Harry Vanquishing LV without killing him.

[a_svirn]

No: HPFGUIDX 146511

> > a_svirn:
> > Actually, that's what I meant when I said that the Prophesy was 
> > literal – that it was a bit of a con. Macbeth thought that "no 
man 
> > of woman born" meant *no one*, and since trees aren't capable 
> moving 
> > and climbing hills the "Birnam Wood prophesy" meant *never*. 
Thus 
> > interpreting both prophesies metaphorically. Yet they were both 
> very 
> > much literal – implied cesarean section and a bit of cover-up 
> > military action respectively.
> 
> Geoff:
> Hm. My comment was intended to point up that the  prophecies 
differed 
> in that the second was more literally fulfilled than the third. 
> 
> Being the father of three offspring who were all born by Caesarean 
> section, I can see what the prophecy was driving at; it was open 
to 
> being considered true whereas the third definitely wasn't.


a_svirn:
Why not, both of them are true. The difference between the second 
and the third is that the third is contrived – a bit like with the 
(in)famous prophesy of Merlin concerning the Prince of Wales. It was 
said supposedly that a Prince of Wales would be crowned in London 
and everyone assumed that Merlin meant a Welsh Prince (from the 
House of Llewellyn apparently) until Edward I found a perfect 
solution –created his own son and hire the Prince of Wales. In this 
instance one literal meaning was cunningly replaced by another 
literal meaning. In Macbeth's third prophesy a metaphorical meaning 
was cunningly replaced by a literal one.