Several of the recent discussions here at The Hog’s Head have reminded me once again of what great thinkers regularly visit and comment. Here’s a discussion starter for you all: Remus Lupin’s character. It’s time to give everyone’s favorite werewolf some careful attention. Directions to head in:
Remus Lupin’s “Furry Little Problem”
Werewolves are classic scary characters, but in Lupin’s case, Rowling seems to have taken some of the psychological analysis of the werewolf as scapegoat and used that in her story line. So while Greyback is certainly nasty, the overall picture of werewolves is that they are an oppressed group within the Wizarding World, rather than a bunch of scary creatures who belong in a horror flick.
Discuss, then, Rowling’s use of the werewolf. Here are a couple of starting points. Feel free to suggest others.
- The werewolf is a metaphor for the “diseased others” in our society, such as AIDS victims.
- The werewolf is a metaphor for internal struggle with personal evil (sin).
Remus and Nymphadora: Did it Work?
I’ve heard it from more than a few Potter fans that the Remus/Nymphadora pairing was out of left field, and that it didn’t work. For a time, it even seemed like it didn’t work for Remus, who was ready to abandon his wife to follow the trio on the Horcrux hunt. Did this relationship “work” for the story line? Many (including David Thewlis!) believed that if Rowling were going to “out” a character as gay, it would have been Lupin.
Lupin Goes to the Movies
What do you think of David Thewlis’s performance as Remus Lupin? I’m of the opinion the Thewlis’s Lupin is bang on, but I’d love to hear if anyone disagrees.
What Else?
This is Remus’s thread. Say what you like. What other important aspects of his character need to be addressed?
PotterMom05 on 
Joivre on 
Red Rocker on 
Arabella Figg on 
korg20000bc on 
Travis Prinzi on 
Loading ...
{ 1 trackback }
{ 44 comments… read them below or add one }
Lupin has always been one of my favorite characters. I like both the character in the books, and how Thewlis brings him to life.
In the books, Lupin seems to have a very interesting position: he is one of the good guys, but he’s an outsider. Essentially all of the grown-ups are “outsiders”, as they must be in a book where the hero is an adolescent. But because he is a were-wolf, Lupin is more on the “outside” than even characters such as Hagrid (a true loner, albeit very sympathetic), Sirius Black, and the Dumbledores. He is dangerous to friend and foe. No amount of good will, no amount of nurturant, suppportive or even heroic deeds on his part can change the fact that at certain times, he can be deadly. As a result, he must always be on the periphery of the circle of good guys, and almost by definition, bordering on the circle of the bad guys. In the sense that if you get killed, does it really matter if it’s a friend or a foe who kills you?
I’m not sure that I see the concept of “outsider” as synonymous with “diseased other”. They are similar. But for me the key concept is being different and dangerous, rather than being different and diseased.
About his potential gayness. I half-way agree with Thewlis. He does present as potentially gay because he seems so much to fit the stereotype of a bachelor male teacher in a boy’s school, down to the scruffy suits and the leather patches on the elbows of his jackets. But not all bachelors are gay. And for a while now, he has reminded me strongly of Mr. Chips, who, as I recall, was not gay.
Plus, in my opinion, the most likely to be gay has always been Sirius Black. Those astonishing good looks, the arrogance, the lack of attachment to any female, his close attachment first to James, and then to James’ son. And the movies don’t do much to dispel that. Or am I the only one to notice the extreme chemistry between the actors portraying godfather and godson?
And to add to the previous point, I have sometimes thought that the closest modern-day approximation to Gellert Grindelwald, in manner and appearance, although not in ambition or affiliation, is Sirius Black.
Back to Lupin.
Lupin has two sides which he tries very hard to keep separate: the were-wolf, and the good teacher. They are both distinctive, especially at Hogwarts which has neither of these two things in abundance. And interestingly, the good teacher is at least as compelling as the were-wolf. Perhaps more so. Because although the were-wolf is menacing, it has very little personality. But as the good teacher, Thewlis delivers a very nuanced performance. I can watch his scenes with Harry in PoA over and over again. There is the teacher I would have loved to have had, as an adolescent. And watching OotP, his brief appearances there quickly recreate the same sense of quiet but strong disinterested love. Philia love. It’s quite different from the stern, brittle love of Professor McGonnagle, the smothering love of Molly Weasley, and the over-anxious sisterly love of Hermione Granger. It is also different from the inarticulate and sometimes painful love of Ron Weasley, and the problematic love of Albus Dumbledore.
