anticipation on his face.

And:

OotP, "Snape's Worst Memory" Snape lay panting on the ground. James and Sirius advanced on him, wands raised, James glancing over his shoulder at the girls at the water's edge as he went. Wormtail was on his feet now, watching hungrily, edging around Lupin to get a clearer view.

Now he's getting what he likes, and he comes closer to see better. Again, we see Lupin stays put, this is not something Peter "has" to do to stay in with his buddies.

And:

OotP, "Snape's Worst Memory" Several people watching laughed; Snape was clearly unpopular. Wormtail snig-gered shrilly. Snape was trying to get up, but the jinx was still operating on him; he was struggling, as though bound by invisible ropes.

And:

OotP, "Snape's Worst Memory" Many of the surrounding students laughed, Sirius and Wormtail included, but Lupin, still apparently intent on his book, didn't, and nor did Lily.

Again, Peter's reaction is highlighted byt he contrast to Lupin and Lily, both of whom, we know, disapproved of the scene.

And:

OotP, "Snape's Worst Memory" Many people in the small crowd cheered; Sirius, James and Wormtail roared with laughter.

The one scene in OotP is long. Peter is in all of it, Peter is mentioned prominently and frequently, and Peter is shown to anticipate and vicariously enjoy the "torment" (Harry's word) and humiliation of a fellow student by his friends.

I'm not sure where this idea that little Peter used to be a nice guy comes from. We are shown he is anything but as an adult, and what we hear and are shown of his youth, matches his adult behavior.

[wickedwickedboy]

Originally Posted by zgirnius

I'm not sure where this idea that little Peter used to be a nice guy comes from. We are shown he is anything but as an adult, and what we hear and are shown of his youth, matches his adult behavior.

But who said Peter was a nice guy? All I said was that I don't judge him on that one scene. Many in the crowd were laughing also, it was funny. Peter liked a good row by his anticipation. He was shown to suck up once. So everyone laughing was vicariously enjoying themselves. I don't look see Peter as especially highlighted other than being one of the main characters in the scene (meaning of the known characters that would go on to be involved in the series). But I feel your opinion is fine - and I appreciate your evidence which I feel supports it. I simply do not try to enlarge upon Peter's character based on that one scene. Especially in an effort to show that the hat got it wrong, when JKR has already says it never does. That one scene does not tell me why he was in Gryffindor, so I assume there was more to Peter than what we saw there. I'm just being fair, imo, I have no liking for Peter.

Originally Posted by kittling

But that very clearly wasn't the point being made Wick. TGW was responding to your statemnet that Severus was afraid of Peter but provideing an example which showed behaviour that was indicative of his feeling being something different from afraid.

TGW said Snape treated Peter like Dobby (I disagree) - I know what the intent was, but the example of inhumane treatment being characterized as okay to make the point wasn't all right with me. So I made it the issue. In my view, it is a mischaracterization of Snape.

I futher clarified what I meant by frightened - not that Peter was some scary dude people ran from. But of what the very dangerous Peter might do and that he might discover Snape's loyalty to Dumbledore. Peter had been in the same position as Snape (with his loyalty going the other way) - so it is a recognizable situation for him. Also, Peter had nothing to hide, so he had nothing else to concentrate upon but snooping. If others don't feel Snape had this fear, I respect that, but I do. It is only natural as I see it, but that is my opinion.

[arithmancer]

Originally Posted by wickedwickedboy

That one scene does not tell me why he was in Gryffindor, so I assume there was more to Peter than what we saw there. I'm just being fair, imo, I have no liking for Peter.

There is an easy answer for why he was in Gryffindor. I think he asked for it. Anyway, the Gryffindor characteristic is courage, not moral superiority - the (to me) repulsive trait I am pointing out in Peter, can absolutely be the trait of a Gryffindor.

[wickedwickedboy]

Originally Posted by zgirnius

There is an easy answer for why he was in Gryffindor. I think he asked for it.

fair enough.

Anyway, the Gryffindor characteristic is courage, not moral superiority - the (to me) repulsive trait I am pointing out in Peter, can absolutely be the trait of a Gryffindor.

Do you feel I would disagree with that? I am the last person on earth who would believe Gryffs are morally superior. Harry, Hermione, Ginny, Les twins, James, Ron, Sirius, Remus...all prove that is an error in thinking, imo. .

However, I believe the person asking the question was speaking about the traits named in the sorting hat. To be honest, I always forget what Gryffs were, courage and some other stuff - but Peter wasn't showing anything I would label as a stellar trait, which is what the hat rattled off I believe, so I can't match him up with any of those when young. I can when he is older, but not when young because we just don't have enough info. Well actually that is not altogether true. It was courageous for him to become an animagus - so there is something. Evidently it takes more than just drinking a potion...

[The_Green_Woods]

Originally Posted by wickedwickedboy

It was a question - if it was good for Snape to treat Peter like the Malfoys treat Dobby.

Yes; not point, but question; okay!

If it were up to me, I would see that there was no need for Peter to be treated in any way at all; getting him Kissed or sentencing to rigorous imprisonment until his death would have been the right thing to do.

But Snape could not punish Peter at that time keeping in mind the bigger picture and I am not going to judge Snape for treating him the way he did, or Sirius and Lupin for wanting to kill him on the spot. I think Peter's fair game for everything.

