Dumbledore's gay.

[Strider]

Possible, but i don;t think so Strider. It's not like she needs either more money or to boost the sales. As to why she chose now to make the comment, to be honest, i'm not sure. I can;t see it as really helping her though.

Publicity can be about more than money, it can be about ego, and wanting to prove you're relevant in a way that goes beyond writing an ultra-popular series of books. Assuming she really did conceptualize the character as being gay from the beginning(and, quite honestly, I have my doubts), I can certainly understand why she would choose not say that in the books and deal with the inevitable shitstorm that would result. But they way she did it seems to make it clear she didn't really think(or just didn't care)about the implications inherent in it.

 

[Cosmo_ac]

Publicity can be about more than money, it can be about ego, and wanting to prove you're relevant in a way that goes beyond writing an ultra-popular series of books. Assuming she really did conceptualize the character as being gay from the beginning(and, quite honestly, I have my doubts), I can certainly understand why she would choose not say that in the books and deal with the inevitable shitstorm that would result. But they way she did it seems to make it clear she didn't really think(or just didn't care)about the implications inherent in it.

Ego trip? Possible, but i've neither seen or heard anything to suggest that the writer is an egomaniac.

I can also see why she wouldn;t choose to say anything, as the "right wing morons" have already proved how intolerent they are by trying to get her books banned for "Witchcraft" and the like.

I am curious though what you mean by the "Implications inherent in it" though.

 

[Strider]

Ego trip? Possible, but i've neither seen or heard anything to suggest that the writer is an egomaniac.

One doesn't have to be an egomaniac to feel a need to boost one's sense of self-importance every now and then.

I am curious though what you mean by the "Implications inherent in it" though.

That you've got a gay character who's completely desexualized, and never once found the time to mention something that's integral to his emotional identity. That's pathetically stereotypical, quite honestly.

 

[drew70]

Pardon Drew? What do you mean?

Well the character was such that whatever sexual preference to which he might subscribe would be moot. He's an old man and a magician with no love interest to his character.

You said that you "kinda wish he had actually come out in the book." I'm assuming you meant "out of the closet." Since his sexuality plays no part in the stories, I suspected this wish of yours likely to be a fantasy scenario fulfillment. But if you want to continue to evade the question, I'll understand.

 

[Cosmo_ac]

That you've got a gay character who's completely desexualized, and never once found the time to mention something that's integral to his emotional identity. That's pathetically stereotypical, quite honestly.

how so?

 

[Cosmo_ac]

Well the character was such that whatever sexual preference to which he might subscribe would be moot. He's an old man and a magician with no love interest to his character.

Would it really be moot Drew? I'm thinking it wouldn't.

You said that you "kinda wish he had actually come out in the book." I'm assuming you meant "out of the closet." Since his sexuality plays no part in the stories, I suspected this wish of yours likely to be a fantasy scenario fulfillment. But if you want to continue to evade the question, I'll understand.

Not advoiding the question at all, Drew. Didn;t even realize it was an actual question. I was under the impression that it was another one of your common, thinly veiled insults.

As for a "fantasy scenario fulfillment" i can only wonder what you mean. What type of fantasy do you suppose i had drew? That Dumbledore would meantion he was gay? Not much of a fantasy their.

 

[Strider]

fair enough, but that seems to be somewhat baseless.

It's a personal evaluation on my part based on interviews with her and the series itself. She strikes me as wanting to be socially relevant, not just popular.

how so?

Up until very, very, recently, when pop culture has shown gay characters at all, they've been completely desexualized. Their sexuality is sort of casually established as a throw-away point and then never mentioned again.

 

[Cosmo_ac]

It's a personal evaluation on my part based on interviews with her and the series itself. She strikes me as wanting to be socially relevant, not just popular.

Fair enough. We all have opinions on the subject. I admit i haven't seen or read anything to really suggest that, but i could be wrong.

Up until very, very, recently, when pop culture has shown gay characters at all, they've been completely desexualized. Their sexuality is sort of casually established as a throw-away point and then never mentioned again.

hmmm...to be honest, i've seen very much the opposite. When a charactor is noted as being gay(Except maybe in will and grace), it tends to become a VERY big thing.

