Ungrateful Werewolf ( Was Re: Character Given A Reprieve)

[frumenta]

No: HPFGUIDX 175796

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "srpripas" <srpripas at ...> 
wrote:
>
> 
Sarah: 
> Nowhere in canon does it actually indicate that James didn't trust
> Remus.  You might infer that he didn't based on the fact that Remus
> didn't know about the switch in Secret-Keepers, but canon doesn't
> actually state it and there are certainly alternative 
explanations. 
> All we know for sure is that *Sirius* thought Remus was the spy. 
> Personally, I doubt Remus would have said that James "would have
> regarded it as the height of dishonor to suspect his friends" if 
James
> had suspected him the way Sirius did.

Mim:
But does Remus know one way or the other? When he says that bit 
about "height of dishonour" he's trying to get Harry to see that he 
should be a little less trusting. Using James as an example, good or 
bad always works with Harry. Until Harry uses it against Remus in 
the end, that was fun. I'll give you that it's possible that James 
didn't know and it had been all Sirius but we truly don't know one 
way or another. James certainly didn't tell Remus and if Remus would 
have expected Sirius to have told him, the same applies to James.
> 





Sarah: 
  And while much
> of Remus' behavior in the early part of the book is indeed
> indefensible, I find it somewhat odd that you blame him 
for "getting
> Tonks pregnant."  First, we don't know what the actual odds of him
> passing lycanthropy (not a genetic trait) to potential offspring 
and
> JKR has said that Teddy's not a werewolf.  Second, it takes two to
> make a baby.  Tonks also bears some responsibility for the 
pregnancy
> (which was probably accidental, IMO).  I agree with criticisms of
> Remus' behavior after the pregnancy was discovered, but criticizing
> him for getting Tonks pregnant at all strikes me as rather odd.
> 
Mim:
Of course Tonks shares responsibility for the pregnancy but we're 
talking about the woman who had been pursuing Remus relentlessly no 
matter what. She was even stalking him in the middle of the battle 
of Hogwarts. I bet she would want the kid regardless. She doesn't 
seem to have any problem with it but Remus throws a hissy fit about 
it. So if wolfie doesn't want little wolfies around (and it was a 
crap shoot, they really didn't know what the kid would be) all 
forgetful wolfie had to do was cover it up. It's simple. He did get 
Tonks pregnant, her responsibility doesn't matter here.

Sarah: 
> > I think that fandom gives them a hell of a lot of slack, myself. 
But 
> > I guess it depends also on where you place yourself in regards 
to 
> > them, a bully or a victim? 
> 
> This is a gross oversimplification of the Marauder/Snape dynamic. 
> While MWPP are extremely far from sainthood, so was young Snape 
(who
> was involved with Dark magic, even to the point of inventing spells
> like Sectumsempra, was entirely too interested in his rivals'
> business, and broke rules and made bad decisions himself as a 
result
> of his hatred.)  I've always been confused by fandom's desire 
to "take
> sides", as it were, instead of recognizing the deliciously 
ambiguous
> characters on both sides of the conflict.

Mim:
They were deliciously ambiguous and when it comes to Snape, he was a 
bully to his students which is almost worse. But we're talking about 
fandom here, not the most rational reaction to everything. Yes, 
Snape did follow them about and try to get them in trouble but they 
were bullying him and others, looking for any chance to jump him if 
they outnumbered him. For better or for worse, the books never gave 
us one scene of young Snape himself bullying others or using that 
awful dark magic to hurt others in school. Except for James from 
what we hear from Remus and Sirius, not the most reliable narrators 
out there. I was bullied as a teenager and that leaves scars that 
make it completely impossible for me to see this situation 
objectively. I'm glad that others can but as fandom and identifying 
with anyone in the books goes, I could never identify with bullies. 
I had teachers like Snape but their nastiness and pettiness left no 
scars at all. What my peers did was much worse.
> 
> > Dumbledore who knew them and let Sirius rot in 
> > jail and Remus be miserable until he could find some use for 
them 
> > again. It's complicated.
> >
> 
Sarah:
> Dumbledore had every reason to believe that Sirius was guilty, and
> therefore very different from the boy/young man he thought he 
knew. 
> Yet when meeting Sirius again in PoA, Dumbledore was willing to 
listen
> to his story and believed him.  

Mim:

I'm sure that Dumbledore and everyone else could have tried harder 
if they truly believed in Sirius. But we'll never know one way or 
another.
Sarah
As
> for Remus, it's not clear what Dumbledore *could* have done for him
> during the "missing years" gap.  


Mim:

He could have hired him. In a position other than a cursed one, that 
is. 

Sarah:
> Using people is what Dumbledore *did*--and I'm not sure what
> conclusions we can draw about MWPP from his various actions.

Mim: 

I was referring merely to the fact that he believed Sirius to be 
guilty. And so did Remus. That's a big deal. But I guess you have a 
point, Dumbledore was such a user that we can't really draw 
conclusions from his behaviour. He was probably glad that he had had 
Sirius out of the way so that Harry could grow up miserable among 
Muggles and I'm sure that Sirius' death was a relief too because 
then he could continue grooming Harry to march to his death without 
any distractions.

Gads, I hate Dumbledore but that's a different story.

Mim