[HPforGrownups] Unfortunate!Peter

[charme]

No: HPFGUIDX 118251

From: "Barry Arrowsmith"

> A major problem is that there's so little in canon that is objective
> and untainted by the opinions or prejudices of others. Still, we'll see
> what we can do with what we have.

charme:

First, I have to say I love your posts, Kneasy.  Most of the time I read 
them and say, "the man has a good point and thinks way out of the box." 
This time though, I have a different opinion and hope that you'll accept it 
as such. :)

> The earliest images we have of him are in the Pensieve memory. It is
> not a comfortable picture. Although generally classed as one of the
> Marauders, he's obviously the odd one out. To James he's an
> appreciative audience, ready to admire and perhaps hero worship
> whenever James feels like putting on a performance. To  Sirius he's a
> nothing, a hanger-on to be belittled; to Lupin - what? We don't really
> know, Lupin acts as if he wasn't there.

>
> So why did they spend so much time and trouble encouraging him to
> master the Animagus spell? Why did they tolerate him, what did they
> need him for? "Ah," some will say "it's because as a rat he could
> immobilise the Whomping Willow, that's why."
> "Oh, yes," says I "and how did they know he'd be a rat?" Because they
> couldn't know, not in advance. Besides, I'm not so sure that the tree
> was all that massive then and even in PoA Harry et al manage quite
> nicely with a broken branch. Peter  was not essential, yet they
> persisted for years. Why?

charme:

There is a quote from Petunia which may apply here. In OoP, Petunia refers 
to that "awful boy" telling Lily about Azkaban and the Dementors. I know a 
lot of people believe that's referring to Snape, but I believe it's 
referring to Peter. There's one reason  perhaps why James would tolerate 
him, along with your point out Lupin's attitude:  have you ever had a 
cousin, little brother, or other likewise family member who trailed after 
you in school? It's just a thought, and it's a thought based on Ron's 
observation in CoS that most pureblood wizards are related in some way, and 
I suppose that might apply to half bloods too? I also would like to say that 
James and Sirius were reportedly the "brightest and the best' at school, and 
helping Peter transform would have been a challenge they couldn't have 
passed up, even if he was a "nonessential."



> Though on second thoughts, there is a place for him in that episode.
> Who told DD? I doubt Sevvy was calm and collected enough to gather his
> robes around him, stalk off to his House-master and request an
> interview with the Dumbledore about a hidden werewolf. He'd be ready to
> shout it from the roof-tops, tell anyone who'd listen - but he didn't.
> I'd think that only the timely arrival of someone like DD would prevent
> that. So, it's either his much-vaunted omniscience (which seems very
> patchy at other times, you must admit) or somebody told him. Could very
> well have been Peter.

charme:

I think it was James who told DD about the incident in the Shrieking Shack 
after he'd saved Snape.  Furthermore, I think at the end of PoA, Snape is 
furious Sirius is missing and flips out reminding DD that Sirius tried to 
kill him (re: Whomping Willow incident).  This in my mind means at some 
point in the past, DD and Snape have discussed this before.

> If so, then maybe we have a role for Peter. James and Sirius -
> tear-aways; Lupin - made a prefect to try and keep them in check
> (unsuccessfully); Peter - informer; he tells DD just what they're up
> to. You don't really believe DD didn't know about them being animagi,
> do you?  Perhaps Peter is getting some basic training in spying.

charme:

If that's the case, Peter would have told DD about them becoming animagi and 
he didn't. DD professes not to know about in PoA and seems rather impressed 
they *did* keep it from him. And yes, I do believe they did keep it from 
him. Peter is weak, and Sirius points out that Peter migrates to whatever 
wizard is the strongest for protection.  Peter himself admits there was 
nothing to be gained by refusing LV. One week it could be James, another 
Sirius, another LV.  That's not "spy" material, IMO that's weakness.
>
> Then there's Moody's photograph. There's Peter, sitting between James
> and Lily. Lots of fans have wondered about this; is it significant? Was
> there unrequited affection (or even requited affection) between
> James/Peter or between Lily/Peter? Why are James and Lily sitting
> apart? Not being romantically inclined I've never read much into it,
> but believe you me, others have.

Again, I think Peter had a friendship with both Lily and James, and 
hero/heroine worship for both, too. I think Peter gave the impression of 
being vulnerable and weak, so they felt a responsibility to protect him and 
Sirius alludes to this in his responses to him in the Shrieking Shack in 
PoA.

