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