The one... to vanquish... approaches.... The one... to vanquish will be born

[justcarol67]

No: HPFGUIDX 168137

Brothergib wrote: 
> I think it is most interesting when you put all this together. 
> 
> The one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord approaches. Born to
those who have thrice defied him, born as the seventh month dies and 
the Dark Lord will mark him as his equal, but he will have the power
the Dark Lord knows not and either must die at the hand of the other
for neither can live while the other survives. The one with the power
to vanquish the Dark Lord will be born as the seventh month dies.
> 
> If you consider the middle sentence, it really doesn't flow i.e. it
doesn't sound like one whole sentence. If you compare this prophecy to
the prophecy that we have actually heard first hand i.e. Trelawney to
Harry, you will find that there are no long pauses (....) between 
sentences. It is a perfectly constructed paragraph. 

Carol:
Possibly the British version reads differently, but in the American
edition, the PoA prophecy (the one that Harry hears firsthand) does
contain ellipses:

"The Dark Lord lies alone and friendless, abandoned by his followers.
His servant has been chained these twelve years. Tonight, before
midnight . . . the servant will break free and set out to rejoin his
master. The Dark Lord will rise again with his servant's aid, greater
and more terrible than ever he was. Tonight . . . before midnight . .
. the servant . . . will set out . . . to rejoin . . . his master"
(PoA Am. ed. 324, ellipses in original).

The construction is very similar to that of the first prophecy except
that it's not the first line but the third, "Tonight, before midnight
. . . the servant will break free and set out to rejoin his master,"
that's repeated in slightly different form in the final sentence:
"Tonight . . . before midnight . . . the servant . . . will set out .
. . to rejoin . . . his master." Although the last sentence omits the
words "break free," the ellipses indicate pauses, not omissions.
Harry, as you've stated, heard the whole thing.

We need to look at the OoP prophecy complete with ellipses (which
you've omitted) to see whether the same technique is being used there.
Let's put them back in:

"The one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord approaches . . . .
Born to those who have thrice defied him, born as the seventh month
dies . . . and the Dark Lord will mark him as his equal, but he will
have power the Dark Lord knows not . . . and either must die at the
hand of the other for neither can live while the other survives . . .
. The one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord will be born as the
seventh month dies . . . ." (OoP Am. ed. 841)

The American edition sets the text in italic caps and small caps,
which I've represented here with roman c/lc (caps and lowercase). It's
possible that the typesetter or copyeditor capitalized the "b" in
"born" and that it was uncapitalized in the manuscript, in which case,
there's no fragment at all: the "born" phrases would modify the first
clause of the opening sentence. If so, he or she would also have
supplied the fourth period, the one indicating the end of a sentence,
in this set of ellipses. (Four periods after "survives" and after
"dies" is surely correct as those sentences are complete as written.)
I'd be interested in a careful transcription of the British version,
with capitalization and ellipses exactly rendered, for comparison
(though what I really need is JKR's unedited manuscript!) to determine
whether the fragment is JKR's and therefore (probably) intentional.

I think that JKR is attempting to make the prophecies, particularly
the main Prophecy in OoP, ambiguous and enigmatic, subject to
disastrous misinterpretation like those of the Oracle of Delphi but
longer and more complex, rather like a biblical prophecy. (Compare
this bit from the Book of Daniel: "From the issuing of the decree to
restore and rebuild Jerusalem until the Anointed One, the ruler,
comes, there will be seven 'sevens,' and sixty-two 'sevens.' It will
be rebuilt with streets and a trench, but in times of trouble. After
the sixty-two 'sevens,' the Anointed One will be cut off and will have
nothing. The people of the ruler who will come will destroy the city
and the sanctuary. The end will come like a flood: War will continue
until the end, and desolations have been decreed." Needless to say,
JKR's prophecies are not quite as obscure as Daniel's, but I think she
was after a similar, if muted, effect. Repeated "ands" like those in
the OoP Prophecy are also a common biblical stylistic device, FWIW.)

My point is that, to me, both prophecies appear to be complete but
deliberately ambiguous (although the ambiguity of the PoA prophecy is
quickly resolved when we find out that "the servant" is not Black but
Pettigrew), and the uppercase "b" making "Born to those who have
thrice defied him, born as the seventh month dies" appear to be a
fragment could be either a stylistic device designed to make the
prophecy sound, erm, sybillic (or apocalyptic), or it could be a typo
introduced in the typemarking or copyediting stages. I don't think it
indicates an omission in the Prophecy itself. (What could have been
omitted, in any case?)

Brothergib:
Therefore, maybe you should be asking yourself exactly which parts of
the prophecy DD 'allowed' Harry to hear. And therefore which parts of
the prophecy has Snape heard and how does this compare with what Harry
has heard.
<snip>

Carol:
The question as to which parts *Snape* has heard can only be answered
if we (and Harry) have heard/read the whole thing (as DD tells him he
has). I agree with those who view DD's and Trelawney's versions of the
story as conflicting, but I don't think DD is lying to Harry about the
two of them being the only people who know the complete Prophecy.

Certainly, DD has deprived Harry of an opportunity to see and hear the
Prophecy *in context* because he doesn't want Harry to know at that
point (or perhaps ever) that Snape was the eavesdropper. (And despite
any arguments I've heard so far to the contrary, it's hard to
reconcile DD's version of the story with Trelawney's, which does not
permit an interruption. Why she thinks young Snape was looking for a
teaching job at that time of year--late fall or possibly spring--is
also unclear; sherry-flavored hindsight, maybe.) But I don't think we
can conclude from the ellipses or the missing context or the
contradictory stories that anything is omitted from the Prophecy
itself. DD can make Trelawney rise from the Pensieve and speak the
Prophecy out of context, but I don't see how he could cause her to
omit words or sentences, nor do I think he would lie to Harry by
telling him that he knows the complete Prophecy if that were untrue.

Carol, choosing to blame the gods or daemons (not demons!) of
inspiration for any lapses in inspired!Trelawney's sentence structure
if it isn't the result of typecoding or copyediting :-)