Dumbledore is Gay

[Lyanna Stark]

She couldn't fit a sentence like "He realised he loved Grindelwald" or something of the effect into the last book? Now she tells that Dumbledore was gay, right after people started to question the lack of gay/lesbian characters in HP? That's a bit too much of a coincidence for me.

Not really. She's said before that a lot of information gets cut from the books.

Why is this a special tidbit?

I agree with Zahir completely.

Also, the whole "OMG she just likes to be in the news" is ridiculous. You don't think she has enough news coverage already perhaps? Saying that is what it is for is claiming JKR is a media whore, which is not very nice, not to mention untrue.

[Innominandum]

Whatever happened to having your story, you know, tell your story, as opposed to interviews? When you have to tell detailed accounts of the characters of your series in an interview, something is wrong, me thinks (such as her continuation of the epilogue, providing the futures of characters that the epilogue didn't concern).

The story is in the books. Questions from fans and their answers are not the story, they're about the characters, the HP world, etc. Things the author had to create to build the story, but that would have bloated the book if they had been explicitly included. All of this is completely irrelevant to the story. Where's the problem in that ? It's like the bonus of a DVD, most people won't watch it, some fans will enjoy it.

[sio]

I didn't think Dumbledore was homosexual - I thought that, at least in his old age, he was simply asexual. I would probably have preferred it if she left it up to the reader (some mysteries are good).

[Calibandar]

Decius

Seems to be more of an afterthought to keep HP in the news.

I agree. Not only is it an irritating offhand revelation, it is also outside of the books. And it is hardly irrelevant. Dumbledore is one the main characters in this series and for quite a few people, the absolute favorite. Something as significant as the man's sexuality should most definitly have fitted in one of the many pages of the 7 volumes. It's part of his character, and we call that characterization.

I would have preferred it if she had not commented on it. Now, even though it was only said in an interview and not in the books, it will still (rightfully) be taken as canon. Seems very silly to just throw this out now.

I don't know, this is like hearing Santa Claus has been fucking his gnomes.

[Xray the Enforcer]

There was ever doubt that Dumbledore was gay?

[Zap Rowsdower]

I don't see a problem.

Ah, think for a moment- the people gnashing their teeth and angsting their panties into knots are, I am guessing, really, really, really, really, big dorks. Like Comic Book Guy from the Simpsons.

You see, to them it was terribly unsporting of JKR to disclose this tidbit free of charge to all the Harry Potter fans around the world in the form of a friendly, informative interview.

All of them would much prefer that thirty or fifty years after JKR dropped dead as a stone, for one of her children or grand children to uncover her unpublished notes in some giant ass treasure chest buried under heaps of dust and debris somewhere in her attic, then for aforementioned children and grandchildren to to team up with Kevin J. Anderson (his withered and aging body kept alive only by black, vampyric sorceries) and use the notes to spawn some godawful piece of pulp that they will foist on a defenseless public. Cyrano, Tony Marston et. all would then line up at Barnes and Noble and happily plunk down forty bucks for a hardback copy whereupon they would ooh and ahhh as they found out that Dumbledore and Grindelwald liked to do the horizontal mombo.

[Zap Rowsdower]

Decius

Something as significant as the man's sexuality should most definitly have fitted in one of the many pages of the 7 volumes. It's part of his character, and we call that characterization.

Yes, because there's nothing young readers like more than learning about the sex lives of 100 year old men.

[Harlot]

.meh. I've read all the books but maybe I'm not really into them enough to care about the sexual orientation of the characters when it's not in the book or important to the story. I mean does this seriously impact the series in some way?

[Xray the Enforcer]

It's part of his character, and we call that characterization.

Now that's crazy talk, Calibander. I mean, an author spending time to create believable, well-rounded characters? Heresy!

[IheartTesla]

Cyrano, Tony Marston et. all would then line up at Barnes and Noble and happily plunk down forty bucks for a hardback copy whereupon they would ooh and ahhh as they found out that Dumbledore and Grindelwald liked to do the horizontal mombo.

Forty bucks in thirty years would be worth a dime in today's money. I would consider that a steal to learn the back story to Albus.

I suppose we cant have explicitly gay characters in a kids book (will someone please think of the children!), but they can learn about homosexual characters through the media. The way it has always been and will continue to be.

[Zap Rowsdower]

Forty bucks in thirty years would be worth a dime in today's money. I would consider that a steal to learn the back story to Albus.

Actually in 40 years time the economy of the entire world has collapsed (Hammer FTW) and the only viable form of currency is deer. Thus the term "buck" refers to a male deer and not the now obsolete paper currency.

1 buck buys you a new car.

3 bucks buys you a house

5 bucks buys you a seat in congress.

40 bucks buys you a Kevin J. Anderson authored ripoff of JKR's life work.

I'm laughing at you Cyrano because to gain the herd of 40 bucks you used to buy that book, you've liquidated your life savings, sold yourself into indentured servitude, taken out a bunch of high interest loans from some local mafia boss, and promised your virgin granddaughter's hand in marriage to the filthy lard merchant, Logar.

Have fun finding out Dumbledore is gay.

