Talk:James and Lily Potter

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This page is within the scope of WikiProject Harry Potter, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to J. K. Rowling's Harry Potter universe. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.

This article has been rated as Class B on the quality scale.

High

This article has been rated as High-Importance on the importance scale.

This article is part of WikiProject Novels, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to narrative novels, novellas, novelettes and short stories on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit one of the articles mentioned below, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the General Project Discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.

This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Article Grading:
The article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.

Tasks you can do:

[edit] Split

Could we split this article in James Potter and another one called Lilly Evans?

[edit] Lily's house affiliation?

Do we know for certain that Lily was a Gryffindor? St. Chris 16:38, 3 August 2005 (UTC)

Answering my own question: JK Rowling said so in a 16 October 2000 chat interview at Scholastic.com.

Question: Which house was Lily Potter in, and what is her maiden name?

J.K. Rowling responds: Her maiden name was Evans, and she was in Gryffindor (naturally).

The interview page yields a "Document contains no data" error when I try it, but it is cached at Google for the time being. St. Chris 19:42, 3 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Lily's eyes?

I sort of remember reading that it was (or was going to be) important that Harry had his mother's eyes. Does anyone else remember reading that, and if so, was it from an authoritative source (the author, or a character who would be in a position to know)?

I think i read that on JKR's site. it could be true, they mention it a lot.

It has already proved to be important. people who look at harry see a lightning scar, his fathers face and his mothers eyes. So Snape, for one, is always presented by images of two people he knew at school. One of whom bullied him (but also saved his life), the other who was likely his friend (maybe only). Complicated, eh? Snapes feelings about Harry are quite likely to be important in book 7. Sandpiper 22:05, 7 September 2005 (UTC)

In the third movie, Prisoner of Azkaban, Remus makes a speech to Harry about how he has his mother's eyes. It was the first thing he recognized about Harry. Why would this be drawn out for the longest time if it wasn't important?

[edit] Speculation on James' and Lily's Professions

as for possible careers of harrys parents- there are some mentioned in book 5 whilst they're studying for owls. One of note is "cursebreaker" as it's one working for a bank (and would be well paid.) Another possibility would be something to do with potions- this would be very likely for lily. One does need high grades in potions to be an auror though...and that might have something to do with eyes...and be well paid.

Moved from the article. Speculation and discussion are better suited to the discussion page --billlund 03:08, August 24, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Discussion on Lily's sacrifice to save Harry

the biggest question has to be- why did voldemort ask her to stand aside?

Moved from the article. Speculation and discussion are better suited to the discussion page --billlund 03:08, August 24, 2005 (UTC)

Lily must have some sort of relationship with lord v. Could they have been friends? Although in book 6 dumbledore says that v never wanted any friends. maybe they are related?

Voldy would very much liked to have Lilly on his side, no doubt. Being blind to love, he may have considered it possible to seduce her to the dark side once James and Harry were gone. Slughorn says that everyone who met Lilly liked her. Alternatively, perhaps he was willing to spare her on Snape's pleading. ---Ransom

For more discussion on Rowling's thoughts about this, see [1] (do a text search for "Lily"). It's very fascinating, but if you want a wide audience to discuss this, you'll probably get more out of posting on a fan forum instead of in here. --Death phoenix 14:50, 26 September 2005 (UTC)

I personally would need more evidence to believe that there's some significance to Voldy having asked Lily to step aside rather than having just killed her from the get-go. My guess is that, being so fixated on his goal of killing Harry, he'd succumbed to tunnel-vision. I'm definitely going to check out that link phoenix just posted, though.--Icarus 14:59, 26 September 2005 (UTC)

Personally, IMO, Voldemort, being fixated on killing Harry, would have killed anyone in his way without asking. It'd be more work to ask her to stand aside than to just kill here. --Prosfilaes 01:17, 1 October 2005 (UTC)

We don't know how magic works, maybe it's hard work, all this magical killing.Sandpiper 06:12, 1 October 2005 (UTC)

JKR stated that Lily definitely had a choice either to stand aside or stay put and try to defend Harry. I would have thought it possible to explain this simply on the view that Voldy was only interested in killing Harry, and anyone else was just clutter. Other random explanations are possible, such as that if he killed everyone then he wouldn't have anyone left to follow him, or that he rather liked the kind of person who would be willing to stand aside and watch their child being killed, to save themselves. None of these explanations has any very firm grounding in the book, nor really helps the article by including them. There are indeed some very interesting possibilities directly related to the main storyline about Harry, concerning the relationships between Snape, Lily and James. They all knew each other, possibly very well, and each has affected the lives of the others, rather markedly. Snape may or may not have had a part in Voldemort offering to spare lily, but that is rather speculative. What can be included is the specific references where Snape is seen to have influenced their lives.

Now why do I find my mind running on the chart hit courtesy of Rolf Harris, 'two little, boys had two little toys, each had a wooden horse....' If you remember the story of the song, it is all about childhood alliegences carried through into adult life. So, so JKR.Sandpiper 21:18, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Of Potions, Snape,the 'Half-Blood Prince', and Lily

Note: This conversation originally took place on Sandpiper's and my talk pages. I'm moving it here in entirety because it's not personal, and other editors may wish to add their thoughts on the issue. --Icarus 03:35, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

I noticed you removed a comment about Snape from the article on James and Lily Potter. Now, I put it in because it is increasingly apparent that there was some sort of relationship between Snape and Lily. Kinda relevant to a biography. It is all wrapped up with Snape's reaction to Harry...because of who and what his parents were in Snape's life. Also interesting for the triangular relationship theme Lily-Snape-James, James attacking him and Lily defending him. There is a good body of opinion that Lily is/was the major motivation for Snape becoming a good guy. Anyway, it is undoubtedly part of her legacy to Harry. The question is just what is the best way of working it in Sandpiper 20:58, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

I do find the speculation about a friendship between Lily and Severus interesting. However, if it is to be included in any Wikipedia article, it needs to be backed up with hard facts from either the books, interviews with Rowling, or other valid sources. There are a million and one fan theories out there, some of which contradict each other, many of which have been proved wrong over time, and many others that will never be proved right or wrong. Theory, opinion, and speculation do not belong in Wikipedia, as fascinating as they often are. If you have sources to back up the theory of Lily and Severus's friendship, by all means include them. Otherwise, the extent of its inclusion should be a line akin to "Because of the way Lily chastised James for his mistreatment of Severus, some fans have theorized that Lily and Severus were friends." --Icarus 03:33, 1 October 2005 (UTC)

Hi, well I had it in mind just to note that she defended him and the circumstances of their being classmates, but someone took it out of the article on the grounds it better belonged under 'Snape'. wiki is not paper. If there is fact about one person interacting with another, then it is part of the biography of each.Sandpiper 06:06, 1 October 2005 (UTC)

