That damn Prophecy - an alternative take

[Wanda Sherratt]

No: HPFGUIDX 77597

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "hermionegallo" 
<hermionegallo at y...> wrote:
  But the body of the same chapter in which 
> we read about the prophecy, we also learn that Dumbledore is very 
> wise, but not infallible.  It's entirely possible, therefore, that 
> he's overlooked something.  In light of that, the second theory 
could 
> make sense.  It's also entirely possible, knowing Dumbledore as we 
> do, that he's omitted a detail, such as Harry having to die along 
> with Voldemort; and in light of that, the third theory could make 
> sense.
> 
I think we have to know whether or not Dumbledore is telling the 
truth when he starts his explanation by saying to Harry, "I am going 
to tell you everything."  If this is really, absolutely true, then 
JKR must have given us all the information we need to see how these 
books will turn out.  (I think she's even said this in an interview 
somewhere.)  If he's NOT telling the truth, then we might find out 
that there was an extra detail left out that will be disclosed 
later, but I dont see how Rowling can honestly do that.  Dumbledore 
may have disclosed some weaknesses in this book, but he's not a 
liar; it would be cheating to say in the next book, 
that "everything" didn't really mean "everything".  So the clue has 
to be in that long explanation.  It *might* be in the prophecy, but 
I've suddenly gotten the strange feeling that it's not.  Just 
because it's SO obscure, and we're all going nuts turning it upside 
down and inside out to figure out what it means.  I've seen enough 
magic tricks to sense when there's some misdirection going on, even 
if I don't realize it right away, and I think we're being very 
forcefully directed toward the prophecy to keep our attention away 
from the REAL clue.  What it is, I haven't figured out yet - I'll 
have to slog through that chapter again and see if anything hits me.