Resurrection (sort of)

Geoff Bannister gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk
Mon Dec 4 07:41:52 UTC 2006


No: HPFGUIDX 162336

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Constance Vigilance" 
<ConstanceVigilance at ...> wrote:
>
> > bboyminn:
> > 
> <snip> 
> > Quirrel is absolutely dead. While we aren't given the
> > details, there is no reason to think that Dumbledore 
> > didn't find Quirrel's body in the last chamber when he
> > found Harry there. 
 
> CV: Actually, the only thing we know for sure is that Dumbledore 
> found Quirrell ALIVE in the chamber. I'm at work and don't have my 
> books, but he says something like:
> 
> "I arrived just in time to pull Quirrell off you."
> 
> Quirrell had to have been putting up a fight to have to be "pulled" 
> off of Harry.
> 
> Later on in the hospital, Dumbledore says (again, paraphrased)
> 
> "Voldemort cares little for his followers, he left Quirrell to die."
> 
> NEVER does Dumbledore say Quirrell is dead. Only that Voldemort 
> THINKS Quirrell is dead because he intended it so.

Geoff:
An interesting couple of side thoughts on this, if the elves 
will forgive a reference to "the medium that dare not speak its 
name".

In the DVD of "The Philosopher's Stone", Quirrell quite definitely 
pops his clogs (in a way curiously reminiscent of the scene in 
"Star Trek: Nemesis").

In additional material included with either the first or second DVDs,
there is an interview involving Jo Rowling and Steve Kloves in which 
the latter says that there had been times when he put something into 
the screenplay but JKR pointed out that it would not fit the later 
part of the story.

So, if Quirrell was intended to play a part again, would that scene have 
been included? Also, is he is still around, where has he been for the 
last five years? And is he likely to seek to be used again by 
Voldemort when he had been so ruthlessly abandoned?






More information about the HPforGrownups archive