The Prophecy II

View previous topic View next topic Go down

The Prophecy II

Post  Elanor on Thu Jun 02, 2011 3:08 am

The Prophecy II

This topic serves as an archive of a thread from the Harry Potter Lexicon Forum as hosted on World Crossing which ceased operation on April 15, 2011. Elanor

essie125 - Nov 30, 2004 11:20 am
Edited by Kip Carter Nov 17, 2005 2:47 pm
In OotP it is said that only the people who the Prophecy is about can take it out of the Department of Mysteries without suffering madness. When Neville took the Prophecy from Harry they were still inside the Department of Mysteries and still he didn't go mad. Nor did Harry. I find this quite confusing. Who is the prophecy really about Harry and Voldie or Neville and Voldie? Also it says that the one can't live while the other survives. So If Harry keeps surviving does this mean that Voldie can't live? And harry Can't live while Voldie survives, which is obvious because of the pain that his scar is causing him. One has to die at the hands of the other. Oh it's a tricky prophecy this one. And Does Voldemort not knowing it's full contents give harry powers that the Dark Lord knows not? He did mark Harry, but did he mark him as an equal?



The Prophecy II thread index

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]


Last edited by Elanor on Thu Jun 02, 2011 3:22 am; edited 1 time in total
avatar
Elanor
Hufflepuff Prefect
Hufflepuff Prefect

Posts : 1440
Join date : 2011-02-19
Age : 45
Location : France

Back to top Go down

The Prophecy II (Post 1 to 50)

Post  Elanor on Thu Jun 02, 2011 3:11 am

Paulus Maximus - Nov 30, 2004 1:20 pm (#1 of 381)
Once Harry touched the Prophecy, anyone could take it.

Or do you really think that Lucius or Bella would risk going mad?

- - - - - - - - - -
Ladybug220 - Nov 30, 2004 1:25 pm (#2 of 381)

...moves faster than Severus Snape confronted with shampoo
Lucius and Bella wouldn't risk going mad as they had already seen what it did to Bode while under the imperious curse.

- - - - - - - - - -
Steve Newton - Nov 30, 2004 1:49 pm (#3 of 381)

Librarian
Paulus, you might be right, but, I think it is important that only these two, two of only three people we know of who might be able to safely touch the prophecy, did indeed touch the prophecy. Remember that Harry's name on it had a question mark before it.

I also think that Harry and Neville are both marked.

- - - - - - - - - -
T Brightwater - Nov 30, 2004 2:12 pm (#4 of 381)

What I'd like to know is, what about prophecies made about an unidentified subject? It seems a rough way to find out who a prophecy is about if a wrong guess is going to lead to someone going insane, especially when there done't seem to be any clues on the bottles. I can't believe that all of the prophecies kept in the DoM are that obvious.

- - - - - - - - - -
Paulus Maximus - Nov 30, 2004 3:01 pm (#5 of 381)

It must have been about Harry.

If it wasn't, then Harry went mad as soon as he touched it, because neither Neville nor Voldemort had yet touched it...

On second thought, it might not have been about Harry, and everything that has happened to him since he touched it has been a delusion...

- - - - - - - - - -
Classicsquid592 - Nov 30, 2004 3:48 pm (#6 of 381)

Unless it was about Harry, Neville, and the dark lord. We know that Neville fits the terms of the prophesy to a large extent. I have made many posts suggesting that both Harry and Neville would be instrumental in the defeat of the dark lord. Perhaps the fact that Neville could touch the prophesy was a clue.

A few notes about this instance in the book to clarify things.

The label on the prophesy: "The Dark Lord and (?)Harry potter." There is a question mark. It could apply to someone else or more than one person. (Neville and Voldemort?)

Neville felt somehow afraid of the prophesy. He warned Harry not to touch it. why?

The final note, Neville is the ONLY other person besides Harry to touch the prophesy. The dark lord only knows about what happens to people who touch the prophesy when they are not authorized to because of the fact that he sent his DEs to try to fetch it. Harry never gives up the prophesy and therefore we only know what happens when Neville touches it. It could very well have affected Malfoy the way it had the dark lord's other minions had Malfoy touched it, he didn't so we may never know. What we do know is that both Harry, and Neville were able to touch the prophesy. Whether the magic that protects the orbs is bound to them so that none but the subjects of the prophesies can touch them, or Harry's touching the prophesy somehow undid the magic, we know one thing. Neville and Harry are the only two to touch the prophesy which could very well be an important clue.

Edit: Lucius and Bella wouldn't risk losing their sanity, but the dark lord would. He did not know the extent of the protection on the orbs because he had not tested having one of his followers take it directly from Harry. He led Bella and Lucius to believe that once Harry had it, it was safe to touch, but he did not know, just as he did not know of the protection on the prophesy in the first place.

- - - - - - - - - -
Paulus Maximus - Nov 30, 2004 4:08 pm (#7 of 381)

And even if one of the DEs DID go mad holding the prophecy, the rest could drag him back to Voldemort, and since the prophecy refers to Voldemort, he could touch it safely.

Granted, Voldemort would lose the sanity (or the vestiges thereof) of one of his followers, so it seems like he would rather tell a less important servant than Bella or Lucius to take it from Harry. (Wormtail, perhaps?)

On the other hand, given how hard Voldemort tried to get the prophecy, the loss of a devoted servant's sanity in exchange for the Prophecy might be considered profitable... until Voldemort heard the Prophecy and found out that it was utter rubbish...

- - - - - - - - - -
prof sprout - Nov 30, 2004 6:00 pm (#8 of 381)

I always assumed (scary I know) that you couldn't remove them from the shelf without being "zapped". I think it is the shelving unit that has the protection on it. I wonder how they are able to make it specifically to the person it is about though. I wonder if ST and DD, would be able to touch it since their names are on it (sort of at least.)

- - - - - - - - - -
Classicsquid592 - Nov 30, 2004 6:32 pm (#9 of 381)

That is why I think that it is the individual orbs with the spells on them. I don't think magic is controlable enough to make it that selective. You can charm a single orb, but it would be impossible to charm a set of shelves to read who is touching which orb. I would think that the charms are woven into the glass of the orb, or even connected somehow, with the process of getting the prophesies into the orbs. Even if you are right, however, it is still worthy of note that Harry and Neville were the only ones to touch the orb. As to your last note, I think that the prophesy has to be about you for it to work.

- - - - - - - - - -
hells456 - Nov 30, 2004 7:08 pm (#10 of 381)

I thought that only the named people being able to touch it was a security measure, in which case the people who heard the prophesies should be allowed to touch them too.

- - - - - - - - - -
The giant squid - Dec 1, 2004 10:03 am (#11 of 381)

essie, you answered yourself:

When Neville took the Prophecy from Harry they were still inside the Department of Mysteries and still he didn't go mad.--essie

Neville didn't go mad because he hadn't taken the prophecy out of the DoM yet. In fact, it never made it out, because it got destroyed in the veil room.

Still, I agree with the other posters that the madness curse only applies to the one removing it from the shelf. After that, the orb is fair game.

--Mike

- - - - - - - - - -
Ladybug220 - Dec 1, 2004 10:19 am (#12 of 381)

...moves faster than Severus Snape confronted with shampoo
Edited by Dec 1, 2004 9:20 am
I had assumed that once the orb was off of the shelf, it could be touched by anyone; but either Harry or the Dork Lard had to be the one that removed it. Lucius and Bella were certainly ready to risk themselves after Harry picked it up but not before that. I also got that impression due to the conversation that Harry 'saw' between Rookwood(?) and Dork Lard in which the Dork Lard realizes that he has been misinformed (sorry I don't have my book with me at work). I think that is why Neville was able to touch it even though his name is not on the label - otherwise, how would the orb know who was allowed to pick it up? How would it know that Neville was also born at the end of July?

edit: I left my computer and Mike posts, but I obviously agree with him.

- - - - - - - - - -
Ann - Dec 1, 2004 11:20 am (#13 of 381)

And, of course, one wonders why they didn't just use a first-year level charm, Wingardium Leviosa. Hold a padded little basket under it, then carry it off to the Dark Lord, without involving Harry at all!

- - - - - - - - - -
Eponine - Dec 1, 2004 11:29 am (#14 of 381)

Way too simple, of course. An evil overlord never does anything simply if he can help it. =)

- - - - - - - - - -
Paulus Maximus - Dec 1, 2004 1:46 pm (#15 of 381)

There are clearly ways of repelling charms. The Shield Charm can block the Summoning Charm, and Summoning is more complicated than Levitation.

It would be child's play, I think, to make something "illevitable."

- - - - - - - - - -
wwtMask - Dec 1, 2004 2:19 pm (#16 of 381)

I imagine the protective charms make it impossible to use hover, summoning, or expelling charms. I'd bet 100 galleons that , should you try to lift it with anything else, it'd weigh a ton.

- - - - - - - - - -
Classicsquid592 - Dec 1, 2004 4:10 pm (#17 of 381)

Yet they were able to destroy so many of them with a misfired stunning Jinx?

- - - - - - - - - -
LooneyLuna - Dec 2, 2004 6:51 am (#18 of 381)

They destroyed the shelves with the Reducto curse, I believe.

Spew at the *evil overlord* comment! Reminds me of Dr. Evil.

- - - - - - - - - -
wwtMask - Dec 2, 2004 7:38 am (#19 of 381)

LooneyLuna is correct. As you will recall, Harry instructed them to smash the shelves. Maybe the MoM should've put those strong protective charms on the shelves too. Now that you mention it, though, the first two smashed prophecies were dislodged by a deflected curse (Cruciatus?) of Bella's. So I guess there really is a question of why Harry needed to pick the thing up if a bolt of magic could dislodge it.

- - - - - - - - - -
T Brightwater - Dec 2, 2004 7:56 am (#20 of 381)

The DEs needed to have the prophecy intact so they could take it to Voldemort, who wanted to hear the exact wording of the entire prophecy. They could have destroyed it at any time. The plan was to lure Harry to the prophecy room, have him take the orb off the shelf, and then the DEs would take it from him; the madness curse applies only to taking the orb from the shelf. They were probably under instructions not to kill Harry because Voldemort needed to hear the prophecy before making any further plans about Harry.

One assumes that if a Summoning or Levitation Charm would have worked, that someone would have tried it already.

- - - - - - - - - -
wwtMask - Dec 2, 2004 8:15 am (#21 of 381)

Well, if you consider that there are ways of extracting memories and truth from a person, smashing the prophecy and hearing it would have been more than enough. After that, Voldemort could use a pensieve or veritaserum or Legilimency to extract the exact wording. I can think of all sorts of ways that they also might have vanished or smashed the shelves but still saved the prophecy from smashing along with the other prophecies (levitating a fluffy pillow underneath to catch it?). If we really think about that whole scene in the prophecy room, we can see that Harry really wasn't necessary for Voldemort to get the prophecy. His presence was necessary, however, for the story to move along.

- - - - - - - - - -
Steve Newton - Dec 2, 2004 9:15 am (#22 of 381)

Librarian
I think that you are grossly underestimating the power of the Unspeakables. I believe that Harry, Lord V, or Neville (I think there is a good possibility that Neville is the marked one, but, that is for a different thread.) had to be the ones to pick it up. (Apparently they are fairly easy to destroy.) Serious bad affects and lack of success for anyone else.

- - - - - - - - - -
wwtMask - Dec 2, 2004 9:29 am (#23 of 381)

Yet they didn't fortify the shelves upon which the prophecies sit. This very fact saved Harry and co. I'm not saying they didn't protect the prophecies themselves from being picked up by anyone but the correct people. I'm saying that, for some odd reason, they made it entirely possible to remove or hear a prophecy without necessarily picking it up. The shelves are weak enough to be destroyed by relatively minor spells and the prophecies themselves were easily moved by a deflected curse.

- - - - - - - - - -
Tessa's Dad - Dec 2, 2004 9:54 am (#24 of 381)

Tired Old Bat Bogey
Edited by Dec 2, 2004 8:59 am
I think this may just be a case where the Wizards in charge of storing the prophecies believed that the fact that only the Wizards involved with the Prophecy could touch it was protection enough. They never gave any thought to the shelves. It probably never occurred to them that someone would destroy the shelves and thereby destroy some of the prophecies.

This reminds me of a friend that installed a very expensive lock on his front door. It never occurred to him that the door and frame around the door were not in good shape. When his house was broken into, the lock was of no use as the thieves just kicked the door in. The door buckled and took some of the frame with it. The good news was we installed the lock on a better door with a reinforced framework.

- - - - - - - - - -
Classicsquid592 - Dec 2, 2004 10:05 am (#25 of 381)

I wonder if there might be any significance to the two other prophesies we heard snatches of?

- - - - - - - - - -
Steve Newton - Dec 2, 2004 10:22 am (#26 of 381)

Librarian
I'd bet on it.

- - - - - - - - - -
wwtMask - Dec 2, 2004 11:00 am (#27 of 381)

Hmm...could be, if the prophecies are relationally sorted. Maybe Sybil Trelawney isn't the only person that has made predictions about the fate of Harry Potter and Voldemort.

Anyway, back to the wording of the prophecy. I've seen lots of speculation that Neville may be "the one" instead of Harry. Can anyone explain how Neville is more deserving of that "honor" than Harry? The prophecy seems to clearly point to Harry. Neville may have been "marked" by Voldemort (or rather, his supporters), but as an equal? Voldemort's attempt on Harry's life and transferrance of powers seems a lot more concrete evidence than Neville's loss of his parents at the hands of the Lestranges.

- - - - - - - - - -
Paulus Maximus - Dec 2, 2004 11:17 am (#28 of 381)

Maybe the terms of the prophecy haven't yet been fulfilled. Voldemort might still mark Neville as his equal.

One thing I know for sure: He hasn't done so yet.

- - - - - - - - - -
azi - Dec 2, 2004 12:00 pm (#29 of 381)

Photo borrowed from Ardent Photography
I have a question. In the prophecy it says, 'and either must die at the hand of the other...' Does this mean that Harry (and Voldie) can't die through any other means such as falling off broomsticks or attacks by Death Eaters (in Harry's case) until one of them is dead? Therefore both are technically immune to death except from one person in the whole entire world? Just wondering if other people saw the line as meaning that.

- - - - - - - - - -
Paulus Maximus - Dec 2, 2004 3:13 pm (#30 of 381)

Okay... maybe Harry, knowing that he can't die unless Voldemort kills him, will "tampt fate" by doing something reckless (like standing in front of a moving car, knowing that unless Voldemort is behind the wheel, he can't die from being hit.)

On the other hand, Harry has known since book one that there are worse fates than death. Sure, the hypothetical car crash might not kill him, but it would definitely make his life worse than death...

No, Harry isn't that stupid.

- - - - - - - - - -
essie125 - Dec 3, 2004 5:27 am (#31 of 381)

Jo, of course I think about Alan when I think about Snape, Who wouldn't think about Alan all day every day eh.
When I read the whole DoM scene for the second time I wondered whether there would be any other prophecies on Voldemort and whether sybill's other prophecie, the one she made to Harry in PoA, is also there?

To die at the hand of someone does this actually mean that harry needs to kill him with his own hands or, that He can be killed by anyone as long as harry has got some part to play, for instance giving Voldemort a push so he can be run over by the Knightbus (this sounds really Ridikkulus!). JKR said she chose the words very carefully.

I wonder whether Sybill will make another prophecy? The poor thing can predict the future and she doesn't even know she can.

- - - - - - - - - -
Ann - Dec 3, 2004 10:46 am (#32 of 381)

azi: I have a question. In the prophecy it says, 'and either must die at the hand of the other...' Does this mean that Harry (and Voldie) can't die through any other means such as falling off broomsticks or attacks by Death Eaters (in Harry's case) until one of them is dead? Therefore both are technically immune to death except from one person in the whole entire world? Just wondering if other people saw the line as meaning that.

I think JKR sees it that way--that's why she mentioned the prophecy in connection with our figuring out why Voldemort didn't die from his own ricocheted AK curse. (from her Edinburgh chat)

And, essie, this means that Harry has to kill him directly, not just be a factor in his death. After all, Harry was a factor in the failed curse; if he hadn't been there, the curse wouldn't have failed.

As for other prophecies about Harry and Voldemort, if there had been any others nearby, I don't think the one that he took would have stood out so sharply.

- - - - - - - - - -
Steve Newton - Dec 3, 2004 11:11 am (#33 of 381)

Librarian
If Harry is the only one who can kill Voldemort then it seems that the rebounding curse should have done the job. After all it was coming from Harry. (I know Harry didn't cast it but prophecies are tricky this way.)

- - - - - - - - - -
Choices - Dec 3, 2004 11:45 am (#34 of 381)

*Completely Obsessed With Harry Potter*
Maybe if the prophesy is heard by the person it is meant for, there is no need to store it in the DOM. Only when the prophesy is heard by someone else (like Dumbledore and not Harry) must it be stored until such time as the rightful person can hear it.

About Neville being the rightful one to vanquish Voldemort and his being marked as Voldemort's equal - I don't think so, otherwise we would be reading the "Neville Longbottom" books and not the "Harry Potter" books.

- - - - - - - - - -
Mrs Brisbee - Dec 3, 2004 2:07 pm (#35 of 381)

The phrase "either must die at the hand of the other" comes with a modifying clause "for neither can live while the other survives." So I would think that both Harry and Voldemort CAN be killed by other people or events (though killing Voldemort would be something of a challenge, given his years of devotion to finding ways to cheat Death). But whatever that modifying clause means won't come out right if either of them don't die at the hand of the other.

Does that make sense?

- - - - - - - - - -
vball man - Dec 3, 2004 2:26 pm (#36 of 381)

He is no fool who gives up what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot loose. - Jim Elliot
Harry and Dumble tell us the answer, don't they?

"So," said Harry, dredging up the words from what felt like a deep well of despair inside him, "so does that mean that… that one of us has got to kill the other one… in the end?"
"Yes," said Dumbledore.

- - - - - - - - - -
Ann - Dec 3, 2004 5:15 pm (#37 of 381)

Either must die at the hand of the other, for neither can live while the other survives.

Mrs Brisbee, I don't see how the modifying phrase could be interpreted as meaning that other people could kill them. All it does is explain why one of them has to kill the other: because neither of them will be able to live (fully, in peace, whatever) while the other is still alive. In other words, they can't just ignore each other and lead separate lives, because, just by existing, they prevent each other from living normally. So one of them (at least) has got to go.

Like vball man (and Dumbledore) said.

- - - - - - - - - -
Paulus Maximus - Dec 3, 2004 5:59 pm (#38 of 381)

So Harry is pretty much invincible against anyone other than Voldemort, and Voldemort is pretty much invincible against anyone other than Harry.

Not that that would encourage Harry (or possibly Voldemort) from doing anything rash...

- - - - - - - - - -
TwinklingBlueEyes - Dec 3, 2004 7:17 pm (#39 of 381)

"Character is doing the right thing when nobody is looking"
"Maybe if the prophesy is heard by the person it is meant for, there is no need to store it in the DOM. Only when the prophesy is heard by someone else (like Dumbledore and not Harry) must it be stored until such time as the rightful person can hear it."

And what if mayhap Dumbledore or anyone else who hears a prophecy dies or becomes incapacitatied before they can report it to the DOM? What happens to it then?

Edit: If it is not "recorded", is it no less likely to come true, or more so?

- - - - - - - - - -
Steve Newton - Dec 3, 2004 7:28 pm (#40 of 381)

Librarian
Ann, I think the line you have is referring to 3 people, maybe even 4. Either would be the first pair (LV and HP), the hand (Peter?), the other(?).

- - - - - - - - - -
vball man - Dec 3, 2004 8:27 pm (#41 of 381)

He is no fool who gives up what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot loose. - Jim Elliot
Really, Steve? With the use of "either" and "neither" it seems to me that she's talking about two people. Harry seems to think that it means just that:

The prophecy line: "and either must die at the hand of the other for neither can live while the other survives"
Harry's asks for confirmation of his interpretation: "so does that mean that… that one of us has got to kill the other one… in the end?"
Dumbledore confirms: "Yes."

I woundn't think that there would be any other way to see this, except for this:
Dumbledor on why he put Harry with the Dursleys: "My answer is that my priority was to keep you alive. You were in more danger than perhaps anyone but I realised. Voldemort had been vanquished hours before, but his supporters - and many of them are almost as terrible as he - were still at large, angry, desperate and violent."
Here, it seems that Dumbledore thought that he needed to protect Harry not only from Voldemort, but also from the other death eaters. These don't seem to mesh very well. I'm wondering, Steve, (or others) how you see the "either...survives" line. Maybe your understanding of that line will work better with the DE-protection for Harry.

(I guess we were typing at the same time, Ann.)

- - - - - - - - - -
Ann - Dec 3, 2004 8:28 pm (#42 of 381)

Steve, "either"/"the other" and "neither" both refer to two people/things, not more. (That would be "any" and "none.")

If you argue that "either" is two people/things and "neither" is a different two people/things, you run into the problem of antecedents: there are only two people previously mentioned. (Granted the "neither" could refer to their two hands, grammatically, but that wouldn't make any sense, since hands don't "live" independent of the people they are attached to.) (If Harry ends up creating a magical silver hand for someone, I will switch sides here.)

And the conjunction "for" indicates that the second phrase is an explanation for the first; if you were talking about two different pairs there is no causality possible. Why should the action of Wormtail and Neville explain that of Harry and Voldemort?

Trust a trained philologist: there isn't much this phrase can mean beside what it looks like it means (and the way Dumbledore interprets it). The "either" is somewhat ungrammatical; it ought to be "one" ("one must die at the hand of the other"), but presumably JKR didn't want to prejudice the outcome by implying that both can't die. "Either" technically should mean only "one or the other" when used as a pronoun, but as an attributive adjective (description tied to a noun) it can mean each: "on either side of the road" means "on each side of the road."

Actually, the only convincing reinterpretation I've heard so far (and even it falls down over stress patterns and "for") is the Theodore Nott suggestion: that everyone is mis-hearing the prophecy, and what Trelawney really said was "But he shall have power that the Dark Lord knows Nott. And either must die at the hand of Theodore, for neither can live while Theodore survives." Really clever, but not, I think, true.



- - - - - - - - - -
T Brightwater - Dec 3, 2004 8:32 pm (#43 of 381)

"So," said Harry, dredging up the words from what felt like a deep well of despair inside him, "so does that mean that...that one of us has got to kill the other one...in the end?" "Yes," said Dumbledore.

I think vball man brought up a very good point. Dumbledore doesn't lie; if he doesn't want to answer a question he says so. This sounds like a pretty definite statement that either Harry will kill Voldemort or vice versa - whatever assistance either may get from Fawkes, Scabbers, Snape, the HBP or any other stray characters. :-)

- - - - - - - - - -
Mrs Brisbee - Dec 3, 2004 8:54 pm (#44 of 381)

I don't see how the modifying phrase could be interpreted as meaning that other people could kill them. All it does is explain why one of them has to kill the other: because neither of them will be able to live (fully, in peace, whatever) while the other is still alive. In other words, they can't just ignore each other and lead separate lives, because, just by existing, they prevent each other from living normally. --Ann

Because the modifying phrase could just mean that death itself for Harry or Voldemort wont solve the problem for the other one. Maybe they wont be at peace or have their own minds back, and their connection would linger beyond the grave, unless one personally killed the other, and that would what it would take to break the connection.

Ann, I'm also interested in the idea that the prophecy is about three people, but you say it isn't philologically possible. Are you sure it doesn't work as "either (Harry or Voldemort) must die at the hand of The Other (the third party)"? I'm not getting why that's not possible, so maybe you could clarify it. Thanks.

- - - - - - - - - -
Steve Newton - Dec 3, 2004 10:01 pm (#45 of 381)

Librarian
I am stunned by the amount of grammar presented. I didn't understand it when I was in school, and still don't. Maybe I'm a slow learner.

Its too late for me to think it through again.

- - - - - - - - - -
Ann - Dec 4, 2004 8:28 am (#46 of 381)

Sorry. Look at it this way. "Either" essentially means "one of the two," right? So, "one of the two must die at the hand of the other." The meaning is pretty unambiguous. "Other" means the one of the pair that doesn't die. It sounds confusing initially because she used "either" rather than "one," probably because she didn't want to rule out the possibility that both will die. (And the either-other-neither-other rhyme and rhythm is nice, too.)

If she'd capitalized "other," I might be tempted to go with the idea that "The Other" was a third person, not previously mentioned. But even then it doesn't make any sense. Let's say, as some have suggested, that "The Other" means Neville. So, plug in the equivalents, and you get: Voldie or Harry must die at the hand of Neville, because neither Voldie or Harry can live while Neville survives. Quite apart from the question of why Neville would want to kill Harry anyway, you have a problem because the "for" (= because) phrase doesn't explain anything. Voldie and Harry can't live while Neville survives; why would that mean that Neville must kill one of them? Wouldn't it more likely mean that one of them would kill Neville? But that isn't even mentioned as a possibility. (This is true not only of Neville but also of Wormtail or any third party.)

If you take it in the more conventional way, you get: Harry must die at Voldie's hand or Voldie must die at Harry's hand, because Voldie can't live while Harry survives and Harry can't live while Voldie survives. This inability to live fully while the other is alive explains why either Voldie or Harry must kill the other. You don't get that with a third party, be it "The Other" or Neville or Theodore Nott.

It's hard to discuss this without tying oneself in knots. But my point is that any alternative explanation has to make sense in the context of the ordinary meaning of the words and follow grammatical rules.

- - - - - - - - - -
Cezar Salem - Dec 4, 2004 8:44 am (#47 of 381)

I think the "other could be the HBP... I mean, if you think about it, Harry and Voldemort are still living, because the "other" isnt here yet... so when he comes, then he will have to kill one of them... so its like this :neither (harry and V)can live while the other(HBP) survives... when the HBP comes he will kill either harry or V and then only one will be alive... thats alright, the prophecy only says that both cant live at the same time that the HBP survives... if its only one, then ok...anyone understant ? this interpretation doesnt only fit with the HBP but with others as well... I only used the HBP because its on of the only people that ar comming we think will be will be new caracters... but anyone new would fit... thats why I thhing the HBP is a baby...

- - - - - - - - - -
Ann - Dec 4, 2004 8:55 am (#48 of 381)

Cezar: "thats alright, the prophecy only says that both cant live at the same time that the HBP survives... if its only one, then ok..."

No, it still doesn't work. It says "neither can live while the other survives." "Neither" means "both not" in the sense of "not one and not the other." So if "The Other" were the HBP, and he killed either Harry or Voldie, the other (Harry or Voldie) still wouldn't be able to live. And I still think that their inability to live while the HBP survived would not explain why he should kill one of them.

- - - - - - - - - -
Daisy Pennifold - Dec 4, 2004 9:02 am (#49 of 381)

I agree, Ann. I know Ms. Rowling can be quite tricky at times, but I for one would be pretty upset if she were to twist up the final confrontation at the end of the seventh book and blame it on the grammatics of the prophecy.

She has said that she and Sibyll have worded the prophecy very carefully. I think that if there were any hint that another person were involved, Dumbledore would have picked up on it. She used the conversation between Harry and Dumbledore at the end of OP to explain it to us as much as possible, and two parts of the conversation made the entire prophecy problem quite clear in my mind.

One part is, of course, when Harry asks if one has got to kill the other in the end, and Dumbledore says yes. Pretty self-explanatory.

The other part is where Dumbledore makes it clear that Neville is not involved:

"Then - it might not be me?" said Harry. "I am afraid," said Dumbledore slowly, looking as though every word cost him a great effort, "that there is no doubt that it is you." "But you said - Neville was born at the end of July too - and his mum and dad - " "You are forgetting the next part of the prophecy, the final identifying feature of the boy who could vanquish Voldemort..Voldemort himself would 'mark him as his equal.' And so he did, Harry. He chose you, not Neville. He gave you the scar that has proved both blessing and curse." (OP US842)

The final identifying feature of the boy who could vanquish Voldemort is that Voldemort would choose him. NO ONE else can kill Voldemort. Not Neville, not Wormtail. Harry is the only one Voldemort has marked as his equal.

Grammar notwithstanding, JKR has made it quite clear that this is how it happens. Either Harry kills Voldemort, or Voldemort kills Harry, "in the end".

Some of the arguments have been very clever, and it is possible Wormtail's hand will have a part to play in the end. It will not kill Harry or Voldemort, however. Here's my quick take on that.

Wormtail's hand kills Harry - This won't happen. I believe Wormtail will have a final redemption before the end of the books, and he will protect Harry in some way, not kill him. I think JKR (through Dumbledore) made this clear at the end of PA. I don't think she would have said it if she wasn't going to make use of it. The idea of a servant to Voldemort in Harry's debt is too large a cliffhanger to just let it go.

Wormtail's hand kills Voldemort - this would make no sense, because Voldemort wouldn't die at the hand of Voldemort, and the hand being considered Voldemort's because he made it is the only way that the hand could be included in the prophecy by any stretch of the imagination.

Sorry if this has all been said before, I've read so many posts on this subject it is difficult to remember all of the ideas. These are my own opinions on the matter.

- - - - - - - - - -
Classicsquid592 - Dec 4, 2004 5:44 pm (#50 of 381)

If you wanted to connect three people to the prophesy, you could twist it to mean that, while, both Harry and Neville have the power to defeat the Dark Lord only one may survive. "neither can live while the other survives." If Harry sacrificed himself and Neville went on to actually kill the Dark Lord, or the reverse of that, it could still fit the prophesy. If this were the case Neville would have fit all of the aspects of the prophesy, He was already born as the seventh month died to those who had thrice defied the dark lord. Now lets move forward. Harry sacrifices himself in battle to save Neville, Harry's place as the chosen one is passed to Neville, and Neville finds himself with a new power that the Dark Lord knows not. Something more powerful than even Harry possessed in life. Voldemort faces Neville in battle, thus marking him as his equal. And Voldemort dies at the hand of THE OTHER one possibly connected to the prophesy rather than THE ONE who had the power to vanquish the Dark Lord. Neither THE ONE with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord nor The Dark Lord live, but THE OTHER survives. Harry sacrifices his power to vanquish the Dark Lord out of love, fulfilling all of the central themes of the book: love, sacrifice, and death.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
avatar
Elanor
Hufflepuff Prefect
Hufflepuff Prefect

Posts : 1440
Join date : 2011-02-19
Age : 45
Location : France

Back to top Go down

The Prophecy II (Post 51 to 100)

Post  Elanor on Thu Jun 02, 2011 3:12 am

Choices - Dec 4, 2004 6:41 pm (#51 of 381)
*Completely Obsessed With Harry Potter*
My question is, since they are both co-existing at the present time, what event will precipitate the need for one of them to die at the hand of the other? How long will they both continue to live and what will happen that will tell them that this co-existance can not go on and the time has come for one or the other to die?

- - - - - - - - - -
Mrs Brisbee - Dec 5, 2004 6:55 am (#52 of 381)

Thanks, Ann, for clarifying yor position. I also think it makes the best sense when read in the most straightforward manner, but I'm not ready to discount any alternative interpretations (whether it's based on farfetched homophone confusion like "not" for "Nott" or the more likely missing a proper noun like "other" for "Other").

My question is, since they are both co-existing at the present time, what event will precipitate the need for one of them to die at the hand of the other? How long will they both continue to live and what will happen that will tell them that this co-existance can not go on and the time has come for one or the other to die? --Choices

Good question. We know that Voldemort tranfered some of his power to Harry. Perhaps he discovers that the only way to get it back and get rid of that connection between them is to kill Harry personally. Suppose Harry died in some other way and the connection continued? I think Voldemort wold find it a real pain to have a sort of psychic connection to someone dead. Even now they are living a sort of half life, never entirely sure when the other is seeing what they are. From the prophecy, we know that Harry is the only one that can vanquish the Dark Lord, and when Dumbledore told him the prophecy Harry was bestowed with a sort of noblesse oblige to try and do just that.

