Voldy, Macbeth and the ambiguity of prophecy (spoilers)

[M.Clifford]

No: HPFGUIDX 129126

> > Geoff:
> > I don't know whether our thoughts touch base or not but I posted  
> > some ramblings involving Macbeth quite recently (but before JKR's 
> > references). The thread was "The prophecy - a maverick view" and 
> > started at post 128332; it might add an item or so to the mix of 
> > ingredients.
> 

Valky:
LOL Geoff, y'know I wondered, when I read the update, if JKR had
caught up on some post reading before updating her web and thought to
herself, hmmm this guy's got it, and explains it well. :D 
Well, anyhow, I always agreed with that part of your interpretation on
the maverick thread and big congrats to you for having your
observation vindicated by Jo herself.


> Inkling:
> What struck me about JKR's comments was her emphasis on how the 
> prophecy itself becomes an actor in the drama, through the way the 
> characters respond to it.  And how the characters, by responding to 
> what they *think* it says, create the very thing they are trying to 
> prevent.  I think this may be the reason she is using the device of 
> a prophecy -- not so much to reveal mystic meaning as to reveal the 
> hearts and minds of her characters.
> 

Valky:
I always thought this was apparent from the first prophecy in the
series (ie Trelawney's second prophecy). The prophecy seems to fulfill
 by the actions of Harry, an insight into his heart and mind also.

A long while ago I came up with a theory called prophecy Instrument,
which postulates that the recipient of a prophecy rather than the
subject becomes the vessel through which it can be fulfilled. 

Basically contriving from this, that Dumbledore's actions in
'preparing' and 'setting up' Harry as the vanquisher of the Dark Lord
are how it is fulfilled, (although at the end of OOtP he begins to
look back on it thinking it all a mistake - like Harry when he
timeturns thinking he can correct the mistake of letting Peter go) and
in spite of all this doubt somehow what Dumbledore does as the burden
carrier of the prophecy fulfills it in the end.

I figured part i of that was already played out; the eavesdropper told
LV about the prophecy thereby machinating the part he heard (ie the
'mark him as his equal' part of the prophecy).

The Power the Dark Lord knows not and the Hand of the other, are by
this hypothesis things that are fulfilled in Harry by the person who
heard this part of the prophecy that is Dumbledore. 

But would that mean the power the Dark Lord knows not isn't from Lily???? 

or to get wild about this hypothetical it could mean that Lily was the
old Divination teacher at Hogwarts helping DD interview Cassandra
while/because she was pregnant? OOOOOH. prophecy interpretation is a
real pain in the medulla oblongata. If we have to go as far as to put
a pregnant Lily in the Hogshead with the goatsmells etc looking at Ms
Trelawney in spooky mode, then maybe the Hypothetical does eat itself up. 


> Inkling:
> One more thought concerning Macbeth.  The witches, at the urging of 
> Hecate, "close contriver of all harms," deliberately use their 
> prophecies to set up Macbeth for a fall.  In the case of Sybill 
> Trelawny there doesn't seem to be any bad intent behind the 
> prophecy.   However, in both of her authentic prophecies, Sybill 
> refers to Voldy as the Dark Lord.  As Harry observed to Snape, "I've 
> only ever heard Death Eaters call him that."  I wonder if there is a 
> clue in that choice of words as to the source of the prophecy?  Just 
> speculating.
> 


Hmmm I really don't know Inkling but it's holding up better than mine.

Valky
Who almost *didn't* post this theory for the fifth time. :S