Deconstructing the Marauders V.9

[grrliz]

Welcome to Version 9!

1) Machiavelli's General Disclaimer
1. We do not condone violence and the victim is not to blame.
2. We cannot judge anyone on the basis of a single incident.
3. People are not single dimensional and cannot be handily sorted into 'good' and 'bad'.
4. No matter how attractive someone is (fan girls, breath deeply now) they are still responsible for their choices.
5. These are just characters in a book and we can only base arguments on the text as given - arguments making assumptions must be recognized as being somewhat weak.
6. Everyone has a right to their opinion - and must be given respect.
7. There is a difference between doing bad things and being a bad person.
8. As divided as this thread can get, no one is to be labeled a "Sevage" for supporting Snape or a "Maudie" for supporting James or Sirius. It is not fair and quite inappropriate to assume that someone is a fangirl just for supporting a certain side.

Finally, if you're new to the thread, glance back at the older version to get an idea of what has been discussed, and welcome!

2) A List of Links to All Versions of Previous Threads For Quick Reference
Version 1
Version 2
Version 3
Version 4
Version 5
Version 6
Version 7 is MIA
Version 8

3) The last post in Version 8, for reference

Originally Posted by silver ink pot

I forgot you were a Mugwump, too! All of you Mugwumps are nice!

(I'm more of a "Grand Poobah" type, myself, lol - "Lord High Everything Else" from Gilbert and Sullivan.)



Welcome, Desraelda!

I think I learned alot about British history from many of those mini-series of the 1970s. Another one that showed the class system so well was "Flambards," which is one of my all-time favorite shows (I own the DVD! ). It seems to me that the Wizarding World is in a similar state to British society just before WWI, as in Flambards. The world was changing due to more open ideas about servants and masters - they make fun of the word "medieval" alot in that series. Alot of role-reversals and justice, as the war treated everyone the same and women gained more power (jobs and the right to vote.) It also showed the way women were treated like servants, and servants were often treated like animals - similar to the Wizarding World.

Alot of young people aren't familiar with these British series - another good one (though more soap-operaish) was Poldark. It is a shame because they taught my generation a world of things about history and were just good stories. That's why so many things in the Potter books seem "new" to American kids, but not to some of us.

[clkginny]

I think alot of that would have to do with specific history of America versus Britain. We didn't really have the class structure over here, no hereditary lords and landed gentry. We did have slavery, though, and our (I hope) national view of slavery tends to identify with the affluent slave owner beating the slaves (a la Uncle Tom's Cabin). It might be different back east, somewhat, but here in the west it is hard to understand a fuedal system in any respect. Although, I've often wondered exactly how different the fuedal system was from slavery.

Of course, I was born in the 70's, so perhaps I'm a kid, too.

[shaggydogstail]

Originally Posted by clkginny

I think alot of that would have to do with specific history of America versus Britain. We didn't really have the class structure over here, no hereditary lords and landed gentry. We did have slavery, though, and our (I hope) national view of slavery tends to identify with the affluent slave owner beating the slaves (a la Uncle Tom's Cabin). It might be different back east, somewhat, but here in the west it is hard to understand a fuedal system in any respect. Although, I've often wondered exactly how different the fuedal system was from slavery.

There were certainly similarities between feudal bondage and slavery. Serfs were 'bonded' to the Lord of the Manor and during feudal times it was commonplace for servants' children to serve their masters' children and so on for generations. Peasants had almost no legal rights and were often ruthlessly exploited as were domestic servants. Servants and serfs could legally leave their masters sometimes, but in practice those that did so were often condemned to destitution as they had no means of owning land to produce for themselves. That they had the 'right' to leave is an important distinction from slavery, but it make limited practical difference as there is little use in having rights if you cannot afford to exercise them. As someone once said of other legal rights 'British Justice is open to all; just like the doors of the Ritz Hotel'.

Feudal arrangements were a precursor to slavery in the British Empire. In the early days of the Carribbean sugar plantations, wealthy landowners shipped 'indentured servants' from Britain and Ireland to work for them, under horrible conditions. When the supply of labour ran out (due to rising employment opportunities afforded to the British peasantry by the beginning of the Industrial Revolution) they then turned to the slave trade, which soon became central to the success of British Industrialisation generating massive amounts of wealth both by the trade in slaves, and the use of their labour to produce cash crops.