- - - - - - - - - -
essie125 - Dec 6, 2004 7:16 am (#53 of 381)

Jo, of course I think about Alan when I think about Snape, Who wouldn't think about Alan all day every day eh.
throughout the whole OoP Harry's scar is irritated and prickly. And when Voldemort becomes aware of the link between him and harry his scar starts to hurt even more. It becomes harder for him to focus on certain things. And also i think this link between harry and V is becoming more and more of a burden for harry. Ad the losses that harry has already encountered from V and his followers. His parents, Sirius, and Cedric Diggory. If I'm not mistaken the Prophecy I says that V will rise more powerfull and more evil then before. And I think we will see a fine example of this in the sixth and seventh book. In the end harry doesn't care whether he has to die or become a killer to get rid of V as long as he gets rid of i/b HIM. by the way does anyone know that the last word of the last chapter of the last book in the series is scar.

- - - - - - - - - -
Hollywand - Dec 6, 2004 8:55 am (#54 of 381)

Gryffindor
Hi Essie---I just want to adder my two newts by suggesting that Rowling may entirely change our association with the scar by the end of the books, if indeed the last word is "scar". For example,

"And when Harry ever needed Fawkes at this side, he only had to touch his scar."

- - - - - - - - - -
T Brightwater - Dec 6, 2004 11:20 am (#55 of 381)

Reading this thread (and a few others) has helped me understand medieval Scholaticism much better. :-)

- - - - - - - - - -
Ann - Dec 6, 2004 10:05 pm (#56 of 381)

Now wait a minute, T; I didn't say anything about angels and heads of pins, did I?

(Sorry about all the grammar. I keep forgetting....)

- - - - - - - - - -
Professor Dumbledore - Dec 8, 2004 1:48 pm (#57 of 381)

Sorry to just burst into the conversation with a completely different topic, but I have a question. I'm not sure if this has been covered in this thread before, but I was rereading OotP for about the millionth time and I saw the inscription on the prophecy and wondered what is meant. I don't remember what the exact letters were, but they must have stood for something. The inscription on the prophecy was on the last page of the chapter 'The Department of Mysteries'. So has anyone worked out what they meant?

- - - - - - - - - -
T Brightwater - Dec 8, 2004 2:06 pm (#58 of 381)

Sybill P. Trelawney to Albus Percival Wulfric Brian Dumbledore (Don't know if I got his middle names in the right order.)

- - - - - - - - - -
bella - Dec 8, 2004 3:16 pm (#59 of 381)

I've always said there was an @ssh*le born every minute, but I think I need to revise that estimate upwards.
"by the way does anyone know that the last word of the last chapter of the last book in the series is scar"

Is it? Where did you hear that?

- - - - - - - - - -
vball man - Dec 8, 2004 4:28 pm (#60 of 381)

He is no fool who gives up what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot loose. - Jim Elliot
I think its from the TV show she did a long time ago. Harry and Me, or something...

- - - - - - - - - -
Paulus Maximus - Dec 8, 2004 4:36 pm (#61 of 381)

And P is for Patricia, I believe.

- - - - - - - - - -
Tomoé - Dec 9, 2004 12:21 am (#62 of 381)

Back in business
Yes, it's P for Patrica.

I reread the quote vball man wrote on post 41 : "My answer is that my priority was to keep you alive. You were in more danger than perhaps anyone but I realised. Lord Voldemort had been vanquished hours before"

The one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord approaches...
born to those who have thrice defied him, born as the seventh month dies...
and the Dark Lord will mark him as his equal, but he will have power the Dark Lord knows not...
and either must die at the hand of the other for neither can live while the other survives...
the one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord will be born as the seventh moth dies...

Can the prophecy already be over?

- - - - - - - - - -
Steve Newton - Dec 9, 2004 6:43 am (#63 of 381)

Librarian
That would be an interesting twist. Meaning that Lord V is not the Dark Lord anymore? Somebody else?

- - - - - - - - - -
Paulus Maximus - Dec 9, 2004 10:29 am (#64 of 381)

Maybe the terms of the prophecy are already fulfilled... except for one thing.

Neither Harry nor Voldemort has died at the hand of the other.

- - - - - - - - - -
Tomoé - Dec 9, 2004 12:22 pm (#65 of 381)

Back in business
Voldemort was at the very least medically dead, how can you be more dead than getting your body anihilated? So even that part could have been fullfilled.

Voldy not being the Dark Lord anymore? Interesting twist ...
Or maybe Harry is not the one anymore ...

- - - - - - - - - -
Mrs Brisbee - Dec 9, 2004 2:08 pm (#66 of 381)

It would seem then that lines 1-3 have come about, but line 4 is yet to be fulfilled. And maybe line 5 too, but that might just be Trelawny repeating herself.

- - - - - - - - - -
Paulus Maximus - Dec 9, 2004 3:10 pm (#67 of 381)

"Voldemort was at the very least medically dead, how can you be more dead than getting your body anihilated? So even that part could have been fullfilled."

Voldemort may have died, but not at Harry's hand. It was Voldemort who cast the AK that took his own life (or would have, if he had been human enough to die.)

- - - - - - - - - -
John Bumbledore - Dec 10, 2004 9:30 am (#68 of 381)

"Tempus edax rerum." [Time, the devourer of all things.] Ovid
... neither can live while the other survives...

I believe it was Choices that asked about this, saying that they both are living now. The subtly is in the meanings of the two words "live" vs. "survive." Yes, Choices, they are both alive at present in the story (book 5), but for both (either) it is merely survival not a life lived. To live means more than having breath and a beating heart, those are the minimums for survival. To live mean to have more, to enjoy, even to have leisure.

-- Bumbledore -- B^D

- - - - - - - - - -
Choices - Dec 10, 2004 11:33 am (#69 of 381)

*Completely Obsessed With Harry Potter*
We don't know that much about Voldemort - perhaps he does have leisure time and things he enjoys. Harry definitely has leisure time and things he enjoys - Quidditch, visiting Hagrid, playing Wizard Chess with Ron, just kicking back with Ron and Hermione out by the lake or sitting by the Common Room fire. I would call that living. The things that individuals enjoy can be very different and so can the definition of living vs surviving.

- - - - - - - - - -
Eponine - Dec 10, 2004 11:39 am (#70 of 381)

Oh dear, now I'm going to picture Voldie kicking back with Wormtail playing Exploding Snap or something. Maybe he likes karaoke or line-dancing.

- - - - - - - - - -
Paulus Maximus - Dec 10, 2004 5:26 pm (#71 of 381)

"Quidditch, visiting Hagrid, playing Wizard Chess with Ron, just kicking back with Ron and Hermione out by the lake or sitting by the Common Room fire. I would call that living."

Notice how little of that Harry has been doing now that Voldemort has returned to life?

- - - - - - - - - -
LooneyLuna - Dec 10, 2004 7:59 pm (#72 of 381)

Eponine - a spew moment! I had a vision of Voldemort singing, "I will Survive".

I like that twist with the prophecy. Something to ponder....

- - - - - - - - - -
Miss Caramel - Dec 10, 2004 8:47 pm (#73 of 381)

I want to reply to something that was discussed at the beginning of this thread but was never really put to rest... about Neville touching the prophecy orb and why didn't he go mad? It was driving me mad, so I had to go look it up.

In OOTP,Scholastic Edition American, page 829, DD says to Harry, "Only the people to whom they [the prophecies] refer can lift them from the shelves without suffering madness. In this case, either Voldemort himself would have to enter the Ministry of Magic and risk revealing himself at alst - or else you would have to take it for him".

This says to me, it is definitely Harry & Voldemort, but that doesn't necessarily mean there couldn't be others involved. Anyway, my whole point was to show that once the orb is lifted from the shelf, it's fair game, or else how could the DEs get it to Voldemort?

- - - - - - - - - -
Ms Hagrid - Dec 11, 2004 11:28 am (#74 of 381)

Is it possible that Neville could touch the prophecy because AT THE TIME THE PROPHECY WAS MADE he was one of the people the prophecy could have applied to?

It appears that the Ministry had not updated their "filing system" by changing the question mark (meaning Harry or Neville) to Harry only. Could the magic that turns someone mad be inherent in the "filing system" rather than in the prophecy?

- - - - - - - - - -
Miss Caramel - Dec 11, 2004 8:57 pm (#75 of 381)

I think it must be in the orb itself, not in the filing system. Also, adding Harry's name after the questions mark was an update. Before Voldemort went after Harry, it was just a question mark.

Another thing, even though the people who knew about the prophecy could only guess about what it really meant, it's not like the prophecy itself would be confused about it. The orb would most likely "know" who could touch it or not IMO.

- - - - - - - - - -
Classicsquid592 - Dec 12, 2004 12:17 am (#76 of 381)

It seems that we will know the answer to our questions about Neville with the next poll question. If JKR rejects it, we declare it an Evans, if she refuses to tell (which I expect she will) the discussion continues and becomes ever more heated.

- - - - - - - - - -
Solitaire - Dec 12, 2004 1:57 pm (#77 of 381)

About the word vanquish ... I looked it up in my old (and I do mean old ... and falling apart) Webster's New World Dictionary, and it defines the term as follows: 1. to conquer or defeat in battle; force into submission; hence, 2. a) to defeat in any conflict, as in argument or competition; b) to overcome or subdue (a feeling, condition, etc.); suppress; as, h is success vanquished fear. Nowhere is the word kill or the expression put to death used.

I'm curious ... has anyone ever read a definition that indicates to vanquish someone is to kill him? I just wondered ... could it possibly be as Tomoé suggested? Voldemort was certainly vanquished when he attempted to kill Harry as a baby.

He remained in that state until shortly before Harry's arrival at Hogwarts. Trelawny's prophecy certainly foretold his rise again to power, and that prophecy has been fulfilled. That would seem to indicate that he was in a vanquished state prior to his rebirth, correct? I'd never thought of it before, until Tomoé mentioned it ... but it makes sense. Well, to me, anyway!

I have often wondered if the ellipses in the prophecy in Book 5 indicate pauses by Trelawny or words that have been deliberately omitted, so that Harry could not hear them. If the latter, then there are still things we do not know about that prophecy.

I look for at least one more "big one" from Trelawny before she bites it. It's odd, because on the surface she seems to be such a fraud. She is so wrapped up in all of the "trappings" of divination that she is unaware of having made the second prophecy. I wonder ... does she even know about the first one?

Solitaire

- - - - - - - - - -
Choices - Dec 12, 2004 8:11 pm (#78 of 381)

*Completely Obsessed With Harry Potter*
I think what changes the meaning of vanquish is the next part that states that neither can live while the other survives. That seems to indicate that one or the other must die, unless JKR intends for "live" to mean be at peace or enjoy life. She definitely does not make it easy for her readers to solve the mysteries of HP.

- - - - - - - - - -
Ainsley Black - Dec 13, 2004 4:16 am (#79 of 381)

in my 'Concise ~Oxford dictionary' vanquish is simply defined as "literary" conquer or overcome.

- - - - - - - - - -
wwtMask - Dec 13, 2004 6:28 am (#80 of 381)

In regards to how Neville could touch the prophecy, I think it's clear that, after Harry took the prophecy from the shelf, anyone could touch it. Otherwise, I doubt the DEs would have been so eager to take the thing from him.

- - - - - - - - - -
Steve Newton - Dec 13, 2004 7:50 am (#81 of 381)

Librarian
wwt, I don't think that that is clear at all. I think that it was a very purposely constructed scene that allowed only Harry and Neville to touch the prophecy.

edited for a slight increase in intelligence.

- - - - - - - - - -
Paulus Maximus - Dec 13, 2004 8:36 am (#82 of 381)

"Either must die at the hand of the other," the prophecy said. Harry has not died at Voldemort's hand, nor vice versa. Harry might have vanquished Voldemort, but that only proves that the prophecy refers to him. It still hasn't been fulfilled.

- - - - - - - - - -
wwtMask - Dec 13, 2004 11:24 am (#83 of 381)

I think the problem may be in how you define "retrieving the prophecy". Is it taking it from the shelf or taking it from the Dept. of Mysteries? I believe now that it is the former, simply because Voldemort already tried to use Bode to take the prophecy. Why would he then send his DEs into the Dept. of Mysteries to take the prophecy away from Harry instead of letting Harry take it out of the Dept. of Mysteries first, if doing so would make one or more of his minions insane? The DEs had to carry the thing out somehow, they were quite ready and unafraid of handling the thing with their barehands, and Voldemort had no intention of going into the MoM himself. Besides that, they had the inside knowledge of Rookwood, who used to work there and would tell Voldemort, to the best of his knowledge, whether handling the prophecy after it's been picked up by Harry would hurt any of the DEs.

- - - - - - - - - -
John Bumbledore - Dec 14, 2004 1:11 pm (#84 of 381)

"Tempus edax rerum." [Time, the devourer of all things.] Ovid


Retrieving the Prophecy
Dumbledore was quite clear, As Miss Caramel so thoughtfully gave us the cannon source in her post, "Miss Caramel - Dec 10, 2004 7:47 pm (#73 of 83)"

In OP page 829, DD says to Harry, "Only the people to whom they refer can lift them from the shelves without suffering madness." There it is spelled out, Neville didn't take it off the shelf, Harry did that. Dumbledore would mention any other protections if there were any. Since he did not, there must not be any other protections appart from the jinx restricting who may remove the prophecy from the shelf.

<)B^D= Bumbledore *

- - - - - - - - - -
wwtMask - Dec 14, 2004 3:01 pm (#85 of 381)

Well, there you have it. I personally am not a fan of the "Prophecy is really about Neville" theory. Besides taking the focus of the story away from the main character, it just doesn't match up with all that has happened in the story. It would seem too much like a cop-out to have the burden of the WW suddenly taken from Harry and thrust upon Neville, who is not prepared to deal with it like Harry has learned to.

- - - - - - - - - -
essie125 - Dec 16, 2004 8:00 am (#86 of 381)

Jo, of course I think about Alan when I think about Snape, Who wouldn't think about Alan all day every day eh.
hollywand you might be right about that sentence, but personally i was thinking of a sentence more in the lines of, "Harry could never have pulled it of if it would not have been for his scar." But anyway it is something to discuss.

- - - - - - - - - -
Miriam Huber - Dec 26, 2004 10:49 am (#87 of 381)

Hi,

merry Christmas!

I have a question I wanted to post on the "Sybil Trelawney"-thread, but it doesn´t exist...

Sorry if you already discussed it here, if so, please tell me where, because I didn´t find it when I tried to search for it.

I just can´t help wondering why Trelawney in BOTH of the real prophecies talks about "THE DARK LORD". Harry says in OoP to Snape that he heard only Death Eaters call Voldemort "the Dark Lord", and I think, he is right (for example, it is a little clue when fake Moody alias Crouch jun. starts saying "the Dark Lord" when he transports Harry to his office after the portkey had brought him back to Hogwarts in GoF; impostoring Moody, he did it never before).

I thought first it could have been only to make the prophecies more impressive. But would it really be so much less impressive if she had said "HE WHO MUST NOT BE NAMED"? And JK insists that she worded the prophecy extremely careful, so I can´t imagine it is a glitch.

And when Trelawney "awakes" after her prophecy about Wormtail, and Harry tells her what she has said, she first repeats: "The Dark Lord?", and then adds immediately: "He Who Must Not Be Named?". Why did JK add this? To show that the "normal" Trelawney does NOT call Voldemort "the Dark Lord"? Or did Trelawney try to hide the use of this title by hastily "switching back" to the common and unsuspicious "He Who Must Not Be Named"?

Probably, I am over-interpreting (but I hope it is allowed on this forum, doesn´t it? ...), but I find this curious.

But I can´t imagine, either, that Trelawney would be a Death Eater, or a former Death Eater like Snape... it sounds ridiculous.

So, what do you think?

- - - - - - - - - -
Solitaire - Dec 26, 2004 2:00 pm (#88 of 381)

If she is "channeling" someone or something--which is sort of implied by the different voice she uses--then whoever or whatever is "sending" the prophecy would determine the wording ... right? Perhaps the "one" sending the prophecy is a former DE. Who knows?

Solitaire

- - - - - - - - - -
aasa - Dec 27, 2004 5:16 am (#89 of 381)

Miriam!

I thought of exactly the same thing, and I totally agree with you: this is not a coincidence and it is definitely a clue! I just can't make anything out of it.

I don't think (don't want to think, more likely) that some Death Eater is speaking through Sybil Trelawny of his/her own free will, but then again we don't know much about prophecies and how they work, do we?

Anyway: Dumbledore seems to believe it is a correct prophecy and he heard the first one, both the voice and the wording, and it did turn up in that room in the MoM where all records of prophecies are stored...

I'm dead sure that the fact that "she" uses the name Dark Lord, is very important, but, as I said: how?

aasa

- - - - - - - - - -
Ann - Dec 27, 2004 7:44 am (#90 of 381)

Calling Voldemort "the Dark Lord" is doubtless popular among DEs because it is a kind of honoring of him--"You Know Who" or "He Who Must Not Be Named" are more neutral, although they both imply a sort of fear. It's funny, actually, that we haven't heard any more negative names for him. (Fudge's "Lord Thingy" is even sort of admiring.) Dumbledore's "Tom" is the most belittling thing he's ever called. Compare that with the Forum where he get's called things like Voldie and the Dork Lard. But perhaps that's strategy on JKRs part--it is hard to make your villain really scary if people in the books are calling him Voldie.

But if you think about the tone of a prophecy, I don't think anything but "the Dark Lord" would work. I find it very hard to imagine a prophetic statement made about "You Know Who." And the people at the DoM who labelled it called him "the Dark Lord," too; surely if the use of that phrase were a tip-off that the user is a DE, you wouldn't find it on an official document like the label.

- - - - - - - - - -
aasa - Dec 27, 2004 9:04 am (#91 of 381)

But couldn't "she" (since it's not really Trelawny that is speaking) simply have said Lord Voldemort, since that is his real name? Instead of using a "nickname" known to be used by Death Eaters?

"And the people at the DoM who labelled it called him "the Dark Lord," too; surely if the use of that phrase were a tip-off that the user is a DE, you wouldn't find it on an official document like the label"

I always thought that was on the label because that is the only "name" acually spoken in the prophecy. Remember that Harry Potters name is followed by a question mark on the label in the MoM since they were not absolutely sure that he was the boy the prophecy was refering to (at least not at the time the prophecy was made).

aasa

- - - - - - - - - -
Miriam Huber - Dec 27, 2004 11:04 am (#92 of 381)

Thank you for your support, aasa! But if it means anything, what DOES it mean? You are right: We know too little about prohpecies to be any the wiser.

Concerning the label:

I think labeling a prophecy is a little like quoting scientifically: You have to stick very strictly to what is actually said (some people even mark it when they fix very little typing errors within the quote), because changing the quote is already interpreting. The prophecy is made about "the Dark Lord", not Voldemort, not Lord Thingy, so it had to be labelled "Dark Lord". In my opinion, you can see that they are very careful also because they did not completely relabel the prophecy after Harry was attacked, but they kept the (?) in front of his name, because literally, the prophecy is made about someone who is in the prophecy itself not explicitly identified as "Harry Potter".

Ann, I thought about the tone of the prophecy, too. But why not say (very dramatically): "He Who Must Not Be Named"?

- - - - - - - - - -
Madame Pomfrey - Dec 27, 2004 11:31 am (#93 of 381)

I agree with Solitaire that the message Sybil gave was "channeled".Maybe from a dead deatheater. Maybe it was Regulus who had tried to back out and was killed.Maybe he was trying to give warning.Then again,Does anyone know if Regulus was killed before or after the prophecy?

- - - - - - - - - -
Choices - Dec 27, 2004 11:36 am (#94 of 381)

*Completely Obsessed With Harry Potter*
Here's a question - the people at the MOM who create the orb and enclose the prophesy in it and then label it....do you think they hear the prophesy or know what it says? If so, are they sworn to keep the information private and tell no one what they hear?

- - - - - - - - - -
aasa - Dec 27, 2004 12:10 pm (#95 of 381)

I totally agree with you about the label, Miriam.

About the name I still claim that the prophecy should have said Lord Voldemort if the choice of the name were not highly significant.

Mme Pomfrey, I just don't see how and why this message/prophecy was channeled through Trelawny from a certain person. All we've seen so far from divination and predicting the future; it's not about contacting people from the "other side" like some sort of a "medium". But then again we haven't seen proof of the contrary either...

The more I think about it the more it bothers me! Because I think, like you Mme Pomfrey, that whoever uses must be a Death Eater, but still it IS a prediction. Both the first and the second one. How could anyone have known that afternoon that Peter Pettigrew was to be discovered AND have the chance to escape later that night???

Choices, I've been thinking about that too. Since nobody but the person/persons "involved" in the prophecy can touch the orb I think (hope?) they are conjured magically in some way. Maybe even automatically? Because how would the MoM know when a new prophecy is made? Do you report it when you hear it? Because obviously Trelawny couldn't report it since she is not even aware of the fact that she made it...

Questions questions...

aasa

- - - - - - - - - -
Madame Pomfrey - Dec 27, 2004 12:20 pm (#96 of 381)

Maybe the ones who work for the Dept. of Mysteries "unspeakables"I think they're called.Otherwise,Voldemort would know its content from Rookwood or other spies.Of course Jo mentioned on her website that she couldn't tell us too much about why the Lestranges were sent after the Longbottoms because it touched too closely to the prophecy and how many people knew about it.

- - - - - - - - - -
Madame Pomfrey - Dec 27, 2004 12:34 pm (#97 of 381)

sorry,cross posted.Aasa,I think maybe I use the word channeled because Trelawneys voice changed to one not of her own. Like someone else speaking through her.I guess when I read Solitaires post the movie "Ghost" came to mind when Whoopee was used by a ghost to converse with his wife.

- - - - - - - - - -
Solitaire - Dec 27, 2004 12:36 pm (#98 of 381)

I've often wondered how they know about the prophecies ... and whether all prophecies are recorded or just some ... and which ones.

As to the channeling issue ... Dumbledore does not say whether or not Sibyll is aware of the prophecy he heard her make. I think this is an important piece of information. If Sibyll does NOT know she made the prophecy, then she is vulnerable to having her mind broken by Voldemort. I think we all can guess what shape she would be in at that point, can't we? She certainly did not seem to have been aware of the one she made to Harry, unless that was an act of some sort. I suppose it could have been, but somehow I don't think it was.

My point was that, from what I've read of and heard about channeling, the "medium" or "channel" tends to go into a trance. She is not aware that her body and voice are being used to give a prophecy; she may even be unconscious. The prophecy is not hers; it is being delivered by some other source who is simply using the medium's body and voice as a means through which to communicate.

Think back to the DoM, when Voldemort was possessing Harry; Harry felt his mouth move, even though it was Voldemort and not Harry speaking to Dumbledore. I am suggesting that whoever or whatever was speaking--and I believe it could have been anyone or anything--was simply using Sibyll to give Dumbledore the prophecy.

If Dumbledore was, indeed, the one intended to hear that prophecy--and an official record of it wound up in the DoM--then it may be safe to assume the prophecy Sibyll gave to Harry was also recorded and placed there. We did not find out this information, and for all we know, it may have been among the orbs that were smashed ... or it may have survived and be on record. It would be interesting to know whether the records of the prophecies continue to exist or whether they self-destruct after the prophecy is fulfilled. If the latter, then the prophecy about Peter and Voldemort would no longer be in the Ministry, would it?

Solitaire

- - - - - - - - - -
Madame Pomfrey - Dec 27, 2004 1:02 pm (#99 of 381)

Solitaire,You explained that so well.That is what I was trying to say.50 points to your house!I wonder why Jo didn't want to give too much away on how many people know about the Prophecy.

- - - - - - - - - -
aasa - Dec 27, 2004 1:04 pm (#100 of 381)

Mme Pomfrey, Solitaire, I think we are on the whole on the same wave length regarding this. I do understand what you mean when you explain it like that. I am too certain that it is not Trelawny herself that makes the prediction, she just speaks it.

It's just that where does the prediction come from? It's not like she interprets what she sees in some tea leaves or in a crystal orb; somebody or something is giving this prophecy with Trelawny simply acting as the loud speaker.

Well I guess it's impossible to crack this clue, but still: the thing about "the Dark Lord" BOTHERS me!!!

aasa

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
avatar
Elanor
Hufflepuff Prefect
Hufflepuff Prefect

Posts : 1440
Join date : 2011-02-19
Age : 45
Location : France

Back to top Go down

The Prophecy II (Post 101 to 150)

Post  Elanor on Thu Jun 02, 2011 3:13 am

Solitaire - Dec 27, 2004 1:24 pm (#101 of 381)
Thanks, aasa and Madame P. Aasa, I am not at all sure about the source of the prophecy, either. Is it just "vibes" that she attracts? Could the source perhaps be a Voldemort victim who has slipped "beyond the veil"? Could it be the spirit of one of the founders? I don't really understand or subscribe to spiritualism, so when I consider it, I am doing my "willing suspension of disbelief" thing, I guess.

Jo's comment that "Madame Trelawney and I worded the prophecy very carefully" (or something like this) makes me think that we will eventually (end of book 7, perhaps) understand its source and everything about it. I wouldn't mind hearing what Firenze has to say about it all, though.

Solitaire

Edit: You know ... a thought just occurred to me. Could the source be one of the Riddle family that Tom/Voldemort murdered? Just something to ponder ...

- - - - - - - - - -
vball man - Dec 27, 2004 4:47 pm (#102 of 381)

He is no fool who gives up what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot loose. - Jim Elliot
Well, I think that the one (or ones) that spoke through Trelawney do so from time to time.
1. Dumbledore knows immediatley how serious the prophecy was. Harry, didn't know what to think when he heard it.
2. We've already seen two prophecies just 15 years apart. The hall of prophecy was full of more. So there have been a lot.
3. The prophecies related to the "dark lord." We know at least one other "dark wizard." (Grindelwald)

Perhaps the prophecies are a way for someone to help the good guys defeat the dark guys.

- - - - - - - - - -
Ainsley Black - Dec 28, 2004 5:35 am (#103 of 381)

Who's to say that the "Dark Lord" in the Prophecy IS Voldie??

Perhaps it refers to an ACTUAL Lord who is on the Dark side, the Lestranges? After all they are a pure-blood family and maybe a aristocratic one too. That's why Voldie sent them to go after the Longbottoms!!!!!

- - - - - - - - - -
TwinklingBlueEyes - Dec 28, 2004 6:01 am (#104 of 381)

"Character is doing the right thing when nobody is looking"
"That's why Voldie sent them to go after the Longbottoms!!!!!"

Maybe I'm mistaken, and don't have time to look it up this morning, but I don't remember Voldie "sending the DE's after the Longbottoms. Seems to me they tortured the Longbottoms in an attempt to find Voldie, AFTER Voldie went poof!

- - - - - - - - - -
Ainsley Black - Dec 28, 2004 6:05 am (#105 of 381)

I'm not sure if JKR has made that clear YET! I may be wrong (please fell free to proove me wrong). Perhaps she will tell us in the next couple of books.

- - - - - - - - - -
TwinklingBlueEyes - Dec 28, 2004 6:13 am (#106 of 381)

"Character is doing the right thing when nobody is looking"
""We have heard the evidence against you. The four of you stand accused of capturing an Auror - Frank Longbottom - and subjecting him to the Cruciatus Curse, believing him to have knowledge of the present whereabouts of your exiled master, He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named -" GOF, Chap 30, The Pensieve.

Seems pretty cut and dried to me.

- - - - - - - - - -
Elanor - Dec 28, 2004 6:20 am (#107 of 381)

LOL TBE! I was just searching for that quote too and I found another one, in the same chapter, DD says: "His father, Franck, was an Auror just like Professor Moody. He and his wife were tortured for information about Voldemort's whereabouts after he lost his powers, as you heard." (p.523) and "The attack on them came after Voldemort's fall from power, just when everyone thought they were safe." (p.524)

So, it seems there is no doubt about that since the fact is mentioned 3 times.

- - - - - - - - - -
Ainsley Black - Dec 28, 2004 6:20 am (#108 of 381)

Good catch TwinklingBlueEyes! Smile

- - - - - - - - - -
Ann - Dec 29, 2004 8:09 am (#109 of 381)

The source of prophecies is an interesting question. JKR seems to follow the Classical model fairly closely, in that prophecies are somewhat enigmatic, delusive, and self-fulfilling. The way Voldemort tries to prevent the partial prophecy he's heard by attacking Harry and thus "mark[ing] him as his equal" as the prophecy itself has predicted is classic Delphic Oracle material.

The voice that spoke through the Dephic Oracle was, I think, inspired by the god Apollo; I don't think the words were actually his. He simply empowered the priestess to make correct prophecies. The same is true of Hebrew Bible (Old Testament) prophets, God inspires them, but they speak with their own voices; only in the case of the Islamic Quran is it claimed that the divinity himself speaks through a prophet.

So I don't think the merely dead would ever speak through a prophet. They are thought to speak to the living through a medium, but not prophetically.

So, why would the "spirit of prophecy" or "divine inspiration" or whatever is speaking through Trelawney use the name "Dark Lord"? I agree that "He Who Must Not be Named" would sound equally spooky and prophetic, but wouldn't that mean that this prophetic "higher power" is endorsing the view that the name should be avoided? Wouldn't such a prophecy imply that Dumbledore is wrong to do so?

Lord Voldemort is a made-up name, a silly, overly grandiose adolescent anagram. I can't see the spirit of prophecy using it, somehow. And the man isn't really Tom Riddle anymore, so that doesn't seem appropriate either--not to mention the rather more casual tone that such a name would give a prophecy. ("The one with the power to vanquish Tom Riddle approaches...." I don't think so.)

The "Dark Lord" is in fact quite descriptive: he is the Lord of those who follow the Dark Arts and use Dark Magic. It's true that Harry's statement to Snape in OotP might seem to have been a clue, but I simply can't see a Death Eater speaking through a prophet. It seems sacrilegious.

- - - - - - - - - -
aasa - Dec 29, 2004 10:32 am (#110 of 381)

Hi Ann,

Even though I too think that "Lord Voldemort is a made-up name, a silly, overly grandiose adolescent anagram" I disagree with you: I think that since he is no longer Tom Riddle (especially after his spell backfired all those years ago) Lord Voldemort is the most "proper" name there is for him these days. Dumbledore call him that all the time (I think he used "Tom" in the MoM was he wanted to remind Voldemort about man he used to be).

I think that all those other name are used more to make a point of where you stand and what you think. I. e.: I think the use of "Lord Thingy" or "the Dark Lord" or "He Who Must Not Be Named" says much more about the one speaking the words than of anything else.

Which brings me to the thing we're discussing: I still claim that the use of "the Dark Lord" is significant and that were the prophecy simply "transmitting facts" it would say Lord Voldemort.

aasa

- - - - - - - - - -
Mrs Brisbee - Dec 29, 2004 3:20 pm (#111 of 381)

For some reason Trelawney doesn't uses proper names in either of her prophecies. In the second prophecy she could have said "Peter Pettigrew" instead of "The Servant", but she doesn't. People in the prophecies seem to be identified by WHAT they are as opposed to WHO they are. Peter is "the servant", Harry is "the one", and Voldemort is "the Dark Lord".

Both Tom Riddle and Lord Voldemort are proper names, and I suppose He-Who-Must-Be-Named and You-Know-Who are substitutes for the proper names. That just leaves his job description; "Dark Lord".

- - - - - - - - - -
Ann - Dec 29, 2004 4:36 pm (#112 of 381)

Mrs Brisbee - "job description": I love it!

"Wanted: Dark Lord. The successful applicant will have documented experience in murder, torture, world domination. Must get on well with snakes. Ability to produce terrifying glances and occasional bursts of mad laughter a plus. Mudbloods and Muggles need not apply"

Interesting observation about the lack of names, too!


Mrs Brisbee - Dec 29, 2004 5:43 pm (#113 of 381)[/b]
LOL Ann! Think maybe he picked up that pamphlet during his 5th year career advice?

- - - - - - - - - -
Hermy-own - Dec 30, 2004 10:20 am (#114 of 381)

S.P.R.W. Vice President = Ponine
LOL@Ann! And Mrs Brisbee! Take 20 points, the both of you.

