Fenxy

It sparked off very disturbing thoughts. Dumbledore and Harry alone ... private lessons.

*shakes head*

Funny she never mentioned or touched upon gay issues in her books. Considering they were a subtle form of commentary and all.

It sparked off very disturbing thoughts. Dumbledore and Harry alone ... private lessons.

No different than if "Harry" had been "Harriette" instead. I find it odd that the first thing people think when they see something like this is that the older, gay man will try a move on the younger. It's like when people are afraid that an older male teacher giving private lessons to a young female student will end up in the teacher taking advantage of the student.

*Used to teach violin privately, with numerous female students. Had to contend with that assumption all to often.*

As a reader, I think its interesting. I enjoy finding out those background details that the author knows but doesn't putongo the books.

The fact that people instantly think about the alone time between Harry and Dumbledore in a different manner is silly. If he was gay, that means he was interested in men<\em> not boys. She didn't come out and say he's a pedophile. Come on people!

WTF Dumbledore's gay and that's it. I don't know why people are making such a big deal out of this. He's just a normal person like you or me...except gay.

On second thought I think I understand were Jk's coming from. She didn't want to include this plot point in the books because it didn't help the story in any way.

The detail of the world she's created never ceases to amaze me.

WTF Dumbledore's gay and that's it. I don't know why people are making such a big deal out of this. He's just a normal person like you or me...except gay.

...and except that he's been known to throw one hell of a wicked spell around too. ;)

He's just a normal person like you or me...except gay.

My phoenix agree-- aw, crap. There it goes again!

I wonder if another reason why she didn't include this plot point was that parents might have disallowed their children from reading it... it's sad to say that these prejudices still exist, but I know a fair number of parents that would have come up with an excuse or just a flat-out "no", had Dumbledore been announce as gay during the series.

I find it amusing that parents are ok with their children reading stories that are based upon witchcraft, and not ok when a wizard is gay.

brandon: I really doubt that's true. For the people who shun HP, this is just another drop in the bucket. For those who are okay with it, I'm sure they won't change their stance. If you can point to any group of people that have said, "that's it, I've supported HP until now but I'm no longer allowing my kids to read it," let me know.

Not like he is Herbert the Pervert, it's just Dumbledore.

I don't understand why this matters at all. Just like real life, unless you've got a pretty intimate relationship with someone their sexuality is completely irrelevant.

It's a neat detail, kind of a behind the scenes look at a character... but nothing to make a deal of one way or another.

It is not a thing.

I would say some people are uppity about it simply because it is a piece of information that doesn't matter. Why she bothered disclosing it at all if it wasn't revealed within the books?

It's the idea that the books should communicate everything that is important about the character and I suppose some people either view this as important to the character or that if it wasn't mentioned it's not true.

I wonder what would happen if Melville were still alive. Would he tell Salon.com "Oh, by the way, Moby Dick was totally about homosexuality?" No. You're supposed to figure it out for yourself and make your own judgments based on the text.

That said, I think Rowling only revealed it to stay relevant for a little while longer. Summer's over, the last book's out and the hype's died down. Why not stir the pot one last time?

Ditto to what jensized said.

I would say some people are uppity about it simply because it is a piece of information that doesn't matter.

Who's to say what details do matter? She spent countless words describing the world of Hogwarts and London, but those details wouldn't be considered overkill. Do I think it was vital to the story? No. But I think it's interesting to hear about the peripheral details that didn't make it into the book.

One of Rowling's goals was to make Hogwarts and the HP universe as diverse as the real world. She made an effort to make children of different races a vital part of the story lines, plus she took the issue of racial profiling head on in book 2 with the pure blood vs. mudblood storyline. To think that she included a homosexual individual, whether it was directly identified or not, makes sense for her overall idea.

I find it amusing that parents are ok with their children reading stories that are based upon witchcraft, and not ok when a wizard is gay.