The important distinctions between slavery and feudalism were both the concept of ownership (which did exist under feudalism, but was more pronounced under slavery) and, most importantly, the value judgements entailed. Under the feudal system it was commonly believed that individuals were allocated their station in life by God - 'The rich man in his castle, the poor man at his gate, the Lord God made them both and put them in their place,' as the hymn 'All Things Bright and Beautiful' puts it. The rise in Enlightenment thinking, which corresponded with the Industrial Revolution challenged this notion, developing the ideas of what we now know as 'human rights' those 'self-evident truths...that all men are created equal'. The concept of slavery was so clearly at odds with those ideals that its supporters propegated notions of racial difference, specifically the idea that people of African origins were somehow so 'inferior' to those with European origins as to not qualify for the rights that were afforded by God to all men. (And of course, they really did mean men!)Slaves came to be seen not as fellow humans afforded a lesser station in life by God, but almost as a sub-specis, either not quite human or not so fully evolved as Europeans. These distinctions are clearly racist lies, though sadly the obnoxious doctrine of racial difference is still come way from being completely existinguished.

In this respect (she said, furiously trying to paddle back from British History 101 towards Potterverse) house elves are more analogous to slaves than serfs. The difference is that they clearly are different species to Wizards, so it is harder to judge to what extent their servility is down to oppression and indoctrination, and what is genuinely in their nature. The confusion about the relative status of different species in the Magical World is very apparent in 'Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them' where JKR gives an amusing account of the Ministry's attempts to categorise everyone into 'Beasts' or 'Beings' with fairly disastorous results. The most human-like of the magical creatures - centaurs and merpeople - insist on being categorised as Beasts rather than Beings, such is their disgust at the whole debacle.

I'm not sure what the message is, other than to point to the folly of trying to categorise and draw boundaries. The three house-elf characters have very different personalities and ideas, whilst the most repugnant elements of the house-elves behaviour, their cringing servility, is also displayed by Wizards - I'm thinking here of the Death Eaters kissing Voldemort's robes.

This relates to Lupin (HA! A Marauder, I am totally On Topic! ). As a werewolf Lupin is at the heart of this confusion. He is very much a human character and JKR presents him as a Wizard inflicted with a terrible disease. Yet werewolves are considered dangerous animals, and the Ministry has departments dealing with werewolves in both the Beasts and Beings divsions. The contrasts in Lupin are so pronounced as to be obviously deliberate. During his transformations Lupin becomes a terrifying and dangerous beasts, yet JKR has been at pains to depict his human character as an exceptionally kind and gentle man who is haunted by his wolfish alter-ego. Lupin's DADA classes focus on 'Dark Creatures' yet he seems to have some compassion for them, as when he mentions having a nice cupboard which the Boggart will like. I think there is an anti-prejudice message here, as again JKR seems to be pointing at the dangers of slotting species as well as individuals into easy categories, but to be honest I don't fully understand where it is all going.

[grrliz]

Originally Posted by shaggy

This relates to Lupin (HA! A Marauder, I am totally On Topic! ). As a werewolf Lupin is at the heart of this confusion. He is very much a human character and JKR presents him as a Wizard inflicted with a terrible disease. Yet werewolves are considered dangerous animals, and the Ministry has departments dealing with werewolves in both the Beasts and Beings divsions. The contrasts in Lupin are so pronounced as to be obviously deliberate. During his transformations Lupin becomes a terrifying and dangerous beasts, yet JKR has been at pains to depict his human character as an exceptionally kind and gentle man who is haunted by his wolfish alter-ego. Lupin's DADA classes focus on 'Dark Creatures' yet he seems to have some compassion for them, as when he mentions having a nice cupboard which the Boggart will like. I think there is an anti-prejudice message here, as again JKR seems to be pointing at the dangers of slotting species as well as individuals into easy categories, but to be honest I don't fully understand where it is all going.

What I find odd is that there is so much rampant prejudice against werewolves, and yet the way they are described in Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them suggests that they're only considered "beasts" when actually transformed, and thus the prejudice towards lycanthropes as people is rather unwarranted.

Werewolves (aren't all bad in Harry's handwriting )
M.O.M. Classification: XXXXXX*
The werewolf is found worldwide, though it is believed to have originated in northern Europe. Humans turn into werewolves only when bitten. There is no known cure, though recent developments in potion-making have to a great extent alleviated the worst symptoms. Once a month, at the full moon, the otherwise sane and normal wizard or Muggle afflicted transforms into a murderous beast. Almost uniquely among fantastic creatures, the werewolf actively seeks humas in preference to any other kind of prey.

