[HPforGrownups] Re: Harry's Friends/ Tempting Harry / DADA teachers/ Wand woods/ Percy

[Carol Bainbridge]

No: HPFGUIDX 43802

Richelle said:

>I really don't see Harry as close to any of his dormmates, considering how
>much time they must spend together.  Other than Ron, of course.
>Particularly Neville.  If he were close to Neville, surely he'd have thought
>to ask him about his parents at some point?  Seeing as Harry felt rather
>ashamed that he'd never asked when he found out from Dumbledore, I get the
>impression if they'd have been closer he would have.

I'm not so sure about that.  That seems to be from a female point of view, 
but boys friendships are always the same.  For instance, at one point 
(sorry, I forget exactly where), Harry is upset and Ron asks him if he 
wants to play Quidditch.  Hermione thinks this is terribly insensitive of 
Ron, but Harry agrees to it.  It's just what Harry wants.  I really don't 
think boys and girls friendships are the same.  Of course, this doesn't 
prove that Harry WAS close to his dormmates, just that his not having asked 
Neville about his parents isn't proof that he's NOT.

>Carol writes:
>
> > I didn't like it when Mrs. Weasley turned on Hermione.  On one level it
> > was rather humorous, but I didn't like what it said about Mrs. Weasley.
> > On the other hand, I think Molly knows Harry better than she knows
> > Hermione, Harry having spent more time with the Weasleys than Hermione
> > has.  Also, I'm sure Molly feels more protective toward Harry than toward
> > Hermione since Harry lost his parents while Hermione still has hers.
>
>The way I saw it was that no one, not even someone she seemed to like, such
>as Hermione, is going to stand between Molly and Harry.  She will protect
>him against whatever and whoever.  Regardless.  She didn't really care that
>Hermione was one of Harry's best friends, if there was even the most remote
>chance that what was said was true, she was going to side with Harry.

I think we're saying the same thing here.  I said that Molly was quite 
protective of Harry and I provided a reason.  Was there something different 
you were trying to say?  Or were you just agreeing?

>Constance Vigilance writes:
> > My understanding was that Quirrel was the DADA teacher, and
> > presumably a good one, for some years until he decided to go on
> > sabbatical for some practical experience - with the results we all
> > know. Then after he came back as Quirrelmort, we don't know how many
> > years prior to Harry's introduction that he taught at Hogwarts.

Couple things here:  First, I don't think Quirrell came back from his 
journeys as Quirrellmort.  I don't think he became Quirrellmort until 
later.  For one thing, when Harry meets Quirrell at the Leaky Cauldron, 
Quirrell is able to touch Harry with no problem -- they shake hands.  There 
is also no description of his turban until Harry sees Quirrell again at the 
feast after the sorting.  It reads, "Harry spotted Professor Quirrell, too, 
the nervous young man from the leaky cauldron. He was looking very peculiar 
in a large purple turban."  Not "his" purple turban, or "the" purple 
turban, but "a" purple turban, which indicates that Harry had not seen this 
turban before.  The word choice seems to indicate that the turban is a new 
addition.  I think that Voldemort attached himself to Quirrell AFTER Harry 
met him at the Leaky Cauldron, possibly because Quirrell failed to retrieve 
the PP/SS from Gringott's.  In addition, the description of Quirrell quite 
clearly states that he is a *young* man.  How young is young?  Dunno.

Second, Hagrid simply says to Harry that Quirrell had a "brilliant mind" 
and was "fine" while he was "studyin' outta books."  I too took this to 
mean that he had been teaching, but that isn't necessarily true.  One 
reason I assumed that to be true is that I don't know why else Hagrid would 
know anything about Quirrell unless Quirrell was at Hogwarts.  Of course, 
he could have learned that Dumbledore just hired a brilliant young man, 
etc., but then if Quirrell was new at the start of the year, he was already 
a stuttering nervous wreck.  Would Dumbledore have hired a person who 
appears to be afraid of his own subject?

Constance Vigilance continues:
> > Presumably, he was there for at least one year previous, because
> > Percy was familiar with him. Based on teaching at Hogwarts for a few
> > years, then going on sabbatical for a few years, then teaching at
> > Hogwarts again for at least two years, we can assume that Quirrel is
> > likely older than he looks. Basically, I'm disputing the theory that
> > Quirrel is young.

Richelle counters:
>Technically speaking, let's theorize for a moment that Quirrell was Snape's
>age.  35.  He'd have been out of school for 17 years.  Suppose he wanders
>around doing whatever wizards do for five years.  Then gets on at Hogwarts.
>He could still have been teaching there for 12 years.  That's a good bit of
>experience.  And I think it was stated somewhere that he took a year off
>(one, not more) to have some real world experience.  Which makes me think he
>didn't have much real world experience to begin with.

Me:
I agree with you.  I think it's unlikely that Quirrell has much experience 
at all.   And it is just one year that he took off.  Hagrid says to Harry: 
...then he took a year off ter get some first-hand experience."  He added 
that Quirrell hasn't been the same since: "...scared of the students, 
scared of his own subject ..."  From that I'd guess that Quirrell has been 
back from his studies for at least one year, or else how would Hagrid know 
Quirrell was afraid of students?  But I don't see anything that makes it 
obvious he was back for more than that.  He may have been, but we can't 
know that.  All that still points to a pretty young Quirrell.  And as a 
side to a previous discussion -- the lack of experience and reliance on 
*book learning alone* comes across as not such a good thing.

Olivia said:
> > A Slytherin may be known for ambition, but from what we've
> > seen, it's blind ambition. They'll do anything and everything to get what
> > they want whereas Percy wants to succeed, but he'll do it by following the
> > rules.

Richelle replied:
>I think that's the key difference between Gryffindor Percy and the
>Slytherins.  Slytherins will "use any means to achieve their ends."  Percy
>is a stickler for rules. Of course, he's got himself in a bit of trouble
>now, as his boss has turned up dead.  We'll see if he stays that way or not.

I think I agree.  I got the impression that the Slytherins are a rather 
Machiavellian lot. Percy is ambitious, but not so ambitious that he would 
do anything to get ahead.  He is more likely to be exceedingly sycophantic 
and hard-working.  Then again, that's not terribly Gryffindor-ish 
either.  Strikes me more as Hufflepuff-ish, especially the hard-working part.



Carol Bainbridge
(kaityf at jorsm.com)

http://www.lcag.org