Dumbledore is gay!

[Danny White]

NTTAWWT :

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/21/AR2007102101192.html

Harry Potter & the Surprise Outing: Dumbledore

By Hillel Italie
Associated Press
Monday, October 22, 2007; Page C04

NEW YORK -- With author J.K. Rowling's revelation that master wizard Albus Dumbledore is gay, some passages about the Hogwarts headmaster and rival wizard Gellert Grindelwald have taken on a new and clearer meaning.

The British author stunned her fans at Carnegie Hall on Friday night when she answered one young reader's question about Dumbledore by saying that he was gay and had been in love with Grindelwald, whom he had defeated years ago in a bitter fight.

" 'You cannot imagine how his ideas caught me, Harry, inflamed me,' " Dumbledore says in "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows," the seventh and final book in Rowling's record-breaking fantasy series.

The news brought gasps, then applause at Carnegie Hall, the last stop on Rowling's brief U.S. tour, and set off thousands of e-mails on Potter fan Web sites around the world. Some were dismayed, but most were supportive.

"Jo Rowling calling any Harry Potter character gay would make wonderful strides in tolerance toward homosexuality," Melissa Anelli, webmaster of the fan site TheLeakyCauldron.org, told the Associated Press.

Gellert Grindelwald was a dark wizard of great power, who terrorized people much in the same way Harry's nemesis, Lord Voldemort, was to do a generation later. Readers hear of him in the first book, "Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone," in a reference to how Dumbledore defeated him. In "Deathly Hallows," readers learn they once had been best friends.

"Neither Dumbledore nor Grindelwald ever seems to have referred to this brief boyhood friendship in later life," Rowling writes. "However, there can be no doubt that Dumbledore delayed, for some five years of turmoil, fatalities, and disappearances, his attack upon Gellert Grindelwald. Was it lingering affection for the man or fear of exposure as his once best friend that caused Dumbledore to hesitate?"

As a young man, Dumbledore, brilliant and powerful, had to return home to look after his mentally ill younger sister and younger brother.

Then Grindelwald, described by Rowling as "golden-haired, merry-faced," arrived after having been expelled from his own school. Grindelwald's aunt, Bathilda Bagshot, says: "The boys took to each other at once."

Potter readers had speculated about Dumbledore, noting that he has no close relationship with women, plus a mysterious, troubled past.

"Falling in love can blind us to an extent," Rowling said Friday of Dumbledore's feelings about Grindelwald, adding that Dumbledore was "horribly, terribly let down."

Dumbledore's love, she observed, was his "great tragedy."

Kind of a "cop out" though waiting until the series is over (with no mention in the actual books) and all the sales are complete to mention this.

 

[DallasCowpoke]

Ya know, I don't have kids. Nor have I read line 1 of any of those books, nor seen 2 mins of a movie. But if I did have a youngster that had been invested in this to the fanatical extent of some I've seen on news reports, only to find out after the fact, "Hey, guess what!?!?... One of the main character's a queen!" I'd be more than a little PO'd!

 

[Crown Royal]

Doesn't bother me. That was never obvious in the novel, nor does it have any major effect on the story. The whole Dumbledore/Grindlewald/Dumbledore's sister storyline was tragic whether he was gay or not, and the revelation that she wrote him as a gay man doesn't really change it for me.

 

[joseephuss]

Ya know, I don't have kids. Nor have I read line 1 of any of those books, nor seen 2 mins of a movie. But if I did have a youngster that had been invested in this to the fanatical extent of some I've seen on news reports, only to find out after the fact, "Hey, guess what!?!?... One of the main character's a queen!" I'd be more than a little PO'd!

Would it have mattered if they mentioned it before? Or how about the opposite? It was assumed by many that he was gay and Rowling came out and said that in fact he was not.

Doesn't matter to me. I have not read any of the books, but have seen the movies.

 

[Hostile]

When you are writing something fiction, you sometimes do not know which way the story is going to go until you get to that point in the manuscript. If I had to guess I'd say she wrote the admission by Dumbledore and then asked herself as she read it back, "is Dumbledore gay?"

