"The smallest worm will turn being trodden on..."

[sistermagpie]

I don't know what I really want to say here...it just occurred to me to ask

It's something I think recent H/D discussions have got me thinking of, because there's lots of reasons for liking different characters and those recent discussions kept making me think of Peter. I think it's got to do with what seems to be the most popular assumption that Harry is learning to ignore Draco by OotP, that he's beyond him, has bigger things to worry about, is growing out of him, and that this is part of his maturation.

That just makes me always think about Peter. Because of course it's good, as we grow up, not to allow ourselves to be distracted by things that will ultimately, you know, distract us from our real goal. But that doesn't seem to really ever be a problem Harry and Draco, whom he's felt above and beyond since book 1. More importantly, it's not what was going on with Peter. I guess a lot of people are really turned off by Peter's obvious fawning, but I think what appeals to me about it is that James falls for it and takes it for granted, and so what some people see as Peter being a big betrayer is more James being done in by his own flaw.

I guess this is a thing with me because I'm rather paranoid about the idea that you never know who is going to be the psycho. I mean, I trust my friends but I also tend to choose friends based on feeling they are trustworthy. And even then I don’t immediately think I should share everything vulnerable about myself just because we're friends-neither do they. Also, while on the one hand I think it's pointless to hold a grudge that keeps you yourself from being happy, I do adore stories where someone has a weak spot because they assumed only certain people deserved much thought or consideration. More than once people have told me I seem to "remember everything," and while I wouldn’t go that far I am often surprised at stuff other people forget about their lives...I also tend to not always make clear how I feel about somebody, so you can't always tell from the way I act. That is, if I run into somebody that I don’t like, I would probably still be polite and pretend to not have any bad associations with him or her. If I learn something they’ve done against me, I probably won’t tell them I know.

Of course, sometimes you can do something to someone without knowing it--like where you say something you think is completely normal and somehow the other person thinks you're picking a fight with them. At least once in my life somebody decided they absolutely hated me and I couldn't figure out why--I guess I don't strike myself as being someone to bother hating. Finally a friend of mine asked this girl (this was in high school) exactly why she hated me so much and she claimed it was because I--ahem!--told the whole school she was a slut! I was completely stunned--wtf? I had never said such a thing. It was just so bizarre, something I would never say about anyone. I might think somebody made a stupid decision about sex, but I'm about as non-Puritanical as I can get. I was probably more offended by the false statement about me than anything else. Ironically, I had in fact *defended* this person against that rumor because it just sounded like a dumb thing people say in high school that wasn’t true. I didn't do this to personally defend her against charges, understand, but merely out of my obsession with not turning speculation into fact. I defended her just like I'd defend a character whose actions were described inaccurately, even if I didn't like the character. Anyway, you can imagine my shock when it turned out I'd started the very rumor I didn't believe! But I was still glad I *knew,* because even if I did generally ignore her, I didn't dismiss her.

But back to Peter.:-) Maybe it's because I get so obsessive about these things myself, but I do always feel a certain satisfaction when a character gets it from somebody not because they were outright mean to them but because they were casually dismissive, especially when the character is "strong" and considers themselves so far above the other person. (I tend to draw a subtle distinction between somebody who bullies from a slightly different perspective, not because they are "better" but just that it doesn't give me the same satisfaction when they’re brought down.)

So that's why, in my twisted way, I just can't help but have a soft spot for Peter. The other Marauders scream about how he's scum, how he just sniffed around until he found somebody powerful to hide behind and then betrayed him. Well, yeah, he did hang around with more powerful people--but obviously you guys knew he was doing that too, only you enjoyed him looking up to you when you thought he was harmless. I guess there's just something in me that appreciates it when the characters designated as useless and worthless (I would not put Neville in that group, btw) trip somebody up. There's even the extra bonus of how ignoble it all is. Sirius Black taken down by the house elf who's been alternately ridiculed and pitied throughout canon--nobody took him seriously, and they paid for it (I, meanwhile, suspected something as soon as they couldn't find him at Christmas). Just because they sound ridiculous to you, doesn’t mean their less powerful. Dumbledore's final speech about Kreacher doesn't even really challenge this view, imo.

