Quirrell Is Ever So Evil (WAS BIG PROBLEM WITH FOURTH MAN! HELP!)

[cindysphynx]

No: HPFGUIDX 38168

Hana wrote (about whether Quirrell was a DE):

> I thought I agreed with this then I checked the book and I'm not so 
>sure -- Quirrell is probably one of the dead DEs.  He says to Harry 
> "I met him [Voldemort] when I travelled around the world.  A 
>foolish young man I was then, full of ridiculous ideas about good 
>and evil.  Lord Voldemort showed me how wrong I was. . .Since then, 
>I have served him faithfully. . ." (PS 211)
> 
> I could be wrong, but that sounds like he was converted into being 
>a DE.  

Good heavens!  What's this?  Canon?  Someone is citing actual 
*canon*?  Uh oh.

<pulls PS/SS out from under bed, flips pages frantically>

Gee.  It says exactly what Hana says it says.  Does this mean that 
Voldemort is referring to Quirrell as the Third Dead DE?

Well, it could be.  But I think Quirrell is exaggerating there a bit 
in PS/SS.  You know, maybe a bit of puffing to highlight his own role 
in Voldemort's organization.  Or, at the very least, Voldemort has a 
very different view of who is and who is not a loyal DE. 

In GoF, Voldemort gets all chatty in the graveyard, and he indicates 
he is a bit annoyed that his DEs cut and ran when the Plot To Kill 
The Potters backfired:

"I settled in a faraway place, in a forest, and I waited . . . . 
Surely, one of my faithful Death Eaters would try and find me . . . 
one of them would come and perform the magic I could not, to restore 
me to a body . . . but I waited in vain."

Now, it seems to me that if Quirrell really were a DE when Voldemort 
fell, Voldemort wouldn't have suggested that all of his DEs hung him 
out to dry.  

Then, Voldemort reminisces about Quirrell's happy midnight stroll 
through the Albanian forest:  "A wizard -- young, foolish, and 
gullible -- wandered across my path in the forest I had made my 
home."  Voldemort mentions that Quirrell "was easy to bend to my 
will."  And what is Voldemort's preferred method of bending wizards 
to his will?  I mean, besides the Cruciatus Curse.  That's right, the 
Imperius Curse!

So that gives us Imperius Quirrell, not Ever-So-Evil DE Quirrell.  I 
think I'm sticking with the idea that Quirrell wasn't a proper DE, or 
as a fall-back position, that Voldemort doesn't consider Quirrell a 
proper DE.  Voldemort just considers Quirrell and his turban a warm 
and cozy place -- a grotesque sort of marsupium.

Hana wrote:

>Skipping over the dead DEs for now, we have (1)the "one too cowardly 
>to return" (Karkaroff since he sold out other DEs then fled rather 
>than going back to Voldemort) (2) "One who I believe has left me for 
>ever" If this isn't Snape I don't know who it could be.  It 
>certainly describes him.  (3) "one, who remains my most faithful 
>servant, and who has already re-entered my service" Crouch Jr.  

Ah, yes.  But we have to guard our flanks against the possibility 
that there are other evil DEs -- DEs who are still out there and who 
could fit one or more of the three categories.  Secret Evil DEs are 
everywhere, you know.  The place is *thick* with them!  Their 
potential evilness makes Voldemort's graveyard speech much more 
difficult to sort out.

One too cowardly to return could be Karkaroff, Snape, Bagman (yes, I 
think Bagman is an Ever So Evil DE, but don't get me started), or 
Fudge (yes, I think Fudge is Ever So Evil, but don't get Dicentra 
started).

One who has left forever could be Bagman, Karkaroff, Snape, or maybe 
Fudge (but probably not Fudge, because Fudge is Evil To The Core And 
Not About To Change).

One who remains my most faithful servant could be Crouch Jr. or 
Snape.  And if you think Voldemort doesn't wish to blow Crouch Jr.'s 
cover of having died in Azkaban, then maybe, just maybe, Voldemort is 
doing a bit of misdirection in the graveyard . . . well, then that 
leaves Ever So Evil Snape.

Hana again:
 
> As for the three dead, I know we've got Rosier, probably Quirrell, 
>and Number 3 which brings us back to the same old argument.  I 
>personally never thought about this until I read it today, but 
>knowing how JKR tends to foreshadow things, it could be someone 
>mentioned in a future book.  It could also be an error on her 
>part ::shrugs::  

JKR make an error?  I'm sorry, I don't know what you mean there.  ;-)

Well, Rosier and Wilkes are both definitely dead DEs.  Now, I don't 
think I want to say that Rookwood is dead, because in Ever So Evil 
Moody, Rookwood is the reason Moody is so jumpy. I need Rookwood 
alive and peeved at Alastor Moody.

But then again, why does Voldemort fail to mention Mulciber and 
Rookwood?  Could they be dead?  Or . . . or . . . could they be 
*innocent*?  Well, could they?

Cindy (nominating Hana for the Order of the Flying Hedgehog for her 
excellent work on Ever-So-Evil Quirrell)

[Messages 34,622, 35,657 and 36,829]