More gay news
Time has a funny, if very misguided, article on why J.K. Rowling should’ve kept Albums Dumbledore in the closet. I’ll publish my favorite parts for you but go here for the whole article and let me know what you think.So along comes Rowling with Dumbledore—a human being, a wizard even, an indisputable hero and one of the most beloved figures in children’s literature. Shouldn’t I be happy to learn he’s gay?
Yes, except: Why couldn’t he tell us himself? The Potter books add up to more than 800,000 words before Dumbledore dies in Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, and yet Rowling couldn’t spare two of those words—“I’m gay”—to help define a central character’s emotional identity? We can only conclude that Dumbledore saw his homosexuality as shameful and inappropriate to mention among his colleagues and students. His silence suggests a lack of personal integrity that is completely out of character.
Anyone want to guess what the chapter with Dumbledore’s “coming out of the closet” should’ve been titled? LOL I so don’t see how that would have fit into any of storylines to be honest and yet he is right. Prof. D’s silence does “suggests a lack of personal integrity that is completely out of character.”
But you see, for me, most of these characters were completely asexual to begin with. What do we know about any of their sex lives? We know nothing of any of the teacher’s families. Are they married? Do they have kids? It’s never mentioned anywhere so why should Dumbledore go around organizing gay pride marches and wearing rainbow pins?
And then I read this and spit all over my computer screen:
In a typical passage, the briefly mentioned Blaise Zabini is described as “a tall black boy with high cheekbones and long, slanting eyes.” Would it have been so difficult to write in a line in which Zabini takes the exquisitely named Justin Finch-Fletchley to the Yule Ball?
I misread that and at first and thought it said: “Zabini takes the exquisitely named Justin Finch-Fletchley AT the Yule Ball.” My mind is in the gutter but, lord, that made me laugh. Just try to imagine that scene in The Goblet of Fire. LOL
Related:
Labels: harry potter nutter
To begin with I didn't think much when J.K said he was gay. I was like, "oh, okay." Probably because to me that isn't a political statement to make, but to her it was.
She started writing these books in the early 90's, and let's face it, back then people were still pretty homophobic (and yes I know a pretty big group of people still are).
Most of the sexual stuff that was happening was important to the story, good old D coming out and saying "I'm a homeosexual" wouldn't have really fit.
Besides, if the Times had read the final book they would have seen Harry being very upset about D never telling him anything about himself.
If D kept his childhood, teen years closed lipped; he is just to have likely have kept his sexual orientation closed lipped too.
It is inapproperiate for a teacher to talk about their sexual orientation with their students (at least in my opinion). I don't know about you, but I didn't know that much about my teachers in high school. I mean, sure I knew some stuff, like who was married and who had children, but I didn't know much more than that.
So that's where I stand, I think J.K had every right to say what she wanted about D and the Times needs to realize that the books aren't porn and they weren't trying to make a gay statement.
10/24/2007 03:11:00 PM
I AGREE WITH TARA!!! She has said it better than I could. Plus if she would have let it out in the stories than most people would have assumed that the worse.
10/24/2007 03:38:00 PM
If sex would have been an important part of the series then I believe she should've let his sexual orientation be known. But we don't know anything about ANYONE'S sexual life there then why should she single the gay one out and make an example out of him?
I think that guy in the TIME's is way off on that "she should've fought for the gays" or whatever it is he said.
10/24/2007 04:01:00 PM
I don't see what the fuss is all about. It's not like Jo said Dumbledore was a teacher who liked little boys.
10/25/2007 12:18:00 AM
There were times I wondered whether Prof McGonagall had a husband or a family...
I don't mind when Jo just out her characters or when she adds information (VERY LATE REVELATIONS) about a certain character - information which she should have included in the books. It's like she is trying to rewrite her manuscript!
What I mind is when she takes away important information from the books like - what happened to the Dursleys? They just disappeared. What exactly is the veil? What is the Department of Mysteries all about? What happened after Hogwarts got destroyed? Now these are the things that should have been cleared and EXPLAINED IN THE BOOKS not whether Dumbledore likes men!
10/25/2007 12:57:00 AM
VT: I don't think she singled DD out as you put it. She was ask by a fan about DD's love life and she answered honestly. I don't understand why it's such a big fuss since his orientation doesn't change his character. I don't think there would be such a contraversy if JKR said DD was straight, which is sad. Also, JKR included a lot of info about the lives of other characters in the interviews as well ie. Neville married Hannah and Cho married a muggle but no one is making a contraversy out of these tid bits of info.
10/25/2007 12:57:00 AM
Anon has a point and honestly, i'm getting tired of all this Dumbledore is gay thingy.
I have to agree with Jolie though. I *HATE* JKR's tendency of having those stupid late--VERRA LATE!--"revelations". Gah! Too many questions left unanswered, important information undiscussed that should have been in the books! Yet it all comes down to Dumbledore's sexual orientation that isn't really important because gay or straight or bi, it doesn't affect the stories and he is still the old Dumbledore (magnificent teacher, friend, mentor, etc) we all love, for crying out loud!
10/25/2007 01:28:00 AM
Anon,
What I meant was why does the author of the article I quoted WANTED JKR to single Dumbledore out to have a sex life when non of the other teachers did and we were fine with it.
But I do agree on what he says, Dumbledore hidding something so important about himself (like the sister thing, the brother, grindelwalt (sp?) and now the gay thing) its so OUT OF CHARACTER. For a man that preached so much about the truth and Love.
With that said, I loved the way the books were written (Except 7) and I saw no necesity (sp?) to include any of the teachers sex/personal life (which she never EVER goes into details about).
10/25/2007 07:41:00 AM
Oh, that was me up there (Trollop).
Jolie, you're as obsessed as Harlot about that Veil. I really couldn't care to be honest LOL That's the least of my worries when so much was left unsaid in HP7 GRRRR.
Also, I've noticed in a lot of books that when they refer to death they mention "veils" a lot so maybe this is somethign we're supposed to know?
I googled "veil death" and found some sites that menton it. Mabe it is common knowledge? :/
Near Death Dialogues
Beyond the Veil
10/25/2007 07:47:00 AM
Post a comment
Home