This thread is for discussion and debate on anything and everything related to James Potter (Prongs), Sirius Black (Padfoot), Remus Lupin (Moony), and Peter Pettigrew (Wormtail), known collectively as "The Marauders". This includes their relationships with one another, their actions, potential, etc.

The idea for this thread stemmed from the following suggestion from SpinJam:

What are your thoughts on this?

To start discussion off, we have a few other suggestions on what you might want to talk about:

• The general characteristics of the four (similarities, differences, etc.)
• How did James, Sirius, and Remus treat Peter?
• What school subjects were they skilled in?
• Comparisons between the Marauders and current students (i.e. Hermione, Harry, the Weasley twins, etc.)
• Why did Wormtail turn on the other three?
• Why was there a sudden change from Sirius to Peter in regards to the Secret Keeper?
• Was/Is Peter hiding his true abilities? (Hey...he killed several Muggles with one killing curse, didn't he!?)
• How did they create the Marauder's Map? (This is pretty advanced magic, right?)
• Their Animagi: symbolic?
• Their relationships with Lily and Snape.

Of course, if you have any other topics you want to bring up, go right ahead! Have fun!

How did James, Sirius, and Remus treat Peter?
It seems that James and Sirius treated Peter bady, at least on the level Ron treats Neville, if not worse. Ron discounts Neville's abilities as nothing. Hermione is a kindhearted spirit, so she'd never say anything about neville's abilites. But Harry, we know, has a lot of respect for Neville. Neville isn't the best wizard in the world, but he is skilled at some things and he is determined. I see wormtail being the same way. But I see James and Sirius treating him like Ron treats Neville. No wonder he became resentful. No matter what, though, they still liked him and treated him as part of the group, like Ron does neville. They say in book 3 that they would have died for him. That is saying something.

Why did Wormtail turn on the other three?
This is such a difficult subject. Part of it seems to be resentment. He wanted to have the approval of someone. Part of it is fear, of course. But his actions seem so slytherin-like. "There wasn't a wizard that turned bad that weren't in slytherin." He's a griffindor. But he seems so sincere in his actions against harry that it is hard for me to believe it all a ruse. I do hope, though, that will still be redemption for him. One of three characters I want redeemed. Snape, Draco, and Wormtail.

Why was there a sudden change from Sirius to Peter in regards to the Secret Keeper?
I don't know. It was Sirius's idea. But there must be more to this. I think there is a whole lot about that night we don't know yet. That is what book 7 will come down to, in my opinion.

Was/Is Peter hiding his true abilities? (Hey...he killed several Muggles with one killing curse, didn't he!?)
As I said, I think Wormtail had abilites in certain areas, but was looked down upon like neville because of his overall performance. Neville got an Exceeds Expectations in charms, after all.


How did they create the Marauder's Map? (This is pretty advanced magic, right?)
They also became animagi at a young age. Apparently they were all very good (especially James and Sirius). But what did James and Lily do? What did Sirius do, for that matter? We don't know. But I imagine it was something where their magical skill could be shown. As to the map, I'm sure it required a number of advanced spells, and is quality magic on or above the level of Riddle's diary (except the horcrux part). So take that as you will.
Their Animagi: symbolic?
We know that Animagi are alway symbolic and connected to the people. A person doesn't choose their animagus after all. So what can this tell us?

• Sirius/Dog: This seems obvious. Harry often comments on Sirius's dog-like qualities, and his playful attitude and agressive nature seems fitting for a dog.
• Wormtail: A rat is so fitting I don't think I even need to explain this.
• James: What does a stag have to do with James? Noble and strong, I guess. But what else? It seems odd to me. I'm open to suggestions.

-Fish

How did James, Sirius, and Remus treat Peter?
At school I guess they all felt a bit sorry for Peter because he wasnt as able as Sirius, James and Lupin. Also from Snapes worst memory it shows Sirius getting annoyed with Peter so I guess they probably didnt have much respect for him.

Why did Wormtail turn on the other three?
I think Wormtail got scared when Voldemort came knocking at his door and because he always wants to be friends with the most powerful, he may have been blinded slightly by fear of death or being bullied by others.

Why was there a sudden change from Sirius to Peter in regards to the Secret Keeper?
Well Sirius thought that it would be too obvious if he was the Potters secret keeper, because Voldemort knew they were friends and I guess they trusted Peter to just hide until they knew it was safe. Also Lupin believed it was Sirius who was the secret keeper, and to avoid anyone from betraying that it was Sirius they chose also to use Peter.

Was/Is Peter hiding his true abilities?
Maybe Peter didnt realise his ability until it came to ultimatley protecting himself from being sent to Azcaban. I think because he was in a real crisis, proper magic worked for him to protect himself, because that is really Peters main aim; self protection.

How did they create the Marauder's Map?
I always wondered how the map was created, probably with help from someone or something (perhaps a book on enchantments) but as they were the most talented students in the year they may have worked it out themselves.

Their Animagi: symbolic?
Their animagi were important to their character.

Sirius: well for the reasons savingharry said. Also Sirius Black means 'black dog'. Now JKR came up with the name after she created the character probably but it does fit directly to his name.
James: again she probably needed a strong anima, which is slightly unusual and very masculine and proud.
Peter: savingharry, really sumed that up, he is a rat.

What school subjects were they skilled in?
Im guessing Sirius and James were skilled in most subjects, particularily defence against the dark arts and transfiguration because they created the mauraders map, and became animagi. Lupin was probably good at defence as well, he was the teacher at hogwarts, and he was probably another all round good student, but he had to work harder than the other two. Peter has probably not good at any subjects, perhaps care of magical creatures or herbology because they seem to be the easier subjects.

Comparisons between the Marauders and current students
Well Harry is similar to James, everyone says so. However he wasnt as intelligent or popular. Hermione is like Lupin, hard working and very caring. Both prefects and dont like breaking rules, however end up doing so because of their friends. They are also outcasts from 'purebloods' because Lupin is a werewolf, and Hermione is muggle born. Peter has been represented as Neville, however Neville has an honest soul and is very brave, he was prepared to die in the battle at the ministry.

Their relationships with Lily and Snape.
Well Snape was hated by James, Sirius and disliked by Lupin. However we never know what Peters relationship was like with him. Maybe it could be important. However at spinners end, Snape had no respect for Wormtail so I guess he doesnt like him much.

With Lily, James loved her, obviously. Lupin liked her and Sirius did too. Wormtail probably liked her as well, and she probably felt sorry for him. However I dont think there is much about their relationship in the books because Lily dies before the characters are introduced.

Comparisons between the Marauders and current students (i.e. Hermione, Harry, the Weasley twins, etc.) I feel like James and Sirius are most like the Weasley twins in that they know how to get into trouble without getting caught.

Why did Wormtail turn on the other three? This is such a great question, and it brings up so many possible scenarios. Maybe Peter felt like the only way he could acheive the level of skill that James, Remus and Sirius had was to tap into the dark side of magic. I feel like he was seduced and coerced by Voldemort to find the power that he couldn't acheive on the light side.

Why was there a sudden change from Sirius to Peter in regards to the Secret Keeper? Well I know this was explained in the books to this extent: Sirius and James decided noone would think of Peter as being the secret keeper, so they decided it would fool the death eaters if they changed it to Peter. Sirius was the obvious choice for everyone, so when they changed it they thought they were being smart, and they were discounting the idea that anyone would think Peter would have any extra knowledge, exhibiting their lack of faith in Wormtails abilities. The thing I don't get about this is if they didn't think he was that great of a wizard why would they think he would be able to withstand possible torturing by Voldemort or the Death Eaters? I feel like it is almost James and Sirius' own fault for giving the secret to Peter, and they should have known better.