*This classification refers, of course, to the werewolf in its transofmed state. When there is no full moon, the werewolf is as harmless as any other human. For a heartrending account of one wizard's battle with lycanthropy, see the classic Hairy Snout, Human Heart by an anonymous author (Whizz Hard Books, 1975).

I'm interested, mostly, in the footnote where Newt Scamander makes his point that lycanthropes are perfectly safe and normal people to be around 365 days a year and 352 nights a year. While he does mention in the body of his entry on werewolves that lycanthropes are otherwise "sane and normal" when not transformed, it's sort of sad that he sort of glosses over it and only fdeals with it more fully in a footnote, because we all know no one reads footnotes. This would have been a great moment for some real evangelism on the subject of werewolf prejudice! But, alas, Scamanader missed the boat on that one.

(Ugh. Serfdom. Maybe reading about it in this thread means I'll have to study less for my Medieval History exam in April. }

[shaggydogstail]

Originally posted by grrliz
Ugh. Serfdom. Maybe reading about it in this thread means I'll have to study less for my Medieval History exam in April.

Never fear, you can always rely of Professor Shaggy, Mistress of Banging on About Boring Stuff From History to relate everything from the Spanish Inquisition to the Peasants' Revolt to Potterverse for your delight, delictation, education and relief of insomnia!

[subtle science]

Does PoA actually contain the line "You'd know about the madness within, Remus"? I don't have the books at hand (aarrggh); right now, all I'm remembering is the line from the film.
Anyway--It's a common theme in horror literature, that the kind, gentle soul is the werewolf (even Buffy used it!). The idea underlying the concept is pretty interesting--that, unlike normal humans, the werewolf releases all of his aggression, violent tendencies, and other negative traits during the transformation. Therefore, he is wiped clean of such for the remainder of the month, as a human. It refers to the idea that human nature is divided between the spiritual and the animal, rational and irrational, civilized and savage--the legends of the werewolves illustrate the dichotomy of human nature. Hence--the movie line referring to all this..............

'Course--I rather like JKR's take on the legend, that she takes the basic format, if you will, and also makes the werewolf some sort of spy (maybe, seems so) and have to operate in a society and for the benefit of a society that generally doesn't value him at all.

[silver ink pot]

CLKGinny: The Feudal System lived on in England with servants who served "Lords" and other wealthy people "on the land." I'm not sure I understand all the implications of people who sort of "belonged" to great estates, but it really was similar to slavery. Yes, they got paid wages - extremely small wages - certainly not enough to go anywhere else and start over. If you were thrown out, then you either have to find another job "without references" (almost impossible) or you had to leave your home and go to London, or if you were too old to work, you had to go to the poorhouse and die there of disease or malnutrition.

The reason their are House Elf heads on the wall at Grimmauld Place is because those are the ones who got too old to work, according to Sirius. I've never read about anything like that in the slavery of the U.S., at least! Although, slaves led such short lives anyway, due to hard work and no medical care, that it really isn't that different.

From other books I've read, I know that sometimes the trap was that servants were "free" to come and go, BUT the landed people owned the servant's houses. Also, they weren't allowed to marry or build a house without permission, even if their families had worked the same land for centuries. That is quite similar to American slavery - except the ability to leave home freely. Also, once a British servant left, they probably couldn't come back to work there ever, just like a slave! That is sort of like Winky's problem in GoF - she can't go home again.

It's interesting that often the reasons given for the Feudalistic arrangement mentions the word "Marauders." The peasants wanted protection, and in return the "Lord of the Manor" would fight off attacks by marauders.

http://www.sparknotes.com/history/eu...section7.rhtml

Why did peasants buy into it? Relatively weak, they had no choice. On the more positive side, it did make some sense at the time to give one's freedom over to the local strongman who could protect against foreign marauders and local pillagers.

Interesting that the word Marauders only comes up when a historian is writing about Viking invasions or Atilla the Hun!

Here's something funny I came across, too, and I've never seen this before. Rober Silverberg is one of the most well-known science fiction writers in the world. I used to like his work alot when I was in middle school.

The picture looks as if the mad scientist has a "giant woman" strapped to a table, lol.

[Desraelda]

Originally Posted by subtle science

Does PoA actually contain the line "You'd know about the madness within, Remus"? I don't have the books at hand (aarrggh); right now, all I'm remembering is the line from the film.
Anyway--It's a common theme in horror literature, that the kind, gentle soul is the werewolf (even Buffy used it!). The idea underlying the concept is pretty interesting--that, unlike normal humans, the werewolf releases all of his aggression, violent tendencies, and other negative traits during the transformation. Therefore, he is wiped clean of such for the remainder of the month, as a human. It refers to the idea that human nature is divided between the spiritual and the animal, rational and irrational, civilized and savage--the legends of the werewolves illustrate the dichotomy of human nature. Hence--the movie line referring to all this..............

