TBAY: Minerva McGonagall Is Ever So Evil!

[porphyria_ash]

No: HPFGUIDX 39557

Porphyria has settled into a squashy purple chair in Diana's castle, nursin=
g her tumbler 
of scotch. She is eagerly awaiting Eloise's return from that celebrity mass=
aging gig so 
she can tell her all about the ever spikier Evil!McGonagall hedgehog, and a=
ll the new 
recruits to the McGonagall flavored SUCCESS variation. While she lounges ar=
ound, she 
gets two more missives:

Arcum, on a completely different subject, has reminded us of the PoA Christ=
mas dinner:

<<
Incidentally, (and off the topic of Sirus), one scene in PoA that 
has been bothering me is on Christmas day, when they sit at the 
common table for dinner. Trelawney makes a big deal about how 
unlucky it is for 13 people to dine together. Traditionally, the 
number 13 being unlucky dates to the last supper, and when we are 
dealing with a scene on Christmas day, I have to wonder if a betrayal
coming from one of the people at the table is being foreshadowed 
here.

OTOH, it just occurred to me that Hermione betrays Harry about the 
Firebolt on the next page, so it may not be that major. Still, that 
seems minor for an analogy to Judas, so for reference, the people 
at the table were: Dumbledore, McGonagall, Snape, Sprout, Flitwick, 
Filch, Trelawney, Harry, Ron, Hermione, 2 extremely nervous first 
year students(one of whom is named Derek), and a sullen-faced 
Slytherin fifth year student.
>>

All the proof I need! See, I've already pointed out that McGonagall is very=
 actively 
trying to discredit Trelawney. This scene especially. ("Tripe, Sibyll?") An=
d I too dismiss 
Hermione's spilling the beans about the Firebolt as anything even remotely =
resembling a 
betrayal; she's worried about Harry's safely. So if McGonagall is actively =
bristling at the 
suggestion that 13 could be unlucky and Arcum is right that this portends a=
 Judas-style 
betrayal by one of the 13, could that person be...Evil!McGonagall? Oh, perh=
aps yes. 

Porphyria eagerly peruses the second missive from Errol, who posts a brilli=
ant idea about 
how LV could have infiltrated Dumbledore's ranks in the last war and placed=
 
McGonagall in the idea position to take over once Dumbledore is incapaciate=
d. But Errol 
has a slight hesitation:

<<
About the only niggle I get is: Why would Voldmort need Fake! Moody 
in the first place, since Evil! McGonagall was already in perfect 
position? Does he not know about Minerva then? Is she ever-so-loyal 
to Voldmort without actually letting him know she's on board? Why is 
she not in the circle with the Death Eaters or mentioned as absent? 
Are ALL death Eaters required to attend the call
or are there some 
extra special ones that only meet him one on one?
>>

Because if McGonagall really is the infiltrator then she is *very* deep und=
er cover and 
LV would not want to risk her blowing it. Even if Harry gets killed, LV wou=
ld still have 
Dumbledore to worry about; he is scared of him, yes? So he needs her to sta=
y in place 
until all is finally over. And these kill-Harry missions are dangerous. Qui=
rrell got sizzled, 
Barty got stunned, veritaserumed and soul-sucked. McGonagall's mission coul=
d be to just 
sit tight, observe Dumbledore's operation and not reveal her true self unti=
l the final battle 
(hopefully involving lava and -- ooouch -- a catwalk!). And this would be e=
xactly why LV 
does not mention her to the other DEs in the graveyard: she's his secret we=
apon and 
there are some pretty dim DEs out there who might spill something like that=
. Since she 
works at Hogwarts, she's probably exempt from being summoned anyway since s=
he'd 
have a hard time apparating around. Plus, as I've suggested, she might have=
 been 
Tom's old squeeze; he probably cuts her some slack the other DEs don't get.=
 She could 
be extra special indeed. 

~~Porphyria, contemplating a pet hedgehog of her own