Was/Is Peter hiding his true abilities? (Hey...he killed several Muggles with one killing curse, didn't he!?) Well he was definitely hiding something. I think that the power that the dark side taps is easier to find than the power that the light side taps, and this goes to my first point above.

How did they create the Marauder's Map? (This is pretty advanced magic, right?) Heck, yes it's advanced magic. Not only would the map have to be able to know where everyone is at all times in Hogwarts, but it would also have to have the ability to keep track of the everchanging staircases, professors, and student population. Maybe what James and Lily were working on together was a marauders map of Britain/London/Diagon Alley/ or other place(s)? That would be the easiest way to find Voldemort, and his followers. Do you think an unplottable place can appear on the map? What's the catch with the room of requirement? Did the marauders know about that, or did Malfoy need a room that was unplottable, and that's why it never appeared on the map?

Their relationships with Lily and Snape. I find this the most fascinating of all, because it seems like all four of the marauders had a deep affection for Lily, and a deep hatred for Snape. I often wonder if this is what brought them closer together in the first place? Lily must have had an extraordinary effect on James, Remus and Lupin, but I wonder if she discounted Peter as much as the rest of them did, because we don't read a lot about Lily and Peter's interaction.
Snape on the other hand definitely had a thing for Lily (in my opinion) and this might have been part of the original hatred between James and Snape. Lily was excellent at potions, and so was Snape, maybe any working friendship that they had over potions was resented by James from the very beginning, and that is what ultimately led to the rivalry. Now, we know that Snape says he thinks she's a mudblood, but honestly I think that's just a 16 year old boy talking, and not wanting his boyhood nemesis to know about anything close to his own heart.

I wonder though, did Snape know about their animagus abilities? He knew about Remus being a werewolf, but wouldn't his involvement of that fateful night when James saved Severus mean that Severus knew about the animagi? If so then that means that not only did Remus not tell Dumbledore, but neither did Snape! Oooooooh, tricky.

Ooh, it's been ages since I've had the time to really post things on this board - it's great, I'm really enjoying it! Anyway, squeeing aside...

How did James, Sirius, and Remus treat Peter?

Well, there's always got to be one who's simply there to make the others feel good, hasn't there? I think Peter was more of a hanger-on than anything else; I find it hard to believe that he was chosen by them as a good mate, simply because he seems, in a lot of ways, to be as obsequious as Snape, and we all know how they treated him. I think Peter played to the others love of themselves - certainly James and Sirius anyway. They liked being flattered, they liked being worshipped, and that's the role Peter fulfilled. In a lot of ways, I think it's hardly surprising that he turned out the way he did. I've always felt a little sorry for him, which is why I had Sirius question himself and his behaviour towards Peter in my fic, because obviously he's never going to have the chance to do that in canon. I think there might have come a time when he would have...at least, I hope there would have, if Peter does turn in the end...which I sort of hope he will. Fish had an interesting point though - they did say they would have died rather than betray their friends. Having said that though, Sirius did say that about James, and I'm sure he would have died for him. Would he have died for Peter though? I guess we'll never know.

Comparisons between the Marauders and current students

Urgh, I hate them. It's lazy, for one thing. It's like having two plots superimposed on each other, mirroring each other, one a blueprint for the other. Obviously, the Lily/James, Harry/Ginny comparisons spring to mind. And the Fred/George, Sirius/James one too, I guess. And I don't like the idea of history repeating itself, with the next generation repeating the mistakes of the latter, which I don't think has necessarily happened yet, but I would be very disappointed if it did. Sirius and James' behaviour, in many ways, isn't something that Harry should be proud of and certainly shouldn't aspire to. I hope that Harry is more than his father was.

Why was there a sudden change from Sirius to Peter in regards to the Secret Keeper?

I think that's fairly simple really - they must have thought that Sirius was too obvious a choice. I guess they failed to consider that Sirius would have stood up better to torture or pressure. But I thought that SecretKeepers couldn't say the name of the secret they were keeping? So how did Peter manage to give anything away in the first place? Mmm...something to ponder....

Their Animagi: symbolic?

Oh definitely. James, being a stag - a symbol of protection, stags watch over their families to the death. Sirius, the faithful friend; Peter, the rat And Lupin...well, he can't help what he becomes, poor old thing, but I think it's interesting that a werewolf is so antithetical to his character. Makes for a very interesting dichotomy.

Why did Wormtail turn on the other three?

Fear, a thirst for recognition and power, greed. Maybe he was tired of being used by the others - and I don't think there's much doubt that they did use him. Like Fish though, he's one of the characters that I really, really want to see redeemed in book seven. There's a reason the Sorting Hat put him in Gryffindor, and we've yet to see that reason.



Yeah, that's good. And a little more understandable than simple fear and thirst for power.

Their relationships with Lily and Snape

I too find this very interesting. I would love to know what happened to change Lily's attitude to James because all we've seen of him to date makes him seem like the world's biggest prat. I can't imagine what someone supposedly so benevolent as Lily would ever have seen in him. And I still wonder why there was so much hatred towards Snape. Harry asked Sirius and Lupin about it, but they never gave a good reason. 'It was more the fact that he exists' - hardly a reason for being so cruel. They were bullies, pure and simple. Snape didn't appear to have done anything to provoke them - the poor guy was just sitting there! Argh, that just really gets me...I hope there's a legitimate reason for the way they behaved or I'm going to have to write a fic or something to try and get it out of my system



Ooh, that's an interesting observation! Mmm...but did Dumbledore really not know they were animagi? I have mixed feelings about that. Part of me thinks he did...but part of me also thinks that he believed Sirius was innocent...but if he did, then why didn't he do more to get him out of Azkaban? Unless there was a bigger purpose...

Ooh, confusing...

Fab topic though!!

I'd have to agree with Louise when it comes to the comparing of the present Hogwarts students and the Marauders. I cannot see the point if were to wind up being the case (i.e: "history repeating itself and getting righted in the end"). I think I would feel quite cheated by such a narrative structure.

I'm also of the opinion that Peter will be redeemed, somehow, by the end. As was pointed out, he was put in Gryffindor, wasn't he? As to why he turned on his friends, could he have been seduced by the lure of powers whcih could only come to him by drawing strength from anger and hate ("You have anger in you, Skywalker", Oooopss! Sorry !) ? Could he have been seduced by Voldemort's promises of power and fame?

Guess we'll have to wait and see, but I do hope these aren't left as loose ends...

Oh yes, definitely. Me too. I'd kind of feel cheated if nothing ever came of Peter's being in Gryffindor, and Dumbledore's assertion that Harry would be "very glad" that he sent a servant back to Voldemort who is in debt to him.

It's very interesting to me what prompted him to turn in the first place though. Maybe it was as simple as him just being seduced by the power Voldemort seemed to have, but I would still rather it be something a bit more involved... Him feeling neglected by the other Marauders, maybe, or that Voldemort got his claws into him, trying to find the weakest of them to give Lily and James location up.

A thought did occur to me yesterday though. JKR has said that Pettigrew won't kill Lupin with that silver hand of his, but she never said that he wouldn't kill anyone, did she? I wonder if maybe, Peter will kill Greyback? Maybe Greyback gets Lupin cornered, Peter suddenly has a rush of morality, and saves his old friend? Now that's something I'd like to see.