'Course--I rather like JKR's take on the legend, that she takes the basic format, if you will, and also makes the werewolf some sort of spy (maybe, seems so) and have to operate in a society and for the benefit of a society that generally doesn't value him at all.

Another example is Wolf in The Talisman by Stephen King. After I read the book, the friend who recommended it asked me who my favorite character was and I said without hesitation, Wolf.

[The Black Adder]

Originally Posted by silver ink pot

It's interesting that often the reasons given for the Feudalistic arrangement mentions the word "Marauders." The peasants wanted protection, and in return the "Lord of the Manor" would fight off attacks by marauders.

Well, this was the whole reason for feudalism, a system of mutual obligations, at least in the ideal. And foreign marauders weren't the only threats to the peasantry. The story of William the Conqueror is a good example. When his father the duke of Normandy died on pilgrimage leaving a young illegitimate child as his heir, his noble blood relations went crazy fighting amongst themselves and trying to kill the boy to get the dukedom. There was anarchy in Normandy. William's guardians went to the french king, his liegelord, for help in restoring order, and it was said that the peasants were particularly relieved to see the king's army.

When William came to maturity and established himself, it was said that a man could walk the countryside with a bag of gold and a woman could walk alone unmolested in Normandy for fear of the duke. Even after he made himself the king of England, the one or two positive things the Anglo-Saxon chronicles will say about him is that he established the peace and sought to uphold the English laws.

Sorry to de-lurk here out of the blue. I have no idea what this has to do with Harry Potter. I just find the story of William the Conqueror sort of fascinating.

Re-lurking

[silver ink pot]

I believe it says in the Intro to Fantastic Beasts that werewolves are handled as humans, but when they have transformed they are considered beasts. From the section, "What is a Beast":

We are all familiar with the extremists who campaign for the classification of Muggles as "beasts"; we are all aware that the centaurs have refused "being" status and requested to remain "beasts"; werewolves, meanwhile, have been shunted between the Beast and Being divisions for many years; at the time of writing there is an office for Werewolf Support Services at the Being Division whereas the Werewolf Registry and Werewolf Capture Unit fall under the Beast Division. Several highly intelligent creatures are classified as "beasts" because they are incapable of overcoming their own brutal natures. Acromantulas and Manticores are capable of intelligent speech but will attempt to devour any human that goes near them. The sphinx talks only in puzzles and riddles, and is violent when given the wrong answer.

That is really more confusing than anything else. But I think Lupin may be one of the few werewolves in Britain who has ever had a friend. The treatment the group has received has to figure in to the next two books, I would think. I wish some of this information was in the main canon, and we could hear the characters talk about it more.

It seems ironic to me that animagi might not be considered "beasts" even though they have no control over what animal they turn into. A person could technically turn into something just as deadly as werewolf whenever they wanted to, whereas a werewolf has no choice. Maybe that is why animagi are "listed" with the Ministry. But as we know, there are ways to get around it.

What I'm trying to say is, from Lupin's or any werewolf's point of view, it really isn't fair that some animagi don't have to register as "Beasts." Especially a pureblood wizard like Sirius Black can have all the advantages of wizarding society, even if he chooses to be a dog all the time, but a registered werewolf can't. There are too many gray areas in magic.

Black Adder: Thanks for putting the "serfs" in context, lol. By the way - I know I haven't answered your last OWL - I'm just running behind due to real life and my slow thought processes!

[HermioneLuna]

Originally Posted by silver ink pot

That is really more confusing than anything else. But I think Lupin may be one of the few werewolves in Britain who has ever had a friend. The treatment the group has received has to figure in to the next two books, I would think. I wish some of this information was in the main canon, and we could hear the characters talk about it more.

I'm inclined to agree with you on this. In Order of the Phoenix, we see a man who is a werewolf, yet never has any visitors when Harry, his friends, and the Order are around. If Lupin were to fall ill and be hospitalized, there would be quite the group surrounding him. However, this poor man had no one to keep him company. Granted, we don't know about his life outside of the hospital room, but it still seems rather odd to me that almost everyone else seemed to have visitors either present with them or planning to be with them, while the lonely werewolf was all alone.

I think there are many people who think like Umbridge on the matter. That because werewolves have an affliction, they are somehow less than human, which is utter rubbish.