Regardless of whether he is gay in her mind or not, if the reader doesn't pick up on the signals, then it doesn't have to be that way. If you think Dumbledore is gay because she says so now, after the fact, then you allow your own interpretations to be manipulated.

My favorite book is Moby Dick. It was the subject of my Senior Thesis in English. While discussing the book in class early in the semester Professor McElroy asked if Queequeg and Ishmael were gay. This is because in an early scene they share a room at an Inn and Ishmael wakes up with Queequeg's arm around him and he feels comforted. Some in the class did read it as gay. Some didn't. I didn't. As I read through the book (I've read it 5 times) I can find nothing that tells me they are gay. Might Melville have considered them gay? Sure. But even if he said they were and I can't see it, they aren't in my mind as I read the book.

She says Dumbledore is gay. So, I didn't read him that way, and if I read it again I won't be looking for hidden inuendos and shadows. He may be gay to J.K. Rowling, but not to me.

That's the beauty of fiction, it is what your imagination lets it be.

 

[Crown Royal]

When you are writing something fiction, you sometimes do not know which way the story is going to go until you get to that point in the manuscript. If I had to guess I'd say she wrote the admission by Dumbledore and then asked herself as she read it back, "is Dumbledore gay?"

Regardless of whether he is gay in her mind or not, if the reader doesn't pick up on the signals, then it doesn't have to be that way. If you think Dumbledore is gay because she says so now, after the fact, then you allow your own interpretations to be manipulated.

My favorite book is Moby Dick. It was the subject of my Senior Thesis in English. While discussing the book in class early in the semester Professor McElroy asked if Queequeg and Ishmael were gay. This is because in an early scene they share a room at an Inn and Ishmael wakes up with Queequeg's arm around him and he feels comforted. Some in the class did read it as gay. Some didn't. I didn't. As I read through the book (I've read it 5 times) I can find nothing that tells me they are gay. Might Melville have considered them gay? Sure. But even if he said they were and I can't see it, they aren't in my mind as I read the book.

She says Dumbledore is gay. So, I didn't read him that way, and if I read it again I won't be looking for hidden inuendos and shadows. He may be gay to J.K. Rowling, but not to me.

That's the beauty of fiction, it is what your imagination lets it be.

I agree with you only in the fact that it really doesn't matter to the story. You can read it, and the sexual orientation of Dumbledore has no more to do with the overall novels than the orientation of McGonagle or Crabbe. Per Rowling, the only significance that it plays is to add tragedy to the Grindlewald saga, but like I already stated, that was already tragic, gay or not, because it was obvious they were close, whether it be platonic or romantic.

But that being said, I do think it is important what an author means in their writing. You can read things into anything - what people say, what novels say, what laws say, etc., but just because you have the imagination to interpret doesn't mean that the interpretation is correct. You might get enjoyment out of it, but I take more enjoyment in accurate interpretation. I think that our knowledge of Rowling's writing style brings creedence to her revelation of Dumbledore's sexuality, if only because we know that she knows far more about the world she created than anyone else, and nearly everything she did was with purpose. Although I don't think that the homosexuality of Albus adds a whole lot more to that tragedy, it does add some, and has some purpose.

In addition, I find it relevant that she created a dynamic character who was homosexual, and did so without making that sexuality too important to the story. Dumbledore's sexuality, to me, is simply not a major influence on the story - he was still a great character one way or another. This revelation is little more than trivial knowledge, kinda like the fact that Aberforth has a thing for goats, or that Ernie MacMillan was a Hufflepuff. Who cares?

(Edit - to summarize, if and when I reread these novels, I will do so with the knowledge that Dumbledore is gay, but it will in no way alter my interpretation of the novel, because it has nothing to do with the story. She could have said that he scratched his nose during the fight with Voldemort, and it will be just as trivial).

 

[Hostile]

I agree with you only in the fact that it really doesn't matter to the story. You can read it, and the sexual orientation of Dumbledore has no more to do with the overall novels than the orientation of McGonagle or Crabbe. Per Rowling, the only significance that it plays is to add tragedy to the Grindlewald saga, but like I already stated, that was already tragic, gay or not, because it was obvious they were close, whether it be platonic or romantic.

