Why is everyone so convinced the prophecy is correct?

[persephone_kore]

No: HPFGUIDX 82194

Tobyreiner wrote:
> Ok, this is *really* bugging me about both my favourite fantasy 
> series now. What makes it worse is that in both cases the prophecy 
> is identical and a needless, in fact, stupid, addition to the 
> series. 

Honestly, I don't think that's the case. I suppose you could argue
that it's not absolutely necessary to either -- that there would be
other ways to tell the story -- but with HP we don't know exactly how
she's going to play on it, and with both HP and Star Wars (as with,
for that matter, much of Greek myth; it's rather a classic really), a
good deal of the point of the prophecy plot is how people's behavior
in reaction to /having/ a prophecy may lead to its coming true, or
lead to its coming true in a way they didn't want it to. 

> I just don't understand why Dumbledore and Voldemort are so 
> convinced that Trewlawny's prophecy is correct. Is there any proof 
> that it will be? Isn't it possible that her seeing eye got things 
> out of whack? Do we know for certain that seers never make mistakes?

Well, that probably depends on what you mean by "proof." It appears
that divination is treated as a legitimate area of study in HP, even
if Trelawny tends to be a joke a lot of the time; I suppose you could
argue that it /shouldn't/ be, but that people can see the future seems
to be an assumption of many of the characters if not JKR's fiat about
 her fictional world. They may well have good reason. Now, what I'm
really pretty sure is true of HP is that telling the future is a very
shaky business -- people practicing divination are quite capable of
lying, and even when they aren't lying and genuinely see something
(which appears to be quite possible) they can misinterpret. I think
what /Firenze/ says on the topic in OotP, in fact, may be something we
can take at face value. (Basically, that it's tricky and even centaurs
can get it wrong by seeing the truth, or aspects of it, and not
interpreting correctly.) 

Actually, I suspect that this may be an intrinsic feature of
foreseeing in HP. You can see bits or signs of the future, but it will
/never/ have just one possible meaning until after it's all over. 

> And I don't see why readers aren't suspecting that JKR might play on 
> this too. Maybe it will turn out that the prophecy is wrong. Maybe 
> Harry won't be the one to vanquish Voldy. 

Well, Trelawny has apparently (unless Dumbledore is lying, of course)
had two prophecy "fits" that are very distinct from most of her misty
predictions. Her second one proved out, and rather quickly at that.
Plenty of readers are suggesting everything from Dumbledore being
deceitful about the prophecy to having missed bits of it to (and this
is the most common, I think) misinterpretation. "I don't think that
means what you think it means." 

This last, I think, is really pretty likely. I'm not absolutely sure
of it, but I don't know what /else/ would be the point of making that
much fuss over it and in the same book bashing us over the head
(briefly) with the idea that even the experts don't always understand
prophecies correctly. :) And to tell the truth, I think (currently)
that I personally would be more likely to feel cheated by all the
buildup leading to "Oh, the prophecy? Fake, unreliable. Never meant a
thing!" than by "Aha! Everyone misunderstood it!" (Especially since if
the most obvious meaning is taken and believed by the characters, it
would appear to be the self-fulfilling type. So far we have little
sign of skepticism about it, so Harry suddenly deciding it makes no
sense and ignoring it would seem to require some work.)
> 
> (While I'm at it, if any Star Wars fans out there could tell me why 
> the Jedi are now so convinced that Anakin Skywalker is the "one to 
> bring balance to the Force", I'd be mighty obliged. Or even that 
> there is going to be any one to bring balance. We, as the audience, 
> do know that there is going to be this one and that it is, indeed, 
> going to be Anakin Skywalker, but the protagonists know no such 
> thing).

Heh. I think, like HP wizards, the Jedi also have some... not
necessarily positive, I suppose, but /confirming/ experience with
prophecy, though it looks to me as if Yoda, at least, gets rather more
wary of it later on. "Always in motion is the future," he says in the
original trilogy. But it's also pretty clear that it's possible to get
/some/ information on it through the Force. 

I was in a class once where the professor compared the Aeneid to Star
Wars in various respects. When we got to the matter of destiny,
however, I thought the parallels broke down somewhat -- the only
people in the original trilogy who tell Luke he has a destiny are the
bad guys. And the Emperor is very smug in his "I have foreseen
it"-ness, but he still falls. In the prequels, it looks as if the Jedi
are a little too complacent themselves -- no one seems to have
considered alternate interpretations, or actually the one that's
probably the most obvious to the audience ("If you're way ahead in a
two-sided situation -- 'bringing balance' is not necessarily something
you want!"). ...Actually, I'm not sure what they think he's going to
do, come to think of it. 

This is not entirely off topic, honest. ;) Star Wars is an example --
I want to say /another/ example, because I strongly suspect HP of
being one as well -- of modern entertainment bringing in the very old
theme of misunderstood and/or self-fulfilling prophecies. So I think
most likely the one we just saw in OotP is valid -- but even if it IS
Harry to vanquish the Dark Lord, and even if he kills him, there will
be something weird about it. *g* 

But then, maybe they will find a way to contradict it outright or
ignore it. I'm sure if done well that could be interesting too. :)

PK