The Trelawney Prediction

[innermurk]

No: HPFGUIDX 58216

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "aja_1991" <aja_1991 at y...> 
wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "M.Clifford" 
> <valkyrievixen at y...> wrote:
<snip>
> > I have noticed that something strange is generally accepted in 
the 
> > theories that I have read. Many are satisfied with the concept 
that 
> > Trelawneys *First True Prediction* was the fall of Voldemort. 
> > 
<snip the rest>


Then (aja_1991):
> I'm game for this!
> 
> My assumption - right or wrong - is that whatever Trelawney 
predicted 
> first was what started or accelerated V's targetting of at least 
> Harry, and possibly one or both of his parents, to begin with.  
> Otherwise, I see no reason to belive he wouldn't simply send a 
squad 
> of DEs to deal with the meddlesome fools... for some reason, he 
felt 
> the need to deal with it personally.  And that's why a prediction 
> along the lines of "Harry will defeat Voldemort" in some form 
works.  
> If she says Harry specifically, he's there just for him and he 
takes 
> out James and Lily for trying to stop him.  If she said "the son of 
a 
> Potter" then he's after James and Harry, who are both the sons of a 
> Potter.  Add to that an interview in which JKR refuses to reveal 
what 
> the first prediction was, and you have to assume it's critical to 
the 
> plot... like as in it led to Harry being the famous orphan with a 
> scar.
> 

I innermurk reply:
It's never made sense to me to say that Trelawny's first true 
prediction was that Harry would defeat LV. In the first place, she's 
always vague (at least a lot more so than that). In the second place, 
Harry didn't actually defeat him seeing as he's back. It remains to 
be seen whether Harry will be the one who finally does defeat him. 
And as that hasn't happened yet, we can't know for sure whether that 
is true or not, thus we can't know whether the prediction was true or 
not.
Now if her prediction was that Harry would cause the *fall* of 
Voldemort, I could buy that, because he did fall.


Then (aja_1991):
> Now, perhaps it was somewhat differently worded than a defeat.  
> Perhaps it was a vanity thing.  Think of the Disney movie "Snow 
White 
> and the Seven Dwarfs."  The evil queen is told one day that she is 
> NOT the most beautiful, and sets out to kill the one who is deemed 
> more beautiful.  V hears a prediction that somehow says that Harry 
> will grow to become the most powerful wizard ever, more powerful 
than 
> V, more powerful than even the dreaded Dumbledore.  Well, can't 
have 
> competition now, can we?  Best take out this upstart before he can 
> figure out how to wave a wand.  And best to do it himself, to show 
> who the most powerful really is.
> 

I innermurk reply:
Again, this relys on the fact that Trelawny's prediction was true. 
How can it have been proved true when we don't in fact know that this 
is the case?


Then (aja_1991):
> Perhaps the prediction was the Harry would be the key to ending the 
> effective use of the Unforgivables, which would certainly limit V's 
> ability to control and terrorize the WW.  Not fearing an AK, 
> Imperius, or Cruciatus means wizards can more adequately prepare 
for 
> an attack and protect themselves.  Also a strong motivation for V 
to 
> take them out.  Perhaps Lily was the one solving this problem, so 
> James and Harry were killed to scare her in to stopping her 
research, 
> or perhaps V wanted to keep Lily, not as a "gift" to a DE, but as 
> someone who could show him how to make the Unforgiveables even more 
> powerful (an Imperius no one can shake off, for example).
> 
> And corny as it may sounds, perhaps the prediction was that Harry 
> would lead V away from the Dark Side, thus ending his reign of 
terror 
> by turning him to good.  I somehow doubt Voldemort, at the height 
of 
> his power achieved by use of Dark Arts, would find that end 
appealing.
> 

I innermurk say:
And see above for responses to these prediction potentials.
They're good theories for what might happen, but they could not have 
been Trelawny's actual prediction. Her predicition will *have* to 
have *already* been proved true for DD to know that she made a 
*correct* prediction.

Innermurk