- - - - - - - - - -
Mrs Brisbee - Dec 30, 2004 7:36 pm (#115 of 381)

Heehee. Anyway, to complete my thought (wow, a complete thought!), I'd say that Trelawney tags people in her prophecies by what they are, not by who they are. The Death Eaters call Voldemort "Dark Lord" for a different reason; calling someone by their title donates respect. Calling someone by their name without their title means familiarity, and could be considered disrespectful, especially if you call them by their little kid name when they don't want you too("Tom," just for example).

- - - - - - - - - -
Madame Librarian - Dec 30, 2004 8:12 pm (#116 of 381)

Jo tells us that she and Sibyll worded the prophecy very carefully. Why? To be vague? To leave the main characters mnetioned therein as generic as possible?

Now tell the truth, everyone--when you read that prophecy in OoP didn't you think of the most obvious characters? Dark Lord = Voldemort, the One = Harry. I did for sure. I can't say the same for the prophecy in PoA since I was clueless about Peter's role in the grand scheme of things. Of course, after the fact, it was clear that the servant = Pettigrew.

OK, now, consider that basic tension JKR has built into this saga what with the two opposing concepts--free will ("...it's our choices, Harry...") vs. prophecies. It's a conflicting message I'm reading here in the Potterverse and it makes me uncomfortable.

So, how can we resolve this? Maybe the answer is in the wording of these prophecies. Since they don't really specify beyond a doubt who they're about, maybe the person hearing the prophecy could fill in the blanks, so to speak, with whomever they feel fits the bill. Someone earlier suggested that we know there was another Evil Wizard before Voldemort. Does that mean that Dark Lord could equal Grindelwald? Well, that puts the concept of a prophecy on much shakier ground. If the listener gets to pick who they think the prophecy is talking about, and then proceeds to act on those assumptions, it's not a perfect choices rule situation, but it's certainly no longer as prophetic as you might think.

I suppose a really radical skeptic, might take the attitude that there are no names named in the prophecy, therefore it's all nonsense. At the very least, it loses a lot of it's force when you realize that one person may hear the words and think, "Ahh, that's Voldemort. Oh, and that's Harry," while another may think of others. If these two take different actions, well, how do we know which path was the one the prophecy predicted?

Golly, I'm totally confused and I did it to myself. If there is any grain of sense buried in this wordy post, I hope someone out there was able to get my meaning. I don't necessarily expect you to agree with this, I just hope I was a little bit understandable.

(This is a great thread and excellent discussion, by the way. I just hope I haven't brought down the level too much here.)

Ciao. Barb

- - - - - - - - - -
MickeyCee3948 - Dec 30, 2004 10:17 pm (#117 of 381)

Avatar courtesy of Gwen
Madame Librarian your posts are always thorough and very well put, it is just a very puzzling question. The meaning of the Prophecy. Your guess is probably better than mine.

Mikie

- - - - - - - - - -
vball man - Dec 31, 2004 1:36 am (#118 of 381)

He is no fool who gives up what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot loose. - Jim Elliot
Yes, well put, Mdm Librarian. There is an interesting tension between the idea that we have choices, and that we fulfill a destiny. JKR brings this out well in her treatment of prophecy. Also in the way that Dumbledore seems both to be in control, and to be laissez-faire.

(Nice to hear from you. Seems like you've been gone lately? - maybe I'm not reading enough.)

- - - - - - - - - -
Solitaire - Dec 31, 2004 1:58 am (#119 of 381)

Barb, wasn't the prophecy delivered many years after Grindelwald had been vanquished and just prior to the birth of Harry and Neville?

Solitaire

- - - - - - - - - -
Ainsley Black - Dec 31, 2004 5:05 am (#120 of 381)

Sorry this is going off topic a little but i just have to say that in POA (the film version) when Trelawny has her second Prophecy is it just me or does she just remind you of Harry from "Third Rock From the Sun"??

- - - - - - - - - -
Madame Librarian - Dec 31, 2004 5:37 pm (#121 of 381)

Hi, everyone -- yes, we were on a vacation to Australia for three weeks and Web-less for most of the duration. Had a great time, but missed you all a lot.

Solitaire, yes, the Grindelwald era was probably too early. I say probably because, though DD heard the prophecy, what was it, 15 years before the year of OoP, can we be sure that it's referring to something in the future? What if the poor woman spouts off a prophecy on a regular basis, say once a year, till there's someone around to hear it, but in some cases the urgency of the prediction is no longer an issue. The prophecy made to DD is taking a long time to develop if we assume it refers to Harry, etal. The one she made in PoA about Peter comes to pass within a few weeks. Curious, I think.

As usual, I'm am not 100% invested in this theory. All of your cogent arguements against it make sense to me when you present them. There's just that feeling I have that when all is said and done, in the choices vs. destiny problem, that choices are going to be the operative system. It just fits so much with JKR's overall themes and, in truth, that jibes with my outlook, too.

Ciao. Barb

- - - - - - - - - -
Solitaire - Dec 31, 2004 6:19 pm (#122 of 381)

Barb, I can see your point. But part of the prophecy has come true, hasn't it? And for a time, I suppose it seemed as if the entire prophecy had come true, since Voldemort disappeared for so many years.

Solitaire

- - - - - - - - - -
Madame Librarian - Jan 1, 2005 5:23 pm (#123 of 381)

Well, yes...we know what we think we know about the facts of the story being the fulfillment of the prophecy. I'm just assuming (dangerous, I know) that it will not be at all cut and dried. Jo has probably built in numerous "alternate exits" to the particulars of the prophecy with that tricky wording.

Hey, if I weren't really rooting for the "choices" system to override the destiny one, I'd relax a little more about the prophecy. But I have this fantasy scene/interview going on in my imagination after the last book where Jo says something like, "What? You folks thought I'd let those characters off so easy as to be ruled by destiny? Didn't I repeat over and over how important a person's choices are? That's truly the main message I was aiming for. I surely hope everyone walks away from this series believing that--especially the kids who read the story."

So, I hunt and hunt for all the possible chinks in the armor as far as destiny is concerned. I hope I'm not disappointed.

Ciao. Barb

- - - - - - - - - -
Ann - Jan 1, 2005 8:45 pm (#124 of 381)

Barb, I agree with you that the idea of predestination undercuts JKR's wonderful theme of choices, and I had argued against the whole prophecy angle until the Edinburgh book fair chat. But the two questions she brought out for our consideration there (Why didn't the bounced curse kill Voldemort? and Why didn't Dumbledore try to kill Voldemort?) seem to point towards the idea that the prophecies are not only true but self-perpetuating. In other words, the fact that Voldemort is destined to be killed by Harry and no one else has made him invulnerable even to his own curse and to Dumbledore's. She actually invoked the prophecy in connection with the first question and then said something like "oh, I am being terribly indiscreet."

So, somewhat to my regret, it seems to me that there is some very strong predestination in the books, but I think we can also assume that choices are extremely important for everything that is not specifically prophesied.

- - - - - - - - - -
Tomoé - Jan 3, 2005 3:57 am (#125 of 381)

Back in business
Fate vs Choice :

The prophecy Harry hears in Dumbledore's office suggests to me that both he and Voldemort will have to die, is that true?
Both Madam Trelawney and I worded the prophecy extremely carefully and that is all I have to say on the subject!

You should be wondering what he did to make sure that he did not die—I will put it that way. I don’t think that it is guessable.

It does seem like Voldemort survived because what he did to make sure that he did not die, not because of a cosmic bug due to the prophecy. A lot of people assume Harry and Voldemort are now invulnerable to death, no one can kill them, my take is anyone can kill them but no one will.

Some people assume Dumbledore didn't try to kill Voldemort because the prophecy wouldn't allow it, my take is Dumbledore know what he did to make sure that he did not die and knew to kill his body is just to postpone the final outcomes, and he'll come back more faster this time, because Peter still think he needs his protection against Lupin/Harry/Dumbledore. Killing Voldemort is less useful than revealing to the Wizarding World the Dark Lord is indeed back.

What are the role of Prophecies and Choices then? Well, Trelawney couldn't tell which of Harry and Voldemort would die, so I would say this part wasn't determined yet and still isn't, the same goes for Wormtail, the fate wasn't for-ordered yet, everybody's choices haven't met yet to the inescapable events of the night, so Trelawney didn't give the prophecy the first time she saw Harry.

That's my two knuts worth on the subject, I hope it does make sense, it's 5:55 am and my due in my bed.

- - - - - - - - - -
MickeyCee3948 - Jan 3, 2005 12:46 pm (#126 of 381)

Avatar courtesy of Gwen
Tomoe'- Your theory makes sense. Harry and Voldemort will have to meet in the final battle and whether either or them or both of them are vanquished is the real geste of the Prophecy.

It seems that DD is anticipating this and wanted in the MoM battle to insure that the final battle did not occur at that moment of time. He knew that Harry was not ready and needed more time and thus stepped in to protect Harry. This is the first time we have seen him fight to protect Harry.

Mikie

- - - - - - - - - -
Ainsley Black - Jan 3, 2005 4:19 pm (#127 of 381)

Perhaps the specifics we are looking for in the first Prophecy do not exist purely for the fact of our 'choices'?

In adolesence do we not change our minds like the weather? Perhaps the specifics of the outcome and those involved in the Prophecy are just as ever changing until they are unrevocable, until a path is set?

Does this make sense?

What I'm trying to say is, what if things had gone differently, Voldie chose Neville instead, Harry was sorted into Slytherine, Hagrid hadn't broken the milk jug and Hermione didn't find Scabbers in the other jug? So many choices, so many options, so many what if's?

What if a prophecy is only set out to show the set paths already taken?

- - - - - - - - - -
Muggle Doctor - Jan 4, 2005 7:41 pm (#128 of 381)

I believe the prophecy is really quite simple. Voldemort has marked the one with the power to vanquish him as his equal: i.e. he gave Harry the scar and transferred some of his own abilities (plus a tenuous link which has grown stronger). One of them WILL kill the other in the end and until this happens, each of them will always be looking over his shoulder.

By one possible interpretation, Harry is not fated to die by any other means until after Voldemort is dead (either MUST die at the other's hand), and vice versa. If either dies any other way, there will be a way back.

The choice of the word "either" implies to me that the winner can and does survive the destruction of the other.

Voldemort is a fool. Despite trying to get others to do his dirty work in retrieving the prophecy, in order to stay hidden, he did in fact end up revealing himself. Not only that, he will now (probably) NEVER hear the prophecy until it is applied to him. Had he just gone in and risked discovery, he could have lifted it from the shelves and made off with it to listen in private.

As it is, he does not know just how important it is to have Harry dead. What he has heard relates to being vanquished (which his disembodiment was), and who would do it. I think his actions would have taken a very different path if he also knew that Harry was the one fated to kill him.

- - - - - - - - - -
Hollywand - Jan 6, 2005 10:07 pm (#129 of 381)

Gryffindor
Voldemort can find Trelawney and invade her mind for the prophecy. I expect that to be his next goal; trying to find out as much about the future as possible, and doing real harm to Sibyll in the process.

The other hare-brained suggestion I will make here is that Peter's silver hand will figure in the mix. The hand is an object that is made of both wizards (Harry and Voldemort "either") yet is a sort of separate entity (other). It could be the life debt Peter owes to Harry that tips the scales ever so slightly to Potter's favor.

- - - - - - - - - -
T Brightwater - Jan 7, 2005 7:29 am (#130 of 381)

Hollywand, I think Voldemort will try to get at Sibyll, but I also think she's protected at Hogwarts, which would be one reason DD wanted her to stay there.

Actually, would he find the prophecy if he was able to access Sibyll's mind? She didn't recall making the prophecy that Harry heard, so maybe it didn't actually imprint itself on her mind.

- - - - - - - - - -
scoop2172000 - Jan 7, 2005 1:58 pm (#131 of 381)

T Brightwater has got a point: Trelawney didn't recall making the prophesy, so it likely is not stored in her memory.

Trelawney seems to go into some sort of seizure state or blackout state when making real prophecies (well, at least the two genuine ones we know of)

- - - - - - - - - -
John Bumbledore - Jan 7, 2005 3:58 pm (#132 of 381)

"Tempus edax rerum." [Time, the devourer of all things.] Ovid
The vagueness of The prophecy

The servent, The one, The dark lord, these all seem to be functional titles, descriptions of images or symbols the prophet is "seeing" in their mind. You don't see a name, you see an evil person styling themself as a ruler or lord. Well, that is my guess as to how a prophecy is received by the prophet.

Do we know DD birthday? Perhaps he was born as the seventh month died to parents that had thrice defied Grindewald? And so a repeating theme.

- - - - - - - - - -
Hollywand - Jan 7, 2005 5:40 pm (#133 of 381)

Gryffindor
Repressed memories sit in a person's unconscious for years without them realizing it in real life----so it would seem plausible that the Prophec(ies) would be stored in Sibyll's mind and accessable to Voldemort.

- - - - - - - - - -
Choices - Jan 7, 2005 5:44 pm (#134 of 381)

*Completely Obsessed With Harry Potter*
While Harry waited to go in to take the divination test with Sybil, he noticed a buzzing fly at the window. Then he goes in and Sybil gives the prophesy. JKR made sure we took note of the fly. Do you think the buzzing fly had anything to do with Sybil giving Harry the prophesy? Could the buzzing fly be like the beetle who turned out to be Rita Skeeter? Who might the buzzing fly be? Any thoughts.....???

- - - - - - - - - -
Hollywand - Jan 7, 2005 6:07 pm (#135 of 381)

Gryffindor
Well, there is a chap in the series who trades in Dung/dodgy goods, and is a bit unreliable, isn't there?

What would be the chances he would report it if he were an unregistered Animagus? Especially if he could close a good deal from selling the information.

Lends new meaning to, "If I could have been a fly on the wall...."

- - - - - - - - - -
Elanor - Jan 8, 2005 1:16 am (#136 of 381)

Very interseting theories, I didn't remember about the fly!

BTW, I think that the fact that the prophecy is still in Sybill's memory or not is not what is the most important for the moment. What is the most important is to know if Voldemort believes she has that memory and try to seize her and check by himself. The result will be the same for poor Sybill and Bertha's fate could well be hers as well. If she doesn't remember, Voldemort's anger will certainly even be more terrible than if she does. And if she remembers, Harry and the Order are indeed in trouble...

- - - - - - - - - -
The Artful Dodger - Jan 8, 2005 5:38 am (#137 of 381)

I think the contradiction between choices and destiny can be quite easily resolved. Fate only gave Harry the power to vanquish Voldemort; he still has to choose to use it.

- - - - - - - - - -
Ann - Jan 8, 2005 2:54 pm (#138 of 381)

Yes, but then it says "Either must die at the hand of the other." That's a bit clearer. (I suppose he could choose not to try to kill LV, but that means that LV will kill him. Not much of a choice.)

- - - - - - - - - -
dizzy lizzy - Jan 8, 2005 3:52 pm (#139 of 381)

There is more to life than increasing its speed: Mahatama Ghandi.
But still a choice nonetheless.

Lizzy

- - - - - - - - - -
Hollywand - Jan 8, 2005 4:37 pm (#140 of 381)

Gryffindor
I think this could get to the heart of what "Albus knows" as Jo has said, and why Dumbledore didn't kill Voldy at the Ministry.

Eventually, "evil pulls down its own house", as the I Ching says.

- - - - - - - - - -
Solitaire - Jan 8, 2005 4:54 pm (#141 of 381)

I just looked back at that scene. In his test, Harry can't see anything so he makes up about Buckbeak flying away. Trelawney doesn't think much of his prediction. I wonder ... did she reconsider and give him an A when it turned out to have happened just that way? LOL

About the fly ... Harry heard it while he was waiting to go in. He did not hear it again in the room with Trelawney.

I agree with Elanor about Trelawney's fate. If Voldemort gets his hands on her--and I certainly believe an attempt to do so will be made--she can count her life in minutes, I fear. If she does not remember the prophecy, Voldemort will torture her and monkey with her mind until he fishes it out of her subconscious memory.

She is likely to die in the process, but even if she survives, she may well wind up "worse than dead." In fact, could this be what Dumbledore meant when he told Voldemort there were worse things than death? Certainly the Longbottoms are enduring a sort of "walking death," aren't they?

Solitaire

- - - - - - - - - -
Hollywand - Jan 8, 2005 5:52 pm (#142 of 381)

Gryffindor
Good points, Solitaire. Trelawney sees death circling ever nearer, and it may be her own. Her description of death circling fits with the description of the dementors as well.

Oh, the anticipation.....by the way, it's "your hero" Severus' birthday on JKR's site.

- - - - - - - - - -
MickeyCee3948 - Jan 8, 2005 9:16 pm (#143 of 381)

Avatar courtesy of Gwen
Don't be ugly Hollywand there are a number of us who have problems with the potions master and his teaching methods. As far as Trelawney goes, I would rather see Voldemort going after her rather than Harry. But as pointed out above I doubt that she would satisfy Tom and wouldn't survive very long.

Mikie

- - - - - - - - - -
Hollywand - Jan 8, 2005 9:29 pm (#144 of 381)

Gryffindor
Beg your pardon, MC I had not intended my remark to Solitaire to be "ugly", but a gentle jest. If remarks I have made on the Snape thread I have been critical of his actions as well.

- - - - - - - - - -
MickeyCee3948 - Jan 8, 2005 9:36 pm (#145 of 381)

Avatar courtesy of Gwen
My comments were made in jest also. Please don't take me seriously.

Mikie
- - - - - - - - - -
Solitaire - Jan 9, 2005 10:58 pm (#146 of 381)

It's okay, Mikie. I just stuck out my tongue at Holly's remark and then giggled very loudly! It struck me as funny that my sentiments about him are so well known as to prompt a little tongue-in-cheek jest. I didn't take it amiss. Smile

Solitaire

- - - - - - - - - -
Madame Librarian - Jan 11, 2005 5:36 pm (#147 of 381)

It's dangerous for me to let my mind wander. I never know what sort of oddball ideas and theories it will pick up off the road along the way. Anyway, I don't have a clue as to why this occurred to me other than the fact that I was watching "Love Actually" for the nth time on HBO and the bits with Emma Thompson always bring to mind her hilarious portrayal of poor Sibyll.

We know how Sibyll is never really "there" when she prophesizes. We know how her great great grandmother Cassandra was indeed a famous seeress. What if Cassandra is really the source of these prophecies and is channeling them or better yet, left them as a sort of magical legacy to her daughters, granddaughters, etc. through a spell or potion). Maybe it's just Sibyll who was the lucky heiress--perhaps she stumbled upon some of her great great grandmother's things and triggered the spell. At inexplicable intervals she goes into a trance and spouts off one of them.

So then these prophecies could be really old. Or at least some of them are. Sure, the one about Wormtail finding his master again might be a new-ish one, or seems so. The one she made when DD was listening back in Hogsmeade, though, has such tricky language and so many possible interpretations, maybe it really doesn't apply to the present day circumstances even though it seems to. What if it's meant to apply to a recurring crisis in the Wizarding world (see the "Recurring Boy Who Lived" thread)?

Well, folks, you should have many dungbombs to throw at this one, so fire away. I know I've not worked out all the reasons why this is a viable theory, but I'm stuck on the unavoidable facts of Sibyll's method of delivery (who or what takes over her mind while she's intoning??) and the obfuscatory language of the thing.

Ciao. Barb

- - - - - - - - - -
Quidditch Mom - Jan 12, 2005 9:01 am (#148 of 381)

I was skimming though the old version of this thread and had an idea. Not fully formed yet, and may have already been discussed to death. Anyway, I'd love some commentary. The thought that Harry could vanquish LV, while still leaving Tom alive gave me another, rather off-the-wall, idea.

One of my assumptions about the series is the JKR is mindful that children are a big part of her audience. I can't believe that she'll have our hero, Harry, commit murder, even in self-defense.

Maybe both Tom and LV co-exist, with LV simply the dominant personality. Harry may find a way, or somehow cause, LVs two alter-egos to duke it out amongst themselves, some kind of internal struggle...

Could the prophesy be interpreted this way -- parenthese mine --

The One with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord approaches...Born to those who have thrice defied him, born as the seventh month dies....and the Dark Lord will mark him as his equal, but he will have power the Dark Lord knows not...and either (Tom or Voldemort) must die at the hand of the other (the alter-ego) for neither (Tom or Voldemort) can live while the other (the alter-ego) survives...The one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord (Harry) will be born as the seventh month dies..."

Counting the days til July 16!

- - - - - - - - - -
Tomoé - Jan 12, 2005 9:16 am (#149 of 381)

Back in business
Interesting interpretation, could work.

- - - - - - - - - -
Ann - Jan 12, 2005 4:22 pm (#150 of 381)

But, as is always the case with these "third-party other" theories, there is the problem of a missing antecedent. We're talking about the One (Harry) and the Dark Lord, two people; and then we get "either" and "the other," both of which must refer back to members of a pair.

Dick and Jane were playing with a ball; either of them would throw it to the other. I simply don't see how you can fit Sally (or Jane's alter ego Elvira, Queen of the Night) into this scenerio without violating the rules of English grammar. Yes, I know it should be "one of them would throw it to the other"; but I think Jo avoided that in her sentence because she didn't want to rule out the possibility that both of them would die.

As for the assumption that heros don't kill monsters, even human-like monsters, in children's books, may I suggest Dorothy and the Wizard of Oz? Not to mention innumerable fairy tales. Kids are tough. It's adults that prefer to see the monster go into intensive psychotherapy and discover his inner good guy. Kids are much simpler, and much more scared of monsters. They want them dead.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
avatar
Elanor
Hufflepuff Prefect
Hufflepuff Prefect

Posts : 1440
Join date : 2011-02-19
Age : 45
Location : France

Back to top Go down

The Prophecy II (Post 151 to 200)

Post  Elanor on Thu Jun 02, 2011 3:14 am

Tomoé - Jan 12, 2005 7:30 pm (#151 of 381)
Back in business
LOL@Ann! take 10 pts whatever your house for the what children want for a story. Even if Disney do ending that doesn't stain the hero's hands, the bad one is always dead. We should never forget that The Little Match Seller is a story aimed for child.

- - - - - - - - - -
T Brightwater - Jan 13, 2005 2:20 pm (#152 of 381)

Spot on, Ann. G.K.Chesterton said adults prefer mercy, but children prefer justice. (paraphrase)

And when it comes to dealing with monsters, the real expert is Terry Pratchett's Susan. :-)

- - - - - - - - - -
Solitaire - Jan 16, 2005 3:16 pm (#153 of 381)

Is it even remotely possible that Voldemort could have learned about the prophecy from some source other than the eavesdropper? On another thread (James & Lily Potter), Catherine pointed out that Rookwood, a DoM Wizard, surely passed information to Voldemort. That got me to thinking (always dangerous). Whoever works with the Prophecies must have to hear them in order to determine to whom they apply. Is it possible that Rookwood could have learned about the Prophecy in the DoM--if not its exact wording, then perhaps its general content--and reported it to Voldemort? Just wondering ...

I think it is also possible that Voldemort initially planned to kill both Neville and Harry, just to make sure he got the right one. The fact that he was stopped by Lily--through Harry--would seem to reinforce the idea that Harry was the One meant by the Prophecy. If Voldemort had gone to the Longbottoms first, Neville probably would have died--unless he, too, was protected by the ancient magic. If so, the outcome still would have been the same ... except no more Neville. Just an idea ...

Solitaire

- - - - - - - - - -
Ann - Jan 16, 2005 3:26 pm (#154 of 381)

Solitaire, JKR says that the prophecy was overheard. What would be explained by assuming he heard about it from Rookwood, too? As for whether DoM employees know the prophecies, I don't think they do; after all, things seem to be set up to limit the access to them very strictly. I'd suppose some sort of magical way of evaluating their contents for labeling purposes.

The difference, if Voldemort had gone after Neville first, would be that he would then be revealed as someone who feared pure-bloods more than half-bloods. But he went for the child who most resembled himself. Voldemort's boggart, I believe, is probably...Voldemort!

P.S. Gorgeous cat, Soli!

- - - - - - - - - -
constant vigilance - Jan 18, 2005 10:42 am (#155 of 381)

art student
The thing I find interesting and puzzling about the Prophecy is that Voldemort believed in it. Why would he believe someone could possibly vanquish him when he KNEW that he had taken drastic measures to immortalize himself. He had never been defeated in his life (that we know of). And as Hagrid said, "I don't know if there was enough human in him for him to die.."

So, why did Voldemort give weight to the Prophecy? Voldemort has only shown fear towards two people: Dumbledore and Harry. By believing in the prophecy Voldemort makes it possible for Harry to kill him.

Voldemort never tried to cross paths with Dumbledore because he fears him. Voldemort doesn't want to admit it but he does know that Dumbledore is not intimidated by him and is an awesomely skilled wizard. With Harry, Voldemort is constantly getting close to Harry because he needs to prove to himself that Harry is not a threat (which he has disproven several times). Even though he would deny it, Voldemort fears Harry and that fear weakens Voldemort. In addition, Voldemort has now had to face Dumbledore in duel because he went after Harry.

To sum it up.. Voldemort will be partially responsible for his own demise for believing that he was vulnerable to attack.

- - - - - - - - - -
T Brightwater - Jan 18, 2005 10:26 pm (#156 of 381)

It wouldn't be the first time a prophecy brought about its own fulfillment.

- - - - - - - - - -
Miccaya - Jan 19, 2005 2:41 pm (#157 of 381)

Okay, I havn't read all the posts so forgive me if i repeat something but when the prophesy says "neither can live while the other survives" maybe it doesn't mean physical being. Maybe they'll both be mentaly tormented or something while the other survives. Am I stating the obvious, im really bad at comeing up with ideas but hey.

- - - - - - - - - -
Choices - Jan 19, 2005 7:51 pm (#158 of 381)

*Completely Obsessed With Harry Potter*
I suppose we could come up with all sorts of possible meanings, but I'll stick with the obvious - one has to die - Harry or Voldemort.

- - - - - - - - - -
Joanne R. Reid - Jan 20, 2005 8:48 am (#159 of 381)

Hello Miccaya,

The answer to your question can be found on Page 844 of Scholastic's American edition of the Order of the Phoenix.

'"So," said Harry, dredging up the words from what felt like a deep well of despair inside him, "so does that mean that ... that one of us has got to kill the other one ... in the end?"

"Yes," said Dumbledore.'

I think that's about as clear and concise an answer as we're going to get.

Thanks

- - - - - - - - - -
Steve Newton - Jan 20, 2005 9:16 am (#160 of 381)

Librarian
JRR, I am 90% convinced that this is the answer. It still bothers me that "the other one" is a little loose.

- - - - - - - - - -
M. Devout - Jan 20, 2005 2:30 pm (#161 of 381)

JRR, although I also agree with you, my question concerns the human error factor. Is Dumbledore infallible? I know he is generally presented as such, but even he concedes fallibility at the end of OOTP concerning his decisions made in regards to Harry. He thoroughly explains how such mistakes came to be made, and though his answers are reasonable, it still affirms that he, along with all the other characters, make mistakes. Is it reasonable to assume that his interpretation of the prophecy is the only possible one? Perhaps in the prophecy, the reiteration of the phrase “born as the seventh month dies” serves to offer various interpretations for the word ‘die’ in the line “and either must die at the hand of the other for neither can live while the other survives”(OOTP, American Edition, page 841). ‘Live’ can’t follow the seemingly obvious definition, as both DO currently live. Maybe dies is better perceived in context meaning ends or finishes, for we already know that “there are other ways of destroying a man” and “things much worse than death” (OOTP, American Edition, page 814), and also that a month can die without being slain. I, like Steve Newton, am also 90% convinced that either Harry or Voldemort must die, but I won’t come to any absolute conclusions just yet Smile

- - - - - - - - - -
Ann - Jan 20, 2005 3:07 pm (#162 of 381)

Dumbledore makes mistakes with Harry, but that very fact suggests to me that if he felt any doubt at all about his interpretation of "either must die at the hands of the other," he would have said so. If he'd said, "Yes, Harry, I think so" or "I'm sorry, Harry, but I don't think it could possibly mean anything else," I would be a lot more receptive to alternative interpretations. But he simply said "Yes." I don't think he could possibly be wrong.

- - - - - - - - - -
Choices - Jan 20, 2005 7:11 pm (#163 of 381)

*Completely Obsessed With Harry Potter*
I agree Ann, but I have always been suspicious about the "at the hand of the other" part. I wonder if the Hand of Glory and Wormtail's new silver hand will play any role in this. Those are the two "hands" we have learned about and it just makes me curious. We all know that JKR puts things out there that are not as simple as they appear to be.

- - - - - - - - - -
Ann - Jan 20, 2005 10:38 pm (#164 of 381)

I don't know. To die at someone's hand or by someone's hand is a standard English expression. I suspect she put it there for the rhythm. "Either must die at the hand of the other for neither can live while the other survives" is almost poetic in its rhythm and repetition of the syllable "ther" (and every word except the last that doesn't end in "ther" is monosyllabic).

And, semantically, neither Wormtail's new hand or the Hand of Glory belongs to either Harry or Voldemort.* So it seems unlikely that they are the hands mentioned in the prophecy.

* Use of either and neither here is intentional.

- - - - - - - - - -
Joanne R. Reid - Jan 21, 2005 11:13 am (#165 of 381)

M. Devout, I do understand what you're saying. I agree whole heartedly that DD is neither omniscient nor omnipresent. Yet, because of his age and wisdom, he seldom makes mistakes. His mistakes come in one of two forms: trivial and whoppers. The trivial mistakes (at least in his mind) derive from not putting any real thought or effort into a decision. That is, he assumes that he's making the right decision without really analyzing it. His other mistakes are not from a lack of study or thought, but of his inability to control events or from his own wishful thinking.

However, when DD makes a statement or provides an answer he is always extremely circumspect. He is very careful to differentiate between what he knows to be true and that which is specualation on his part. He will also withhold information rather than be specific when he is in doubt. However, whenever he has always spoken the truth he has been clear and unambiguous.

I think that DD's unqualified "Yes" is critical not only to the character of the man but also to the story. IMO, this is the nexus of the ethical dilemma of Harry Potter.

OK, I've blabbered on far too long.

Thanks,

- - - - - - - - - -
Aurora Gubbins - Feb 8, 2005 6:36 am (#166 of 381)

New to thread...I confess to not having read every post but I think I get the gist of much of what is there. Here are a couple of points for you all to shoot down in flames.

Has anyone considered JK's comments on her website about the DEs going after Frank and Alice - not Neville? She said she couldn't go into detail because it touched too close on the Prophecy. I seem to remember something about no DE knowing about the prophecy, which tells me that they were aware that LV was off to visit the Potters (to kill Harry) and then the Longbottoms (to kill Neville) in that order. He disappeared after the rebounded AK so the next logical place would be the Longbottom household - hence the DEs torture Frank and Alice to find out what happened to LV.

Also, has there been any discussion about the wands of Harry and LV doing battle against each other and about thier reactions? In GOF they became connected and cancelled each other out, and LV's wand didn't seem to reproduce the curse that backfired, giving Harry his scar. (Am I remembering this right?) This is one of the clinchers that makes me think the Prophecy will cover Neville, and his new wand. And don't forget Neville has a toad which can be used to create a basilisk which could do battle with Nagini.

Aurora xx

- - - - - - - - - -
Mrs Brisbee - Feb 8, 2005 12:30 pm (#167 of 381)

In GOF they became connected and cancelled each other out, and LV's wand didn't seem to reproduce the curse that backfired, giving Harry his scar. --Aurora Gubbins

Good point. Bertha Jorkin's shade comes out of Voldy's wand, then Lily's, with no mention of Priori Incantatum effects in between. Whatever the AK that was supposed to kill Harry that came between did its reverse effect wasn't spectacular enough to be noticed by Harry, perhaps because it didn't do what it was supposed to in the first place?

- - - - - - - - - -
Ann - Feb 8, 2005 4:21 pm (#168 of 381)

VERY interesting point about that missing AK spell! You're saying it wasn't spectacular enough to show up, but in fact it left the scar, more or less killed Voldemort (okay, less, but you'd think his body would come out of it), and possibly blew up the house (otherwise, what did?). So why wasn't it there? Hmmmm. On the other hand, it would have been very weird had a dead Voldemort come out of the wand--particularly if it ended up helping Harry!