My apologies for meandering. It’s late, and I should be in bed, but it’s an interesting topic.
(I wish I could contribute a better developed comment.) Two very important aspects of Lupin are his passive aggression and his willingness to lie by omission.
Passive aggression: in PoA, Lupin knows that, in their youth, he nearly killed Snape. (Unwittingly, of course.) He knows that Snape knows what he’s capable of in his werewolf form (but has kept the secret for around fifteen years now.) And he knows that Snape is brewing the difficult Wolfsbane potion for him. But instead of saying, Thank you for brewing the potion for me, what time would you like me to come down and get it? he leaves it to Snape to chase him all over the castle and provide room service. Month after month.
Lying by omission: Map, Sirius Black is an Animagus who knows secret passages in and out of the castle, etc….
Perhaps Remus and his lycanthropy is a metaphor of the person who excuses or blames away his faults, and won’t acknowledge his capacity for sin. His anger and aggression aren’t “really his”, it’s all the fault of the wolf within, this thing inside him that isn’t really him. “I’m getting sacked because I think Snape is sore because he’s not getting the Order of Merlin, not because I didn’t bother to tell the Aurors or even Dumbledore about Sirius Black’s powers, and neglected to take the Wolfsbane potion and wound up running around an unprotected school on the very night the Minister of Magic was on campus.” “Oh, I’m not ditching my pregnant, DE-targeted wife — I’m helping Harry Potter!”
I have this idea bubbling around in my head about seven of the significant adults in Harry’s life corresponding to the Seven Capital Vices; in this scheme, Remus = Acedia. He takes the easy way out.
Peony, very interesting thoughts! As much as I like Lupin in lots of ways, I think you’ve pegged a couple of really important aspects of his character. While I think he came around and did the right thing by the end, you’re right – there’s really a passive aggressiveness to Lupin.
I think his relationship to the Marauders is an interesting area to explore. Sirius and James are the Fred and George of their day. Pettigrew the coward. Lupin fits in by being the “good guy” friend, the one who got good grades, was a prefect, hung out with the cool troublemakers, but sort of passively – neither joining them fully nor trying to stop them.
Still, I think his status as werewolf and everything he went through as a werewolf in the WW (scapegoated, outcast) puts him in a very awkward spot, especially with the unconditional acceptance of Dumbledore.
An interesting discussion. Will comment more when I have time. But just a quick thought. Thinking of the differences between the Gryffindors & Slytherins, isn’t it strange that the Slytherins are always played as being unpleasant & evil & bad. And yet looking at HPSS, it’s the Slytherins who have won the House Cup for the past seven years. And how do you win the House Cup? By obeying the rules, by being productive in class, by towing the line. It’s the Slytherins who are following the rules! While the Gryffindors are breaking them! First the Marauders & then the Trio. And the Trio gets rewarded for breaking the rules while the Slytherins are punished for following them. Very interesting & I think a valid point to the people who have problems with Harry.
What’s this got to do with Lupin? Well, I found Peony’s comments quite insightful into Lupin’s personality. I hadn’t thought it about that way before, except of course for the DH stuff. And this seems to be indicative of the nature of the Gryffindors, to some extent. Great Stuff!
I’ve got a long comment on Lupin stuck somewhere in spam limbo. But I feel the need to respond to his critics.
I see Lupin as a bachelor by necessity, and not a closet gay. I was one of those who saw his relationship with Tonks as completely out of left field, not based on any kind of personal compatability, and totally out of place in the story. I think it was primarily a marriage of convenience for JKR: she needed an orphan at the end of the story to carry on the tradition of wizarding orphans. Similarly I think that she had him ditch his pregnant wife so Harry could read him a lecture about paternal responsibility.
Bottom line: having created a compelling character, JKR didn’t know what to do with him, married him off and then quickly killed him in a clumsily plotted, utilitarian fashion. Sort of like what she did with Snape.
Wonderful woman, JKR, able to create fascinating characters other authors would kill for. Just not so good in the follow-up.
Need to expand on the last comment.
There was of course a very important reason why Lupin had to die, just like why Sirius Black had to die: so they could accompany Harry on his last walk.
