James and Lily

[MsJPotter]

Originally Posted by Goddess_Clio

I agree with MsJ and FurryDice that Lily and James certainly grew up faster than they would have had there not been a war and certainly probably faster than they should have. But GrimeldaDursley says "bear in mind in the Wizarding World kids are considered adults at 17 and are expected to act so" not that Lily and James acted like adults despite their youth. Her quote implies that all 17 year olds in the wizarding world, whether during war time or not, are expected to act like adults and the fact is many simply don't have the maturity to do so.

I do think that Lily and James having such a purpose and focus in their lives to fight the dark arts aided in them developing the kind of maturity they would need to be in such a serious, committed relationship at such a young age but I don't by any means think that all wizarding kids their age were as adult as they were. I think they were exceptions.

I've always thought that maturity had very little to do with age myself. Some people are mature at 16 and others are infantile at 35. It all depends on the person. James and Lily obviously did mature quickly. They enlisted in the Order because they must have realised that the world didn't owe them a long and happy life. They were prepared to fight for a good life. This they did. I don't think they were spoiled, pampered children who expected the world handed to them on a silver platter. I really admire that about them.
In my misspent youth I studied history for a while. One of the things that impressed me, not in a good way mind you, was how spoiled the youth of today is compared to our grandparents and great grandparents. My great-grandparents on both sides were mostly all working in full time jobs when they were 15. They were expected to do this because they were not kids anymore. It's only a fairly recent development to say that 17-19 year olds should be considered children. 100 years ago they would be considered adults and expected to act like adults.

[Goddess_Clio]

Originally Posted by MsJPotter

I've always thought that maturity had very little to do with age myself. Some people are mature at 16 and others are infantile at 35. It all depends on the person.

That's all I'm saying. Not everyone becomes mature when they are expected to.

In my misspent youth I studied history for a while. One of the things that impressed me, not in a good way mind you, was how spoiled the youth of today is compared to our grandparents and great grandparents. My great-grandparents on both sides were mostly all working in full time jobs when they were 15. They were expected to do this because they were not kids anymore. It's only a fairly recent development to say that 17-19 year olds should be considered children. 100 years ago they would be considered adults and expected to act like adults.

There were also different expectations of kids in the past that meant that they had to grow up a lot faster than they do today. Today we (in the US anyway) are generally expected to enter school around age 5-6, stay in school until we're 18 when we acheive a high school diploma and then more or less expected to carry on to higher education and attain a degree from a univeristy or junior college or something.

Around 1900 (the turn of the century - your great grandparents' generation) children were expected to be out of school by age 14 so they could enter the laboring workforce and contribute to their family and were often released from mandatory attendance around age 12 or 13. Of course they were more mature than kids today, much more was expected of them! Families couldn't afford to keep their able-bodied kids in school when there were wages to be earned and mouths to feed. Very poor families didn't bother educating their children past basic reading, writing and basic math because they didn't feel it would substantially pertain to their working future so kids were often yanked from school even earlier than age 14, hence the great age of child labor when 9-year-olds were working 16 hour days in factories.

Kids in America and Europe today can afford to stay in school until 16 or 18 years of age because families are generally wealthy enough not to have to rely on that child to get a job and contribute to the family. Thusly, kids today are not expected to show a great amount of maturity until age 18-20 when they leave for college or are expected to move out of their parents' house and are therefore not considered a child anymore.

Societal expectations of when a child is expect to begin acting like an adult and when that child is actually mature enough to act like an adult are two completely separate things and are very personally and historically variable. Your grandparents may have been personally mature enough to leave school and hold full-time jobs, even to display characteristics of acting like an adult in holding down that full time job, but I'd bet you anything society at large didn't consider a 15-year-old an adult - there are solidly an adolescent.

This is getting OT...

[MsJPotter]

Originally Posted by Goddess_Clio

That's all I'm saying. Not everyone becomes mature when they are expected to.



There were also different expectations of kids in the past that meant that they had to grow up a lot faster than they do today. Today we (in the US anyway) are generally expected to enter school around age 5-6, stay in school until we're 18 when we acheive a high school diploma and then more or less expected to carry on to higher education and attain a degree from a univeristy or junior college or something.

