Dumbledore Is Gay...

Ms. Poe · Post by **Ms. Poe** » Sat Oct 20, 2007 1:24 pm

http://www.cnn.com/2007/SHOWBIZ/books/1 ... index.html

All I can say is AWESOME....F'ing AWESOME!

otakusin · Post by **otakusin** » Sat Oct 20, 2007 1:32 pm

Never saw that coming... cannot wait to show my husband that, he's gonna shat his pants!! Mwahahaha

Cloud · Post by **Cloud** » Sat Oct 20, 2007 1:32 pm

What if I said wait to show my husband that he is gonna shat his pants can?

blueheaven · Post by **blueheaven** » Sat Oct 20, 2007 2:04 pm

Totally agree. Good on her for having the balls to make such a statement. I hope this starts a dialogue among readers.

usamamo · Post by **usamamo** » Sun Oct 21, 2007 5:18 am

I couldn't beleive it make headlines. I opened my paper and there it was on page 2

Forget about the recent going's on, but hold the phone...dumdore is gay!
Mmm I can see how that is page 2 worthy....not!

blueheaven · Post by **blueheaven** » Sun Oct 21, 2007 8:36 am

Don't be glib about this. Like it or not, Harry Potter is a pop culture/literary icon. Pop culture shapes our consciousness, and the revelation that a major character in young adult literature is living a lifestyle that is still considered quite controversial is a big story. Name other gay characters in young adult literature in the past 100 years. I think it is very page two worthy.

sailorsv13 · Post by **sailorsv13** » Sun Oct 21, 2007 11:25 am

I like her style. People who blindly follow popular social views, never challenging or questioning, are not exercising their basic human ability to reason and learn. I think that this is an extremely important development for the popular Harry Potter. Revealing to readers that their beloved character was gay can show the more open-minded that they had loved this gay character without even knowing. Now that they know, can they simply stop loving that character? Perhaps some will realize that sexual orientation doesn't make a difference, just like race, when it comes to the quality of the person. My guess is that many close-minded readers will deny the news because it alltogether makes them uncomfortable. These people are likely to admonish Rowling as an agitator using her famous book to push her views on other people. Rowling developed a wonderful character who will have a lasting impact on readers, and he was gay. This is an attempt to increase social tolerance for gays, many of whom are just as lovable as Dumbledore yet you wouldn't know it because they are condemned for their sexuality. Take it or leave it.

~ Bri ~

dude_moose · Post by **dude_moose** » Sun Oct 21, 2007 11:41 am

I think it adds a bit of realism to the story too. I mean, out of like, dozens of characters, at least one of them should be...

moonrabitt · Post by **moonrabitt** » Mon Oct 22, 2007 12:33 am

He is??? I was shocked...An old man...alone with a young boy with a scar..and now he is gay..At this time I could follow that up with a joke but i won't

p.s-I don't really care if he is or not...It's funny of how some people react..."A made up character is gay???? OMG!!"

buttrflym · Post by **buttrflym** » Mon Oct 22, 2007 12:38 am

Okay, I think I am the only one that thinks this is a prime example of why writers should never speak in public. They intentionally ruin a good thing.

I wouldn't mind him being gay if she had shown that in the books but for her to state it after the fact is just wrong. It is like an afterthought that had no business being spoken. It seems she is just saying anything to please every type of audience. Look at the interviews after the last book. She told readers what they wanted to hear like what happened with Harry's career but didn't put it in her book. Somehow this makes her a poor writer in my opinion.

If any of this is how she felt for the characters then she should have had the guts to write it that way in the first place. Why didn't she write that Dumbledore was gay in the actual books? It would have truly rocked if she had but this way is just another media ploy on her downward writing career. (Which by the way, the books were good until the last two where she completely lost whatever writing skill she had in the first place.)

Just my two cents.

buttrflym

Maiko · Post by **Maiko** » Mon Oct 22, 2007 1:12 am

buttrflym wrote: It would have truly rocked if she had but this way is just another media ploy on her downward writing career. (Which by the way, the books were good until the last two where she completely lost whatever writing skill she had in the first place.)

Just my two cents.

buttrflym

That was my boyfriend's opinion exactly. I haven't read the books, but he has, and his first thought was that this was just an attention ploy since the books have ended. My best friend, who is in fact homosexual himself and a huge fan of the series, was extremely upset by the news because he felt it was for the same reason: a media ploy. He doesn't believe JK Rowling waited simply because she was afraid people wouldn't read the books anymore because one of the characters was gay ( speaking as if she had revealed it in the books, as she should have, if this was truely part of of Dumbledore's character ). "HP" has already fallen under bizarre criticisms for it's protrayal of "black magic" and wizardry and no-God principles, but people still loved and read it. So how much more backlash could the series possibly have gotten if she was upfront about some of their sexualities while the books were still being written?