But the manner of his death, like Snape’s, was very utilitarian. It’s like the author is saying: “I now need you to be dead, so presto, you’re dead. Now go for a walk in the Forest with Harry.”
And for Snape, the comment is: “You have two plot functions left: to die looking into Harry/Lily’s eyes and hand over your memories, so get on with it already, we only have four chapters left and a lot of story to tell still.”
I agree RedRocker about the characters, I think Rowling is primarily a plot-first author as opposed to a character-first. Problem is she creates interesting characters but then doesn’t know what to do with them. Seeing as interesting characters don’t like being put in box, they’d much rather take on a life of their own, forgetting they are only paper and ink.
Way too much good stuff here & not just on Lupin.
First off, on Lupin & Tonks, yes, I agree that it does seem to come out of left field. But I also think we need to remember whose perspective we’re getting, Harry’s limited perspective. So, by default Tonk’s love for Lupin comes out of left field because it comes out of left field for Harry. Harry doesn’t know everything & thus we don’t know everything. Things are going on in the wizarding world that we don’t know nor can we know until Harry knows.
So, I don’t think we can complain too much about the out of left fieldness of it. But I do agree with Red Rocker that it is all rather utilitarian. Deus ex machina on JKR’s part.
I also agree that Jo creates wonderfully nuanced characters, even minor ones, & then doesn’t quite know what to do with them. Snape seems terribly wasted in DH. But again maybe it’s because for reasons of plot, that is, Harry’s limited perspective, things about Snape couldn’t be revealed until the end. To reveal them earlier would’ve given away the show, so to speak. Just a guess.
POA movie & Lupin: Thewlis nails this performance. It’s the highlight of the movie in my opinion. He provides the best acting & I think nails the character, too. I love watching POA just for his scenes.
I thought he was good in OOTP, too, the way he holds Harry back from the veil after Sirius’ death…
Just kidding. Actually for the very little face time & dialogue he had in the movie, Thewlis still brought the character of Lupin to life. I think even better than Oldman did for Sirius. Oldman just doesn’t seem to capture the Sirius we see in OOTP the book. Not that his performance is bad or lacking, just a bit off in my view.
Is the “is this a horror flick we’re talking about” your question?
HP obviously isn’t primarily a horror tale, but it does contain gothic and weird-tale elements – many traditional ones are subverted and turned into social justice issues, and her own creations are the ones are the best examples of supernatural horror.
“the overall picture of werewolves is that they are an oppressed group within the Wizarding World, rather than a bunch of scary creatures who belong in a horror flick.”
… Is this a horror flick we’re talking about?
One of the most interesting aspects to Lupin for me is his self-loathing- the fact that he can’t stand the idea of who he is, and is continually trying to run away from himself (resigning, abandoning Tonks, refusing to let anyone close to him). He seems to feel that the best way to deal with his “furry little problem” is to accept his social position as the scapegoat and to martyr himself.
It’s for that reason that I think Lupin/Tonks is perfect. I admit, I don’t know how in the world they would be attracted to each other in the first place, but she is exactly what he needs. She is someone who faces issues head on instead of running away, who won’t take his cr*p about being not good enough, and who comes from a family that was ostracized (from both ends of the spectrum) and yet went on with life the same as usual. Their relationship was a little sudden (from Harry’s point of view), but I don’t see it as any more out of left-field than Lupin’s friendship with Sirius, who, incidentally, has many of the same qualities as Tonks.
As far as Harry’s viewpoint goes, let’s be careful not to explain away too many inconsistencies simply because we see most everything from that perspective. There are plenty of problems with the characterizations in these books.
I agree with Red Rocker and others that Lupin starts well and kind of whimpers out as a character. Part of the problem is that we get different sides of a character’s personality as it suits Rowling’s plot needs. Despite his problems, Lupin has been one of the more upstanding characters in the series…then he ditches his wife to be read the riot act by a 17 year old?! Red’s right — Rowling wanted to make a point about about paternal responsibility and she connived the moment for the bully pulpit. In terms of modern sensibilities, Rowling’s tendency to make character subject to plot is what leaves her on shaky ground with us snotty critic types.
But, though I’m no expert, I have always imagined that Lupin could potentially be the most psychologically damaged character in the series. He’s the walking embodiment of someone with multiple personalities (perhaps his disease?). I can’t imagine waking up in the morning knowing there’s every potential I killed someone the night before (much less doing so in the manner a werewolf would).