However, frankly i think it should be a "Throw away point". Why should a charactors sexual preference define them? Why does the revelation, or possibly just thrown in for ego's sake revelation, that Dumbledor's charactor being gay become noteworthy? Straight or gay, it shouldn't really matter two fucks.

 

[Strider]

Fair enough. We all have opinions on the subject. I admit i haven't seen or read anything to really suggest that, but i could be wrong.

She's said on more than one occasion that she's trying to tweak the conventions of the fantasy genre. Certainly her reviewers have noted that. I didn't even think this was particularly controversial.

hmmm...to be honest, i've seen very much the opposite. When a charactor is noted as being gay(Except maybe in will and grace), it tends to become a VERY big thing.

In what sense? If you mean as a point of conflict, I agree with you. But that's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about things where a gay character's relationships are treated as just the same as everybody elses. Those are still few and far between.

The archetypal example given here is usually the prime-time soap opera Melrose Place, which had a gay character who didn't have one date in the entire time he was on the show(meanwhile, the rest of the cast seemed to manage at least one sex scene per show). Other times gay characters are the best friends of the lead(almost inevitably a single woman in her late 20s/early 30s). Mainstream entertainment in which gay relationships are depicted on the same level as others(Four Weddings and a Funeral comes to mind)is still the exception, and not the rule.

However, frankly i think it should be a "Throw away point". Why should a charactors sexual preference define them?

It shouldn't. But, by the same token, why mention it in the first place if it has nothing to do with the plot? To write a character as gay, and then not have them engage in any sort of relationship(especially if other characters are)just strikes me as a bit timid.

 

[Cosmo_ac]

She's said on more than one occasion that she's trying to tweak the conventions of the fantasy genre. Certainly her reviewers have noted that. I didn't even think this was particularly controversial.

I agree. However the media, and to an extent a certain amount of the public feel otherwise i'm sure.

In what sense? If you mean as a point of conflict, I agree with you. But that's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about things where a gay character's relationships are treated as just the same as everybody elses. Those are still few and far between.

I also agree with this.

The archetypal example given here is usually the prime-time soap opera Melrose Place, which had a gay character who didn't have one date in the entire time he was on the show(meanwhile, the rest of the cast seemed to manage at least one sex scene per show). Other times gay characters are the best friends of the lead(almost inevitably a single woman in her late 20s/early 30s). Mainstream entertainment in which gay relationships are depicted on the same level as others(Four Weddings and a Funeral comes to mind)is still the exception, and not the rule.

Hmmm...i do admit i've never watched melrose place. I do remeber a 90210 episode that had a strong homophobic theme to it. I do agree though that homosexual relationships are not depicted the same as straight relationships though from what i've seen.

It shouldn't. But, by the same token, why mention it in the first place if it has nothing to do with the plot? To write a character as gay, and then not have them engage in any sort of relationship(especially if other characters are)just strikes me as a bit timid.

I do agree it shouldn't and was a bit timid. Then again, these books were being pulled from libraries(and i could have sworn being burned) for fear of witchcraft, so i can understand a reluctance to say the charactor is gay. That being said though, i find their is a somewhat interesting moral question that comes from such a revelation. Say you had a life-long friend. You;ve known them for your entire life. You trust them, you care for them, you hang out with them, drink beer with them, etc, and so forth. then one day they tell you they are gay.

Does that change your feelings about them? Should it? Do you suddenly avoid them, ignore them, hate them, because they have made this revolation to you? Or do you simply treat them the same as you always did? Maybe she wasn't going for this, but i think it does raise this question.

 

[Krokus]

Who cares?

 

[tickledgirl]

That you've got a gay character who's completely desexualized, and never once found the time to mention something that's integral to his emotional identity. That's pathetically stereotypical, quite honestly.

I haven't read all the books, but from what I have read, I think most (all?) of the time we encounter Dumbledore he's acting as guardian/teacher/responsible adult for minor children. A very old man not being sexual with children in his care doesn't sound particularly pathetic to me.

