Worst Characters in Harry Potter?
Vent your rage (politely) against the characters you most dislike in the Harry Potter fandom. (Obviously, Snape is not included, haha!) Leave logic, restraint, and objectivity at the door! (Or not.)
This woman.
*clenches fists*
I hate Dolores Umbridge for many reasons. She undoubtedly represents the officiousness and selfishness you can often find in bureaucracies. She uses people as a means to an end. Worst of all, she hates freedom of speech and thought. Plus her sadism towards Harry with that scarring quill was some evil stuff.
Man, I hate this woman! More on this to come.
Great thread, and of course, I agree with you about Umbridge. She's the WORST.
You know who else was the worst? James fucking Potter. Just look at his smug ass, spoiled rich kid face:
What the fuck, James? You had everything. Loving parents. Loyal friends. You were adored by everyone, never wanted for anything, and still, that wasn't enough. You had to bully someone who wasn't half as fortunate as you, ultimately driving away his closest, most beloved friend. Not just his closest, but the only real friend he'd ever had. Then, to add insult to injury, you went and took her for yourself. Could've had anyone, but no! You just had to pour salt in that wound, all while lying your ass off to get what you wanted.
Yes, Lily was almost an adult. She had agency, blah blah blah. But would she have married (or even dated) your sorry ass if she'd ever discovered the truth? I guess we'll never know, and for that I say, "Fuck you, James Potter". Fuck your selfishness, your manipulation, and fuck you for pretending to be the golden boy when you were anything but.
Also (I know this is petty, but it needs to be said)…
Teenage Severus was WAY better looking than you.
I hate James Potter more than Voldemort, Umbridge, Pettigrew, etc. (list any other characters, and I'll say that I hate James more); I'm also not a fan of the Marauders, and I'm listing them here as well. My problem isn't just that he was a spoiled bully who had everything could have possibly wanted to get any girl he wanted, and it's not just that he drove a wedge between Severus and Lily and later won her over; I have two major problems with him.
- Despite having served many detentions, as shown in the books during one of Harry's detentions with Professor Snape, we see no meaningful punishment for his (and his friends') misdeeds, and he gets away with the most severe breaches of wizarding law because reasons.
- He is an idiot.
Now, I can possibly understand how he became a bully, but if anything, it makes it worse. According to the Wizarding World website, for the section mentioning Fleamont Potter, it's said that Fleamont was a skilled duelist due to the number of times other students mocked him for his name. This means that Fleamont wasn't afraid to get violent when called names, or mocked in general, and it's possible that he told James this at some point to tell him that he shouldn't let other people walk over him. If this is the case, then not only did James interpret this in the worst possible way, but he also became the very sort of person who bullied his father (Snivellus).
I'm going to get into the Werewolf Incident, just to highlight how James and friends aren't held to the same standards as Severus is; in addition, this is to draw attention to the flaws of Sirius and Remus (the former of whom I don't like too much, but I can understand more). The short version: Severus notices Remus going into the tunnel, Sirius tricks Severus into going in on the night of the full moon, James rushes in and saves Severus, and Dumbledore forces Severus into silence. This isn't in any particular order:
- Sirius wanted to scare Severus a bit, so he either didn't think the latter was in any danger, or he didn't care, or if he wanted him to die; this depends on how well-sealed the Shack was, and whether or not the other Marauders had become Animagi or even found a way to open the Shack at this point. There are two possibilities, and either one of them paints either James or Sirius in a worse light:
- If the Shack was sealed, and Severus wasn't in any danger, then James never saved Severus.
- If the Shack wasn't sealed, then Severus was in danger, and Sirius deserves to go to Azkaban (even if Severus didn't die). At best, it's endangerment; at worst, it's depraved-heart murder. In addition, assuming the Shack wasn't sealed, Remus is equally culpable to this, as he knew the Shack wasn't secure and that his friends knew (possibly).
- Dumbledore forced Severus into silence, and yet rumors still spread that James had saved Severus, to the point where Lily hears about it. This means that someone (either James or Sirius) wasn't forced into secrecy, and that said person talked about the incident. Alternately, they were forced, didn't care, and weren't punished for it (which is fair, considering the danger it poses to Remus).
Not to mention that there's no textual evidence, outside of James's best friends (one of whom is a known liar), to suggest that James stopped bullying. I can believe that he stopped randomly hexing students in the hallways, and I can believe he deflated his ego a bit; however, I can also believe that, with a less inflated ego, he would understand the concept of negative consequences, and he would start hiding his behavior by not only cutting down on the number of people he bullied, but also by specifically targeting Severus (who is, rightly, incredibly biased against him).