- - - - - - - - - -
Mrs Brisbee - Feb 8, 2005 8:02 pm (#169 of 381)

The AK probably made Harry's scar (I think it says that the killing curse did so in CoS, though none of the other books say so definitely that I know of), and I have always assumed that the AK did rebound on Voldy. You would think it would show up in the reverse effects as something (though not a Voldy shade, since the AK failed to make him all the way dead), but we have no other examples of how spells that go wrong are recorded by wands to go by. Also in the mix was Lily's protection and whatever Voldy had done to protect himself from death, neither which would be recorded by the wand. I think Rowling just skipped it so as not to give too much away.

- - - - - - - - - -
Aurora Gubbins - Feb 9, 2005 7:34 am (#170 of 381)

Just one further thought since reading your responses: It did occur to me that maybe it was only spells that involve people that could be reproduced during Priori Incantatem, but that's how the Dark Mark was reproduced after the Quiddich World Cup. Now that I have checked my GoF, the spells reproduced were: Screams of pain (Cruciatus curse), a smoky hand (Wormtail's), shouts of pain, Cedric Diggory, more screams of pain, Frank Bryce, Bertha Jorkins, Lily Potter then James Potter. No sign of the missing AK. I know this has a bearing on what will happen - I can just feel it. We'll see. Maybe something happened to Lily's body and it was the curse hitting her that overcame LV and gave Harry the scar rather than a direct blast from the wand (Remember in CoS; Nobody died from the Basilisk's stare as nobody actually saw it, only a reflection of it) If this is right this will probably make LV more determined to kill Harry.

As for the Prophecy (and getting back to thread) does anyone else think that the wands will actually be able to do battle, bearing in mind the graveyard scene in GoF?

I suppose we'll not get to know the details of the night LV turned up until book seven, as the only witnesses are either dead or were too small to remember. And, after all, the end will probably take us back to the beginning.

Aurora xx

- - - - - - - - - -
Choices - Feb 10, 2005 11:38 am (#171 of 381)

*Completely Obsessed With Harry Potter*
Maybe the AK didn't show up out of Voldemort's wand because it was a failed curse. It was designed to kill and it didn't - it destroyed Voldemort's body, but technically it didn't kill him - his essense or spirit escaped. It was the essenses or spirits of the people he had successfully killed that came out of the wand - their shadows if you will - but they were knowledgable of what was going on and they helped Harry. Voldemort's spirit couldn't be in there with the others because it survived the rebounded AK.

- - - - - - - - - -
Aurora Gubbins - Feb 10, 2005 2:58 pm (#172 of 381)

Don't forget the screams of the Cruciatus curses and the silver hand!

Aurora xx

- - - - - - - - - -
Choices - Feb 10, 2005 7:51 pm (#173 of 381)

*Completely Obsessed With Harry Potter*
Yes, the Cruciatus Curses did what they were supposed to do, they were not failed spells, so it was correct that they (the screams) emerge from the wand. The ghost of the hand he had made for Wormtail came out because that was not a failed spell either. Wormtail's real hand was dead and he had a new silver hand. The AK that Voldemort used to curse Harry failed to kill either Harry or Voldemort, so I believe that is why it did not emerge from the wand. There was no ghost of Harry or Voldemort to come out.

- - - - - - - - - -
Solitaire - Feb 13, 2005 11:31 pm (#174 of 381)

I believe you are correct, Choices. It makes sense.

- - - - - - - - - -
Ann - Feb 19, 2005 4:31 pm (#175 of 381)

I don't know. While it's true that the spell failed, Choices, it wasn't without effects--and fairly major effects at that. I'm more inclined to believe that it was an oversight. Jo was clearly working fairly quickly toward the end of GoF. Still, it would be interesting if someone asked her about it.

- - - - - - - - - -
Choices - Feb 19, 2005 7:06 pm (#176 of 381)

*Completely Obsessed With Harry Potter*
It did have "effects", but not the desired effect which was death. I think the AK is one of those spells that either works or it doesn't. It's supposed to kill and when it doesn't it fails and there is no ghost/spirit/shadow (whatever) to emerge from the wand, so it is simply not represented.

- - - - - - - - - -
Solitaire - Feb 27, 2005 12:26 am (#177 of 381)

Gerald, I am answering your post 1778 from the Harry Potter thread here, because it seems to relate more to the prophecy and the issue of predestination and less to Harry. If this is the wrong place, I would request that a moderator move it to the right place. Thanks.

I think your use of predestination may be the word with which I quibble. You see, I do not see gender and time of birth as predestined. They are simply determined at the moment of conception. This is not the same thing as predestination.

Again, I do believe Sibyll's big prophecy is genuine rather than a fraud, because Dumbledore says it is real. But just because the prophecies are real doesn't necessarily mean everything is predestined. Look what it says: the One with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord approaches ... It does not say the One who will vanquish the Dark Lord approaches ... This prophecy is information, not predestination. We are not told how things will play out and who will prevail.

Based on past history and knowledge of the parties involved, we assume Voldemort will make another attempt to kill Harry. This has little to do with predestination. It is simply knowledge of the character of Voldemort and his obsession with Harry.

Harry now knows the prophecy and its contents, and he knows what is at stake. Of course, he could flee Britain and hide out somewhere, but this would not be consistent with what we have come to know of his character. We can be fairly certain that he will willingly walk "into the fire" again and face Voldemort. We know this because we know Harry and understand his character and what makes him tick.

I do not see either of these cases as predestination. I see them as simply interpreting what we know about the people and events thus far, based on past events and actions. In their pasts, both characters have come to crossroads when each could have chosen other than he did. The choices each has made at critical junctures have brought each of them to where they are at this time ... and there are more choices to come.

Solitaire

- - - - - - - - - -
Joanne R. Reid - Feb 27, 2005 11:43 am (#178 of 381)

Indeed, Solitaire. You've hit it right on the head.

As I have stated earlier, Harry is the classic hero. He is "doomed" to fulfill a role. He is told what he must do. However, he has a choice.

He may do it. But, if he does, he will face his own death.

He may avoid doing it. If so, he will probably live. However, the rest of his world will suffer.

The hero accepts his role and faces the danger, regardless of the consequences.

What happens to such heroes? Most of them survive. Of those who don't, they are generally taken up by their gods or whatever to live on a higher plane of existence.

So, Harry, knowing the Prophecies, will face Voldemort and, most likely, he will survive. He will bear his scars, both the physical one and a newly acquired mental one for the rest of his life.

At least that's how it goes in classic literature of the West.

Thanks

- - - - - - - - - -
Gerald Costales - Feb 27, 2005 7:03 pm (#179 of 381)

"I think your use of predestination may be the word with which I quibble. You see, I do not see gender and time of birth as predestined. They are simply determined at the moment of conception. This is not the same thing as predestination."

Solitaire, the gender and time of birth thing was LPO's thought on predestination.

- - - - - - - - - -
Solitaire - Feb 28, 2005 12:18 am (#180 of 381)

Sorry to attribute it to you ... I still feel the same way, however, even if it was LPO.

Solitaire

- - - - - - - - - -
Gerald Costales - Feb 28, 2005 6:30 am (#181 of 381)

"I think your use of predestination may be the word with which I quibble. You see, I do not see gender and time of birth as predestined. They are simply determined at the moment of conception. This is not the same thing as predestination." Solitaire

(Solitaire, the gender and time of birth thing was LPO's thought on predestination.) (I didn't read post #180 when I did this.)

Does “Predestination” exist in our Real World? Yes, if you want to look for it. To me the following is an example of “Predestination” from history -

“Damage to the battle line proves extensive, but carriers Enterprise (CV-6)and Lexington (CV-2) are not in port having been deployed at the eleventh hour to reinforce advanced bases at Wake and Midway. Saratoga (CV-3) is at San Diego on this day, preparing to return to Oahu. The carriers will prove crucial in the coming months. Convinced that he has proved fortunate to have suffered as trifling losses as he has, VAdm Nagumo sets course for home, thus inadvertently sparing fuel tank farms, ship repair facilities, and the submarine base that will prove invaluable to support the U.S. Pacific Fleet as it rebuilds in the wake of the Pearl Harbor disaster.”

Source: WW2 in the Pacific Countdown to War, [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Would the U.S. have been as able to rebuild it’s Fleet as fast as it did if those three carriers had been lost or damaged that Sunday morning? Some experts think that both the Enterprise and Lexington could have been damaged if in port or if a third air strike was launched by the Japanese Imperial Fleet that morning.

“Predestination” is most likely a collective mixture of individual resolve, judgment, and choices. If there is no individual resolve; there could be no unit resolve. If there is no unit resolve; there could be no fleet or army resolve. If there is no military resolve; there could be no national resolve.

In a biography of Winston Churchill I recently read, there is an incident that may also be an example of “Predestination”. Churchill having resigned as First Lord of the Admiralty became a Major on the Western Front. A superior ordered Major Churchill to meet him. Churchill reluctantly went to the meeting. The person Churchill was supposed to meet never showed up.

On Churchill’s return to his underground lodging, he discovered that his dwelling had been hit by a shell. In fact, a soldier that was in that dwelling was killed by the shell’s explosion. Churchill was convinced that he was spared by Fate to live.* What would Britain or for that matter the World have done without a leader with the resolve of Churchill during WWII? (By the way, Churchill’s mother was American and his father British. Interesting, a Half-Blood.)

There is a collective mixture of individual resolve, judgment, and choices in the Series. But, there are hints of Fate, Destiny, or “Predestination” that will only be evident when all the major events of the Series play out. Then finally JKR will reveal the truth hidden in the “Prophecy”. (She did word the "Prophecy" very carefully.)

PS Chance is the Fool’s word for Fate. ;-) GC

PSS Maybe, if I’d used the words “Fate” or “Destiny” you might find this more acceptable. Some things are just meant to be. There is really no good explanation. I just believe there are some moments and events in life that are unavoidable no matter what others do or what you do. ;-) GC

.* New Abode

One day during World War I, Winston Churchill visited France as a volunteer to observe the fighting first hand. In his sandbagged shelter at the front line, he was brought a message from a visiting general, a former acquaintance, who wanted to see him. Churchill was instructed to walk to a crossroads some three miles away, where a car would meet him. After waiting at the crossroads for nearly an hour, however, he was joined by one of the general's officers. The car had been sent to the wrong crossroads, the man explained, and it was now too late for any meeting to take place. Churchill, understandably peeved, began the long haul back to the trenches in the dark; then, as rain began to fall, he produced a stream of silent invective describing the thoughtless general.

When he finally reached his camp, Churchill was astonished to find that his shelter had apparently disappeared. Five minutes after his departure, he learned, a shell had come through the roof, obliterating the structure and killing the man inside.

"Suddenly I felt my irritation against General X pass completely from my mind," he later recalled. "All sense of grievance departed in a flash. As I walked to my new abode, I reflected how thoughtful it had been of him to wish to see me again, and to show courtesy to a subordinate when he had so much responsibility on his shoulders."

Churchill, Winston Leonard Spenser (1874-1965) British politician and writer, First Lord of the Admiralty (1911-15, 1939-), prime minister (from 1940), Nobel Prize recipient (Literature, 1953) [noted for his remarkable eloquence and leadership ability; for his memoirs and letters; and for such works as The Second World War, The Great Republic : A History of America and My Early Life]

[Sources: Little, Brown Book of Anecdotes]

Source: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

- - - - - - - - - -
Solitaire - Feb 28, 2005 12:18 pm (#182 of 381)

We must be defining predestination differently. I am using the following definition, found at [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] the doctrine that God in consequence of his foreknowledge of all events infallibly guides those who are destined for salvation. This definition presumes that all events, actions, and outcomes are decided before the individuals concerned are even born. Free will and choice really do not exist, according to this theory.

I do not wish to enter into a theological discussion here. I will simply say that I see choice as a major theme in the books. I do not see predestination as such.

I personally believe you are taking about pre-arranging, pre-planning, and pre-establishing from a HUMAN standpoint. Either way, I think we are at a stand-off and must respectfully agree to disagree on this issue. Smile

Solitaire

- - - - - - - - - -
vball man - Feb 28, 2005 1:47 pm (#183 of 381)

He is no fool who gives up what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot loose. - Jim Elliot
I guess I'd say that choice and predestination are themes in this series. I know that they are often assumed to be contradictory, but I don't necessarily see them that way.
Like Solitaire said, this is not the place for theological discussions, but at the same time they do seem germane to the HP series. I would just point to Spurgeon. Read his notes on "free agency" and "predestination."

So, how can I say, "both"? Yes, Harry will choose his fight. He will choose to pit himself against Voldemort. But he was also chosen for this, at least by his wand.

- - - - - - - - - -
Gerald Costales - Feb 28, 2005 6:24 pm (#184 of 381)

"I personally believe you are taking about pre-arranging, pre-planning, and pre-establishing from a HUMAN standpoint. Either way, I think we are at a stand-off and must respectfully agree to disagree on this issue. Smile" Solitaire

Solitaire, this isn't the first time that we've disagreed. I still think of you as a Lexicon "Forum Friend". I'm sure we'll agree and disagree on more topics. (We had some great exchanges on the Marietta Edgecombe thread before they closed it down.) Looking at the dictionary definition, it really doesn't agree to my thoughts on "Predestination". I may have use an alternate word like "Fate" or "Destiny" in the future.

". . . I'd say that choice and predestination are themes in this series. I know that they are often assumed to be contradictory, but I don't necessarily see them that way."

". . . how can I say, "both"? Yes, Harry will choose his fight. He will choose to pit himself against Voldemort. But he was also chosen for this, at least by his wand." vball man

vball man, both the "Prophecy" and the "Wands" make me think that there is some higher power involved in the Series. I can't wait to read Book 6, even if I've missed the boat on many of my thoughts about the Series. ;-) GC

- - - - - - - - - -
Aurora Gubbins - Mar 1, 2005 6:47 am (#185 of 381)

Hmm...predestination...???

During The Great War (Muggle WWI) my Great Grandfather, a member of the British Merchant Navy, arranged for shore leave to spend time with his family. Arrangements were made for another seaman to take his place on board ship and holiday plans were made. With only a few days to spare, my Great Grandfather cancelled his plans, his leave and eventually set sail with his shipmates. His ship was hit by an enemy torpedo and the entire crew went down with the ship, all but the stand-in seaman. Was this predestiny? Did events happen in this way because my Great Grandfather was to die, or was it because the other seaman was meant to live? Who knows.

I will say this though: Even Centaurs have misinterpreted the signs..

Aurora xx

- - - - - - - - - -
Joanne R. Reid - Mar 1, 2005 7:33 am (#186 of 381)

One of the greatest advantages of writing fiction is that one does not necessarily have to live in this universe. In the real world we are all bound by the laws of physics. In the imaginary world of fictional literature, authors can create their own universes, free from the encumbrances of reality.

In the WW, we find a world of magic. We explore new concepts, new realities and new people. But, none of it exists, except within the pages of these wonderful novels.

However, this also means that we cannot apply the rules of our universe to that of the non-real world portrayed within the pages of JKR's novels. In her imaginary world, Fate might exist. In her imaginary world, Predestination might exist. They could, because in this wonderful world of magic, there is no causality.

Causality is a critical limitation of our universe. Magic can not happen in our universe, because neither the neccessary nor the sufficient causes exist to create the desired effect. We are limited by what it is, rather than what we'd like it to be. Thus, it is that neither Fate nor Predestination can exist in our universe. There is no causal nexus that will create the desired effect.

We'd all like such things to be true in our universe. But, chaos reigns supreme. We'd all like to think anecdotally: This person avoided utter catastrophe at the last second .... But, what of the other people who did not avoid the catastrophe. One or two people did not get onto the Titanic. Many hundreds did. One or two people missed their merchant ship, which was later sunk. Yet, the rest of the crew perished. One or two people missed this or that or the other thing by the merest of happenstance. Thousands of others didn't. This is not Fate or Predestination. It is the way things happen in our universe.

Perhaps this is one of the strongest reasons we seek out literature like Harry Potter. We seek to escape this universe and to enter a parallel world in which things are different and unknown. There, in that world of Harry Potter, Prophecy does exist. Fate does take a person's hand to lead them to their doom.

All we know for sure is that the boy who lived has the power to defeat the Dark Lord. And, I say, "Accio, Half-Blood Prince!"

Thanks,

- - - - - - - - - -
spinowner - Mar 1, 2005 12:10 pm (#187 of 381)

1. "...and he shall have powers that The Dark Lord knows not..."

Does this mean that he shall have powers whose existence V is not aware of, or that he shall have powers V is aware of but does not "know" (have the ability to use), or that V will not be aware that he has these powers? Does it matter?

2. To me, "vanquish" implies rendering V powerless. Going back to the duel in GoF, Harry and V were rendered equal when the wand connection was in place. No outside help was available to either wizard. Harry was able to outduel V under those conditions. Perhaps this was a foreshadowing of Harry being able to squibify V. A bit of a reach, I know, but what the heck.

- - - - - - - - - -
Gerald Costales - Mar 3, 2005 7:31 am (#188 of 381)

.* Carl Jung defined synchronicity as "The coincidence in time of two or more causally unrelated events which have the same meaning." *

,* The true story of synchronicity begins with the collaboration of two remarkable thinkers, the psychologist Carl Jung and the physicist Wolfgang Pauli. Their concept of synchronicity originated in a marriage between the approaches of physics and psychology. . . . . . . "Meaningful coincidences are unthinkable as pure chance--the more they multiply and the greater and more exact the correspondence is...they can no longer be regarded as pure chance, but, for the lack of a causal explanation, have to be thought of as meaningful arrangements." W. Pauli writes, "There must be something else. I think I know what is coming. I know it exactly. But I don't tell it to others. They may think I am mad. So I am doing five dimensional theory of relativity although I don't really believe in it. But I know what is coming. Perhaps I will tell you some time." *

Five dimensions? I think most of us could account for four dimensions - Length, Width, Height, and Time. Why “Time”? Many people believe that the fourth dimension must be “Time”. “Time” as a dimension could allow the possibility of time travel. (JK Rowling has used the “Time Turner” to travel time.) Also, we live in the present but there is history - “time past” and the future - “time unknown”. (And JKR has used the “Pensieve” to reveal the past.)

But, is the future really “time unknown”? We build products and structures from blueprints for the future. A car or skyscraper doesn’t build itself. People have clocks, watches, routines, schedules, and calendars to manage time. How could a modern society survive without the managing of time? Even ancient and primitive people had the Day, the Cycles of the Moon, and the Solar or Lunar Year. And there are the Seasons. To some people there are the four seasons. With each Season having some signs to herald there approach and ending. The stars helped measure the Year as well as the Sun or Moon.

In Tropic areas there are the Monsoons with a Wet Season and the Dry Season. In areas near rivers there are the time of Flooding, the time of Planting, and the time of Harvesting. In some places there was the time to pasture and water the herd and the time to gather the herd. For others there was the time to Hunt. During calm seas, still others took to waters for a time to fish. And to marshal people there was a time to raid, pillage, war, conqueror, and explore. Some Conquerors like the Romans have left ideals and structures that still exist to our present time.

The explorer and sailor sometimes used the stars as guides. These wayfarers made landmark, signposts, charts and eventually mapped the world. The modern driver has electronic navigation and even satellites to guide them. The modern man certainly has control over Matter, Time, and Space. But is this sense of control just an illusion of control. There are forces of nature that are uncontrollable and unpredictable - whirlwind, storm, landslide, earthquake, tsunami, flood, volcano, wild fire, and even the stars have been known to fall. And other forces Plague, Pestilence, and Famine.

And what of man and the forces they have wrought through history and to the present - The Invader - Conqueror, Lawgiver, Empire Builders; The Conquered - Subjugated, Enslaved, Oppressed; The Liberated - Barbarian, Vandal, Church Builder; The Infidel - Crusader, Merchant, Discoverer; The Reformer - Heretic, Persecutor, Inquisitor; The Enlighten - Revolutionary, Nationalist; The Partisan - Racist, Fascist, Dictator, Genocide; and The World Power - Liberator, Aid Giver, and Peacekeeper. These forces in history are entwined with no clear beginning and no clear ending. These forces exist today with causality clear and defined and other forces remain - bias, hatreds, and prejudices with causality unclear and undefined.

An what of that Fifth Dimension alluded to by physicist Wolfgang Pauli? Might it be labeled Fate, Destiny, Predestination, or Synchronicity.

.* “. . . Synchronicities represent a bridge between matter and mind and the concept of causality is clearly not appropriate to the world of mental events. By probing causality to its limit, it has been discovered that "everything causes everything else" and that each event emerges out of an infinite web or network of causal relationships. Causality therefore remains an idealization that can never be put into absolute practice.

In building the bridge between mind and matter, the notion of causality must be bypassed in favor of transformations and unfoldings. Causality and synchronicity are not contradictory but are dual perceptions of the same underlying reality. In other words, synchronicities are manifestations, in mind and matter, of the unknown ground that underlies them both.” *

Source: (* for matter between asterisks *) SYNCHRONICITY - THE BRIDGE BETWEEN MATTER AND MIND by F. DAVID PEAT PhD [Abridged] - [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Predestination or Chaos. Now, Chaos sound good. But, stop and look around you. Despite the destruction and wars man has made, Mankind remains. And we may many times feel that we are prisoners on a speeding train going into the unknown. But, the truth is there are tracks that guide us and the train. Those tracks exists and you may label them - Fate, Destiny, Predestination, or Synchronicity . And while we many times feel that our train has derailed, we remain on course. We just don’t know we're on course. We should sometimes just rest, sit back, and relax. The Conductor has control and He knows the schedule, stops, and destination. ;-) GC

PS Hey isn’t “Synchronicity” just a song by the Police?

“We are Spirits in a Material World”, yup that’s lyric from that song. ;-) GC

- - - - - - - - - -
Joanne R. Reid - Mar 3, 2005 12:47 pm (#189 of 381)

Hi,

Gerald, you declare that there are "tracks" upon which our train travels a predetermined course.

Please, demonstrate that these tracks exist. Without them, there is no predestination. Without predestination, the complex verbiage used by Jung, et al, to obfuscate rather than to illuminate, is just a sound and fury signifying nothing.

Prophecy exists in JKR's works of fiction, and we love them for it. Unfortunately, we live in a universe of chaos, in which predictability is severely limited.

Accio, Half-Blood Prince!

Thanks

Thanks,

- - - - - - - - - -
Gerald Costales - Mar 4, 2005 6:43 am (#190 of 381)

I don’t believe in a total cradle to grave type of “Predestination“. But, I don’t believe everything is random either. Some things are meant to be. There is a tiny bit of fate and destiny in individual lives and history. If you’re not familiar with “Titan”, here’s some info. from the web.

“English author Morgan Robertson wrote Futility, a fictional story about a collision between a large trans-Atlantic oceanliner, called The Titan, and an iceberg on her maiden voyage to New York. Incredibly the story was written in 1893, 14 years before the RMS Titanic sailed. . .”

Source: Jim Sadur’s Titanic Reading List, [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Here are some of the strange similarities between the book and the actual ship, they're much more impressive in table format: Weird Similarities

Robertson's Titan. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Actual Titanic

. British . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Country. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . British

. 800 feet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Length . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .882 feet

. 70,000 tons . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Displacement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .60,250 tons

. 24 knots . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Top Speed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .24 knots

. 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .# of Propellers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

. 19 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .# of watertight bulkheads . . . . . . 15

. about 3,000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . Capacity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .about 3,000

. 2,000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Actual # of passengers aboard . . .2,200

. 24 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . # of lifeboats aboard . . . . . . . . . . 20

. Starboard side forward . . . . Area of damage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Starboard side forward

. April . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Month of disaster . . . . . . . . . . . . . April

Kind of strange, don't you think? Especially when you remember that the book was written 14 years before the disaster. When Robertson wrote Futility, there were no ships anywhere near the size of Titanic in use, or being built."

Source: Morgan Robertson’s “Futility”, [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Not everything is random. ;-) GC

- - - - - - - - - -
Joanne R. Reid - Mar 4, 2005 11:55 am (#191 of 381)

Hi, Gerald,

Neither Predestination, Fate nor Random enters into our universe at all. Our universe follows well-known processes and procedures. However, because of their innate complexity, we can not use our knowledge of the universe to predict the future accurately. This condition is called Chaos.

Further, compilations of similarities, anecdotes, pseudo-statistical and pseudo-scientific gobbledygook do not formulate an argument. One must demonstrate Cause-and-Effect in our universe.

The demonstration of causality is accomplished through experimentation and observation, in which every aspect of the phenomenon is rigorously explored by large numbers of skilled and experienced persons using every technique to disprove the hypothesis. If, in the end, nobody can demonstrate that the hypothesis is untrue, then it is reluctantly accepted.

Over time, huge numbers of demonstrated hypotheses are linked together to form theses and even theories. Some of these linkages, because they can not be explained, become laws or principles upon which theories can be constructed. Still others are recognized as axioms upon which entire systems can be built.

This is not true in the non-real worlds of fiction. Writers can create any universe they wish. It is up to the reader to determine if that writer has created a sufficiently entertaining and engaging universe. In this case, JKR has created a wonderful universe ... one that we all love.

However, we must never confuse the two. In our universe, predictions, such as either of Sybill Trelawney's two known prophecies, are impossible. However, in the WW, they are relatively common.

Thanks,

- - - - - - - - - -
Gerald Costales - Mar 5, 2005 9:33 am (#192 of 381)

“Neither Predestination, Fate nor Random enters into our universe at all. Our universe follows well-known processes and procedures. However, because of their innate complexity, we can not use our knowledge of the universe to predict the future accurately. This condition is called Chaos.

Further, compilations of similarities, anecdotes, pseudo-statistical and pseudo-scientific gobbledygook do not formulate an argument. One must demonstrate Cause-and-Effect in our universe." Joanne R. Reid

It's been awhile since I took Philosophy, but I do remember the idea of Causation. I’ve check the web to refresh and expand my ideas.

“The first difficulty is that most causes are not invariably followed by their effects. For example, it is widely accepted that smoking is a cause of lung cancer, but it is also recognized that not all smokers develop lung cancer. (Likewise, not all non-smokers are spared the ravages of that disease.) By contrast, the central idea behind probabilistic theories of causation is that causes raise the probability of their effects; an effect may still occur in the absence of a cause or fail to occur in its presence.”

Source: Probabilistic Causation, [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

This excerpt about Causation certainly supports your ideas on Chaos. But, the reason I remember Causation is this argument - It should be possible to trace “Cause-and-Effect” to its origin? What was the “Prime Mover”? What was the first original Cause that set into motion every event that has brought us and this World to this point in Time?

If there was “Nothing” or a collection of inert matter - What force, power, or cause emerged from that “Nothingness”? I always think of this theory - Neither Mass-Energy can be created or destroyed. (I think that’s a sufficient restatement of the 1st law of Thermodynamics.)

But, if my definition of “Nothing” is a collection of inert matter -What force, power, or cause created that first “collection of inert matter”? Creation by definition is usually the making of “Something” from “Nothing” isn’t it. (Which can be said of my current argument also!)

Simply stated I believe there was a “Prime Mover” and that there is some hidden meaning to everything. I do not think that this power, force, or cause, that “Prime Mover” began everything and disappeared. (Remember, neither Mass or Energy can be created or destroyed.) That power, force, or cause doesn’t just intervene but has some guiding influence from that first event to our present time. Order tends to Disorder. (Which I think is a sufficient restatement of the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics.) So, if there was no guiding influence, the universe our World would simply at some point in time cease to exist. (Isn't that what is called Entropy. The Heat Exhaustion of the Universe, that the energy that started the Universe in not infinite.)

I don’t think either one of us will back down from our positions. But it’s great to have a Forum where truly meaning ideas are exchanged and discussed. ;-) GC

- - - - - - - - - -
S.E. Jones - Mar 6, 2005 7:13 pm (#193 of 381)

Let it snow!
While I find the emerging essay on predestination and our universe interesting, I'm afraid it is entirely off the mark on this thread. We've established that this is a fictional world, therefore predestination and what have you do exist, so please return to the proper topic... i.e. make it HP related.

- - - - - - - - - -
Gerald Costales - Mar 7, 2005 7:20 am (#194 of 381)

I looked at the intro to the thread and will address some of the issues raised in it.

I think Neville was able to touch the Prophecy because when the Prophecy was placed in DoM no one was certain if it applied only to Harry. Neville like Dumbledore stated could have been the object of the Prophecy until Voldermort marked Harry as his equal.

I've posted, but probably not in this thread, there are ways to mark someone besides putting a lightning bolt scar on an infant's head. The "Scar" was unintentional. Voldermort has marked Harry with something deliberate and not accidental.

The Wands mark both Harry and Voldermort as equals in my opinion. But again the ownership of the Wands are also unintentional. But at the rebirthing rite at the Graveyard, Harry's blood entered Voldermort. This act was deliberate. And Voldermort needed it to receive a new body. Wouldn't Harry's blood residing in Voldermort mark Harry as Voldermort's equal? ;-) GC

PS The existence of the Prophecy, I still think, implies some measure of Predestination in the Series at least. And the Wands only enforce a sense of Predestination. ;-) GC

- - - - - - - - - -
vball man - Mar 7, 2005 11:11 am (#195 of 381)

He is no fool who gives up what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot loose. - Jim Elliot
GC - Voldermort has marked Harry with something deliberate and not accidental.

I have to disagree. (Although I agree with GC on the off topic predestination stuff.)

...and in marking you with that scar, he did not kill you, as he intended, but gave you powers, and a future, which have fitted you to escape him not once, but four times so far - something that neither your parents, nor Neville's parents, ever achieved.'

Voldemorts intention was to kill Harry. The marking was unintentional.

- - - - - - - - - -
TomProffitt - Mar 7, 2005 11:22 am (#196 of 381)

Bullheaded empiricist
Prophecy is traditionally used in literature (all the way back to MacBeth & probably further) as a plot device to get the reader to expect one thing and then deliver another. That is prophecy almost never means what it literally predicts, yet by some small twist of interpretation turns out to be exceedingly accurate.

That is, the problem with Jo's prophecy. It is a great big hint right in front of us, but there are dozens of ways to interpret it. And even if taken at face value, we are not told which of the two, Harry & Voldemort will succeed, or if they will survive the event. This really makes it a non-prophecy, but a device which strengthens the tension of the seven-book plot as opposed to one of the seven single book plots.

--- on the off topic predestination bit, I was always powerfully struck by Carl Sagan's quote,(paraphrased) "It amazes me how people can believe in time continuing into infinity, but cannot comprehend time extending infinitely into the past." Thus implying that there never was a beginning, but an always has been. That's hard to wrap your brain around and does preclude predestination

- - - - - - - - - -
Phoenix song - Mar 7, 2005 12:06 pm (#197 of 381)

Dumbledore did not speak for a moment; he looked as though he was trying to make up his mind about something. At last he said, "I am sure. I trust Severus Snape completely." (HbP, p. 549)
"That is, the problem with Jo's prophecy. It is a great big hint right in front of us, but there are dozens of ways to interpret it. And even if taken at face value, we are not told which of the two, Harry & Voldemort will succeed, or if they will survive the event. This really makes it a non-prophecy, but a device which strengthens the tension of the seven-book plot as opposed to one of the seven single book plots." Tom Proffitt

I agree with you Tom, there are simply too many ways to interpret the prophecy for us to conclusively come up with a single answer. This prophecy, however, ties the past to the present to the future, and is integral in pulling together the overall plot of all seven books.

I'm sure that at the end of the series, the prophecy will make perfect sense to us since it will have been, in effect, "decoded". But for now there are too many ifs and question marks present.

I also really like your quote regarding the past as being something that can stretch out as infinitely as the future. I like that... I'll have to think on it some more!

Barbie

- - - - - - - - - -
Liz Mann - Mar 7, 2005 1:13 pm (#198 of 381)

Join us for the Philosopher's Stone Watch-A-Long
A Theory About the Defeat of Voldemort

If this should go somewhere else, please feel free to move it. I couldn't see anywhere myself which is why I'm starting a new thread.

