I personally don't care or mind that Rowling has now said that Dumbledore is gay. My only concern is that even more kids in my rural, conservative community will not be allowed to read the books b/c of this revelation. Edited to add link to article: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071020/ap_on_en_ot/books_harry_potter;_ylt=AoardGCiYd.7btRZ1SqlXtkDW7oF
I think it's riddikulus (spelling on purpose). What is the point in revealing that now? I think people are going to read the books differently now or not read them at all. There are a lot more people out there that are intolerant of homosexuals than there are that are intolerant of witchcraft. It was a foolish decision on her part.
HE WAS A CHARACTER IN A BOOK!!!! What was her point in revealing all of that? He was just a part in the book. It doesn't change the fact that I love him as a character...I just don't see her point.
I don't see the point, either. I LOVE the books- but I have seen interviews where she talks about characters lives outside of the books. It seems like it doesn't fit into what the story line is about. Me- I am more interested in the stories, and I am a little disappointed that she brought up the relationship between Dumbledoor and whats-his-name ( Locklear? something like that) I felt like it was irrelevant to the story line, and just gives parents and religious groups more ammunition against a great literary piece.
I read that she mentioned it because in one of the movies there was mentioned a girl in his past. I guess she wanted to set the record straight in her mind, but agreed that I don't really see what it has to do with the whole book series, since it has officially "ended". More publicity for it?
I am clueless about this Will someone please tell me what this is about or where I can read about it? I LOVE HP :wub: but this really makes no sense to me.
Thanks rougue0208 - I love reading books because I can imagine the way the characters look, their background stories etc.... I have to say - it does make sense in regards to the Gellert story. It doesn't change my views or opinions about the book although I am surprised that she revealed this info. I have always felt she left a lot up to the readers imagination on purpose.
Here's another consideration. Dumbledore's relationship with Gellert Grindelwald is basically very unhealthy and it ultimately destroys Dumbledore's family. If Rowling wanted to introduce gay characters into the series in a positive way, wouldn't it have been better for these characters to be in a healthy relationship with one another?
I found the link. I guess I should have read the entire thread before posting. Really though, what was the point? I was totally satisfied with her explanation of events in book seven regarding Grindewald. I will always love the books, but I think this is one detail that will fall into the distant recesses of my mind when reading them. It doesn't change, enhance, or detract anything from the plots.
I'm with you runsw/scissors. It wasn't necessary to add that postscript to the stories. Does it really add anything to the series? No.
I loved the HP series, I waited for all seven books to come out and I read all of them last week. I was entranced. I teach at a small faith based school, and we have a mixture of people who love them and people who hate them. I'm on the love side. However, I see no point in Rowling outing the most beloved character now. I know that a lot of the parents at my school will now have even more ammo against the books, but since this is never mentioned or referred to in the books, I do not understand the thinking behind Rowlings statement. I love the books no less, I am just a little bit confused by this whole thing. Oh- Well. ~ Sarah
Oh, this is just something else for fanatics to get their hands on. I wouldn't read the series when it first came out because of what others in my church said about it. I finally read them, and love the series.
Would someone please inform Ms. Rowling that she is an author, and authors convey elements of characterization in their novels.
It was never so much as hinted at. I think she was possibly blind sided by the question and just pulled some answer out of the air. We teachers know you should just kind of say "Good question. What do you think?" Interesting discussions usually follow.
Ooh you mean he is homosexual Never mind this and the previous post was a pun I also felt like it was irrelevant to the story line, and just gives parents and religious groups more ammunition against a great literary piece. Now Harry Potter will get in the Banned book line with Huckleberry Finn, Tom Sawyer. and the characters in the books, "Of Mice and Men", "Brave New World", "To Kill a Mockingbird","The Road Less Traveled", "The Great Gatsby", "The Grapes of Wrath", "1984", "Slaughterhouse-Five", "As I Lay Dying", "Lord of the Flies", "The Sun Also Rises", "The Catcher in the Rye", "The Call of the Wild", "A Farewell to Arms", "The Color Purple", "Flowers For Algernon", "The Clan of the Cave Bear" and yes even "The Bible" (for sex ex: Genesis 19:30-36)
HP books have been on the banned books list for a while in different places. That's nothing new, but in light of this nex information Dumbledore's relationship with Harry will be called into question and dirty rumors are bound to crop up. With all the sexual cases you hear about teachers and students it's a wonder there hasn't been any noise about that yet. And I got the pun, Irishdave.