Or was it the 'most probably' you did not like? This is a 'balance of probablility' most probably, rather than a wild guess one. It is stated that gryffindor and Slytherin share potions classes, hence they would be. It is also stated they were in the same year. There remains some element of doubt as it has not yet been explicitly stated that they were. (or maybe JKR has conceded this by now).Sandpiper 06:25, 1 October 2005 (UTC)

That Lily defended Severus when James was bullying him deserves a mention. But any information about Lily and Severus having any sort of friendship is pure speculation at this point, unless you have a link to an interview with Rowling in which she confirms it. Just because they were in the same class doesn't mean they were friends. Just because Lily didn't like the way James bullied Severus doesn't mean they were friends. They might have been, but there's no way to know one way or another. Unsourced speculation does not belong in Wikipedia. --Icarus 07:25, 1 October 2005 (UTC)

Don't you just hate the inherent difficulty of conducting a discussion when the two parties' sections appear on different pages? Ah well. The issue is all about the potions book, Snape being the owner and indeed becoming potions master, yet Lily was the innovative star student, without their class teacher Slughorn mentioning Snape. That needs explaining. On the justifiable assumption that JKR does not go in for red herrings, and just about everything has a triple plot point attached, all this stuff is important information. The plain conclusion is that somehow lilies brilliance became written down into Snapes book. Whether they were lovers, friends, or Snape just cheated is harder to say, but plainly they collaborated on the book. I would not be at all surprised to find that lily was the one person (mentioned by JKR) who loved Snape. But more importantly, that he loved her. As to including theories, widely held theories are eminently includeable, and as far as I can see are indeed included about most works of fiction.

There is an important distinction between discussing fiction and discussing fact: In the factual universe there exists a right answer, such that guessing becomes inappropriate when actual information is unavailable. In a fictional world there is an actual edge to the known world. The factual information about things beyond that 'edge' is that readers have made their best guess, and what that guess is.Sandpiper 00:44, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

It's a possible theory. But Slughorn's personality must also be taken into account. He wants to form social and political alliances. Flattery, by means of emphasizing (or even exaggerating) Harry's mother's accomplishments, while tactfully abstaining from mentioning Harry's nemesis's accomplishments, can be easily explained as nothing more than that. Rowling may reveal information in the last book that strengthens your theory, but until then it's fanon at best. There isn't enough support to include anything beyone a brief, passing mention of fan speculation in the article. --Icarus 05:02, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

Well, harry's nemesis is Voldemort, not Snape. Slughorn even goes so far as to comment to Snape that not even he did as well as Harry (with book) has done. What basis do you have for assuming that characters in JKR books do not tell the truth? They rarely lie. JKR is extremely trutheful with her readers in that respect. Refusing to report the statements of characters on the grounds that they might not have been telling the truth seems to be taking things a bit far. Which did you mean was 'my' theory? The one about how wikipedia should report fiction?Sandpiper 21:32, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

I didn't say that Slughorn was outright lying, or necessarily lying at all. I said that it makes sense that, when trying to woo Harry, he would emphasize (possibly exaggerate, but possibly not) Lily's accomplishments and refrain from mentioning the accomplishments of someone Harry hates. That Lily was very good at potions, and Harry achieved better results than Snape while using Snape's notes, does raise some very interesting possibilities. Nothing is certain at this point, except that it's fun to muse over such possibilities!

Back to how this discussion started, with the article... I looked up which sentence I'd removed to refresh my memory. It was "She was most probably in the same potions class as Snape, who once possessed a potion's text book containing many handwritten improvements from their school classes." This wording puts the emphasis on Snape, and doesn't make it clear how it relates to Lily. To make it appropriate for Lily's article, a wording such as "Her former potions professor, Professor Slughorn, said that she'd been exceptionally skilled in his class." should be used. If the fan theory in question is to be included, it should be limited to something short, such as "Some fans have speculated that, through Lily sharing them or Snape stealing them, many of the ideas in the Half-Blood Prince's textbook may in fact have been hers."

And by "your theory", I just meant this fan theory. I know it's not really "yours", but I was tired and didn't bother coming up with a better wording.

By the way: I've moved this entire conversation from our talk pages to the James and Lily Potter article's talk page. This way it's all in one place (instead of divided between two talkpages, though I compiled it all onto mine too for convenience) and other users can weigh in with their thoughts. --Icarus 03:35, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Quotations mentioning Lily, James and Snape

There's actually a fair bit of cannon to support that something of some sort, most probably a friendship, happened between Lily and Snape. This includes an early interview with JKR where she responds to a reader who "wondered if Snape is going to fall in love."

"He, um, there’s so much I wish I could say to you, and I can’t because it would ruin. I promise you, whoever asked that question, can I just say to you that I’m slightly stunned that you’ve said that and you’ll find out why I’m so stunned if you read Book 7. That’s all I’m going to say."

[2] I'm kinda busy right now, but sometime soonish I'll dig up all the cannon evidence I found for this theory. Cmouse 05:56, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

I look forward to seeing it. This quote could mean that Snape loved Lily, but it's far too vague for that to be certain. --Icarus 06:59, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

Well,it was my intention not to make it clear how their both being in the same class and his nickname being in the book with the notes is exactly relevant to Lily, because as you said Icarus, it isn't exactly clear. As an editor, I judge these facts extracted from the book as relevant to her biography, to dress it up in wiki-phrasing. some quotes (anyone, please add more):

Snape the teenager had a stringy, pallid look about him, like a plant kept in the dark. His hair was lank and greasy and eas flopping on to his table, the hooked nose barely half an inch from the surface of the parchment..his writing was minuscule and cramped. OOTP p565 uk, ch Snapes worst memory. Seen while doing his dark arts exam. Continues over several pages.

Harry stared at Wormtail for a moment, then back at James, who was now doodling on a bit of scrap parchment. He had drawn a snitch and was now tracing the letters 'LE'. What did that stand for?.....hastily crossed out the 'LE' he had been embellishing....stuffed his quill and the exam paper into his bag. Order of the phoenix ch. Snape's worst memory. P566 uk. (Where James shows his interest in Lily Evans)

Snape lay panting on the ground...Several people watching laughed; Snape was clearly unpopular.' You wait,' he panted, staring at James with an expression of purest loathing.....'Leave him ALONE!...Leave him alone, Lily repeated. She was looking at James with every sign of great dislike. 'What's he done to you?... You think you're funny,' she said coldly,' But you're just an arrogant, bullying toerag, Potter. Leave him alone. Order of the Phoenix ch Snape's worst memory p571 uk. and a few pages of similar, where Snape also gets mad at Lily, possibly for saving him, or possibly for seeing him humiliated.

You shouldn't have favourites as a teacher, but she was one of mine. One of the brightest I ever taught. vivacious, charming, I used to tell her she should have been in my house. Very cheeky answers I used to get back... Your mother was Muggle-born, of course. Couldn't believe it when I found out. Thought she must have been pure-blood, she was so good. Slughorn HBP71 (so apparently the sorting hat's view that Harry could have been a Slytherin is not so strange..Now we have three examples of house crossover Gryffindor-Slytherin... Lily, Harry and Sirius. If Sluggie is choosing his words to flatter Harry, then it is hardly brilliant of him to mention he looks down on non-pure bloods, like Harry's mother.)

