Sirius' declaration of loyalty in the Shrieking Shack

[horridporrid03]

No: HPFGUIDX 139756

> >>Betsy Hp:
> > And really, his statement *is* an exaggeration, IMO. 

> >>Nora:
> As JKR disagrees with you, I'm going to take her exegesis on the 
> character over yours. :)

Betsy Hp:
As I'm basing my exegesis on JKR's presentation of the character, 
I'll just say, she's deep that one, and stick to my guns. <g>

> >>Betsy Hp: 
> > Sirius and James weren't willing to die for Peter.  They put him 
> > into the incredibly dangerous position of Secret Keeper, where 
> > Peter would be risking *his* life for James. 

> >>Nora:
> <snip>
> We're lacking information here (of course), but I don't see this  
> going down without Lily's input, and I don't see a situation of   
> great duress being put onto Peter.
> <snip>

Betsy Hp:
Asking anyone to keep a secret is putting them into *some* level of 
duress.  And this is a really big secret.  One Sirius worried the 
Death Eaters would kill for.  Hence the shell game.  So yes, Peter 
*was* asked to put his life on the line.  Though I will back up and 
say that I do think Sirius felt himself willing to die to 
protect "Peter the Secret Keeper".  But ultimately, it was all in 
service to James (and James's wife and James's child).

> >>Betsy Hp:
> > <snip>
> > Yes, much of this is based on the one scene JKR gives us, but   
> > it's a fair judgment to make, IMO.  We're not anthropologists   
> > stumbling upon the Marauders and needing furthur proof that this 
> > is a typical day.  JKR deliberately gives us this scene to give 
> > us an idea of what their characters were like.

> >>Nora:
> I don't think that's quite how it is, because of my read on the 
> function of that scene.  It's placed where it is and composed as  
> it is, to disrupt some of our assumptions and constructions to a  
> maximal degree. 

Betsy Hp:
Ooh, I disagree here. The beginning of the scene (pre-Snape 
spotting, if you will) I think the Marauders played exactly to 
character expectation.  The only real dark horse was James, but I 
certainly wasn't shocked at his behaviour.  A bit of a jock and a 
showman, that was new.  And the fact that Sirius and James were the 
core of the group, rather than Sirius and Remus, that shifted things 
about a bit.  But none of those things really rocked the boat.  And 
I doubt any of those things changed much as the characters grew.

The James that faced Voldemort "straight backed and proud" is easily 
the same James purposely tousling his hair and showing off with the 
snitch.  He's aware of how he looks, how he comes across.  Not a bad 
thing, certainly, but a part of his character.  And the deep 
friendship between Sirius and James is another thing that I doubt 
changed much over the years.

> >>Nora:
> Most of us felt rather disoriented from what we'd thought, after   
> that scene.  Of course, we've learned things which complicated     
> other aspects of the scenario in book 6, to put it mildly.  Is it 
> too much to suspect the pendulum swings even more in the other    
> direction?  Clean extrapolation from one scene is very dangerous--
> it lets us hang ourselves with our own rope.

Betsy Hp:
Post-Snape spotting things do get furiously muddled, I agree.  And 
yes, to assume, based on one scene, that Snape was *always* the 
victim and James and Sirius *always* the nasty bullies, *is* 
dangerous.  But I seriously doubt the characters change to too 
drastic a degree.  Within a fictional world, where character 
exposure is limited, it's unwise for the author to have her 
characters act wildly out of character the first time she introduces 
them to her readers.  It's not a mistake JKR makes, that I've seen.

> >>Nora: 
> As well, your extrapolation from that scene requires that they    
> remain basically the same from 15 to 21 or so, or maybe even      
> earlier. Characters can't change, develop, show more depths?  It's 
> one clean line from childhood into adulthood, and all actions can 
> be completely linked back to the pettinesses of youth?  Draco's   
> *really* doomed, then. :)

Betsy Hp:
Ah, but they *do* stay the same in some very basic ways, don't 
they?  Remus still fades to the background and fears snitching on 
his friends.  Sirius is still confident and brash.  Peter still 
sucks up to the most powerful guy around.  

Yes, characters develop and grow.  James obviously changes before he 
graduates, though I bet he was still recognizable to his friends.  
Remus manages to develop a bit more backbone. (Sirius doesn't grow 
much but he's got an incredibly good excuse.)  But they don't change 
entirely.  James still had a bit of the showman in him.  Remus still 
hesitates to speak out.  Draco will probably always know exactly 
what spoon is used for what.  Ron will probably always support the 
Chudley Cannons.  Hermione will probably always love knowing 
things.  Harry will probably always love to fly.

An author *can* drastically change a character.  But they can't 
spring it on the reader and leave it at that.  So yes, I expect some 
evolvement of the Marauders (specifically around the time of the 
Prank) but I'm sure the character foundation will remain the same.  
And we've already seen that the pecking order remained pretty much 
the same.  (Sirius leaves nothing to his old friend Remus in his 
will.  That says a lot, IMO.)

> >>Nora:
> <snip>
> Ultimately, I think JKR is really rather sentimental about many 
> things, and the friendship of the Marauders may well be one of    
> them. 
> <snip>

Betsy Hp:
Hmmm.  JKR strikes me as rather ruthless when she wants to be.  Look 
what she does to poor old Sirius.  He goes from this rather grand 
and noble character to a bit of a raving drunk to a footnote in the 
war.  It looks like his own brother may well out-hero him.  I 
suspect JKR gets great pleasure in setting something up just to 
knock it down.

Betsy Hp