Nice thought Louise about the silver hand and all. I would like to see Peter redeem himself as well. So far Remus has turned out to be okay despite being a werewolf, Sirius has turned out to be okay despite being a convicted murderer (but he's dead! Argghhh) - (sorry for the outburst), and James turned out to be a decent father, wizard, and husband (as far as we know) despite being a total prat in his youth (who knows what dark secrets lie in James Potters closet). So I am of the firm belief that Peter will redeem himself in some way. I feel the same thing must have happened to Peter as happened to Skywalker. There is definitely a character connect there. ("Harry, I am your father!" yells Peter. Just kidding!!)

By the way, Omerus: I love the fact that your dancing Elmo is "Fighting Dementors"

I hope it's ok if I quote a few posts from the Are We Blinded By Alan Rickman's Performance? thread.





I agree with Annie. Why would they talk to Harry about how his father was an idiot in school? It seems petty when you compare it with what Harry has faced and will still face.

I'm not completely anti-James either, though. I think Janet explained it very well -



That's exactly how I feel. I wouldn't say James is a favourite character, or anything, but I don't dislike him that much either. I'm more indifferent than anything. I don't particularly like Lily, but I think I've let her fanfic image influence me. She's presented in an idealistic way in the books, but that always happens with the deceased, and fanfic authors have made too much of her 'perfection', imo.

I try to see the Potters in terms of their worth to Harry. They're an anchor to him, and that makes me like them in a distant kind of way, because he loves them.

As for Snape and James - is it possible to dislike neither of them? I don't deny that Snape is a very unfair teacher, but it almost feels like there are bigger things going on - like his bravery in fooling either Dumbledore or Voldemort. I know James had a big influence on how Snape treats Harry, but it was really Snape's home circumstances that lay the foundation for his being a git, and James was just an idiot at 15. I have two family members who were both, right on cue, idiots at 15. (Hermann? Just kidding, boet! )

One last thing - the memory. That's difficult. Personally, I don't think a memory can be clouded in the way you describe, Mayfair. Dumbledore said that his memories were full of detail, but I don't think you can see anything if it's not there. That's exactly what the purpose of a pensieve is - to be able to go back to your memories and re-examine what happened anew. If they were coloured by prejudice, a pensieve would not be worth much more than a brain, because revisiting thoughts and feelings is what it amounts to then, isn't it?

I probably did a bad job of explaining myself. It's late here.

That's a fair argument I admit, but then if Snape's behavior is a consequence of his childhood, then Harry should have been the biggest git in the world considering his upbringing. But Harry doesn't seem to hold a grudge against everything and everyone else in the world. He's as normal as they come though he's anything but ordinary. I agree that Snape seemed to have had a tough childhood and the marauders did not do him favours by ganging up on him. But we should recall something that both Dumbledore and Sirius told Harry: James and Snape never liked each other from the first instance and that Snape never lost a chance to curse James. Juts because we don't have a memory of Snape ganging up with his death eater pals and hexing James or Sirius, doesn't mean that those events did not happen. But I doubt that even if such a memory existed, people would have found an excuse for Snapes' behaviour saying that James somehow provoked him. Like I mentioned in the Rickman post you cited Capricorn, people seemed to have extreme patience when forgiving Snape, but are not willing to let go of their views of a 15 year-old prat James Potter, not even considering the fact that he could have grown up.

One thing that Louise pointed out and I too would be extremely curious to know is that what happened so make Lily change her opinion about James. Did he grow up? That means he wasn't a prat anymore, are people willing to consider that? Furthermore, what i find extremely strange is that people who call James a 15 year old prat, cocky and arrogant son of rich parents, do not extend the same terminology to Draco Malfoy. Are there different sets of rules for different people?



You have a point there capricorn, but a memory is nothing but a manifestation of what a person saw or feels at a particular times and is influenced by the same chemical processes that influence ones' thoughts. It's not that memory is an entirely accurate recollection of the events that transpired. We have seen how Slughorn modified his memory to purge the details on Tom Riddle asking him about Horcruxes. Memory modification charms are commonplace in wizarding world. But the question here is whether Snapes' memory can be considered a video recording of what happened or not? Memories can often lead to wrong conclusions, if we recall what happed with Tom Riddle's memory in CoS. Harry almost believed for a second that Hagrid was guilty, and developed a favorable impression of Tom Riddle. But after he got the full picture he realised how it was all a set up. I wonder if the whole context of that confrontation between Snape and James in put forth, would the things be seen in the same light?

See the fact is Harry is not the only one Snape has been nasty to. He's been nasty to Ron. Hermione (who even though being the best student in the class is not regarded favorably by him) and not to speak of Neville. The way he has treated Neville is reprehensible. If we were to argue that he treats Harry the way he does because of James, then why does he treat Neville the way he does? Are we waiting for another memory to justify that Frank and Alice did something to him as well?



That may be true but it still doesn't excuse what he did or does. There's no big deal in fooling Dumbledore, the man has a history of making oversights, such as he did with Harry or he did with Quirell and Barty Crouch Junior. Tom is much more tricky since, he would have no morals in dealing with a person. If he puts Snape under cruciatus and scans his mind, I believe all secrets would come tumbling down. Tom needs Snape for his usefulness as a spy in Hogwarts, a gifted potions maker and a talented wizard. How do we know that he wouldn't dispose of Snape once he has no more use for him. The fact is all those years Tom was thought to have disappeared, even Snape admitted that he did not know that Tom had come back till after the Triwizard tournament, that still didn't make him change his opinions and actions.

Since this is a Marauders thread, I would really like to see what the last Marauders Remus and Peter come up with in the final book. Remus has been nothing but tenacious throughout, he has survived where others have failed and I believe that he would be the last one standing. Peter, that's an interesting one. Like Louise said, I would like to see something come out of Dumbledore's statement on Peter being in Harry's debt. I am looking forward to that

*sigh* Okay, you got me...I'll admit it...I am very biased towards Snape *hangs head in shame* I'm also very biased against James and Lily because of the comparison with Harry/Ginny, a relationship that I have stated multiple times I absolutely loathe. I think the main problem is that I have pre-judged James and Lily a lot because of this, when the truth is that we really don't know all that much about them. Other than second hand views, of course, which are also subject to bias on the part of whichever character is recounting the memory. Whether that is deliberate on JKR's part (that she doesn't want us to know that much about them) or whether it is just a touch of laziness, expecting the reader to accept these characters based solely on hearsay, I don't know. Whatever the case, we have only seen/heard Lily and James for ourselves on two occasions - one, during Priori Incantatum, two, during Snape's Worst Memory.

Those who've said that memory is fallible, open to interpretation and subject to feelings are, of course, entirely correct. They are not simple recordings. But we used to have a whole thread here dedicated entirely to the Pensieve and what exactly these "memories" are. The way they are presented certainly would seem to imply that they are carbon copies of what went on. The only time that JKR bows to the fallibility of memory is when Harry comments on the fact that he hopes Snape didn't wander off anywhere else because he would have lost the link to his father. Other than that, it's almost like instant recall. I don't think that JKR is that complicated, and thus I personally think it more likely that we should take the memories at face value - what happened is exactly what happened.

With that premise in mind, I go back to what we know of James and Lily - everything based on hearsay and from recollections from people who were biased towards them. The only actual time we've seen either of them for any length of time is in that memory - what I consider to be a first hand account.