We don't know exactly how it went down with Peter. Whatever his reasons for throwing himself in with the Dark Side (and becoming perhaps the most effective Death Eater ever), I do like to think about how he framed it in his mind regarding James. Was he overcome with guilt, or was he secretly satisfied that the person everyone agreed could amount to nothing would be the one to change everything? Not only that, but once he gets James killed everybody thinks Sirius did it, because who could suspect Peter? Isn't he just useless? If their places had been reversed, I suspect Peter would have had a much better chance of convincing people he was innocent. James and Sirius were always the stars—even in the end. I guess this is also why I tend to like spies--people think of spies as being like Sean Connery or Tom Cruise, but of course real spies need to be the opposite. If people notice you, it's harder to spy. Much better to be a "grey man" who makes little impression and comes and goes invisibly. (George Smiley, for instance.)

Draco's obviously far louder than Peter...but I guess I would like to think this worm will turn in his own way, just as Kreacher and Peter did. The more confident the characters and fans are that this character's all figured out and can't possibly be any harm or help to our hero because Harry is stronger and smarter and better, the more I think, "La-la-la, nobody’s paying attention, you could do ANYTHING." Especially since this disdain colors interpretation of all of his scenes, just as I'm sure it would have colored Peter's scenes had we read MWPP-era canon. It's that lovely misdirection. Not the Snape kind, which broadcasts BADDIE when he's really good, or like Fake!Moody who tricks people into thinking GOODIE when he's really bad, but that wonderful assurance that this person's a joke, is harmless, is simple and weak and should be ignored, especially when at the same time there are often hints of him when he's not present, or roads lead to him, even if they're dead ends.

Turn, little worm, turn!

Comments

[cs-luis.livejournal.com]

Excellent points - I don't think about Peter nearly enough. I think he's much, much smarter than he lets on, though - witness his daring escape at the end of PoA. I'm very interested to see where he'll ultimately end up.

[tinderblast.livejournal.com]

I don't know, but I love this last line: Turn, little worm, turn!

*cuts out*

*sticks onto construction paper*

*pins to wall*

[glitterdemon.livejournal.com]

i just woke up, so i don't think i can be too terribly meta here, but i like your essay, esp. the points regarding the parallel between peter and draco.

what some people see as Peter being a big betrayer is more James being done in by his own flaw.

is it? see, i hate assigning blame, and i hate that others feel the need to do it. it always makes me feel like they're not reading the text properly (which i know you do, so i'm all, woe!). ootp actually make me love mwpp more simply for the fact that they're so human, and they each have/had flaws that led to the destruction of their little group. i don't deny that james' were part of this, but, you know, it's still a pretty fucked up thing to join the death eaters, no matter what your motivation, and it was peter's own choice to be the sycophant that he'd ever be in the position of either needing to prove himself or be the worm that turns.

The other Marauders scream about how he's scum, how he just sniffed around until he found somebody powerful to hide behind and then betrayed him. Well, yeah, he did hang around with more powerful people--but obviously you guys knew he was doing that too, only you enjoyed him looking up to you when you thought he was harmless.

i love this. 'tis all.

[ljash.livejournal.com]

This was so nifty.

I have to admit something I do, which is that the first time through reading the books I read them exactly as I'm intended to. I feel just what I'm supposed to (told to) feel, I see it all from Harry's (or JKR's, depending a little on the scene) point of view, and I only see the characters are they're supposed to be seen.

That's why the first time through I found them fun but largely uninteresting. An attractive world and fun writing but maybe a little repellent overall. It wasn't until I started getting into all these discussions that I really peeked around the corners and tried to figure out my own opinions of who was right and who was wrong.

So. Never gave a thought to Peter until right now. Am slightly embarrassed.

Actually, that's not wholly true. When we were looking at that flashback in the Pensieve, I felt a little bad for Peter. When he was described in PoA, everyone said he was that little guy who followed them around and worshipped them. As you said, he was useless and pitied. But actually seeing that in the Pensieve was different to me. They really did disregard him. He was just the toady sidekick for them.

And it is a little satisfying, isn't it? I did not suspect Kreacher while reading OotP--though that was partly because I found him kind of baffling. I wasn't sure what to make of both his attitude and Sirius's treatment of him. But I guess I assumed that, like Dobby, he couldn't turn on his master easily even if he hated him.

Kreacher and Peter were both pathetic, pitied or scorned. I don't know if Draco falls into the same category--though it's an interesting point that he should. He really can't do anything effective at all and never could. Yet he's still portrayed as someone who is supposed to look like he could be effective. We're not supposed to pity him. We do, but we're not supposed to. He's the straw man who's satisfying to punch. The fact that he can do nothing but be punched is supposed to stay hidden.

