Some Sybil questions (or questions on the Sybil...)

[Steve]

No: HPFGUIDX 124847


--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "manawydan" <manawydan at n...> wrote:
> Just to try to spark some discussion in a new direction, here's some
> ponderings on Sybil T.
> 
> 1. Canon is silent on how old she is. 

bboyminn:

Well, I'll take ahot at your questions and see if I can add anything
to the mix.

I speculate that Sybil is older than Snape (35) and younger than
McGonagall (70), so that places her in the 50 to 60 range. Which in
turn implies that she got her job at Hogwarts at the age of 35 to 45
(in round numbers). 

One thing to be cautious of when calculating /generations/ is that
generation, in a manner of speaking, aren't stacked end-to-end; they
overlap. Right now, four generations of my family exist at once;
mother, children(me), grandchildren, and great grandchildren. And, of
course, we are just ordinary muggles. 

In addition, one generation of wizards, because of their extended
lifespan, are capable of producing multiple generations. Illustration,
a wizard+witch at age 20 have kids. Those kids growup and, at age 20,
have their own kids.  Now the original parents (now grandparents) are
40, they could have kids again at 40 and again at 60. Now the original
parents are not only great grandparents, but parents of children of
equal age to thier grandchildren and great grandchildren. Did that
make sense?

Parents(age 20-Gen1) have kids(Gen2) --> Parents(age 40) have
kids(Gen3) --> Parents(age 60) have kids(Gen4)

Parents(age 20-Gen1) have kids(Gen2) --> Kids(Gen2) have kids(Gen3)
--> next Gen kids(Gen3) have kids(Gen4)

Given this overlap, and given that common muggles can have four
generations living at once(my family), easily, wizards could have 6 to
8 generations of a given family living at any one time. A fact that
seems rather odd, when you consider the lack of extended families in
the books. 


> Ffred continues:
> 
> Just what did she prophesy about that made her so famous?
> 

bboyminn rambles on:

Sybil in primarily an involuntary trance psychic, which means her
greatest level of psychic abilit occurs when she is unaware of it.

I suspect the Cassandra had a more active psychic ability, and that
she was able to use it more readily, and therefore was able to
demonstrate her abilities in easier, more obvious, and more frequent
ways. Thus, her ability was easily demonstrated to the world around
her. Therefore, She wouldn't necessarily have needed any great
historically significant prophecy to solidify her reputation.


> Ffred: #2. Was there no psychic ability in the two intervening
> generations? Does that mean that Seers have to be female?
> 

bboyminn:

Oddly, if we look at the real world, most psychics do seem to be
female. Can we assume that translates as well into the wizard world? 

I don't think we can say NO psychic ability in the intervening
generations, only that there was no significant ability, and/or that
none in those generations were interested in pursuing that ability.


>Ffred: #3. What precisely made Sybil decide to apply for the Hogwarts
> post? Canon suggests that she didn't have anything to recommend her 
> at the time. Is that correct? Might she have shown some abilities 
> before applying? 
> 

bboyminn:

Sybil DOES have psychic ability beyond her 'involuntary trance'
abilities. She saw the Grim repeatedly when giving Harry /readings/.
Of course, she had know way of knowing the Grim was really Sirius in
anamagus form. She also seems well versed in teaching the various
methods of Divination like crystal gazing and tea reading. Sybil also
accurately saw other things (Binky-the dead rabbit, Hermione leaving
the class, etc...). Although, she is not always very good at
interpreting what she sees.

As to why Sybil applied for the Divinations job, well, everybody has
to eat. I'm sure she is just 'dotty' enough that other jobs were
difficult for her to get and keep, so when Divinations Professor
opened up, that was like a gift from heaven to her; the perfect job.

I'm not sure if she demonstrated abilities before applying, but I'm
sure she certainly claimed abilities.


> Ffred: #4. Given that Hogsmeade is walking distance of Hogwarts, why
> did Dumbledore go to interview her rather than asking her to go to 
> the castle?
> 

bboyminn:

Well, this pretty unfounded, just an intuitive guess on my part, but I
think Dumbledore went to meet Sybil rather than having Sybil come to
him, because he had already (almost) made up his mind, and didn't even
consider it a true interview worthy of taking place at Hogwarts.
Dumbledore probably thought he would just run down to the Inn, have a
polite cup of tea, tell her 'no thanks', and be done with it.


> Ffred: #5. The question about who the eavesdropper was has been 
> frequently discussed, so I won't pose it again, just to point out 
> that it couldn't have been Peter ...edited...
> 
> Ffred: #6. But what prompted an eavesdropper to be present at that
> precise time? Who knew that the interview was going to take place? 
> Why might they have believed they were going to hear something 
> important?
> 
bboyminn:

Peter could have been the eavesdropper, I don't have a problem with
that and even find the idea somewhat appealing. 

We know that Voldemort had spies, and we know that Dumbledore was
certainly being watched, and we know that the Hog's Head is a
slighltly (understatment) dodgy place. It's not unreasonable for some
random dodgy character in the bar to see Dumbledore come in and wonder
that he's up to. So, they simply followed him to find out. 

This /dodgy character/ could be a random opportunist, a Voldemort
sympathizer, a Voldemort supporter, or one of Voldie's henchmen/spy.
Even a random opportunist might realize that what he overheard could
be useful to Voldemort, and more important, realize that doing Voldie
a favor might just save you life someday. So, they sent word to Voldie
that they had useful information.

It's kind of a flip of a coin, but in the moment, I am leaning toward
the eavesdropper being a random insignificant character. Although,
tomorrow, my opinion might be exactly the opposite.

> Ffred: #7. Having taken Sybil on, Dumbledore seems to have left her
> to her own devices. But while she's prophesying, she seems unaware 
> that she's doing it. Wouldn't it have made some sense to have put 
> some sort of monitoring spellon her lodgings ...
> 
> Ffred: #8. What exactly brings a prophecy on? Is it spontaneous, or 
> does something spark it off? 

bboyminn:

Well, would you want to live somewhere where your every movement and
thought was being monitored (can you spell 'Big Brother 1984'?). I
don't think so (the living, not the spelling). Sybil, like anyone
else, deserves a fair and reasonable amount of privacy. 

I do however believe that Dumbledore hired her both because she might
be IN danger as well as A danger, but also because he wanted to keep
he close by. She seemed to be intune to the events surrounding Harry's
life and fate, and it would be good to keep her close in case of new
information via prophecy arose.

While Sybil could be making 10 prophecies a day when no one is
looking, I suspect what triggers her trance is the proximity of
someone for whom there are siginificant prophetic events; someone with
a strong aura of Destiny. While Sybil's prophecies relate to
Dumbledore and Harry, their fruition will have massive impact on the
entire wizard and muggle world. So, as the Centaurs might put it,
Sybil's prophecies are not about single events or individuals, but
about 'great tides'. 


> 
> Ffred: #9 Is Sybil ESE?
> 
> ...
> Cheers
> 
> Ffred

bboyminn:

ESE...? NO.

Steve/bboyminn