And from that account, I have drawn my own conclusions about James; those conclusions being that he's a prat I'm sorry, I really am, but I just don't like him. I'm not disputing the fact that he defended his family - that's a very admirable thing to have done. But that doesn't make him a good person - a person who deserves the kind of praise that everyone seems to heap on him. Narcissa defends her son, but she's not someone to be admired. Snape seems almost fatherly in his regard for Draco, certainly far more than Lucius, but that doesn't negate how awful he is to the other students - and I don't deny that he is. All I have seen of James is someone who seemed obsessed with Quidditch, making a show of himself, wanting to be popular, someone who thinks it's funny to bully and humiliate someone - anyone - for kicks. By their own admission, Snape has done nothing to any of them to deserve it. Yes he was odd, yes he knew a lot of curses, but that was not an excuse for what James and Sirius did.

Even Lily thought James was a prat. I am so very curious to find out what this monumental "good" thing James did to suddenly turn everything on its head. Apparently he had second thoughts about Sirius' "joke" to send Snape in to the shack during Lupin's transformation and so technically saved Snape's life. But was he saving Snape's life because it was the right thing to do? Or did he do it because he didn't want Sirius and Remus to get into trouble? There is a huge world of difference in my eyes, and judging from the evidence thus far, I would say that the latter is far more likely to be the case.

So yes, I am very coloured by fanfic, I know and accept that. But still, I can't get past the fact that Snape did absolutely nothing to deserve the humiliation he suffered at their hands. I also can't get past the belief I have in Snape's inherent goodness - there was a reason he killed Dumbledore, I'm sure of it. If that's the case, then it would seem that nothing we've learned so far about any of them is so clear cut. I just wonder if JKR has time in one book to make sense out of all this because as it stands now, I have a horrible feeling I'm going to be disappointed.



A very fair point. It's testament to Harry that he isn't. Unfortunately, not everyone who has the same upbringing will handle it the same way. Some, like Harry, are strong. Some, like Snape, aren't so strong and thus resort to outside influences to make themselves feel better, which is most likely the reason he was seduced by the Dark Arts. He liked the power and control it offered him probably. Let's not forget how close the sorting hat was to putting Harry in Slytherin - "It's all here in your head".... But as Dumbledore said, "It's our choices which make us what we are"...Snape obviously chose the easy path, but that doesn't mean he didn't regret it later. Perhaps because, at some time, he was loved by someone...most likely his mother. A small kindness by her could have been all he needed to give him that small sliver of conscience that he needed to save him from going completely over to Voldemort's side.

If I'm wrong and he is evil, then it will be a huge opportunity lost, in my humble opinion of course, to show how it is not merely choices that define people, but the effect of love and support from people around us too. Dumbledore said that love is a force that Voldemort could never understand. Wouldn't it be a huge kick in the teeth for him if Snape did switch sides at the last minute, because of that tiny sliver of conscience?

Anywho...this is long enough now so I won't start on Sirius - suffice it to say that I have forgiven him, to an extent, because I feel as though he's paid his dues already and he did have the chance to say that he regrets what he did to Snape...a bit anyway James never had that chance and so I'm still going on the evidence thus far. Which, to me, says he's a prat



No, not at all. I think Draco's a prat too.

To agree some more, I also get tired of the obvious comparisons between the marauders and the current students. I mean, there's some comparisons to be made, sure-there are always things that will appear similar from generation to generation I think. On the whole, though, I don't think the current students and the marauders really are parallel. Similar in ways, yes; but vastly different in others.

I agree, also, that we should take the memories in the pensieve for what they are: what happened that day on all parties accounts. Makes the marauders out to be compete jerks and Snape out to be very victimized. With what we continue to learn of Snape during Occlumency lessons; it seems that it would be easy to believe him to be a harsh product of victimization. However, I believe what Sirius told Harry-Snape isn't entirely innocent in this situation. (Just look at him use the sectusempre curse on James.) Not that they would have ever gotten on well, but they both loathed each other from the start. I've had experiences like that. I typically try to avoid those people instead of looking for instances where I can humiliate and harm them, but that's what I see in this group. We see that one instance, not the other instances where Snape walked away victorious in his curse. That wouldn't have made it into his "worst memory." (Maybe those are the memories he uses to conjure a patronus! ) Anyhow; though James doesn't present himself as a nice person, or even a caring person, in the episode-the only time we see him "alive" and interacting with people- I know that this is an isolated (of sorts) incident of his reaction to Severus and being goaded on by Sirius. . . not as an indication of his true personality. We are only offered a brief snapshot of real-life of James in respect to the pedestal he's often placed on in Harry's eyes. I, like Laurette, have a feeling of mild indifference to both him and Lily. I don't dislike him. I don't like him. I think I could like him. After all, he was best friends with Sirius and Lupin, and I like them!

Peter, peter, peter. I'm going to mention Neville here, but not as a character comparison. As a proximity comparison. We know that Peter was the boy always running around after James and Sirius, but I don't think he was quite their "inner circle. Hierarchy was, I would think, Sirius-James-Lupin-Peter. I think that they were indeed friendly to him. They wouldn't have tolerated someone who annoyed them too much, I don't think. Like Neville, I think Peter was a friend who was around at more opportune times and could get in on things. Neville's not quite at the same level; but I think his character is the closest to explain the proximity. I also believe that his betrayal was because of his shortcomings. He was attracted to things more powerful than he; more popular than he. There are a few tantalizing temptations in what Voldemort offers, and knowing Peter, it was probably easy to tempt him into it.

Do you ever feel like you ramble on and on and never say anything? Sigh.

Same here. I think he's weak. In the end it is Snape's genius that really grabs me, whereas Draco is just a average sort of guy with very little but his charms to recommend him. (Hehe - too much BBC Pride & Prejudice).

Anyways, I don't like comparisons between the two generations either. It's boring and imagination-less. I loathe the Harry/Ginny - James/Lily comparison. Can true love really be down to hair colour?

Anyways, the Marauders. I agree that the memory is like a video. Though it does make sense that memories would be coloured, I don't think Jo is that deep either. From what I've seen from her interviews she has a few ideas that form the centre of her series, and the rest is pretty straight forward. I'd say that love and choice are, in an over simplified way, the two main things. Or more concise - they aren't so much two ideas, as they're part of the same idea: to choose for love. And then - is it that over simplified? Pretty much everything can be traced back to that.

It seems like she's really given Lily's sacrifice a lot of thought for instance, and like she expects everyone to accept Dumbledore as the moral voice of the story. Memories that can be coloured don't seem to fit with the level of emotional depth that the stories have.

That would mean that the Marauders really were gits. I agree with everyone saying that we don't see the times that Snape walks away as the victor. In a way I think Jo thought that she had made Snape enough of a jerk throughout the whole series without us needing to see him go at James. He's going at Harry forever already.

I completely understand the anti-James feeling. Jo really struck a nerve with that scene, because everyone has been bullied at some point in their lives. The thought of Harry's dad being that cool kid who embarrassed you so much that you wanted to sink into the floor was a very effective way of earning Snape lots of sympathy - whether it was intentional or not. It worked for me, anyway.

Maybe the big thing that never really made me feel sorry for Harry is the fact that he had friends who could join him in bashing Snape whenever he had been unfair. As a kid though, Snape was alone. That's different. Also, with Harry:





Harry is the chosen one. The hero. He is different from anyone else, so I don't find it difficult to accept that he could handle bullying much better than anyone else.