So might Draco come out of the woodwork suddenly and do something really damanging, something unexpected? I don't think so... because he keeps trying. He must fail, but he keeps trying. It would simply be that one of his plans, never really hidden, worked for once. He still worries the protagonists. He made himself and other Slytherins into the Umbridge Gestapo (can't remember what they were really called) and he was worrying for a little while. Doomed to failure and ineffectiveness, of course, but worrying enough to make for a little story conflict.

I'm not even sure I could write it otherwise in fanfic. Could you really have Draco being as much a loud pain in the ass as he is in canon and then have him do something as unexpected as the betrayals of Peter and Kreacher? We know he's a straw man, but Harry & Co. would also have to come to that opinion. And if they did, they might actually start to feel bad about their own participation in that little drama.

Now... if they saw this, felt bad, took in the Slytherins as allies in what will ultimately be a huge war where possibly everyone must unite, and then Draco carries out his final resentment and betrays everyone, well, that'd be fascinating. It'd also cause riots. :)

[earwurm.livejournal.com]

Peter Pettigrew appeared to worship James in OoP. It's hard to believe he was faking it. I wonder if James did anything specifically to shatter the illusion. The explanation that Peter gave to Sirius for his betrayal – that Voldemort was winning anyway – was pretty weak. I hope there was more to it than that.

The more confident the characters and fans are that this character's all figured out and can't possibly be any harm or help to our hero because Harry is stronger and smarter and better, the more I think, "La-la-la, nobody's paying attention, you could do ANYTHING."

Lol. Draco, Crabbe and Goyle are so obviously going to spend the summer improving their DA skills exponentially at Bootcamp for Evil Wannabees. It'll be interesting to see whether they will be smart enough to play dumb once they get back to Hogwarts. Draco's never been that good about keeping his mouth shut. Maybe his dad's incarceration will be enough to shock some sense into him

Big stupid Hagrid would make a fabulous worm. I love Hagrid. He comes within an inch of killing his students every year, and the general response in the books and in fandom is “ah... what a (huggable) lout. Pity he's so stupid.”

[playscape.livejournal.com]

Draco's obviously far louder than Peter...but I guess I would like to think this worm will turn in his own way, just as Kreacher and Peter did. The more confident the characters and fans are that this character's all figured out and can't possibly be any harm or help to our hero because Harry is stronger and smarter and better, the more I think, "La-la-la, nobody’s paying attention, you could do ANYTHING."

This was my thinking at the end of OotP: that Harry may be leading himself into a false sense of security where Draco is concerned. No matter what nonsense Draco spouts out, Harry's learned to never take him seriously because he's never proven himself a real, dangerous threat before. He's not afraid of him, even after Draco delivers the death threat: "You're dead Potter...I'm going to make you pay for what you've done to my father..." Harry's response is sarcastic: "Well, I'm terrified now." I'm not sure what plans JKR has for Draco, but I do think it's unwise of Harry to turn a blind eye where this enemy is concerned. Even if Harry doesn't consider Malfoy worth his time, doesn't consider him even worthy of being an enemy, he's not taking care to take Draco seriously. This is what nobody did to Peter. I'm wondering if we as readers are supposed to take Draco seriously, because if we are, Harry had better watch his back (which he isn't doing).

Great essay, as always!

[malafede.livejournal.com]

I was saying this (http://www.livejournal.com/users/debauchedferret/11733.html) in the far, far spring of 2002:

Oh Peter, Peter, Peter. How do I love thee? Let me count the ways. Slipperiest of the slippery creatures, first on the run for the Babysitter Of The Year award, canonical Voldemort slash (is that incest?), loving keeper of Nagini, killer of the spare, living proof that underestimating the teenage dirtbag Does. Not. Make. For a winner, and yet. People. Keep. Ignoring. You!

I also remember having a fic where Lucius had this line (to Draco): "They never saw you coming."

Clearly I was a smarter pie in my newbie days. ;)

a bit of a tangent

[millefiori.livejournal.com]

But that doesn't seem to really ever be a problem Harry and Draco, whom he's felt above and beyond since book 1.