Dave, I’m not trying to explain away the inconsistencies by using Harry’s limited perspective. I think we have to take that into account, though.
I agree, also, that the way Lupin is handled in DH is really rather forced by JKR. I think Red Rocker’s spot on in pointing out that Jo makes wonderfully detailed characters who come to life & then just uses them as plot devices.
I was very disappointed in the lack of Snapey goodness in DH; I wish we could’ve had more. But he got uppity on JKR. He started to really come to life on his own & become a most fascinating character & to contain him Jo simply left him out of the picture until the very end. Almost the same thing with Lupin, he was used almost ham handedly to push certain aspects of the plot along.
Now. all that being said, despite any literary criticisms I may have of Jo’s work, I still love it dearly.
Ned, very insightful comments on Lupin & his self-loathing. I think it’s true that he ostracizes himself almost as much as the wizarding world does. It’s almost as if he’s bought into the propaganda & rascism or specieism of the wizarding world himself.
And so he needs people like Tonks & Sirius (as long as you’re not pushing Sirius/Remus slash fiction
) & even Harry to make him realize his own worth. To make him realize that being a werewolf is not what defines him as a person, that it is really a furry little problem. Of course, it really is a big problem but yet not one that defines who Lupin is, as he seems to believe.
Hmm, well implying slash certainly wasn’t my intent, but I suppose if you’re in that camp…
I like what Red Rocker said bout Lupin’s struggle between the Teacher and the Werewolf, and I have a similar idea to Peony’s on the duality of Lupin. I’m not sure of this or not, but what if Lupin has a desire to sometimes let out the werewolf. I’m not sure whether Lupin sought out James and Sirius or vise versa, but I think the werewolf represents Lupin’s “wild and reckless side.” I think that’s how he relates to James and Sirius, because otherwise they don’t have much in common. Normally Lupin is the quite and studious person, but then, once month, he gets to run around like a wild animal. In Book 3, Lupin takes the Wolfsbane Potion to subdue his wild nature and remain the teacher. In Book 7, Lupin is married and has a child on the way. He needs to be the intelligent role model, but in the thick of a war his wild side temporarily takes control and he seek out Harry, the one having all the fun. He convinces himself that what he is doing is right by saying that Harry and his friends need him as the teacher on their journey.
I also agree with Ned that although Lupin and Tonks seem random, she is a lot like Lupin’s friends so I can see what he likes in her, and I suppose Lupin could be described as the quite dangerous type, so perhaps that’s what she sees in him.
Just on a side note: I don’t think Snape was underused in DH. He was there to protect Hogwarts and her students! As soon as I found out Snape was headmaster I knew without a doubt that he was another of Dumbledore’s men, through and through.
Okay, going to talk about werewolves & gayness. Please note I will not be saying anything either for or against homosexuality, just about its portrayal in the books & movies.
First off, supposedly Cuaron told David Thewlis to play Lupin as gay in POA. Exactly how does one do that, though? Isn’t that just playing into a stereotype of gay people, especially gay men, that you can peg them by their mannerisms or what not? I can’t point to anything specifically ‘gay’ in Thewlis’ performance, & if I could, I’d probably be accused of being homophobic or something.
Next, regarding the books, I’m still of the opinion that the people who should be most upset about Jo outing a character after the fact is in fact those who are in favor of seeing gayness as just another lifestyle choice. We had plenty of heterosexual relationships going on, so obviously relationships aren’t the issue. Some have said that since they were children’s books, Jo didn’t want to bring in a topic like gayness. But yet it’s quite obvious that something is up between Aberforth & goats. Is bestiality okay in a children’s series but not gayness?
And lastly, I’m not sure it’s wise to equate werewolfness with gayness, as many have seemed to do. For one, that would make Greyback a positive role model for fully accepting & revelling in his werewolfness/gayness while Lupin would be someone ashamed of his werewolfness/gayness & someone trying to control or avoid it. Not quite the impression one would want to give of gayness, I think.
Just some questions & thoughts. Before anybody gets too worked up, again remember I’m not trying to talk about the rightness or wrongness of homosexuality, simply it’s portrayal in the HP series. And my above questions are just that, questions. I think we’ve done a reasonable job of discussing such hard topics before on The Hogshead, so I’d really like you all’s input & thoughts on these issues.