I have come up with an idea about how Voldemort will be defeated. People have speculated on here and elsewhere on the Internet that Dumbledore might die in order to save Harry's life. If this is true, or if someone else sacrifices themself for Harry, then maybe Harry will gain the same kind of protection that his mother gave him when he was a baby. And therefore, the series will end how it began - with the killing curse reflecting off Harry onto Voldemort. I have this image in my head of Voldemort firing the curse at someone else and Harry jumping in the spell's way and getting hit with it himself (and the spell then rebounds). Hence Harry lives, and Voldemort (who, if you remember, came back to life as a mortal, not an immortal, and perhaps might not be able to remember just which of the steps he took was the one who worked, and so might not get his immortality back) dies.

What does everyone think?

- - - - - - - - - -
TomProffitt - Mar 7, 2005 7:49 am (#199 of 381)

Bullheaded empiricist
A character that is passive in the resolution is not a good character from a literary stand point. That is, while we don't really want to see Harry killing anyone, having Voldemort, in effect, kill himself is not a well written ending.

On the other hand, if Harry, knew or deduced that that would be the result, is quite different. Harry choosing to block the Avada Kedavra in the belief that it will be Voldemort's end is good writing. Particularly if Harry isn't one hundred percent certain that it will work.

- - - - - - - - - -
Nathan Zimmermann - Mar 7, 2005 10:58 am (#200 of 381)

I like the idea Liz, I think that if such a scenario takes place it could occur after a Camlann like battle in which only Harry, Dumbledore, and Voldemort left standing. Voldemort fires an AK at Dumbledore and Harry deflects the cure causing to rebound on Voldemort.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
avatar
Elanor
Hufflepuff Prefect
Hufflepuff Prefect

Posts : 1440
Join date : 2011-02-19
Age : 45
Location : France

Back to top Go down

The Prophecy II (Post 201 to 250)

Post  Elanor on Thu Jun 02, 2011 3:16 am

Choices - Mar 7, 2005 10:59 am (#201 of 381)
*Completely Obsessed With Harry Potter*
As long as it would fulfill the prophesy of one having to die at the hand of the other, then it would work. I, however, am hoping for something much more clever and unexpected to happen. JKR don't fail me now!

- - - - - - - - - -
Liz Mann - Mar 7, 2005 11:06 am (#202 of 381)

Join us for the Philosopher's Stone Watch-A-Long
On the other hand, if Harry, knew or deduced that that would be the result, is quite different.

That's what I meant.

Voldemort fires an AK at Dumbledore and Harry deflects the cure causing to rebound on Voldemort.

Except if Dumbledore's still alive, then someone else would have had to have just died to save Harry, otherwise the curse wouldn't have reflected. Harry would have just died in place of Dumbledore.

- - - - - - - - - -
So Sirius - Mar 7, 2005 1:07 pm (#203 of 381)

I like your theory, but I have a small problem with it. DD knew the prophecy and knew one had to die at the hand of the other, yet he blocked the AV from hitting Harry at the MoM, he wouldn't let a curse get to him, using the statues. If he knew a curse reflected back at him would do him in, he'd let them go through. As much as I like your theory, I have problems with it, again, DD knowing Voldy was mortal by this point and still blocked the curses. I do think DD is in the mix of things, but in a different capacity. Something about him conquering the other dark wizard, the 12 uses of dragons blood, his own blood line, Voldys fear of him, etc. I think he's definitely in the mix somewhere, but regarding your theory Liz, i'm not sure it's there.

- - - - - - - - - -
Nathan Zimmermann - Mar 7, 2005 9:06 pm (#204 of 381)

Liz, I misunderstood thank you for pointing out my error.

Very Sirius, I think the reason Dumbledore blocked prevent the curse from hitting Harry is because Dumbledore was fully aware that Harry was not thinking in a rational manner as such Harry rendered himself of incapable of facing Voldemort and prevailing.
- - - - - - - - - -
Aurora Gubbins - Mar 20, 2005 5:20 pm (#205 of 381)

Gosh - it's been quiet on this thread for a long time...

One thing that is really bugging me lately is the bit about the Dark Lord marking someone as his equal. Do we have to assume that he expects to find an 'equal' or that this is an unintentional occurence and he sees the marked person as his equal after he or she has been marked? Or does he just not see the 'equal' at all? I always imagined him to see himself above all around him and could not accept another as an equal. Then again, he has made his mark on all the DEs, so does he see any of those people as an equal? Or are they all really 'followers'?

My belief is that he didn't mark Harry as an equal and would not see him as such (who would see themselves as being equal to a baby?), I think this is an assumption of DD's and DD is wrong. I think LV went after both Harry and Neville but was stopped by what happened at Godric's Hollow, and that is why the LeStranges tried to find out where LV was by torturing Frank and Alice - the DEs knew that was where he was heading next.

BTW, has anyone noticed that the seventh month in the Zodiacal Calendar is Leo? That would mean that as the seventh zodiacal month dies - we are looking at November. Does anyone know who has a birthday in November?

Aurora xx

- - - - - - - - - -
Choices - Mar 20, 2005 6:28 pm (#206 of 381)

*Completely Obsessed With Harry Potter*
Aurora - "BTW, has anyone noticed that the seventh month in the Zodiacal Calendar is Leo? That would mean that as the seventh zodiacal month dies - we are looking at November. Does anyone know who has a birthday in November?"

Are you suggesting that the prophesy may refer to someone born in the month of November? I think the prophesy refers to the seventh month on a regular calendar and that is July - Harry was born at the end of July and Harry is a Leo. Another hint (among many) that he is the heir of Gryffindor perhaps. Neville was also born at the end of July and could have been the "chosen one", but Harry is the one that Voldemort tried to kill, resulting in the scar that Harry bears on his forehead. Poor Neville seems to have only been marked with a particularly powerful memory charm.

I am sure Voldemort did not mean to mark Harry or empower him as an equal, but that is what happened. Of course, Harry wasn't equal then, he was still a baby, but the seeds of future equality were planted. Some of Voldemort's powers were transfered to Harry and once Harry developes his skills and grows more powerful, he will be "equal" to the task of taking on Voldemort and hopefully defeating him. Can two wizards ever be exactly equal? I don't believe so - one may be more powerful in some areas and the other stronger in different areas. Hopefully Harry will prove stronger in the areas that count.

- - - - - - - - - -
Dumbledore - Mar 20, 2005 7:00 pm (#207 of 381)

(Albus Percival Wulfric Brian)
Very well said, Choices.

- - - - - - - - - -
Aurora Gubbins - Mar 21, 2005 11:33 am (#208 of 381)

OOPS! Sorry, made a mistake in reading my own notes.

The seventh month in the Zodiacal Calendar is Libra, not Leo as I said in my earlier post. The first sign of the Zodiac is Aries. Someone born towards the end of the seventh Zodiacal month would have a birthday sometime in the second and third weeks of November. I can't be more accurate as the dates on the Gregorian calendar don't match the movements of the stars and planets on which Astrology is based. This rules out Percy Weasley (I never thought it would be him anyway) as his birthday is at the end of November.

We know very few people know about the Prophecy and some of those that do, don't know the full story. I'm basing my supposition on Jo's responses to questions during Q and A sessions and on a comment on her website about the LeStranges being sent after Neville. The LeStranges went to the Longbottom house because they knew LV was headed there and they thought Frank and Alice knew LV's whereabouts. Jo says that The LeStranges were NOT sent to kill Neville - she said it touched too closely on the Prophecy and so would not expand on this. If LV saw a threat to his power, I can't see him making a choice between two babies when he could just kill both of them. Herod didn't take that chance and he had loads of kids killed.

Hence my train of thought.

Aurora xx

- - - - - - - - - -
Solitaire - Mar 21, 2005 5:00 pm (#209 of 381)

I did not realize that Jo had said Voldemort was headed to the Longbottoms' home. When Sirius talked to Peter/Wormtail in PoA, he said the talk at Azkaban--and among the DEs who were still outside--was that Voldemort had gone to the Potters' home on Wormtail's information--and it was there he met his downfall. This makes it seem that more DEs than just Peter were in on this information (Barty Jr. and the Lestranges, at least). If they knew Voldemort met his downfall at the Potters' house, they would have known that he was in no shape to go anywhere else afterward. They must have assumed that--in his weakened state--he had been taken from the Potters' home by someone and was being held somewhere. Assuming this was the case, they apparently suspected that Frank Longbottom--an Auror--might know his whereabouts.

A question: Do we know that Neville was the victim of a memory charm, or is this just speculation? It seems unlikely that a DE would have performed the charm, since Neville would not have been old enough to give evidence in any kind of court. I agree that if he saw his parents tortured, Gran might have wanted to obliviate that memory, so that he did not continually relive it--but I can't see any other reason for it.

I agree, Aurora, that Voldemort does not consider Harry an equal. But we must remember that he did not know the entire contents of the prophecy before he attacked Harry--particularly the part about "marking" the One as an equal--because the eavesdropper in the Hog's Head heard only the beginning of the prophecy. Voldemort acted on partial information. Dumbledore indicated that at the end of OotP. Interesting, isn't it? Voldemort often seems to lack full information about Harry.

Solitaire

- - - - - - - - - -
Choices - Mar 21, 2005 7:16 pm (#210 of 381)

*Completely Obsessed With Harry Potter*
There is no canon evidence that Neville was put under a memory charm, but there sure is plenty of hints to indicate that is what happened to him. Also, what's up with Trevor? Why does he keep running away from Neville? I hope we find out what's up with Trevor, the escape artist, and Neville's bad memory.

- - - - - - - - - -
Solitaire - Mar 21, 2005 7:42 pm (#211 of 381)

Yes, I agree there is something about Trevor ... what, I'm not sure.

- - - - - - - - - -
LaLaLisa - Mar 22, 2005 1:47 am (#212 of 381)

I think that no one but the person who the prophecy was about can take it off the shelf without going mad, I haven't read that portion of OotP in almost two years, but it seems like more than just Harry and Neville handled the prophecy in passing (Death Eaters who were chasing them, etc.) before it was destroyed. I have no idea what to think about the prophecy, but it seems like the words "live" and "survive" must have been chosen very deliberately. What is living? Has Harry really been "living" since he entered the wizarding world and found out about Voldemort? Because clearly they have been co-existing all these years. It's an interesting question.

- - - - - - - - - -
Solitaire - Mar 22, 2005 8:52 am (#213 of 381)

I believe Neville did handle the prophecy at some point, but it was Harry who lifted it off the shelf. I think you are correct about the terms "live" and "survive." Jo herself said that she and Madame Trelawney worded the prophecy very carefully--or something like that.

As with many things that have happened in the books, everything will make sense in the end, and we will probably wonder how we ever could have missed "those clues" in the first place!

Solitaire

- - - - - - - - - -
Steve Newton - Mar 22, 2005 9:07 am (#214 of 381)

Librarian
Only Harry and Neville touched the prophecy. I am still only 80% sure that it is about Harry and not about Neville.

- - - - - - - - - -
Catherine - Mar 22, 2005 9:36 am (#215 of 381)

Canon Seeker
I know what you mean, Steve. So far, the Prophecy does appear to be about Harry. But there is still time for Voldemort to mark Neville, too. JKR is too sneaky sometimes for me to accept everything at face value, even if Dumbledore indicates that it is true. I've wondered if Neville can be "the Other" instead of Voldemort.

That said, I agree that the words "live" and "survive" are important. I don't know if the Prophecy means the words literally, or figuratively. I've even wondered if the rebounded curse left not just Voldemort, but also Harry, not quite "alive."

And no, I don't know what I mean by that, exactly. But Ron's joke in GoF about Trelawney has always intrigued me, that if Harry had died all of the times Trelawney predicted, he'd be a "super-concentrated ghost." (p. 372, Scholastic hardback) That phrase always sticks out at me; for one reason, Ron tends to make accurate guesses when he's joking, and for another, because we see that Nick can still be affected by the Basilisk in CoS, even if he can't die twice.

So this leads me to wonder, as some of us did last year this time, if Harry is fully "alive" in the typical way, or if something happened during the curse that failed, something besides the connective scar and protection from Lily and the transfer of power. Something that we don't fully know about yet, perhaps something that explains the "gleam" in Dumbledore's eye after he heard the story of Voldemort's rebirth, or something that explains the intense attraction Harry holds for the dementors.

Ah, well...more questions than answers at this point. Maybe things will seem less murky come July 16th! Or...maybe I'll have a whole new batch of questions....

- - - - - - - - - -
Steve Newton - Mar 22, 2005 10:23 am (#216 of 381)

Librarian
Harry's 'aliveness' is a good question. He does seem to be immune to somethings. Why didn't the acromantula venom affect him during the tournament? Some suspect that he is immune to poison. Maybe the AK did work but just not the normal way. I wish I had some evidence and not just idle questions.

- - - - - - - - - -
Solitaire - Mar 22, 2005 10:29 am (#217 of 381)

Harry wasn't immune to the Basilisk venom. It could be that he is immune to some poisons, however. With everything Voldemort transferred to him that night--and we do not know the extent of what was passed on just yet--he might have transferred an immunity to some kinds of poisons, since that seems one of the first steps Voldemort might have taken toward immortality. Just an idea ...

Solitaire

- - - - - - - - - -
Puck - Mar 22, 2005 9:09 pm (#218 of 381)

Mommy, Queen of Everything
Do we know if Neville's family had also been in hiding? The Potter's had been tipped of by DD's spy (I presume Snape) that Voldemort was coming after the child. If he planned to go after both, then likely both family's would have gone into hiding. How, then, would then Lestrange's found them?

- - - - - - - - - -
Tomoé - Mar 23, 2005 12:12 am (#219 of 381)

Back in business
Because people started to feel safe again and the Longbottoms though it was time to get back to their old live.

Here's my 2 knuts on the words "live" and "survive"; I guess, while he wasn't dead, Vapormort wasn't alive. By one spell, he marked Harry as his equal and killed his own body, so they never lived together, Harry live and Voldemort survive. Now he has a new body, does that count as being alive or not, my guess is as good as your.

- - - - - - - - - -
Aurora Gubbins - Mar 23, 2005 5:59 am (#220 of 381)

IMHO there is a distinct difference between the words 'live' and 'survive' in this context. I think 'live' is as in 'Live life to the full', whereas 'survive' would be to simply exist: consume fuel, respire, etc. This would follow the way Harry's life has been since his birth. While there has been a suspicion that LV will return, Harry has had to exist in his Aunt's house, unable to enjoy the things children should enjoy, unable to enjoy life. Even at school he has had a tough time - mainly because of the continued existance of LV. Maybe if LV's lifeless body was discovered at Godric's Hollow that night Harry would not have had to go and live with his Aunt and Uncle and suffer at their bullying hands - he would have been able to live life to the full!

Aurora xx

- - - - - - - - - -
Tomoé - Mar 23, 2005 11:13 am (#221 of 381)

Back in business
That was my first understanding of the quote too, Aurora.

and either must die at the hand of the other for neither can live while the other survives…

Now that I re-read the full sentence, my last post sounds like pure rubbish. ^_~

edit: maybe not that much after all, since Voldemort's reincarnation, Harry's life have been even worse than usual ... I'll keep that in mind when reading HbP this July.

- - - - - - - - - -
Mattew Bates - Mar 28, 2005 6:36 pm (#222 of 381)

“Out of suffering have emerged the strongest souls; the most massive characters are seared with scars.” Kahlil Gibran
I just posted this over at "The Longbottoms - what is the secret behind their illness?" thread, and I thought it might be food for thought here, too.

First off, given how much Moldy Voldy wanted to know the full prophecy in OotP, it's a safe bet that he wanted to know the rest back in '81, too. He was willing to act without knowing it all back then, but that doesn't mean that he wasn't still seeking it out. So, While trying to destroy "the one with the power to destroy the dork lard," he had some Death Eaters trying to dig up the rest of the prophecy. When Voldy became Vapormort, They may have taken the first opportunity to try to complete this task by seeking out someone who knew likely knew the prophecy - the Longbottoms. (the Potters were dead, and Albus and Trelawney at Hogwarts were a harder target than the Aurors). It's not that they were trying to get the location of the Dark Lord from them directly, they were hoping that the rest of the prophecy would give them a clue of how to contact their fallen master. At this point, it doesn't even matter if the Longbottoms know the full prophecy or not - just that the Death Eaters think they do.

Similarly, Even if Voldy wasn't as desperate to know the rest back in the day, the one who overheard the prophecy would be able to work out who the candidates of the prophecy were. Even if this unnamed Death Eater hadn't had the task of finding the rest of the prophecy before, they still probably thought it might lead them to their master. So then, they share what prophecy info that they had with others they trusted. So, I'm confident that one of the Death Eaters imprisoned for the crime of attacking the Longbottoms was the one who overheard part of it to begin with.

Either because the Longbottoms would not, or could not (another Fidelus?), release information about the prophecy, they were driven insane by the torture.

Having since learned from his mistakes, OotP Voldy wanted the full prophecy before acting publicly again. Since he doesn't have it yet, he still may be tentative to act, and will likely still focus his actions on getting the rest of the prophecy. Because he still fears Albus, HBP Voldy's focus should turn to either kidnapping Trelawney or prying it out of Harry's mind through their connection.

- - - - - - - - - -
Aqualu Nifey - Mar 28, 2005 9:26 pm (#223 of 381)

"So this is how liberty dies, with thunderous applause." - Padme Amidala-Skywalker
I was thinking something along those lines, too. Someone did get removed from the Hog's Head, and they heard part of the prophecy at least. It would make sense that it would be some one like Bella, they would know to go after the other child born as the seventh month dies to those who had thrice defied the Dark Lord.

- - - - - - - - - -
Madame Librarian - Mar 29, 2005 10:16 am (#224 of 381)

X-posted from the "Longbottoms" thread:

I got the impression that not very many knew that there even was a prophecy--Sibyll (well, she did know...um, sort of), DD, the eavesdropper, and Voldemort. Beyond that we are just speculating as to others who might know. They would include:

James and Lily--in hiding, but already prime targets for Voldemort and the DEs, which is a good enough reason to be underground.

Longbottoms--same as above.

DEs--all or some of Voldemort's inner circle.

Wait! Does anyone remember if there's canon text that DD did tell the Potters? If so, that's two more to the list we're sure of. Ditto then for the Longbottoms. But I can think of many good reasons that Voldemort would not want his cronies just yet to know about the prophecy. He might have wanted to present the resolution of it as a fait accompli.

I think the Longbottoms were tortured to find out where Voldemort was hiding. His DEs were unwilling to believe the reports that he had been destroyed.

Ciao. Barb

- - - - - - - - - -
Mattew Bates - Mar 29, 2005 2:18 pm (#225 of 381)

“Out of suffering have emerged the strongest souls; the most massive characters are seared with scars.” Kahlil Gibran
The crossposting continues... edited from original post for clarity.

That's one thing that always bugged me, even before I knew about the prophecy. Why would several Death Eaters, either exonerated or never accused, risk attacking Aurors on a rumor that they might have information about Voldemort's whereabouts? And why those particular Aurors?

The Death Eaters must have believed that the Longbottoms had special information. As of this point, the only thing JKR has given us that makes the Longbottoms seem more likely than anyone else to have information on Voldemort is that their son could have fulfilled the prophecy. We also know that the eavesdropper loyal to Voldemort overheard enough of the prophecy to point to the Potters and the Longbottoms. Maybe I am grasping at straws by connecting these Canon facts, but in my mind they dovetail nicely. I try to keep my speculation Canon-based.

Madam Librarian, I still think it isn't necessary that either the Potters or the Longbottoms knew anything other than the existence of the prophecy. The only thing necessary for this theory to hold water is that this group of Death Eaters believed the Longbottoms knew more of the prophecy than they did. This would be all the more reason for the Longbottoms to go insane - they were being tortured to reveal information that they did not possess.

- - - - - - - - - -
Winky - Mar 30, 2005 8:37 pm (#226 of 381)

I think the Longbottoms were targeted was because they were Aurors. They were two of the few who actually survived fights with the DE and LV. Most others were killed. The point the prophecy makes is that it could only apply to two families. With the Potters being dead, Sirius in jail, and Lupin being a werewolf and not being trusted; there were very few people to ask what happened to LV. The DE would not go and ask DD because if LV feared him why shouldn't they. DD was more powerful then their master. I think the Longbottoms were a target chosen by desperate people looking for answers. More simply a by-product in the fight to strengthen the Dark Arts. I could be wrong and they were killed for a very specific reason, but this is what I think.

- - - - - - - - - -
Solitaire - Mar 30, 2005 9:53 pm (#227 of 381)

They were tortured for information they did not possess. According to the scene in Dumbledore's Pensieve (GoF, chapter 30), Barty Jr. and the Lestranges were accused of torturing Frank Longbottom because they believed him to have knowledge of the whereabouts of Voldemort. When Frank did not give up that information, they tortured Alice.

Barty Sr. goes on to say that the four of them planned to find Voldemort, restore him to power, and then continue the lives of violence they led while Voldemort was strong. Even Bella states at that time, "We alone were faithful! We alone tried to find him!"

So, yes ... they were seeking information--information on Voldemort's whereabouts. I doubt they would be too interested in the prophecy--even supposing they knew of it--once Voldemort was vaporized. In fact, did Bella even know about the prophecy? I seem to remember that Jo has said that she did not know. And if she didn't know, is it likely that her husband and brother-in-law would have known? It does not seem so to me. But I could be wrong about her not knowing ... I'll see if I can find information about this.

Solitaire

Edit: From post #1255 of the Chambers Clues thread ... there is information in the Rumours section of Rowling's site that Bella did not know of the prophecy.

- - - - - - - - - -
Mattew Bates - Mar 31, 2005 12:48 pm (#228 of 381)

“Out of suffering have emerged the strongest souls; the most massive characters are seared with scars.” Kahlil Gibran
Ah, but Solitaire, she only said the Lestranges were not in on the secret. To quote:

Section: Rumours

The Lestranges were sent after Neville to kill him

"No, they were’t, they were very definitely sent after Neville’s parents. I can’t say too much about this because it touches too closely on the prophecy and how many people knew about it, but the Lestranges were not in on the secret."

She's hinting that who did & didn't know about the prophecy is a plot point, and she's only excluding the Lestranges. That leaves open the possibility that the Longbottoms and Crouch Jr. could have at least known about the prophecy, and may have actually known parts (or, in the case of the Longbottoms, all) of it. I'll admit I am unsure of whether or not the Longbottoms knew anything about the prophecy, but now I am more convinced than ever that Crouch Jr. was the eavesdropper in the Hog's Head.

- - - - - - - - - -
Miriam Huber - Apr 1, 2005 1:40 am (#229 of 381)

I am rather sure that the Longbottoms knew of the prophecy. I think Dumbledore had, after he heard it, informed at once the two families to whom (grammar?) it could apply. Before Voldemort attacked Harry, I do not see any possibility for Dumbledore to know which boy was the one, and even if he did, he knew Voldemort did not know. So it was probable that Voldemort would try to kill them both, and both families hat to get into hiding. The Lestranges may not have been after Neville, but Voldemort surely would have killed Neville the next thing after Harry.

- - - - - - - - - -
Solitaire - Apr 2, 2005 1:44 am (#230 of 381)

I agree, Miriam, that the Longbottoms would have known as much as the Potters were told. Since no one knew beforehand which boy would have been The One--remember that the Prophecy was originally labeled with Voldemort and ?--I'm sure equal precautions were taken to protect both families and kids. The reason Dumbledore may have been more involved with the Potters could be that they were more "on their own" than the others. It is possible that all of the Potter relatives had been killed by this time. But I'm willing to bet that both families may have been protected by Fidelius Charms before Voldemort killed the Potters.

After the death of the Potters and the disappearance of Voldemort--and most of the violence that had characterized his reign of terror--it was probably deemed unnecessary for the Longbottoms to take such heavy precautions. I agree that if Voldemort had not been vaporized, he would have probably killed both kids and their families, if necessary. Remember that the Prophecy was relabeled AFTER Voldemort was vaporized, so those who maintained the records obviously believed Harry was the One to whom it referred.

While the existence of the Prophecy may not have been made public, the belief that Voldemort had been vanquished for good obviously was made VERY public. Everyone thought it was safe to resume "normal life" again, and this was why the torture of the Longbottoms so outraged the magical world.

Solitaire

- - - - - - - - - -
Gerald Costales - Apr 2, 2005 8:30 am (#231 of 381)

"While the existence of the Prophecy may not have been made public, the belief that Voldemort had been vanquished for good obviously was made VERY public." Solitaire

In fact the First chapter of the First Book, described the many things that Wizards & Witches did to celebrate the fall of Voldermort. Uncle Vernon noticed strange people walking about and was greeted by a Wizard dressed in purple. Also the Muggle TV news had reported an extraordinary number of owls flying about during the day. And of course Dedalus Diggle shot so many sparks into the air to celebrate that Muggles even noticed. Wasn't there comments that "Bonfire Day" was being celebrated early. (Don't have my book to check it out.)

I've posted that Harry was marked by Voldermort (and we can't really assume it is Voldermort by the way because the Prophecy reads the Dark Lord will mark "the One" as his equal) by more than Harry's Scar. There are the Brother Wands. Only Harry and Tom Riddle have them. Harry is a Parseltongue as well as Voldermort. And I'm sure that there are many other things that could mark Harry as the "Dark Lord's" equal.

JKR is subtle to be sure. The Prophecy was worded carefully, so the speculation continues. I'm leaning to the Brother Wands being more important than the Scar. And Fawkes being a bigger part of the mix that will result in the defeat of Voldermort. ;-) GC

PS Isn't all about Fawkes. ;-) GC

PPS It maybe more about Fawkes especially if Fawkes was Gryffindor's pet as well as Dumbledore's. ;-) GC

- - - - - - - - - -
MickeyCee3948 - Apr 2, 2005 8:44 am (#232 of 381)

Avatar courtesy of Gwen
GC the scar is the gist and the answer to it all.

Harry would probably not be a parseltongue if not for the scar.

Harry would probably not have a link to Voldemort if not for the scar.

Harry's wand may not have chosen him had he not been marked as the one who could defeat the dark lord.

I also believe that the scar holds the ultimate key to the defeat of Voldemort.

Just M2K's.

Mikie

- - - - - - - - - -
Gerald Costales - Apr 2, 2005 9:00 am (#233 of 381)

"Harry's wand may not have chosen him had he not been marked as the one who could defeat the dark lord." Mikie

You maybe right. The whole dynamic surrounding the Wands is so speculative. When was Harry's wand built before or after the "Scar"? Was Tom Riddle marked to become a "Dark Lord" as Harry apparently has been marked as "the One"? (I've posted quite a bit in the Ollivander and Wand threads about this.)

I believe the "Scar" did transfer the Parseltongue ability to Harry. But, I'm still not convinced that it just the "Scar". Hopefully, Book 6 will resolve some of our nagging questions and sometimes wild speculations. ;-) GC

- - - - - - - - - -
Choices - Apr 24, 2005 6:44 pm (#234 of 381)

*Completely Obsessed With Harry Potter*
I thought we had already been told (by Dumbledore) that the power Harry possesses, in abundance, is LOVE, and this is the thing that Voldemort knows not.

- - - - - - - - - -
Ff3girl - Apr 24, 2005 8:12 pm (#235 of 381)

I think most everybody is very strongly inclined to believe it is love. I'm 95% sure, but I don't think Dumbledore ever actually plainly spells it out for us.

- - - - - - - - - -
Eponine - Apr 24, 2005 8:16 pm (#236 of 381)

Nice post on the prophecy, Andrew. You have some interesting thoughts.

Edit: It could be love, but I'm not inclined to accept it just because Dumbledore said it was. Especially considering how he just explained how he had been so wrong about some things.

- - - - - - - - - -
Solitaire - Apr 24, 2005 11:17 pm (#237 of 381)

Dumbledore's errors generally tend to be errors of judgment in how to handle people and situations--errors of communication and behavior, how much to reveal and how much to conceal. He seems to have a fairly firm grip on the problems and their causes. JM2K, of course ...

Solitaire

- - - - - - - - - -
I Am Used Vlad - Apr 25, 2005 3:26 am (#238 of 381)

I Am Almighty!
I like the Patronus idea. But there's still "one must die at the hand of the other." So I guess Voldemort will get off one final, and successful, Avada Kedavra as the Dementors set upon him. Sad ending.

- - - - - - - - - -
Verschwinden Sie - Apr 25, 2005 4:12 am (#239 of 381)

The prophecy doesn't say both Harry and Voldemort have to die. It says "either must die at the hand of the other for neither can live while the other survives...."

The word "either" implies there is a choice between one of the two of them. If both were fated to die from the actions of one another, the prophecy would probably read "both must die at the hand of the other" and it doesn't say that.

- - - - - - - - - -
I Am Used Vlad - Apr 25, 2005 11:45 am (#240 of 381)

I Am Almighty!
I know all that, but Dementors don't kill you. In your Patronus senerio, Voldemort would not die at Harry's hand; he would have his soul sucked out at the hand of the other. So unless you're suggesting that Harry also kills Voldemort's soulless body, he(Harry) would have to be the one who dies. Assuming, of course, that Dumbledore's interpretation of the prophecy is correct.

- - - - - - - - - -
I Am Used Vlad - Apr 25, 2005 12:57 pm (#241 of 381)

I Am Almighty!
I can sort of buy into that fulfilling the "one must die..." part of the prophecy. However, if Voldemort is vunerable to the Dementor's Kiss, why is Harry the only one who can defeat him. Harry casts a decent Patronus, but I'm willing to bet that Dumbledore's would be better, and Dementors sometimes act on their own.

- - - - - - - - - -
Good Evans - Apr 25, 2005 1:19 pm (#242 of 381)

Practically perfect in every way
Can i just go back to "the power" referred to in the prophecy

JKR has said that something that Harry found out in COS is important, maybe I am jumping a bit here. Harry found out that he speaks parseltongue and that it is a very rare gift. He also finds out that Voldemort has that gift (and indeed we have seen Voldemort use this power over and over).

We know of no other parseltongue, does Voldemort know of Harrys gift? only if wormtail has told him, and would it seem really important?

I am rambling - but I wonder if the power to speak to snakes could end up being an important issue concerning the final battle between the two, "one must die at the others hand" if Harry were to turn a snake on Voldemort(this would be at his hand) which perhaps Voldemort had tried to use to destroy harry? I know it sounds a little like COS and I am sure someone will say - well in that case why didnt Harry command the basilisk in COS. The fact is he never tried or thought to try. He did not speak parseltongue to the basilisk, it may have obeyed him (slytherins heir or not, a command is a command)we simply do not know.

I'm going to stop rambling here. It is an alternative "power" theory anyway

- - - - - - - - - -
Choices - Apr 25, 2005 2:39 pm (#243 of 381)

*Completely Obsessed With Harry Potter*
I believe we have not seen the last of the Chamber of Secrets - after all "Secrets" is plural. I think there is another secret down there that will be divulged.

- - - - - - - - - -
Potterhead - Apr 25, 2005 4:52 pm (#244 of 381)

I've been wracking my brain over the line "he will have power the Dark Lord knows not." Andrew, similar to what you were saying, what if there is more to Harry than we (or LV or DD) even know at this point? The prophecy could, conceivably, have been referring to either Harry or Neville. Assuming that one of Neville's parents would have just as willingly given his or her life to save Neville, and by all accounts that would have been the case, then we cannot really say that Lily's blood protection of Harry is unique. So what is the power? Is it the love that Harry possessed (which was the downfall of Quirrell as well as LV), as DD surmises? And isn't that really the same, or springing from the same source as, Lily's original protection of him, anyway? I feel like we have to consider that there may be some power completely unique to Harry, not resulting from circumstance.

Regarding the fact that Harry is a Parselmouth, Tom Riddle knows Harry is a Parselmouth, as he recites the similarities between them in the Chamber, "(b)oth half-bloods, orphans, raised by Muggles. Probably the only two Parselmouths to come to Hogwarts since the great Slytherin himself." I don't know what canon says about Voldemort knowing everything Tom Riddle in the Chamber knew, but that's a very interesting connection that's been pointed out regarding power.