I'm not sure I agree with this. In CoS Harry thinks enough of Draco to seriously consider that he's the Heir of Slytherin, and in PoA his first thought at the idea of spending the night in the hospital wing after the dementor attack was speculating/dreading Draco's reaction and thinking of it as "torture." Later in the same book he tells Oliver that he doesn't want any broom that Malfoy thinks is good. In GoF Draco manages to make Harry's life miserable with those badges and the stories he fed to Rita Skeeter. I think Harry was pretending it didn't bother him, but he was certainly stressed out about it--it was the reason he lost his temper with Cho. I think in GoF Harry still considered Draco a formidable, equal enemy. IMO it was the death of Cedric and the duel with Voldemort that changed Harry's perception of Draco, but it changed his perception of everything. And even at that, Draco still looms large in his mind as a sort of Bad Example.

That exchange at the end of OotP takes place right after Sirius' death, and another duel with Voldemort, and being told that he personally would have to either kill Voldemort or be killed by him. I can see why he would be dismissive of Draco at that point. What I kind of picked up from OotP was that Harry was too traumatized and self-absorbed to really give Draco much attention. (I mean, he certainly wasn't feeling dismissive when he attacked Draco after the Quidditch game!) The problem (from Draco's perspective, if he but knew it) is that he's still the nemesis he's always been to Harry, but Harry's got so many bigger, badder, more deadly enemies causing him pain that Draco's harm just isn't registering. It's like being attacked by wasps -- it's a real bitch and can make you miserable, but it doesn't seem like all that big a deal if it happens while you're being attacked by a pack of wolves.

Er...I hope I didn't misunderstand your point! I agree that Harry thinks he's a better person than Draco, but I think that up until the end of year 4, he considered Draco sort of an equal/opposite, if that makes sense.

And, as for your real point, I too get a little bit of satisfaction when a "loser" wins. As someone else said, Peter Pettigrew looks to me like one of the most competent and successful characters in the book. (And, whether James and Sirius helped him or not, he *did* manage the animagus transformation, which is supposed to be a rare and difficult skill.) Unfortunately for Peter, neither he nor his methods are sexy so people think he's lame. And lame people *can't* be competent, talented or successful.

[http://users.livejournal.com/_rp_zeal_/]

so I probably just threw that in as if I had written it out here!

I need to know the whereabout of this other H/D essay of yours!

Though I didn't experience a little "Ha,HA!" moment when Peter and Kreacher did James and Sirius in respectively, now come to think of it both were really well-written plot twists! As for Draco, I echo the sentiment that since I've been talking about him at great length for so long, I don't really know what to expect of him anymore. I'll think about it like... later.

[slinkhard.livejournal.com]

I was actually going to get into the similiarities between Draco and Peter, mainly based around the words used to describe them (um...ratty?) for one of the snarkery entries, but this is much better!
Took me a while to look at this, sorry. Too much meta scares me off at times (like I said once, it angers the blood, even yours, which I almost always agree with. GHRJKDUT STUPID BOOKS, STUPID FANDOM!111 ;)

I tend to draw a subtle distinction between somebody who bullies from a slightly different perspective, not because they are "better" but just that it doesn't give me the same satisfaction when they’re brought down.

I think 'revenge' fantasies of 'beating the bully at his/her own game' have to be incredibly well planned and executed. (Well, they don't have to, since crappy Hollywood films do them all the time, but for me to buy them, they do.)
Taking advantage of someone underestimating you is not the same as doing what was done to you (especially since 'beating a bully at his own game' usually involves doing something worse.)
It's kind of why I had a problem with the PoA!Movie - Hermione's GURL POWER!11 is presented as her 'getting her own back', when of course, since no-one hit her at all, she wasn't so much beating the bully at his own game than starting a new game altogether.
And there's something very smug and almost childish about it. Like in OotP. Much as I liked the Weasley is Our King song (the second version, I mean, although the first made me laugh!), it was very twee, like a Sweet Valley Twins story.
For James, as the bully figure, to be 'got back' by Snape, for example, in a proper revenge fantasy, Snape would have to do exactly what was done to him.
Otherwise, it's not bringing down the bully, it's becoming the bully.
And much as I like Snape, I'm very uncomfortable with the suggestions made by some of his fans that him say, becoming a Death Eater was justified (but then, I think that James will be featured in other books, along with MWP, and that he'll be more sympathetic, whereas there'll be more details and exploration of Snape's role as a Death Eater and what he did as one.)
Being a DeathEater is worse than a bully, imho, since DEs kill people.
Likewise, in an undoubtedly less serious, but still relevant situation: Hexing someone is worse than being a sneak, and punching someone is worse than a person verbally insulting another.
So, I don't see any of these situations as the bully getting their comeuppance, I see them as people who've identified themselves as victims lashing out.
(You made a great point once about everyone in the HP verse being either rescuer, victim or aggressor, and while I was discussing psychology with my mum the other day, she mentioned that this is actually a genuine theory of relationships. Think it's by someone called Capman? Anyway, there's a tidbit for you, if you didn't already know that.)

[slinkhard.livejournal.com]

Who started it isn't really an issue, and maybe neither is looking at what is worse (like hexing is worse than being a sneak, because in a different context being a sneak could be worse).

Oh totally. I mean more that while being a sneak could have horrible consequences (ask Peter! ;), worse than hexing, I think maybe I see it as 'worse' because the hexing is a reaction to the sneaking.
Like, I don't support or agree with stealing, and could definitely see how the consequences to it could be serious, I would think that say, executing someone for theft would be the 'worse' crime, because it's an over-reaction, whereas the first could be motivated by god knows what.
I think I'm coming back to motivations here - since we don't really know Marietta's or Draco's, they could be horrible or they could be pure and sweet (I doubt either somehow, although knowing JKR it'd be closer to the former) and said motivations are considered meaningless and unimportant; but we do know Hermione's in hexing Marietta.

Malfoy doesn't *have* to be turned into a ferret; Crouch wants to hurt him because he's angry at Lucius. It amazes me how people will still claim he did it because he just hates hexing from behind--hello? This is a Death Eater we're talking about.

Really? People think that he's just defending Harry and he hates 'stinky cowardly scummy' kids who hex from behind? God, the mind boggles.
Especially since it appears he struck from behind himself in order to transfigure him!
I had a problem with that as soon as I read it, because the message is so clearly hypocritical - you hate cowards? Then why incapacitate someone by making them small and helpless before punishing them? Really brave! (But then that's what I said about the snow scene in POA. I don't like the hexing or fights much more, but at least they're honest.)
So when Fake!Moody turned out to be 'bad', I was completely unsurprised, because what he said his motivations were and what they seemed to be to me differed so wildly from his very introduction. Ruined the twist a bit! ;)
I always saw that yeah, he hates Death Eaters who got away, and here's the image of one, getting into it with the very boy who's trust he has to win (well, he doesn't have to, but that's the stupidity of the plotting in GoF) - convenient! Everyone's impressed by Mad Moody, it would likely be fairly IC even from the real Moody, who also hates Death Eaters; and you've 'saved' Potter, who like a dog, happily licks your hand and trusts you completely from then on. Too easy, man!

Amazingly, none of the kids in the DA are bright enough to object to it either--"Excuse me, are you telling me that you secretly cursed me when I signed a parchment? Like if I told my cat about the club I would have been hexed?" Instead they take the short-sighted, rather dumb view that they could never have been in Marietta's position--which is the same view all of the WW seems to have about law in general.

Heh-heh. Mrs. Whiskerson knows alllllll my secrets! And of course, what if you want to invite someone new to this great club?
That's the really pathetic thing about the DA - if Hermione had told them? Most of them probably wouldn't have minded!
And yeah, the fact they can all feel so safe around Hermione, Harry, Hagrid, Moody and even Dumbledore because after all, they don't endanger/attack/hate me.
Not yet! Do you really think that if Ravenclaw had beaten Gryffindor in PS, that Dumbledore wouldn't have done exactly the same?
Do you really think that if one of Hagrid's beasts went for a Hufflepuff, that he'd accept full responsibility?
Do you really think that you're going to be exempt from a hexing if Harry loses his temper with you?
OotP kind of blew a hole in the idea that the other houses are the smarter ones. *sniff*

[slinkhard.livejournal.com]

In fact, that seems to be wishful people on a lot of peoples' parts who don't like this character-it's exactly what Harry *wants* to happen, and how often does he get that?

Oh yeah. Wouldn't it be fantastic if everyone's enemy was recognised as scum by the rest of the world, and everyone loved us and cheered us on while they slunk off, humiliated? Classic wish fulfillment.

If Malfoy were just a minor annoyance Harry had grown beyond, he wouldn't have been kicked off of Quidditch. If people didn't already think most of the things Malfoy says, nobody would listen to him--Malfoy has been clearly shown to *not* be particularly convincing in himself (if he were he'd have convinced the school Harry *wasn't* the Heir of Slytherin). He's not Saruman with his honey tongue. He simply has a knack for picking up on the hidden fears and thoughts people already have and using them against them.

