ESE!Lupin condensed and Lupin and Sirius replies

[nkafkafi]

No: HPFGUIDX 147012

> Pippin:
> JKR points up Snape's suspicions about Lupin:
> "So that's why Snape doesn't like you," said Harry slowly, "because
> he thought you were in on the joke?"
> "That's right," sneered a cold voice from the wall behind Lupin.
> PoA ch 18
> 

Neri:
It's *Harry* here who refers to Lupin specifically, and he says Lupin
was "in on the joke", suggesting one out of several partners rather
than an instigator, which Snape confirms.

> Pippin:
> I don't recall any canon that Snape suspects Pettigrew is
> involved so I don't see how we know that Snape blamed the
> prank on all the marauders.
> 

Neri:
PoA ,Ch. 14, p. 285 (Scholastic):
"Your saintly father and his friends played a highly amusing joke on
me that would have resulted in my death
"

I understand "his friends" to be the other Marauders, which is
probably what Harry understood too, since he says to Lupin "he thought
you were *in* on the joke". But this only points at Lupin because
Harry happens to be talking to Lupin at that moment, and he is talking
to Lupin because Lupin is the only living Marauder that Harry had the
chance (at that point in the story) to see Snape showing hatred to.

> Pippin:
> You're welcome to think the ESE!Lupin clues inadequate  and
> overly reliant on reader speculation, but they're perfectly in line 
> with the sorts of clues JKR has offered for other
> mysteries. 
> 
> What clues do  we have for Barty Crouch Jr?
> The only clue that Barty has the same name as his father is that
> Tom Riddle has the same name as *his* father. 

Neri:
We have a clue that the Map says "Bartemius Crouch" was in Snape's
office. There's a lot of discussion between the trio and Sirius about
why would Crouch be in Snape's office when he's not even supposed to
be at Hogwarts, which makes it an "official" mystery. At this point,
if we realize that the Map only gives us the *name*, not the absolute
identity, we would realize that it could be another person by the same
name. And who such a person can be? The son of Bartemius Crouch, who
is extensively discussed in that very same talk with Sirius but his
name is never mentioned. It's a very devious clue, which makes it so
good. But AFAIK there isn't in the books any similar clue suggesting
"Wormtail" might be someone other than Pettigrew, certainly not
something that is highlighted as an official mystery. 

> Pippin:
> The only clue
> that Barty's  death has been faked is that Peter Pettigrew faked
> *his* death. 
> The only clue that he escaped from Azkaban is
> that Sirius managed it. 

Neri:
Also that the son and his mother both died shortly after she visited
him in Azkaban, an event that is also described by Sirius in that very
same talk.

> Pippin:
> The only clue that he's using polyjuice potion
> to hide his identity is Snape's reference to missing boomslang
> skin, but there's no way to tell that Snape is referring to a 
> recent burglary, not the one that took place two years before.

Neri:
There are several indications that Snape is referring to a recent
burglary: he mentions boomslang skin together with the gillyweed,
which we know to be recent. Before that, in the "Egg and The Eye"
chapter (p. 471 Scholastic) he says that someone has been stealing
from his office, and he adds "Potion ingredient have gone missing from
my private store cupboard
 no doubt students attempting illicit
mixtures". Gillyweed was never mentioned as an ingredient of a potion,
certainly not an "illicit" potion, but boomslang skin was. And again,
all this is highlighted as an official mystery because we know that it
was "Bartemius Crouch" who broke into Snape's office.

> Pippin:
> There's no hint that Fake!Moody's flask contains a potion, no 
> cabbage-y smell or anything like that.
> 

Neri:
But we were told in CoS that polyjuice potion works for only one hour.

> Pippin:
> None of this would be enough to implicate Fake!Moody by itself.

Neri:
The combination of them would certainly point to him. Or at the very
least, it would suggest that Barty Coruch's son could be at Hogwarts
stealing potion ingredients from Snape's office, and Fake!Moody would
become the prime suspect.

But the most important point here is that the reader, even if he/she
hasn't solved yet the Fake!Moody mystery, is very aware that there's
something fishy going on. There are all kinds of unexplained
occurrences, suspects and clues around. Something is definitely afoot.
At that point, if a perceptive reader suggests a theory that Moody
could be Barty Crouch's son on polyjuice, even if the details aren't
clear yet, the theory would already answer several official mysteries,
like who is Voldemort's agent at Hogwarts (who was mentioned in the
first chapter), who put Harry's name in the goblet, what family secret
is Winky covering on and why was "Bartemius Crouch" stealing potion
ingredients from Snape's office. Later on in the story it would also
explain the disappearance of Crouch Sr. in the forest. In comparison,
ESE!Lupin doesn't solve any official mysteries. There is practically
no need for it except that it would be bangy. 