- - - - - - - - - -
Eponine - Apr 25, 2005 5:06 pm (#245 of 381)

Plus, I think if Voldemort had an inkling about the Tom Riddle affair, or the extent to which his thought processes were exposed to someone else, he would probably be going just as single mindedly after Ginny Weasley to off her, because she could be a significant danger to him, and so far he hasn't shown even the faintest signs of knowing she exists. - Andrew

Which is a plus for Ginny. I've long felt that Ginny will reveal some information about Tom that will be advantageous to Harry.

- - - - - - - - - -
Shannon aka Brammwell - Apr 25, 2005 11:42 pm (#246 of 381)

Financial Services Representative
I've reviewed many of the posts regarding this topic and find the discussion regarding choices very applicable. Although the prophecy in of itself is vague by not declaring any one name it is in fact Voldemort, through his choices to act on the prophecy, who gives the prophecy it's truth and legitimacy. He presumed the term Dark Lord to mean himself and further assumed those who defied him to be the Potters, and marked Harry as his equal.

Whether the prophecy was meant for himself and for Harry is not clear, however, when reading the last line if we were to take the meaning of it literally it states that the one will be born, thus, the child had not been born as yet. This is why I believe that the prophecy was intended for the present day. Further,in other posts the question was asked whether the Dark Lord could mean Grindiwald(sorry if I've spelled that wrong), I believe it stated that DD defeated him in 1945, which would lead one to believe that he was not the Dark Lord at the time the prophecy was cast if my present day theory holds up (have a feeling I'm going to be ripped apart with this, or as someone else has said, receive innumerable dung bombs). But that being said, even though I believe it meant present day, it was Voldemort's beliefs and actions in the prophecy which lead to who the prophecy was about.

Many question whether the prophecy could still apply to Neville and whether his parents were killed by the LeStrange's because of the prophecy. I wonder however if we are taking it for granted that Voldemort even realized that the Longbottoms could have also applied to the prophecy. What we do know for sure is the following:

1. Voldemort's spy did hear the prophecy but as DD says on page 740 of OofP, "though he (Voldemort) did not know it's full content". What can we possibly gather that he did realize from the prophecy then. There are two things that we can then assume that he'd gathered from the prophecy; a)what - one with the power to vanquish him b)who - he assumed Harry. What we don't know is what pieces of the prophecy he'd heard that lead him to choose Harry and not Neville which means that he may not have even known about Neville.

2. A second piece of information that we know is that the LeStrange's went after the Longbottoms after Voldemort had disappeared with the intent to find out what had happened to him (has been quoted in previous posts). Now, if the Lestrange's were aware of the prophecy then is it also possible that they'd assumed that it was meant for Harry as well. It may have been pure coincedence that they'd attacked the Longbottoms not because of the prophecy but instead because Mr. Longbottom was an Auror and the Lestrange's believed that he would be the best one to tell them where Lord Voldemort was.

3. The only one that we know that heard the prophecy in it's entrity is DD so it is possible that only DD knew of the possibility of Neville.

4. The fact that Lord Voldemort wanted the prophecy in OofP reinforces that he'd not heard it all or heard it correctly. I believe he knew about the first section of the prophecy which stated that the one would have the power to vanquish the Dark Lord and went after Harry at a young age assuming that he wouldn't be equipt with that power so young. When his curse backfired and he'd learned as he'd stated in GoF to his death eaters that it was Lilly and very old magic that had caused his downfall he'd believed that he'd found the "power" that was stated in the prophecy. He'd thoght that he'd overcome that obstacle by taking Harry's blood to bring himself back to flesh, but it wasn't till Harry had escaped him again in GoF that he'd decided that he needed to hear the prophecy and that there was more there then he'd assumed. Further, in the second section that talks about "power" it states that, " he will have power the Dark Lord knows not", which could then mean that Voldemort has no idea that there is another power that Harry possesses that will equip him to vanquish the Dark Lord. I also find it interesting that the word vanquish and not kill is used. It says one must die but it does states vanquish yet again.

Hopefully this makes sense, and also that you guys aren't too hard on me; I realize I'm in deep waters with some very sophisticated and well versed HP theorists!

- - - - - - - - - -
Miriam Huber - Apr 26, 2005 2:32 am (#247 of 381)

Shannon, I think what you said under 4. is a very thorough summary of V´s thoughts and his following actions. While it was not new, I find it great to read in that condensed way! Take a butterbeer!

- - - - - - - - - -
Catherine - Apr 26, 2005 4:44 am (#248 of 381)

Canon Seeker
I've long felt that Ginny will reveal some information about Tom that will be advantageous to Harry. --Eponine

I hadn't considered this, but the scene in 12 GP at Christmas time in OoP does reveal that Ginny can be a kind of "authority" for Harry on Voldemort possession. As readers, we only know the little bits that Ginny revealed in CoS and OoP. Tom Riddle arrogantly dismisses Ginny in CoS; he boasts about his charm and how he manipulated her. It would be very satisfying if Riddle unwittingly gave Ginny information that can be used against Voldemort.

I think part of the power that Harry has which Voldemort "knows not" is Harry's willingness to die. So far, Harry has defeated Voldemort several times in his courage in "fighting the good fight" to the end. In CoS, Harry accepts that the basilisk's venom is killing him, and after Fawkes's healing tears, begins to think that death isn't so bad. He strikes a blow against the diary and saves Ginny. In GoF, he decides to emerge and face Voldemort proudly. In OoP, he wishes that Dumbledore would "end it" and that death would be preferable to the agony of Voldemort's possession.

- - - - - - - - - -
Steve Newton - Apr 26, 2005 6:10 am (#249 of 381)

Librarian
The person who overheard the prophecy was thrown out of the Hog's Head without hearing the entire prophecy. I cannot imagine the entire thing lasting as much as a minute. That leaves a very brief listening opportunity. Aberforth is on the ball with his duties.

Someone above commented that Bellatrix knew only that Harry could be the one. I can't imagine how that could be. There is no reading that leaves Harry as the only possibility unless the listener was ingnorant of the OOTP membership and leapt to an unfounded conclusion.

- - - - - - - - - -
Catherine - Apr 26, 2005 6:25 am (#250 of 381)

Canon Seeker
I don't know... you and I have different takes on this one, Catherine. --Andrew Buchanan

Actually, I'm not sure that we do. I agree that Harry isn't as powerful as Voldemort in a purely magical way. Harry admits this in OoP by saying that he couldn't fight like Voldemort, or possess people.

Dumbledore tells Voldemort that his failure to understand that there are things worse than death is his greatest failing. But Harry doesn't fear death, and seems to accept it. He was determined not to die in hiding in GoF; he was wishing for the end in OoP. At the end of SS/PS, Dumbledore explains that death is simply "the next great adventure." I think Harry's actions at crucial moments with Voldemort demonstrate how he isn't afraid to die.

I think this is one aspect of "the power Voldemort knows not."

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
avatar
Elanor
Hufflepuff Prefect
Hufflepuff Prefect

Posts : 1440
Join date : 2011-02-19
Age : 45
Location : France

Back to top Go down

The Prophecy II (Post 251 to 300)

Post  Elanor on Thu Jun 02, 2011 3:17 am

Miriam Huber - Apr 26, 2005 12:51 pm (#251 of 381)
Yes, Catherine, I am absolutely with you on that (as I have said before on other threads). In my opinion, this could be the/one reason to call the Order "Order of the Phoenix". Doesn´t Sirius say about the Order´s work: "There are things worth dying for" (to Gred and Forge when Arthur Weasley was attacked)? And the leader of this Order calls death something like "the next great adventure" -- what a difference to Lord Thingy! Oh, I´ll shut up now, off topic.

- - - - - - - - - -
Catherine - Apr 26, 2005 2:51 pm (#252 of 381)

Canon Seeker
We've covered GoF already, and as for OotP, I think there's a difference between accepting your fate and being a deer trapped in the headlights of an oncoming truck, and Harry was acting much more like the second one. Again, not willing to die, just unable to stop it. --Andrew Buchanan

I maintain that Harry shows great bravery in the face of death, and seems to accept that he could die. I think this is a significant detail because of Sirius "going on" and Nearly Headless Nick's admission that he feared death.

As for SS, I think Harry was unwilling to give up the Stone, even at his own cost. And it very nearly did cost him his life.

Let's not also forget that Harry finds the Archway and Veil entrancing and seductive.

I still believe that this will prove to be part of Harry's "power."

- - - - - - - - - -
Catherine - Apr 26, 2005 3:59 pm (#253 of 381)

Canon Seeker
I have to ask where, in that incident, you get the idea Harry is being brave at all? I'm not trying to be rude. I'm sincerely curious, because he seems pretty well frozen in fear to me. -Andrew Buchanan

Gosh. It never occurred to me that you were trying to be rude. Asking a question isn't rude. Anyway, I hope the following quote answers your question:

Harry crouched behind the headstone and knew the end had come. There was no hope...no help to be had. And as he heard Voldemort draw nearer still, he knew one thing onlhy, and it was beyond fear or reason. He was not going to die crouching here like a child playing hide-and-seek; he was not going to die kneeling as Voldemort's feet...he was going to die upright like his father, and he was going to die trying to defend himself, even if no defense was possible....(p. 662, GoF,Scholastic hardback)

I think this shows extreme bravery--fighting the good fight even when it may seem pointless.

As far as in OoP, he was stoic about his fate during Voldemort's possession. He was ready, he accepted the possibility of death and seeing Sirius again.

- - - - - - - - - -
Catherine - Apr 26, 2005 5:33 pm (#254 of 381)

Canon Seeker
Andrew, it seems we have a difference in interpretation.

I think Harry's acceptance toward death in OoP shows bravery. He wasn't blaming anyone else, he wasn't railing at how unfair life can be, he was ready.

I still believe that is something. I think it is a kind of bravery that has nothing to do with reflexes, or readiness in battle, or rashness.

Just as facing "the unknown" was a test in the Triwizard Tournament, I think Harry has begun to prepare for the test of "the well-organized mind" mentioned in SS/PS.

We know that Riddle/Voldemort doesn't share this viewpoint. So, as I have been arguing, this may prove to be part of the power that Harry possesses that Voldemort does not.

- - - - - - - - - -
Weeny Owl - Apr 29, 2005 1:35 pm (#255 of 381)

any question whether the prophecy could still apply to Neville and whether his parents were killed by the LeStrange's because of the prophecy.

Neville's parents weren't killed by the Lestranges, though. His parents were driven insane.

JKR has stated that Bella didn't know about the Prophecy. The Longbottoms were tortured because the Lestranges were trying to find out information on what happened to Voldemort. At least that's my understanding.

We know that Riddle/Voldemort doesn't share this viewpoint. So, as I have been arguing, this may prove to be part of the power that Harry possesses that Voldemort does not.

That's an interesting interpretation, Catherine, and I cannot say that I disagree with you.

Death has been part of each book in the series, from Harry's parents dying to Sirius. Each book has included a death in some way... Quirrell in the first; Moaning Myrtle in the second; in the third, twelve Muggles and Peter Pettigrew, even if we found out later he didn't dive after all; Bertha Jorkins, Frank Bryce, and Cedric Diggory in the fourth; Broderick Bode and Sirius Black in the fifth.

Death is but the next great adventure... interesting comment from Dumbledore. Harry being entranced by the veil. All of that does seem to be leading to something, and Harry not fearing death or being willing to sacrifice himself would be something Voldemort wouldn't have going for him.

- - - - - - - - - -
Solitaire - Apr 30, 2005 5:31 pm (#256 of 381)

Since Harry is now aware that he is a "marked man"--and that a "final face-off" with Voldemort would seem to lie in his future--he must also know that his own death is a distinct possibility. I suppose that this summer will be spent coming to terms with that reality as well as the reality and finality of Sirius's death. It will be interesting to see whether knowing the existence and content of the prophecy gives Harry a sense of "release" and freedom to act or makes him feel bound and restricted and causes him to second-guess everything.

Solitaire

- - - - - - - - - -
Shannon aka Brammwell - May 1, 2005 8:37 am (#257 of 381)

Financial Services Representative
I find the most intriguing piece of the prophecy to be the line that states, " ...but he will have power the Dark Lord knows not.."

So far we know of the power that Harry received from Voldemort when the Avada Kedavra curse backfired.

I'm wondering if a second power may exist and tie the prophecy into the heir of Gryffindor theory. Maybe, as Voldemort being the last descendant of Slytherin has powers from that line that Harry may have powers from the Gryffindor line if, in fact, he is the heir to Gryffindor.

This leaves an interesting question, which of these two powers was Voldemort aware of and which was he not, if in fact one of these two could be the power described in the prophecy?

- - - - - - - - - -
mischa fan - May 1, 2005 12:51 pm (#258 of 381)

Easy being green, it is not
I think the power that Harry has that Voldemort "knows not" is the power of love. Love is something that Voldemort knows nothing about.

- - - - - - - - - -
Choices - May 1, 2005 12:59 pm (#259 of 381)

*Completely Obsessed With Harry Potter*
I agree Mischa - it is the power of LOVE!

- - - - - - - - - -
Choices - May 1, 2005 3:04 pm (#260 of 381)

*Completely Obsessed With Harry Potter*
I don't think you have to know a lot about it to have it in your heart. Love is not something you learn from experience necessarily. The capacity or the ability to love is something you are born with.

- - - - - - - - - -
Steve Newton - May 1, 2005 4:09 pm (#261 of 381)

Librarian
I don't think that Love works. In OOTP it was his heart that saved Harry by forcing Voldemort to leave. Heart has many meanings and many of them encompass love.

- - - - - - - - - -
Shannon aka Brammwell - May 1, 2005 5:06 pm (#262 of 381)

Financial Services Representative
Love is definitely the one thing that Harry possesses that Voldemort does not. We found that in the MoM that it was his love for Sirius and wanting to be with him that drove Voldemort out of his body.

However, if this is the answer to the power in the prophecy can it still be the case since Voldemort was forced out of Harry's body because of love. He would have felt the effects of it first hand and is now aware of it.

I don't think this power that Harry possesses has been revealed yet. I keep going back to the point of Voldemort not knowing about this power which leads me back to this belief.

I also wonder how love/his heart can be used as a weapon to overcome Voldemort and what is behind that door in the MoM that applies to love that is so powerful?

- - - - - - - - - -
Steve Newton - May 1, 2005 5:36 pm (#263 of 381)

Librarian
I don't think that it was his love that drove off Voldemort. Voldemort left when, your choice, Harry thought that he wanted to die, or had very strong emotion(perhaps love, perhaps not).

- - - - - - - - - -
Shannon aka Brammwell - May 1, 2005 8:16 pm (#264 of 381)

Financial Services Representative
Oh no, I'm in with the big leaguers (Steve and Andrew) you are the masters of HP, okay I'm getting out my books. It's what I was afraid of...you're right! I'm looking over page 743 of GoF in which DD says,"In the end, it mattered not that you could not close your mind. It was your heart that saved you.." thus it does not say love.

So what is the power that he is describing here:

"There is a room in the Department of Mysteries, "interrupted Dumbledore, 'that is kept locked at all times. It contains a force that is at once more wonderful and more terrible than death, than human intelligence, than the forces of nature. It is also, perhaps, the most mysterious of the many subjects for study that reside there. It is the power held within that room that you possess in such quantities and which Voldemort has not at all. That power took you to save Sirius tonight. That power also saved you from possession by Voldemort, because he could not bear to reside in a body so full of the force he detests."

What is this power? And is this the power that the Dark Lord knows not?

- - - - - - - - - -
Elanor - May 1, 2005 10:11 pm (#265 of 381)

Some times ago, on the alchemy thread, we talked about what was in that famous room of the MoM, this is my theory: theological virtues and Archangel's, Zelmia's and Hollywand's about that:hope. I rather like that theory!

- - - - - - - - - -
Shannon aka Brammwell - May 2, 2005 8:43 am (#266 of 381)

Financial Services Representative
Elanor, thank you for the links they were very thought provoking and well written. I knew that JKR researched quite extensively before writing her books, I'm guessing alchemy, mythology,and Latin were involved in that research.

In reading many of the post's it appears that many have theorized the hidden power that Harry has to be anything from love, hope, emotion, to an open heart; which is also the great force behind the door in the MoM. It appears that this power has been linked as the power that Voldemort knows not, as well as the same power that DD said that Harry has boundless amounts.

Do you believe that the hidden power in the prophecy is in fact one in the same with this power that DD had described that allowed Harry to force Voldemort out of his body or could it be something completely different that we have not seen in Harry as yet?

I've found that this hidden power has been theorized as any of the following, or any combination of the following:

1) power derived from his possibly being the heir to Gryffindor

2) power received when the Avada Kedavra power had rebounded and Voldemort had unwittingly transferred a bit of himself to Harry

3) power is that of emotion/his heart/love, which is equal to the power found behind the door in the MoM and Voldemort does not possess any of it. The same type of emotion, feelings that you'd described in alchemy and the 4 temperaments

4) we have not seen this power as yet

The only way that I could only foresee this being a threat to Voldemort is in two things. First Hag rid had said that there wasn't enough human left in him, and secondly, in GoF Voldemort said that when he was ripped from his body that he was less then a soul. Could all of these emotions/feelings/love that Harry possesses in fact be his soul and Voldemort through his actions/life in fact, has no soul. I believe the soul is the being within us that gives us our compassion, our love, our emotion, and our ability to feel. Voldemort could very well be afraid of death and wants to be immortal because if he dies there will be no soul to continue into the next great journey as DD has said. Voldemort has always underestimated the power of the heart and soul (Lilly saving Harry), he hates it, thus he ignores it's existence and it's power.

- - - - - - - - - -
Detail Seeker - May 2, 2005 2:17 pm (#267 of 381)

Quod tempus non sanat, sanat ferrum,... so prepare
Another power, that might work very ambivalent and that Voldemort does not appreciate ist the will for truth and honesty. Harry has this will, even if it hurts him sometimes. Voldemort on the other hand, is not known to be honest even to his followers. His lack of honesty might become his downfall too, e.g. if he by unhonest treatment of a follower (Pettigrew?) causes him/her to disband him in a moment, he relies on help . Just another aspect for fruitful discussion.

- - - - - - - - - -
Shannon aka Brammwell - May 3, 2005 10:37 am (#268 of 381)

Financial Services Representative
I've wondered if it is more broad in scope, if Voldemort is literally no longer human, absent of soul, conscience, heart, or feeling.

In essence he has lost the very things that make us human which Harry has in such boundless amounts.

- - - - - - - - - -
Elanor - May 3, 2005 2:30 pm (#269 of 381)

Thanks Shannon, your post really asks the good questions! You said: "Do you believe that the hidden power in the prophecy is in fact one in the same with this power that DD had described that allowed Harry to force Voldemort out of his body or could it be something completely different that we have not seen in Harry as yet?"

I think that the power the prophecy talks about and the power hidden behind the MoM door are the same one, and that it is also the one that forced Voldemort out of Harry's body, but I can be wrong, it would not be the first time!

Detail Seeker, I do agree! I hope Voldemort will get his comeuppance at last and the way he treats his followers, beginning with Wormtail, will have serious consequences for him!

- - - - - - - - - -
Gerald Costales - May 10, 2005 5:55 am (#270 of 381)

I think that the “Holly Wand” is to Harry as Excalibur was to King Arthur. Harry’s wand is the symbol of Harry’s Magical greatness. And of course Fawkes’ feather is at the core of Harry’s Wand.

That being said, I’ve been thinking that Harry will defeat Voldermort with a Power that doesn’t come from his “Holly Wand”. “Wandless Magic” will be the Power that the Dark Lord knows not. I maybe wrong. JM2K ;-) GC

PS Isn’t all about Fawkes!!! Especially if Fawkes was owned by Godric. ;-) GC

PPS Slytherin’s Basilisk is rotting in his Chamber. Godric’s Phoenix is alive and Fawkes’ feather is the Power at the core of Harry’s Wand. (And unfortunately Fawkes’ feather is at the core of Tom Riddle’s Wand.) ;-( GC

PPPS Isn’t it July 16th yet. ;-) GC

PPPPS What does Fawkes or his feather symbolize? ;-) GC

- - - - - - - - - -
Victoria Sinclair - May 11, 2005 10:27 pm (#271 of 381)

Solitaire- I think that's a fascinating point about the ellipses. One of the things that has disturbed me most in my multiple re-readings of OOTP is why the prophecy is so important. To either side...why did it need constant guarding? What information, other than the fact that one would have to kill the other, is so important?

OK, I know the killing thing brings it very close to home. But it's not like Voldemort hasn't been trying to kill Harry at every opportunity anyway. And how much harder would he have tried? Why was the Order so intent on keeping the prophecy away from him? Also, DD says to Harry at the beginning of the scene in his office (post DOM) that the prophecy contains the information on how to destroy Harry. Did anybody glean what that information actually was? At least from the sections delivered to Harry?

And what's Dumbledore playing at, witholding further information? That seems unlikely too. Ugh! Any clarification would be appreciated.

- - - - - - - - - -
Miriam Huber - May 12, 2005 4:11 am (#272 of 381)

Victoria, I think the point is: Voldemort knows about the killing thing. So he thought he would fulfill the conditions of the prophecy when he went to kill baby Harry. But he found out, he was wrong. Harry escaped again and again, and most spectaculary from that graveyard. So Voldemort realized the second half of the prophecy, which his informand hadn´t heard, contained something very important about HOW to kill Harry, so he needed this information rather badly. If he had gotten the prophecy he would have known a) about "mark him as his equal" and b) "powers the Dark Lord knows not" and perhaps could have worked out (what we can´t, yet): how to get around these things. Dumbledore explains it that way to Harry in the conversation at the end of OoP.

- - - - - - - - - -
hells456 - May 12, 2005 11:13 am (#273 of 381)

I think the prophesy as told to Harry was incomplete. I think that Dumbledore edited in some way before he let him hear it. It made no sense to me that the entire book was based around keeping Voldemort away from it, then he just tells Harry knowing Voldemort can take that information from his mind. I was disappointed when I heard the prophesy after the build up to it in the book, I even said "is that it?" out loud. Apart from Neville being a candidate for saving the wizard world we didn't really learn anything new. I wonder what the other (hypothetical) bits were?

- - - - - - - - - -
Aurora Gubbins - May 12, 2005 3:28 pm (#274 of 381)

I agree with hells, I wondered (and still do) about the beginning of the Prophesy not being repeated. We seem to have been led to believe that had the image in the Pensieve been allowed to continue it would have continually repeated, only it is some kind of illusion. The continuance does not begin with the same words as the 'first pass', and it doesn't say much about how to destroy Harry.

This brings me on to the wording of "..either must die at the hand of the other..." Dying at the hand of someone makes me think of hand to hand combat, or unarmed combat as it it otherwise known. Don't quite see LV as much of a fighter and he couldn't get a Second to stand in on this one. Just a thought.

Aurora xx

- - - - - - - - - -
hells456 - May 13, 2005 4:18 am (#275 of 381)

Also, if you compare it to Trelawney's other prediction it is very different. The other prediction has proper punctuation, it is made up of short sentences, but the prophecy Dumbledore showed him was one big rambling sentence. I am convinced that there is more to it.

- - - - - - - - - -
Gerald Costales - May 13, 2005 6:02 am (#276 of 381)

Why wouldn't the "Prophecy" just be a "Red Herring"? Book 2 could have been titled "HP and the Half-Blood Prince". I would think the Chamber of Secrets was indirectly about a "Hier of Slytherin". So, why not remove info. about the "Hier of Gyrffindor" and better present it in Book 6 - "HP and the Half-Blood Prince"?

Nothing happened to Neville when he touched the "Prophecy". But, that could just be because Neville was linked to the "Prophecy". Or the "Prophecy" is just another prophecy (just like Harry's "Scar" could be just another scar).

I think this line from the "Prophecy" is the key -

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . "but he will have power the Dark Lord knows not ..."

I believe you know what I believe the "Power" is. But, if the "Power" is "LOVE", etc. - I really won't be disappointed. Come on we're just posting until July 16th!!! Then after a week or two of quiet on the Forum. We'll really have some solid posting and posts to read. ;-) GC

PS Isn't July it 16th YET!!! ;-) GC

PPS I don't think the HBP will disappoint. I believe a faulty JKR novel will be better than many other novels in print. We are reading and posting about a "Modern Classic". Enough said!!! ;-) GC

- - - - - - - - - -
Catherine - May 13, 2005 6:49 am (#277 of 381)

Canon Seeker
Nothing happened to Neville when he touched the "Prophecy"--Gerald Costales

There is only the restriction of removing the prophecy, not touching it. As Harry's name was on the prophecy, he could remove it with no ill effects. Nothing prevents anyone else from holding the prophecy; indeed, the Death Eaters tried very hard to take it away from Harry.

- - - - - - - - - -
Ponine - May 14, 2005 7:04 am (#278 of 381)

I reject your reality and substitute my own!
Just a VERY quick question - has anyone noticed that the label on the prophecy states *Dark Lord* - I found this to be interesting, in my opinion it either sort of clears Snape from using it, or it makes somone on the Dept of Magic look highly suspicious...

- - - - - - - - - -
Steve Newton - May 14, 2005 7:16 am (#279 of 381)

Librarian
If you were Voldemort would you want Lucius to know how to kill you? I sure wouldn't.

- - - - - - - - - -
Miriam Huber - May 14, 2005 7:52 am (#280 of 381)

Ponine, we discussed that some months previous - I think on this thread or his predecessor. In my opinion, the label says "Dark Lord" because Trelawney says "Dark Lord" -- which has intrigued me more than the label (it is just "scientifically correct" labelling not to change one name for another even if it is the same person -- they didn´t delete the (?) either, probably because the prophecy does not state explicitly that it is about Harry). Trelawney has in both her real prophecies used "the Dark Lord", but - of course - when she is "normal" she says "He who must not be named" (see PoA, just after her real prophecy, for instance).

Well, we discussed the matter but no one had any idea really what this could mean - can you imagine Trelawney being a DE? So, if you have a suggestion, I am very, very interested to hear this, because I do not believe that JKR just made a mistake or did this only do make the prophecies more impressive. But what can it mean?

- - - - - - - - - -
Gerald Costales - May 14, 2005 10:58 am (#281 of 381)

I would think the current "Dark Lord" is Lord Voldermort. Then one could reasonably assume the "Prophecy" refers to Voldermort.

I know there could be several "Dark Lords" and there is a slight possibility that the "Prophecy" refers to someone besides Voldermort. But, I just don't see that being the case. There are several "Dark Wizards" but I can only imagine only one "Dark Lord" existing at one time. (I know this sounds like Star Wars - only one "Sith Lord" exists at a time - one Master with one Apprentice.)

So, I would think one would want to know if Grindelwald was a "Dark Lord"? If Grindelwald was a "Dark Lord" then did Lord Voldermort eventually replace Grindelwald when Tom Riddle finished his transformation into Lord Voldermort and journey into the Dark Arts? I couldn't imagine Tom Riddle being a "Dark Lord" shortly after defecting from Hogwarts.

And since Dumbledore told Harry that he was the "One" marked by the "Dark Lord" not Neville, can't we also reasonably assume that Voldermort's scarring of Harry was the "mark" and Voldermort the "Dark Lord" that the "Prophecy" referred to?

My take is that Harry was "marked" by more than his famous lightning bolt "Scar". I believe the "Holly Wand" also "marked" Harry as the "One". So, Tom Riddle is also "marked" as a "Dark Lord" by his "Yew Wand". Kings have scepters. And two Great Wizards - Voldermort and Harry - have their Wands. But, these Wands are not mere symbols of "Power" but channels for extreme "Magical" power. Power that could defeat a "Dark Lord" and power to mark the "One" who will vanquish the "Dark Lord". ;-) GC

- - - - - - - - - -
Solitaire - May 14, 2005 8:42 pm (#282 of 381)

I couldn't imagine Tom Riddle being a "Dark Lord" shortly after defecting from Hogwarts.

Down in the Chamber--after using Harry's wand to write out his name and then rearrange the letters to read I Am Lord Voldemort-- Riddle says, "It was a name I was already using at Hogwarts, to my most intimate friends only, of course ..."

Remember that one of Riddle's first acts upon leaving was to murder his father and grandparents. And it was he who had set the Basilisk loose back when he was in school, resulting in the death of Moaning Myrtle. That's four murders under his belt by the time he is eighteen years old. It sounds to me like Tom Riddle was well on his way to being the Dark Lord the moment he left Hogwarts.

Solitaire

- - - - - - - - - -
Miriam Huber - May 15, 2005 5:21 am (#283 of 381)

You are right, Gerald, but that was not the point I wanted to make. I, too, assume that "The Dark Lord" of the prophecy is V and "the one" is Harry. It is not a question of persons, but of titles. Concerning the labelling: My apologies for the rather bad example, but if I quote a book written by Joseph Ratzinger in 1976, I will quote the author as "Ratzinger", even if he now is named "Benedict XVI." That is just how it is. You don´t change titles in quoting or labelling, even if you are absolutely sure it is the same person.

Lord Voldemort and the Dark Lord are the same person, but only DEs (and Snape) call him, as far as we know, "Dark Lord". So why didn´t Trelawney say "Lord Voldemort" or "He Who Must Not Be Named"? Some suggested it was to make the prophecy more impressive. But 1) I don´t think Trelawney had any conscious influence, 2) I don´t think JKR would put something like this in this very important prophecy just to impress us, 3) I don´t find it more impressive with "The Dark Lord" instead of "He Who Must Not Be Named" (all a question of intonation!).

- - - - - - - - - -
Solitaire - May 15, 2005 9:50 am (#284 of 381)

for neither can live while the other survives ..." Okay, here is a weird one to ponder ... Could this part refer to the two "halves" of Voldemort--Tom Riddle and Lord Voldemort? Just tossing it out for comment. If you've already covered this issue, please accept my apologies.

Solitaire

- - - - - - - - - -
Ydnam96 - May 15, 2005 10:18 am (#285 of 381)

Solitaire, that is an interesting observation. I had never thought of it that way (or rather at this moment don't remember having done so anyway).

We are quick to assume that it's about Harry and VM. It could be about VM and TR. Hmmmm...Somthing to ponder.

- - - - - - - - - -
Gerald Costales - May 15, 2005 1:33 pm (#286 of 381)

Edited May 15, 2005 2:21 pm
(re: post# 283)

"Lord Voldemort and the Dark Lord are the same person, but only DEs (and Snape) call him, as far as we know, "Dark Lord". So why didn´t Trelawney say "Lord Voldemort" or "He Who Must Not Be Named"? Some suggested it was to make the prophecy more impressive. But 1) I don´t think Trelawney had any conscious influence, 2) I don´t think JKR would put something like this in this very important prophecy just to impress us, 3) I don´t find it more impressive with "The Dark Lord" instead of "He Who Must Not Be Named" (all a question of intonation!)." Miriam Huber

I've always believed that Trelawney is unaware of the trance-like state she goes into when she is giving a prophecy. Trelawney has no control or influence on the content or even the delivery of a true prophecy.

. . . 1) I agree - Trelawney is unaware and has no influence on what is said.

. . . 2) JKR has stated that "we" worded the "Prophecy" very carefully. JKR doesn't have to impress anyone. When the true meaning of the "Prophecy" is revealed, us readers will for the most part finally understand the reasoning for the wording and phrasing of the "Prophecy".

. . . 3) Prophecies are ambiguous by nature. The Oracle of Delphi warned Athens to - Take refugee behind walls of wood. Some took that as the wooden walls of the city while others took that to mean the wooden walls of ships. The ships were the correct choice since Athens was sacked. So, there isn't a need to impress. Confusion is part of the nature of most prophecies. ;-) GC

PS The line that I believe is important is

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . "he will have POWER the Dark Lord knows not . . ."

What is this POWER??? I believe this is more important than whether the wording is "Dork Lard" or "Voldadork". hehe ;-) GC

PPS Sorry,it must be pre-HBP syndrome. I also hear voices whispering it's just two months away. Is that a lunar month or 28, 30, or 31 day month?!?!?! ;-) GC

PPPS Isn't it July 16th yet!!!