What I find more interesting: people who don't let their children read Harry Potter because of the witchcraft bit, but encourage them to read The Hobbit, Lord of the Rings, Chronicles of Narnia (White Witch anyone?) or allow them to watch pretty much any vintage Disney movie. The idea of witchcraft is a staple of children's literature for one reason or another. Why flog HP and praise LOTR?

RyanArrowsmith: I suppose the point of contention is that the "witches" are good in HP, and not in Narnia. But I agree with you 100% about it, if you would let them read Narnia then the argument is invalid.

Who's to say what details do matter?

In the context of Harry Potter, I think (because I could easily be proven wrong, so please do) that you could argue if something is important it would be in the books. As I said, there may easily be an example of such, but if Dumbledore being gay is an important part of the story then no doubt it would be a part of the books.

I honestly think she's just doing this to get back into the hype a bit, which I can understand since everyone was talking about her at one point but now the only new thing will be the movies which are arguably someone else's baby.

Dumbledore pride shirts, get em while they are hot.

Well, I honestly see how it's germane other than as a gimmick to increase sales with the gay community. Honestly, after reading the books any gay references between Big D. and that other dude just were not apparent in my opinion, if at all.

I've got two words for this whole "Dumbledore is gay" story:

Who Cares!?

Honestly, after reading the books any gay references between Big D. and that other dude just were not apparent in my opinion, if at all.

Imagine the tragedy, though. The Grindewald - Dumbledore fight could've matched that famous "I AM YOUR FATHER" Skywalker battle, had she covered it.

I'm with Cappucino. I just recently finished reading the series (not just the last book; I read them all within a rather short time frame), and I just don't see it. Certainly, there wasn't anything in the book that said, "Hey, Dumbledore isn't gay" - there was nothing about him dating girls or being interested in a woamn - but on the other hand, there wasn't anything that I saw that pointed to him being gay, either. Dumbledore was, if anything, a Gandalf rip-off - highly intelligent, a bit (okay, maybe more than a bit) eccentric, somewhat aloof at times. I've not seen Christopher Tolkien stating that, yes indeed, Gandalf was actually gay.

Ultimately, this just sounds like a marketing ploy to me. Maybe it's not, and maybe Rowling intended Dumbledore to be gay all along, and just let it out of the bag now for a bit of publicity; but I'm not buying that much. The proof is in the pudding (in this case, the books), and the books don't point to Big D. (heh) being gay.

shadowsun7 said:

Imagine the tragedy, though. The Grindewald - Dumbledore fight could've matched that famous "I AM YOUR FATHER" Skywalker battle, had she covered it.

Heh. "I AM YOUR LOVER!"? Doesn't have quite the same ring to it, I'm afraid.

I just realized that Dumbledore lost usage of one of his hands, just like ol' Luke. Maybe the Big D. is a blend of Gandalf and Luke Skywalker; then again, Dumbledore didn't whine much, so the Luke strand can't be that thick.

I didn't see it coming but now that Dumbledore's out it doesn't surprise me.

@Josh: We never knew him when he was young. ;)

She really needn't have revealed that little gem about Dumbledore. It's generally accepted in fantasy to have a single (as in not married) old wizard popping up to help (or kill). Didn't anyone ask about Voldermort's sexual orientation? I didn't. It never crossed my mind.

Probably because the lot of them walked into my life fully formed, with little revealed about their past demons until the last 3 books.

EDIT: Josh! That was brilliant! Never noticed the hand reference before too!

This is a really good article about why, at least in the author's opinion, Rolwing's decision is important. Good reading.

Yeah that's a good article Ryan.

I've not seen Christopher Tolkien stating that, yes indeed, Gandalf was actually gay.

I don't think this guy would be at all surprised...

Hah, Gnorb. :P

Gnorb: fan-freakin-tastic!

Well, Dumbledore did have a legendary "wand" after all...

...sorry, couldn't resist. I don't really see Dumbledore as gay (more like a person who was more dedicated to his magic and career than romance), but there is a goldmine of jokes for a parody-writer like myself.