[The Journeyman]

Well, now the Christian Right has another reason to hate HP. As if all the "witchcraft" and "teaching children real spells" wasn't bad enough, the headmaster is a homosexual! OHNOES!

I never looked too much into the sexuality of the characters. There was the obvious sexual tension between Harry and Cho and later Harry and Ginny, and especially between Ron and Hermione in the last two books. But as far as the professors at Hogwarts, it never was a big deal.

I just looked at Dumbledore as an asexual old man through out the series. Whoever said it earlier, I'm agreeing with them that Rowling outed him after people complained about a lack of gay characters in the book.

As far as Renly and Loras are concerned, I picked up on that during my read of A Clash of Kings. It wasn't like they were strolling through Highgarden hand in hand waving a rainbow flag and singing show tunes but it was there.

[Ecchi-Oni]

I didn't think Dumbledore was homosexual - I thought that, at least in his old age, he was simply asexual. I would probably have preferred it if she left it up to the reader (some mysteries are good).

You'd think that wizards would invent magic viagra centuries before the real stuff. Just like LCD picture panels.

[IheartTesla]

I'm laughing at you Cyrano because to gain the herd of 40 bucks you used to buy that book, you've liquidated your life savings, sold yourself into indentured servitude, taken out a bunch of high interest loans from some local mafia boss, and promised your virgin granddaughter's hand in marriage to the filthy lard merchant, Logar.

Have fun finding out Dumbledore is gay.

No, not Logar!

Alright, you've convinced me. I would next like to hear about Snape's fetish for wearing women's underclothes in a JKR-held coffeeklatsch near Oxford Street.

[Brude]

Whatever happened to having your story, you know, tell your story, as opposed to interviews?

Probably because people don't ever stop bugging her about these questions in interviews, readings, etc. I mean, it's not their fault, they just want to know. But I'm sure she hears the same questions over and over again and after a point it's just easier to explain things.

Every major writer who responds to their fans has to do this. Tolkein responded to many fan letters with information that we only now know is "canon" because he said so to some letter who wrote back to them.

[SquireThomas]

I suppose we cant have explicitly gay characters in a kids book (will someone please think of the children!), but they can learn about homosexual characters through the media. The way it has always been and will continue to be.

That was sort of my reaction too. JKR didn't have the guts to have an openly gay character in HP, because she knew it could potentially have a seriously negative impact on her book sales. Therefore, she can just make him gay by fiat later. Are you seriously buying that in 7 bloated volumes, she couldn't possibly include a paragraph on Dumbledore's sexuality? She could have written it into the pensieve scene, no problem.

[Lord Mord]

I don't know why I'm so cynical about this, but I am.

On the one hand, there is no reason why JKR should have told us previously about Dumbledore's being gay, and there is no reason why she shouldn't have revealed the fact in this interview.

Except one reason: privacy. Isn't it terribly convenient that she should make this revelation now, and isn't it an awfully casual treatment of somebody's sexuality?

Except then that leads us back in a circle to the viewpoint: Is his being gay something that needs to be stepped around delicately?

But then that just seems like a convenient excuse for what, as I say, is a fortuitous timing on JKR's part to out this central figure of the series.

So, yeah, it really shouldn't be a thing, but I'm suspicious. Maybe it's just a matter of expectations: I've come to expect people are not forthright when it comes to the most otherwise-benign of activities, especially where controversy on the subject can only benefit their own exposure or sales.

[Erik of Hazelfield]

I think it's bad to add stuff outside of the books because it takes some part out of the reading experience. What we read is just our interpretation of what the author wrote. The words are exactly the same for everyone, but the pictures that are shaped inside our heads are totally individual. This doesn't just include things like the looks of a person or the furniture of a house that were left undescribed, but also how we understand people. Is Snape evil or good? What motives drive Draco Malfoy? No matter what we think we know, the beliefs we hold in such matters affects our reading.

Every book contains some questions which the readers will have to come up with answers to. By giving those answers in an interview, the writer somehow decides for the reader something that should have been decided by the readers themselves. Just imagine GRRM saying something like "Syrio is dead" or "Sandor is alive and living on the quiet isle". That just won't happen, because GRRM respects the readers' pleasure of figuring these things out on their own. If the reader interprets a passage in a different way than the author intended, that's not necessarily a bad thing.

Returning to Rowling, I think she could have said something like "I actually intended Dumbledore to be gay, but I'm not sure all readers understood it that way". Instead she just flat out said he was, implying anyone who didn't think so was wrong. (I feel kind of insulted because I missed it completely, heh.)

What's the point in hinting at stuff in your book if you intend to reveal them later anyway?

[The Pita]

I'm annoyed at JKR anyway for the mess she made with book 7. The fact that she covered up later just annoys me even more.

Comparing this to GRRM's Loras and Renly is quite a big mistake...

There are many small snippets throughout ASOIAF that would explain to one how they are gay, but in HP, there isn't even one textual fact. Unless someone can quote it, or give me the page number and the book (american hardcover) and let me search it for myself?

[Lord Mord]

I'm less concerned about their being no hints, as there just being no reason to make it conclusive.