Sending Voldie through the Veil (Was: Where will the "great battle" be)

[Constance Vigilance]

No: HPFGUIDX 162049

CV, who has been out of the HP loop for a very, very long time, hears 
the magic word "Quirrell" and rises from her self-imposed coma in 
Quirrell Corner.

<big snip>

> 
> Sarah:
> > Harry already killed Quirrell, didn't he?  It could be argued that
> Quirrell self-bubbled by touching Harry, or that it was accidental, 
or
> a side effect, but the bottom line is that Harry laid hands on
> Quirrell and Quirell died.  If this didn't divide Harry's soul, then
> he should have plenty of options for Voldemort.
> 
> Carol:
> Erm, no. As I said, offlist, it's only in the film that Harry kills
> Quirrell. In SS/PS, Harry falls unconscious before Quirrell dies.
> Dumbledore tells Harry that he "arrived just in time to pull 
Quirrell
> off [him]" and that Voldemort "left Quirrell to die" (SS Am. ed. 297
> and 298). And in GoF, Voldemort reiterates this version of events 
when
> he tells the DEs that "the servant [Quirrell] died when I left his
> body" (Am. ed. 654). Better still, JKR confirms the accuracy of 
these
> statements in her answer to a question on Thestrals in the 2004
> Edinburgh Book festival interview: "Someone said that Harry saw
> Quirrell die, but that is not true. He was unconscious when Quirrell
> died, in Philosopher's Stone. He did not know until he came around
> that Quirrell had died when Voldemort left his body." Someone said
> that Harry saw Quirrell die, but that is not true. He was 
unconscious
> when Quirrell died, in Philosopher's Stone. He did not know until he
> came around that Quirrell had died when Voldemort left his body."
> 
> http://www.accio-quote.org/articles/2004/0804-ebf.htm
> 
> So, no, Harry hasn't killed anybody, even in self-defense, and
> Quirrell's death had no effect whatever on his soul. (IMO, it was 
the
> DADA curse, in combination with his own character flaws, that killed
> Quirrell. See my post, "The DADA jinx and its victims"
> 
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/
137961?threaded=1&l=1
> 

OK. As old-timers here know, Quirrell is my favorite character. He 
represents the rape and abuse victim class in the series. He was a 
wide-eyed innocent when he left Hogwarts to improve his skills. He 
was seduced by a charismatic character who enters Quirrell's body 
against his will. This is a classic rape metaphor. Quirrell's 
personality then changes - he dressed differently - he stammers - he 
has body tics - he is frightened by everything. We hear him weeping 
in private. Some of those mannerisms were affected, but there is no 
doubt that the weeping in private is real. I think that the other 
mannerisms are probably more real than affected as well. I believe a 
lot of the forcefulness in the dungeon was bravado.

In every way, he behaves as an abused spouse. He is forced to do 
things against his will. He apparently has no friends or confidents.

At the time JKR was writing the first book of the series, she was 
also a recovering victim of spousal abuse. Intentional or not, 
Quirrell is her mirror at the time. 

We readers are accomplices in this. We are given a character who is 
quite obviously in a state of distress and we are not empathetic. We 
even allow her to kill him off in cold blood without looking back. 

For this reason, I have real difficulty believing that we have heard 
the end of the stuttering professor.

There are a couple of problems with his supposed death. First, 
Dumbledore never says that Quirrell actually died. As Carol points 
out above, he only says that Voldemort left him to die. Why would 
Quirrell be in a terminal condition? He has a double-dose of unicorn 
blood in him which "will keep you alive if you are a breath from 
death". Furthermore, Voldy says that when he inhabits animals, they 
die because their bodies are not suited for magic. But Quirrell's 
body is well-suited for magic. Finally, the one key to physical 
recovery, even after the unicorn blood is the Stone, which is right 
there in the room with them. He was certainly damaged by having Harry 
touch him, but is that a fatal blow?

There is no proof in the book at all that Quirrell didn't survive the 
dungeon. We have only the JKR quote above (http://www.accio-quote.org/
articles/2004/0804-ebf.htm) to indicate that Quirrell is dead. 

"He did not know until he came around that Quirrell had died when 
Voldemort left his body." 

I don't know. I just have a problem with that. First of all, it isn't 
true. Harry did not know in the hospital wing that Quirrell died when 
Voldy left his body. At best, he knows that Quirrell died AND Voldy 
left his body. There is no way for Harry to put the two issues 
together at this point in his education. Plus, we have an example of 
Voldy leaving a body and the body not dying - I refer to Harry's 
possession in the Ministry.

And then there is Dumbledore's statement that he NEVER was able to 
keep a DADA teacher after the curse. But that is also demonstrably 
wrong related to Quirrell. Was Dumbledore mistaken? Is it a flint? Or 
is Dumbledore and JKR covering up something important for the 
climactic battle?

Finally, could JKR, in one bold stroke, kill off the most pitiful 
character in the series - the one who represents herself at her 
lowest?

I'm just not sure. But I'm liking the idea that Quirrell is alive 
more and more.

~ CV, glad to be back.