DD killed Quirrell? (was: re:Scrimgeour/WerewolfBites/Legilimency/DDsecrecy)

[lizzyben04]

No: HPFGUIDX 179826

> Carol responds:
> 
> Nevertheless, it's confirmed by Voldemort himself in GoF:
> 
> "The servant died when I left his body, and I was left as weak as I
> had ever been" (GoF Am. ed. 654).
> 
> Carol, noting that the snakes and other small animals that 
Vapormort
> possesses also die when he uses up their life force


lizzyben:

This is true! However, LV isn't the best witness - he did leave 
Quirrell's body, but does he know if & when Quirrell died? Small 
animals die when LV posseses them, but Nagini didn't die. Harry 
didn't, Ginny didn't. Humans that have been posessed by LV haven't 
died from the experience. How can we be sure that Quirrell did? And 
even if he did die the instant that LV left, we still don't know how 
or when that happened. Did DD & Quirrell/LV have a spectacular 
battle? Did LV flee right when DD was about to kill Quirrell? Did DD 
throw Quirrell/LV into a dundgeon for three days until LV got bored 
& left? Or did they all sit down for a cup of tea & a discussion of 
their various plans for world domination? We just don't know. 

JKR cut out the most exciting part of the book - the moment where 
Voldemort flees & Quirrell dies. The movies actually showed this 
climatic moment, like a good story should. But in the book, we just 
have to take DD's word on what happened after Harry passed out. And 
DD's word on this matter is (deliberately?) vague. The Master of 
Secrets & Lies says (actually just implies) that Quirrell died - but 
where's the funeral, burial, etc? It's actually more like Quirrell 
evaporated. I thought we'd get more information on those missing 
three days, but we didn't. It's like it's meant to be a secret 
between JKR & DD. 

And that's really the problem. JKR says that DD has been pulling 
strings behing the scenes, treating people like puppets, acting like 
a Machievelli, but she doesn't ever lay out exactly what DD has been 
responsible for. It's all just speculation now, because canon is 
closed. But she calls him a great wizard. How can we agree/disagree 
if readers still don't know the extent of his manipulations? Does 
she mean "great" in the same sense Ollivander did - "terrible 
things, but great"? 

I think that Quirrell was DD's puppet just as much as LV's. DD sent 
the gullible young professor to the Albanian forest, where 
his "sources" had informed him that LV was lurking. In GOF, DD says 
that those sources told him that LV was back in the same spot post-
SS, so he's always known where LV was. It's about time for the 
Chosen One to come to Hogwarts, & so it's about time to fetch LV 
back to fight him & "test his strength". DD then sets up the 
philosopher's stone trap to lure LV (and Harry) to their 
confrontation. DD obviously knew that LV was inhabiting Quirrell's 
turban that year (keep an eye on Quirrel), so it's just a short hop 
to conclude that DD sent Quirrell to Albania in the first place in 
order to bring LV back & set the Plan in motion. Then, DD moves the 
Stone to Hogwarts, moves Quirrell to the cursed DADA position, & 
lets the games begin. In the process, Quirrell's life is used up & 
tossed aside - by both DD & LV. 

In the first novel, DD is presented as good, noble, someone who 
wouldn't use Dark means to accomplish his ends. But by the end, we 
know that DD did indeed use dark means to accomplish his goals. He 
exploits people & treats them as puppets, just as he treated 
Quirrell like a puppet on a string. So, if Quirrell was just a pawn 
to both LV & DD, what's the difference between these wizards? 
Quirrell's statement that "there is no good & evil, only power," 
starts to look like an accurate statement of the ultimate morality 
of the Potterverse. 


lizzyben