Dumbledore on Slughorn's character (HBP75uk) ...he had an uncanny knack for choosing those who would go on to become outstanding in their various fields. (so Dumbledore is impressed by his ability to pick the best students. There is more, and plainly Horace likes to manipulate people, but no suggestion he does it by lying)

HBP173 ch9, JKR comments on all four houses having potions classes together (12 students) for the advanced class.

when you have seen as much of life as I have, you will not underestimate the power of obsessive love HBP177uk ch9, Slughorn speaking

Everyone kept glancing around at what the rest of the class was doing; this was both an advantage and a disadvantage of Potions, that it was hard to keep your work private JKR on potions classes, HBP179, (which plainly suggests that someone sitting nearby could make notes about the clever innovations you used in your potion making, but I find it hard to see how Snape could have cheated off lily for an entire year without her at least noticing.)

Excellent harry! Good Lord, it's clear you've inherited your mother's talent, she was a dab hand at potions, Lily was! Slughorn complimenting Harry's potion, HBP181 uk ed (admittedly, he may be choosing his comparisons to also compliment Harry's family, but he never suggests Snape was better than Lily, or that there was anything special about Snape in potions classes at all)Sandpiper 07:56, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

scribbled along the bottom of the back cover in the same, small cramped handwriting... This book is the property of the Half-Blood Prince. HBP P183 uk ed, end ch9

Harry continued to follow the HBP's instructions...with the result that by their fourth lesson Slughorn was raving about Harry's abilities, saying he had rarely taught anyone so talented. HBPch10 p184 uk, JKRs commentary. Goes on, there was barely a page on which the prince had not made additional notes, not all of them concerned with potions making. Here and there were directions for what looked like spells that the prince had made up himself. "Or herself, said Hermione."

Incredibly, and to Hermione's increasing resentment, Harry's best subject had suddenly become potions, thanks to the HBP JKR commentary HBP204 uk ch10

The more Harry pored over the book, the more he realised how much was in there, not only the handy hints and short cuts on potions that were earning him such a glowing reputation with Slughorn, but also the imaginative little jinxes and hexes scribbled in the margins which Harry was sure, judging by the crossings-out and revisions, that the prince had invented himself. HBP224uk start ch12. (well, Harry things that --in contrast to the potions tips-- the prince had invented the spells. So Harry thinks the Prince did not invent the potion tips?) Continues with descriptions of other invented spells in the bookSandpiper 20:46, 10 October 2005 (UTC)

On the other hand, the Prince had proved a much more effective teacher than Snape so far HBP224uk Harry, thinking about trying 'levicorpus' non-verbally. He considers the prince a better teacher than Snape?

For the last time..I am not giving back this book, I've learnt more from the Half-Blood Prince than from Snape and Slughorn put together HBP286 uk, Harry talking to Hermione

But I don't think I've ever known such a natural at potions!'said Slughorn... 'Instinctive, you know - like his mother! I've only ever taught a few with this kind of ability, I can tell you that, Sybill -why, even Severus-'...(Slughorn notices Snape and pulls him into the conversation)'...come join us Severus...I was just talking about Harry's exceptional potion-making... you should have seen what he gave me first lesson...never had a student produce finer on a first attempt, I don't think even you, Severus- HBP299uk ch15,slug club party. (only time I recall Slughorn compares Harry's and Snape's abilities. Slughorn does not finish what he was going to say about Severus, because he notices him listening. He then resumes by commenting that Harry made a better Living Death, first go, than any other student. Then he is interrupted again before he finishes saying what Snape did. But Slughorn does again comment that Harry has shown the same instinctive ability, by cheating from the book, as his mother showed.)

I neither like nor dislike Severus', said Lupin...'We shall never be bosom friends perhaps; after all that has happened between James and Sirius and Severus, there is too much bitterness there. But I do not forget...Severus made the wolfsbane potion for me, made it perfectly HBP, p312 uk, ch A very frosty Christmas. (Harry talking to Lupin)

Have you ever heard of the Half-Blood Prince?...I've got his old potions book. He wrote spells all over it, spells he invented. One of them was levicorpus'. Oh, that one had a great vogue during my time at Hogwarts.' said Lupin reminiscently. 'There were a few months in my fifth year when you couldn't move for being hoisted into the air'. My dad used it', said Harry...Lupin's smile was a little too understanding. 'Yes', he said, 'but he wasn't the only one...James was a pure-blood, Harry, and i promise you, he never asked us to call him "Prince'. And it wasn't Sirius... or you?' 'Definitely not. How old is this book, Harry?... perhaps that will give you some clue when the prince was at Hogwarts. HBP p315-316 uk, ch A very frosty Christmas (Harry talking to Lupin)

There was Golpalott's third law, stated word for word as hermione had recited it, but not a single illuminating note in the prince's hand to explain what it meant. Apparently the Prince, like hermione, had had no difficulty understanding it HBP353 (It appears the comments as a whole are the work of an 'intuitive' rather than 'theoretical' potions maker. Or perhaps the point is again to draw the analogy between Harry and hermione helping each other,.. and the prince and ?)

You've got a nerve boy...Oh, you're like your mother....that's the individual spirit a real potion maker needs!...Just like his mother, she had the same intuitive grasp of potion-making. It's undoubtedly from Lily he gets it. Slughorn HBP354-355, (after harry cheats finding the antidote to a poison, using the advice from the book to just use a bezoar. No mention of Snape doing tricks like that in class. I'm inclined to believe Slughorn, that the tip came from Lily, even though that is not precisely how he imagines harry inherited her talent)

Well now, this looks absolutely wonderful...unorthodox, but what a stroke of inspiration...I really don't know where you get these brainwaves, my boy...unless- its just your mother's genes coming out in you. Slughorn HBP444 (harry has just made another innovative potion from the book. To spell it out, every time Harry does something from the instructions in the book, Slughorn is reminded of Lily's work. Yet Snape claims he is the prince. How did this come about? Obvious conclusion is that the prince did not create the tips)

You liked her, didn't you? (said Harry) 'Liked her?' said Slughorn, his eyes brimming with tears once more. 'I don't imagine anyone who met her wouldn't have liked her...very brave...very funny...it was the most horrible thing... HBP p458 uk After the Burial. (Harry talking to Slughorn after Aragog's funeral, discussing deaths of Harry's parents)

Harry', said Hermione,' how can you still stick up for that book when that spell-' 'Will you stop harping on about the book!' snapped Harry. 'The prince only copied it out! It's not like he was advising anyone to use it! For all we know he was making a note of something that had been used against him! HBP495 uk ch Sectumsempra. Harry and Hermione arguing after Harry has used Sectumsempra on malfoy and been rather shocked to discover it sliced him up.