Around 1900 (the turn of the century - your great grandparents' generation) children were expected to be out of school by age 14 so they could enter the laboring workforce and contribute to their family and were often released from mandatory attendance around age 12 or 13. Of course they were more mature than kids today, much more was expected of them! Families couldn't afford to keep their able-bodied kids in school when there were wages to be earned and mouths to feed. Very poor families didn't bother educating their children past basic reading, writing and basic math because they didn't feel it would substantially pertain to their working future so kids were often yanked from school even earlier than age 14, hence the great age of child labor when 9-year-olds were working 16 hour days in factories.

Kids in America and Europe today can afford to stay in school until 16 or 18 years of age because families are generally wealthy enough not to have to rely on that child to get a job and contribute to the family. Thusly, kids today are not expected to show a great amount of maturity until age 18-20 when they leave for college or are expected to move out of their parents' house and are therefore not considered a child anymore.

Societal expectations of when a child is expect to begin acting like an adult and when that child is actually mature enough to act like an adult are two completely separate things and are very personally and historically variable. Your grandparents may have been personally mature enough to leave school and hold full-time jobs, even to display characteristics of acting like an adult in holding down that full time job, but I'd bet you anything society at large didn't consider a 15-year-old an adult - there are solidly an adolescent.

This is getting OT...

Societal expectations aside and getting back to James and Lily, there's no sign that James and Lily were immature for their age. IMO they were fully adult and acted that way. They took things seriously and acted like the adults they were.

[Melaszka]

Guys, try to keep on the topic of canon and avoid going off into extended detours about parallels in your friends/family/Muggle history. Thanks

[Goddess_Clio]

Originally Posted by Melaszka

Guys, try to keep on the topic of canon and avoid going off into extended detours about parallels in your friends/family/Muggle history. Thanks

Sorry. My point, though long winded, was simply that there's no use comparing people today to people 100 years ago. Expectations were different, life styles were different, everything was different.

Originally Posted by MsJPotter

Societal expectations aside and getting back to James and Lily, there's no sign that James and Lily were immature for their age. IMO they were fully adult and acted that way. They took things seriously and acted like the adults they were.

I agree. I just disagree with comparing them to people 100 years ago.

Back on topic now... =^P

One further question going back to several posts ago when we were discussing Molly and Arthur eloping and how she said many people eloped because of the war. Do you think that that is the reason James and Lily married so young? For instance, and a BIG for instance, if there hadn't been the war, or it had ended about the time they left Hogwarts, do you think they would have waited a couple years to get married? Did they rush into it because of the war or was the bond they created in their seventh year so strong so fast that they would conceivably marry straight out of school whether or not there was a war?

It seems to me for some reason that the war hastened their marriage and that otherwise they might have waited a couple years. I don't know...

[wickedwickedboy]

I thought JKR decided to mimick the idea of early marriage in war time in her book and I think that applied to the Potters as well. But to be honest, people may have been marrying earlier back in those days anyway - that was what, the late 70's? I don't know, but one could likely check.

[SadiraSnape]

Yes indeed, people did get married earlier in the 70's and 80's. I was first married at 20, and my husband was 19, in 1977. And the Potters had to have been married in 1979, in order for Harry to be born in October 1980...

[silver ink pot]

Originally Posted by wickedwickedboy

I thought JKR decided to mimick the idea of early marriage in war time in her book and I think that applied to the Potters as well. But to be honest, people may have been marrying earlier back in those days anyway - that was what, the late 70's? I don't know, but one could likely check.

I think you're right that JKR was going for the idea of the wartime quick marriage ~ really more like the Vietnam generation a few years older or the WWII generation. Of course the Potters had also been out of school for a while anyway, so maybe it was just natural timing that coincided with the war.

(Edited because I saw warning upthread after I posted)

[StarryVeil]

Hello, everyone! I'm a big James-Lily supporter and have just finished going through this whole thread. Thought I'd revive it.

One reason why I think JKR did not give much information about this pairing is because I get the feeling she thought it was a given thing. They gave birth to Harry the most loving person in the whole series (as compared to Voldy) so their relationship is obviously a direct contrast to Merope and Tom Riddle's. Also, from the way we were simply supposed to infer that the doe was Lily's Patronus in DH, it looks like JKR expects us to firmly believe in the love between James and Lily. And I certainly don't have much trouble doing so! (Although I WAS disappointed of the lack of James-Lily in DH).