Mark-Anthony,
I’m not sure he was underused so much as used simply as a plot device. I do think he got away from Jo & she didn’t quite know what to do with him.
But I’m still of the opinion, too, that a lot of these things regarding Snape couldn’t have been revealed to us till the end & thus it makes him seem underused. But again this might be a limitation of the perspective Jo chose to use throughout the books, Harry’s limited one.
Revgeorge,
I didn’t really elaborate on why I am of the opinion that Snape was not underused or used merely as a plot devise. I think it is very much in Snape’s character to do exactly everything Dumbledore instructed him to do in DH. At this point Dumbledore and Snape new that the story was coming to an end, and Snape was completely Dumbledore’s tool by then. Snape was about to get what he wanted: to avenge/make up for the murder of Lily, and Dumbledore had the end all planed out. Snape just needed to try not to screw it up.
Then again, I still may agree with you. A lot of the time JKR uses Dumbledore as her voice in the stories. I guess Dumbledore’s plan basically is her plot, so Snape is almost it’s tool as much as Dumbledore’s.
(By the way, sorry to get so off topic!)
The relationship with Tonks did come out of left field and happen fast. Our only clue was that Tonks’ patronus had changed. Tonks and Lupin are not together at Dumbledore’s death, together at his funeral, and married before DH begins – we didn’t see their relationship at all.
That said, I don’t think that Lupin’s decision to want to abandon Tonks was entirely uncharacteristic. He begins to change at Dumbledore’s death. Before that, he seemed pretty calm and collected, and very much like Dumbledore in some ways. But at Dumbledore’s death, Harry said it was the first time he’d seen Lupin lose control. And from then until Harry calls him a coward, Lupin is described as a very unhappy man: incredulous that Dumbledore trusted Snape, upset that Harry didn’t attack an Imperiused Stan Shunpike, and angry when Tonks returned late from the Harry decoy.
The problem with Lupin is that we were all so focused on Harry that we missed seeing what Lupin was going through. And Jo, as the writer, probably should have made it more prominent, so that we wouldn’t have missed it. But it’s difficult, as the writer, to judge if she’s put in enough hints.
Though I agree that Jo’s characters do sometimes escape her, I would hesitate to say that she’s less character-driven than plot-driven. I’d say it might be the other way around: she created a loose plot, then really great characters. Then she had to pare the characters down to fit them into the plot. Wasn’t there a whole back-story for Dean Thomas that we never got to learn?
I see Lupin less as a werewolf, and more as a teacher. I think he plays an excellent “shadow” to Umbridge (compare their first lessons: books away vs. wands away) and possibly even a “shadow” to Snape (look at his treatment of Harry and Neville, and students in general). Any thoughts on the three lessons we see Lupin teach? Boggarts, dementors, and hinkypunks?
miles365, some really excellent points! You could very well be right. In Rowling’s mind, there is probably no incongruity between Lupin’s previous character and his actions in book 7. But perhaps she didn’t succeed in giving us enough of Lupin’s character in the first place.
Which leads to the same thing if you’re a textualist; what’s in Rowling’s mind external to the text doesn’t matter. Our experience as readers is still one of incongruity of character.
I agree that plot doesn’t always trump character in the books, nor that the books are, in all places, more plot-driven than character-driven. But I think in the places that they are more plot-driven (i.e., Snape in DH), the books lose a touch of magic. The magic is in these brilliant characters. We all had the key elements of the plot figured out two weeks after HBP.
Quick question on werewolves: Where do they live?
Lupin says in OOTP that the other werewolves don’t trust him because he shows signs of having tried to live among wizards. Just where else was he supposed to be living? Do the werewolves live off in their own villages or just run around in the woods. After all, they’re only in wolf form a couple of days each month. Otherwise, they are in human form.
Granted Greyback acts like a savage wolf all the time, but most of these werewolves have to have some place to live, to get food, to raise children. I assume that werewolves would marry each other or, at least, mate during their wolf times. And most of all their time would be spent as humans.
Maybe Jo can write a book on the ecology of the werewolves.
I seem to recall the word “underground” being applied to werewolves, but I could be thinking of something else…
Okay, but is underground in reference to them actually living under the ground or underground as in living amongst wizards & humans but just in hiding. Or living amongst human civilization but in colonies like, say, feral cats, prowling on the edges of life.
