I quite doubt Lucius is upset with Harry at the moment. He’s not stupid, and Harry is not to blame for what happened to his son.
And I’m quite confident Quirrell is not H&C, as the Defense Professor would have been considerably better at brain-washing Hermione. Besides, Harry will know that Hermione truly going dark is far more unlikely than interference via mind-magic or blackmail. He is going to stay on her side and investigate what happened, and Quirrell would anticipate this and not expect Harry to fall into darkness.
Harry’s not to blame, but the person Lucius believes is posing as Harry might well be.
From Lucius’s perspective it must seem more likely that Hermione is a cat’s paw than that she’s actually strong enough to beat Draco fairly. Plus, having a Muggleborn arrested for the attempted murder of another student hurts Dumbledore as well. It would be far from unreasonable for Lucius to leap to conclusions at this point.
He would not have been considerably better at brain-washing Hermione. Others, yes, but not Hermione. Quirrell is Voldemort, the ultimate evil (that we know of). Dumbledore has said that “Evil is that which does not love, and cannot know love without ceasing to be evil,” or similar.
Quirrell has already tried to convince Harry that Hermione is making a show of goodness to further her own ends. If he really believes that to some extent, given that he’s the ultimate evil, he would have a hard time modeling Hermione’s thought process well enough to get it right on the first try.
Eliezer thoroughly deconstructed Dumbledore’s (And Gandalf’s) view of evil in Lord of the Rationality. “If the Enemy thought that all his foes were moved by desire for power alone—he would guess wrongly, over and over, and the Maker of this Ring would see that, he would know that somewhere he had made a mistake!”
Even if somehow Quirrell was stupid enough to not truly understand non-sociopathic motives, he would not make the obvious mistake of revealing this weakness to Harry. Harry thinks that Quirrell can’t comprehend good because that’s what Quirrell wants him to think.
And H&C didn’t even fail because of a miscalculation about Hermione’s altruism. It was a rookie mistake to not use a different appearance than you did with Zabini. Even if you still wanted to look dark and mysterious, you wouldn’t pick the exact same disguise you used earlier, just in case.
Finally, H&C’s dialogue is highly unquirrellish. “I hoped for better from you, Hermione. Surely such a Ravenclaw as you, the most intelligent Ravenclaw to grace Hogwarts in a generation, knows that appearances can be misleading.” Those are not the words of a Dark Lord who doesn’t care about your opinion and is about to wipe your memory.
Those are not the words of a Dark Lord who doesn’t care about your opinion and is about to wipe your memory.
They are precisely the words of a mysterious person who’s trying to persuade you of something. It’s simple flattery.
Eliezer thoroughly deconstructed Dumbledore’s (And Gandalf’s) view of evil in Lord of the Rationality.
Excellent point, but I hardly think this is a Sauron-level mistake. He may not absolutely fail to consider the actions and thoughts of moral people, but that doesn’t mean it doesn’t take him a few tries to find what buttons to push on an almost absolutely moral little girl.
Quirrell has to have some weakness, after all, if Harry is to ever beat him, as he presumably will. Why couldn’t it be that Quirrell is truly cynical and does truly believe all people act selfishly most of the time? Why couldn’t that omake be a foreshadowing of Quirrell’s downfall? Quirrell would never have left Mount Doom unguarded, but that doesn’t mean he won’t make some other, smaller critical mistake.
He might have revealed a weakness to Harry, even as brilliant as he is. He certainly doesn’t love Harry, he’s certainly not fond of him, but I think he feels a kinship with him, given that Harry houses a piece of Voldemort’s mind/soul/whatever. In his effort to turn Harry Dark, he might yet reveal more than he should.
Quirrell doesn’t have to be perfect. If he were, then Harry could never defeat him. Just that he never holds the Idiot Ball doesn’t mean he doesn’t make small, insignificant-seeming mistakes that may haunt him later.
The strongest evidence that H&C is not Quirrell seems to me to be how much more amateurish he is at manipulating people than Quirrell is. I don’t believe it would have taken Quirrell dozens of iterations to realize he ought to change his appearance. It probably wouldn’t have taken him one.
Those are not the words of a Dark Lord who doesn’t care about your opinion and is about to wipe your memory.
As you should know, appearances can be misleading. (This was not the first iteration, so whatever the default, this iteration already incorporates some adjustments.)
Yes, but he wouldn’t have made obvious slip-ups. H&C came within two words of blurting out “Time travel.” No way Quirrel did that, unless he’s playing a nth-level game through the fourth wall. (Which I wouldn’t put past him at this point, but anyway...)