Even in Prisoner of Azkaban, Ron tells Lupin to stay away from him and calls him a werewolf. Now, Lupin is a werewolf, but in context it was a cry of fear from Ron. The wizarding world is conditioned to think less of werewolves which is clearly seen in that moment. Ron liked Lupin until he discovered his teacher's situation. Eventually, he overcame it, but I think Ron's reaction is typical of many in the wizarding world.

[_uh]

Originally Posted by HermioneLuna

I'm inclined to agree with you on this. In Order of the Phoenix, we see a man who is a werewolf, yet never has any visitors when Harry, his friends, and the Order are around. If Lupin were to fall ill and be hospitalized, there would be quite the group surrounding him. However, this poor man had no one to keep him company. Granted, we don't know about his life outside of the hospital room, but it still seems rather odd to me that almost everyone else seemed to have visitors either present with them or planning to be with them, while the lonely werewolf was all alone.

I think there are many people who think like Umbridge on the matter. That because werewolves have an affliction, they are somehow less than human, which is utter rubbish.

Even in Prisoner of Azkaban, Ron tells Lupin to stay away from him and calls him a werewolf. Now, Lupin is a werewolf, but in context it was a cry of fear from Ron. The wizarding world is conditioned to think less of werewolves which is clearly seen in that moment. Ron liked Lupin until he discovered his teacher's situation. Eventually, he overcame it, but I think Ron's reaction is typical of many in the wizarding world.

Not to mention, in OotP when Mr. Weasley told them that the man next to him was bitten by a werewolf, and Mrs. Weasley replies, "Are you sure it's safe to have him in a public ward?", which Mr. Weasley talked some sense into her and said that the full moon wasn't for another couple of weeks. It just seems like people are inclined to be afriad of them.

[silver ink pot]

I think when Mrs. Weasley says that about the werewolf, you have to consider that her husband just had his ribs broken by a huge poisonous snake, so she knows he can't fight off a werewolf. Plus, maybe she doesn't want to be married to a werewolf, in case he is bitten.

[grrliz]

Originally Posted by silver ink pot

What I'm trying to say is, from Lupin's or any werewolf's point of view, it really isn't fair that some animagi don't have to register as "Beasts." Especially a pureblood wizard like Sirius Black can have all the advantages of wizarding society, even if he chooses to be a dog all the time, but a registered werewolf can't. There are too many gray areas in magic.

Interesting point. I don't think it's unfair that animagi don't have to register as "beasts"; that being said I don't think werewolves should really be classified as beasts either, but that's a matter for the Ministry to decide I suppose. As Hermione points out in PoA (the movie), an animagus elects to transform into an animal, whereas a werewolf has no choice, and I think it has to do with the ability to make the choice that lands one in the Beast category or simply on a registry list.

But given that animagus transformations are based on one's personality, exactly what type of person would one have to be in order to turn into something as deadly as a werewolf?

Even in Prisoner of Azkaban, Ron tells Lupin to stay away from him and calls him a werewolf. Now, Lupin isa werewolf, but in context it was a cry of fear from Ron. The wizarding world is conditioned to think less of werewolves which is clearly seen in that moment. Ron liked Lupin until he discovered his teacher's situation. Eventually, he overcame it, but I think Ron's reaction is typical of many in the wizarding world.

I agree. Ron's reaction shows the complete irrationality regarding the wizarding world's approach to werewolves: Lupin is standing there in human form and yet Ron starts getting twitchy about his lycanthropy. Granted that Lupin of course later does transform, but that doesn't have anything to do with my point that Ron still irrationally fears Lupin when he isn't transformed.

Originally Posted by silver ink pot

I think when Mrs. Weasley says that about the werewolf, you have to consider that her husband just had his ribs broken by a huge poisonous snake, so she knows he can't fight off a werewolf. Plus, maybe she doesn't want to be married to a werewolf, in case he is bitten.

Given that it's two weeks to the full moon, Arthur isn't in any immediate danger of having to fight off a werewolf. Also, they're in St. Mungo's, and I'm pretty sure the healers would be smart enough to give him the Wolfsbane potion when it did come time for the full moon. Arthur is in no danger by having a werewolf in the room.

[shaggydogstail]

Originally Posted by silver ink pot

I think when Mrs. Weasley says that about the werewolf, you have to consider that her husband just had his ribs broken by a huge poisonous snake, so she knows he can't fight off a werewolf. Plus, maybe she doesn't want to be married to a werewolf, in case he is bitten.