- - - - - - - - - -
Choices - May 15, 2005 6:11 pm (#287 of 381)

*Completely Obsessed With Harry Potter*
What I have always wondered is.....where does the prophesy come from? We know Sybil speaks the words, but where does the message originate? Who is putting the words into Sybil's mind? If Sybil is like a "medium" and is channeling the message, then who in the "beyond" is sending the message? Any ideas my learned forum friends?

- - - - - - - - - -
Solitaire - May 15, 2005 10:01 pm (#288 of 381)

Choices, I think some of us got into that farther back in this thread. I found this old post of mine ... I'm not sure how much farther back or forward the discussion goes, but it does touch on the issue of channeling and who the source of the prophecy might be. The discussion goes on for several posts.

Solitaire

- - - - - - - - - -
KWeldon - May 16, 2005 10:17 am (#289 of 381)

See JKR's answer to the FAQ on her website about Neville regarding more about the prophecy.

- - - - - - - - - -
Catherine - May 17, 2005 4:18 am (#290 of 381)

Canon Seeker
I nearly posted the following on the JKR site thread, in response to a post about Shakesepeare, but I decided my random musings might be better suited to this thread.

I've been mulling over Jo's answer about Neville and the prophecy, especially as she referenced "the Scottish play."

My Shakespeare is certainly rusty, but I remember that Macbeth was told that "no man born of woman" could defeat him; his conqueror had been born by caesearian section, and therefore technically qualified. I find it interesting that the prophecy, worded so carefully by Jo, uses the imagery of the "one" being born as the month dies juxtraposed by "neither" living while the other survives.

Is Voldemort like Macbeth--spurred to action by a prophecy, and underestimating the contents of the prophecy? Even if Voldemort hears the prophecy in its entirety, would his ambition blind him to the truth?

Also, while Macbeth was told that he would be "king," he and Banquo were told that Macbeth's progeny would not sit on the throne; that honor would belong to Banquo's descendants. Could a situation like this occur in the HP world? Could this be what is meant by "surviving?" To have one's heirs carry on?

::off to reread the Scottish play::

- - - - - - - - - -
T Brightwater - May 17, 2005 12:32 pm (#291 of 381)

The best overview I've ever read on the subject of prophecies in literature is Dorothy L. Sayers' essay "Oedipus Simplex: Freedom and Fate in Folklore and Fiction." It's terrific! It was republished in _The Whimsical Christian_, (1987?) which you might be able to find used or in a library; so far I haven't found it online.

- - - - - - - - - -
applepie - May 17, 2005 2:57 pm (#292 of 381)

"Always forgive your enemies; nothing annoys them so much." -- Oscar Wilde
I'm new here and this may not be the appropriate place to post this, but I was wondering if all prophecies had a place in the Department of Mysteries. Dumbledore says "The thing that smashed was merely the record of the prophecy kept by the Department of Mysteries. But the prophecy was made to somebody and that person has the means of recalling it perfectly." Do all prophecies have a record in the department and if so, Professor Trelawny's previous prophecies to Harry would also have shiny orbs in the Department of Mysteries. It seems that the Minister of Magic would have had access to those and might realize that Harry was not really making this up as he went along trying to be the meddling teen they thought him to be. It's just a thought, but one I couldn't do without questioning.

- - - - - - - - - -
Solitaire - May 17, 2005 5:47 pm (#293 of 381)

Applepie, I think this is as good a place as any to ask that question. In fact, I believe more than a few of us have wondered the same thing ... but I doubt you feel like going back through the entire thread to find that out.

Solitaire

- - - - - - - - - -
Choices - May 17, 2005 6:27 pm (#294 of 381)

*Completely Obsessed With Harry Potter*
Applepie - "It seems that the Minister of Magic would have had access to those and might realize that Harry was not really making this up"

From what we know so far, only the people actually involved in the prophesy can remove the orb from the shelf and then it would appear that the orb has to be broken for anyone to hear what is inside of it. I believe the Minister of Magic, as powerful a person as he is, could not touch the orb or remove it without dire consequences to himself.

- - - - - - - - - -
applepie - May 17, 2005 7:24 pm (#295 of 381)

"Always forgive your enemies; nothing annoys them so much." -- Oscar Wilde
Choices - "From what we know so far, only the people actually involved in the prophesy can remove the orb from the shelf and then it would appear that the orb has to be broken for anyone to hear what is inside of it. I believe the Minister of Magic, as powerful a person as he is, could not touch the orb or remove it without dire consequences to himself. "

This is very true, however I guess I just thought that if the minister knew there was a prophecy added to the shelf or dated around the time that Trelawny spilled the beans in front of Harry he might have been more inclined to accept Harry's story.....unless of course he didn't want the truth to come out because he feared he could not handle the job it would bring about for himself.

I guess what I was really wondering is how a prophecy gets placed in the room and whether or not every prophecy is there, or only the ones the ministry has particular interest in.

I have not had the opportunity to look through the entire thread to see if this question has been answered, so if it has...sorry.

- - - - - - - - - -
Crimson1 - May 19, 2005 11:03 am (#296 of 381)

Applepie - I have spent the better part of a month catching up on this particular post and your question has been hinted at and touched upon, but no definitive answer has come to light. "Do all prophecies have a record in the DoM?" Answers have ranged from "Absolutely" to "Not necessarily". I think unless JKR tells us somewhere in black and white, you fall into "if a tree falls in the forest and nobody hears it, does it make a sound?" territory. I don't think I have the knowledge to speculate either, for as HP knowledge goes, most of you folks wipe the floor with me.

I do wish to ponder something Applepie touched on: Was or is Cornielius Fudge on the take? Even if he could not touch the orb, doesn't he have advisors and such to inform him of important facts like, "Hey Minister, before you go roasting Harry Potter for talking about Voldemort, you should go to the DoM and have a listen to the Ministry Wizards there who know there is a prophecy about him and Voldemort."

We know Fudge spent a lot of time trying to discredit Harry and get him kicked out of Hogwarts, but did he spend too much time on it. Self-preservation seems to be a politicians main goal sometimes, but is it more than that? Has he been working for Voldemort?

I am sure the last few sentences are on the wrong post and I apologize for my tangential wandering.

- - - - - - - - - -
Choices - May 19, 2005 11:12 am (#297 of 381)

*Completely Obsessed With Harry Potter*
"Do all prophecies have a record in the DoM?"

I have speculated in the past that if the prophesy is given directly to the person it is for (Trelawney to Harry about Wormtail returning to Voldemort), then it is not recorded and kept in the DOM, but if a prophesy is given to a second party (Trelawney to Dumbledore, but it is for (?) Harry), then it is recorded and stored in the DOM so Harry (or the person involved) can hear it later for him/herself.
- - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - [b]
Crimson1 - May 20, 2005 4:55 am (#298 of 381)

I see your methodology Choices, but two other people were mentioned in Trelawney's prophecy to Harry in the Divination classroom, Peter Pettigrew and Voldemort. Would a prophecy show up in the DoM, if any one of the people mentioned in it heard it? Or would a prophecy show up in the DoM if just anybody off the street heard it?

I'd like to believe if the folks at the MoM knew a prophecy was dangerous, they would not bottle it, but either the Prophcy Bottling Team doesn't judge the relative good/bad merits of a prophecy or they just don't know what's in them.

- - - - - - - - - -
applepie - May 20, 2005 9:10 am (#299 of 381)

"Always forgive your enemies; nothing annoys them so much." -- Oscar Wilde
I was also wondering if we know who overhead the prophecy in the Hog's Head, and was thrown out? Could it have been Mundungus? Do we know that he's definitely on the side of the Order? That would explain why he happened to "go out" just as the dementors descend upon Harry in Wisteria Walk???

- - - - - - - - - -
Steve Newton - May 20, 2005 9:17 am (#300 of 381)

Librarian
To my knowledge we only know that the prophecy was partially overheard. It could have been anyone or anything living at the time. So while it could be Mundungus it could also have been anyone else except Albus and Sybil since we know that they were both there for the whole thing. I guess we also know that it was not the tavern keeper.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
avatar
Elanor
Hufflepuff Prefect
Hufflepuff Prefect

Posts : 1440
Join date : 2011-02-19
Age : 45
Location : France

Back to top Go down

The Prophecy II (Post 301 to 350)

Post  Elanor on Thu Jun 02, 2011 3:19 am

Choices - May 20, 2005 10:57 am (#301 of 381)
*Completely Obsessed With Harry Potter*
Crimson - Yes, Peter and Voldemort were mentioned in that prophesy about Peter returning to his Master that night, but I think the prophesy was specifically for Harry, so I don't think it was recorded and kept in the DOM since Harry heard it first hand. That's just my opinion and is not based on canon, since I don't believe there is any to either support or deny it.

- - - - - - - - - -
Gerald Costales - May 27, 2005 6:14 am (#302 of 381)

Re: post# 290

“I nearly posted the following on the JKR site thread, in response to a post about Shakespeare, but I decided my random musings might be better suited to this thread.

I've been mulling over Jo's answer about Neville and the prophecy, especially as she referenced "the Scottish play." Catherine

Catherine here are some thoughts on “the Scottish play” or should that be an English play about a Scot. From my post #909 - Predictions for books six and seven

Yesterday, I was watching a musical group on the TV. Well, this was the group my older son had previously told was cast to play the "Weird Sisters" for Goblet of Fire.

Then it struck me that the "Weird Sisters" was what the three witches in Macbeth were called. So, I went on-line to check for the "Weird Sisters" being mentioned in Macbeth. Well, I'm glad a reference to "Weird Sisters" was in Act 1.

Macbeth – Act I, scene 3

. . . ALL (Three witches dancing in a ring)

The weird sisters, hand in hand,

Posters of the sea and land,

Thus do go about, about:

Thrice to thine and thrice to mine

And thrice again, to make up nine.

Peace! the charm's wound up.

Enter MACBETH and BANQUO . . .

But what does the “Weird Sisters” have to do with Voldermort. Both Macbeth and Voldermort in part live their lives because of a Prophecy. In fact Macbeth has four Prophecies that applied to him. All four of these Prophecies are given to Macbeth by these three “Weird Sisters”.

Macbeth four Prophecies are

. . . . . . 1. Macbeth will become Thane of Cawdor.

. . . . . . 2. Macbeth will become King of Scotland.

. . . . . . 3. Macbeth will be defeated when Birnam wood walk unto Dunsinane. (Birnam wood is the forest that is near the King’s castle Dunsinane.)

. . . . . . 4. Macbeth cannot be killed “To one of woman born”. (The wording is very important.)

Well, Macbeth did nothing to become Thane of Cawdor. Duncan the King rewarded Macbeth with this new title. But to become King, Macbeth killed Duncan. Duncan’s sons fled and everyone was convinced that Duncan’s sons are responsible for Duncan’s death. The argument was why would Duncan’s sons have fled if they were innocent.

Just as Peter Pettigrew was thought innocent and was awarded the Order of Merlin. (It is only later we knew that Peter framed Sirius in the murders of James and Lily.) So, Macbeth was thought innocent though bloodstained from killing the two men that were guarding Duncan.

Macbeth claimed to have found Duncan murdered and in a rage Macbeth slew Duncan’s two guards. When Duncan’s sons fled, everyone was convinced that Duncan’s sons certainly had hired the two guards to murder their father. Macbeth was too loyal to have killed Duncan. Just as Pettigrew was too meek to have anything to do with the murders of James and Lily.

In regards to the third Prophecy - How do trees walk? Well, the soldiers attacking Dunsinane were ordered to cut some trees down and then tied the branches to them. So when they attacked it appeared as if Birnam woods walks unto Dunsinane. But before I write about the final Prophecy, I need to mention a Fifth Prophecy.

The Fifth Prophecy was given to Banquo (Macbeth’s friend). The “Weird Sisters” predicted that his descendents will become future Kings of Scotland. After becoming first Thane and then King, Macbeth was convinced that this Fifth Prophecy for Banquo would come true. Macbeth decided he could intervened with Fate. Two men, traitors to Duncan, are hired by Macbeth to kill both Banquo and his son.

But, Fate cannot be tampered with and Banquo’s son escaped. Sounds familiar, didn’t Voldermort tamper with Fate and also failed to killed Harry allowing him to also escape. In Voldermort’s Prophecy, Harry was the “One born in the seventh month.”

Finally to a closing scene from Macbeth. This is the fulfillment of the Final Prophecy of Macbeth. Again, Macbeth will not dead “To one of woman born”.

Macbeth – Act V, scene 8

. . . Enter MACDUFF

MACDUFF

Turn, hell-hound, turn!

MACBETH

Of all men else I have avoided thee:

But get thee back; my soul is too much charged

With blood of thine already.

MACDUFF

I have no words:

My voice is in my sword: thou bloodier villain

Than terms can give thee out!

(They fight)

MACBETH

Thou losest labour:

As easy mayst thou the intrenchant air

With thy keen sword impress as make me bleed:

Let fall thy blade on vulnerable crests;

I bear a charmed life, which must not yield,

To one of woman born.

MACDUFF

Despair thy charm;

And let the angel whom thou still hast served

Tell thee, Macduff was from his mother's womb

Untimely ripp'd.

For those unfamiliar with Middle English – “ . . . Macduff was from his mother's womb Untimely ripp'd” in Modern English translates to – “Macduff was removed from his (dead) mother’s womb by C-section.” So, technically Macduff was never born by a woman. We can assume either Macduff’s mother was dead and Macduff ripped or cut-out from her womb or if Macduff was delivered by C-section then it really wasn’t a birth technically. Also didn't Voldermort believe he had a "charmed life".

“I believe JKR is leading us to a similar moment. When the Prophecy is fulfilled and we also finally understand the Prophecy.” ;-) GC (From the Wand Usage thread, my post# 73) (This post based on two of my posts on the Wand Usage thread.)

PS Know this is off the current topic but wanted to give you some info on Macbeth. I hope you all enjoyed it. ;-) GC

- - - - - - - - - -
Tomoé - May 27, 2005 9:31 am (#303 of 381)

Back in business
Thanks for the summary, Gerald, I gave up after Act 3, I couldn't remember who was who (I suppose it's much easier when you watch actors playing).

Interesting paralleles between the two stories, the way some prophecies are fulfilled in a similar manner.

- - - - - - - - - -
Miriam Huber - May 27, 2005 11:55 am (#304 of 381)

I think you are absolutely right, Gerald. JKR mentioned that connection not without motive. But I suppose like the Macbeth-prophecies, the "trick" with her one is not guessable - at least not before we have read book 6. Kind of self-fulfilling prophecy. I only wonder why the other prohecy (the one about Wormtail) was so relatively clear and without "twist". It didn´t change anything, for example, that Harry heard it. So was it only to assure us that Trelawney sometimes really prophecied? Or is there a twist we haven´t found out about yet?

- - - - - - - - - -
HungarianHorntail11 - May 27, 2005 2:54 pm (#305 of 381)

The heart sees deeper than the eye.
Miriam: I only wonder why the other prophecy (the one about Wormtail)

I thought it was to show the difference between someone who modifies his actions due to a prophecy (Big V) versus someone who didn't (Harry) although he was tempted to, he didn't. Who came out better in the long run?

Great summary, Gerald.

- - - - - - - - - -
Miriam Huber - May 27, 2005 11:44 pm (#306 of 381)

Very interesting idea, Horntail, really! Although Harry did not do nothing to make the prophecy true but to prove it wrong. It became true without him realizing that that was what happened. Voldemort, on the other hand, expressly tried to act according to the prophecy. Isn´t there a difference?

- - - - - - - - - -
HungarianHorntail11 - May 28, 2005 7:03 am (#307 of 381)

The heart sees deeper than the eye.
Well, with regard to Harry, I meant the Wormtail prophecy. (Maybe you're giving me too much credit.) As much as he wanted to capture the rat, he heeded Hermoine's warnings and did nothing to stop him from returning to Big V. Now Big V has a right-hand man (pun intended) who is in Harry's debt, whether he wants to be or not.

Big V vigilantly "chased" after the prophecy (what part he did hear) in an effort to thwart its outcome and look where he ended up.

- - - - - - - - - -
Miriam Huber - May 28, 2005 9:19 am (#308 of 381)

Oh, I seem to have expressed myself badly. Sorry, Horntail, once again:

Harry heard the Wormtail prophecy. Let´s lay aside the point that he didn´t realize it´s meaning until after the events. IF he had stepped in to prevent Wormtail from escaping, he had (consciously or not) acted AGAINST the prophecy which said Wormtail would return to Voldemort.

Voldemort heard part of the Harry/V prophecy. HE stepped in to FULFILL the prophecy not to stop it from becoming true.

Have I made myself clearer now?

- - - - - - - - - -
HungarianHorntail11 - May 28, 2005 10:23 am (#309 of 381)

The heart sees deeper than the eye.
Yes, but what began this posting episode is that someone asked why JKR would throw in the Wormtail prophecy. I suggested that it was to show a contrast between a prophecy that wasn't acted upon versus one that was acted upon. I didn't consider whether it was acted against or with the grain of the prophecy just whether or not it was acted upon at all.

According to JKRs response on the Neville question, she seemed to want to point out how our actions (or reactions) to information can serve as a catalyst if not more, then as much as the actual prediction itself.

With regard to for or against the grain of the prophecy, I don't know if that has come into play. Both came true, but the motive behind each decided (seemingly) that the outcome would be good for good motives and poor for bad motives. (Big V's motive was plainly self-serving and I'm sure he didn't listen to anyone trying to tell him it was a bad idea - maybe Snape did just this. Harry, on the other hand let Wormtail go for the good of not altering time or the future while using the time-turner. He must have been absolutely bursting while watching that rat escape, but he did the right thing.)

- - - - - - - - - -
Miriam Huber - May 29, 2005 3:08 am (#310 of 381)

It was me who asked about why she threw in the Wormtail prophecy.

Because, if we had only the Harry/V-prophecy I would think she constructed the whole prophecy-thing to be self-fulfilling (a theory which I would have liked). But the Wormtail-one stands against.

So your point with prophecies acted upon or not is quite important. The wormtail-prophecy would have come true even if nobody had heard it. And that irritates me.

- - - - - - - - - -
HungarianHorntail11 - May 29, 2005 9:44 am (#311 of 381)

The heart sees deeper than the eye.
Anything about Wormtail irritates me.

- - - - - - - - - -
hells456 - May 29, 2005 4:49 pm (#312 of 381)

I think the Wormtail prophesy was shown to demonstrate the difference in stucture between the two prophesies. When comparing the two it struck me how different they were, and I believe that DD edited the first prophesy before showing it to Harry. Why would the Order spend an entire year trying to keep the prophesy from Harry (and therefore Voldemort) only to tell him at the end anyway? DD knows Harry has not mastered occlumency and that Voldemort can waltz into his head and see it. I believe that DD only showed Harry the 'safe' portions of the prophesy and the rest will be revealed later.

That and a nice bit of dramatic tension.

- - - - - - - - - -
HungarianHorntail11 - May 29, 2005 8:49 pm (#313 of 381)

The heart sees deeper than the eye.
Well, that would add a good twist to the story, hells456.

Why would the Order spend an entire year trying to keep the prophesy from Harry (and therefore Voldemort) only to tell him at the end anyway?

I would tend to think it's because Harry had a showdown with Big V and he didn't fight back. He really needs to arm himself and DD doesn't want it to end in another senseless death. It would be a good enough motivator for me to learn to block out Big V - or at least master control of it enough to make it useful for myself. Harry could always store the thought in DD's pensieve.

- - - - - - - - - -
Solitaire - May 29, 2005 10:20 pm (#314 of 381)

I believe Dumbledore may have felt that if Harry knew the prophecy, then he would dwell on it, thereby giving Voldemort access to it--something they were trying to prevent. After everything that happened at the Ministry, perhaps Dumbledore felt that Harry had earned the right to know what it said. Just speculation, of course ...

Solitaire

- - - - - - - - - -
Miriam Huber - May 30, 2005 12:37 am (#315 of 381)

I can´t imagine Dumbledore saying to Harry "I will tell you everything" and then give him an "edited", a "safe" version of the prophecy without even mentioning it is NOT all. Dumbledore sometimes withheld information from Harry, but then he said so (see end of PS) and he never LIED to Harry.

- - - - - - - - - -
Solitaire - May 30, 2005 1:35 pm (#316 of 381)

Dumbledore may not lie to Harry, but we all know he withholds information from Harry (and us) when he feels the need to do so ... and we may not be aware that he is doing this.

I will not go so far as to say I do not trust Dumbledore, but I do not believe he has shown all his cards just yet. I think he gave up what he had to give up at the end of OotP. I can't help it ... I believe there is much more to be revealed that we have not yet been told.

Solitaire

- - - - - - - - - -
Choices - May 30, 2005 2:46 pm (#317 of 381)

*Completely Obsessed With Harry Potter*
Miriam - I have to agree with you. If Dumbledore said he would tell Harry everything, then I think he did. Not that there might not be more to the story, but I think he told everything about that particular aspect of the story.

- - - - - - - - - -
hells456 - May 31, 2005 3:34 am (#318 of 381)

I also find it peculiar that there isn't really anything in the prophesy that Voldemort shouldn't know. He had already heard the first bit, and the rest only really told us (and Voldemort) what we had figured out, that one had to kill the other. Why all the secrecy over the prophesy? Why did they describe it as a weapon of sorts?

I apologise if I'm being completely dense here, I just fail to see what was so important in the prophesy. The Order effectively wasted a whole year guarding it, Sirius and Bode died, Arthur nearly died. Harry could have alienated his friends with his continual prickliness, he may never fully trust Dumbledore again. Which part of the prophesy was worth all of this? I appreciate any help.

- - - - - - - - - -
Aurora Gubbins - May 31, 2005 4:55 am (#319 of 381)

The idea that Dumbledore edited the prophecy is brilliant! If LV takes a trip into Harry's head and discovers that 'neither can live while the other survives', he might decide that his taking of Harry's life would mean his own life comes to an end, and as his main aim is to achieve immortality he may decide that it wouldn't be worth it - LV has misjudged plenty before now.

In the event of a showdown between Harry and LV, if LV dies, will Harry's scar disappear?

Aurora xx

Aurora xx

- - - - - - - - - -
Miriam Huber - May 31, 2005 7:49 am (#320 of 381)

hells,

firstly, it is always very useful to keep the enemy in the dark. Voldemort feels there is something to the prophecy/to Harry he doesn´t know or understand as Harry has escaped ihm so often (says Dumbledore). But more important:

Secondly, at the beginning of OoP Voldemort knew nothing about having marked Harry "as an equal". And if he realizes now the full impact of that scar is doubtful.

Thirdly, he still doesn´t know that Harry has power "the Dark Lord knows not". If he knew, he could perhaps guess what power that is (especially after him possessing Harry briefly and being driven out of him).

Just my 2 knuts. Forgotten anything?

- - - - - - - - - -
vball man - May 31, 2005 8:31 am (#321 of 381)

He is no fool who gives up what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot loose. - Jim Elliot
The idea that the prophecy was edited by Dumbledore has been discussed quite a bit.

JKR had the readers and Harry hear the prophecy only through Dumbledore's memory, rather than through the prophecy glass orb. Perhaps she did this to allow Dumbledore to edit it. Who knows?

Dumbledore does tell Harry that he's going to tell him "everything." Would it be truthful to edit the prophecy? Are there reasons why Dumbledore would lie, even to Harry?

The prophecy does seem to be not all that much of a "weapon." But even if the remainder of the prophecy had no meaning, at least it was a year-long diversion for Voldemort. Harry learned a lot in that year. I think a large part of Dumbledore's strategy is to buy time to give Harry more training before the "final conflict."

- - - - - - - - - -
Choices - May 31, 2005 12:12 pm (#322 of 381)

*Completely Obsessed With Harry Potter*
Aurora - "In the event of a showdown between Harry and LV, if LV dies, will Harry's scar disappear?"

Book one, ch. one - conversation between Dumbledore and McGonagall

"Yes," said Dumbledore. "He'll have that scar forever."

"Couldn't you do something about it, Dumbledore?"

"Even if I could, I wouldn't...."

- - - - - - - - - -
Gerald Costales - Jun 2, 2005 7:52 pm (#323 of 381)

If Harry's "lightning bolt" scar marked Harry as "the One" - Does Dumbledore's scar of the London Underground now have some new meaning? Apparently the "Scar" is more important than I thought. And what if Grindelwald gave Dumbledore the London Underground scar? Is there still a thread about Dumbledore's Scar?

On whether Dumbledore edited the "Prophecy", I don't think so. Did the Order waste a year guarding the "Prophecy"? No. Voldermort still doesn't have the complete "Prophecy".

There is more to the "Prophecy" when we know. Just as there is more to the "Scar" than we know.

You were right Mikie and I was wrong. ;-( GC

PS Now, the best thing is that Book 6 and July 16th are approaching fast. ;-) GC

PPS Mikie. Fawkes is still important but maybe not as important as the "Scar". ;-) GC

- - - - - - - - - -
Astragynia Winifred Posy Miranda Yseult Cawdor - Jun 2, 2005 11:00 pm (#324 of 381)

We don't really know enough about the scar to predict whether it will disappear. My thought on it, though, is why would it? I think it is the literal "mark" that Voldemort gave Harry when he "marked him as his equal," and we know that it is the focal point on Harry's body of his connection to Voldemort - but even if the magic of that connection leaves him when Voldemort dies, wouldn't his skin still be damaged? Wouldn't it just become a non-magical scar?

Regarding the self-fulfilling/choices-vs.-destiny nature of prophecies: as I understand prophecies (and I say this as somebody who has briefly studied both Oedipus Rex and Macbeth and knows something about the theology of predestination, in other words with just enough knowledge to be dangerous...) prophecies say what WILL happen. Period. When the people involved KNOW about the prophecy, they make decisions (sometimes trying to avoid the prophesied outcome) that ultimately cause it to happen (Oedipus' father sending him to be killed); when they DON'T know, they fulfill the prophecy directly (Oedipus had never heard of the existence of the prophesy when he killed his father). Though the prophesied outcome is unavoidable, free will is still involved. The prophet simply knows ahead of time what choices will be made. No character is ever forced into fulfilling a prophecy, though they may feel like it.

Come to think of it, the Harry Potter prophecy is unusual in that it allows for more than one final result. It actually predicts a situation - Harry and Voldemort fighting to the death in some way - without predicting the outcome.

(Some people have said there are 2 possible outcomes, but I disagree; my personal prediction: Harry will kill Voldemort by dying himself, perhaps jumping through the veil and pulling Voldie after him).

-Astra

- - - - - - - - - -
Tomoé - Jun 3, 2005 7:36 am (#325 of 381)

Back in business
Astragynia -> prophecies say what WILL happen. Period. Though the prophesied outcome is unavoidable, free will is still involved. The prophet simply knows ahead of time what choices will be made.

That's precisely how I see it. The first prophecy has an ambigous end, because either Harry or Tom would avoid the final confrontation if they knew, but the end is already by God (which is to say JKR ^_~).

- - - - - - - - - -
Ms Amanda - Jun 3, 2005 4:38 pm (#326 of 381)

Astragynia, you gave me a wonderful idea! What if it isn't Harry, but Peter, who jumps through the veil? It is HIS decision who he grabs to take with him!

Oooo, maybe that should be fanfic, as I have no canon evidence, but still, that would be a wonderful ending.

- - - - - - - - - -
TwinklingBlueEyes - Jun 3, 2005 8:05 pm (#327 of 381)

"Character is doing the right thing when nobody is looking"
"The one with the power to vanquish the- Dark Lord approaches… born to those who have thrice defied him, born as the seventh month dies … and the Dark Lord will mark him as his equal, but he will have power the Dark Lord knows not … and either must die at the hand of the other for neither can live while the other survives … the one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord will be born as the seventh month dies …"

Thinking about it, it could work. JKR has built Dumbledore up as almost omnipotent, to both her readers and Harry. From Book one to an eleven year old, and to us, he was infallible. We have watched Harry grow, and we, along with Harry have learned that Dumbledore also makes mistakes. He has descended from god-like in Harry's, and the readers eyes, to human.

If Dumbledore has mis-interputed the Prophecy ... and believes Voldemort chose and marked Harry as the One through his scar he was both right, and wrong. What if Voldemort really transferred the only good that was left in him, an essence if you will to Harry. We have had several theory's about just that, as JKR showed us with the diary. Then we would have Good (Harry) vs Evil (Voldemort), very similar and sharing a connection through the scar. Picture devil on one shoulder, angel on other ("mark him as his equal". Or as Dumbledore showed us with the silver instrument and the smoke snake, "but in essence divided".

Ok, lets look at the next part of my half-baked theory. Neville, the one we have always seen in the background, the one seemingly opposite of Harry. We have also watched Neville grow and as we say, is coming into his own. Harry is the one seemingly actively fighting Voldemort (Good vs Evil). Neville, the shadowy one in the background, but always in the background, but coming to the fore in each progressive book.

What if the One is really Neville, the one we have always seen in the background, the one seemingly opposite of Harry. "Neither can live while the other survives", Good can never really truly survive, or thrive while battling evil. Evil, in the persona of Voldemort has to be VANQUISHED before Good can survive and thrive (Harry). What if Neville is the one with the power to vanquish evil, maybe as a turning point as Harry battles Voldemort, maybe even with a "hand from Peter".

...toddles off to think some more... feel free to throw dungbombs as I won't be here :-)...

Edited: Thanks for the inspiration SE!

Edited edit...I have always wondered how Dumbledore knew about the "bravery to stand up to your friends", the points that actually won them the House Cup...

- - - - - - - - - -
Gerald Costales - Jun 4, 2005 4:21 am (#328 of 381)

. . . . “the one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord will be born as the seventh month dies …" . . . . .

What if the One is really Neville, the one we have always seen in the background, the one seemingly opposite of Harry. "Neither can live while the other survives", Good can never really truly survive, or thrive while battling evil. Evil, in the persona of Voldemort has to be VANQUISHED before Good can survive and thrive (Harry). What if Neville is the one with the power to vanquish evil, maybe as a turning point as Harry battles Voldemort, maybe even with a "hand from Peter". TwinklingBlueEyes

Neville could have been “the One” but I think JKR’s recent website response nixed that possibility. Voldermort marked Harry as his equal and Harry has the “Scar” to prove it.

I liked your a “hand from Peter” comment. Dear Peter (Scabbers) Pettigrew has a life debt to Harry. Both Scabbers/Wormtail’s and Harry’s blood is now flowing in Voldermort. What that means maybe revealed in either Book 6 and/or Book 7.

TBE, Neville will be moving forward and out of the background. Neville’s courage at the Battle in the MoM and his improved Magical abilities as a member of the DA will not go unrecognized. Neville like Ginny will be part of an expanded Inner Circle joining HRH in Book 6 in the fight against Voldermort and the Death Eaters. And Neville will confront Bella before the end of the Series. Great post TBE.

I’d like to revisit something mentioned earlier in this thread.

Re: post# 304

“ . . . . . But I suppose like the Macbeth-prophecies, the "trick" with her one is not guessable - at least not before we have read book 6. Kind of self-fulfilling prophecy. I only wonder why the other prophecy (the one about Wormtail) was so relatively clear and without "twist". It didn’t change anything, for example, that Harry heard it. So was it only to assure us that Trelawney sometimes really prophecied? Or is there a twist we haven’t found out about yet?” Miriam Huber

Without the Wormtail returning to his Master Prophecy, there would be some doubt by readers about the credibility of Trelawney. The Prophecy given directly to Harry gave us readers the proof that Trelawney is sometimes not a fraud but capable of real Prophecies. Trelawney‘s Hog‘s Head Prophecy isn‘t revealed to us reader until the end of Book 5. The Wormtail/Master Prophecy helped us accept the Hog‘s Head Prophecy as the "Real Thing" when Dumbledore finally gave it to Harry.