And if you ask me...who cares? Really, why should I care if Dumbledore is gay? Aren't we just labeling him, then? Are we saying that his coolness factor has just gone up 10 points because he is gay? Is he not as cool if he is straight? Or bisexual? Regardless, his sexuality should not define his person, gay or straight.

And I don't want to hear about how it's important because an important literary character just scored a point for the gay crowd. Especially when it feels more like JK Rowling is cheapening the gay community by using it as a selling-point for her own personal gain and to call attention to herself.

And really...we shouldn't like Dumbledore more now just because he's gay. It shouldn't have ever mattered in the first place because judging a person, whether your are judging them good or bad...is still judging them.

This is just an opinion- no harm is intended towards anyone. My problem is not with gay issues, but with a creative-type post-labeling a character as 'gay' as an appeal point to a specific audience and as a media ploy.

moonrabitt · Post by **moonrabitt** » Mon Oct 22, 2007 1:45 am

I never really thought about it that way...Did she even hint that he was gay in the book??? I did not read them, so I don't know...but if she didn't...then like you guys said...She should have.....

I guess she just wants to attract more attention...But if it was not even hinted on....then.....EH???
Or maybe she just came up with it one day....and just said it....

blueheaven · Post by **blueheaven** » Mon Oct 22, 2007 2:16 am

BF, you honestly think her publishers would have allowed her to do that? There is no chance. While she does have creative control, they still make the decisions of what will be published. I think it is more effective now. After the series has ended, and fans discuss the series and its place in the literary canon, it starts a very interesting dialogue among the readership. Can they deal with a character whom they loved being gay? If she had made Dumbledore gay from the start(or later in the series), would that have really been better? The focus would then be on one character's sexuality rather than the actual story. You can be as radical as you like, but the mass media and most of America still is not OK with the whole gay thing. It took 400 years for slavery to end and segregation to be outlawed. And that only happened because people in the media and the literary world took baby steps to raise our consciousness. So, you can either demean JK Rowling for what she could have done, or use what she has done to start a conversation.

And to answer the above question, did she really HAVE to hint at it? What did you want her to do, give him a lisp? Wear a rainbow sticker on his broom? Kiss Snape? Most gay men that I know keep their private life just that, private. They don't go leaving breadcrumbs for the breeders to follow.

buttrflym · Post by **buttrflym** » Mon Oct 22, 2007 5:47 am

blueheaven wrote:BF, you honestly think her publishers would have allowed her to do that? There is no chance. While she does have creative control, they still make the decisions of what will be published. I think it is more effective now. After the series has ended, and fans discuss the series and its place in the literary canon, it starts a very interesting dialogue among the readership. Can they deal with a character whom they loved being gay? If she had made Dumbledore gay from the start(or later in the series), would that have really been better? The focus would then be on one character's sexuality rather than the actual story. You can be as radical as you like, but the mass media and most of America still is not OK with the whole gay thing. It took 400 years for slavery to end and segregation to be outlawed. And that only happened because people in the media and the literary world took baby steps to raise our consciousness. So, you can either demean JK Rowling for what she could have done, or use what she has done to start a conversation.

And to answer the above question, did she really HAVE to hint at it? What did you want her to do, give him a lisp? Wear a rainbow sticker on his broom? Kiss Snape? Most gay men that I know keep their private life just that, private. They don't go leaving breadcrumbs for the breeders to follow.

I still think she she would have planned it from the beginning and this is an afterthought. I mean her first book was meant to be a stand alone because no one was sure it would make it. They didn't even advertise the first few runs and let the book go directly to the public by means of searching shelves. Interesting strategy.

And no, there were no hints but like you say, could have been completely private. But it would have made a few scenes in her series a bit weird and inappropriate.

Either way she became popular enough towards the middle/end that she probably could have written anything she wanted and the gay factor would have been published. Maybe not but her first publisher but you know someone would have picked it up. And people would have bought it.

irmgaard · Post by **irmgaard** » Mon Oct 22, 2007 6:55 am

Maiko wrote: My problem is not with gay issues, but with a creative-type post-labeling a character as 'gay' as an appeal point to a specific audience and as a media ploy.

Having a Public School Headmaster be gay in a British book is equivalent to having a hairdresser, or choreographer be gay in an American novel. It’s a hackneyed cliché.

If she wanted to be different, she could have had Mr. Weasley be living a lie. If she wanted children reading it to view it as an acceptable lifestyle, she could have had one of the main student characters portrayed that way throughout the series, and show him/her dealing with the acceptance and/or rejection of his/her peers in the storyline.

Still, she does know how to publicize her work better than anyone else, doesn’t she!