Somewhere there is one about Lily always seeing the good in others who no one else would be prepared to talk to.Sandpiper 07:36, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

Then there is something from Petunia Dursley, who says Lily brought 'an awful boy' home, the year before she started going out with James.Sandpiper 09:58, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

Slughorn saying Lily should have been in Slytherin is his determination, not the sorting hat's. And what he meant was that he thinks Slytherins are always the best, and therefor, someone who's one of the best should be a Slytherin. Because the first point is incorrect, what follows is only his personal opinion. He almost certainly thought he was speaking highly of Lily by saying she wasn't like other non-purebloods. His racism doesn't allow him to see that that in and of itself is racist (much like a real-world racist who thinks it's a compliment to tell a black person that they're so different from other blacks).

You're the one who's making a big deal over whether or not he lied. I said that he used emphasis, and possibly a small amount of exaggeration to complement the emphasis. Exaggeration, not outright lying. And it's only a possibility, at that.

While I find most of the evidence you've presented interesting, though not compelling, I think the bit about Golpalott's law is way off base. Even if Snape received information from Lily, he's still the one who wrote it down in his book, and did so for his own personal use. If he'd needed further clarification on the law, the fact that Lily might have understood it purely intuitively wouldn't have kept him from making the notes he needed to understand it. Just to clarify, do you think Snape was not an exceptional student just because Slughorn didn't gush about him to Harry?

Slughorn saw an excellent student who was the son of another excellent student, and who had enmity toward another excellent student. Of course Slughorn would assume that Harry's aptitude came from his mother rather than from the person he was known to hate. The evidence you've presented is interesting, and it's certainly possible that Lily helped Snape, in one way or another. I look forward to finding out more about them in the next book. But so far, the evidence is only compelling to those already intent on believing. I'm remaining neutral until there's something more concrete. The Wikipedia article should do the same. --Icarus 05:44, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

Hi Icarus. This is not meant to be a complete set of relevant quotes, I know there are others, these are just some I could find at short notice. The point is indeed that no one has said Snape was an exceptional student, but we have been bombarded with stuff in this book telling us Lily was truly exceptional. On the basis of what we have actually been told about Snape, he was brilliant at 'the dark arts', even before he got to school. In HBP we are told he created his own jinxes. We know he has become a good potions teacher, at least from the point of view of knowing his stuff, and being asked by other staff to make potions for them. He has now had 15 years practice doing this. But this was originally a makeshift position for him, arranged by Dumbledore to protect him. I repeat, who has ever said he was exceptionally good at potions?

So, in the books we are told Lilly is briliant whereas Snape is merely described as good, yet you feel it more likely he created the tips... when he was sharing a class with the one described as excellent, where at the very least it was easy to see what someone else was doing? Again, show me where JKR has given false information to her readers. Misleading or obscured, certainly, but not false.

Actually, what instantly struck me as I read the book and it became clear he was the HBP, was why the devil he wasn't teaching all the tips to the students? If he was that good while he was at school, he should be bloody fantastic by now, and frankly should have revolutionised the curriculum. How come everyone is still learning the same old out-of date stuff by Libacious Borage, not the spanking new stuff by Severus Snape? I have seen rebuttals of this on the lines that he would wish to keep his secrets to himself, but if he was that brilliant he would surely have surpassed the stuff in the book by now, and would love to bask in the fame of being recognised by the world as brilliant. I find a convincing explanation of this is that it was not his work. He became good at potions because he had the tips to help him. Slughorn found the book in the store cupboard Snape had used for 15 years. Snape knew about the book: he was extremely suspiscious that Harry had it now. He became potions master because he had the book, rather than because he was brilliant.Sandpiper 11:19, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

I don't think Slughorn meant at all what you say. He described her cheekiness, and used that as the example of why he thought she should be in Slytherin. He was referring to her character, not her brilliance at potions. I am sure he meant to compliment her, by saying he thought she must be a pureblood. This illustrates though that he did not guilefully choose his words. he just spoke what he thought. I do not see that Slughorn could not be aware of the blood-wars from Slytherins in particular. If he customarily stopped and carefully chose his words to suite the listener, he would not have said this. I take this as evidence he says what he means. Further, at least at the start of the book, I don't see how Slughorn would know how Harry feels about Snape. Slughorn first remarks on Lily's brilliance at their very first meeting, before Slughorn has even agreed to return to the school.

As to Golpallots law, I agree with your reasoning. I think there are no notes on it, because the notes are derived from someone who is an instinctive potions creator. The law is about theory. Hermione has always been very good at potions. Overall, she is a classic outstanding student, but Harry has repeatedly done better than her in potions by following the tips. But Hermione would very probably still have done better in the class on making antidotes than the author of the tips did. Just as happened in class with Harry. From all the evidence in the books, Hermione could go on and in 15 years be a potions teacher every bit as good as Snape is shown to be, but not with the instinctive brilliance of the tips author.

Some editors need to stop arguing on this page... this isn't a discussion board.

My favourite theory, is that Lily wrote the tips in her own book, but later presented it to Snape as a parting gift when they left school. She created the nickname for him, because it makes sense for two friends to make up a name which could be an insult, but if it was a mudblood calling him a half-blood as a joke on their shared muggle ancestry, it would be ok. It would be a secret between them. They had a lot in common in terms of background, and he could be the 'ghastly boy' she took home in the holidays. It is possible Snape simply cheated off her, but I doubt she would have allowed it and her character is deliberately described as someone who would make friends with the most unlikely people. We have the one scene of her defending Snape against James. I think she recognised his brilliance at the dark arts which complimented hers at potions. This is an exceptionally JKRish explanation, all to do with her theme of the power of love. I wonder who taught DADA then? Sandpiper 11:19, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Splitting article

Shouldn't this article be split? James and Lily have very different backstories and personalities. We actually know very little about the time they were married, most of our information is from their Hogwarts days (especially for James).

