Help me understand the importance of the prophecy, please

[arrowsmithbt]

No: HPFGUIDX 82165

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jwcpgh" <jwcpgh at y...> wrote:
> <tim_regan82 at h...> wrote:
> > A while back I speculated that this one stretches a bit further
> > than you've cast your net.
> > 
> > The two of 'neither' could be James and Lily, the 'other', Harry.
> > 
> > So it would be foretold that if Harry is to survive, James and Lily 
> > must die.
> 
> Laura:
> 
> But that's an incredibly tortured (you should forgive the expression 
> in this context) reading of that phrase.  The "neither" and "either" 
> have to refer to the same people, and those two people must be the 
> ones referred to in the previous clause.  Otherwise it violates the 
> rules of English.  
> 


Kneasy:
Not necessarily.
You must remember this was a dark time in the HPfGU  world.
Hurricane  Jo  had just blown through, shell-shocked posters,
clutching the tattered remains of their beloved theories wandered
over the landscape looking  for succour. Counseling clinics were
overwhelmed by distressed Siriophiles; conspiracy theorists
licked their lips and dreamed dreams of  heinous betrayals
beyond the fantasies of mortal men. Lovely.

Just about everyone was beating their heads against The Prophecy
and coming to the conclusion that it was not as  straightforward as
it appeared at first glance. That phrase in particular was a big block.
It was looked at up, down, sideways, back to front and inside out.
Nothing.

So I put in my alternative take. Does it refer to Harry and Voldy *only*?

His parents are  mentioned obliquely at the start - "born to those.."
Why not another mention?
Also, why should the "either" and the "neither" be talking about the
same pairs?

This resulted in a reading that can be written as
"either (Harry or Voldy) must die at the  hand of the other for
neither (James nor Lily) can live while the other (Harry) survives.."

OK. It's not perfect. But it did seem to make some sort of sense
and fit the canon as we know it up to now. It also helps eliminate
Neville from DD's calculations. I don't claim to be right; it was
offered as a *possible* interpretation that resolved *nearly all* of
the grammatical conflicts.

After days of reading all the other posts on the subject and me tying
syntax and grammar into knots, IMO the only way to make sense 
of this part of the prophecy is to have it refer to more than two 
people. Eventually, nearly everyone gave up in disgust; either it
wasn't complete or DD and/or JKR was lying, were opinions expressed
on site.

Well, it's raised it's head again. 
I hope  that this time it gets  sorted, but somehow I doubt it.

So, c'mon Laura! Give us your interpretation. I'm really interested.
Warning: whatever you write, somebody out there will put the
boot in. It always happens. There are more critics than analysts;
they'll tell you what's wrong, but they don't put it right.

Kneasy