It's ok for things to be a little fantastical. This is, after all, a children's series. I'm not really disappointed by the thought. It's simply a very cool children's series that appeals to an older audience too. Perhaps I'm lucky. My ideas were formed when I was still a kid. I didn't look for certain elements, like I do know when I read something new. I accepted many things Jo kind of expected her readers to accept without giving it much thought.

Where was I going with this? Oh. I almost think she is expecting us to give a lot of weight to Harry's confidence in his parents, and the Snape memory was there to balance it out. Maybe she is expecting us to accept her characters without too much thought. In a way, if she made the emotional story too complex, it would be lost on children.

It sort of comes down to that choice again. In the end, the good guys were the guys who chose for love - in a general way. I don't admire Narcissa, but I do believe there is some good in her. She loves her son, but where she differs from Lily is that her previous choices placed her in a situation where her son was in danger and it was almost too late for her to save him. She's weak, in that sense. She didn't realise soon enough that choosing for love is bigger than she thought. It's not just about one person (Lucius), or certain people who qualify because of things as silly as ancestry. It's a more all-encompassing thing. Did James realise that in time? I think so, and that's his redemption. Sirius and Lupin did. We just see their choice played out in front of us.

I think we're meant to accept that James did save Snape because some part of him knew it was the right thing to do. We don't have to, I know, but it's not such a leap once one accepts that the moral of the story is as simple (but powerful) as it is. Measured against other children's books, Harry Potter still beats all of it out there for adventure, plot, wonderful characters and a clear, positive message. Even complexity, on a fun scale.

What an absolutely fantastic topic....how did I miss this one. It's so informative!!

Janet...you never ramble on aimlessly...everything you say is very relevant I think!!

The one thing that I have picked up on (I will comment on other questions later) is about James Potter being a bit of a wally. I agree with Louise that as we have only 'seen' him 'properly in the pensieve, and on that particular occasion he was a total prat. But I think it was all bravado. Trying to impress the girl, his mates etc..being the big I am! I hope that when he got older in a time that we know nothing about, that he came to his senses. That he grew up and put his sad silly self behind him. I'm not trying to defend him here, but like Janet I do so like two of the other marauders namely Lupin and Sirius, but because of the pensieve incident with Snape, I have mixed feelings about James. I want him so badly to be a hero type. A father that Harry can be proud of, I hope we find out more about what else went on between Snape and the marauders. For no other reason than to say 'Oh, that's why so and so acted that way'

And Peter, I think like Janet here also. There always the sad little boy that can't get the attention that he craves amongst his peers and searches for it elsewhere, even if that elsewhere is going to lead him down the wrong path. Unlike Louise, I don't want redemption for him. I want him to get his comeuppance(sp)!!

No, I never think that you ramble either, Janet!! Now me, that's another story... But anyway...



Mmm....see, here's the thing. I really don't blame Snape. I just can't find it within me to blame him. From that memory, I saw a boy who was obviously lonely and friendless, bit of an oddball, who was minding his own business. I saw a group of popular kids who decided to humiliate the boy for nothing more substantial than the fact they were bored. I felt so much for Snape, I really did. I don't know why...I mean, we've all been bullied at some time, I'm sure, and I didn't get any more or less than a lot of other people, but it just struck a nerve, I guess. I wouldn't have felt it so strongly if I knew that Snape had done something horrific to deserve it, but hexing someone in the corridor isn't exactly the same as humiliating someone in public *and* even going so far as to do something that would have resulted in his death. That's getting to the point of becoming rather serious.

I can understand Snape's anger. From the snippets we've seen of his childhood, I really can understand the bitterness, the sense of injustice, the loneliness, the hatred that must have arisen within him from seeing people like James being respected and admired for his talent when his own talents went largely ignored. He didn't handle the experience as well as Harry - he was hurt, and his hurt became something dark, ugly, and evil, and even though he's cruel and nasty and cold, I still just can't find it within me to blame him for it.

I can understand why he hates the sight of Harry, why he's prejudiced to his own house, why he turned to the Dark Arts, why he resorted to dark curses to hurt James physically just as much as James had hurt him mentally. And that's the trouble - physical scars heal, mental ones don't, which is why I will always argue that what James did to Snape was a thousand times worse than what we know Snape did to James.



Precisely. Snape had no one to defend him, so he defended himself in the only way he knew how. I loved Darcy's explanation of how his mum might have helped him in that regard in 'Our Turn in Time', it was a very convincing scenario. James was always surrounded by friends to back him up, which just makes it so much worse.

Likewise, Harry is always surrounded by friends and I really don't think he's particularly bothered by anything Snape says.



Yes, you're probably right. But I've never been the type of person to just accept things, and I really don't believe that JKR included that memory for no reason. It was too powerful, far too anti-Marauder, far too pro-Snape, flying in the face of everything she had led us to believe about him so far, to possibly be of no significance. Powerful enough, at least in my books, to rival the power of his murdering Dumbledore.

And if Snape did something so powerful to go against him, as James did in that memory, then I'm expecting James to have done something equally as powerful to make up for the part he played in making Snape who he is today. You could almost say that James is therefore partially responsible for Dumbledore's death Now there's a thought....

Ooooooo! Very wicked, very wicked indeed. However, we can reverse that what if:
If Snape had been eaten by Lupin (heaven forbid) perhaps no one would have overheard the prophecy. If someone had still overheard the prophecy, say Lucius Malfoy, he wouldn't have had a change of heart and confessed all to Dumbledore thereby warning the Potters. Perhaps they would have died. Perhaps not. What if, what if, what if. Oh I could keep going, but it's starting to make my brain hurt.

I personally do sympathize a great deal with Snape. Noone likes a bully, and James was most definitely that. But how many 15 year old boys do you know that are sensitive, sweet, and are constantly saying to themselves: Gosh I don't want to hurt anyone's feelings. I know that's not an excuse for his behavior, but really, we are talking about 15 year old boys that grew up priveleged, and they knew it. Perhaps we really need to blame James' parents for all of this.

We seemed to be headed in the stratosphere as far as the blame games are concerned. Louise, I understand you sympathise with Snape, but then going on to blame James (in part) for Dumbledore's death.... doesn't it kinda look too outlandish? I mean from what I can make out is that we had a Tsunami in Asia two years ago because pluto was about to be stripped off it's planet status!!!!

From what I can gather, you would like to emphasised that all that Snape's done is somehow not his doing, but should be blamed on someone else. If he's nasty to Harry, blame it on James, if he's nasty to rest of the school, blame it on "he's spy, what do you expect", if he's biased towards Slytherins, "he's supposed to pretend to be on their side, what do you expect", if he's a right foul git "you see what he had for parents, what do you expect", he hates Harry, "Harry looks just like James, what do you expect", he intimidates Neville, "Neville's a wuss anyway, let Snape have some fun". It seems that all and sundry are to be blamed for Snape's actions but the man himself.

But I would like to add one thing here. JKR in one of her interviews quite clearly said "Harry-Snape has now become as personal as Harry-Voldemort" I would love to see what comes out of this in the final book.