I agree. I would have expected an article for each of the two characters and was rather surprised to find only one. To me, this way it looks like they are "only" important as a married couple and Harry's parents, and not as characters of their own. Eisblume 12:11, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

I have come across quite a few people who tell me not to include facts in a biography about a person, because the same facts are listed in a different persons biography... when both were concerned in the same scene. I find that rather a perverse view, but it exists. I don't see why one biography should keep saying 'see so and so's for more details'. Now in this case, most of what we know concerns them both. Half this article is about their deaths together, and Harry. They were in the same classes. The main bit of info we have about James at school comes from the scene in OOTP, when he bullies Snape and Lily defends Snape. So most of this is also common information. Even stuff about Lily being friends with Snape is relevant to James, since he seems to have been in love with Lily from year 5, despite her disliking him intensely. About one pragraph each is unique. So at least at present, it makes sense to keep them together. Sandpiper 07:29, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

I don't think there should be two seperate articles for James and Lily, there is not enough noteable information on each to make split articles. I also think that they are "only" important as a married couple and as Harry's parents. That may change in book 7, I do seem to remember JK saying that their professions and what they did after Hogwarts will be touched upon but who knows but JK herself if it is really important, or if she is just throwing in a little backstory to keep us fans happy. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk. 02:17, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Snape and Lily friends

Besides that point, Lily and Snape friends? From what I've picked up from the books is that Snape had very few friends and the ones he did have were all in Slytherin and became Death Eaters. In fact when Lily defends Snape in the memory (Snapes Worst Memory), he calls her a mud blood, and says I don't need your help. At least something along those lines. Not to be crude but if I called someone, "nigger", "spic", or "cracker" I don't think we'd be friends. (I'm assuming that mud blood is like those terms) KnowledgeOfSelf | talk. 02:17, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

I havn't found it, but there is a quote about Lily making friends with even the most unlikely people, in fact particularly with people others did not like. She is rather taken aback by the insult above, which could mean anything... but would still be consistent with her surprise at being insulted by a friend. Mostly, there is the problem of how Snape is the HBP and has that book, but Lily being the one brilliant at potions (not him). So the mystery is how he came to have the information: from a friend? cheating in class? The really interesting question is whether Snape, like everyone else, was in love with her and this ruled the whole of the rest of his life. Sandpiper 13:10, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

Those are great points, but if Snape and Lily were friends, don't you think she would have known that James was still cursing Snape every chance he got? "She started going out with him in seventh year," said Lupin. "Once James deflated his head a bit," said Sirius. "And stopped hexing people just for the fun of it," said Lupin. "Even Snape?" said Harry. "Snape was a special case. I mean, he never lost an opportunity to curse James, so you couldn't expect James to take that lying down, could you?" "And my Mum was okay with that?" "She didn't know much about it to tell you the truth, I mean James didn't take him on dates with her and jinx him in front of her, did he?" (Page 671 American Scholastic Edition, order of the phoenix, p591 uk) My point is if Snape was in love with her and a friend of her's and he hated James don't you think he would have been telling Lily all of that, to get them to break up. So he try and be with her and because he hated James? Break them up just to spite James? LOL this is what I love about these books there is so much to look at and to think about. And only JK knows what the truth is. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk. 05:10, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

I think you have the chronology wrong. The scene where Lily defends Snape is from their 5th year. They have advanced potions together in their 6th year, the stuff Harry has just been getting tips on, and she finally gets together with james only in their seventh year. So from the point of view of the backstory for HBP and its mirror when Snape and Lily were in the same year, Lily is still not interested in James. If you take the 5th year scene at absolutely face value, snape swears at Lily, suggesting he hates her too. So, obviously, no relationship. But alternatively he is so upset because he has been made a fool in front of her and lashes out at everyone when he imagines it all going pearshaped. If that is the case, then it seems quite possible he would not want to keep telling her every time James made a fool of him again. From the other side, Lily getting sweet on James would certainly give him a motive to keep up the vendetta in 7th year, when probably Lily would not be listening to him anyway. But we have the 6th year clear when they were busy spooning in potions class. We know Lily goes off with James, but what happened before that, and in particular what did Snape think might happen. At least at the start of year 6, she and Snape had similar opinions of James and everyone knew his likeing for cursing people. Sandpiper 03:33, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

Just because Lily and Snape shared a 6th year class in potions doesn't give any valid indication that they could have been friends. Harry and Draco share a 6th year potions class too and they hate each other. In fact Harry, Ron, and Hermione all share that class with Draco. I'm not saying that it's impossible for Snape and Lily to have been friends at one point. I'm just saying it's highly improbable. Who knows when Lily starts getting "sweet" on James. There are not any indication that she only started in 7th year. In "OotP" Lupin just says they started going out in 7th year. They could have been becoming friends during thier 6th year. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk. 23:54, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

This argument has gone in circles, a bit. The reason for supposing some connection between Snape and Lily is the potions book, apparently property of Snape, and the repeated insistance by Slughorn that Lily was the one brilliant at potions. Hence, how the information got from her to him. Like Harry, he seems to have been taking lessons from someone other than Slughorn. Then there are the comments about her character, making friends with anyone and being admired by everyone, and her apparent sympathy for Snape. I quite agree, nothing explicit is stated, but the circumstantial evidence is there. Mostly, JKR writes detective books. She could wholly dismiss this in book 7, and write it off as just amusing background. But that is not her style. She follows up on clues. a relationship with Lily explains Snape's whole life. Sandpiper 19:36, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

Slughorn does say that Lily is great at potions. But his insistance is that Harry is better at potions than Snape was. He does not ever state that Lily was. He does however state that Lily was rather good at potions and that thats where Harry gets it from. BUT AGAIN SLUGHORN NEVER ONCE SAID THAT LILY WAS BETTER THAN SNAPE AT POTIONS Book 6 also states strong speculation from Harry that he thinks, the "Half-blood Prince" made some of those curses up himself. You really think it's at all possible that Lily would help invent, or invent spells like Levicorpus, Sectumsempra, and Muffliato. All of that seems very unlikly to me. :-D KnowledgeOfSelf | talk. 23:46, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

Well, I try to follow what is actually said in the books. What it says is that Lily is fantastic at potions, and Snape is fantastic at curses (or whatever, but 'dark' magic). So the obvious conclusion is that snape wrote the spells, and lily wrote the potions tips. The thing is that both have ended up in the same book, and the book, at least at one point, belonged to Snape. Also, the spells were created well before the time that this particular book was being used in class. If Snape simply created everything in the book, then he would have to have been fantastic in class at potions, but Slughorn never mentions him. I can believe Snape taught Lily curses, and she taught him potions. Slughorn commented on how cheeky Lily was, and that she ought to have been a Slytherin. Yes, I can believe she was interested in improving her curses. Sandpiper 20:24, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

Thats a fair point but the writting seems to be all the same. Harry never says hey you know what? these potions tips and these spells look like they have different hand writting. Besides Harry uses a potion tip to save rons life...REMEMBER.....Just shove a bezor down thier throats that doesn't sound like a potion tip Lily would have made. :-D KnowledgeOfSelf | talk. 21:46, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

Well, I wouldn't agree with that, she is described as cheeky and instinctive. Not as being good at analysis and theory. So, sod the analysis and just stuff a bezoar down his throat, because it would work. The tips are about what works. I agree, the handwriting is described as small and crabbed, just like Snapes. But as yet we do not have a description of her writing, and we still have the odd circumstances of why Snape would still be working on these spells so long after releasing them through the school. In some ways it makes more sense if it was Lily who did all the writing. 81.7.59.24 16:15, 13 November 2005 (UTC) (wrong computer Sandpiper)

[edit] Links to Norwegian articles

Hi. I have added the links to the respective Norwegian articles at the bottom, in <>. Hope someone can come up with how to link them, since there are two separate ones. - Helga76 20:00, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] US general James Potter (deceased)

