The depiction of LGBT characters in fiction

[Ser_not_appearing_yet]

To be fair to show Renly the 'sissy' scene is a behind closed doors one. We never actually got to see Renly from Loras' POV in the books, so in truth we probably didn't know as much about him as we thought.

Also Renly's 'love of pageantry' didn't strike me as gay back during my first read-through, more immature. And in any case, if Renly is a gay stereotype in that regard Loras isn't. In fact he seems to be heading down the path of a gay Jaime Lannister. So that makes up for things.

Other than that those lesbian sailors looked like actresses and Dumbledore is the greatest LGBT character in SFF ever.

[The Marquis de Leech]

Dumbledore is the greatest LGBT character in SFF ever.

If Rowling had wanted to make Dumbledore gay she should have put it in the books. You'd have a good case (under the Death of the Author principle) to simply ignore Dumbledore's sexuality altogether.

[Ormond]

If Rowling had wanted to make Dumbledore gay she should have put it in the books. You'd have a good case (under the Death of the Author principle) to simply ignore Dumbledore's sexuality altogether.

Why should an author have to EXPLICITLY talk about the sexual orientation of adult characters in a children's book?

I don't recall anything specifically in the books that mentions whether or not Minerva McGonagall or Dolores Umbridge were attracted to men or women. Do we have to assume they are heterosexual rather than lesbian, then?

And there isn't anything in the books that misdirects the reader into thinking Dumbledore has to be heterosexual, is there? Plus there's this exchange in Half-Blood Prince:

Oh, there you are, Albus,' he said. 'You've been a very long time, upset stomach?'

'No, I was merely reading the Muggle magazines,' said Dumbledore. 'I do so love knitting patterns.”

When I read that I immediately thought "is she implying that Dumbledore is gay?". The only reason I wasn't sure about that conclusion was that I wasn't sure if the idea of an adult male loving knitting patterns would give off a "gay vibe" in the UK the same way it would if an American author had written that. It turned out that Rowling had the same stereotype about men and knitting patterns that most American authors would have.

[Arthmail]

I think what Roose was saying, and i might be wrong, is that the author saying they are gay does not make gay, if you know what i mean. Besides, knitting patterns is pretty weak sauce.

As for why an author has to explicitely mention it in a childrens book....well, she felt the need to explicitely say it afterwords, no?

[The Marquis de Leech]

Why should an author have to EXPLICITLY talk about the sexual orientation of adult characters in a children's book?

I don't recall anything specifically in the books that mentions whether or not Minerva McGonagall or Dolores Umbridge were attracted to men or women. Do we have to assume they are heterosexual rather than lesbian, then?

No, we don't make any assumptions about their sexuality at all (or more accurately, it's up to the reader to decide). Dumbledore as portrayed in the books is simply not a sexualised character: for the purposes of the story he is pretty much asexual.

Suppose Rowling came out tomorrow with the claim that Harry was a vampire. Would that make Harry a vampire? I'd say no.

And there isn't anything in the books that misdirects the reader into thinking Dumbledore has to be heterosexual, is there?

No, there isn't. Because the Dumbledore in the books is not a sexual creature at all.

Plus there's this exchange in Half-Blood Prince:

Oh, there you are, Albus,' he said. 'You've been a very long time, upset stomach?'

'No, I was merely reading the Muggle magazines,' said Dumbledore. 'I do so love knitting patterns.”

When I read that I immediately thought "is she implying that Dumbledore is gay?". The only reason I wasn't sure about that conclusion was that I wasn't sure if the idea of an adult male loving knitting patterns would give off a "gay vibe" in the UK the same way it would if an American author had written that. It turned out that Rowling had the same stereotype about men and knitting patterns that most American authors would have.

I'm really puzzled why knitting should be taken as a sign of homosexuality. If anything it's something I'd associate with 'old people'.

[TerraPrime]

I'd say Dumbledore in books 1 to 5 has been pretty asexual, and in fact, quite cardboard. But starting in book 6, we get to see him at a closer range. The subtext is there for those who can read it, as in his relationship with the famed Dark Wizard. To me, Rowling confirming it afterwards was not a surprise at all. I was beginning to wonder about that about halfway through book 7.

[Talleyrand]

Renly was kind of a sissy in the books. Annoyingly so, to be honest. The whole 'he loved dressing up and pageantry' thing, how Renly was portrayed as liking the trappings of war but not knowing about war, how he was having a tourney while on the march...GRRM didn't do him any favors.

Renly wasn't sissy at all in the books. Yes he was a good dresser but that's not really too much of a camp thing is it? In the books Renly took part in the tourney and preformed well before being beaten by the hound rather than the whole being disgusted by violence and throwing up because someone died.

[Sci-2]

Well, no. Dream is the protagonist and the series is dealing with his situations and his rectifying his past errors which are, by and large his own fault while also examining the nature of dreams and stories. Telling lots of stories with the lord of stories playing a role is less 'stupid' and more 'the point.'

We should probably make a separate thread for this, but I can see both you and Kalbear having meat for your arguments.