Then Spinjam you go a step ahead and blame James' parents for that? Why just because they were better parents to him than Snape's. Would you then blame Harry for the reason that he has no parents. If he was not a prophecy child then maybe "poor innocent" Severus wouldn't have overheard the prophecy and would not have been "compelled by reasons beyond his control" to go and inform Tom. Then Tom would not have gone after Harry and it would not have resulted in the death of Harry's parents, which made Snape feel "so guilty and remorseful for what his poor soul had inadvertently facilitated". Or perhaps we should blame Harry, like Tom said "Your mother need not have died...." If Harry was not there, Tom wouldn't have killed Lily or if only she had stepped aside, then with both Harry and James out of the way, (as the proponents of Snape-Lily love Angle would love to say) Snape would have thought that he had a clear shot at Lily.

I apologise if this sounds harsh and if I have offended anyone, but some of the arguments were plain outrageous.

Like I said before, Why not have a look at what Harry got for his guardians? If he can turn out OK what stopped Snape from doing so? I know that Harry is special and all that but the main theme of the series is "It's your choices that define you not your abilities". What stopped Snape from taking a correct stand in there. There were several other death eaters who openly renounced Tom on his downfall and projected a respectable face and Tom had no problems whatsoever accepting them back. Nothing stopped Snape from doing so, or perhaps those reasons are not important enough in the scheme of things, am I right?

I could put up a thousand arguments in favour of James behaviour. His hair was messy and when he saw Snape with greasy hair all slick and settled down, he would have thought " Hey I can't get my hair to stay down even with grease, how does he do it?" He asked Snape his secret that Snape refused to reveal, along with choicest of comments like "Potter why don't you asked your sidekick (Sirius) about it, his hair stays down as well..." or "This is my family secret, I use special homemade grease and I would never reveal to blood traitors" and that's what could have sparked the hatred between two. Sounds out of this world? Believe me, with some of the theories that I have come across, it sounds almost benign

P.S. Louise one more thing, I understand about you not liking James/Lily because it reminds you of Harry/Ginny. But I would like to believe that there's is nothing in common between the two ships except for Potter, Messy hair, Glasses and Red Hair. In fact Lily doesn't even have the same hair as Ginny. Lily was described as having dark red hair (sounds much closer to brown ) than "flaming red" of Ginny. There is no similarity between the two girls either. Like I said, Harry/Ginny is nothing but a manifestation of a hero-worship and dreams of a young girl come true. James/Lily on the other hand, is a perfect example of two people growing into love. Harry/Ginny (eegh) can never ever compare with James/Lily and thank god for that.

Mayfair, I loved reading your commentary on what we had to say.

I think I am agreeing with you about the whole blame game thing. If you noticed I said I could've kept going with that whole tangent, but it made my brain hurt. I guess sarcasm doesn't come through on these posts very well. My point was that if we are going to blame James for Dumbledore's death, then we might as well go one step further and blame his parents, etc. I know it's ludicrous. Snape (James, Sirius, Remus, everyone in the Potterverse) made choices just like everyone else, I don't necessarily like the choices that he makes, but that doesn't mean I can't be sympathetic towards his character. Just like I'm sympathetic to Harry when his scar hurts, but I want to smack him upside the head every time something happens that he should've told Dumbledore about and doesn't. Does that make sense? It just comes down to the fact that we can come up with all of these different angles, and Jo's ability to give us so much fodder for discussion. I love the word fodder.

Oh, I wasn't being serious Glib remark at the end of a post, that's all. I'm not seriously suggesting that James is to blame for Dumbledore's death! I know I'm a bit off the wall with my theories sometimes, but I don't think I've hit "stratospheric" proportions yet



Yeah, looking back at my previous post, it does rather look that way, doesn't it? No, I'm not implying anyone else is to blame. I agree with you that it's choices at the end of the day, and you can't blame other people for your actions. But (and you knew there was a "but" coming, right? ) that doesn't mean that we can't attempt to explain a person's actions, which stem from their personality, which in turn stems from experience. Yes, everyone has free will and the ability to exercise it, but you also have to make allowances for the things which have shaped that person. Shaped them into being people who view the world very differently to someone else.

If pushed to say which of the two characters, Harry or Snape, I felt was portrayed in the more realistic manner, I would unhesitantly say Snape. Both characters were abused, both characters had their fair share of hard times - but is it realistic to expect a person to come through such horrendous experiences totally unscathed? Harry does have a fair amount of bitterness within him, as does Snape - but Harry has a target for his aggression in Voldemort. Does Snape have a target? Of course he does. Harry. He can't get at James anymore; he substitutes, which is a perfectly understandable thing to do. I'm not excusing his behaviour, he had the choice to treat Harry better than he was treated, but he chose not to. That's his choice, his error; it's not right, but it's understandable.



Well, someone is to blame for James' being a prat. Someone made him egotistical. He was an only child, it's conceivable that he may have been spoiled, for example. Again, James had choices. He could have chosen not to bully Snape. He didn't make that choice. He showed no empathy or understanding, no concept of understanding 'do as you would be done by' as his son does - to his credit. No, it is not acceptable to simply brush James' actions away as "well, he's 15, they're all like that at that age". Does that undo the obviously grevious psychological harm that it did to Snape? Saying they were only fifteen doesn't negate the humiliation. It doesn't negate the feelings. It provides a reason for them, yes, just as Snape's background provides a reason for his behaviour, but it does not excuse it. Not all 15 year olds are like that. James and Sirius were, Snape probably was to some extent to - but Lupin wasn't. Lupin knew they were doing wrong. Lupin was just powerless to do anything about it because he felt vulnerable for his own reasons.



Ah, but that's going down the 'is-Snape-guilty' route...I believe he was acting under Dumbledore's orders because he is inherently good. He didn't return to Voldemort, though he could have, because he chose not to - he chose to wait for Dumbledore's say-so. If I'm wrong, I'm wrong...so be it. But I would be absolutely gutted that a wonderful opportunity to show Snape as an 'antithetical Harry' - someone who may have followed a slightly different path to the same end goal. He'd be just another bad-guy.



The outlandish one notwithstanding, I would love to hear some explanations for James' hatred of Snape; "because he exists" doesn't count though Why did James hate Snape so much? Why did he choose to bully, belittle and humilate him?



I concur, but you weren't here at the end of the shipping wars I was, and I emerged rather bloody and full of a rather Snape-like loathing of even the mere mention of any similarity between the two. I don't see it myself, unless relationships in the wizarding world are based on hair colour and glasses. I really find the concept of them "growing into love" to be something of an assumption. We have seen absolutely nothing to show that they "grew" into anything. If they did, it happened very, very quickly, within the space of two, possibly four years. For two of which they wouldn't have been in school anyway. Lily hated him after the OWLs, so I would love to know what prompted the change of heart. Could anyone really be attracted to someone who is so callously disregarding of another person's feelings? Yes, even at the age of 15. Unless Lily is as shallow as Ginny and is attracted to good looking Quidditch players, of course. Now there's a similarity between the ships for you Something fundamental must have happened to change her opinion of him. Do we know when the tricking-Snape-into-the-shack incident occured? Before or after the OWL's? Before, the fundamental thing could have been simply that (which, if it is, is rather pathetic...it was hardly life changing). After, then there must have been something else.



Ditto

I am not sure I entirely agree with you there Louise. You say that the kind of environment they both were put in, should have ensured that both came out bitter and prats, or rather both came out as Snapes. Now that Harry is different from Snape leads you to believe that his portrayal is not realistic. Actually both their portrayals are as close to reality as they come. Lot of people have grown up in abusive home environments, but not all of them turn out the same. Some turn out embittered like Snape, while others determined like Harry, about letting bygones be bygones and ensuring that they do not treat others in the same manner they were subjected to. It's the latter who display true strength of character, while the former are escapists and often anarchists. Another reason that they turned out to be different (aside from the inherent differences; Harry is inherently good and survived by an act of love, Snape on the other hand seems to be product of bitterness) may be the friends Harry was able to make. With Ron and Hermione (I do not include Ginny here for obvious reasons that you would understand Louise ) by his side he finally found people who loved him unconditionally. The weasleys regard him as one of their own and that may be one of the big differences between Harry and Snape at Hogwarts. Snape hung around with a bunch who were acquaintances bound together by a common goal of racial superiority.