Anyone know where the information on this historical character better belongs. Is there enough info on him for an article or a mention somewhere more suitable? Sensible to have a redirect or disambiguation, but not really sensible to have a bio of him here Sandpiper 09:13, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

I've never heard of him, but there are several hit for his name in a google search. One of the sites that mention him is a government website. --¿ WhyBeNormal ? 20:41, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Lily's relationship

Observing Lily Potter's relationships with several players, Severus, Lupin, she was just a friend to the friendless no more or less, (like Hermone?) not really close to anyone, but not backing down to any injustice. Gena207.133.71.245 19:49, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] James' relation to Sirius

Rowling's recently disclosed Black family tree does not directly state how Charles/Charlus Potter was related to James. However, Dorea Black is the granddaughter of Phineas Nigellus, and Phineas is Sirius's great-great-grandfather: four generations back. Since Sirius and James were contemporaries, it is reasonable to assume that Dorea was two generations prior to both James and Sirius. Charles/Charlus was therefore most likely James's grandfather. If Harry is the last living Potter, his family probably doesn't branch out in too many directions in the wizarding world. Kenobifan 21:38, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

There is a major problem with this, though. Dorea was only born in 1920, and died in 1977. This condtradicts what Rowling said about James's parents being "elderly" when James was born (Dorea would only have been 39), and "old in wizarding terms" when they died. We know wizards have a much longer lifespan than Muggles (Dumbledore is 150 during the series, and JKR has stated that this is the case), which means "old in wizarding terms" would be at least 100. Dorea dies very young at 57. So Dorea is too young to be either James's mother or grandmother. Charlus must be some other relation.

However, we have no evidence that witches were capable of childbirth longer than their muggle counterparts. Assuming for a moment that child-bearing capabilities were identical for Muggle women and witches, then a mother having her first (and only) child at age 39 or 40 would fit very well Rowling's description of the circumstances of James's birth. In any case, we would not expect any woman to be considered extremely elderly within 20 years of having a child, even if she had one late.

There is actually some evidence that wizards and witches are capable of having children later in life than Muggles. This is what Rowling said on the subject of James's parents: "James's parents were elderly, were getting on a little when he was born, which explains the only child, very pampered, had-him-late-in-life-so-he's-an-extra-treasure, as often happens, I think. They were old in wizarding terms, and they died. They succumbed to a wizarding illness." So they were actually "elderly" when James was born, and "old in wizarding terms" when they died. 39 is not "elderly", and 57 is certainly not "old in wizarding terms" - 157 would be closer! Remember that "elderly", at least in Britain, is a specific term referring to people who are noted as senior citizens. 39 year olds don't fall into this category. To back this up, Rowling said that Theodore Nott, who is currently about 17 in the books, has a "very elderly" father. So it does appear that wizards and witches can have children much later in life than Muggles, probably because they age at a different rate to Muggles. Whatever James's mother's age when he was born, though, we know that she was "old in wizard terms" when she died, which certainly suggests that Dorea could not have been James's mother.
- Let's take those issues on a point-by-point basis, under the assumption that JKR's quote is (a) exactly what she intended and still intends and (b) precise and not general. First, the quote does not necessarily say that they were elderly when James was born. They were elderly at some point as parents (obviously by the time they died), but the only descriptor that definitely applies to the time "when he was born" is "getting on a little." Second, "they were old in wizarding terms" does not necessarily mean that they were old in general (as in old for still being alive); it could mean that they were old to rear a child. They certainly did not die of old age. Third, it is not clear what "old in wizarding terms" means, even if it actually refers to their age at death rather than their age as parents. Most of the examples we have of wizarding lifespans are unremarkable, the main exceptions being Nicolas Flamel and Dumbledore. Flamel's extended lifespan was due to his work on the Sorceror's/Philosopher's Stone; since Dumbledore was his partner he may have had some exposure to the benefits of this as well (note: Griselda Marchbanks said that she examined Dumbledore in his N.E.W.T.s, which would seem to indicate that she was older than Dumbledore; this would be a counterexample unless she also had access to some sort of life-extending agent or maybe had some non-human/wizard heritage that increased her lifespan). Fourth, the example of Mr. Nott is not probative in any way, since the issue is not the fertility period of wizards but of witches.
  - Remember that Slughorn was going bald when Tom Riddle was at school - this implies that Slughorn may be around 85-90 by the time HBP comes around. Nott was apparently an old friend of Slughorn, so he may be roughly the same age. Newt Scamander, it is confirmed in "Fantastic Beasts", is actually 100 at the time of HBP, and as far as we know, he is still alive. Marchbanks would be at least 170. It looks like it's not so rare that wizards can live to extreme ages. Rowling specifically said in an online chat in 2000 that "Wizards have a much longer life-expectancy than Muggles", and that McGonagall is "sprightly" at 70 - therefore, "old" and "elderly" would mean something different to wizards than to Muggles. Also, we have to accept that they were "elderly" at some point - even if you're talking in Muggle terms (it is likely Rowling talked in wizard terms), 57 is hardly "elderly" these days. I'd also argue that 39 is not necessarily "old to rear a child" - I believe Rowling herself was 39 when she gave birth to her most recent child, so I'm sure she would agree! But anyway, 39 does not seem "old to rear a child" in wizarding terms, since wizards have a "much longer" life expectancy than Muggles, and James was born "late in life" for his parents.
    - On the issue of the age a witch can give birth, we have to consider the Weasleys. Mrs Weasley says she remembers the gamekeeper before Hagrid, a man called Ogg. Hagrid became gamekeeper in 1943, after he was expelled. This means Arthur and Molly were there during, or before, 1943, which makes them at least 65 in HBP, and probably older. This means that they were at least 50 when Ginny was born. So it's not unusual for witches to give birth at such an age. Also, more evidence that wizarding bodies age much slower - in the flasback in CoS, Dumbledore had brown hair, even though he would have been 100. McGonagall, who is 70, still has black hair.
      - The context of that quote should also be noted - Rowling is not being asked about the birth of James, she is being asked about when Harry's grandparents died. So the sentence, "They were old in wizarding terms, and they died" would seem to indicate that they died at an age which was "old in wizarding terms".

Perhaps a more telling piece of evidence against the above identification is the fact that Sirius never mentioned it to Harry, even when they were discussing the Black family tree and the various relations that did and did not appear thereon.