The Wormtail/Master Prophecy has no “trick” or “twist” because its purpose in the Series is to set up the credibility of the Hog’s Head Prophecy. Miriam Huber your - “So was it only to assure us that Trelawney sometimes really prophecied?” - comment is in agreement with my understanding of the purpose of the Wormtail/Master Prophecy. ;-) GC

PS The only "twist" that could exist in the Wormtail/Master Prophecy is that Wormtail is not the "Servant" that returns to his "Master".

PPS Isn’t it July 16th yet!!!!! ;-) GC

- - - - - - - - - -
Choices - Jun 4, 2005 9:34 am (#329 of 381)

*Completely Obsessed With Harry Potter*
".....and either must die at the hand of the other for neither can live while the other survives …"

I know the prophesy is worded to be ambiguous - to make it impossible for us to nail it down. I have always wondered about "the other". If Harry is "the one", who is "the other"? Maybe there will be a third party - "the other" - involved in the final showdown. Just a thought....

- - - - - - - - - -
lemonbalm&bees - Jun 4, 2005 9:54 am (#330 of 381)

"This time it was right, it would work, and no one would have to get nailed to anything." ~D.A.
I think Trewlaney's Wormtail prophecy had a small twist, just not one that survived the book. When we hear it for the first time, we are meant to believe that the servant is Sirius, since we don't know he's innocent yet. However, since this is a prophecy with a time limit ("It will happen tonight...") we figure out the true meaning before the end of the book. I think what it tells us about Trewlaney is that, yes, she is sometimes capable of actual foresight, but that her predictions can be interpreted in many ways.

- - - - - - - - - -
Solitaire - Jun 4, 2005 1:47 pm (#331 of 381)

I think what it tells us about Trewlaney is that, yes, she is sometimes capable of actual foresight, but that her predictions can be interpreted in many ways.

And isn't it interesting that she seems unaware of having made that particular prophecy? I still can't wait to find out whether she is even aware of having made the other one to Dumbledore.

Solitaire

- - - - - - - - - -
haymoni - Jun 4, 2005 6:12 pm (#332 of 381)

Choices - I've always wondered about that wording in the prophecy - "the hand of the other" - It makes me think that it is Peter's hand.

He had to supply "flesh" - he had already cut off a finger - why not another one? Why did he have to cut off his whole hand? He could have used his pinky toe!!

And then Voldy gives him a new hand - a strong hand - it was created with magic - who knows what kinds of power it has?

- - - - - - - - - -
Choices - Jun 4, 2005 6:35 pm (#333 of 381)

*Completely Obsessed With Harry Potter*
haymoni - I definitely think Peter's hand is going to play a role in the defeat of (I hope) Voldemort. Peter may well be "the other".....time will tell.

- - - - - - - - - -
Solitaire - Jun 5, 2005 11:16 am (#334 of 381)

Yes, consider that line in the prophecy ... either must die AT THE HAND of the other ... I believe hands are going to be significant in the coming two books--Peter's hand, the Hand of Glory, "the hand of the other" ...

Solitaire

- - - - - - - - - -
HungarianHorntail11 - Jun 5, 2005 12:37 pm (#335 of 381)

The heart sees deeper than the eye.
Didn't Voldemort say, "the other hand, Wormtail"?

- - - - - - - - - -
haymoni - Jun 5, 2005 3:24 pm (#336 of 381)

Voldy told him to hold up his arm and Peter thought he was going to fix his limb, but Voldy said no, your other arm - he just wanted to use his Dark Mark arm to summon the Death Eaters.

- - - - - - - - - -
HungarianHorntail11 - Jun 5, 2005 4:43 pm (#337 of 381)

The heart sees deeper than the eye.
Thanks, haymoni!

- - - - - - - - - -
Astragynia Winifred Posy Miranda Yseult Cawdor - Jun 6, 2005 10:28 pm (#338 of 381)

Though, you never know - maybe Voldemort just enjoys macabre puns. (What evil archvillain doesn't?)... I think he says something much earlier in GoF about Wormtail being honored by being the one to perform a service "that any of my followers would give their right hand to do," or something of the sort. Followed by an evil smile, of course.

- - - - - - - - - -
Elanor - Jun 7, 2005 12:02 pm (#339 of 381)

TBE, I've just had the time to read your theory and I agree that Neville will play a decisive part in Voldemort's defeat. It reminds me of something I posted some days ago about Neville's name:

"- there is a "n" before "evil" in his name, much like a negative: non-evil.

- Neville reminds me of Richard Neville, Earl of Warwick, known as Warwick the Kingmaker during the Wars of the Roses. He was famous for trying to act as an arbiter first in the conflict and his role during the wars was very important. The "kingmaker" mention is very interesting when we remember that Jo said Neville was "nearly king"... If we see Harry as the King, symbolically, then this connection reinforces the fact that he will help him in his task, don't you think so? "

Solitaire:"I believe hands are going to be significant in the coming two books--Peter's hand, the Hand of Glory, "the hand of the other" ..." I do agree too!

- - - - - - - - - -
T Brightwater - Jun 7, 2005 12:31 pm (#340 of 381)

If a prophecy or vision is truthful, then according to Dorothy L. Sayers' theory, it is seeing the "nodes" that the future will pass through. For example, in a life, there must be a birth and a death, but how those two events come about is influenced by the free will of the people involved. The seer sees an event, but not the process that led up to it. (There are a couple of good examples in "Revenge of the Sith": Anakin's nightmare and the "prophecy" that he is the Chosen One.)

Besides the Wormtail prophecy, other examples of prophecies that are fulfilled without being "aggravated" by someone trying to avert them include the Harpy's prophecy in the Aeneid (that Aeneas and his companions would be reduced to "eating their platters" - which comes true harmlessly) Sam's visions in the Mirror of Galadriel, including the one of trees being felled in the Shire, and one of the five subplots in John Buchan's "A Gap in the Curtain" - a man who sees his own name in an obituary column from a newspaper one year in the future lives to learn that the obituary is of someone else with the same name.)

Sam's vision is particularly interesting. It does come true, but if he had "turned aside from his path" to avoid it, I think it probably would also have come true - only worse. Because Sam stays true to his mission, he is able to heal the wounded Shire with Galadriel's gift, but if he had abandoned Frodo, the Ring would have almost certainly fallen into the hands of Sauron and the fate of the Shire would have been far worse.

- - - - - - - - - -
haymoni - Jun 8, 2005 4:26 pm (#341 of 381)

Elanor - I thought something similar - Neville - "Never Evil".

- - - - - - - - - -
Gerald Costales - Jun 9, 2005 8:19 pm (#342 of 381)

"... either must die AT THE HAND of the other ..."

Neville or Wormtail. The one who would be King or the one who gave his hand to his Master. With the nature of Prophecies than either Neville or Wormtail could be part of Fate.

I'd pick Neville but than again, I think Neville's date with Destiny would happen if he confronts Bella again. And of course Neville will best Bella and avenge his parents!!!!!

Wormtail has a life-debt to Harry. So, Wormtail deciding between Harry or Voldermort could provide Wormtail a chance to redeem himself. Wormtail is a Gryffindor and his true colors would finally be shown if he saves Harry. Peter will choose to be Brave and stand-up to Voldermort and aid Harry. Peter taking an AK to save Harry would seem poetic since Peter betrayed James and Lily in the first place. ;-) GC

PS July 16th is on the horizon. ;-) GC

PPS Dobby could save Harry again. ;-) GC

PPPS And there's always Fawkes. But, Fawkes doesn't have any hands does he. Just feathers and claws. ;-) GC

- - - - - - - - - -
Ms Amanda - Jun 10, 2005 4:35 am (#343 of 381)

Edited by Jun 10, 2005 4:37 am
OOhhhh, claws are sort of hands, aren't they? I'm just being a little silly (it's much too early for me), but I just noticed that Ravenclaw, mentions a claw, too. Maybe it's a Ravenclaw that helps.

Sigh, sorry, while it could possibly be a Ravenclaw, I'm just being silly. I think that I've about exhausted all the theories I've come up with on "the other." It's one of the two most fascinating parts of the prophecy.

The alternate part of the prophecy which is very interesting is "neither can live while the other survives." I'm sorry, but aren't Harry and Voldemort both very much alive?

Oh, oh, oh. How about this.... Wormtail is indeed "the other." But, what he is is the "other" Dark Lord. Ohhhh. So, either Harry or Voldemort must die at the hand of the NEW Dark Lord because the new Dark Lord must die, or both Harry and Voldemort will die.

Well, ok, that doesn't sound simple enough or very clear. But, hey, I managed to come up with a theory this morning.

Edit - oh, you know, I figure that someone else already came up with that explanation. Sorry. I knew it was much too early to try to make my brain come up with something novel.

. . . time to apparate to work

- - - - - - - - - -
Robert Dierken - Jun 13, 2005 3:04 pm (#344 of 381)

Of course, the Durmstrang ship also has hands!

- - - - - - - - - -
Astragynia Winifred Posy Miranda Yseult Cawdor - Jun 13, 2005 8:25 pm (#345 of 381)

So does Molly Weasley's clock! So if she adds a hand for Harry, Neville could tear it off the clock and use it as a dart to kill Voldemort...

Umm, Siriusly...

No, of course not. Smile

- - - - - - - - - -
HungarianHorntail11 - Jan 5, 2007 9:36 am (#346 of 381)

The heart sees deeper than the eye.
I am not sure if this has been discussed, but it seems the most likely place for me to post it.

I came across a snippet of Howard's End (Ch. 22) by E.M. Forster that struck a chord.
"The beast and the monk, robbed of the isolation that is life to either, will die."

Though I may be taking Forster's meaning out of context, I felt as though it could be applied to the wording of JKR's prophecy.

I thought about how Big V. cut himself off from Harry in Book 5 (thus, making a separation, or isolating himself from Harry). Harry benefited from this connection. Could it be that Harry will need to reconnect with Big V again?

There is lots of food for thought here, and I would love to hear some speculation.

- - - - - - - - - -
me and my shadow 813 - Jan 5, 2007 5:49 pm (#347 of 381)

Image Courtesy of Burgundyeyes at fanpop.com icons -- [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
HH11, first of all, very synchronicitous because I just rented the film today. Haven't seen or thought of the story in a long time.

The quote above does remind me of the prophecy. On a symbolic level, I like how it says "the isolation that is life to either", implying it isn't natural for their lives to be separate (yin&yang). Isolation is a *negative* word to me, as far as philosophic/humanistic writing goes.

Could it be that Harry will need to reconnect with Big V again?

I'd say definitely, albeit my views are extreme, yet metaphorical, when talking about how dark&light, Vold&Harry, will have to merge in order to truly fulfill his Reluctant Chosen One role.

The "reconnect" you mention might never have truly been severed if one considers Harry's scar a horcrux. (Either no one has ever asked JKR this question, or she has thusfar been an expert at dodging it). But even if the scar is not a horcrux, the scene with DD observing the two serpents at his desk can be taken as Vold "in essence divided" as an individual (horcruxes), or as in Vold and Harry being permanently connected. Thus it being Harry's task to absorb/transmute the Beast that is Vold.

Well, you wanted to hear some speculation... hope it wasn't too confusing, as I tend to be sometimes.

- - - - - - - - - -
HungarianHorntail11 - Jan 5, 2007 7:06 pm (#348 of 381)

The heart sees deeper than the eye.
I was hoping someone would get the connection - I'm glad you did, me and my shadow 813.

The "reconnect" you mention might never have truly been severed if one considers Harry's scar a horcrux. (Either no one has ever asked JKR this question, or she has thusfar been an expert at dodging it). I agree - with regard to the connection, as I understand it, Big V has to maintain Occlumency to keep a separation of sorts - so the connection is indeed still there, isn't it?
As far as JKR goes, I definitely think it is the latter and she has successfully dodged that question, as well as many other key questions. (Do you detect a hint of frustration as noted from the questions chosen for the reading in August, '06?)

It was not confusing at all, rather, you really managed to expand on an idea in a precise manner that I briefly touched on. Funny that you should rent that movie today. . .

I thought of 'isolation' as more protective than negative. It is something that neither will have, though Big V clearly wants it and Harry thinks he does. (i.e., they do not have what they feel would protect them) If you think about Forster's point, he does seem to have a negative connotation - the two must connect for each to be effective. Perhaps we have seen a bit of it in the GoF graveyard scene (Priori Incantatem).

- - - - - - - - - -
me and my shadow 813 - Jan 5, 2007 8:22 pm (#349 of 381)

Image Courtesy of Burgundyeyes at fanpop.com icons -- [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
with regard to the connection, as I understand it, Big V has to maintain Occlumency to keep a separation of sorts - so the connection is indeed still there, isn't it?

HH11, yes and it's an interesting point because Harry is not ever going to master Occlumency. I agree that to a certain point isolation is protection. It certainly is for orphans and others who are operating from the survivial instinct, feeling always threatened. But if I keep going with the idea of isolation as ultimately limitation, Harry is not the one blocking with Occlumency, he won't be the "isolator". He is the innocent, for lack of a better term, and, coupled with the love he inherits from his mother, could literally *take in* the last fragment of Vold and transform it. Perhaps the only fragment left will be a very terrified and helpless piece of soul that will surrender to being absorbed into our hero. Or it could be pure evil and still be transformed via our hero, since Harry understands and accepts rage, manipulative behavior, being a Parselmouth, etc.

I, and others, have used a comparison before on this forum and I think it's a good one: in the Matrix, after relentless fighting with the agent Smith ad nauseum, Neo finally *enters* him and ends the battle once and for all. This is my basic point. What do you think?

- - - - - - - - - -
HungarianHorntail11 - Jan 5, 2007 8:50 pm (#350 of 381)

The heart sees deeper than the eye.
I have only seen bits of the Matrix and though, that makes sense, I am not sure how he defeats him. Maybe you can elaborate? It seems to be an interesting comparison.

I do believe that all of the soul bits must be destroyed. Hence, I find it difficult to go with any type of assimilation of Big V's soulbit w/in Harry. (I believe Harry is a horcrux.) The fact that JKR left out how to destroy a horcrux, as well as precisely how they are made are, to me, no coincidence.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
avatar
Elanor
Hufflepuff Prefect
Hufflepuff Prefect

Posts : 1440
Join date : 2011-02-19
Age : 45
Location : France

Back to top Go down

The Prophecy II (Post 351 to 381)

Post  Elanor on Thu Jun 02, 2011 3:21 am

me and my shadow 813 - Jan 5, 2007 9:54 pm (#351 of 381)
Image Courtesy of Burgundyeyes at fanpop.com icons -- [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
HH11, in a nutshell: Neo (the Harry figure) battles his "opposite", Agent Smith in endless martial arts fighting. Their "skills" are matched and mirrored with the other. There are other aspects to the story (love, doubt, choice), but ultimately Neo stops hitting, punching, kicking and finally just dives straight into Smith's body. He becomes one with Smith. I probably can't get more into it without this post getting deleted... but it's basically alchemical in nature. Nothing is destroyed, only transformed, but of course a treacherous road that very few could survive.

If Harry contains part of Vold's soul, he will either have to destroy a part of himself or find a way to assimilate the fragment into himself. The latter, to me, would be an extremely powerful tale for modern times. Not even LotR had Frodo truly become one with Gollum, although the metaphor was there nonetheless.

To bring it back to the prophecy, I have always read it as one consuming the other. It is metaphorical, yet in literature things occur *literally* in order to make such a point, I feel.

-edited for clarity

- - - - - - - - - -
Solitaire - Jan 6, 2007 8:20 pm (#352 of 381)

I could certainly be way off, but as I understand it, all of the Horcruxes must be destroyed before the final bit of soul that is Voldemort himself can be destroyed once and for all. If Harry is a Horcrux, then he will not be The One referred to in the prophecy who has the power to vanquish Voldemort ... because, being a Horcrux, Harry would have to be dead in order for Voldemort to be destroyed. Can anyone address this issue?

Solitaire

- - - - - - - - - -
TheSaint - Jan 7, 2007 5:52 am (#353 of 381)

If Harry is a horcrux, then the soul bit he is carrying has learned about love from being with Harry. Should Harry's death be required to release this horcrux, then he truely is 'the one' that will make Voldemort experience love.

I posted on here a long while back a link I had to an interesting premise in Kabbalah having to do with people unable to reach enlightenment. It was possible for thier soul to be carried by another to reach the goal and aid them in thier journey. I will see if I can find it again.

- - - - - - - - - -
TheSaint - Jan 7, 2007 6:27 am (#354 of 381)

Too late to edit.

In order that the soul may return to its source, it must previously have reached full development of all its perfections in terrestrial life. If it has not fulfilled this condition in the course of one life, it must begin all over again in another body, continuing until it has completed its task. The Lurianic Cabala added to metempsychosis proper the theory of the impregnation () of souls; that is, if two souls do not feel equal to their tasks God unites both in one body, so that they may support and complete each o?her, as, for instance, a lame man and a blind one may conjointly do (compare the parable in Sanh. 91a, . If one of the two souls needs aid, the other becomes, as it were, its mother, bearing it in its lap and nourishing it with its own substance.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

- - - - - - - - - -
Chemyst - Jan 7, 2007 10:41 am (#355 of 381)

"Organizing is what you do before you do something, so that when you do it, it is not all mixed up." A.A. Milne
**thinks that puts a whole new spin on Gina's holiday avatars showing Snape with a menorah**

One of the reasons I don't like such theories is the use of the word "vanquish" in the prophecy. For me, "vanquish" connotes a black & white defeat without grey areas of debate. We have had six books build to an epic Good vs. Evil conflict with a prophesied promise of vanquishment. To have Harry deliver Voldemort by nourishing one of LV's fragments with love would sink the entire foundation of the story into a morass of wizard pantheism.

If HP does end that way, I'm going to find an agent to sell my story about the little girl who saves the world by baking brownies for the devil.

_________
Question: why the ? in o?her? Does that have some special significance?

- - - - - - - - - -
HungarianHorntail11 - Jan 7, 2007 12:49 pm (#356 of 381)

The heart sees deeper than the eye.
My idea seems banal compared to what I've read. . .

I am thinking Big V will decide to kill Harry (sacrificing his horcrux) with the intent to use the murder for a horcrux and the AK kills Big V's horcrux within Harry and either rebounds because of the reaction of one AK'ing himself (in a sense) or others are standing by and AK Big V. Harry's scar no longer pains him.

But this should be continued on the Horcrux thread. Solitaire, I am sure you will find information for your questions there.

- - - - - - - - - -
me and my shadow 813 - Jan 7, 2007 11:36 pm (#357 of 381)

Image Courtesy of Burgundyeyes at fanpop.com icons -- [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
The Saint, I am not a Cabala adept, but that's basically what I believe as well. I do not believe "vanquish" necessarily means "kill" any more than I believe DD's "defeat" of Grindewald means "kill". (I am aware that JKR did say in interviews that DD did in fact kill Grindewald but I think there is a reason she chose such wording and averted "kill"). We fans know there is an important quote from DD in the MoM which states there are worse things to do to a man than kill him. It all depends upon the man. What is the man's boggart? Would Voldemort loathe the idea that his soul was saved by Harry? I think so, although there is a part of him (and all villains) that wishes to be saved and made innocent again.

I do not see black and white in the story at all. To the contrary, this story to me has been building up 6 books of "what and who is exactly evil" and that grey areas abound. I believe, and truly hope, this is JKR's moral and not that good Harry killed the evil Dark Lord.

- - - - - - - - - -
me and my shadow 813 - Jan 8, 2007 12:26 am (#358 of 381)

Image Courtesy of Burgundyeyes at fanpop.com icons -- [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Should Harry's death be required to release this horcrux, then he truely is 'the one' that will make Voldemort experience love. - The Saint

I want to add that I do not believe Harry must die in order to achieve this.

...an interesting premise in Kabbalah having to do with people unable to reach enlightenment. It was possible for thier soul to be carried by another to reach the goal and aid them in thier journey. - The Saint

I believe Harry will in fact do this with Vold. There's just too much emphasis on their connection for me to discount this as a strong possibility. I believe it's possible Nagini isn't a horcrux, but I will take the rest of this idea to the horcrux thread.

- - - - - - - - - -
Chemyst - Jan 8, 2007 6:01 am (#359 of 381)

"Organizing is what you do before you do something, so that when you do it, it is not all mixed up." A.A. Milne
m&m shadow, if you notice, my last post never said vanquish meant "kill." I do think it means a clear and decisive defeat, however. That is, at the end of the series, Voldemort must be accountable for implementing the prophecy. So while I look for a twist where Harry does not have to kill, (at least not any closer to a "kill" than what happened with the diary) there still has to be death. Otherwise, if Harry carries Voldemort on into enlightenment, there is no decisive defeat. No vanquishing. Voldemort will have achieved his immortality – He wins.

- - - - - - - - - -
TomProffitt - Jan 8, 2007 6:23 am (#360 of 381)

Bullheaded empiricist
I don't know that Tom Riddle will literally die at Harry's hand, but I feel confident that the series will end with Tom Riddle's literal death. I think anything else would be too vague and not bring a sense of closure to the plot line.

- - - - - - - - - -
HungarianHorntail11 - Jan 8, 2007 8:06 am (#361 of 381)

The heart sees deeper than the eye.
What is the man's boggart? Would Voldemort loathe the idea that his soul was saved by Harry? - m&ms813
If memory serves, JKR did say in an interview that Big V would see himself dead as his boggart, so I'll go with him fearing death rather than the fear of being saved via Harry and his love.

- - - - - - - - - -
me and my shadow 813 - Jan 8, 2007 7:36 pm (#362 of 381)

Image Courtesy of Burgundyeyes at fanpop.com icons -- [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Yes, JKR said Vold fears death over all other things. I was saying he wouldn't be keen on his soul being consumed by the Chosen One in the process. But there is a part of everyone, even Charles Manson, that wants to be saved. It is not Harry's love for Vold. It is his love for himself. That soul fragment is already a part of Harry, moreso than it is a part of Vold.

Vold's body will be dead at the end. I have no doubt about that. But I personally am convinced Harry's scar is a horcrux and, with Harry remaining alive at the end, this soul fragment will be fully part of Harry. In CoS the clues begin and haven't stopped:

"Voldemort put a bit of himself in me?" Harry said, thunderstruck. (scar)

"It certainly seems so."

This seems to be clear foreshadowing to me, not a red herring.

- - - - - - - - - -
journeymom - Jan 8, 2007 10:09 pm (#363 of 381)

No! No! No! No! No! (How's that for expostulation? *sheepish grin* ) Harry cannot be a horcrux. Or, if he is, there's an antidote. Dumbledore's death created it, or Lily's protection. Or LV's own bit in Harry, acting like an antibody, like Jenner's cowpox vaccination. Sigh. I can't accept it if it means Harry will have to destroy himself, or other unthinkables. < end tantrum >

Sorry, carry on.

- - - - - - - - - -
Thom Matheson - Jan 8, 2007 10:27 pm (#364 of 381)

A BIG FAT NO!

- - - - - - - - - -
me and my shadow 813 - Jan 8, 2007 10:38 pm (#365 of 381)

Image Courtesy of Burgundyeyes at fanpop.com icons -- [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
There is a saying that goes: "...to confide a part of your soul to something that can think and move for itself is obviously a very risky business."

Quite.

- - - - - - - - - -
haymoni - Jan 9, 2007 7:56 am (#366 of 381)

Perhaps Harry has to perform "The Deathly Hallows" to get the soul-bit out of him.

- - - - - - - - - -
Steve Newton - Jan 9, 2007 8:19 am (#367 of 381)

Librarian
And then Celestina Warbeck could do the song!

- - - - - - - - - -
me and my shadow 813 - Jan 9, 2007 4:18 pm (#368 of 381)

Image Courtesy of Burgundyeyes at fanpop.com icons -- [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
journeymom and Thom,

TomProffitt cited a recent quote from JKR's website in the "rumours" section. It basically says Harry and Vold will not "merge".

So you can all take a deep breath and thank goodness I'm not responsible for book 7. I still believe Harry's scar is a horcrux, but if it is true, it seems the soul fragment will release and not remain with Harry.

- - - - - - - - - -
journeymom - Jan 9, 2007 4:35 pm (#369 of 381)

Gah! *mouth opens and closes like a fish* But- but- I was going to bring up that very thing from JKR's Rumours section! I decided not to because you weren't talking about Harry leading a dark army, you were simply talking about Harry merging with LV.

I'm not complaining, though! I'd just as soon Harry not have to get too cozy with Sir Psycho Slither.

- - - - - - - - - -
me and my shadow 813 - Jan 9, 2007 5:00 pm (#370 of 381)

Image Courtesy of Burgundyeyes at fanpop.com icons -- [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
journeymom, thanks, I definitely was not theorising Harry would lead inferi, DE's, etc., as JKR added in her statement. I have no idea if she was referring to my comments here, but my use of the word "merge" was purely an alchemical reference. When two opposites merge in alchemy or metaphysics, it is not so that the end result can behave just as the two opposites did prior. Rather, my understanding is "the dark works for the light", in that dark is merely perverted power used to control others. But it is power nonetheless. It could be power taken from others that needs to go back to its right place. So the "merging" puts everything back into proper order, dark opens to receive the light (if it chooses to) and thus is transmuted. But evil (consciously deciding not to accept or give love) must be kicked out of the kitchen, period. That's how I feel at this point.

~edited for clarity

- - - - - - - - - -
HungarianHorntail11 - Jan 9, 2007 8:15 pm (#371 of 381)

The heart sees deeper than the eye.
But perhaps they have in a sense - if Harry is a horcrux and Big V has Harry's blood - then there you have it. Perhaps that is why he is the "one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord". Since his blood is in Big V and if he's a horcrux, the spell may not differentiate between himself and Big V - he might be able to destroy the horcruxes without damage to himself.

- - - - - - - - - -
Elanor - Jan 9, 2007 11:32 pm (#372 of 381)

I do like your idea Me and My Shadow!

IMO, the "merging" will indeed occur though it will be an inner one for Harry: the day on which Harry will truly accept and integrate his Slyterin skills (which he denies till now), then he will be fully One, and become the one able to "vanquish" Voldemort, whatever the word "vanquish" refers to.

As I posted a few days ago on the alchemy thread: "As for Harry and Slytherin/water, I think Slytherin represents his inner Mercurial side. From the very beginning of the series, that is from the Sorting Ceremony, Harry has feared and denied that part of himself. Yet, he won't be able to succeed if he doesn't face who he really is. By doing so, he will reach an "inner conjunction", conjunction which will allow him to be truly One.
Harry is not only the Chosen One, but also the one who has to Choose - and then be One, that is fully himself - or his full self, the One able to defeat Voldemort. " (post #1497)

- - - - - - - - - -
TheSaint - Jan 10, 2007 2:04 am (#373 of 381)

Elanor - But is that Mercury two-fold?

I have already indicated that all things are constituted of three essences - namely, mercury, sulphur, and salt - and herein I have taught what is true. But know that the Stone is composed out of one, two, three, four, and five. Out of five - that is, the quintessence of its own substance. Out of four, by which we must understand the four elements. Out of three, and these are the three principles of all things. Out of two, for the mercurial substance is twofold.

Two contrary spirits can scarcely dwell together, nor do they easily combine. For when a thunderbolt blazes amidst a tempest of rain, the two spirits, out of which it is formed, fly from one another with a great shock and noise, and circle in the air, so that no one can know or say whither they go, unless the same has been ascertained by experience as to the mode in which these spirits manifest.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

- - - - - - - - - -
Elanor - Jan 10, 2007 1:36 pm (#374 of 381)

I think so! What Valentine calls "Twofold Mercury" has also been called by other alchemists "Philosophical Mercury" and "Animated Mercury", or "Twice Born Mercury" and it refers to "Mercury stemmed from the conjunction of two bodies" (L.Gineste, L'Alchimie Expliquée par son Langage).

This Mercury is not the quicksilver mercury but rather the Mercurius principle, Mercurius who is "not only the materia prima (the 'mother' of metals) which is sought at the beginning of the work, but also the ultima materia (the philosopher's stone), the goal of his own transformation." (L.Abraham, A Dictionary of Alchemical Imagery)

This definition of Mercurius fits Harry's journey very well: he is the goal of his own transformation, at the same time "first matter" and already goal/outcome of his journey through the prophecy. And from his inner transformation will be born (again) the wizard able to vanquish Voldemort.

I do like the "thunderbolt blazes" of your quote. It is from Basil Valentine as well? I know the first part of your quote is but is the second part as well?

- - - - - - - - - -
me and my shadow 813 - Jan 10, 2007 3:29 pm (#375 of 381)

Image Courtesy of Burgundyeyes at fanpop.com icons -- [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Nice thoughts the last few posts. Thank you for adding technical information, as that is not my strong-suit rather I see it more in the abstract I suppose.

I feel Harry's acceptance of Slytherin/water comes unconsciously from his acceptance of his similarities with young Tom. By now I'm sure you all know which quotes this is illustrated in, and there have been at least a few. This, to me, strongly suggests that Harry will internalise the water, or mercury?, and the alchemical process will be complete when Vold no longer exists. For the end result can only reside in one piece of matter, one body. And it will be Harry's body. Now, JKR's comment on her website seems clear: they will not merge. But when dealing with the abstract as I am, I accept her response and still see the alchemical process taking place within Harry, as his accepting his "dark" side, which means Water/Slytherin.

Regarding the "thunderbolt blazes", it coincides nicely with my recent post quoting from CoS when Harry remarks, "Voldemort put a bit of himself in me?" Harry said, thunderstruck. Scar reference in the context of Harry having a piece of Vold inside him, and Valentine's comment reinforces this idea for me.

HH11, I did post on horcruxes (I think) thread that I believe Harry has had no trouble physically handling, touching, resisting the curses so far (diary) because of the connection. I feel this will continue.

- - - - - - - - - -
TheSaint - Jan 10, 2007 3:48 pm (#376 of 381)

Elanor - Yes, the second quote is from the 8th Key.

me and my shadow - Yes, that struck me as well.

- - - - - - - - - -
Elanor - Jan 14, 2007 12:44 pm (#377 of 381)

Very good post Me and My Shadow!

Thanks the Saint!

- - - - - - - - - -
essie125 - Jan 23, 2007 6:43 am (#378 of 381)

Jo, of course I think about Alan when I think about Snape, Who wouldn't think about Alan all day every day eh.
me and My shadow813,

It says 'will not merge'.

It does not say ' have never and will never merge'. And if Harry really was a horcrux (which I highly doubt) then he and LV have already merged.

- - - - - - - - - -
Solitaire - Feb 3, 2007 9:57 am (#379 of 381)

Will not merge would seem to indicate that they are not merged at this time and will not merge in the future. If they have been merged in the past, perhaps they are now distinct and will remain so.

Solitaire

- - - - - - - - - -
aasa - Feb 20, 2007 10:06 am (#380 of 381)

First of all: I find it rather difficult to search old topics so please yell at me if this is something you’ve all discussed before.

On my way to work this morning I thought about Neither can live while the other survives. Listen, Harry already survived an attack from Voldemort, he survived the Avada Kadavra curse!

Mustn’t this mean that Harry is not in danger of being killed by Voldemort?

Remember JRK’s own words on [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] ”The prophecy Harry hears in Dumbledore's office suggests to me that both he and Voldemort will have to die, is that true? – Both Madam Trelawney and I worded the prophecy extremely carefully and that is all I have to say on the subject!”

- - - - - - - - - -
me and my shadow 813 - Feb 21, 2007 2:44 pm (#381 of 381)

Image Courtesy of Burgundyeyes at fanpop.com icons -- [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
aasa, that's interesting. With the prophecy worded extremely carefully - and usually these things are riddles or at least not obvious - the phrase neither can live while the other survives could be interpretted many ways. To me, at the very least, it could be *until one is dead, neither is fully alive*, that until Vold dies Harry will not be truly free to live his life. It doesn't mean to me that Harry will kill Vold, nor vise versa.

Your statement "Harry is not in danger of being killed by Voldemort" is provocative, yet I'm sceptical. I feel even if it is true, there is more to the story.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
avatar
Elanor
Hufflepuff Prefect
Hufflepuff Prefect

Posts : 1440
Join date : 2011-02-19
Age : 45
Location : France

Back to top Go down

Re: The Prophecy II

Post  Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum