| Author | Comment | ||
|---|---|---|---|
k myrtle m |
Re: ... | ||
deb est la |
Re: ... | ||
|
I started reading that article Keziah..
But I am weird, I couldn't continue after they misspelled Tolkien. ----------------
[18:18] astrocast00: what? you don't like cornflakes! That is unamerican! oh wait.... :-P [18:18] debofone: lol |
|||
k myrtle m |
Re: ... | ||
Padfoot1 |
Re: ... | ||
CuteScottyboy2006 |
|||
|
Yes that was a great post. I think what was meant though was that Pettigrew was never HARRY'S friend but he was James's. So he betrayed his friend and
hid his friends son but he probably did not really have a relationship with Harry at that age really and could never have been classed as Harry's friend at
any point in his life. He WAS however,supposed to be James's friend and therefore he did betray the trust and loyalty James had placed in him. Harry never
trusted or was loyal to the traitor Pettigrew and was never his friend. Pettigrew betrayed the trust and friendship of James. That's why it was James that
he was said to have betrayed. He endangered the life of Harry and committed an unforgivable act against him but it is James who he had the long relationship
with and was childhood friends with e.t.c,and James's wife and son who he was endangering along with him but he wasn't BETRAYING Harry because Harry
was just a baby and he wouldn't really have known Harry to betray him. He knew James and Lilly. What he did to Harry may have been worse than what he did
to bring about the deaths of James and Lilly,you can argue that yes,but the word betrayal is more suited to James and Peter than to Harry.
|
|||