The irony being, that at this point, she is friends with a werewolf and is quite happy to have her children living under the same roof as him! I think this is an interesting insight into the nature of prejudice. Molly knows that Remus is a werewolf, but he isn't afraid of him becuase she knows him. To Molly, Remus is Remus - a person she knows and gets on well with. Because the man on the hospital ward is a stranger, and because she is so stressed out about Arthur, she seems to forget that the man is a person just like her friend Remus, and just sees him as a Dangerous Werewolf. It is similar to Ron's 'get away from me werewolf' comment - the moment he finds out about Remus' lycanthropy, he forgots that he is his favourite teacher. The revelation dehumanises him in Ron's eyes because initially at least he only sees him as a werewolf.

Once the knowledge has sunk him, Ron remembers that Remus is Professor Lupin and not just some random dangerous beast. Similarly I expect once Molly has cooled down she will be perfectly pleasant to the man on the ward. But their gut reactions give an indication of how difficult life is for werewolves. If decent people like the Weasleys react like that when they find out someone is a werewolf, is it any wonder Remus sought to keep his condition a secret even from his closest friends?

Originally posted by grrliz
I don't think it's unfair that animagi don't have to register as "beasts"; that being said I don't think werewolves should really be classified as beasts either, but that's a matter for the Ministry to decide I suppose. As Hermione points out in PoA (the movie), an animagus elects to transform into an animal, whereas a werewolf has no choice, and I think it has to do with the ability to make the choice that lands one in the Beast category or simply on a registry list.

I think SIP raises an interesting point about the inconsistancy of the Ministry's attitude, but there are significant differences between an animagus and a werewolf. As you say an animagus elects to transform and, just as importantly, can elect to transform back whenever they choose. The mental state of an animagus is also worth considering. From Sirius' description of his transformations in Azkaban it is clear that an animagus does not retrain all of their human mental functions whilst in animal form, but they must retain some, not least to allow them to transform back. Padfoot appears to have superior intellectual capacity to a normal dog - a dog couldn't understand a Quidditch match for example. A werewolf loses their human mental capacity completely during transformations, which is what makes them so dangerous (this is how Wolfsbane potion works, but allowing the lycanthropy suffer to retain mental capacity, though they still transform physically). This doesn't happen to animagi, which I think is a crucial difference.

[clkginny]

I think that Ron's reaction to Lupin just reinforces JK's message about bias and prejudice. They are completely irrational. I often think Ron ends up being the "real" wizards have X prejudices. The comforting thing is that Ron often quickly gets his head back on straight.

One thing that I felt was a heartrending portrayal of how lonely Lupin must have felt (even with the Marauders), and how compassionate he is, is the scene in St. Mungo's where he talks to the other werewolf.

By the way, guys, thanks for the British History lesson. The closest that I've come to World History is Humanities.

[Chievrefueil]

Originally Posted by whizbang

But more likely to me, at least, is that the family no longer lived in England. Perhaps generations of Slytherin's heirs went to Durmstrang or lived in Albania, (or both). . .Tom Riddle may have been the first Slytherin to set foot in Hogwarts since Salazar left.

That’s an interesting alternate possibility to shaggy’s idea of Voldemort being Slytherin’s true heir in spirit, as well as in blood. It’s much more likely than Slytherin having no male heirs until Voldemort.

Originally Posted by muggleview

However all Death Eaters are from Slytherin.

That’s not necessarily true. Peter is a Death Eater and was most likely in Gryffindor, although it’s not confirmed at this point.

Originally Posted by Norbertha

There might be one in the summer. A private one with the Order, perhaps. I don't think there was time for one before the book ended. Hopefully, a memorial service will help Harry. (Big question for me: Will Snape attend? How will he react to the speeches, that are probably going to praise Sirius? Probably with silence, but what will go on in his head?)

I hope there will be one, but I’m not certain there will be one in HBP.

I enjoyed Snape’s obituary for Sirius, shaggy.

I wouldn’t think that Snape would attend the memorial service. He wouldn’t need to for himself and he wouldn’t need to for Harry’s sake, would he? I don’t see how it would do any good.

Interesting synopsis of the history of feudalism and slavery, shaggy! I never knew how slavery came about in the colonies, but not in Britain itself.

Originally Posted by shaggy

The contrasts in Lupin are so pronounced as to be obviously deliberate. During his transformations Lupin becomes a terrifying and dangerous beasts, yet JKR has been at pains to depict his human character as an exceptionally kind and gentle man who is haunted by his wolfish alter-ego. Lupin's DADA classes focus on 'Dark Creatures' yet he seems to have some compassion for them, as when he mentions having a nice cupboard which the Boggart will like.

