Okay, if this has already been covered, sorry. I'm sure somebody will come through to delete it. Anyway, I had been thinking about that often-discussed possibility that the prophecy was fulfilled the night of Harry's parents' deaths. That Voldemort's expulsion essentially fulfilled the prophecy. Well, I thought, what if that was true, but because of Voldemort's loophole - i.e. Horcruxes, he prolonged the prophecy's relevance even tough he already technically fulfilled it once.

Maybe as long as the horcruxes exist, the prophecy will play out in an endless loop. Obviously, Harry doesn't have time for that. So, having completed the prophecy once already in the cycle, we've still got a Dark Lord who's gotta bite it. So the prophecy remains, and when Voldemort regains his corporeal body, he essiantly starts the cycle up again. This time, in his attempted possession of Harry in the DoM, he has again, unknowingly and inadvertently, taken a situation where both Harry and Neville are viable choices, and has again chosen Harry. Harry's victory in that particular battle of wills, or maybe even perhaps in the graveyard, if the situation fits better, has again marked or confirmed Harry as an equal, thus granting him perhaps a bonus, or a new skill of some sort. Just like his scar, this new invisible mark of equality will be perhaps both a burden and a gift, or one or the other, depending on how someone chose to write it.

Just a thought, I know it probably sounds like the plot line where Harry gains all Voldemort's experience, power, etc. after the DoM, but I thought that maybe this would be a more logical theory that allowed for more realistic and interesting development by a skilled author.

EDIT: Please feel free to expand or critique the idea.

 

My greatest criticism would be that the prophesy isn't something with any magical power of its own: it's merely a prediction, no more powerful than me saying "It will rain next Saturday". The only difference is the the prophesy is 100% certain. The prophesy does not ensure that certain events happen in any magical way, it's simply a statement of what will be, though to an extent it is self-fulfilling.

Also, in a way, this already happened. When Voldemort took Harry's blood into himself, he continued to treat Harry as an equal, and this granted Harry an advantage that eventually led to his victory (Voldemort was a horcrux to Harry), though it was both a burden and a gift (the visions).

 

Doesn't someone (Dumbledore?) mention at some point that there are thousands of unfulfilled prophecies in the department of misteries? Do we even know that they necessarily happen? Couldn't they just be information, say on a 'possible future'.

My thoughts on this are pretty vague, but I just dislike the whole concept of some certain future. Even if prophecies being true wouldn't fix the whole future, it does limit freedom. The only way I see to make that work is to see it as a point to which all paths lead.

 

Taure's wrong. Dumbledore even contradicts what he said.

Dumbledore says exactly that the prophecy was only true because "Riddle believed it was true."

Which has always been the way I saw fortune telling and prophecies. Its a slight of words and the mind. If you tell someone "You'll see a red dog." then the chances are they're going to see it. If Dumbledore/Snape/anyone had never told Riddle/Harry/anyone the prophecy, the chances are it never would have played out.

 

See the bolded words:

I have allowed that Voldemort hearing the prophesy will lead to him fulfilling it. My point was that the prophesy does not magically enforce this such that it is a necessity that it happen - only that it is a prediction of what will happen, even if that prediction existing causes people to act in a way such that it is fulfilled. This is not a magical causation, it is simply people's choices.

 

This does remind me of one of my fanfiction pet peeves, when Harry/Voldemort gets hit by a really nasty spell and the only reason they don't die is becuase "the prophecy protected them." That's enough to make me hit the red X button every time.

On topic, I always figured that every prophecy is eventually fulfilled, but that given the nature of prophecies (usually vague and full of symbolism) they might not always be interpreted correctly. That might make an interesting little ficlet sometime; Harry/Voldemort finds out that Trelawny's prophecy actually had nothing to do with them and was really about something piddling and insignificant, despite the impressive sounding language.

 

Ok Taure, that's all nice and all, but doesn't Dumbledore say something like 'the prophecy was only fulfilled because people were there to believe it's true; there are thousands of unfulfilled prophecies in the DoM, etc something something'?

Edit: Here we go...

Of course, if you're stupid you'll come up with a lame excuse like, 'of course some of them aren't fulfilled, but that doesn't mean they won't be'. I just hope you're not.

Also, reading that passage, it does strike me how pathetic Harry is.

 

Um, that just backs up what I'm saying: the prophesies do not magically enforce their outcomes, since there are prophesies in the hall of prophesy that have not been fulfilled.

The only power the prophesy has is that of changing people's choices by existing. This is not a magical power, it is simply a piece of knowledge that people will adjust their choices through taking into account, and thus fulfill.

 

I never said prophecies magically enforce their outcome, I agree with you on that, but what I dispute with the Dumbledore quote is this:

What Dumbledore says allows for the possibility that the prophecy isn't 100% certain. There could be several views on this. For example, one random idea: prophecies can't be shown to be wrong, but they don't have to be right (so if nobody involved comes across the information, it's worthless). Or maybe it's just a priviledged piece of information, or possibly the most probable future, like a weather forecast. That would work better with the Copenhagen interpretation of quatum mechanics and avoids being deterministic, which I dislike.

I'm not saying this is how it works, but it should be considered that prohpecies could be wrong sometimes.

 

I disagree with that simply because of this;

With that, you contradict yourself.

"It is 100% certain to happen."

"There is no magic to it and it only happens if circumstances are met."

Take a little time and actually read that. And as Oephyx quoted, Dumbledore says there is no possible way for it to be 100% certain. Even if Voldemort had heard it, it doesn't make it a certainty to happen.

And despite all of that, and your contradiction, people have different interpretations of different things. Riddle might not believe it the way Potter does, or Dumbledore does. Just hearing it doesn't mean anything.

Just as important is human choice. Voldemort chose to pursue the prophecy as he understood it. Potter could have ignored it and left Europe or the UK. There is never a certainty to them. Its 50% belief and 50% choice.

 

I don't think Taure said 'prophecies are fulfilled if circumstances are met', and I think he means 'prophecy are fulfilled because circumstances are met'. What Taure means when he says there is no magic enforcing the prophecy is that a prophecy is a statement that happens to be necessarily true (although I personally dispute that).

If you want to illustrate the role of magic in that theory, take magic completely out of the equation. When making any statement in the normal world, there is always a probability that it is true (let's forget about subjectivity and everything else here). Taure says that a prophecy is any such statement (made on the future) of which we know (through magical means) that the probability of it being true (ie, fulfilled at a finite point in time) is 1. There.

 

I SEE YOUR LIPS MOVING BUT ALL I HEAR IS BLAH BLAH BLAH!

Also; I know thats not what he said. It was only meant to illustrate a point. DONT BE SO LITERALZ! D:

 

You people amuse me, even though I should not be amused at all?