Cheapening Death? (was Remus is James)

[kiricat2001]

No: HPFGUIDX 70513

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Kelly Grosskreutz" 
<ivanova at i...> wrote:

<snip of a lot Kelly's excellent summation as to why James would not 
have abandoned his family when they were in imminent danger from 
Vmort)

> Also, we have to keep in mind that James received word that his 
family was
> Voldemort's next target.  Harry had been picked to be annihilated 
before
> Neville.  As we know, precautions were taken to keep the Potters 
save by use
> of the Fidelius Charm.  But James knew that Dumbledore was uneasy 
over his
> choice of Secret Keeper.  Now, I thoroughly believe that James did 
trust
> Sirius with his life, and he also had no reason to doubt that Peter 
was the
> traitor, but James does have to prepare himself for the worst.  
Peter could
> be captured and tortured and inadvertently give away the secret.  
Sirius,
> although James would never say this to him, could also be captured 
and
> broken, revealing Peter's existence.  Even though they are under the
> Fidelius Charm, James has to know that his family is still not 100% 
safe.
> Aside from his deep love for his family, I can't see James truly 
entrusting
> their safety to anyone other than himself.  If nothing else, he 
would see it
> as his duty as husband and father to be the last line of defense 
for his
> family.  Let's not forget that James was said to be a pretty bright,
> powerful wizard in his own right.  He is no weakling..
> 
> With this in mind, I don't see why James would be away from home 
for a short
> period of time, especially after the decision to use the Fidelius 
Charm was
> made.  I don't think any force on this planet could have drug James 
away
> from his family after he received word Voldemort was coming after 
them with
> the intent to kill.

The recent threads on the potential for a James/Remus switch have led 
to this more general thought. And I'll identify myself up front as 
one of those who doesn't like the idea of a James/Remus switch for a 
number of reasons.

One of them, and I don't think it's been touched on, but I could be 
wrong as I haven't read every single post, is that I would be 
uncomfortable with James being revealed alive in Book 6 or 7.  And 
that's because we've been led strongly to believe that he is indeed 
dead. It would leave a bad taste for me if suddenly we are hit with 
an "AHA!" moment and, presto-chango, James appears, very much alive.  

In the initial reaction to Sirius' death (and the denial thereof...) 
some posters expressed the opinion that JKR would never bring Sirius 
back as a living man because that would cheapen the idea of death, it 
would be too Hollywood (or "Dallas"), and it would be unfair in a 
sense to other characters who have died. Death would not be a given 
in JKR's world - it would be something she could play with. She 
already does that to some extent by having shades or representations 
of the dead float around in Potterworld as ghosts, portraits, etc.
But, to resurrect someone goes a little too far along that scale.

Now, if your position is that James never died, and he shows up alive 
sometime, then JKR will not have resurrected him as he was never 
really dead in the first place. But, I still hate the idea. We the 
readers, along with Harry, have been working under the assumption 
that he's dead. Harry has had a miserable life with the Dursleys.  If 
he had to suffer that not only because of the blood protection it 
afforded him, but also because there was some secret reason that a 
living James could not be reunited with his son anytime in 15+ years, 
then I will be very much annoyed by that scenario.

Especially since we've just had the big speech from Dumbledore about 
how Harry should have been given more information at an earlier age. 
How will Harry react if he finds out that, once again, he's been kept 
in the dark, and this time what he wasn't told was that his father is 
alive?

No, that just won't fly at all...

Marianne