Originally Posted by subtle

Does PoA actually contain the line "You'd know about the madness within, Remus"? I don't have the books at hand (aarrggh); right now, all I'm remembering is the line from the film.
Anyway--It's a common theme in horror literature, that the kind, gentle soul is the werewolf (even Buffy used it!). The idea underlying the concept is pretty interesting--that, unlike normal humans, the werewolf releases all of his aggression, violent tendencies, and other negative traits during the transformation. Therefore, he is wiped clean of such for the remainder of the month, as a human. It refers to the idea that human nature is divided between the spiritual and the animal, rational and irrational, civilized and savage--the legends of the werewolves illustrate the dichotomy of human nature. Hence--the movie line referring to all this..............

I think that, often, the most compelling characters are those who have an ongoing inner conflict along these lines.

You guys reminded me of the song “Moon Over Bourbon Street” by Sting. The lyrics are:

There’s a moon over Bourbon Street tonight
I see faces as they pass beneath the pale lamplight
I’ve no choice but to follow that call
The bright lights, the people, and the moon and all
I pray everyday to be strong
For I know what I do must be wrong
Oh you’ll never see my shade or hear the sound of my feet
While there’s a moon over Bourbon Street

It was many years ago that I became what I am
I was trapped in this life like an innocent lamb
Now I can only [sic?] show my face at noon
And you’ll only see me walking by the light of the moon
The brim of my hat hides the eye of a beast
I’ve the face of a sinner but the hands of a priest
Oh you’ll never see my shade or hear the sound of my feet
While there’s a moon over Bourbon Street

She walks everyday through the streets of New Orleans
She’s innocent and young from a family of means
I have stood many times outside her window at night
To struggle with my instinct in the pale moon light
How could I be this way when I pray to God above
I must love what I destroy and destroy the thing I love
Oh you’ll never see my shade or hear the sound of my feet
While there’s a moon over Bourbon Street

When I first heard that song, I thought it was about a werewolf (probably because of the emphasis on the moon). Several years later, I read Anne Rice’s Interview with the Vampire and realized that it was about the vampire from that story, Louis. They made this book into a movie a few years ago (for which, I thought I’d throw in for grrliz’s benefit, Guns N’ Roses covered the Stones’s Sympathy for the Devil--an appropriate song). Louis is a sympathetic character and undergoes incredible internal conflict as part of the story, but this was mostly left out of the movie. He is struggling with his nature—of having become a monster. He spends quite a bit of time soul searching about whether or not God exists because, if God exists, he is a damned creature. He hates himself for what he’s become, but he has no choice other than to be what he is.

Lupin’s character is a dichotomy—a gentle soul who becomes a ferocious beast on a regular basis—but, is Lupin struggling with his nature? Or does he accept it? We don’t get any of Lupin’s inner narrative, but he seems pretty accepting to me. The only part I remember that describes his inner conflict is in PoA when he is describing how he justified to himself that there was no reason to tell Dumbledore about Sirius being an animagus. It’s not an example of him struggling against his werewolf nature, though, and I don’t think Lupin hates what he is.

In contrast, I see Snape’s internal conflict as much more similar to that of the vampire. Even JKR’s comment about Dumbledore not allowing Snape to teach DADA suggests this. Snape must struggle with his attraction to the Dark Arts—his inner beast. Snape must struggle with his bitterness, also—he can’t let it get in the way of the greater cause of the Order, although he failed in this when he refused Harry further Occlumency. (Still, perfectly understandable, IMO.) Does Snape hate what he is?

[silver ink pot]

Chiev: Thank you for that song! I'll have to think about a song for Snape, lol. Would it be "King of Pain" or "I'll Be Watching You," lol.

This is off-topic, but I have decided to take up the cause of getting the Harry Potter Books back on the New York Times Bestseller List. The more I think about this, the stupider it is that these great books which are read by people of all ages have been pushed onto a "children's list." It just isn't right.

A woman named Mary Ailes, who is a writer for The Plot Thickens, has started a petition you can sign here:

Free Harry!

I think Mary is hoping to get Harry and our dear JKR reinstated by the time HBP comes out. (Fingers Crossed!)

And thanks to all the posters who signed this morning after I posted this on another thread! I think it is great to take a stand!

[Desraelda]

Originally Posted by Chievrefueil

Peter is a Death Eater and was most likely in Gryffindor, although it’s not confirmed at this point.