Considering that JKR isn't much of a romance writer IMO, her depiction of James and Lily's relationship through brief flashes of their school years was very well done. The tension between them in SWM, the adorably naughty way 11-year-old James mocks Lily during their first Hogwarts Express meeting with his "Ooooo"s (that mental image had me cracking up), James doodling Lily's initials (I've heard of girls doing this, but boys?), and the way Lily secretly laughs at/defends James without him knowing (cuz that wouldn't help his head-deflating process, would it? ) were very nice, subtle hints to their future relationship.

However, on the other side of the spectrum, I also sometimes got the feeling that Dumbledore (JKR's main expository character) did not view James and Lily's relationship in a completely positive light, especially in light of his close friendship with Snape. The way he kept referring to Lily as "Lily Evans" instead of "Lily Potter" in TPT, his "Harry's deepest nature is more like his mom's" comment, and his "Snape should be in Gryffindor" allusion somehow gave me the feeling that he thought Snape would have been the better man for Lily and that he didn't particularly admire James. This really upset me since I feel Lily couldn't have been happier with any other guy other than James. So is it just me or did anyone else get this feeling?

[wolfbrother]

I think Dumbledore was just being tactful with Snape. Snape did not like hearing abut James. I don't think Dumbledore spent much time wondering whether certain people were best paired with each other or not. I don't think his comment about sorting too early had anything to do with Lily either.

[Melaszka]

Just a friendly reminder that whether Lily or Snape would have made a good couple or not (or whether other characters thought that) is offlimits for this thread

[Goddess_Clio]

Originally Posted by StarryVeil

Hello, everyone! I'm a big James-Lily supporter and have just finished going through this whole thread. Thought I'd revive it.

Yay!! Another one!

One reason why I think JKR did not give much information about this pairing is because I get the feeling she thought it was a given thing. They gave birth to Harry the most loving person in the whole series (as compared to Voldy) so their relationship is obviously a direct contrast to Merope and Tom Riddle's.

I saw it more as a "give the reader just enough information to draw their own conclusions" type thing. We readers were led to believe certain things about James and Lily but their actual romantic relationship was left entirely for the reader to fill in thus giving every reader the chance to insert their own idea of the best, most fitting relationship.

Also, from the way we were simply supposed to infer that the doe was Lily's Patronus in DH, it looks like JKR expects us to firmly believe in the love between James and Lily. And I certainly don't have much trouble doing so!

I'm not a fan of the patronus argument being the be-all-end-all evidence that they were the most perfect, compatible couple ever, but that's a discussion for the patronus thread.

(Although I WAS disappointed of the lack of James-Lily in DH).

Me too!!! Although in a way I'm glad there wasn't any canon J/L stuff because then my whole perception of their relationship would have to change to fit around that canon information and I already am trying to forget the fact that JKR wrote that terrible prequel.

James doodling Lily's initials (I've heard of girls doing this, but boys?)

I am assured by some of the men in these threads that boys do this sort of thing too.

the way Lily secretly laughs at/defends James without him knowing (cuz that wouldn't help his head-deflating process, would it? )

I interpret James's head-deflating process as independant of Lily or her influence or relationship with him. I see it more like him kind of resigning to the fact that he's never going to win her over, he stops trying, he matures over the intervening months and when they return for their seventh year -after the summer months spent apart - Lily then notices the subtle growing up James had done. I think part of his maturing probably happened in sixth year (maturity doesn't happen overnight or over a summer holiday after all) but it often takes being physically separated for a period of time to really notice changes in a person. (Like weight loss or your kids growing up; if you see that person every day the changes in them aren't noticable but if you see them only once every couple months the changes from visit to visit are dramatic)

However, on the other side of the spectrum, I also sometimes got the feeling that Dumbledore (JKR's main expository character) did not view James and Lily's relationship in a completely positive light, especially in light of his close friendship with Snape.

I don't know if Dumbledore had a big opinion on James and Lily's relationship. The only reason I think he wouldn't see it in an entirely positive light would be if the prophecy about Harry had been made before Lily became pregnant and Dumbledore would then know that James and Lily's relationship would lead to 1) the endangerment of their child 2) the endangerment of their own lives and 3) the possible downfall of the whole of wizarding Britain.

