Nitwit? - Remus John Lupin

[dumbledore11214]

No: HPFGUIDX 168108

Magpie:
<SNIP>
I  think we can think of Remus as wanting Sirius 
> to be innocent and maybe not wanting to turn him in. But it 
doesn't seem 
> like Remus is *actively* working against Dumbledore in PoA, as he 
would be 
> if he thought Sirius was innocent. He's just passively not giving 
> information. I don't see why he'd have any reason to lie to 
Dumbledore and 
> Sirius about that motivation and instead make one up about not 
wanting to 
> out himself.

Alla:

I did not say anything about actively working against Dumbledore, I 
did not even say that Remus was actively thinking that Sirius was 
innocent, lol. Because if he was actively thinking that, he is 
rather rotten friend, if you ask me. He should have done something 
to try and free Sirius, if he actively believed in his innocence. I 
believe that Remus may have thought deep inside that Sirius is 
innocent, that's all. Sort of on subsconscious level. But to me it 
is enough to consider the possibility that Remus may have had 
another reason to conceal information besides what he says.



> Magpie:
> I think Dumbledore, being Dumbledore, is supposed to see Remus' 
motives for 
> what they are and so understands his personality. He doesn't think 
Remus was 
> actively working against him because he wasn't. He seems to get 
that Remus 
> was really just keeping his own personal secret, and everything's 
turned out 
> well and he can deal with that.


Alla:

Let's agree to disagree on whether Remus only motivation was to keep 
his personal secret, ok? Let's pretend that I am agreeing with it. 
So, here we have exactly what you described here, agreed.


Magpie:
> But I still wouldn't say it was uncanonical for someone to say 
that Remus 
> had betrayed Dumbledore's trust if they meant that very same 
thing. For 
> instance, I don't think it's uncanonical to say that Snape let 
Dumbledore 
> down in OotP by not continuing the Occlumency lessons, even though 
> Dumbledore obviously doesn't consider Snape a traitor for doing 
it. Or that 
> Hagrid let him down by spilling the beans about Fluffy. I think 
when people 
> talk about Remus betraying trust--and this is just how it comes 
across to me 
> in what other people say, so I could be misinterpreting--I think 
they're 
> just saying that it's canon that Remus has this very clear limit 
that we're 
> aware of. He, Hagrid and Snape all have these limits we've seen.

Alla:

Let me make sure I understand.  When you are talking about betraying 
DD trust, do you just mean these characters not doing what 
Dumbledore expected them to do? Or are you also including those 
characters willingness to endanger other people? Because if you are 
stopping short on my first sentence, then I can sorta agree, if I 
forget about my doubts of Remus and Sirius innocence, but if you are 
including second sentence and then we are back to Remus willingly 
putting hundreds of kids at risk, then I just do not see it.


Magpie:
> I'm not explaining this well, but that's more what I think it's 
about, is 
> mapping out the weak spots and limits of the characer. Neither 
Lupin nor 
> Snape are perfectly in step with Dumbledore. He's aware of their 
weak spots 
> and he doesn't think they're reason enough to consider them 
traitors, but 
> they're there. I don't think Dumbledore being upset or not is why 
people 
> describe their actions this way. It's more about what makes Snape 
and Lupin 
> tick than Dumbledore.


Alla:

But but when we are talking about Snape being a good guy, 
Dumbledore's unwavering trust in him is given as iron clad reason 
for Snape to be such a guy, but when I am bring Dumbledore talking 
about piece of info what Remus concealed and not being upset and 
telling Fudge that Remus saved lives, isn't it supposed to mean the 
same thing?

That Remus really did not betray DD trust, since DD does not think 
so.

I mean, believe me I get what you are sayiung, it is just I believe 
that betrayal is not the word I choose here, sorry.

To me Peter is the traytor, not Remus who did not tell Dumbledore 
about them being animagi, which did not lead to anybody's death, you 
know?




 
> Alla:
> > Dumbledore does not sound too upset to me here either after 
learning
> > this information. If his trust had been betrayed, shouldn't he 
had
> > been more upset?
> 
> Magpie:
> Not necessarily. He's just admitted his trust was betrayed. He 
gave Lupin a 
> chance at school and Lupin did betray it by taking risks as a 
werewolf. 

Alla:

Where did he admit that his trust was betrayed? I thought he said 
nothing like that.


Magpie:
All 
> these years he never knew about it (he always seems a bit pleased 
when kids 
> put one over on him). He's just not angry about it. Similarly, DD 
tells 
> Harry in OotP that he thought Snape could get over his issues and 
teach 
> Harry Occlumency but he was wrong. So he's saying that Snape let 
him down 
> there, but he's also not angry at him. Dumbledore may not always 
be 
> successful but he tries to deal with people as individuals with 
flaws rather 
> than robots.


Alla:

He is not just not **angry**. He seemed awfully pleased to me with 
that "extraordinary achievement". And you know, I wish nothing more 
for Snape but die painful death or suffer in Azkaban forever.

Nevertheless if this is the Snape we are getting who was so 
painfully hurt and mental that he could not continue Occlumency 
lessons, so crasy that he cannot distinguish between two Potters, 
etc, it would not even enter my mind to call it betrayal of trust, 
you know. I would call such Snape mentally incapacitated and blamed 
DD for letting him teach, but that is about it.

The thing is - I do not think that this is the Snape we are getting, 
I think Dumbledore exaggerates his mental hurts here, I think Snape 
executes a cold blooded revenge on James Potter through his son.

In any event, I hope I am clear enough :) Let me know if I am not.


Mike:
<SNIP of the whole post that I loved, loved, loved> 
> It is quite hard for James and Sirius to defend themselves when 
> they're dead. And we have been fed a 6 year diet of Snape's 
position 
> on their relationship without much counterpunching from the likes 
of 
> Lupin. The few times that Sirius had with Harry were mostly spent 
on 
> more important concerns, not Snape. Or they included Sirius trying 
to 
> explain himself and James after a particularly egregious event 
from 
> their school days. I hope that JKR restores some of the lustre on 
> James armor in DH. Or I'll be feeling like Sherry, that JKR has 
> pulled the rug out from under Harry and killed his father all over 
> again.

Alla:

Okay, just sticking it in another post to say how much I loved every 
word Mike, I so did :)