But I am not sure how, one can assert that Snapes transfer of hatred to Harry from James (not including his hatred for the entire school save for Slytherins) is "understandable" while "James was 15 and all of us are prats at 15" is not. I believe both are as unreasonable as the other and deserve no justification. But the fact remains, while James apparently grew out of his prat-like manner and became a wonderful husband and a father, Snape refused to let go of his childhood issues and is the sorry excuse of a pitiable human being we see in the texts. No one is to blame for Snape but himself. Sirius had a rough family but he came out of it as a devoted and loyal friend. Remus is a werewolf, but has never displayed tendencies to turn on the wizarding world in spite of all the discrimination he has faced. If anyone has a right to hold a grudge it's those two, but nowhere in the texts I saw them acting like Snape, especially Remus. Hagrid received a lot of flak when his half-giant lineage was revealed, but I haven't seen him go all bitter.

The thing is if we justify Snape's actions then there's justification for everything. Tom becoming Voldemort because he was a orphan and his mother abandoned him. Pure-bloods are right in waging a war against muggle borns since muggle borns are moving into their turf and usurping their traditional domains, while pure-bloods are incapable of or unwilling to do so in muggle world. So it all comes down to choices and Snape has definitely made his.

Loiuse I can also understand your stand on Lily James thing. I mean you are right that we don't have much information on those times save for some recollections and one memory, which definitely do not add up to conclusive evidence. But then people are willing to use those to slander James Potter and justify Snape, but find it hard to believe that James could have turned out to be a good person. But Harry/Ginny, now that is dysfunction written all over it. I particularly detest that how in the space of one summer she goes from nobody to the most popular, charming, bold girl in Hogwarts and I am like "When the heck did this happen?". Talk about lame excuses, that was the lamest one I have come across, but people are trying to justify it and after JKRs stamp of approval, they've got their wish. But that's something I am never going to agree with official or not. Maybe that's a topic of another discussion

Oh I'm so happy to hear from you! I thought I'd completely killed this thread



Well, I'm not saying they should have both turned out the same way exactly. I think it depends on a lot of different factors, perhaps I didn't make that too clear in my last post. I felt sure I'd mentioned it somewhere before though...mmm...possibly not... Anywho, I think Harry turned out differently to Snape because he had a very strong support network from his friends where Snape had no one. He didn't seem particularly loved at home (aside from his mum, who I think was the person who JKR meant loved him) and he certainly wasn't loved at school. Harry has respite, Snape didn't. Harry certainly did have bursts of temper and still does, to a certain extent, and he has been known to have little attacks of self-pity too - not that it translates to bitterness, but I don't think that the two feelings are worlds apart.

I do think that you are stretching it somewhat though to say that Harry has let bygones be bygones - I really don't think he has. He deliberately goaded Dudley in OotP and he certainly does feel very bitter towards the Dursleys. Yes, he's a stronger person because he doesn't want people to be made to feel the way he was, but he's not above revenge and bitterness. I don't think he'd be human if he was



Perhaps Snape did try to make friends. Or perhaps he didn't, perhaps he preferred to be alone because he felt uncomfortable allowing people to get close to him - a lot of people who have problems at home are ashamed of them, and so are afraid to let people get too close. That can be mistaken for coldness, aloofness, rudeness, compounding feelings of inadequacy, resentment and bitterness. It was a cycle of decline that he allowed himself to fall into, sadly, and no one cared enough to want to help him out of it. Hence he turned out the way he did - which just makes James and Sirius' cruelty towards him all the worse.

But then I wouldn't expect your average fifteen year old to really get the whole psychology behind Snape, or to care that much if they did. So I guess I have to concede that they can't really be blamed for the way Snape turned out. They certainly didn't help, and it doesn't excuse their cruelty, but it doesn't necessarily make them bad people. I certainly don't think that Sirius was a bad person - he was a little wild, but not bad. I really just don't know enough about James to be able to decide one way or the other.



Well, as I've conceded that James being a prat at 15 is understandable, I still think Snape's transfer of hatred is understandable, and I'll give a small personal example of why I believe that to be so Let's just say that a friend of mine's father ran off with another woman. Understandably, my friend hated that woman. Obviously, she doesn't hate her father, though she may be angry with him. She blames the woman. Now let's say this woman has two children. If my friend were to see those children, she would hate them with equal venom. Though they themselves haven't wronged my friend, I feel that my friend's hatred of them AND the woman is justified. It's not logical or reasonable, but it is the human thing to feel. Some things are beyond forgiveness and it's very, very hard to let bygones be bygones when the pain is still very real. Again, let's just say that I know this from experience And I'd like to think I'm human!



Oh and how many times I've felt like screaming at him for it!! Is it really reasonable to expect *anyone* to be so calm? I don't think we've seen enough of him to really be able to say with any certainty that he has *never* had his blowouts. We know he does have a darker side because he's not above murdering Pettigrew, so who's to say that he hasn't harboured bitterness? I'm sure he has. He's just good at hiding it, he's developed a coping mechanism for it and he's very lucky that he has friends. Snape doesn't. Again, it comes back to the same thing; he's never had a support network. No one has ever tried to point out the error of his ways to him. He has isolated himself and fed on his own bitterness, making him what he is.

Voldemort's always been a nasty piece of work though. His father wasn't exactly a nice guy either so I think a lot of it could be put down to the good old nature over nurture argument. But you know, as corny as it may sound, I really do have to wonder how differently he might have turned out had he really known what it was like to be loved and cherished and wanted.



No, I don't find it hard to believe. But my argument is simply that dying for your family does not make you a good person. Anyone, good or evil, might make a decision to sacrifice themselves for someone else. My point really is that I'm sure James must have done something more than just be good at Quidditch to earn the respect and admiration of so many people. I just hope that JKR allows us to see what that was and she doesn't just leave it up to the reader to simply accept what she tells is in the way she did with Ginny. I would be bitterly disappointed if she did and my sympathies will forever be with Snape.

I think Janet said it at some point, but the real reason I can find it in my heart to feel sorry for Snape is the fact that he is a 'tangible' character. We see him interact with other characters, and we see his reactions to many situations. We feel like we know him, even if it's not that well. If you fear what you don't know, and if fear breeds hatred, isn't the opposite true in some cases?

Human beings are drawn to the familiar like a moth to a flame. It explains why people who have been through difficult times together can become fast friends without ever having liked or been interested in each other before - in a difficult time, you found some measure of comfort in some one's company, and familiarity was simply forced onto you. It's why you can learn to love people, and why you can love your family even when they hurt you. They share your genes, so there's something familiar about them that's impossible to feel objective about. And then there's the fact that you've spent your entire life in their company. That counts for a lot, even though it sounds slightly flat in writing.

In fact, many 'irrational' feelings can be explained quite easily by our need to feel at home. Not that it's remotely that simple in the end, but on a very instinctive level, it might be what drives us to start feeling like we do.