Is there someplace in the books where it would have been reasonable for him to mention his sexuality?

OTOH, I think I'd quibble with Cosmo's discussion of his "coming out". Is there anything to indicated that he's closeted? Not being sexually active doesn't mean he's closeted.

As Drew said, at 100+, he's not likely to be a wild swinging guy. That's may be a stereotype, but in my experience it's an accurate one for both gays and straights.

 

[asutickler]

So she waits until well after her last book is published, picks out the oldest, crustiest, most asexual character in the whole mess, claims that he's been gay the whole time, and expects... What? That people will say she's brave, or some sort of champion of the gay cause? If she had said all of this before all of the books were out, that would be one thing. If it had been (gasp!) actually mentioned in one of the books, it would be different as well.

As for her doing it now, however... I'm sort of split between saying she's doing it for attention and saying that she's doing it to buddy up to the local "social justice" crowd. Whatever.

 

[drew70]

Would it really be moot Drew? I'm thinking it wouldn't.

Feel free to elaborate at your convenience.

Not advoiding the question at all, Drew. Didn;t even realize it was an actual question. I was under the impression that it was another one of your common, thinly veiled insults.

The question mark (?) should have tipped you off.

So, you take insult at somebody inquiring if you have homoerotic fantasies? Most interesting.

As for a "fantasy scenario fulfillment" i can only wonder what you mean. What type of fantasy do you suppose i had drew? That Dumbledore would meantion he was gay? Not much of a fantasy their.

A fantasy scenario fulfillment would be the realization of a fantasy scenario. For example, Ginger and Mary-Anne tickle torturing Gilligan would be a fantasy scenario. CBS actually incorporating this in an episode would be the fulfillment.

You expressed a desire for Dumbledore's homosexuality to have been made evident at some point during the series, rather than after the fact. If you had been indulging in homoerotic fantasies involving Dumbledore (which is certainly nothing of which to be ashamed), this would be a fantasy scenario fulfillment for you, and would explain why you harbored such a wish. I'm genuinely curious if this is the case, but you seem reluctant to answer, evidently because you find the notion insulting.

 

[Cosmo_ac]

Feel free to elaborate at your convenience.

As pointed out, Harry potter books have been potitioned against because of beliefs by christians that the book supports witchcraft. A leading charactor being gay in the series would have more then likely given these people more reason to protest the books.

The question mark (?) should have tipped you off.

So, you take insult at somebody inquiring if you have homoerotic fantasies? Most interesting.

Only if that person is you Drew. I guess maybe i'm just used to your personal attacks and twisting of my words, so i'm a little concious of any "Questions" yuo have to ask as a rule.

You expressed a desire for Dumbledore's homosexuality to have been made evident at some point during the series, rather than after the fact. If you had been indulging in homoerotic fantasies involving Dumbledore (which is certainly nothing of which to be ashamed), this would be a fantasy scenario fulfillment for you, and would explain why you harbored such a wish. I'm genuinely curious if this is the case, but you seem reluctant to answer, evidently because you find the notion insulting.

To answer your question Drew, no, i have not had any homoerotc fantasies.

 

[jim66e]

Is there someplace in the books where it would have been reasonable for him to mention his sexuality?

A good deal of the 7th book concerns a biography of Dumbledore written for the express purpose of exposing all the gritty little details and secrets of his life. Considering the reaction homesexuality still causes in society, and that wizarding society is as discriminatory and predudiced as muggle society, that would be the obvious place to mention Dumbledore being gay.

 

[Redmage]

A good deal of the 7th book concerns a biography of Dumbledore written for the express purpose of exposing all the gritty little details and secrets of his life. Considering the reaction homesexuality still causes in society, and that wizarding society is as discriminatory and predudiced as muggle society, that would be the obvious place to mention Dumbledore being gay.

That would have been the place, if she was going to do it. Since #7 is the last one, the controversy wouldn't have affected the sales of future books. Might even have spurred sales of #7.