Timing: Trelawney and Dumbledore's version of the Prophecy

[Steve]

No: HPFGUIDX 179527

--- "Mike" <mcrudele78 at ...> wrote:
>
> > bboyminn:
> >
> > I'm always amazed that so many fans see Trelawney and 
> > Dumbledore's version of events that lead to the original
> > hearing of the Prophecy as being so diametrically opposed.
> 
> Mike:
> I think diametrically opposed is overstating the quandry. ...

bboyminn:

Yeah but 'diametrically opposed' sounds so much cooler than
'inconsistent accounts'. 


> Mike:
>
> JKR just wanted Trelawney to reveal that Snape was the 
> eavesdropper, and by all appearances, the scene played out 
> pretty much as you speculated. 
> 
> -<snip>-

bboyminn:

Of course, two aspects are playing out here. JKR is withholding
Snape as the eavesdropper because it is not the right time in
the story to reveal this. As to Dumbledore not mentioning that
little fact, I think knowing Snape and Harry's relationship,
Dumbledore thought that neither Harry nor Snape would like
this bit if info revealed. Dumbledore wouldn't like Harry to
know because it would, as it did, increase his hostility
toward Snape. And Snape would not want this information 
generally know because it would be embarassing and humiliating
for him.

Probably not the smoothest explanation above, but to some
extent, I think Dumbledore believed nothing could be gain
from Harry knowing at that time, and a great deal of hostility
could be created by Harry knowing. So, yes indeed, he 
specifically and willfully chose not to tell Harry.

> 
> 
> > bboyminn:
> > Then I constructed the scenario below and timed it as I played
> > it out in real time. 
> > 
> > - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> > 
> > -<snipping a very entertaining scenario. Which part did you play
> > in this re-enactment Steve, Snape or Abe? :snicker: >
> >
> > - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> > 
> > Twenty (20) seconds to play out in real time. Twenty 
> > seconds distraction from a 30 second Prophecy. Note as soon
> > as Aberforth speaks, Snape is pulled away from the Prophecy
> > in progress. 
> 
> Mike:
> I don't doubt your timing was accurate. Of course, we had no
> way of knowing that Abe was walking up the stairs just as 
> Trelawney started her prophesy. Until DH, I couldn't be sure 
> there was no collusion between DD and Snape. After the scene 
> on the windswept hill, I'm convinced there wasn't any, I was 
> wrong in my suspicions.
> 

bboyminn:

Well of course, my little scenario what just an illustration. 
It doesn't matter whether Aberforth was climbing the stairs,
skipping down the hallway, or if he came out of another room.
What matters is that Aberforth /came upon the scene/. Snape 
would keep listening until he became aware that he had been
discovered, and the most likely means by which he discovered
this is that Aberforth said something too him. It is from the
point that Aberforth speaks that Snape is distracted from his
listening.

And, I think 20 seconds is a pretty fair estimate. I recited
the dialog out loud with pauses both for natural speech under
the circumstances, and for movement of characters. I did it
three times and 20 seconds was pretty close.

> 
> 
> > bboyminn:
> > Each account emphasizing what it feels is relevant to the 
> > listener and the speaker in the moment, and equally hiding 
> > what the speaker feels is not relevant to the speaker and 
> > the listener.
> 
> Mike:
> Add in there - hiding what the speaker (DD) felt obliged to 
> hide (Snape's involvement) - and your account is complete. 
> But you do see how DD's failure to come clean on this account
> made us want to inspect the rest of the scene more closely, 
> right?
> 

bboyminn:

I honestly don't think Albus is obligated to 'come clean on 
this account'. I stated this position several times before,
as an accepted lead, Dumbledore is only obliged to tell what
he thinks is relevant in the moment and to the listener. 

Certainly Harry would want to know it was Snape, but from
Dumbledore's strategic perspective as a leader, what purpose
would it serve at that moment. I'm sure Dumbledore felt that
at some point in time Harry would need to know this, but this
simply was not that time.

> 
> 
> > bboyminn:
> > 
> > -<snipping why DD would let Snape go, perfectly plausible>-
> > 
> > In the moment, I suspect Dumbledore let Snape go because
> > he wasnt' sure it mattered. Plus, exactly what is the 
> > legal penalty for eavesdropping? ...
> 
> Mike:
> Well wizards do have other ways of obviating any damage 
> stemming from Snape's eavesdropping. Obliviate, comes to 
> mind. ..., why take a chance?
> 
> As we've seen in the WW, governmental or official authority 
> to act rarely is taken into consideration. ... why DD 
> obliviated an apprehended eavesdropper in a time of war.
> 
> Mike, wondering if Steve started at the bottom of the stairs 
> or part way up them for his re-enactment? ;)
>

bboyminn:

Well to some extent we are caught in an Author's Catch 22, it
is so because it needs to be so. Within the story, I think it
all happened so quickly that Dumbledore hadn't fully realized
that anything important had been heard. He wasn't even sure
that Trelawney wasn't faking it. Certainly a prediction, fake
or otherwise, about Voldemort would have gotten her some
attention. I think Dumbledore acted casually without really
analyzing the situation, and thought there wouldn't be a
problem with letting Snape go.

There is also the fact that Dumbledore doesn't set much store
in Prophecies and Divination. He perhaps thought that it 
would be a good distraction for Voldemort. Something to keep
his mind off general killing and terrorism. 

In either case, we all make momentary decisions we later 
regret. I think this was one of Dumbledore's.  

Whatever....

Steve/bboyminn