I would put Lucius up there as a suspect or accomplice: he loves his son, and was noticeably offended when he saw Hermione beat him in magic. Purebloods also have a history of thinking of muggleborns as not-people (see Harry and Draco talking about Luna on the train), so he wouldn’t have any moral compunctions getting in the way of hurting Hermione. He was also at the school at the time, so he has almost as much opportunity as the rest of them.
And wouldn’t that just be a perfect rationality lesson? Eliezer can talk about how Lucius is blinded by perceived threats to his beliefs, thereby putting his son and an innocent girl in danger.
Of course, I really hope that it’s Quirrel instead, if only because it would be impossible to convict Lucius.
He was also at the school at the time, so he has almost as much opportunity as the rest of them.
He hasn’t been at school during the various times H&C appeared, that we know of.
(Edit: retracted: And Eliezer’s Author’s Notes have confirmed that Harry explanation in the latest chapter is correct (False Memory Charm to make Hermione suspect Draco, then months of obsession, then more FMCs about the duel and Obliviating Hermione regarding the original FMC.) )
Edited to add: See comment below; I probably misinterpreted the Author’s Notes. Also, I admit it’s possible Lucius has been in the school without us knowing explicitly every time, since he’s on the board of governors.
Anything you think will be completely inexplicable to the readers, probably won’t be—they know less background info than you, so where you see a single huge missing fact you haven’t yet revealed, they see a plentiful bag of possible interpretations. (Discovered when I compared all the reviewers’ interpretations of the Wham Line at the end of 78, to the actual interpretation revealed in 79.) [my highlighting]
Edited to add: I thought that referred to interpretation of “why did Hermione try to murder Draco? Why was she convinced Draco was plotting against her?”
But I see now that it refers to interpretations of the Wham Line specifically. So it more likely means interpretations of “how did Hermione try to murder Draco?” Or even, “what does the accusation that she tried to murder him mean? Did she really try? Or is this a combined Hermione-Draco plot to flush out whoever is manipulating her?”
I take it others adopt the second reading. It’s apparently the intended one. I retract my claim.
Thanks for asking me to quote and so forcing me to reevaluate my evidence. Upvoted!
I would put Lucius up there as a suspect or accomplice: he loves his son, and was noticeably offended when he saw Hermione beat him in magic. Purebloods also have a history of thinking of muggleborns as not-people (see Harry and Draco talking about Luna on the train), so he wouldn’t have any moral compunctions getting in the way of hurting Hermione. He was also at the school at the time, so he has almost as much opportunity as the rest of them.
And wouldn’t that just be a perfect rationality lesson? Eliezer can talk about how Lucius is blinded by perceived threats to his beliefs, thereby putting his son and an innocent girl in danger.
Of course, I really hope that it’s Quirrel instead, if only because it would be impossible to convict Lucius.
He hasn’t been at school during the various times H&C appeared, that we know of.
(Edit: retracted: And Eliezer’s Author’s Notes have confirmed that Harry explanation in the latest chapter is correct (False Memory Charm to make Hermione suspect Draco, then months of obsession, then more FMCs about the duel and Obliviating Hermione regarding the original FMC.) )
Edited to add: See comment below; I probably misinterpreted the Author’s Notes. Also, I admit it’s possible Lucius has been in the school without us knowing explicitly every time, since he’s on the board of governors.
Could you do me a favor and quote the exact line that made you think this?
Quoting A/N chapter 79:
Edited to add: I thought that referred to interpretation of “why did Hermione try to murder Draco? Why was she convinced Draco was plotting against her?”
But I see now that it refers to interpretations of the Wham Line specifically. So it more likely means interpretations of “how did Hermione try to murder Draco?” Or even, “what does the accusation that she tried to murder him mean? Did she really try? Or is this a combined Hermione-Draco plot to flush out whoever is manipulating her?”
I take it others adopt the second reading. It’s apparently the intended one. I retract my claim.
Thanks for asking me to quote and so forcing me to reevaluate my evidence. Upvoted!