But that being said, I do think it is important what an author means in their writing. You can read things into anything - what people say, what novels say, what laws say, etc., but just because you have the imagination to interpret doesn't mean that the interpretation is correct. You might get enjoyment out of it, but I take more enjoyment in accurate interpretation. I think that our knowledge of Rowling's writing style brings creedence to her revelation of Dumbledore's sexuality, if only because we know that she knows far more about the world she created than anyone else, and nearly everything she did was with purpose. Although I don't think that the homosexuality of Albus adds a whole lot more to that tragedy, it does add some, and has some purpose.

In addition, I find it relevant that she created a dynamic character who was homosexual, and did so without making that sexuality too important to the story. Dumbledore's sexuality, to me, is simply not a major influence on the story - he was still a great character one way or another. This revelation is little more than trivial knowledge, kinda like the fact that Aberforth has a thing for goats, or that Ernie MacMillan was a Hufflepuff. Who cares?

(Edit - to summarize, if and when I reread these novels, I will do so with the knowledge that Dumbledore is gay, but it will in no way alter my interpretation of the novel, because it has nothing to do with the story. She could have said that he scratched his nose during the fight with Voldemort, and it will be just as trivial).

I get what you are saying. I agree with some of it. I disagree with some of it. I don't care how she interprets his sexuality. I care about where my imagination when reading takes me. It didn't take me there. Therefore I don't care what her interpretation is. If I had known it ahead of time, perhaps I would care. After the fact, I could give a crap. My imagination has already been served, and her interpretation is irrelevant.

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

It makes no difference to me in the grand scheme of the story as it was never relevant.

Actually I would not be shocked if that was not her original intent but just added later. Whether it be as a joke, as a statement for or against a group or because many fans have written cannon about gay relationships.

Whatever the reason none of it changes what I liked about the books.

I will say this though. Even now I don't see it as him being gay, the way I viewed it was that as a young dumbledore he finally found someone else that was not only as talented as him in magic but also as eager to push the boundaries of magic.

I think he found a kinship in those ideas and basically found an equal.

Was he gay, was he not gay. Was it originally her intent or did she change it now...does not matter to me.

 

[burmafrd]

She was making nice with the PC crowd. Thats all it is.

 

[Crown Royal]

She was making nice with the PC crowd. Thats all it is.

That's silly. Why would she care? If anything, this adds controversy to her work.

 

[Hostile]

She was making nice with the PC crowd. Thats all it is.

I disagree with this. If she was interested in being PC she wouldn't have written about wizards and witches.

 

[Kevinicus]

That's silly. Why would she care? If anything, this adds controversy to her work.

contreversy = attention.
attention = $$$.

Not that she needs more of either.

 

[Faerluna]

contreversy = attention.
attention = $$$.

Not that she needs more of either.

It seems like she just answered the question that was asked. She's obviously had many years to get to know her characters, some traits of which may be known to her but were essentially irrelevant to the story.

 

[Danny White]

It seems like she just answered the question that was asked. She's obviously had many years to get to know her characters, some traits of which may be known to her but were essentially irrelevant to the story.

I'm just shocked Rita Skeeter wasn't able to break the scoop!

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

I'm just shocked Rita Skeeter wasn't able to break the scoop!

I think Herms caught her again and has her stashed in a jar somewhere.:

 

[DallasCowpoke]

I think Herms caught her again and has her stashed in a jar somewhere.

Wait!? So now you're telling me there are gays AND herms in this!?

:

 

[Dallas]

What ? A queen Wizard?


No wonder he rode the broom so well.

 

[HogsRLegends]

Sales of this book should be banned immediately.

 

[Yeagermeister]

Sales of this book should be banned immediately.

Oh brother......give it a rest. It's a fictional book.

 

[superpunk]

Ya know, I don't have kids. Nor have I read line 1 of any of those books, nor seen 2 mins of a movie. But if I did have a youngster that had been invested in this to the fanatical extent of some I've seen on news reports, only to find out after the fact, "Hey, guess what!?!?... One of the main character's a queen!" I'd be more than a little PO'd!

Depends on what country he ruled.

Me? I can't stand Lithuania.