-One who holdss it now, wass not born to name now ussed. -One who holdss Sstone iss repossitory of much lore. -Taught sschoolmasster many ssecretss.
I’ve been under the impression through the whole story that Harry’s father’s rock is the philosopher’s stone. Is Quirrel just referring to Harry here?
The Harry we know wasn’t “born to the name now used”, or really born at all, because his current self comes from a merger of the original Harry and Voldemort.
Harry is the repository of much lore about science.
Harry has taught Dumbledore many “secrets” about muggle science and rationality. (hasn’t he? I can’t remember any specifics because I haven’t done a reread in a long time)
Even assuming that all this is accurate, why would Quirrell give Harry a third-person description of Harry, framed as if he was describing a third party?
Apart from the standalone ridiculousness of such behaviour, if Quirrell believed that Harry already had the stone, and knew that Harry was willing to use the stone for his benefit, then this sort of obfuscation would be the last thing he’d do.
Hmm I hadn’t thought the rock was the stone. That would be a great twist, but I doubt it because Dumbeldore said it was not magical to his knowledge when Harry asked him.
Also even if it is the stone, I don’t think QQ knows this.
Also, we have what seems like a sufficient explanation for the rock—assuming Albus knew that the Defense Professor mentioned trolls while he was subtly encouraging Harry to learn the Killing Curse.
I’ve been under the impression through the whole story that Harry’s father’s rock is the philosopher’s stone. Is Quirrel just referring to Harry here?
The Harry we know wasn’t “born to the name now used”, or really born at all, because his current self comes from a merger of the original Harry and Voldemort.
Harry is the repository of much lore about science.
Harry has taught Dumbledore many “secrets” about muggle science and rationality. (hasn’t he? I can’t remember any specifics because I haven’t done a reread in a long time)
Even assuming that all this is accurate, why would Quirrell give Harry a third-person description of Harry, framed as if he was describing a third party?
Apart from the standalone ridiculousness of such behaviour, if Quirrell believed that Harry already had the stone, and knew that Harry was willing to use the stone for his benefit, then this sort of obfuscation would be the last thing he’d do.
Unless Quirrell isn’t interested in the stone primarily here, but in tricking Harry into doing something else trying to get the stone.
Hmm I hadn’t thought the rock was the stone. That would be a great twist, but I doubt it because Dumbeldore said it was not magical to his knowledge when Harry asked him.
Also even if it is the stone, I don’t think QQ knows this.
Also, we have what seems like a sufficient explanation for the rock—assuming Albus knew that the Defense Professor mentioned trolls while he was subtly encouraging Harry to learn the Killing Curse.
No. It would be stupid for Dumbledore to hand out the philosopher’s stone that way. It doesn’t make it protected.