Voldemort won’t always be able to step in and rescue him, he doesn’t have him under constant tabs, it’s not like he’d instantly know if something bad were about to happen to him.
There are other ways aside from being oppositional that Harry could have failed to be properly impressionable. For instance, he could have been extremely stupid (there would be no way to tell when he was a baby,) and it would have been impossible to set him up as a figurehead leader because he was too obviously incompetent.
In Voldemort’s place, I would never attempt a plan like this, because the odds of success, even at their best, do not justify sinking a couple of decades into its execution. Given the same amount of time, I’d expect him to be able to take over the country several times over. I could probably take over the country several times over in his place, given the same level of power along with an outside perspective on wizarding society, and I don’t think I’m as good at plotting as Quirrelmort.
I’m betting on what happened with Harry not being intentional, because, for all the ways that one can postulate that the events that followed benefited Quirrelmort, I think the fact that he lost his body, much of his power, all his servants, and a decade of time, should shift our prior considerably away from whatever happened that night being deliberate.
Again, I’ve cooled on this theory myself, so I think I probably agree with you in the broad sense that I don’t think this is exactly what happened. I’m still going to argue a few of the points you made though, because if we share an opinion but disagree on the justifications for it I still think that’s a disagreement we should try to heal. Better to be justified but coincidentally wrong than unjustified but coincidentally right, right?
Anyway, I agree with your first point. remember that I said:
Obviously that doesn’t lower the risk to zero, but it’s still a big reduction.
So what I’m saying is, having Voldemort hanging around in the wings won’t save you from everything, but it certainly won’t hurt your chances of survival. There’s nothing to say Voldemort hasn’t done little things to increase Harry’s survival like magically lower the risk of lightning strikes in Surrey. Wizards are more durable than muggles AND Harry also has Dumbledore’s protection AND there’s no absolute reason Voldemort has to use /Harry/ as his posterboy for good—he’s just the best available choice. So I don’t think the risk of Harry dying unexpectedly is great enough to invalidate this plan, although I do agree that it would be inconvenient if it happened.
Your second point, on the other hand, I have to disagree with prima facie. The wizarding world in general has no problem taking idiots as leaders—look at Fudge. If anything, a stupid figurehead would be BETTER, because it would give Quirrelmort more control. The only thing I can see being a barrier here is if Harry had some obvious, crippling mental condition. That sort of thing, though, WOULD have been obvious from a young age and as I’ve said, in that case he can tragically kill off Harry in such a way that Neville becomes the new posterboy. So again, whilst there is a risk here it is low, manageable and avoidable. I don’t think it’s enough to rule out this plan.
Your third argument. I’ve discussed the odds of success already, but I think the effort and time involved is an important point. You’re absolutely right that Voldemort could have taken the whole country over several times by now—he was winning when he disappeared, after all. The difference, though, is that before Voldemort would have had control over a broken, wretched country and a whole generation of wizards who had no goal except vengeance. On the other hand, if he fakes his own death at the eleventh hour, lets the goodies think they’ve won and then takes them over from the inside eleven years later, he now has control over a strong, united country AND their opposition. He’s unopposed because he controls both sides. I had only heard the term “super villain gambit” when I came up with this theory, but having read the article here on LW since I think you’ll be able to see the utility in this ploy. I think it’s worth ten extra years.
Finally, I should point out that I’m theorising he FAKED the Godric’s Hollow scene. If this is what happened then Voldemort wouldn’t have been hit by a rebounding curse that night and wouldn’t have lost his body or his power. Harry’s scar would have been intentionally created to mark him as the storybook hero everyone wanted and Harry would have been intentionally made a horcrux to in order to keep tabs on him. Also, in cannon horcruxes are close to indestructible: if this carries over in some form then it would be a good way to keep Harry safe.
To reiterate: I now doubt that this is what happened, because it looks like someone is trying to turn Harry evil.
Your second point, on the other hand, I have to disagree with prima facie. The wizarding world in general has no problem taking idiots as leaders—look at Fudge. If anything, a stupid figurehead would be BETTER, because it would give Quirrelmort more control.
Fudge isn’t particularly stupid, he’s just not particularly smart. He occupies a position of nominal power with significantly more competent people maneuvering around him, so he looks dim by comparison.
A not-very-bright figurehead would probably be better than a very clever one, but a legitimate dimwit, someone significantly less intelligent than average, not merely about average, would be very unlikely to make it into high office.
