A Defense of James Potter(Whose flaws are bigger)

[montavilla47]

No: HPFGUIDX 175346

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "prep0strus" <prep0strus at ...> wrote:
>
Prep0sterus:
> Incidentally, when most of us refer to `The Marauders', no, we're not
> including Peter.  And not because we're trying to sweep him under the
> rug, or because we're trying to raise Lupin and Sirius so they're not
> tainted by him.  It's because when Peter betrayed them, he stopped
> being a Marauder. But really, it's because it's easier and more fun to
> say `The Marauders' than it is to say "James, Sirius, and Lupin' all
> the time.
> 
> ~Adam (Prep0strus), who did NOT criticize Severus in this posting,
> even obliquely, for he's found that attempting to defend "James,
> Sirius, and Lupin" by comparing the way they are evaluated by posters
> by how Snape is evaluated only results in pro-snape vs anti-snape
> posting, so tried a new tack
>

Good post, Adam.  I have no problem with your defense of James
as James.  

Although, just to be a quibbler, I quibble with the idea of excluding
Peter from the Marauders.  During school he was one of them, and 
he must have had some part to play in their antics.  

If, on the other hand, you are talking of the post-Godric Hollow 
Marauders, then he wouldn't merit inclusion.  Of course, at that 
point, the Marauders didn't exist as a group at all.  And post PoA, 
they still weren't the Marauders.  They were Remus and Sirius.  

Montavilla47