I don't think it's about courage. But more about the fact that saying explicitely that he's gay would have ment talking about sexuality in the books, and she chose not to. If she would have talked about it for Dumbledore, than she should have done so with everyone, and that is not the subject of the books. And I think that people would not have read through some parts of the books the same way they would have if they knew he was gay. People would have thought that Dumbledore might be a pedophile, inviting Harry in his office, giving snape a second chance, and being the headmaster of a school of kids. It could have been mistaken for pedophilia by some dumb, close minded people and it could have brought prejudice to the real message of the books!
mmmm....yes, yes, you are probabily right. there's so much people who believe gay = pedophile...it's just i really didn't like the 7th book, so i think it would have been different if we would have know that Dumbledore was gay.
I find this so funny because of all the characters fans would have died to hear wee gay, he probably wasn't the one, but I still think its good, a lot of time I find if you have a gay character there is more time spent on there being gay then on there character, after all being gay or bi or straight is only a small part of who someone is and in HP's case I am glad that the story was more impotent then this fact coming out in it, because it wouldn't have added to the story but taken away from what was impotent, yet at the same time I love how divers all her characters are ^^ I hope that made sence >.>
Reading the last book I kind of had a feeling about his relationship with Grindelwald, but I didn't know whether it was my slash fan mind just seeing things or was it really there. The tell-all that Rita Skeeter was writing seemed to hint at it, but then I dismissed it because that character makes things up anyway.
I honestly think this is great news, but now there are going to be those same Christians that hated the series before going up in arms saying "omg the evol ghey!" And then there's going to be the homophobes that loved the series that will hate it now. And the people that will look at Dumbledore's relationship with Harry as some form of pedophilia.
I thought that she was very brave to say it. (even if it was for attention) Hell, the series is over and she already has everyones money. So she can say what she wants.
I don't mind or really care... but it bothers me that JKR keeps distributing important information via INTERVIEWS. Like, couldn't she have cut out some of the camping crap and stuck in some of the things she keeps telling us? People aren't going to be reading the interviews a hundred years from now, just the book. If she saw fit to tell us stuff like this at all, why doesn't she think it important enough to put in the BOOKS?
No, not really. But it's very good to know that some people in child literature are ready to take risks, to show that some things considered "unnatural" by some are part of people that can play major roles in life. Even if it's fiction, there is still some kind of impact. Just like making the hero of a superhero cartoon a black gay for instance. It triggers something in the masses, if you see what I mean!
Hm. Hm. Hmmm.
I dunno. I feel ambiguous about that revelation. Being gay myself I of course like the idea that one of the most positive and loveable characters of Rowling's novels is gay. That's a good thing. On the other hand I have to say I really do not like what "gay" means for people who belong to this crazy HP-fandom. Being gay is not the same as "yaoi" and has nothing to do with "kawaii" and "person X person". While I'm sure that Rowling knows what she's talking about when she announces one of her characters to be gay I'm not so sure about the fans. I'm sick of all those crazy gay pairings. Sick of Draco asking Harry "will you be my UKE tonite?". Sorry, I know this sounds incredibly closed-minded but I don't like the fact that this revelation will result in raising numbers of DumbledoreXGrindelwald "Uke seme kawaiii" stories in which what it means to be gay is perverted into a 12 year old girl's wet dream.
So yeah, as I said. My feelings are ambiguous. And I find it sad that they are because it SHOULD make me happy that Rowling "didn't forget about us".
Oh, I so agree with you. There will be (unfortunately) a whole bunch of fans who like slash and fantasm about it who will write this pairing. I don't like slash simply because people generally don't write it correctly. It's just, you know, like watching a porn movie. Dude1 lusts for Dude2 and they have hot steamy gay sex. Most fans of yaoi just write it for those scenes, and most of them are not gay.
Its the same as guys thinking that lesbians are hot girls who jump on other girls all the time, they find it sexy and fanatazise about it, and are only fed on supid clichés. Being gay is not the problem at all, it's the fact that people don't go further than the aspect of two people of the same gender having sex etc... I personnaly find this gross and disrespectful towards gay and lesbians, in a certain way...
The perfect counter example is "Brokeback Mountain" because it was all about feelings, it was subtle, not too much, and totally believable...
But I do think it's a great thing for younger readers: Dumbledore is a mentor figure, and a very wise, powerful and good man. If that can be associated with "gay" in their minds, I personnally think it's a good thing. It's risky, but it's time that child literature stopped being so "conservative" and gave minorities bigger parts. Dumbledore being gay is a huge step forward in my opinion!
Glad to have yours, by the way! I was wondering how gay people would react in fact. Thanks a lot for your message!
Haha - I really like your comparison of yaoi-fandom to straight guys drooling over lesbians I'll remember that one for my next argument on "why yaoi-fans do not REALLY make gay people's life easier"
And I totally agree on what you've said about Brokeback Mountain. That was an incredibly sensitive movie. What I particularly liked about it was that it wasn't really about GAY people but about how hate, ignorance and fear can destroy love and the chance for happiness. Well, of course it was about gay people since both protagonists were male but it didn't satisfy any clichés. How hearts and hopes decay when being forced to hide Shakespeare told us already 400 years ago Sad thing everyone cried for Romeo + Juliet but only few people are willing to accept Ennis' + Jack's love - Accepting gay people as they are, without turning them into walking clichés or beating the shit out of them, doesn't happen often these days.