<snip>

> There's just  a couple of points I want to consider on the GH episode:
> 1. I  think there's a hole in the SK set-up. Remember in OoP Harry is
> given the GP address (presumably written by DD) - it is not addressed
> to him and once he has read it, Moody  burns it. This leaves one with
> the impression that *anyone* reading that slip of paper could find
> No.12 GP. This makes tying down who knew what and when about GH much
> more iffy. For a start, it'd wouldn't be necessary to have a meeting to
> pass on the address, nor would the SK know if an address slip hadn't
> been burned but had been passed on to someone who was not a friend of
> the Potters.

charme:

I don't know that we have enough information about SK's and charms to come 
to a conclusion:  JKR has said in her interviews that she had to define the 
boundaries and rules of magic in the wizard community so she could have a 
viable and accurate way to construct the plots and storyline. Since we don't 
know the particulars "yet", I can't necessarily agree that James and Lily 
wouldn't have met with Peter directly to establish him as the SK.

>
> 2. Scabbers vanishes into the sewers. Right. Then what? Where does he
> go? Who does he see? Want a suggestion?
> OK - Dumbledore. Neither the  DEs nor the MoM people believe he's
> alive. Who's left? DD. It's maybe my memory, but unlike just about all
> the adults in the books I  can't remember DD ever saying or hinting or
> commenting in PoA that he believed Peter was dead. If I'm wrong I'm
> sure someone will correct me.

charme:

How about another suggestion or two?  Lucius Malfoy or even Fudge, as Fudge 
was the first person on the scene after Peter's suppposed demise. I could 
also think of others Peter could have gone to, so DD isn't the only one. And 
you're right, DD doesn't say anything about if Peter's dead or not - he may 
suspect he isn't and that Peter had something to do with the Potter's demise 
but can't PROVE it. If you look at the way he talks about Sirius' conviction 
in PoA, he states that he has no means to show other wizards the truth of a 
situation or go against the MoM even after Hermione and Harry tell him 
Sirius is innocent.

>
> One of the FAQs that crops up regularly is Scabbers' association with
> the Weasleys. How long has he been there, along with musing on how a
> long-lived non-magical rat was accepted as a pet at Hogwarts for years
> and no-one so much as blinked. What was Peter likely to know about the
> Weasleys? Damn all, I should think. Neither Molly nor Arthur appear on
> Moody's photograph and so probably weren't in the Order in the first
> Voldy War, and they were at school years before him and their kids were
> years after him.

charme:

Of your whole post, this is the one paragraph that interests me the most. We 
have never been told "why" Molly and Arthur weren't on the photo when so 
many others were, plus we're left to wonder how Peter got to Percy and the 
Weasleys as a pet.

>
> Then there's the general acceptance of Peter spending 12 years as a rat
>  and never, so far as we can tell, having a tea-break and stretching
> his legs. Add to this the fact that at the Shrieking Shack it took two
> wizards wielding  two wands simultaneously to switch him back to human
> form and I begin to suspect that Peter has been spelled. He might not
> even be in animagus form at all, he could have been transfigured. And
> who's the Transfiguration Supremo? DD. Would being transfigured count
> as being chained?

> There's not much evidence (before SS) that Scabbers shows any sign of
> human intelligence -  except perhaps once, when he bites Goyle. That is
> interesting in itself - why would a Voldy supporter go out of his way
> to attack a Slytherin? But to all intents and purposes he acts just as
> a rat should. If he was in animagus form I'd have thought Crookshannks
> would have forced him out of it. Being chewed up as moggy appetiser is
> just as bad and much more immediate than being chased by DEs.


charme:

How about Peter was "stuck"? In canon, the point is made that specifically 
that the Animagi state can be dangerous and that's why the Ministry, and 
Hogwarts, are so sensitive to transformations like it. We don't have those 
"rules" of the wizarding world so to speak, so we don't know what happens to 
a wizard who retains his Animagus state for an extended period of time. 
Lupin in PoA states that James and Sirius needed to give Peter all the help 
they could since he wasn't as good at it as all the rest of them, which 
leads me to believe that perhaps Peter got himself into an Animagus state 
that might have been particularly difficult for him to overcome.
>
>
> Another oddity; when Scabbers runs away (when Ron thinks Crookshanks
> has eaten him), where does he hide? Hagrid's Hut. Hagrid has given me
> pause to wonder over the years. I've never been quite sure how deep in
> DD's confidence he is. Just how much does he know, just how many little
> errands has he run for DD? This is the wizard  who states "..nobody
> went bad 'cept they was Slytherin" yet rubbishes Black (a Gryffindor)
> for betraying James and Lily. Does not compute. Now if Harry could
> corner Hagrid and start asking some pointed questions we might get to
> the bottom of this.

charme:

