There are only...

[heidi]

When Dumbledore and Harry were in the Weasley broomshed, Dumbledore said that the only two people in the world who knew the contents of the prophecy were the two of them.

Does that mean that the Longbottom parents don't know the contents of it? And if they don't, did James & Lily? Or have they just forgotten in their madness?

Or am I overanalyzing something she didn't give that much plotting to?

Comments

[lls-mutant.livejournal.com]

Yeah, I agree with the above poster. Alice and Frank might have been told, but they certainly don't remember, by all appearances. (and it sounds like it will stay that way.) And Lily and James are dead, and so is Sirius (if James told Sirius....)

Interesting that it does mean the Order doesn't know the full content though, and were willing to guard it anyway!

[aphoenix2007.livejournal.com]

Interesting that it does mean the Order doesn't know the full content though, and were willing to guard it anyway!

I think that shows how much the Order trusts Dumbledore; I mean, like you said, they didn't know anything about the prophecy, yet they guarded it because Dumbledore said it was important.

[ginsu.livejournal.com]

how much the Order trusts Dumbledore

Yes. I think the Order knows other things... which we do not know... which lead to that trust.

In fact, I think that's the reason it's called the Order of the Phoenix.

[aphoenix2007.livejournal.com]

::sigh:: Sometimes the Harry-POV gets so frustrating...

[ginsu.livejournal.com]

True. On the other hand, when she abandons it for third omniscient, I immediately start to lose interest, such as chapter one of Goblet or the first two chapters of HBP.

One of the reasons the second and third books are my favorites is the unbroken third-person limited. It requires the author to work harder, to get the reader all the relevant information, but when it works, it works very well.

[aphoenix2007.livejournal.com]

It requires the author to work harder, to get the reader all the relevant information, but when it works, it works very well.

I have to agree with that. :) When you realize how much more effort it takes for the author to do that, you appreciate it more, and the writing seems (and is) much better.

[ginsu.livejournal.com]

the writing seems (and is) much better

It really is.

Another of my favorite English writers, Wodehouse, does first person better than anyone ever, in my opinion. He has these hideously complex plots and is absolutely painstaking and rigorous in the execution of information flow... despite the huge authorial limitations of first person.

One interesting exercise would be to rewrite a HP book entirely in first and still get in the whole plot, logically and cleanly. Or, even better, rewrite bits of HBP so those first two chapters are unncessary and the perspective is uninterrupted.

[aphoenix2007.livejournal.com]

He has these hideously complex plots and is absolutely painstaking and rigorous in the execution of information flow... despite the huge authorial limitations of first person.

Now that is an accomplishment. ::admires::

That would be a great challenge for someone who wants to improve their writing. Maybe I'll try it sometime...

[royalmidnight.livejournal.com]

I rewrote Goblet of Fire with Harry as a girl.

It was on the Hard Drive that died.

[aphoenix2007.livejournal.com]

It was on the Hard Drive that died.

That must have been rather frustrating... :(