It’s possible that Voldemort faked the Godric’s hollow scene, but I seriously doubt it; real or fake it took too much time and resources for too little return for me to think it’s likely.
Voldemort won’t always be able to step in and rescue him, he doesn’t have him under constant tabs, it’s not like he’d instantly know if something bad were about to happen to him.
There are other ways aside from being oppositional that Harry could have failed to be properly impressionable. For instance, he could have been extremely stupid (there would be no way to tell when he was a baby,) and it would have been impossible to set him up as a figurehead leader because he was too obviously incompetent.
In Voldemort’s place, I would never attempt a plan like this, because the odds of success, even at their best, do not justify sinking a couple of decades into its execution. Given the same amount of time, I’d expect him to be able to take over the country several times over. I could probably take over the country several times over in his place, given the same level of power along with an outside perspective on wizarding society, and I don’t think I’m as good at plotting as Quirrelmort.
I’m betting on what happened with Harry not being intentional, because, for all the ways that one can postulate that the events that followed benefited Quirrelmort, I think the fact that he lost his body, much of his power, all his servants, and a decade of time, should shift our prior considerably away from whatever happened that night being deliberate.
Again, I’ve cooled on this theory myself, so I think I probably agree with you in the broad sense that I don’t think this is exactly what happened. I’m still going to argue a few of the points you made though, because if we share an opinion but disagree on the justifications for it I still think that’s a disagreement we should try to heal. Better to be justified but coincidentally wrong than unjustified but coincidentally right, right?
Anyway, I agree with your first point. remember that I said:
So what I’m saying is, having Voldemort hanging around in the wings won’t save you from everything, but it certainly won’t hurt your chances of survival. There’s nothing to say Voldemort hasn’t done little things to increase Harry’s survival like magically lower the risk of lightning strikes in Surrey. Wizards are more durable than muggles AND Harry also has Dumbledore’s protection AND there’s no absolute reason Voldemort has to use /Harry/ as his posterboy for good—he’s just the best available choice. So I don’t think the risk of Harry dying unexpectedly is great enough to invalidate this plan, although I do agree that it would be inconvenient if it happened.
Your second point, on the other hand, I have to disagree with prima facie. The wizarding world in general has no problem taking idiots as leaders—look at Fudge. If anything, a stupid figurehead would be BETTER, because it would give Quirrelmort more control. The only thing I can see being a barrier here is if Harry had some obvious, crippling mental condition. That sort of thing, though, WOULD have been obvious from a young age and as I’ve said, in that case he can tragically kill off Harry in such a way that Neville becomes the new posterboy. So again, whilst there is a risk here it is low, manageable and avoidable. I don’t think it’s enough to rule out this plan.
Your third argument. I’ve discussed the odds of success already, but I think the effort and time involved is an important point. You’re absolutely right that Voldemort could have taken the whole country over several times by now—he was winning when he disappeared, after all. The difference, though, is that before Voldemort would have had control over a broken, wretched country and a whole generation of wizards who had no goal except vengeance. On the other hand, if he fakes his own death at the eleventh hour, lets the goodies think they’ve won and then takes them over from the inside eleven years later, he now has control over a strong, united country AND their opposition. He’s unopposed because he controls both sides. I had only heard the term “super villain gambit” when I came up with this theory, but having read the article here on LW since I think you’ll be able to see the utility in this ploy. I think it’s worth ten extra years.
Finally, I should point out that I’m theorising he FAKED the Godric’s Hollow scene. If this is what happened then Voldemort wouldn’t have been hit by a rebounding curse that night and wouldn’t have lost his body or his power. Harry’s scar would have been intentionally created to mark him as the storybook hero everyone wanted and Harry would have been intentionally made a horcrux to in order to keep tabs on him. Also, in cannon horcruxes are close to indestructible: if this carries over in some form then it would be a good way to keep Harry safe.
To reiterate: I now doubt that this is what happened, because it looks like someone is trying to turn Harry evil.
Fudge isn’t particularly stupid, he’s just not particularly smart. He occupies a position of nominal power with significantly more competent people maneuvering around him, so he looks dim by comparison.
A not-very-bright figurehead would probably be better than a very clever one, but a legitimate dimwit, someone significantly less intelligent than average, not merely about average, would be very unlikely to make it into high office.
It’s possible that Voldemort faked the Godric’s hollow scene, but I seriously doubt it; real or fake it took too much time and resources for too little return for me to think it’s likely.