I don't think this is the mystery you do.  Hagrid is overwhelming a lover of 
animals and if he saw a rat, he wouldn't kill it, he'd feed it and take care 
of it. In other words, the similiarity there exists with Peter again being 
protected by the "biggest and strongest," just in a different sense.
>
> No, I think DD placed Scabbers with the Weasleys. It was a large enough
> family that sooner or later Scabbers would turn up at Hogwarts while
> Harry was there. And Harry is important, both to DD and to Peter.
>
> A few weeks ago I complained that the description of Peter's escape
> after the SS debacle had been cut short. we're told he ran away - but
> not the direction. The natural assumption is that it'd be towards the
> Forest. But it'd be a turn up for the books if he hadn't, if he'd run
> towards the school instead. I'm sure DD would have been fascinated by
> what he could tell him.
>
> Peter is supposed to be weak, pathetic, ineffectual.  Now  compare him
> to the big, brave DEs. They cower before Voldy. Peter disagrees with
> him, tries to get him to change his mind about using Harry Potter for
> his scheme while they're at the Riddle House.

charme:

Actually, my natural assumption was Peter fleeing toward Hogwarts, but not 
to DD.  Rather, I would think the rat went down the pipes:  remember, Peter 
also knows about the Marauders Map and all the ways out of Hogwarts. I 
disagree that Peter doesn't cower before Voldy (he cringes when Sirius 
refers to Voldemort in the Shrieking Shack,) however you're right that he 
does try to change Voldy's mind in the Riddle House. I think this is because 
he *knows* if he has to try to go after Harry in any way for Voldy, there's 
a distinct possibility his old friends will kill him. He probably also 
doesn't want a repeat of the last time LV went after Harry:  that little 
incident caused Peter to be hunted by DE's as a double crosser.  Plus 
there's the fact that "life debt" thing you don't subscribe to - but I'll 
get to that later in my responses.

>
> I think Peter works for DD - and probably has for a long time.
>
> A few days ago I wrote pointing out that Peter had never been
> 'chained', that he could leave at any time. I also hinted that there
> might be an alternative explanation. Ready?
>
> I think Peter is/has been paying penance, with the encouragement of DD,
> for some act of foolishness, naivety or stupidity that contributed to
> the deaths of the Potters. He's DD's eyes and ears in the Voldy camp
> and maybe the final safety net if Harry gets  into  a really sticky
> spot. Forget all this 'life debt' guff (a phrase invented by fans
> incidentally and not in canon). Peter will eventually help Harry and/or
> turn on Voldy for reasons that have little to do with the Shrieking
> Shack episode. He may already have done so.
>
> Remember the graveyard, the bit where Harry escapes? Do you really
> think that one unaimed Impedimenta! spell thrown over his shoulder
> could have discommoded that many DEs, spread in a circle, all at once?

charme:

I think Peter is the ultimate "flip flopper." In PoA, he admits he did tell 
LV where the Potters were, and refers to LV's powers and that LV would kill 
him had he not done as he was told. He does not deny he was spying for LV 
for a full year before James and Lily were killed.  If that's not bad 
enough, Peter uses the logic that LV was taking over everywhere, what was to 
be gained by refusing him? I think there's only 2 options here, either Peter 
started out with the idea of spying for the Order and got sucked in or he 
got recruited by LV and his followers and couldn't resist. I don't think 
he's DD's eyes and ears any longer, though. He's sealed his fate by the 
choices he made.

I also agree that while the actual phrase "life debt" is not in canon, it IS 
in canon in concept through DD's words to Harry at the end of PoA in Lupin's 
office.  He specifically says the Pettigrew owes his life to Harry, and that 
a certain bond is created when one wizard saves another.
>
> "Ah," you'll say, "but he killed Cedric. He must be ESE"
> Did he? Read the passage again. The cloaked figure (Peter) is carrying
> something in his arms (plural). It's only after Cedric has  been killed
> that he puts down the bundle (Voldy) and lights his wand. And he's
> scared, trembling so much he can hardly tie knots in a rope. It's been
> proposed in the past that there was someone else in that graveyard -
> the most common suspects being Sirius, Lupin or Bagman. What is sure is
> that the passage does not say that the AK came from Peter.
>

charme:

While it true it's not explicitly stated that Peter killed Cedric with LV's 
wand, it's alluded to by the mere fact that Cedric comes out of LV's wand 
during the graveyard duel. The line you mention where the cloaked man puts 
down the bundle and lights the wand is written in past tense with what Harry 
observed:  he *had* put down the bundle and lit his wand, which means to me 
it was done and Harry hadn't seen him do it, he just noted the result. 
Peter's fumbling around because he *knows* going to have to cut off his hand 
and because he's just killed a kid intentionally - the Muggles that were 
killed when Sirius  found him after the Potters were snuffed at GH fell 
because of the explosion Peter created with LV's wand to get away.  In other 
words, he didn't aim an AK at them and specifically intend to kill them. 
He's now crossed that line - the line he avoided by screwing it up with 
Barty Crouch, Sr earlier in GoF. He's full fledged on the dark side now if 
you look at it that way, isn't he?

<snip>

> As a final indicator there's his name,  and we all appreciate how JKR
> likes fitting names to characters. Pettigrew - small of stature,
> nothing special there; but Peter - the rock, that's something else.

charme:

"Peter" is also JKR's father's name. Interesting, isn't it?