Prophecies Always Come True?

[Eustace_Scrubb]

No: HPFGUIDX 131376

Tamara wrote:
> > Maybe it's because a lot of my mind still lives in the Buffyverse
> > when it comes to prophecies, but in HP land, do the prophecies  
> > always come true? Or can they be thwarted?

Then Steve/bboyminn wrote (in part):
> 
> The answer is YES ...sort of.
> 
> I assume you are wondering about the conflict between fate/destiny 
> and free will. Are we forced to act in way over which we have no 
> control, our destiny sealed no matter what we do, or can we still  
> make free will choices and even possibly avoid our fate? Again, the
> answer to both is...sort of.
> 
> Harry does have free will. That is, he can move to Australia and try
> to avoid the whole affair. Remember the Prophecy say he CAN defeat 
> the Dark Lord, not that he WILL. So, he can move away and avoid the 
> whole thing. On the other hand, even if he does avoid Voldemort,
> his life is somewhat controlled by the Prophecy. <snip> 
> He has been forced to do things he would prefer not to do,  
> and the specter of Voldemort will always be hanging over him. <snip>

> Also, Prophecies are so vaguely and strangely worded that you can
> always find data after-the-fact to fit your assumed interpretation.
> 
> Further, Harry wouldn't have been fated by the prophecy if it wasn't
> in his nature to play it out. <snip>

Now Eustace_Scrubb:
I agree...sort of.

I agree that the subjects of a prophecy aren't forced to act in a
certain way because of the prophecy.  They have free will on a
day-to-day basis.  Harry _could_ move to Australia to avoid the
prophecy, no question--much as Oedipus left Corinth to avoid
fulfilling the prophecy that he would kill his father,etc.  

But having free will doesn't mean that one escapes the prophecy. 
Oedipus later discovered that he had been adopted by Polybus of
Corinth and that the man he killed on the road to Delphi was in fact
his real father and that he had in fact married his mother.  Prophecy
fulfilled.  And it's not just a matter of interpretation.  It
objectively worked out that way.

[Of course it's true that the prophecy doesn't say that anyone _will_
vanquish the Dark Lord, though one will have the power to do so.  But
if Harry interprets the line "either must die at the hand of the other
for neither can live while the other survives" to mean that he must
become either a murderer or a murder victim (as Dumbledore encourages
him to believe--possibly incorrectly) then this would be the part that
Harry might wish to avoid.]

So it's Harry's choice whether to flee to Australia, but if prophecies
work in the Potterverse the way they do in Greek (and other)
mythologies, he can't escape in the end.  And as Steve says, it runs
against Harry's nature to run away from the prophecy.  Though I
suspect he'll be sorely tempted to do so before the end.

But the real question is how Rowling views these prophecies.  She's
certainly borrowed liberally from various mythologies throughout the
series, so it might make sense that she'll have Potterverse prophecies
come true in the end, despite anyone's attempts to subvert or escape
them.  But perhaps she's just using them as a plot device (as others
in this thread have suggested) or maybe she's going to explicitly
debunk the-prophecy-as-inescapable-fate idea as the series concludes.

I suppose Potterverse prophecies could turn out to be analogous to the
visions seen in the Mirror of Galadriel _or_ what the Ghost of
Christmas Yet to Come shows Scrooge--possible futures that may not
come to pass at all, depending on choices made.  But then those aren't
really prophecies, are they?

Cheers,

Eustace_Scrubb