I quite doubt Lucius is upset with Harry at the moment. He’s not stupid, and Harry is not to blame for what happened to his son.
And I’m quite confident Quirrell is not H&C, as the Defense Professor would have been considerably better at brain-washing Hermione. Besides, Harry will know that Hermione truly going dark is far more unlikely than interference via mind-magic or blackmail. He is going to stay on her side and investigate what happened, and Quirrell would anticipate this and not expect Harry to fall into darkness.
Harry’s not to blame, but the person Lucius believes is posing as Harry might well be.
From Lucius’s perspective it must seem more likely that Hermione is a cat’s paw than that she’s actually strong enough to beat Draco fairly. Plus, having a Muggleborn arrested for the attempted murder of another student hurts Dumbledore as well. It would be far from unreasonable for Lucius to leap to conclusions at this point.
He would not have been considerably better at brain-washing Hermione. Others, yes, but not Hermione. Quirrell is Voldemort, the ultimate evil (that we know of). Dumbledore has said that “Evil is that which does not love, and cannot know love without ceasing to be evil,” or similar.
Quirrell has already tried to convince Harry that Hermione is making a show of goodness to further her own ends. If he really believes that to some extent, given that he’s the ultimate evil, he would have a hard time modeling Hermione’s thought process well enough to get it right on the first try.
Eliezer thoroughly deconstructed Dumbledore’s (And Gandalf’s) view of evil in Lord of the Rationality. “If the Enemy thought that all his foes were moved by desire for power alone—he would guess wrongly, over and over, and the Maker of this Ring would see that, he would know that somewhere he had made a mistake!”
Even if somehow Quirrell was stupid enough to not truly understand non-sociopathic motives, he would not make the obvious mistake of revealing this weakness to Harry. Harry thinks that Quirrell can’t comprehend good because that’s what Quirrell wants him to think.
And H&C didn’t even fail because of a miscalculation about Hermione’s altruism. It was a rookie mistake to not use a different appearance than you did with Zabini. Even if you still wanted to look dark and mysterious, you wouldn’t pick the exact same disguise you used earlier, just in case.
Finally, H&C’s dialogue is highly unquirrellish. “I hoped for better from you, Hermione. Surely such a Ravenclaw as you, the most intelligent Ravenclaw to grace Hogwarts in a generation, knows that appearances can be misleading.” Those are not the words of a Dark Lord who doesn’t care about your opinion and is about to wipe your memory.
They are precisely the words of a mysterious person who’s trying to persuade you of something. It’s simple flattery.
Excellent point, but I hardly think this is a Sauron-level mistake. He may not absolutely fail to consider the actions and thoughts of moral people, but that doesn’t mean it doesn’t take him a few tries to find what buttons to push on an almost absolutely moral little girl.
Quirrell has to have some weakness, after all, if Harry is to ever beat him, as he presumably will. Why couldn’t it be that Quirrell is truly cynical and does truly believe all people act selfishly most of the time? Why couldn’t that omake be a foreshadowing of Quirrell’s downfall? Quirrell would never have left Mount Doom unguarded, but that doesn’t mean he won’t make some other, smaller critical mistake.
He might have revealed a weakness to Harry, even as brilliant as he is. He certainly doesn’t love Harry, he’s certainly not fond of him, but I think he feels a kinship with him, given that Harry houses a piece of Voldemort’s mind/soul/whatever. In his effort to turn Harry Dark, he might yet reveal more than he should.
Quirrell doesn’t have to be perfect. If he were, then Harry could never defeat him. Just that he never holds the Idiot Ball doesn’t mean he doesn’t make small, insignificant-seeming mistakes that may haunt him later.
I have no strong opinion on whether H&C = Quirrell, but Harry has already remarked on Quirrell’s facility at playing different roles.
The strongest evidence that H&C is not Quirrell seems to me to be how much more amateurish he is at manipulating people than Quirrell is. I don’t believe it would have taken Quirrell dozens of iterations to realize he ought to change his appearance. It probably wouldn’t have taken him one.
As you should know, appearances can be misleading. (This was not the first iteration, so whatever the default, this iteration already incorporates some adjustments.)
Yes, but he wouldn’t have made obvious slip-ups. H&C came within two words of blurting out “Time travel.” No way Quirrel did that, unless he’s playing a nth-level game through the fourth wall. (Which I wouldn’t put past him at this point, but anyway...)