Well, exactly. Much like Umbridge and Peter succeeded not by direct attack, but by taking advantage of flaws already inherent in the enemy.
Umbridge without the Inquisitorial Squad would have been banished a lot quicker, imho, not because they were particularly competent or impressive, but because they prevented the entire school from uniting together.
And Umbridge wouldn't have been able to sway the Squad and it's members if they hadn't already been dissatisified by Dumbledore's way of running things.
Likewise, Peter couldn't have betrayed James if James hadn't underestimated him to begin with. If everyone respected Peter, he wouldn't have been able to trick them.
People wouldn't believe rumours about Harry in CoS or GoF or OotP if they didn't already doubt him (of course, so far everyone who doubts Harry has been proved to be a gullible fool, but cross your fingers...) and really, why shouldn't they? They don't know him that well, and he's not the most friendly person.
Likewise, that crack about being second best to Ron wouldn't have bothered Harry if he didn't already feel that way.

But he didn't need to say anything to get Harry bunged up about it. When Harry is determined not to be like James what's the first thing that gets in his way? Wanting to see Malfoy upsidedown.

And pantless, presumably?
Sorry, I couldn't resist!
There's very little effort Draco has to expend at all, really. And it works for all the Gryffindors too - witness their reaction to his cheating in POA, Ginny's sob after the diary remark, Neville's to that thing about St. Mungoes.
There's the whole fanon thing of Draco is obsessed with taunting, and while there's tons of evidence for it, and like most characters, his motivations tend to revolve around Harry, he doesn't even need to be focussing on Harry. I mean, he disappears for screeds of OotP, and when he appears I woke up he doesn't need to exert himself. Of course, he can, and does.
But even something fairly innocous works!

Seems fans want to have it both ways with Draco, that he's beneath notice but also a righteous target for evil-bashing.

Oh, completely. And this is a point I made after the last JKR interview: if you don't like someone? Don't mention them.
Not because I'm a proponent of the whole 'Say something nice or don't at all, no-one should ever be negative' ideal, but because nothing starves a character quicker than no attention.
Despite my criticism of the books, I've always believed that they'll turn out well by my standards - that the characters I like will be dealt with in a way that will make me happy, or at least, satisfied.
And yet, I doubted this a lot more when JKR never mentioned my favourites from one year to the next than I do now that she brings them up regularly, even if it is negatively.
A lot of fans, seems irritated by people blowing up Draco, for example, beyond his importance.
The smartest ones simply don't write him, or about him at all.
The ineffectual ones rant constantly and achieve exactly what they were complaining about in the first place: people discussing him.
Thinking Draco's the AntiChrist is giving him as much power as thinking he's Prophecy Boy; and while I've seen tons of people venture ideas on his purpose, I think the overestimation is coming from the h8rs ;) rather than the fangirls.

[chresimos.livejournal.com]

Hee - the Wormtail love! Your reasons for liking him are much different from mine, but nevertheless - I see what you mean about the insignificant characters coming back to get you. *takes a moment to envisage final showdown between the Creevey bros and Stubby Boardman for the fate of all wizardkind* I think you really have a point with the idea that our dismissal of Draco is blinding us to some future crucial plot or character event; I'd never thought of it that way before, and, yeah. And of course, real spys have to be the people you don't notice, suspect - so Peter was a really great spy.

What's even more interesting is that I was always disposed to think of Peter as a completely useless, insignificant, one-dimensional character, until I stopped to think about it! The man had some insane skills - whether JKR meant to do that, or whether it's just a byproduct of some necessary plot structures, I don't know.

And I view the demise of Peter not so much in terms of comeuppance to James and Sirius, but...you can at least feel a little sympathy for him, a kid who had friends who didn't seem to really care about him, beyond his use as James' personal ego-booster (a cynical view of MWPP, to be sure, but, I mean, there's elements of that even in the most happy scenario - though I don't think that's the reason he betrayed them, or anything).

Hmmm, old Voldemort seems to have a pull on these alienated, lonely individuals; thinks I of Peter, Snape, or Crouch...can't imagine that the home life was all rollicking good times for Regulus, either. I wonder if Lucius or some of the other DEs have really well-adjusted social skills to balance the rest out? Or something other else...