Spy novel? maybe (was Lupin's secrets )

[delwynmarch]

No: HPFGUIDX 118571


Naama wrote :
"When I said 'adequete', I meant that the basic knowledge we have of a
 character (mostly on the good/evil divide) is true. That doesn't mean
 we know every thing, or even every interesting thing about the 
character. The question is, whether the additional information we get
 will be, in some way, an extrapolation of what we already know, or
that it will undermine, subvert what we knew (thought we knew, in this
case). My argument is that JKR tends to develop her characters on a
trajectory of their basic personality, which she mostly makes known to
the reader early on. "

Del replies :
I would tend to agree, if it weren't for huge counter-examples like
Riddle, and even more importantly, Peter Pettigrew. I think that with
those two examples (among others), JKR has amply demonstrated that we
simply cannot trust anyone.

Peter was James', Sirius' and Remus' *intimate* friend. they had known
him for years, they had gone through loads and loads of things with
him, James trusted him with his very life and the life of his family,
Sirius and Remus more readily suspected each other of betrayal than
suspecting Peter. Even DD, with all his Legilimency and knowing
people's characters, doesn't seem to have ever suspected Peter.
Apparently, Peter was the last person on Earth anyone would have
suspected of turning to LV. And yet he did. Not only that, but he
managed to keep this betrayal hidden for an entire year !

I personally think that JKR set a very definite pattern of "Don't
trust anyone !" throughout her books.

In PS/SS, Harry discovers that he's not at all who he thought he was.
He then discovers that he shouldn't take people at face value :
Hermione and Neville, for example, both clearly show him that there's
more to them than he first thought. And of course, there's the whole
Snape vs. Quirrel affair.

In CoS, Tom Riddle goes from perfect student and school hero to
machiavelic monster. Ginny goes from annoying and very minor side
character to crucial plot element. Same with Moaning Myrtle. Harry's
funny little gift, Parseltongue, becomes absolutely central to the
whole book.

In PoA, Sirius and Peter both change from apparently being very
definitely on one side of the good/evil line to actually being on the
other side. Remus is revealed to be infinitely more than just a poor,
chronically ill and sympathetic teacher.

By the end of PoA, JKR has clearly taught us the "Don't trust anyone
!" lesson. She then devises a test for us in GoF, in the character of
Crouch!Moody, and we all (?) walked right into the trap. We hadn't
learned our lesson.

Then we go on to OoP, where Harry's previous knowledge about some very
impportant things is attacked. His father was always a noble hero ?
Nope. DD can be blindly trusted ? Nope. Harry can casually trust those
who pretend to be on his side ? Nope (Marrietta). People who were once
on Harry's side and who always belonged to the Good Group will
undoubtedly remain so ? Nope (Percy). Worst of all : Harry can blindly
trust himself ? Nope.

It seems to me that having an intimate betrayal in one of the next
books wouldn't be out of line. I'm not saying it's necessary, but IMO
it really wouldn't be out of place. If anything, Peter's betrayal can
be seen as a dark foreshadow.

I just hope it's not Ron or Hermione, but they would be perfect
candidates.

Del