The Prohecy / Dumbledore, Hermione

[mhbobbin]

No: HPFGUIDX 126066


--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mryburge" <mwburge1 at a...> 
wrote:
> 
> > mhbobbin writes:
> > DD's story is that he was willing to meet Sybil out of respect 
> > for her grandmother Cassandra Trelawney, who was a famous seer. 
> > He indicates he had low expectations for the mtg. I'm willing to 
> > accept that there was no more to his rationale for meeting her 
> > than he has told us (although he so often holds something back) 
> > <snip>. DD's willingness to meet with this seer immediately gives
> > the seer some credibility, whether or not deserved. The surprise
> > prophecy would be of interest to Voldemort simply because it was 
> > made to DD. That it was made in a trance probably enhanced its 
> > credibility.
> > 
> > I'm not so sure that Trelawney is a fraud. She seems to be more 
> > right than not in what she sees, although not in divining the 
> > meaning. <snip>
> 
> mryburge:
> I am not sure that the prophecy meant that much to Dumbledore 
until  Voldemort acted in such as way so as to make the 
prophecy "true" as > to Harry.  (E.g., although D. warned James and 
Lily into hiding, it > doesn't seem like the prophecy was the 
reason - because he didn't > warn the Longbottoms either, when the 
prophecy could just as easily,  AT THE TIME, have been about 
Neville.) Although once it came to  pass, he became a "believer."  

mhbobbin:
We don't actually know if the Longbottoms were told to go into 
hiding at the time. We only know that some time after the events at 
Godric Hollow when people were feeling safe, the Longbottoms were 
tortured.

mryburge:

> 
> Contrast Dumbledore with Hermione, however.  She adamantly refuses 
> to consider Trelawney as anything other than a fraud.  And she may 
> be right - consider that the prophecy was nothing more than a 
> guess/prediction until it was acted upon.  It was only LV's 
> voluntary act that made the prophecy "true" as to Harry, 
> and "untrue" as to Neville.  I think level-headed, Muggle-born 
> Hermione knows that no prophecy is written in stone, and that 
> choice, action, free will, etc. all work to affect outcome.  She, 
> who loves "magic" more than anyone in the series, refuses to 
> acknowledge divination as magical at all, and remains the one who 
> refuses to be blinded/impressed/overwhelmed by the prophecy.  In 
> other words, she seems to be the only one at this point who 
believes 
> that the outcome can be changed.  And if the outcome of the 
prophecy 
> can be changed, then what is its real value?  Hence, perhaps, 
> Hermione's disdain?  
> 
> MaryB

mhbobbin:
First, whether or not DD believed the prophecy does not mean that 
Voldemort would not take it seriously. For that reason alone, DD 
would have to consider advising the Potters, and probably the 
Longbottoms, to hide.

Second: I love the character Hermione. But her rational mind does 
not have the last word on whether the concept of prophecy is true or 
not. I think all the characters are challenged in one way or another 
and HErmione's challenge is to get beyone her rational concept of 
the possible and to consider the impossible.  But whether or not the 
concept of divination is a serious discipline in the wizarding 
world, much of the wizarding world does accept there's some basis 
for it. So back to the original question--why did the Voldemort act 
upon a prophecy considering how unreliable it was--it may come down 
simply to he gave it some credence, and expected there'd be no 
consequence for him if it wasn't.

mhbobbin