The Prophecy: Harry's interpretation and reaction

[carin_in_oh]

No: HPFGUIDX 104602

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "meriaugust" <meriaugust at y...>
wrote:
> Is that how you interpreted the prophecy? Because the way I always 
> read it was that Harry has "the power to vanquish the Dark Lord" and 
> that "either must die at the hands of the other" but to me that 
> doesn't mean that no one else can kill Harry. If that was the case 
> then what would the purpose of all the protection surrounding Harry 
> following LV's defeat? No, I think that Harry is still vulnerable, 
> and anything, like an accident or an illness could probably kill 
> him, which is just one of the reasons he's so protected. 

Carin replies:

I guess I did interpret the prophecy that way (i.e. only H can kill LV
AND vice-versa), but I admit it's not watertight. My (tentative)
belief is based on my theory that the bond-and-mutual-tension thing
between H and LV means that their continuing existences are, in the
long run, mutually exclusive. Harry's failure to die blasts LV almost
out of existence...the during the early books, Harry is a half-formed
wizard and LV is only gradually reclaiming his body... and now that LV
is fully reconstituted and Harry is coming to maturity and full power,
fullscale war is breaking out. 

But that's a kind of meta-view of the trajectory of the whole series.
The question of how others have understood the prophecy and what it
means for Harry is a sticky problem. How many others have known about
the prophecy before now, anyway? If DD is sure that Harry is the only
one who can vanquish LV but unsure about how much LV remains a threat
in the meantime and to what extent Harry is at risk from anyone else,
that would be enough for DD to put all his efforts into keeping Harry
alive. 

Whatever the prophecy _really_ means, I can see Harry deciding (at
least in the near term) that it authorizes him to be reckless. (Cf.
Achilles.)

Carin