It's also worth noting that Rowling has said she killed off all of Harry's family, except Petunia. This implies that Harry surely cannot be related to the Weasleys through blood - which would be the case if Dorea were James's mother (Ron, and Ginny, would be Harry's third cousins once-removed). So it follows that Dorea probably wasn't Harry's blood relation - he's only related to her through the marriage of Charlus, who may have been his great-uncle.
- Mathematically, Harry was certainly blood-related to members of the other pure-blood families, including the Weasleys and the Blacks. According to JKR, the "current" British wizarding population numbers in the several thousands. We may assume that the number several hundred years earlier would have been about the same, if not smaller. Every person, whether wizard or Muggle, has 2 parents, 4 grandparents, 8 great-grandparents, and so on. If you go a mere 13 generations back, everyone has 8,192 ancestors in that generation alone. It is simply not feasible that there could be any two members of the British pure-blood community that did not share at least some ancestry, probably significantly closer than 13 generations back. The issue is not whether or not Harry and the other characters of pure-blood heritage are related, but to what degree. The fact that Harry's "family" was killed off does not mean that he has no relatives, but that he has no immediate relatives (no ancestors, no aunts or uncles, and no first cousins--except, of course, for the Dursleys).

And one more point against Dorea and Charlus being James's mum and dad - the fact that Dorea and Charlus have not been burned off the tree. James's mum and dad took Sirius in as a second son - if they were ever on the tree, this act would have seen their names burned off it as "blood traitors" - that fate befel uncle Alphard, who did nothing more than leave Sirius some money. Also, the fact that they are on the tree means that they did not act against the Black's blood-mania in any way, and did not oppose Voldemort during his rise to power. This suggests that they cannot have been James's mum and dad - since James's parents were a refuge from the Blacks and took Sirius in, that implies they had nothing against Muggle blood, which would have made them blood traitors. Plus the fact that their son married a Muggle-born, Lily Evans. Dorea and Charlus still being on the map means they can't have been James's parents.
- Or at least it means that they probably weren't. It may be pressing the point too much to suppose that Mrs. Black (or whoever it was that blasted entries) was omniscient about all of the activities involved and was perfectly consistent with whom she blasted off and whom she didn't. Also, opposition to Voldemort (assuming that the Potters all opposed him publically enough that Mrs. Black was aware of it) could not be seen as being necessarily Muggle-friendly. After all, Barty Crouch and Fudge, not to mention most of the Wizarding world, opposed Voldemort without laying aside their pure-blood proclivities. The Blacks themselves, while they agreed with many of Voldemort's ideas, did not go along with him fully (except Regulus for a while, of course). There is another issue about the blast marks and the indications as to number of sons and daughters certain couples had, and that is whether the sheet being auctioned is intended to be an exact replica of part of the tapestry. Were the children of Black daughters really just numbered or were they named (like Draco Malfoy)? If James Potter just appeared as "1s" his entry may not have attracted the immediate attention and ire of the tapestry blaster.

[i]And one more point against Dorea and Charlus being James's mum and dad - the fact that Dorea and Charlus have not been burned off the tree.[/i]

1. There is no evidence of James being Muggle-born. If the Potters are pure-bloods, or were before James married Lily, then all Potters would be related. And according to Sirius, there's so much inbreeding that all pure-blood families are related. It has never been revealed what the exact connection was between the Blacks and Weasleys, Sirius himself didn't know. 2. Their names not being burned off means nothing. They may very well have been burned off the copy at 12 Grimmauld Place. What Rowling auctioned off was an intact family tree.Kenobifan 04:28, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

1. I didn't say James was Muggle-born. The point is, James's mum and dad took in Sirius and "adopted me as a second son". That would surely have seen them blasted off the tree as blood-traitors, were they ever on it. Uncle Alphard was blasted off simply for leaving Sirius some money. The "crimes" of Mr and Mrs Potter were similar to that - they are blood-traitors for associating with someone who turned his back on the Black blood-mania. Also, the relationship between Sirius and the Weasleys has been established. Sirius stated that "Molly is my cousin through marriage", which means a Prewett certainly married into the family somewhere. He also said "Arthur is something like my second cousin once removed". If that's true, They are related through Sirius's great-great-grandfather - Phineas Nigellus, who would then be Arthur's great-grandfather. 2. She did not auction off an in-tact family tree, because some of the names are burned off - look at it carefully. There are big black blotches, one in every generation. They are the burn-marks, and accoring to Harry in OotP, a section of the family was "burned off" in every generation. That tapestry JKR auctioned is the tampered one, not the original one.
- Two points. First, the "would surely have been blasted off" is a fallacy that assumes facts not in evidence--that the blaster was aware of all of the events listed above and was perfectly predictable (i.e. rational) in whom was blasted off. Second, the term "blood traitor" does not refer to people who betray the Black family in some way but to people who don't hold to the quasi-racism of thinking pure-bloods a special and separate breed apart. The Weasleys were "blood traitors" (and referred to as such by Mrs. Black's portrait and by Kreacher) due to their happy association with and love for Muggles and other non pure-bloods. Uncle Alphard may have been one as well, but the reason he was blasted off was due to his interference with Sirius and not to any "blood-traitor" status. One might well expect (but not necessarily) the Potters to have been blasted off if they were seen interfering with Sirius as well, but that would have been because they were interfering and not because they were "blood traitors."

Only a partial view of that tree has been published, but what is visible shows no burn marks. If you've seen something I haven't, post a link to it. Kenobifan 00:59, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

This is the picture of the tree, with two burn marks clearly visible. It is possible that the burn in the third generation is Arthur Weasleys parents: http://www.mugglenet.com/viewer/?image_location=jkrtelegraph/telegraph_jkrbookaidclose.jpg

Updated given new information from the Black family tree - James and Sirius would be first cousins once-removed, if they were related.

[edit] Lily's picture

Can we please get a better picture of Lily? I distinctly remember seeing her, in full color- although possibly not in close-up, I'm a little fuzzy on details- in the beginning of the first film. That, and she looks psychotic in the one presently inhabiting the 'portrait spot'.

[edit] James, Lily, and Harry Section

Does fanon speculation on Snape's (potential) romantic interest in Lily Potter really belong here?

There's no canon or JKR interview I can recall which supports the idea of a romantic attraction between Snape and Lily (reciprocated or otherwise).

I thought I'd ask before simply editing it out.

-Sean

[edit] Did Lily or James work?

did either have a job?--Bohouse 22:34, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

I think there is JKR quote where she alludes to their occupations becoming important, so probably yes. Sandpiper 01:05, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

I've read that they may have been aurors, but I believe that was speculation. Michael 04:54, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] James a supporter of the dark arts, or pure blood supremacy?

The article seems to have gained a paragraph discussing James' views on these subjects when at school. I am not at all sure we know what his views were, or even how far they have been reported by others, i.e. Remus. it seems to me possible (though unlikely) that James looked down on Snape precisely because he was a half blood, and didn't care whether he was interested in the dark arts, the precise opposite of what the article now says. James seems to have had an evil streak when at school. Comments, anyone, before I change it myself? Sandpiper 01:03, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

also strikes me that if you read the books, snape is cast as the kid everyone likes to bully, and James as the kid who likes to do the bullying. Sandpiper

He strikes me as being an anti-Malfoy: rich, objectionable, and with a kneejerk reaction to anything he despises (the dark arts rather than muggles or the light). And if his mother was a Black, that would make sense: they have an obsession with the dark, and a hatred of muggles; he has an obsession with the light and a hatred of the dark (compare him with Sirius). We might speculate that he is Rowlings way of showing that 'the enemy of your enemy' is not necessarily your friend: that just because he is a 'good guy', we shouldn't ignore the fact that in some ways he is just as bad as the opposition.Michaelsanders 11:53, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Lily's birth month

May would be an appropriate birth month for Lily: its birth-stone is the emerald, and its flower is Lily of the Valley. Has Rowling ever given anything about when in the year Lily was born? Michaelsanders 22:50, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Lily's features

I am not intending to troll with this comment, nor do I believe that Harry Potter is "evil" or what have you. I simply found this interesting and wondered about peoples thoughts.

