Re: Prescient Dumbledore
- From: Welsh Dog <welshdog@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2008 06:03:21 +1000
On Fri, 26 Sep 2008 07:11:08 -0700, Toon <toon@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Fri, 26 Sep 2008 05:50:09 +0800, "Deevo"
"Welsh Dog" <welshdog@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
I wonder how someone so clearly prescient as Dumbledore was could be
so disparaging of Divination!! While a lot of his decisions were made
from 'deductions' it's clear a lot of them couldn't have been
straightforward extrapolation from knowledge because of the depth of
... *and* that so many happened despite the possibilities of external
forces interfering with the outcomes he'd anticipated!!
I don't think he was so much disparging of the subject than of the teacher.
He wanted to eliminate it from the curriculum. Course, the answer
could be almost nobody ever really saw the future after the course, so
why bother with it? If most don't see the future, how reliable is it
anyway? Let alone interpretation it, and major players changing
It was quite clear that despite her occasional flashes of 'sight', which
even she didn't remember, Trelawney was for the most part a 'right old
Was she? She predicted Harry would die. And he kinda, sorta did. Out
of body experience at least. She saw hermione leaving, dead bunnies
and what not. Broken cup.
And the 'lightening struck tower' etc... even if she didn't know what
it was she saw she was seeing *something*... and not just sherry
Ignoring Harry, which her timing was off on, most of her future vision
were of the immediate future, not distant.
News and views... for people like youse!!
Not as strange as it looks!
- Prev by Date: Re: DD and Marvolo's ring
- Next by Date: Re: Rape in the books
- Previous by thread: Re: Prescient Dumbledore
- Next by thread: Re: Prescient Dumbledore