More to the Prophecy

[Mike]

No: HPFGUIDX 167575

> ---  "arminor75" <april.minor@> wrote:
> > 
> > There has been a lot of discussion over the discrepancy
> > between DD and Trelawney's recitation of what happened
> > the night she gave the propecy. DD says Snape only 
> > heard the first part of the prophecy, but Trelawney 
> > gave the entire thing in the pensieve memory without
> > interruption, and she claims Snape rudely interrupted 
> > them, so did Snape hear the whole propecy ..., did 
> > Snape only hear the first part but didn't interrupt 
> > until Trelawney finished the entire thing, or is this 
> > a discrepancy we just have to look past?
> 
> bboyminn:
> 
> Yes, this has been touched on, though the resulting 
> thoughts remain polarized.
> 
> The first flaw in your logic is that you assume all
> parties are giving full and completely factual accounts
> of what happened. They are not. They are giving short,
> broad, and general summaries of events, each emphasizing
> what they personally feel is important.  <snip>

Mike:
Quite frankly, I don't see any logic flaw in April's comments. Yes, 
each account is given from that character's perspective (DD's and 
Trelawney's, we don't get Snape's or Aberforth's yet). But there is 
no doubt that Dumbledore is holding back in his account. That's not a 
flaw in April's logic but rather she has identified Dumbledore's lie 
of omission. 


> bboyminn:
> Next remember that Snape himself was interrupted. He was
> interrupted by Aberforth while listening at the keyhole.
> That interruption is what prevented him from hearing the
> whole prophecy. By the time Aberforth and Snape finished
> discussing what the heck Snape was doing listening at 
> the door. The Prophecy was over, and Aberforth brought
> Snape into the room to see what Dumbledore wanted to do
> with him. 

Mike:
This is your extrapolation of what you think happened based on what 
Dumbledore told us in OotP with the added information from Trelawney 
in HBP. I don't buy it. 

Professor Dumbledore, did you tell the truth, the whole truth, in 
that exposition in your office to Harry? 

"Well, I left out that part about it being Snape who was the listener 
at the door. And I made it sound like the listener was discovered and 
expelled before the prophesy was complete. So, no, I didn't tell the 
whole truth. But my reason was ..."

Thank you, Professor Dumbledore. Members of the reading public, I ask 
you, if Professor Dumbledore is willing to lie by omission, why 
should we give him the benefit of believing the rest of his story 
happened the way he wants us and Harry to believe?


> bboyminn:
> Those aren't inconsistent stories. Those are the same
> story told by different people with different 
> perspectives with each different storyteller emphasizing
> different aspects of the story.

Mike:
Those are incomplete stories. Trelawney's because she doesn't know 
any more than what she related. Does anyone have any reason to 
believe Trelawney's story was false, even if it was incomplete?

Dumbledore doesn't have the same excuse. Dumbledore doesn't want 
Harry to know it was Snape. On this point we can all safely assume, 
imo. But what else doesn't Dumbledore want us and Harry to know about 
that night?  On this point we have not been priveledged to any 
information. But Dumbledore's hesitation in answering Harry's 
accusation of Snape's duplicity (in "Seer Overheard" chapter in HBP), 
can be an indication of any number of things. 

> bboyminn:
> Both accounts are correct, they are just focusing on
> different aspects of the same event.
> 
> Or so says I.

Mike:
And I says, there's more to Dumbledore's and Snape's story that has 
yet to be revealed. I says that Dumbledore was hiding more than just 
the identity of the listener-at-the-keyhole.

April, if you want to read a previous thread on this subject, I 
started a thread called Dumbledore Does Lie. It starts here:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/158940

It was started by me but a lot of people weighed in, including 
bboyminn/Steve.

There was a part II to this theme and it began here:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/159761

I will specifically point you to Neri's counter-argument in this 
thread, I thought his was the strongest against my theory.

Enjoy,
Mike