Anyway, I would probably not like to have Greyback as a neighbor. Imagine trying to borrow a cup of sugar from him!
As you can probably guess from my first comment, I don’t see any incongruity between the Lupin of books 1-6 and the Lupin of the beginning of DH. Sure, Tonks/ Lupin was a surprise at the end of Book 6, but of course it would be a surprise to Harry — neither of them would have been discussing their love lives with Harry. They would have seen a good bit of each other at Grimmauld Place in OOtP.
what if Lupin has a desire to sometimes let out the werewolf…. I think the werewolf represents Lupin’s “wild and reckless side.”
I can see that. Looking at it psychologically, it could represent the wild and reckless part of himself that he represses, his anger and aggression.
Which is neat, because although Lupin has these problems managing “the worst of himself”, he is also the one to teach Harry the Patronus Charm, in which Harry must bring out the best of himself.
Lupin himself talked about the recklessness which the Marauders felt as they roamed the grounds in their animagus forms. Lupin said he regretted it later but at the time it felt wonderfully freeing to him.
The love story doesn’t have to happen “on camera” for it to feel integral to the plot and consistent with the characters. Look at Grindelwald and Dumbledore, for example.
OK, so maybe that’s not the best example. But there is a lot of stuff which Harry only finds out about retrospectively which still rings true. So I don’t think it’s the third person limited perspective which explains why this pairing feels so artificial.
On the other hand, I think JKR links up quite a few people without rhyme or reason. Harry and Cho. Ron and Lavender. Hermione and Krum. Hermione and Ron. And even Harry and Ginny seems to come out of the blue – on his part, anyways. She of course has loved him from day 1. Maybe the problem is not with Lupin and Tonks, but a more general problem JKR has writing convincingly about normal attraction. Abnormal attraction (e.g. Bellatrix to Voldemort, Umbridge to causing pain, Greyback to Hermione, Smith to Riddle, Slughorn to his trophy students, Aberforth and his goats), or doomed love (Snape to Lily, Dumbledore to Grindelwald) she seems to have no problems with.
On the other hand, I think JKR links up quite a few people without rhyme or reason. Harry and Cho. Ron and Lavender. Hermione and Krum. Hermione and Ron. And even Harry and Ginny seems to come out of the blue – on his part, anyways.
I’d argue that every one of those pairings is purposefully archetypal – anima/animus.
Harry/Cho, Ron/Lavender, Hermione/Krum, Hermione/Cormack are all our protagonists choosing for themselves stereotypical members of the opposite sex. It’s an anima/animus thing. Campbell explains that we often chase our ideal representation of the opposite sex, but not someone we actually need to balance us and pull us to the center. The Harry/Ginny and Ron/Hermione couplings finally satisfy those needs (I can already hear protests re: Ron/Hermione on this, but I’m sticking by it).
You won’t get any protests out of me on Ron & Hermione. I think it fits. One opposites do attract a lot, even if those don’t end up being the best relationships.
But in the Ron/Hermione pairing, everyone goes under the assumption that Ron is stupid. He is not. He is immature & there’s a big difference. DH is in many ways also a story about Hermione coming to see Ron as an intellectual equal, if in a different way than her book learning, & of Ron coming to realize that he needs to grow up & become more of a responsible, dare I say it, sensitive man. And Hermione also needs to see that she also needs the sincere, passionate, often reckless love Ron brings to the mix. Alchemical opposites melding into a complementary substance.
Harry & Ginny are somewhat similar. Ginny loves Harry from day one but she has to grow up out of the puppy dog, idolizing love of the rock star of the wizarding world. She needs to see Harry more than just an idol. And Harry needs to realize that Ginny is & always has been the girl for him. Harry epitomizes the guy who looks for love everywhere around him & then wakes up one day & realizes it’s been right under his nose all along. And just to show I’m not a pure texualist, Jo mentions that this is case. Harry needs to come to the realization that Ginny is the girl for him.
There are too many wonderful discussions happening here, so I’m going to try and address as many as possible!
I agree with Red Rocker’s comments about Lupin being a bachelor by necessity, 1. due to the self-loathing mentioned by a few others, (how can he love someone if he doesn’t love himself), and 2. the simple element of fear, the fear of harming them, the fear of the other being ostracized for being with him, the fear of reproduction… these are all things given to us in the books.
