Maligning Lupin

[spotsgal]

No: HPFGUIDX 149680

> >Renee:
> >Unfortunately, Pippin's answer doesn't solve my problem, which is 
> >that the *only* two members of this particular group we get 
> >acquainted with would be evil if Lupin is ESE. We have no basis 
> >left within canon to assume werewolves could ever be okay and are a
> >cause worth 

> Pippin:
> 
> If two werewolves are evil will  our heroes  feel justified
> in believing that  all the bad things they've heard about werewolves
> are true?  That werewolves are too scary to be given their rights 
> and their freedoms? I hope not, because that would mean they were 
> prejudiced.

Christina:

But it isn't just two.  We only know two werewolves personally, but we
know OF many more.  Fenrir Greyback has a nice little group going, and
as Lupin says, they don't take to wizards nicely.  The werewolves are
attracted to Fenrir because of his opinion that "we werewolves deserve
blood, that we ought to revenge ourselves on normal people."  They
don't sound very nice to me.  Lupin is held up as the exception to the
rule, and so erasing that exception isn't just a "we only know two
werewolves and they happen to both be evil" kind of thing.  It's a
"Lupin has finally joined his brethren in a werewolf evil-fest."

It is only after Ron comes to know that Lupin is good and trustworthy
that he loses his prejudice against werewolves.  And that follows real
life, where sometimes people just have to get to know a person from
the group they fear/dislike to lose their prejudice.  I don't think
that an ESE!Lupin situation would feature Ron saying, "Well gosh,
guys, Lupin was the only good werewolf we know, so I guess they're all
rotten now," but when you use a character to make others overcome
their prejudice, and then make the character evil, I see it as a sort
of thematic hole.  Then again, I suppose you see it as good trickery :)


> Pippin:
> Unfortunately there  are people,  in the WW as in the real world, 
> who make human rights look like a bad idea.
....<snip>...
> Whenever anyone tells me that Lupin can't be evil because it 
> would make things look bad for the werewolves, I'm reminded of
> something I think Ben Gurion said:  that he would know anti-Semitism
> was over when no one was afraid to say  that Israel's jails were 
> full of Jewish murderers and thieves.

Christina:

Prior to HBP, I would have agreed with you.  Now, absolutely not. 
Because we DO admit freely that there are werewolves that are bad,
even while fighting for their rights.  Even while Lupin is a walking
poster-boy for the poor, rejected werewolf, even he admits that there
are those of his kind that enjoy infecting children for sport.  JKR
even puts him through a philosophical transformation of sorts, by
having him feel sorry for the werewolf initially and then realizing
that Fenrir was evil.

JKR gave you an example of somebody that makes human rights look bad
in Fenrir Greyback.  It really IS hard to go around shouting about
werewolf rights when the most famous werewolf of them all is tearing
up innocent children.  That particular role has been filled.  That's
why I don't see the need for an evil Lupin - what would it achieve?


> Pippin:
> I firmly believe that JKR will show us that ESE!Lupin's efforts to 
> be good weren't  futile because  he was a werewolf. They were
> futile because he never had the courage to make himself accountable
> for what he'd done.

Christina:

This is why ESE!Lupin is so paradoxical to me...Lupin is "too
cowardly" to admit to his mentor that he betrayed his trust, but he
has the guts to kill his supposed best friend with DD standing in the
same room?  Lupin's canonical sins are of the passive sort (he doesn't
give DD important information, he doesn't stop his friends), but
ESE!Lupin seems overwhelmingly active, killing Sirius when Bella was
doing fine on her own, framing Peter when Sirius would have taken the
blame anyway, purposefully forgetting to take his wolfsbane when his
evil goals would have been more directly served by just apprehending
Sirius at the Shack.  In terms of holding himself accountable, I find
it interesting to compare Lupin and Peter (especially since you've
said in the past that Peter is a decoy of sorts).  When Sirius blames
Peter, Peter points to external forces - "He was taking over
everywhere!...What was there to be gained by refusing him?"  But even
when Sirius pays Lupin's virtue a compliment, Lupin responds by
pointing out his character flaws - "Did I ever have the guts..."


> Pippin:
> Note his utter incredulity that Dumbledore believed in  Snape's
> remorse.

Christina:

He is incredulous because Harry presents Snape's remorse as the
iron-clad reason DD trusted him.  A lot of us agree that DD had better
proof that he never told Harry, but Harry speaks with authority to the
adults in the hospital.  They have no reason to think he's lying.


Christina