Also, as Wolfbrother says, Dumbledore might simply have been being tactful with Snape and trying not to rub James-flavored salt in his wounds.

The way he kept referring to Lily as "Lily Evans" instead of "Lily Potter" in TPT

This might have to do with him knowing Lily as "Lily Evans" for several years before she and James married. Teachers often remember their students in a certain way (for instance, all my teachers viewed me as my big sister's little sister and couldn't divorce me from her). Dumbledore does the same thing with Voldemort, calling him Tom Riddle - though part of me thinks he was doing it to rankle Voldemort by not cow-towing to his wishes of being called Voldemort but also he simply knew Voldemort by the name Tom Riddle.

his "Harry's deepest nature is more like his mom's" comment

He didn't seem to be as arrogant as young James so I think this comment is fair. I see this as saying more about Lily's nature that Harry's, though, because we don't know a whole heck of a lot about Lily herself.

and his "Snape should be in Gryffindor" allusion somehow gave me the feeling that he thought Snape would have been the better man for Lily and that he didn't particularly admire James.

This comment to me had more to do with how Hogwarts sorts its students than with whether Dumbledore thought Snape was a better romantic match than James. (I'm sorry, this is approaching a Snape v. James situation but I'm really trying not to let it go there!!) It also comes down to a discussion of what qualities the sorting hat sees when you are sorted at age 11 - does it see only the qualities you have as an 11-year-old or does it see into your future and what you will grow into? The sorting hat, to me, is very inconsistent.

This really upset me since I feel Lily couldn't have been happier with any other guy other than James. So is it just me or did anyone else get this feeling?

Would love to discuss but there's a serious no Snape v. Marauders rule and I don't want to get a slap on the wrist from the moderators...

[FurryDice]

[quote]

Originally Posted by StarryVeil

Hello, everyone! I'm a big James-Lily supporter and have just finished going through this whole thread.

If you're interested, check out the Lily/James social group : http://www.cosforums.com/group.php?groupid=23

One reason why I think JKR did not give much information about this pairing is because I get the feeling she thought it was a given thing.

Perhaps she did. Personally, I take it as a given. Lily and James are one of my favourite couples in the series, I think they're wonderful for each other.

(Although I WAS disappointed of the lack of James-Lily in DH).

Me too. I would have loved some information about their relationship or about their involvement in the Order and how they defied Voldemort. On the other hand, I just love that beautiful poignant scene of Lily and James together with Harry at Godric's Hollow before Voldemort bursts in.

James doodling Lily's initials (I've heard of girls doing this, but boys?),

I love that one, I think it's really sweet.

However, on the other side of the spectrum, I also sometimes got the feeling that Dumbledore (JKR's main expository character) did not view James and Lily's relationship in a completely positive light,

IMO, Dumbledore respected and accepted that Lily and James chose each other, loved each other and were happy together. I don't think he would have been so presumptuous as to consider Lily an object to be with someone else, and disregard her happiness with a good man.

I think Dumbledore did have regard for James. He was proud of Harry for showing mercy to Pettigrew, and feels that James would also have spared him. IMO, this shows that he did think positively of James. He refers to James and Sirius in response to Harry's declaration that if he is going to die, he's going to take DEs and maybe even Voldemort down with him if possible. He's proud of Harry's courage in facing the road ahead, and of his determination not to back away, and he compares him favourably to James and Sirius.

[LilyDreamsOn]

Originally Posted by wolfbrother

I think Dumbledore was just being tactful with Snape. Snape did not like hearing abut James. I don't think Dumbledore spent much time wondering whether certain people were best paired with each other or not. I don't think his comment about sorting too early had anything to do with Lily either.

I agree, I think Dumbledore was mostly appeasing Snape because he knew this was all a touchy subject for him. Dumbledore seemed to have a pretty close relationship with James and Lily from working in the Order. I'd also say he saw them both as good people and good leaders since he made them Head Boy and Girl.

[StarryVeil]

Originally Posted by Goddess_Clio

Also, as Wolfbrother says, Dumbledore might simply have been being tactful with Snape and trying not to rub James-flavored salt in his wounds.

Haha, yeah, I'd reasoned it like that too but I wasn't too sure.