Yikes, that was totally off-topic
btw: I'm taking a seminar on new trends in children's literature this semester. We'll talk about gender issues in contemporary children's novels in one session and the instructor promised me she'll introduce some books that feature either gay characters OR otherwise address the topic. I'm looking forward to that session. In case you're interested I'll drop you a line about those books once the session is over
That said, I do agree with you that it's important to adress "problematic" topics in children's literature. As I said, I'm somewhat glad Dumbledore is gay because he's such a positive character. It's not Rowling's conceptualization of Dumbledore I find alarming, only what those crazy fans will make out of it
No need to thank me, btw I'm very much enjoying for this little conversation of ours, so thank _you_ for your thoughts!
I agree. Now mind you, I HAVE read some of those crazy yaoi fanfics and stuff...and have liked them, but I don't read them all the time. I'm actually VERY picky about what I read, even amoungst the het fiction. I MUCH prefer a believable plot line, hopefully believable thoughts and feeling between said male characters, and much less sex involved in said stories. Sometimes you can find those. But those are harder to find, unfortunately. *sigh*
But I also agree with you on Dumbledore. It's nice to have a character who has been seen as a good man and mentor, and even though he's gay, hopefully, still be seen as a good man and mentor in the younger people.
You know, I think I have to agree with you on that one... While I kind of like "crazy gay pairings" (mostly because they are, in fact, crazy), "a 12 year old girl's wet dreams" is just gross, distorted and... well, unrealistic and unemotional :S
Well, you get what I mean I agree with you, I just don't have my way with words...
im know! I read it on bbc news, and I was like DUDE! FANS WERE SO RIGHT! It was awesome!
it proves that jo's really open minded
and that she has a lot of influence over the young generation, which means that they imght be more accepting!
I was so happy to hear the news. I think it adds a lot more to Dumbledore's story- the bad ending to his relationship with Grindlewald making him more wary of the people he meets, and, sadly, doesn't allow him to truly love again. It definitely makes me feel for sympathy for the character in "Deathly Hallows"
As for the whiny parents...blah. JK Rowling didn't say anything until after the books were released, and any hints of his sexuality in the books were very implicit (she's really good at that! ). Plus, it teaches kids a good lesson about love, and how it's all the same.
I think it's awesome. I'm glad to see a gay character in like..the most popular book series ever. XD
My mom absolutely did not believe me, so she put the TV on CNN, and I went back to my computer.
5 minutes later she was screaming "OH MY GOD!!!" and i was like "*snrk* YEEEES MAMA?" 8D
She thinks it'll ruin the support that the parents gave to the books, and probably ruin the movies. I think it'll take the fans awhile to adjust to it, but they'll get over it. It's not like he touched Harrys happy place or anything :C
I guess it's nice that she came up with that, but what it have to do with anything now? It never came up in the stories, so I don't see this as her finally doing anything. She could've made Dumbledore a three-toed hermaphrodite with gills. If it didn't come up in the series, then announcing it seems like another way to grab attention.
She isn't really doing a service to the LGBT community here by announcing after the fact that Dumbledore is gay. And so he's an old gay guy. The point is still that Rowling didn't have the pluck to talk about sexuality in her novels, so she's doing it now after the fact when she can say whatever the hell she wants. I guess keeping it a secret was to show that being gay and being good are mutually exclusive things. A person doesn't have to be defined by their sexuality. But if she is defining people by their sexuality, that doesn't reflect well on her.
I don't know. I just fear that she is contributing to the continued objectification of the LGBT community
I see what you mean. But I think that if Rowling started talking about sexuality in Harry Potter, and therefore Dumbledore's sexuality, she would have been obliged to talk about every character's sexuality. And that is not the point of the books. She delivers a lot of hidden message, but she chose not to talk about sexuality, and maybe it would have been a little too much indeed.
I think she pointed it that he was gay to show what he went through with Grindelwald, to show that Dumbledore had loved and knew what he was talking about when he rants for hours about how great love is to Harry.
Imagine that: he had to kill his one true love that had fallen to the dark side. Even if it's terrible to have to kill your best friend, it's even more terrible to kill your beloved one.
I also think that if it was mentionned Dumbledore was gay, all the scenes with Harry, or Snape etc in his office would have been read through differently (though that brings up a lot of comic ideas to my percerted mind! ), and I don't think rowling would have wanted the readers to focalise on the fact that a gay man is speaking to another man about love etc... It could have easily start a fire: Dumbeldore is in fact a pedophile, and that would have ruined the way we viewed some relationships in the books.
Exactly! Harry Potter is not about sexuality. So it seems like a totally moot point to bring it up. I personally would have more respect for her if somewhere in the interview, she had said, "I didn't reveal his sexuality because it's not important." I didn't see that anywhere in the transcript. What I did see was her saying that she wanted to give the fans something to talk about for the next ten years.
You're right about the sexuality thing, though, and that's the sad part. Yes, it is sad that he has to kill his beloved and best friend. And you're right that revealing his sexuality would have pegged him as a pedophile. The fact that we have those stigmas for fictional characters says something about our society right now. And obviously, mentioning anything about sex would've given the book much less appeal.
However, I don't really see the gain in mentioning that Dumbledore is gay. I guess that the way I write characters is different, so it could just be my subjectivity. It just seems as though she's mentioning it for attention. I don't know her, so I could be wrong