 
> Pippin:
> You have to look at the way he acts for that. The way Lupin acts
> ought to be enough to draw suspicion on him. He's willing to 
> kill in cold blood. 
> 
>  I've heard any number of excuses for it -- he was temporarily 
> unhinged by Pettigrew's reappearance, he was following some 
> old WW tradition of revenge killings, he'd
> lost faith in wizarding justice, he was blindly obedient to
> Sirius.  All purely speculative, contra-canonical and highly 
> convoluted, IMO, when all the time there's a  simple but heartbreaking
> answer: he's a killer.
> 
> Not a brutal, psychotic or indiscriminate killer, but one who
> chose to kill when he had to choose   between what
> was right and what was easy. 
> 

Neri:
Here is my own explanation for Lupin's behavior. I think that JKR is
slightly guilty of plot-device-ness here (what is the proper literary
term?). She needs Pettigrew to leave the Shack with a Life Debt to
Harry. So Pettigrew must have died if not for Harry, and Harry alone
is allowed to save him. Well, Sirius definitely would kill Pettigrew,
but Lupin must go along with him. Otherwise Pettigrew would have owed
his Debt to Lupin.

How do we know that this is indeed what was going on in JKR's head?
The obvious indication is Hermione's behavior. Hermione is the most
politically correct character in the series, the very voice of What's
Right, and during most of the Shrieking Shack night she just can't
shut up. Everyone gets a piece of her mind - Lupin, Sirius, Snape,
Dumbledore, Fudge - she's not afraid of any of them. But when a field
execution is going to take place right in front of her, Hermione shuts
up. When the convict begs her for mercy she merely "backs away against
the wall looking horrified" and when Sirius and Lupin raise their
wands to kill, she "covers her face with her hands and turns against
the wall". She's choosing what's easy over what's right. So is Ron.

Now, Hermione and Ron are only kids, so they can merely watch, but
Lupin is the grownup and the teacher in the scene, so he must take an
active part, or it wouldn't be clear that Pettigrew indeed faced
certain death and that only Harry saved him. So Sirius asks Lupin to
kill Pettigrew together and Lupin agrees. This would also make it
slightly more like an execution and less like a revenge murder, and
Sirius would share the blame. Now, how would Lupin go about this
execution and still be in character? He wouldn't act emotional like
Sirius, even if he's torn by emotions from inside, and he wouldn't
pretend to be noble either. He's not proud of what he's doing, it's
just a necessity imposed by the ruthless author. He'd be very composed
and matter-of-fact about it. But when he says goodbye to Peter he's
talking "quietly", not "coldly" or "indifferently". When Lupin is
talking "quietly" it means he feels deeply.  

I must say, right after we've witnessed not only Sirius' revenge
frenzy, but also Snape taunting the people he's turning in to the
dementors, Lupin's killing style seems almost refreshing.          

> Pippin: 
> I fail to see why the first six books of the series 
> should be concerned with spies, traitors  and
> mysteries, but not the last. You don't have to *read* them for
> the mystery plots, but they're definitely there. How else
> are we to explain JKR's constant references to clues and
> red herrings when she discusses her work? 
>

Neri:
Yes, but there's a difference between JKR's style of mystery a
standard whodunit. In the standard whodunit we are practically
guaranteed that by the end of the book an "unexpected" murderer will
be revealed. In JKR's case the clues and red herrings can be about the
location of a Horcrux, or about the motives of a character, or about
what exactly happened one fateful night 16 years ago.  

> Pippin: 
> You are welcome to think it's no mystery and Snape is
> the traitor, but if it isn't, why should JKR have refused to say
> that he's evil? What's the point? 

Neri:
Maybe because the real mystery is about Snape's motives and future
choices rather than about whether he killed Dumbledore or not. A "who
killed Dumbledore" would be a standard whodunit, but is JKR writing a
standard whodunit? You might want to consider again Dumbledore's tip
to the reader in CoS: the real question isn't *who*, but *how*. 

> Pippin:
> I  think that if the body of the deceased has fresh
> blood on it a considerable interval of time after it's supposed
> to have died of a curse that doesn't leave any trace --
> well, if that's not meant to be a clue, then JKR *is* a 
> terrible mystery writer. 
> 

Neri:
If that's not meant to be a clue, then JKR is perhaps a terrible
mystery writer in Agatha Christy's standards. But is she writing a
Christy style mystery? 


Neri