I interpret James's head-deflating process as independant of Lily or her influence or relationship with him. I see it more like him kind of resigning to the fact that he's never going to win her over, he stops trying, he matures over the intervening months and when they return for their seventh year -after the summer months spent apart - Lily then notices the subtle growing up James had done. I think part of his maturing probably happened in sixth year (maturity doesn't happen overnight or over a summer holiday after all) but it often takes being physically separated for a period of time to really notice changes in a person. (Like weight loss or your kids growing up; if you see that person every day the changes in them aren't noticable but if you see them only once every couple months the changes from visit to visit are dramatic)

Yes!! That's the way I imagined it too! Except I feel that Lily's outburst in SWM did have a profound effect on him and his development. He may have vented his immediate anger on Snape, but I imagine James would be tossing and turning around in bed that night, going over Lily's words. I think that was the first time he realized that his behavior was wrong. All I meant by my comment was that if Lily had openly laughed at his jokes/defended him, that realization may not have hit him, thus probably slowing down/delaying his maturation.

However, I agree with you on his development throughout 6th year. I imagine Lily noticing it gradually while she herself discovers that her Amortentia smells like broomstick polish ("But I don't even own a broomstick! When do I smell broomstick polish?" she wonders, her mind subconsciously drifting to evenings in the Gryffindor Common Room where a certain someone obsessively keeps his broomstick in tip-top shape.) Ha!

[Goddess_Clio]

Originally Posted by StarryVeil

Yes!! That's the way I imagined it too! Except I feel that Lily's outburst in SWM did have a profound effect on him and his development. He may have vented his immediate anger on Snape, but I imagine James would be tossing and turning around in bed that night, going over Lily's words. I think that was the first time he realized that his behavior was wrong. All I meant by my comment was that if Lily had openly laughed at his jokes/defended him, that realization may not have hit him, thus probably slowing down/delaying his maturation.

I might be the only J/L shipper who doesn't think that it was really necessary for James to have had some big epiphany as a result of Lily telling him off. Yes, he was being a jerk but I personally feel like he knew what he was doing and to a certain extent how he was perceived so Lily telling him off wasn't imparting any new information on him.

I feel like to a certain extent being a jerk and going through that kind of phase is a part of growing up. I know there were times when I was in school when I was flagrantly mean or rude or a jerk to someone but I thought at the time at it was somewhat acceptable because that's the way all my friends were acting and I wasn't saying or doing anything original in being a jerk in that moment. I knew I was in the wrong and the things I was saying or doing were mean or bad or socially unacceptable or however you want to say it but I was bowing to peer pressure and acting the way my friends were. Is it right? No. Did I know it at the time? Yes. Do I feel bad about some the things I said or did now? Absolutely. But that's a part of growing up, everyone falls off the horse at some point, nobody can be a saint all the time.

I think to a certain extent this was what was going on with James in his middle teen years. I think he came to Hogwarts as a good kid and left Hogwarts as a good young man but the years in between, when all he had to steer him in moral guidance were other teenagers, that he stumbled, he fell victim to his own popularity and realized it or simply got tired of trying to maintain that kind of popular, too-big-for-his-breeches persona. I don't necessarily think Lily was the linchpin in James's maturation, her intervention might have simply come at an apropos moment in time: at the end of a school year when he was riding high on his popularity and self-importance, having becoming an animagus and was about to go home for two months where he didn't have to keep up appearances and maintain that big man on campus facade.

Maybe this is just me.

[StarryVeil]

Originally Posted by Goddess_Clio

I might be the only J/L shipper who doesn't think that it was really necessary for James to have had some big epiphany as a result of Lily telling him off.

You aren't alone - I don't think he needed anything huge to change either. He always had a good heart, as evidenced by the fact that the werewolf prank came before SWM. But I do think he needed a nudge from somewhere to straighten up. Lily's tirade did the trick. I'm not saying he wouldn't have matured if Lily or someone like her hadn't told him off; I'm just saying if that were the case, he might have taken a little more time to do so.

Yes, he was being a jerk but I personally feel like he knew what he was doing and to a certain extent how he was perceived so Lily telling him off wasn't imparting any new information on him.