I was reading The Illuminatus! Trilogy last night when on page 117 of the first book when the characters are at a Satanic black mass, there is a line: "A black-draped altar stood in the center, and upon it lay the thirteenth member of the coven. She was a woman with red hair and green eyes—the traits which Satan supposedly relished most in mortal females. (There had been a time, Joe remembered, when any woman having those features was automatically suspected of witchcraft.)"

If this is the case, then did Rowling make Lily's hair and eye color reminiscent of what people used to think of witches? And if so, does anyone else find it a little weird that she would do that, seeing as how in her world witches aren't wives of Satan and evil creatures like puritans (in the past and now) believe? I dunno I just found it a bit odd that she would reflect an image of witchcraft which she is not aiming to imitate with her novels --insertwackynamehere 16:15, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

I can't say. But I would say that rowling has used many traditional stories and ideas in the books. If you are interested in the point, I would suggest trying to find where this information originally comes from. It may be that the information in 'Illuminatus' has already been twisted about a bit to suit that book. Rowling also needed to give Lily striking features (because Harry has to look like both her and his father), and maybe this appealed to Rowling. Now that you point it out, I would guess that you are probably right. Maybe In a year someone can ask Rowling this and it would be nice background in the article. I would judge that a properly sourced comment on witches traditionally having these features would be sensible content. Sandpiper 09:41, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

The whole red hair, green eyes is often seen through history as the symbols of a witch. Maybe check out articles like red hair, green eyes, and witches or something like that. I've seen lots of works of fiction with features like these, and they are often tied to witchcraft (or the version in the series) and the like. Disinclination 08:23, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Head Boy/Prefect

Moved this to the Talk Page. The sentence in question seems to say that its unknown whether they both were. Remus and James could have been prefects at different times. However, its possible that James was Head Boy, and Remus could have been a prefect at the same time, since, if they had to choose one prefect from each House, and a Head Boy and Girl, there was bound to be a (for example) Ravenclaw prefect and Ravenclaw Head Girl, etc, etc.

Well, we don't know. All we know is that Hogwarts appears to run a system whereby two prefects become Head Boy and Girl (e.g. Tom Riddle, Percy Weasley). And that Hagrid claimed Lily and James to be Head Boy and Girl in PS. But that in OotP, Lupin clearly states that he, not James, was the Prefect of their dormitory. Now we don't know how everything fell out. Maybe Lupin gave in his badge after the Werewolf Incident, maybe he was a Prefect whilst James was Head Boy, maybe he was sacked, etc. We don't know. All we know is that Lupin, not James, was dormitory prefect. But that, as things stand, James became Head Boy of their year. Since James has never been said to be a Prefect, we cannot say that he was, because we don't know enough about how the system functions. It is speculation to assume that because James was Head Boy, he must have been a Prefect. Michaelsanders 00:54, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

I am just attempting to make the distinction between Head Boy/Girl and Prefect, and the sentence assumes there was an error (which I don't think there is.) Disinclination 00:46, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

You certainly don't appear to: you appear to be suggesting that both Lupin and James served as Prefects. Michaelsanders 00:55, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

I am sorry for the confusion. But, in my half-hazaard(sp?) attempt to make sense, I was just trying to say that James could have been Head Boy, and Remus at the same time. Although yes, it would probably make sense that Remus would not have been. Problem is, we just don't know when Remus was a prefect. The wording of the sentence in the article, however, seems to assume that there was some sort of error in their respective 'ranks'. Thats why, when I did my second editing, I added in that Remus was also said to have been a prefect. Perhaps just add on something that lets the reader know that the chonrological order of James and Remus being prefects is unknown? Disinclination 01:16, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

But we don't even know if James was a Prefect, only Head Boy. Rowling has never said him to be a Prefect, only Head Boy. So, either it must be explained as that in the article, so the reader is not misled. Or, it should be left as it is, since that is how it stands in canon. And by the way, please take more time to write your messages, and construct them more carefully. Your last above is unclear in what you are trying to say. Michaelsanders 01:54, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

But then how could James have become Head Boy, if he wasn't a Prefect? Didn't you just say that to (supposedly) become a Head Boy, you needed to (supposedly) be a Prefect in the first place? Or were they completely seperate, in which when I made the edit to the article, is what I was trying to show? Disinclination 02:04, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm saying that we presume the two to be linked, but we don't know for certain. And your edit attempts merely give a false impression of the matter (you imply that both were Prefects, when we do not know this to be the case). Michaelsanders 02:33, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

But doesn't the current sentence give the impression that a House cannot have a Head Boy and a Prefect, and that they could possibly be the same? Disinclination 03:14, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

No, it says what we know to have happened: that Lupin was the Prefect, and that James was the Head Boy. Michaelsanders 12:11, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Cant a new Project named "Wikifiction" start and put all this thing in that.

This is bit odd to have fictional characters floating around in mainstream wikipedia....a new portal "Wikifiction" may be a better place. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 216.47.129.181 (talk • contribs) 15:39, 4 December 2006 (UTC).

Just my opinion, but such a project would be phenominally massive in size, and perhaps too general. Disinclination 04:32, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

"Such a project will be massive in size" .. thats exactly why we need "Wikifiction". -- patelgopal

You can use ~~~~ to sign your comments, by the way. :) And what I meant is... it would be kind of pointless. There is already a WikiNovel and a WikiHarryPotter or whatever. Such a WikiProject would be too large, and too generalized, I think. Disinclination 07:21, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

But why is it odd to have articles on HP in wiki main? wiki main is the sume of human knowledge, however rare, but this is even of interest to many. Sandpiper 15:57, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] James and Quidditch

Was James a chaser or a seeker? Zain Ebrahim 13:10, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

From the HP Lexicon: In the first film, James was said to be a Seeker (PS/f), but JKR stated that he was a Chaser in the second Scholastic interview. Yes, the editors are aware that on a summer's day when he was 15 he was fooling around with a Golden Snitch - much more effective to impress girls than a Quaffle, of course, and something that proves nothing about which position he actually played. JKR said in Sch2 that James was a Chaser, so until she explicitly says otherwise, her word goes. Hp Lexicon--T-dot (Talk | contribs) 16:06, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../j/a/m/Talk%7EJames_and_Lily_Potter_8bd9.html"