One small comment about Sirius: I see him more as a “player”, one who would have no interest in settling down. I don’t see any chemistry on screen between Harry and Sirius, THAT was out of left field!
Lupin/Tonks: The pairing here seemed odd… but there are many times we see two people together and say “How did that happen?” For me, I could see Tonks’ feelings for Lupin a mile away… I just assumed that Lupin did not feel the same way, there was no reciprocity in the books, so the marriage was a surprise.
I also agree that we are, rightly so, limited in our knowledge of the other characters because we share Harry’s perspective. I am not trying to make excuses, but it definately has to be taken into account! There’s a reason the books were written this way.
Lupin is a complicated character, he seems to have many personalities, or perhaps the ability to conceal certain parts of his personality to others. Perhaps this is why I didn’t believe he had any feelings for Tonks, we certainly don’t see that side of him, even after the baby is born I was skeptical. It was Tonks that kept asking “Where’s Remus?” and then she’s off after him.
I agree with Travis on Thewlis’ portrayal of him on screen, exactly what I thought he should be… I am interested to see how he does in DH!
Oh the pairings… I think I will get trampled on for this, BUT, I thought the pairings were VERY well done on Jo’s part, with the exception of Lupin/Tonks. I don’t think I can be as articulate as I would like to be in giving you my reasons, this would once again go back to Harry’s perspective. We can only know what Harry knows or suspects… let’s start with Ron and Hermione. This relationship only becomes more obvious to us as Harry matures and HE understands it… his feelings for Ginny, another example of us only being given insight into Harry’s feeling when Harry himself has insight. Ron/Lavender, Ron just grabbed the first girl to give him attention to make Hermione jealous. I could keep going, but I think I’ll let someone else have a go!
Chelsea, you won’t get trampled on by me. Recalling, with all the other factors in play, that we are still talking about teenage romance here, I think she did a great job with her romantic comedy and commentary.
Ginny presents a problem to me similar to Lupin’s — a really interesting character that doesn’t seem to fully come into her own. Aside from Snape and a few details about the house elves, I tend to think Ginny is one of the biggest missed opportunities in the whole series.
I love the books, don’t get me wrong. I just start to feel by the end of the series that “off camera” becomes more a convenience than a real tool for Rowling — but this starts to get into the Voldemort post I’ve been working on (sorry for the delay, btw…between a killer case of the summer flu and finals for my summer students, the last couple of weeks have been a wash).
I tend to think Ginny is one of the biggest missed opportunities in the whole series.
Agreed! I’m a big Ginny fan, and I think we needed a lot more of her.
I also agree about Ginny. The seventh child of a seventh child should get a bit more of a write-up. I think the movies haven’t done a bad job of her though. Both Cuaron and Yates have suggested, each in his own way, Ginny’s hidden depths. Yates, especially, has shown, without any dialogue, that Ginny is a powerful witch on her own right.
Dave, glad to hear there will be a second Voldemort post. I was half afraid that revgeorge and I between us had turned you off the whole subject by rushing ahead.
But I have to warn you about this. I’m not sure how seriously I can take anything posted by a kitten wielding an assault rifle. Like revgeorge’s blue penguin, he is lacking the chief appendage necessary to fire such a weapon: an opposable thumb.
Yeah, I know. Pot calling kettle black. I think I’m about to change my avatar …
I don’t know. None of the fourteen cats in my house have opposable thumbs & yet they still rule the place. It’s only because of the denseness of my wife & I in failing to understand fully the divine feline language that they don’t have everything they desire. Otherwise they don’t need opposable thumbs to get humans to do their bidding.
So, is that Eddie Van Halen?
Chelsea,
I think you had a great go at these questions. I’ve already laid out my case for Ron/Hermione & Harry/Ginny. And nothing warms my heart more than a good shipping debate.
But I think you made some excellent points about Lupin & his personality. At least what we can guess of it from the limited info we have.
To just guess about Lupin & Tonks, I’d say that in the long hours they spent together in the Order, crammed in Grimmauld Place that she came to see how desperately lonely Lupin was & how much of a good, kind man he was despite all his other flaws & so fell in love with him. Tonks is, after all, fairly young, in her mid twenties. She’s young, idealistic, & probably lonely, too. It just fits, at least on her part.
Hey, I could write fan fiction!