I somehow did not get the feeling that James knew what he was doing in SWM was wrong. His disappointment that Lily did not find him funny and his (adorably) disgruntled "What is with her?" comment did not strike me as those of a boy who knew his actions were not right. IMO, James was strongly against the Dark Arts and he couldn't understand what a decent girl like Lily was doing, hanging around with someone like Snape, who was a pretty questionable character himself. This sense of righteousness put together with his, in JKR's words, "bombastic" personality caused him to act the way he did towards Snape. I don't think for a moment that he pointlessly bullied other students that same way he did Snape in SWM. His pranks are described as "petty misdeeds" in HBP - sort of the same as Harry using a toenail-growing hex on Crabbe and a tongue-sticking hex on Filch just for the fun of it. So in James's eyes, his pranks on other kids were just good fun (with which I agree ) and what he did to Snape was deserved by the latter for his involvement in the Dark Arts and, yes, his friendship with Lily. Someone simply needed to signal to James that he shouldn't act that way towards Snape, no matter how suspicious Snape's interests were. Lily gave him this signal.

[Goddess_Clio]

Originally Posted by StarryVeil

You aren't alone - I don't think he needed anything huge to change either. He always had a good heart, as evidenced by the fact that the werewolf prank came before SWM. But I do think he needed a nudge from somewhere to straighten up. Lily's tirade did the trick. I'm not saying he wouldn't have matured if Lily or someone like her hadn't told him off; I'm just saying if that were the case, he might have taken a little more time to do so.

Meh... In my view Lily's tirade might have been a kick in the pants but there had to have been something more substantial that would really spur James into maturing or deciding to abandon his big man facade. Perhaps it was the death of a parent (since he had elderly parents) or an increasing brutality or escalation in the first war that did it.

[StarryVeil]

Originally Posted by Goddess_Clio

Meh... In my view Lily's tirade might have been a kick in the pants but there had to have been something more substantial that would really spur James into maturing or deciding to abandon his big man facade. Perhaps it was the death of a parent (since he had elderly parents) or an increasing brutality or escalation in the first war that did it.

That's exactly what I meant. Lily's words simply shook him up and cleared his view.

Now that you brought up the parents, does anyone else find it incredibly sad that all four of their parents died during the four years they were together? I know this probably was just JKR's way of making sure Aunt Petunia was Harry's only remaining blood relative but since we're discussing everything within the context of the HP universe, this must have been VERY tough for both James and Lily. It's sad that precisely when the two of them start finding happiness with each other, it is dampened by the passing of all four of their parents. This must have been a factor in strengthening their bond and also something that made the arrival of Harry all the more poignant and joyous for them.

[Goddess_Clio]

Originally Posted by StarryVeil

Now that you brought up the parents, does anyone else find it incredibly sad that all four of their parents died during the four years they were together? I know this probably was just JKR's way of making sure Aunt Petunia was Harry's only remaining blood relative but since we're discussing everything within the context of the HP universe, this must have been VERY tough for both James and Lily. It's sad that precisely when the two of them start finding happiness with each other, it is dampened by the passing of all four of their parents. This must have been a factor in strengthening their bond and also something that made the arrival of Harry all the more poignant and joyous for them.

YES, it is very sad! In my mind, though, James might have begun losing his parents while still in school but after the events of OOTP (Maybe, he might have lost his father early in life which would enhance his idolatry of him; his father wouldn't be around to prove James's perfect image of him wrong ). We are told his parents were elderly so it's reasonable to think that one might not have survived to James's graduation.

As for Lily's parents, I've often wondered if Petunia telling Harry that James and Lily were killed in a car accident was because she lost her own parents in a car accident. Lily's parents were never mentioned as being old or sickly or anything like that and for both relatively young and healthy parents to die within a couple years of each other makes me wonder if they were victims of an accident. For Petunia, a car accident might have been the first thing that came to her mind when Harry began asking questions about his parents because that was how she had lost her own parents so suddenly and unexpectedly.

The one thing I do feel pretty strongly about, for some unknown, unexplainable reason, is that I think James lost his parents before Lily lost hers. I think, if her parents were victims of an accident, she would have had a lot harder of a time coping with that loss than James, who would have known his own parents weren't long for this world and had a lot more mental and emotional prep time, even if that was all unconscious. In such a tragic moment as losing both parents in one fell swoop, James would have had to be the rock for Lily and for some reason I feel like he would be more capable of being the right kind of rock for her if he had already gone through the loss of his own parents first.