"genuine prediction"

[GulPlum]

At 15:26 28/06/03 , naamagatus wrote:

<snip stuff>

>Dumbledore hadn't said, and we don't know, what makes a
>prediction genuine. After all, he said it was genuine *before* it was
>verified, right? So, how could he know beforehand that it was? In
>fact, since only prophecies (which I take to mean genuine
>predictions) are kept in that Mysteries room, there must be some
>signs that marks a prediction as genuine, and that are independent of
>the actual outcome (e.g., the authenticity of the trance state). If
>you had to wait for future events in order to decide whether it's
>genuine or not, what would be the point of keeping prophecies at all?

My view on this is that the semantics are very, very important. Dumbledore 
refers to Trelawley's two prophecies (as opposed to the gumpf she comes up 
with in class) as "real" (PoA p. 311). Indeed, so does the narration (i.e. 
Harry's thoughts and perceptions, e.g. p.238 when he witnesses the second 
prediction).

I agree that for a prediction to be labelled "true" or "genuine", it needs 
to have come to pass, and thus have been verified.

However, because in both cases, Trelawney entered a trance-like state (of 
which she herself was unaware, as she is of making the prediction), 
Dumbledore has reason to believe that the prediction is true; it's not 
necessary *accurate* (for which it needs to be verified), but is materially 
*different* from her usual divining.

In other words, the *act* of making the prediction is genuine; whether or 
not the prediction is accurate remains to be seen.

Incidentally, upon re-reading the relevant PoA passages now, I find 
Dumbledore's reaction somewhat bizarre in view of what we now know. He's 
described as "thoughtful" and "mildly impressed" and the tone and content 
of his comments is quite relaxed. Yet in OoP he implies that he was tearing 
himself up inside about whether or not to tell Harry the details. So much 
for correctly interpreting a "gleam of something like triumph"!

--
GulPlum AKA Richard, who's wondering in view of another current topic 
whether the US-based folk know what "gumpf" means...