I thought Renly was a great character in the books, we'll see how the series treats him. I disliked the wishy-washy unmanly portrayal in the show as well.

[Ser_not_appearing_yet]

When I say Dumbledore is the greatest LGBT character in SFF ever I mean he's just a better written character in general.

Reason for that is when Rowling claimed him to be gay, a lot of people got annoyed and stated that this had 'no relevance' and that Dumbledore isn't defined in any way by sexuality.

And that's the problem with almost ALL LGBT characters written about in SFF. It turns into their defining trait, when in reality it shouldn't be anymore important than hair or eye colour.

Although, I think there are a few hints about Dumbledore in the books, at least enough to say that Rowling didn't randomly tag it on for shock later. Fairly sure he was gay in book 1, etc.

[The GRRumbler]

When I say Dumbledore is the greatest LGBT character in SFF ever I mean he's just a better written character in general.

Reason for that is when Rowling claimed him to be gay, a lot of people got annoyed and stated that this had 'no relevance' and that Dumbledore isn't defined in any way by sexuality.

And that's the problem with almost ALL LGBT characters written about in SFF. It turns into their defining trait, when in reality it shouldn't be anymore important than hair or eye colour.

Although, I think there are a few hints about Dumbledore in the books, at least enough to say that Rowling didn't randomly tag it on for shock later. Fairly sure he was gay in book 1, etc.

THIS

That's the thing that always bothered me about LGBT characters, why is it that their sexual orientation has to define them? And when Rowling confirmed Dumbledure's it just confirmed my own suspicions, and i really think that it just wasn't for the auctor (by the time she was writing the story) to be explicit about it.

About Renly, i think that's one of my worse critics about the HBO adaptation, just like they did with most of the story, with Renly they took a character and created characteristics for him that he didn't had in the books, they made him a caricature of what a gay man "is suposed" to be, he was nothing like that in the books, and it seemed to me like they where forcing the hand with him, spoonfeeding the viewers, just to show that he is "gay", as if to be gay he would have to "fit" the "stereotype"

[Sci-2]

I think there is a difference between sexuality being the sole or greatest window into a character and the total absence of said sexuality.

I mean, we could say any character whose sexuality is not explicitly expressed to be the greatest LGBT character if we use Dumbledore as a rubric.

[ambyr]

And that's the problem with almost ALL LGBT characters written about in SFF. It turns into their defining trait, when in reality it shouldn't be anymore important than hair or eye colour.

This seems like an odd thing to say. Unless you're postulating a world without prejudice, sexuality (and the societal reactions someone deals with as a result of that sexuality) is going to have an effect on a person far beyond the color of their hair or eyes--not the defining trait, no, but an important one. And while I enjoy reading prejudice-free settings, I don't think they're the norm in the genre.

[Ser_not_appearing_yet]

This seems like an odd thing to say. Unless you're postulating a world without prejudice, sexuality (and the societal reactions someone deals with as a result of that sexuality) is going to have an effect on a person far beyond the color of their hair or eyes--not the defining trait, no, but an important one. And while I enjoy reading prejudice-free settings, I don't think they're the norm in the genre.

But aren't we talking about SFF? Why would you recreate modernworld prejudices/culture in a SFF novel? It seems to miss the point somewhat.

It also gets presented poorly. As a straight writer myself, I wouldn't attempt to write about modern gay culture in a SFF novel, because I'm fairly sure it would straight up suck. And anyone who lives that culture would be able to see right through me.

That said, I've never read Hal Duncan, and I've heard some good things about him.

[Sci-2]

It's been over a decade since I read the Iliad, but one would think Achilles and Patroclus are among the greatest gay characters in fiction.

ETA: Or, going by the Dumbledore rubric, one might even claim the mantle is held by Jesus, Thoth, Gandlaf, etc.

[Apathete]

It's been over a decade since I read the Iliad, but one would think Achilles and Patroclus are among the greatest gay characters in fiction.

If it wasn't for the fact that the driving motive for Achilles in the first 2/3rds of the story is having his slave girl taken from him?

[Sci-2]

But is it love/lust or dishonour that motivates him? And doesn't he accept a substitute for the girl?

(Again, it's been a loooong time)

ETA: Thoth was married to Ma'at as I recall.

[Fryie]

It's been over a decade since I read the Iliad, but one would think Achilles and Patroclus are among the greatest gay characters in fiction.

Except "gay" is a concept that's not readily applicable to Greek and Roman antiquity in a straightforward manner.

[Sci-2]

Yeah, I should have said LGBT. Though I was specifically thinking of Calasso's commentary, wherein he notes Achilles and Patroclus breaking the lover-beloved hierarchy.

[Fryie]

Is it even sure they were lovers? I thought that was still controversial.

But you seem to know more about the Iliad than I do, so I'll just stop embarassing myself. ;)

[Sci-2]

Not at all - I barely remember it. I read Calasso's Marriage of Cadmus and Harmony more recently, and that work is very biased in the sense that it is all Calasso's (brilliant IMO) views on Greek mythology and the evolution of Western Thought.