I suspect she may have attended a few gay rights seminars and about how little literature there is supporting gays and lesbians. It's possible she just wanted to put her stamp in the book and support a cause even if it provides controversy. I haven't read her response though so I could be further from the truth. Personally I think most sexual comments can best be left out of most television shows and certainly all teenage literature, but since when does my opinion on that matter? I also think the above the kids heads innuendos don't belong in kid movies but they are there tenfold.
If it provides just one gay kid a positive role model and hope for the future, she's done a very good thing. And if it gives one bigot cause to repent, she's done an even better thing.
As soon as the news filters through to the kids in my class I'm going to have some explaining to do. I'll have to check on how much I'm allowed to discuss in the classroom. I wonder if rereading the HP books with this knowledge now will be like watching the original 3 Star Wars movies again after seeing Episode 3...puts a different spin on it.
I love the books. I have no issues with homosexuality whatsoever. That said, I do not understand her reasons for making the announcement, or what she hoped to achieve by doing so. It might be a way for her to stand up for her beliefs, or to teach tolerance or something, only she knows why she did, but the fact Dumbledorf is a homosexual really does not change anything about the storylines, though now I am forced to reread them to see...kinda like that hidden lyric on the Beatles album.
I think it was pointless and stupid for her to do this at this point in time. He's been dead for 2 books already!!! It kind of made me annoyed but other than that, whatever. It's just pointless at this late of date.
The entire series has been about the evils of intolerance of every shape and form, from the house rivalries to the Death Eaters and the pure blood mania. But this new revelation is not pertanent to any of the story lines. Interesting that Dumbledore she ever really revealed much about that was not married or in love with somebody. Only one teacher (Snape) ever had anything revealed about his love life. We know nothing about McGonnagal, Madame Hooch, Sprout, Flitwick, or Binns (even though he is a ghost). What conclusions should we draw about them? None. The stories were told as if we were watching Harry from a camera on his shoulder, and he never considered any of this important. Why should we?
I agree. Dumbledore's love life and sexual preferences were never something I thought about at all. He always seemed above all that. Which, I suppose Book 7 spent some serious time bringing Dumbledore down to a more human level, and chipping away at his wizard pedestal, but to me it was still there. Other great wizards in fantasy are also beyond the sex question--look at Gandalf and Saruman.
I think she said "I always thought of him as gay" and that is fine. I am sure authors make up whole background stories for their characters when they are writing, and a lot of that probably never gets incorporated into the book. But I don't like her and other people saying he IS gay. As an English teacher, I think a character IS only how he appears in the book. That doesn't mean he is straight, either. His sexuality is ambiguous in the books. If she wanted to make him gay, she should have made him gay, but she didn't. So he isn't. Once the book is written, sorry to say, but the characters aren't her's anymore - they are the readers.
TeacherGroupie posted: I agree! I will admit, I have not read HP. However, I applaud Rowling for providing a "gay" character whose sexuality does not define his character. She has provided a visibly gay literary figure (you know, for those who don't read Whitman, Wilde, or Nugent). Dumbledore is not defined but his sexuality--we assume he is straight due to heteronormativity, but he, in fact, is not. I would imagine she did not make this up off the top of her head--to devote so much of her life to her stories would mean, to me, that she knows her characters. Even what is not written still has stories. Lucas's Star Wars characters live on in hundreds of books. Just because seven HP books were written does not mean the characters don't have lives beyond the pages. I heard a concern on the news that Dumbledore was a classic sad gay figure--an older man, alone, surrounded by young boys (see also the 2006 play/movie History Boys). I see no reason why his portrayal is negative. Rowling isn't a racist even though white people save the world, nor sexist since a man saves the world, and so on. A portion of a character's identity is homosexual, and she left it at that. The fact that his homosexuality is a non-issue for the characters (we see nor have heard of any negative reaction from the other adults due to his orientation) is a wonderful perspective. Just as every other character's heterosexuality (or perceived heterosexuality) is not an issue (for the most part), Dumbledore's homosexuality is not an issue. Bravo!