And I think you also hit a point in your observation about couples. There are certain couples we look at & say, What the heck happened there?! What can they see in each other? We also have to remember what Molly Weasley said about the last war, that people got married all the time because of the uncertainty of the times when they probably would’ve been better off waiting or else examining their decision more closely. It just goes to show that if you can get a girl thinking it’s your last night on earth, well, you know…
Red, I have four cats and love them all. I have a real soft spot for animals in general.
And if I came home to any of those little sociopaths wielding an assault weapon, I’d take them very seriously!
One of my cats, the most beautiful & gorgeous & intelligent cat on earth, in his opinion, doesn’t need opposable thumbs for a lot of his mischief.
Back when we used to board our cats, several of them would be in a four part cage thing with a fair amount of room but with bars on the doors with handles. He would be able to reach his paw outside the cage & work the handle open. Then he & the other cats would frolic about in the vet clinic until the morning when the people showed up to change their food & water & litter. The vet staff had to always make sure they shut the door to the room where the cats were boarded & even put up a sign whenever the ‘houdini’ cats would come to stay.
And this has to do with Remus Lupin how? Well, werewolves don’t have opposable thumbs either & look what they can do!
Red Rocker wrote, “I also agree about Ginny. The seventh child of a seventh child should get a bit more of a write-up. I think the movies haven’t done a bad job of her though. Both Cuaron and Yates have suggested, each in his own way, Ginny’s hidden depths. Yates, especially, has shown, without any dialogue, that Ginny is a powerful witch on her own right.”
I agree with all the comments about Ginny. Also a big fan of her character. Would’ve liked to see more of her in the books. Again, though, I think it’s part of Jo’s foreshadowing of things to come & of Harry’s limited perspective. That is, Harry, & thus we, have to gradually come to the knowledge of who Ginny is & why she’s the one for Harry. And plus the story of the books is really about the Trio & not a quartet. Now, I’ve seen some good fan fiction where Ginny is included in the horcrux hunt & it works to an extent. But it is after all only fan fiction. So, still disappointed we didn’t see more Ginny but I can understand why Jo did it the way she did.
Red Rocker, I get how Yates how shown some depth to Ginny’s character but Cuaron? As I recall, Ginny only had one line in POA. “The Fat Lady’s gone!”
But I am looking forward to HBP & DH, as I think Bonnie Wright will do a good job of it. It’s a shame we haven’t been able to see some of these actors & their talents more clearly in the previous films. Tom Felton, also. We haven’t see very much depth to Draco in the films, but I think in HBP we might get that. If I remember rightly Tom Felton had much more acting & performance experience before the films than any of the Trio actors.
revgeorge,
Re: Cuaron and Ginny: I have no idea which scene in PoA I was thinking of. I can’t even recall if it was in PoA, anymore. If it comes to me, I’ll let you know, probably in the middle of a totally unrelated conversation.
In the interests of not always agreeing with you – our recent harmony is really weird – I want to point out that we don’t know what Tonks and Lupin did in the time they spent together at Grimmauld Place or what exactly she saw in him. JKR hasn’t written those scenes. And until – and if – she does, they haven’t happened. We can make educates guesses, but they are only valid if they are guesses about how the author might have written those scenes had she written those scenes.
I can’t top your Houdini cat story, but I can tell the story of two cats I had, long ago: a very humble but intelligent cat I took in from the street, and a very arrogant but lazy cat I took home after I found him being hand-fed pepperoni pizza in a lingerie shop. One day, I left some eggs on the counter. I rushed to the kitchen after hearing double splats. Humble cat was on the counter, pushing the eggs off the edge. Arrogant cat was down below, licking them up.
Just call me Eddie…
You’ll have to do better if you want to disagree me with, Red Rocker. I clearly noted my comments on Tonks & Lupin were just guesses.
I’m not saying that’s what happened at all, just what might have happened.
That probably should be ‘disagree with me’ rather than ‘disagree me with.’ I English speak good.
In the interests of perpetuating the funny cat tangent…
A friend of my wife’s used to live in a two-story apartment in which the stairs were right next to the front door. The stairs had a 90 degree turn, and thus had a landing about five steps up. Her cat figured out how to jump from the steps onto the doorknob, use the momentum in her swinging body to turn the knob, and pop the front door open.
Forunately, mine just try to peek out of the mail slot… No sharpshooters in the family.