Case for Marauders (was Re: Marauders, Voldemort and the Map)

[romulusmmcdougal]

No: HPFGUIDX 109778

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Nora Renka" <nrenka at y...> 
wrote:
Nora:
> Actually, I do think Voldemort is pretty one-dimensional.  He gave 
> up his humanity for power, and he wants power.  He's pretty slick 
> about it, too, but he's not a terribly deep character--there was a 
> good post arguing to this effect not long ago.

RMM:
Well you underestimate him then.  You shall see.

Nora:
> 
> He *wants* to pursue Lily, though--even though she told him off.  
> Since it's canonical that he's after that, why would he join an 
> organization that wants to destroy her?

RMM:
Because he is joining a society that hasn't advertised the
destruction 
of non-Purebloods.  He is joining a society that advocates Purebloods 
running things.  Big difference.


Nora: 
> It's canon that he ditches a decent amount of ego for Lily,

RMM: I don't think he has to ditch anything to date her.

Nora:
> and she 
> starts dating him in 7th year.  Are we going to put a full-fledged 
> Dark Arts 'Rise and Fall' in the time in-between then--because
one's 
> he's involved with her, there's no way he's going to be hanging out 
> with the DEs.

RMM:
It is clear here that you simply do not understand the essence and 
makeup of a political movement.  And that is why you probably look at 
Voldemort as a one-dimensional person.


Nora: 
> Yes, yes you have.  You've ignored the fact that the blood issue
was 
> the first and foremost public face of what Voldemort stood for, and 
> that that is what people approved of in his positions.
> 
RMM:
Again, I disagree.  There are many ways of saying Pure is Good that 
gain a large acceptance.  See my comment above regarding what the
Pure Bloods were preaching.  Running things....  NOT  Wiping out the 
opposition.
If there is one thing you need to understand is how political
rhetoric works.  Take Bush and his WMDs for example.  See how far he 
got with that!

Nora:
> Because Dumbledore is there--remember how in CoS everyone is 
> like "With DD gone, it's not safe for the Muggleborn students".  
> This line of argument doesn't impact my contentions.  If Lucius 
> Malfoy had gotten away with the diary plot, it might have kept all 
> the Muggleborns out of Hogwarts.  If LV takes over, it would 
> certainly keep all the Muggleborns out of Hogwarts.

RMM:
Yes, in the end that is true, and in CoS, everyone was looking back
on the 1970s with perfect hindsight.
Big difference between 1990s and 1970s when it comes to understanding 
the 1970s.

Nora: 
> I but consider myself an honest woman. :)

RMM:
And I'm not?  

Nora: 
> And how can you say "Oh, James was involved with the Dark Arts"
when 
> it's so canonical that he disliked them? 

RMM:
I have never stated that he was "involved with the Dark Arts."
You continue to misunderstand what I am saying and it is because you 
totally underestimate what the heck was going on in the 1970s in the 
WW.

Nora:
> Are you trying to argue 
> that he got fooled into it?  The Dark Arts seem to be a pretty
clear 
> sub-branch of magic in JKR's world, and it doesn't seem to be a 
> relativistic "Oh, it's just how you use the magic" thing.

RMM:
He fooled himself into it.  He went in with both eyes open.
And here is another point.  Pureblood philosophy has nothing to do 
with the Dark Arts.  The Dark Arts have everything to do with how 
Voldemort was going to take power.
And that is what turned everyone off, or at least many including
James Potter.


Nora:
> If James were also into the Dark Arts, it messes with the point
that 
> he was a good man who HATED the Dark Arts but yet was still an 
> obnoxious bully.  It's important to have that good consistency on 
> the one side to make his faults thematically meaningful.

RMM:
And I have never stated that James liked or was into the Dark Arts.
How many times do I have to repeat it?

> 
> > Nora:
> >> 5.  We've already got one tempted betrayer in the MWPP group; 
> >> seems more than a little like thematic overkill to have two.
> > 
> > RMM:
> > Who is the other?  Wormtail?  Lupin? Black?
> > I believe all of these save Wormtail were brave enough to stand
up 
> > to Voldemort. (See Wormtail's comments here.) 
> > This implies that all were to some degree, more or less, idiots 
> > for the cause of the DEs. (See more Black's comments here.)
> 
> Guh?  Standing up to Voldemort means that you had to have been an 
> idiot for the DE cause?  That's not logical.

RMM:
Continuing to want to misunderstand me.
Yes, it is logical if you know what it being stated.
S. Black himself said they were "idiots" at that age.  At that age, 
the speculation is that they were attracted, by their heritage, into 
joining up for the cause.  They rose in rank and stature in the 
organizatiion to the point that they were "the few good men" that 
Voldemort was looking for.
And up to this time there were NO DARK ARTS!!!!!!

Then, the test came.  The true purpose was exposed.  The loyal stayed 
and the others left.  The Marauders, minus one, left.

James was of such stature in the organization, that Voldemort made it 
a priority that James must be killed.  And that is what the snake did 
to the deer, or in this case, the Anaconda did to the stag.

Looking back, Sirius Black can say that we were all idiots. (And that 
is canon.)

> 

Nora: 
> We have strong canon that James Potter hated the Dark Arts, coming 
> from Sirius.  We have strong canon from Hagrid that You-Know-Who 
> never tried to recruit the Potters, being as they were personally 
> close to Dumbledore.

RMM:
As far as Hagrid knows.

Nora:
>  We have strong canon that James Potter did not 
> subscribe to the pureblood philosophy that Voldemort overtly stood 
> for the in WW, the philosophy that is the thing that attracted a 
> number of his followers.

RMM:
Not so.  Give me an instance where James swore off Purebloodism.
And contrast what you find, if you can, with what I said earlier
about the extremists and the nominalists.

Nora:
>  This, natch, all adds up to a coherent 
> picture of a man--someone who was an arrogant bully in school, but 
> had a coherent strong moral sense about some things, and acted on 
> that sense by joining the Order of the Phoenix.

RMM:
He joined after he rejected Voldemort.  He was not hunted personally 
by Voldemort because he was a good wizard.  Lily was a good witch,
but Voldemort did not want to kill her.

You view is too one dimensional here.  Jo Rowling's characters drip 
with real personalities.  That is why her books are so good.

Nora: 
> Your readings have to bend, twist, or ignore a lot of canon.  My 
> reading fits in smooth and clean, and takes account of all details--
> and one good way to judge competing readings of a text is to 
> consider how much they are able to explain, and how much they have 
> to leave out.

RMM:
If you strip down the characters to one dimension, then I can see
what you are saying.  Fortunately Jo Rowling does not have 1-D 
characters in her books!  That is why I love them so much.

RMM
www.hermionegranger.us