Prophecy problems (was Harry the Chosen)

[Kirstini]

No: HPFGUIDX 79169

Jim Ferer quoted Tom Wall (lots of surnames on list today):
>>> Tom:" as far as I can see, Heir of Gryffindor is out the window 
now. The prophecy has completely nullified its relevance, as far as 
I'm concerned.">>>

and then continued himself: 
>> Not necessarily. Why was Harry the child foretold?  Although 
Neville meets some of the prophecy's conditions, Voldemort marked 
Harry, fulfilling the rest. The prophecy may have been as much about 
the coming of the Heir as anything else, although I would agree you'd
think Sybil would say this child was the Heir.>> 

Now I, Kirstini Pantalini (not really. I just felt left out)ponder:
I'm with you up to a point, in that I agree that Harry as spiritual 
heir would be a far more satisfying way to approach the whole sordid 
business, and I certainly don't think that the prophecy proves 
anything finally.
Don't forget, OoP still hasn't resolved the problem of why James had 
to die and Lily didn't. I still think there's *something* about those 
Potters. Remember, Sirius, who as best friend, member of the Order 
and potential Secret Keeper, would know about the prophecy, still 
says to Wormtail (something like) "Telling your master you can bring 
him the last of the Potters", not "the child in the prophecy" or 
just "Harry Potter".

(at this point I have to pause, to beat down a nasty little part of 
my brain which tends to pipe up at times like this, saying things 
like, "I bet she switched the terms of the prophecy round in a fit of 
spite because everyone had guessed where she was going with it." It 
does this when any mention of MemoryCharmed!Neville comes up, too. I 
do apologise. It's all due to a peculiar strain of Listie Egotism 
that I caught some time ago.)

So - the second part of my ponder - *would* Sybil necessarily know 
about it? What Firenze seems to tell his pupils is that human fortune-
telling doesn't stem from any rational or comprehensive understanding 
of celestial plans or future events. The fact that Trelawny fails to 
remember her true prophecies as she makes them would suggest to me 
that the prophets themselves merely act as receivers for small pieces 
of information, randomly generated whenever the "force is strong" or 
the dust moves, or something along those lines. It's been suggested 
that Voldemort was on his guard because an initial prophecy had 
already been made, that otherwise he wouldn't have believed 
Trelawny's authority. 

Also, remember that DD controls the version of the prophecy that 
Harry hears, and all those pauses at least offer the possibility that 
what he shows Harry is edited. (It's terribly convinient that Harry 
is unable to hear the actual prophecy, and duly report it to the 
reader.) Personally, I've always felt a little suspicious about the 
fact that DD claims that the eavesdropper only heard the first part 
of the prophecy, that a boy who could defeat the Dark Lord would be 
born at the end of July, to parents who had thrice & etc, and yet at 
the point that DD says the eavesdropper was thrown out, *his* version 
of Sybill hasn't mentioned the child's sex. And how was he able to 
concentrate on what she was saying while a scuffle was breaking out? 
And who gave the order for the eavesdropper to be thrown out anyway? 
Did the barman (Aberforth Dumbledore. I'm telling you)say something 
like "I say! That chap's listening in to the prophecy that woman 
appears to be making about the coming hero who will vanquish the Dark 
Lord! We'd better get him out of here quick smart!" And how did DD 
know that there was an eavesdropper at all if that eavesdropper 
wasn't Snape? And why would Snape be all the way up in Scotland in 
the Hog's Head when DD was interviewing a totally unremarkable woman 
with no known gift for prophecy, and no track record of knowlege 
about Dark Lord vanquishing?

(do you see what she's done? She's buried all my previous doubts 
under an avalanche of more interesting plot facets/gaping holes. The 
vixen.)

No, I don't believe that the prophecy proves anything definate at 
all. And I don't trust that beardy fellow one little bit. 

Kirstini, eyeing you all suspiciously as her mind drips onto her 
shoes.