Harry NotAnimagus/Pettigrew Name/Ghosts/DE in MoM/AbusedChildren:Snape&Harry

[Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)]

No: HPFGUIDX 47351

Telly wrote:

<< Does anyone know if Harry or any of the characters in the book 
might become animagus? >>

I am SURE that JKR said in one of her on-line chats that Harry will 
not become an Animagus. I think she said that none of the Trio will 
become an Animagus. I can't find the damn transcript via the Goat 
Pen: Mike, what's wrong? 

Barb wrote:

<< It is notable that neither James Potter's name nor Peter 
Pettigrew's name really point to their Animagus forms, >>

Well ... someone pointed out on-list long ago that both Peter (as in 
'to peter out') and Pettigrew ('he grew petty') mean to become 
smaller. I, at least, thought that referred to his soul, shrinking 
from a courageous, chivalrous Gryffindor to a whining, shrivelled 
coward/traitor. But it could literally refer to physical size: 
Wormtail the rat was much smaller than Peter the human.

I was impressed by Shauna's observation about 'pet' in Pettigrew 
sounding like his role as Scabbers, the Weasleys' 'pet'. Thus I am 
inspired to share my weird thought that the name Pettigrew sounds a 
little bit like Pedigree. I wish I could think of a way that's 
meaningful in the midst of so much Pure-blood-ism.

Katsmall the Wise wrote:

<< I believe the MoM has ghosts that enforce it for them - we all 
know ghosts can affect each other's behaviour, like the Hogwarts 
ghosts want to kick Peeves out. >>

We've been told that the Bloody Baron is the only being who can 
control Peeves; Peeves is visibly afraid of him. I've speculated that 
the Bloody Baron is the only ghost at Hogwarts able to do magic (at 
least the Fat Friar was a wizard: he referred to Hufflepuff as "my 
old House", but I suppose that most wizards lose the ability to do 
magic when they die) and therefore able to curse Peeves. I've gone on 
to wonder WHY he would still be able to do magic; only now have I 
gotten around to wondering why Peeves isn't equally afraid of all the 
living wizards. Maybe because the living wizards don't *try* to curse 
him, except Lupin put the chewing gum up his nose.

(Peeves isn't a ghost, he's a poltergeist. In the same scene that you 
referred to, Nearly Headless Nick said: " He gives us all a bad name 
and you know, he's not really even a ghost -- "

<< I believe that Avada Kedavra also doesn't let ghosts be, otherwise 
Harry's parents would take care of him. >>

It is disputable whether James and Lily could have become ghosts in 
the Potterverse. The Goat Pen found the interview: 
http://www.scholastic.com/harrypotter/author/transcript1.htm
" Q: What makes some witches/wizards become ghosts after they die and 
some not? 
JKR: You don't really find that out until Book VII, but I can say 
that the happiest people do not become ghosts. As you might guess, 
Moaning Myrtle!"
This goes back to the question of "what is happiness?" that I meowed 
at Pippin in IIRC my latest previous post. Of course, James and Lily 
wouldn't be HAPPY about dying young and leaving their baby an orphan, 
but they were cheerful people when alive, they were in love, they 
lived nobly and died bravely -- that meets certain definitions of 
Happiness!

However, there has been discussion on list of why AVADA KEDAVRA is 
UNFORGIVEABLE. People have suggested that it destroys the victim's 
soul (like being soul-sucked by a Dementor) as well as his life. In 
the Potterverse, is the soul what becomes a ghost or goes to the next 
world? It has also been suggested that AVADA KEDAVRA turns the person 
into a ghost who is trapped inside the curser's wand until released 
by Priori Incantatem or maybe by breaking the wand...                 

Abigail wrote;

<< Even if there were still DEs in the Ministry (and not that I'm 
suggesting that there couldn't be but have we ever had canon evidence 
that there are?) >>

Abigail, I agree with many of your points, but this is a nitpick. We 
know from canon that McNair is a Death Eater (GoF) and that he is 
employed as an executioner for the Committee for the Disposal of 
Dangerous Creatures of the Ministry (PoA).

Shane wrote:

<< It seems to me that Snape has a lot of demons, and I believe that 
many of them are deeply personal, possibly familial in nature. (snip) 
characteristic of an individual who has experienced an insecure 
attachment to a parent or significant adult, or who has suffered 
abuse or even neglect during the formative, developmental years. 
(snip) I'd love to hear other listie's thoughts. >>

I agree. In my universe, Snape comes from an old wizarding family 
with a long history of dabbling in Dark Arts. His parents found 
children extremely boring but felt a duty to pass on the family name. 
They were always cold to him, very stern, condemning any sign of 
"softness", and the only times they ever seemed pleased with him were 
when he learned a new curse from the books in the family library or 
when he brought home a straight-A report card. However, I did provide 
him with a loving nanny for his first four years, to give him the 
basis for having a conscience, love, redemption, a *possibility* of 
happiness.

Eloise wrote:

<< my own Snape backstory does have him coming from an emotionally 
deprived background with a cold father (and an ineffective or absent 
mother) for whom nothing was ever good enough and his turning to 
Voldemort at least in part in the search for an adequate 
father-figure, Dumbledore having apparently failed him. >>

Just as I don't see Snape as Gleeful!Sadist, I have yet to see him 
turning *to* Voldemort. I see him *brought* to Voldemort by a person 
(Lucius, Karkaroff, whoever) on whom he had projected a ton of 
transference (father-figure, etc). "Turning to Voldemort" = X% 
infatuation on that person who was already working for Voldemort + 
100-X% turning away from Dumbledore in a fury.

Grey Wolf wrote, of Christopher Nuttall's concern that leaving Harry 
with Dursleys interfered with him learning lots of magic to fight 
Voldemort:

<< If you force a child to learn everything he can to save the world, 
you destoy any chance to ever be a person. He might as well become 
paranoic and without any sense of morality. >>

Becoming paranoic and without any sense of morality would be a likely 
result of leaving a child with abusive Dursleys in real life.