With that out of the way, I'll go on to something that has been talked about, but from a different angle: the Secret-Keeper. The short version: James and Lily have to go into hiding, they reject Dumbledore's offer to be Secret-Keeper, and they ultimately choose Peter as Secret-Keeper at Sirius's suggestion. Oh boy, this is something, all right:
- James's reason for rejecting Dumbledore's offer was that he trusted his friends. Well, he trusted Sirius, and he didn't think that Peter would betray him. But he doesn't trust Remus, or at least Sirius doesn't. Neither one of them thinks that Peter is significant enough to be targeted by Voldemort, which shows how highly they viewed their friend.
- Also, James and Lily, knowing that he and his wife are being targeted, are pretty lax about keeping their wands on them at all times, even if they're taking care of their son.
Anyway, I've gone on long enough on this, and I think I hit everything I wanted to hit.
I love this analysis, and I agree with every point. You also brought up a couple of things I've never really thought about it (i.e. Fleamont), further emphasizing James's callousness and entitlement. I personally believe that his personality was that of a classic abuser and almost certainly a narcissist, something I plan to explore in depth in a future meta/blog post.
As for Peter Pettigrew… as old as it sounds, I find it easier to empathize with him than any of the other Marauders. I know the things he did were despicable, and I'm certainly not excusing them, but I can understand what drove him to that point. Like Severus, he was used and abused and taken for granted. Maybe he wasn't bullied, but the obvious contempt that James and Sirius have for him was abuse of a different sort. You're correct about why he was chosen as Secret Keeper. It was an insult, and I'm sure he knew that when he was cast in that role.
I'd like to get more into Remus/the werewolf incident, but I'll have to save that for later. For now, I'll just reiterate what I said in my previous post, which is "Fuck James Potter."
My most hated characters in descending order are Umbridge, Greyback, James, Fudge, Percy, Voldemort, Dumbledore, Peter, Sirius, Remus.
Worst in the sense of personality? Umbridge. Worst written character? Peter Pettigrew. The series tries to convince us that Peter is a mediocre wizard at best, but he is incredibly competent when judging his actual actions. There is a rather glaring discrepancy there.
Quote from FIQ on February 5, 2023, 7:38 pmThe series tries to convince us that Peter is a mediocre wizard at best, but he is incredibly competent when judging his actual actions. There is a rather glaring discrepancy there.
The books tend to do that with a few characters when it comes to show vs. tell, and there's a few ways to read it regarding Peter:
- Rowling was inconsistent with her characterization of certain characters and retroactively made it make sense, or at least tries to.
- The inconsistency is based on the perspective of Harry and other characters, and so there's more credence to the idea that the inconsistent character in question is simply misjudged by others (i.e. Peter is perceived as mediocre despite his feats).
- It might be that Peter views himself as inferior, and this influences how other people perceive him.
- It might be that Peter is intentionally hiding his true nature and playing into his cowardice, thereby distracting people from what he can actually do and making him significantly more dangerous.
Quote from The Gestalt Prince on February 5, 2023, 7:51 pm
The books tend to do that with a few characters when it comes to show vs. tell, and there's a few ways to read it regarding Peter:
- Rowling was inconsistent with her characterization of certain characters and retroactively made it make sense, or at least tries to.
- The inconsistency is based on the perspective of Harry and other characters, and so there's more credence to the idea that the inconsistent character in question is simply misjudged by others (i.e. Peter is perceived as mediocre despite his feats).
- It might be that Peter views himself as inferior, and this influences how other people perceive him.
- It might be that Peter is intentionally hiding his true nature and playing into his cowardice, thereby distracting people from what he can actually do and making him significantly more dangerous.
This was always my impression, especially during his altercations with Severus Snape as he is mistrustful of Snape, tries spying on him, and understands that gaining damaging information is the best way to restore his standing with Lord Voldemort.
I do think that Peter is really not as incompetent as generally believed and I put the following points for this argument:
- He became an animagus at age of 15 which is an impressive achievement. I do find his form best among the marauders due to its usefulness.
- I believe he was the potioneer among his friends because he brewed the Voldemort's recurrection potion, a responsibility he wouldn't have taken if he was incompetent in it.
- He was quite useful while making the map. While most of the spellwork was done by the his friends, he was vital in mapping out the hidden and small passageways due to his rat form.
- He was able to kill 13 muggles with a single blasting spell and implicate Sirius simultaneously which was a feat.
- He was able to fool Weasleys for 14 years and avoided detection from the map when it was in possession of the twins.
- He was able to brew the resurrection potion correctly, cast the killing curse and sacrifice his hand willingly.
In my assessment of his character, his actions actually came from self-preservation not cowardice and he was anything but incompetent.
