A Gleam in the Darkness

[cornflower_o_shea]

No: HPFGUIDX 31305

--- In HPforGrownups at y..., dfrankiswork at n... wrote:
>  Likewise, it's not clear what is needed to activate the 
>protection - it works against Quirrell, but, for example, would it 
>work against any use of AK?  Any person who hates Harry touching 
>any case, the two cases (Quirrell touching and Voldemort's original 
>AK) do not seem completely parallel.  And could Harry (and Riddle) 
>be wrong?  That is to say, the mother's-love protection was active 
>in the case of Quirrell, but something else was responsible for 
>protecting Harry when Voldemort originally attacked him.  

"P-P-Potter,' stammered Professor Quirrell, grasping Harry's 
hand, 'can't tell you how p-pleased I am to meet you.' (p.55 
Raincoast PS)

As we can see, before Voldie comes to reside in Quirrell's head he 
is able to touch Harry just fine, so I'm assuming that the burning 
has more to do with Voldie's presence than you suggest. By the way, 
did you notice in the movie how Quirrell doesn't touch Harry? Hmm...

Also, (she says as an off topic aside), JKR seems to be having a 
little fun with the language here, because Quirrell really CAN'T 
tell Harry how pleased he is to meet him, can he? 

Cheers!
- Cornflower O'Shea

ps. I like the mother/mother theory, especially coming from a single 
Mom. Since the power of motherhood seems like an obvious theme to 
come up with from a mom, wouldn't its corrolory, the destructive 
potential of motherhood, come up too? What mother hasn't fleeting 
thought, "Oh my god, what am I doing to this child" from time to 
time. ;)