I really don't think Pettrigrew is an actual DE. I think he's just a Voldie supporter. I've always felt that the DE were the inner circle, the privileged ones. The Black family weren't DE, but I can see them contributing to the cause both financially and sending their son to join LV. I see people like Pettigrew being cannon fodder/peasants (in GoF, he was more like an aide-de-camp), with LV as the king, and the DE as the royal dukes and earls, etc.

[grrliz]

Originally Posted by Chievrefueil

That’s an interesting alternate possibility to shaggy’s idea of Voldemort being Slytherin’s true heir in spirit, as well as in blood. It’s much more likely than Slytherin having no male heirs until Voldemort.

While I agree that it's not terribly likely that Tom Riddle was Slytherin's first male heir in a millenium, it reminded me of how Ginny is the first female Weasley in quite some time. We don't know how long it's been since there's been a girl born to that particular family (certainly not a thousand years, I hope!) but I thought that parallel was interesting.

Originally Posted by Chievrefueil

I wouldn’t think that Snape would attend the memorial service. He wouldn’t need to for himself and he wouldn’t need to for Harry’s sake, would he? I don’t see how it would do any good.

At first I was thinking it might make things worse, given Harry's attitude towards Snape after Sirius' death, but at the same time if Snape did attend Sirius' memorial I think it could be taken as an absolutely huge gesture of goodwill on Snape's part. Snape and Harry need to find common ground at some point and learn to work together rather than against each other, and I think Snape coming to the memorial servce would help in that. It would show that although he disliked Sirius, he still held Sirius at a certain level of respect and also that he is supporting Harry through this tumultuous and confusing time.

That all assumes that Snape doesn't start making disparaging remarks about Sirius, now that he's dead, like he does about James. "How extraordinaryily like your godfather you are, Potter, strutting about the castle..."

Originally Posted by Chievrefueil

Several years later, I read Anne Rice’s Interview with the Vampire and realized that it was about the vampire from that story, Louis. They made this book into a movie a few years ago (for which, I thought I’d throw in for grrliz’s benefit, Guns N’ Roses covered the Stones’s Sympathy for the Devil--an appropriate song).

Heh, nice! PLus Anne Rice has a huge Gary Oldman fixation, so score more points for my interests!

Originally Posted by Chievrefueil

Lupin’s character is a dichotomy—a gentle soul who becomes a ferocious beast on a regular basis—but, is Lupin struggling with his nature? Or does he accept it? We don’t get any of Lupin’s inner narrative, but he seems pretty accepting to me.

I think Lupin has definitely accepted his lycanthropy, and deals with it much as one would with any other chronic illness. Because he was bitten as a young child, he's had 30+ years living with the condition, and if he hadn't accepted it by now, he never was going to. What's that saying, accept that which you cannot change? That seems to be Lupin's MO regarding lycanthropy.

Originally Posted by Chievrefueil

In contrast, I see Snape’s internal conflict as much more similar to that of the vampire. Even JKR’s comment about Dumbledore not allowing Snape to teach DADA suggests this. Snape must struggle with his attraction to the Dark Arts—his inner beast. Snape must struggle with his bitterness, also—he can’t let it get in the way of the greater cause of the Order, although he failed in this when he refused Harry further Occlumency. (Still, perfectly understandable, IMO.) Does Snape hate what he is?

Hmmm. I've always gotten a vibe of self-loathing from Snape, but now that I'm trying to think up examples I'm falling short. Perhaps it's not that he hates what he is, he just hasn't come to terms with it and hasn't accepted it yet. It seems like it would be tought to accept that you do have an attraction to the Dark Arts; it would seem to be a confirmation to those who believe that you actually are a Dark Wizard (or at best, a big old meanie ). Or perhaps his problem is that he did accept his penchant for the Dark Arts, which led him down Voldemort's path, and what Snape is struggling to come to terms with is not the acceptance of his interest in the Dark Arts, but the acceptance of things he might have done because of his interest in the Dark Arts?

Originally Posted by Desraelda

I really don't think Pettrigrew is an actual DE. I think he's just a Voldie supporter. I've always felt that the DE were the inner circle, the privileged ones. The Black family weren't DE, but I can see them contributing to the cause both financially and sending their son to join LV. I see people like Pettigrew being cannon fodder/peasants (in GoF, he was more like an aide-de-camp), with LV as the king, and the DE as the royal dukes and earls, etc.

Peter is definitely a Death Eater; he has the Dark Mark branded on his arm, and only Voldemort's closest supporters and servants (aka the Death Eaters) have them.