Spy novel? maybe (was Lupin's secrets )

[delwynmarch]

No: HPFGUIDX 118635


Naama wrote :
"How exactly are you making a pattern out of one case? "

Del replies :
I wasn't. I first mentioned that we had 2 examples of untrustworthy
characters who first seemed worthy. Then I stated that JKR set a
pattern of unworthiness, and proceeded to explain it. My statement
wasn't related to Peter's example, but to the list that followed. I
realise now it didn't necessarily read that way, and I apologise for
the confusion.

Naama wrote :
"I think I have shown that the large majority of the HP characters
are, more or less, as they appear to be. Very few - one or two - we
are told have taken the path of deception, and have succeeded."

Del replies :
Two is already a lot, ocnsidering that there aren't that many
important characters. Moreover, none of these untrustworthy characters
happen to be close to Harry. LV was Tom Riddle long before the HP saga
began, and Pettigrew changed sides during the times of James Potter.
Harry hasn't experienced *first-hand* the horror of intimate betrayal.
I really wouldn't be surprised if that was one of the tough things JKR
has in store for him.

Naama wrote :
" You say that because Peter fooled his friends we must therefore not
trust anyone. Why? If in RL, out of the hundreds of people you meet,
one proves false - is it wise (or healthy) to conclude that you
mustn't trust anyone and everyone? The same goes for the books."

Del replies :
Peter wasn't just someone the Marauders met. He was *one of them*. He
knew their most intimate secrets, he shared in their most illegal
adventures. James trusted his life and the life of his family to him.
 In short, he was *above suspicion*. If he, who was above suspicion,
proved untrustworthy, how can we assume that anybody else is trustworthy ?

Moreover, he didn't just "prove false" : he deliberately sent the
Potter family to their death, and if he knew about the Prophecy, he
even set out to allow the entire world, both WW and Muggle World, to
be dominated by an evil wizard. That's no small betrayal.

Peter was as close to James as Ron and Hermione are to Harry. And yet,
James *shouldn't* have trusted Peter as he did. So how can we assume
that Harry is safe trusting Ron and Hermione, let alone anyone else ?

JKR has shown us that the links of family and friendship are not
unbreakable in her books. But if you can't be sure of your friends and
your family, then *who* can you be sure of ?

As many keep repeating, there's a war going on. And during a war, the
smallest mistake (trusting Peter) can produce the biggest disaster.
Nobody can afford to make careless mistakes in a war. Harry cannot
make the mistake of assuming that all the White Hats are trustworthy.
I hope they are, Harry can hope they are, but he shouldn't *assume*
that they are.

Naama wrote :
" Against the background of so many other WYSIWYG (in basic
orientaions) characters, surely if we speak of pattern then it is that
we should trust people? "

Del replies :
Nope.
In OoP, DD got chased out of Hogwarts for that very reason. If Harry
and Hermione had done their job properly and checked the background of
every prospective DA member, then they would immediately have spotted
Marrietta's huge liability, and they would at least have had a talk
with her. But because they assumed that whoever accepted to belong to
the DA must be trustworthy, they allowed a disaster to happen. A
disaster that nearly resulted in their deaths ultimately.

Naama wrote :
" Look - I'm making a case against ESE!Lupin, puppetmaster!DD and the
like theories. Sure characters develop and may surprise us somewhat,
in minor ways. That's not my point. ESE!Lupin, for instance, requires
that Harry and the reader are totally mistaken about the character's
basic personality."

Del replies :
I understand. But I brought up my arguments to show that Harry doesn't
know how to analyse people's personality and events accurately, not
even his own. He keeps dismissing details if they don't fit in his
general understanding of people and events. He assumes that people are
the way he understands them, and never stops to consider that maybe he
is completely mistaken.

With ESE!Lupin, Pippin brought to light a series of details that don't
seem to fit in completely with our general understanding of Lupin.
Harry never stops to consider them because they don't fit in the way
he thinks Lupin is. He assumes he got Lupin right, and that if Lupin
wasn't who Harry thinks he is, other people would notice and tell him.
People like DD or Sirius, for example. People who never noticed that
Peter wasn't who they thought he was. People who got other people
wrong at times : Sirius thought Remus might be the traitor, DD thought
Sirius was the traitor. So I really don't think it is safe for Harry
to rely on the judgement of people who have already proved that their
judgement isn't always accurate. Incuding himself.

As an aside : it is particularly telling that Sirius thought Remus
might be the traitor. We are not told what led Sirius to think that.
But we are told what apparently convinced Sirius that Lupin was OK :
Sirius found another traitor. But logically, that shouldn't have been
a reason for Sirius to stop doubting Remus, if he had any reason to.
The fact that Peter was guilty didn't absolve Remus.

Naama wrote :
" I don't understand how Ginny becoming an important plot element,
Moaning Myrtle's changing role, Harry's gift or parseltongue and Remus
revealed as a werewolf have any relevancy to the question of
trustworthiness. I think you are mixing here several types of plot
twists and surprises - and only the Sirius/Peter thing is relevant to
the *type* of plot twist I'm talking about - that involving a complete
reversal of the reader's understaning of a certain character
(especially in terms of good/evil). "

Del replies :
My examples are relevant because they show that Harry and the reader
shouldn't trust their understanding of things and people.
If I understand you correctly, you're discussing whether characters
are inherently trustworthy. You're discussing whether Lupin is or is
not trustworthy. The problem is that this sort of question doesn't
lead us anywhere, because there's only one person who knows the answer
: that's JKR, and she hasn't told us yet. And as long as she doesn't
tell us, it's our personal decision to decide for ourselves whether we
want to trust Lupin or not.
But this is not what ESE!Lupin is about. A theory is not about our
personal convictions. It's about what could be, according to canon.

So, *could* Lupin be ESE according to canon ? Is it *possible* that
the odd details be signs, even if Harry isn't reading them ?

I know that this kind of reasoning leads straight to paranoia. But in
a war, paranoia can actually become a quality. I believe that's one
reason JKR invented Mad-Eye Moody.

Del, who wonders if the Potters couldn't have used of themselves
(James or Lily) as SK.