And that is why I can feel sorry for Severus, like him a bit, respect him a lot and be endlessly fascinated by him, while at the same time not being very bothered with James. Yes, he was a good man and I like him for being 'Dumbledore's man through and through' too, but I don't feel that connected with him. Sirius, while being an equally big prat at 15, is redeemed in my eyes by simply being familiar to me - being real. I have a relationship with him, because I've spent time in his company - if that makes sense.

That is, incidentally, the point where the Harry/Ginny ship went off the edge of the map - we don't know Ginny well enough to trust and like her with Harry. Yes, we know her, but enough to be his friend, not the love of his life. Her presence feels forced.

These quips just can't keep out of it, can they?

As for Snape's 'irrational' transfer of hatred, it could also be explained by his search for familiarity. I don't think it's much of a stretch to imagine that he found comfort in his hatred for James. It gave him a target for his bitterness, like Louise said. The irrational part would be the transfer to Harry, but if hatred was what Snape clung to as familiar, isn't it very understandable that he did transfer it to Harry when James was gone? It would actually have been irrational if he had simply ceased to hate.

In defence of his hatred, I agree with Louise's reasons for his bitterness when compared to Harry. Also, Harry is special.





This shows that Harry isn't the norm. He's the exception, and is it really fair to judge everyone by his standards? Yes, it's the sort of person we should all strive to be like, but I have no problem with giving a 'normal' character my sympathy, and even liking him. In light of this I would agree that Snape is presented more realistically than Harry. Sirius had a difficult childhood, but he was a prat at 15, whereas Harry wasn't.

Remus wasn't the one dangling Snape by his ankles, but he didn't do anything to stop his friends even though he was a prefect, and it's something Lupin immediately admits when Harry mentions it. His situation was extremely difficult, but he also didn't tell Dumbledore about their night-time adventures, even though he had given Lupin the chance of a lifetime. I do not hold it against him, but I'm simply trying to say that Remus made serious mistakes too, and that they are perfectly understandable.

By the very same standard, I think it's quite fair to believe that a friendless, lonely and hurt Snape could also be essentially good, and deserving of our sympathy at the very least.

I also think that around 50% of my posts will be eligible to receive an 'ABSOLUTE RUBBISH' stamp if Snape turns out to be a cruel and cold-hearted murderer.

(Oh, Voldemort. He wasn't born from love. His father was under a spell when he was conceived, so he is as void of love as any person has ever been. He is not comparable to any feeling, human character imo.)

So how does everyone think that the boys made the map? This does seem to me to be pretty advanced magic. What kind of role do you think their creation of the map will play in the next book?

Hope everyone had a Happy New Year!

That's a tricky one. I mean it's another of those things in the canon, which do not have an explanation anywhere except in the fanfictions, none of which can be reliably considered. It's just like those spells in the Half-blood prince book, no one knows how exactly he created them, but he did. The map is an extremely fascinating magical object with lots of enchantments and even a bit of magical essence of the creators. We also do not know how the marauders became animagi, what kind of procedures they followed, what kind of training, spell work and enchantments were required. But it's evident that both were handiwork of mainly James, Sirius and Remus as Remus mentions that Pettigrew could never have become an animagus without their help. Those guys really had some brains. I can't see Harry, Ron or Hermione becoming an animagus. Hermione because she would balk at breaking so many rules, when there is no immediate danger and Harry and Ron because they do not have the aptitude to do some extra studying to accomplish such a thing.

I was so happy when I saw this thread, for two reasons. One is that the characters in the Marauders' era are my favorites (bad guys and good guys), and the other reason is that I am currently rereading the HP series, researching the Marauders. I little obsesive, I know.



I agree, it is very advanced magic. I think that it was predominantly James, Sirius, and Remus who made the Map. In fact, I would be shocked if Peter did anything more than be a gofer for them (a "gofer" is a persom who people ask to get things for them, bring them things).

PoA, p.207 US


The person McGonagall is talking about is Peter. This is the reason that I believe that Peter was the gofer. Remus probably did a majority of the research, found the books, etc. Sirius and James did most of the spell-work, more likely than not. It has been hinted and left unsaid that both Sirius and James were powerful. Also, I believe that a fair few of the spells that they used to make the map they invented. The spells must have been either NEWT level or higher. The Map is up there with Riddle's diary, by my standards. How they made it cannot be exactly explained, even by themselves. BUt I do believe that they left a strong magical signiture in the Map.


I don't believe that there is an actual event or action that is the reason behind James's loathing of Snape. I do believe that there is a reason. I think that James felt uneasy, on-egde, and uncomfortable around Snape, and he also had a strong, passionate hatered for him. The feeling could not be explained, for there was no logical reason behind it. James felt it the first time he met Snape, and it just got stronger as they both grew up. It was a gut feeling, and instinctual feeling. Those feelings are hard to explain. If this be the case, then it would make sense that the only reason James could think of as to why he loathed Snape was "because he exists". I know that this can happen from experiance. There is a person at my school that I hate, for no logical reason at all. It is just a gut feeling. But if this is the case with James, it would make sense in the long run. It was a gut feeling to loathe Snape, and James was smart to listen to his gut. After all, Snape is the reason that James is dead...
I am really sorry if this doesn't make sense, I am not that good at explaining abstract things.

~Bella

The general characteristics of the four (similarities, differences, etc.)
James and Sirius, I think they were like in one mind with each other, like the Weasley Twins! I think they loved adventure adn loved to pull pranks. I don't think they ever hurt anyone, or got in too much trouble, they just toed the line a lot!! Remus, I expect he was their conscience, their reasonable guy for advice, also their reality check every once in a while! Peter, I expect him to be nervous, quiet, and admire James and Sirus. They were probably his idols!

How did James, Sirius, and Remus treat Peter?
I think Sirius and James treated him okay, like Ron treats Neville, as someone put it earlier! They put him down a lot, and never are really THAT close to him. Remus, I think he stands up for Peter, and treats him with a little more respect! He probably feels sorry for him.

What school subjects were they skilled in?
I think Remus, James, and Sirius, were excellent in every subject, and everything was easy to them. Although Remus probably memorized everything from a textbook, like Hermione! James and Sirius probably tried out the spells on someone, particularly Snape! Peter, well I think he wasn't very bright, I think he wasn't confident, and was like Neville. I think he was just a hanger-on to the rest of the Marauders!!

Comparisons between the Marauders and current students (i.e. Hermione, Harry, the Weasley twins, etc.)
I think they were all close like The Trio, or the Weasley twins, they looked out for each other and helped each other! To be more specific, I think James and Sirius were pranksters like the Weasley twins. Remus was probably the one who disapproved everything, like Hermione, except he probably rarely stood up to them! Peter, he really reminds me of Neville!!

Why did Wormtail turn on the other three?
I think he was fed up with being made fun of, was power-hungry, and desperate to prove himself!! I think he saw LV as the perfect opportunity to show them how skilled he could really be.

How did they create the Marauder's Map? (This is pretty advanced magic, right?)
I'm not sure how they created it, but I expect it would be a lot of hard work. You know, complicated spells and all. I think it might have taken them a while to make it, like it took them a while to each become an animagus, well except Remus of course!!

Their relationships with Lily and Snape.
They liked Lily, and James loved her! James and Sirius hated Snape, like Harry hates Malfoy! Remus, he...um.. I think he didn't hate him, but he didn't like him either. I think he felt sorry for him a little, but also disliked him. Peter, I think he just went along with anything James and Sirius did or said to Snape!!