Nitwit? - Remus John Lupin

[wynnleaf]

No: HPFGUIDX 167970


> > 
> > > wynnleaf
> > > You left out the parts of his betraying Dumbledore's trust 
> > on several long-term occasions, both as a student and an 
> > employee.
> > 
> > Goddlefrood:
> > 
> > Ok, the teacher part, possibly, but as a student? You must mean 
> > that he did not immediately tell Dumbledore about his three 
> > only friends being Animagi by their fifth year.
> 
> Pippin:
 
> Lupin would not have had to rat out his friends-- he
> only had to tell them that he didn't want them to  let him
> out of  the Shrieking Shack any more. But, as he says
> he always managed to forget his guilty feelings when it
> came time to plan the next adventure.

wynnleaf
Exactly!  Lupin not tattling on his friends pales to insignificance 
when compared to his willingness to -- for years -- make a mockery 
of Dumbledore's giving him a chance to be a student at Hogwarts and 
yet keep Hogwarts and the surrounding population safe from a 
werewolf.  

I'm always amazed that readers overlook so much about Lupin when we 
are given two very clear examples of Lupin's willingness to put his 
own personal benefit -- for the more trivial desire to keep his 
friend's goodwill -- above the lives of children and townspeople.  
If this was a one-time occurance it would be one thing, but in both 
cases -- Lupin's jeopardizing the safety of the community in order 
to keep the goodwill of his Marauder friends, as well as his 
jeopardizing the lives of his students in order to keep Dumbledore's 
goodwill -- Lupin consciously makes these decisions over and over 
again.  He repeatedly and knowingly jeopardized the lives of the 
community for literally *years.*  And he repeatedly withheld 
information and jeopardized the safety of his students for an entire 
school year.  

This isn't just a "mistake."  This, imo, is indicative of huge 
character flaws.

 
> > Goddlefrood:
> > 
> > Well, thanks for the reiteration there ;). It would be quite 
> > probable, despite the lack of canon support, that Peter was the 
> > one stirring up suspicions between Sirius and James and Lupin. 
> > Lupin was the only Marauder not to be involved in any way with 
> > the Secret Keeper switch, and Sirius is very quick to proffer 
> > apologies for his own suspicions.

wynnleaf
Considering that Sirius had spent many years reviewing the fact that 
he alone knew that Pettigrew was the traitor, and therefore had lots 
and lots of time to pick apart every possible treacherous thing 
Pettigrew did, I feel sure he would have thrown that accusation down 
at Pettigrew in the Shrieking Shack.

Sirius *does* mention that he and James suspected Lupin.  But even 
though he was cataloging Peter's crimes, he never said anything that 
even hints that he considered one of Peter's crimes to be spreading 
discord or suspicions among the friends.  

That, imo, is fairly decent evidence that Peter did not spread any 
such suspicions.

Goodlefrood:
> > Who would be left to muddy the waters, only Peter, as far as I'm 
> > concerned, although an alternate viewpoint would be interesting 
> > to see expounded on :)

wynnleaf
Who would be left?  How about Lupin?  The idea that Peter *did* 
spread such suspicions rests in circular reasoning:  Lupin did 
nothing that appeared suspicious, therefore if Sirius and James 
suspected him someone else must have planted suspicions, and because 
someone else must have planted the suspicions, Lupin did nothing 
suspicious.


> 
>> Goodlefrood:
> > 
> > Of course the other difficulty I have with Lupin as evil, or 
> > inadvertently bad at least, is that I see little value in it for 
> > the progress of the series. There will be quite enough problems 
> > for Harry to face without one more he was not expecting. 

wynnleaf
Unfortunately (for book 7) this also assumes that the reader will be 
presented with no more problems than we are already aware of.  
Fortunately, I expect JKR to surprise her readers as per usual.

Goodlefrood:
This is 
> > why Remus is vastly different from Snape. If Snape turns out to 
> > be helping Harry, as I think he may (but have said more than 
> > enough on this in a prior thread for several lifetimes ;)), then 
> > that would be a bonus. If any other character turns out to be a 
> > hindrance, apart from Severus, who may also prove one, we would 
> > have to have an extremely good explanation as to why.

wynnleaf
As I've pointed out, JKR always does have a surprise traitor, or at 
least betrayer.  And in order to make it a surprise, yet also make 
sense, JKR generally sprinkles enough ahead of time that it all 
makes sense once she reveals who the surprise betrayer actually is.  
If she decided to make Lupin that betrayer, she's already given him 
motive, opportunity, the weakness of character, and the past history 
of breaking Dumbledore's trust and being excellent at deception for 
it to be believable.

As regards the parallels and juxtapositions that work so well 
between a loyal Snape and a betraying Lupin, you would not get 
nearly so excellent a set of literary parallels and juxtapositions 
with Peter.  

The primary reason is that the parallels and juxtapositions are most 
important is how they affect *Harry* - the protagonist.  Making 
someone Harry trusts and considers a friend betray him can be used 
to develop Harry as a character, especially when that is balanced 
with learning that someone he dislikes and considers an enemy is 
actually loyal.  

But in addition, there has to be a surprise element both for Harry 
and the reader.  We've known Peter was a traitor for several books.  
And whichever way Snape ends up it's no longer a surprise.  We all 
want the definite answer about Snape, but it's no surprise that his 
loyalties are in question.  For JKR to pull a surprise (and please 
remember, JKR definitely wants to surprise her readers in Book 7), 
her betrayor (or traitor) has to be someone Harry doesn't suspect, 
nor do most readers suspect.  

I'm sure it gets harder and harder to surprise her most die-hard 
fans, who dream up what they hope is every possible theory.  But she 
*did* surprise people with Snape as the HBP, because she had managed 
to have almost all of her readers convinced that he was a pure-
blood.  Peter as traitor is old, old news.  Snape as a character 
whose loyalties are in question is old news.  And Harry must be 
surprised as well.  The protagonist has to grow and Harry's not 
going to grow being told once again that Peter is a traitor.  That, 
after all, is the whole point -- developing the protagonist.  

Yes, learning that Snape is loyal will help change the protagonist.  
That's a growing experience.  But JKR has always had someone betray 
Harry or the Order, and it's got to surprise him and overturn some 
beliefs for it to help him grow as a character.

wynnleaf, who uses the expression "betrayer" instead of "traitor" 
because it can encompass choices that are simply weak, rather than 
out-and-out evil treacherous intent.