He didn't have to treat him cordially - just with humanity because he was a human. If he didn't treat him like a human, that is a shame.

I respectfully disagree. I am a great believer of the line of thought that one should be treated according to the level they are. A kid should not be treated like an adult for example.

For Peter to be treated like a human, means, Peter to be treated with respect one gives to a fellow human being. That is something I believe Peter lost his rights to, when he behaved inhumanly; what he was getting was a response to his actions; he was facing the consequences of his own actions I don't see why there should be an interference with that.

But again, you are mixing "young Peter" with "death eater" Peter (the vicarious enjoyment bit). In as far as young Peter, we had one scene - and everyone is free to conclude all they will. But unfortunately for Peter, it wasn't one of his best moments, so the conclusions would necessarily be negative, imo. I only recall one moment in the scene when he was shown to be a suck up - so I am not sure what you mean by 'more than twice'. Thus, I don't judge him "when young" on the basis of that one scene. However, I respect the view of those who do.

I must quote zg's lovely post as answer for this.

http://www.cosforums.com/showpost.ph...&postcount=153

What we see of Peter is what is indicative of his nature. If his nature was something else, I am sure the author would have made us aware of it; like she has done with so many other characters, where she has shown us both the negative and positive sides; their changes and their evolution. I don't see that with Peter.

Originally Posted by kittling

But that very clearly wasn't the point being made Wick. TGW was responding to your statemnet that Severus was afraid of Peter but provideing an example which showed behaviour that was indicative of his feeling being something different from afraid.

Whether it was good or not is another issue entirely from the point being made!

Thank you kit . That's exactly what I was trying to say.

[halfbloodsnape]

Originally Posted by The_Green_Woods

I respectfully disagree. I am a great believer of the line of thought that one should be treated according to the level they are. A kid should not be treated like an adult for example.

For Peter to be treated like a human, means, Peter to be treated with respect one gives to a fellow human being. That is something I believe Peter lost his rights to, when he behaved inhumanly; what he was getting was a response to his actions; he was facing the consequences of his own actions I don't see why there should be an interference with that.

I have to agree here wholeheartedly. There is a moral difference between Snape and Wormtail. When Snape served the dark lord he did it faithfully, and when he realised his mistake and turned around he did it becouse he believed in something and he (probably) understood his mistakes, and tried to make them right, but he never bumped from here to there out of fear or seeking protection. While Wormtail was pretty accurately described by Sirius in PoA

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…”[...]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?

And then I agree with the last statement of your post, TGW saying that this was most probably Peter's nature.
We can't be sure though that he didn't have the possibility to turn out a better man. He must have had something of Gryffindor if he ended up there, I don't think the Hat would've put him there if there was nothing at all of Gryffindor in him, but perhaps he wasn't strong-willed enough...

[The_Green_Woods]

Originally Posted by halfbloodsnape

I have to agree here wholeheartedly. There is a moral difference between Snape and Wormtail. When Snape served the dark lord he did it faithfully, and when he realised his mistake and turned around he did it becouse he believed in something and he (probably) understood his mistakes, and tried to make them right, but he never bumped from here to there out of fear or seeking protection. While Wormtail was pretty accurately described by Sirius in PoA

It baffles me, as to how 3 very intelligent people were fooled by him for 10 years and one intelligent girl for some four years (Lily), even when they were in such close contact with him. It looks to me, like they loved all the false simpering, adoring and the sycophancy truly.

And then I agree with the last statement of your post, TGW saying that this was most probably Peter's nature.
We can't be sure though that he didn't have the possibility to turn out a better man. He must have had something of Gryffindor if he ended up there, I don't think the Hat would've put him there if there was nothing at all of Gryffindor in him, but perhaps he wasn't strong-willed enough...

I think it was Peter's nature too. While I agree Peter had the possibility of change, everyone did, it did not happen for him in this life. What we see is a cold blooded human being who cares not for his friends or foe. He is the ultimate self centred character in the whole series, with no goals except his wellbeing. One who does everything only for himself. There is no right or wrong, no policy, no rule for Peter; he did what was best for himself IMO.

[halfbloodsnape]

Originally Posted by The_Green_Woods

It baffles me, as to how 3 very intelligent people were fooled by him for 10 years and one intelligent girl for some four years (Lily), even when they were in such close contact with him. It looks to me, like they loved all the false simpering, adoring and the sycophancy truly.

Well, stating only my opinion here, but I sometimes did have the feeling that James and Sirius liked to be admired and that it was overconfidence on their part to trust Peter to this extent. With this plan, to make Peter Secret Keeper Sirius outwitted himself actually.
I believe trust is not the right word here: the merely thought Peter will do anything for them becouse they were use to it....

Originally Posted by The_Green_Woods

I think it was Peter's nature too. While I agree Peter had the possibility of change, everyone did, it did not happen for him in this life. What we see is a cold blooded human being who cares not for his friends or foe. He is the ultimate self centred character in the whole series, with no goals except his wellbeing. One who does everything only for himself. There is no right or wrong, no policy, no rule for Peter; he did what was best for himself IMO.

Exactly, this is why I always thought he was more worthy of Slytherin