Yeah, I was pretty surprised too...I actually put a link to a story reporting this in my journal. I must admit I've never suspected the character. *cough*ifanyonewasgayitwouldhavebeenSnape*cough* Just kidding.
Much as I was amused to find out (because of anticipation of fandom and media shitstorms), Rowlings announcement just doesn't sit too well with me. It's mainly because, whatever Dumbledore felt for GG had the most disasterous results consequences in the whole book, aside from the actions of Voldemort.
It seems to be implied Dumbledore's conflicted feelings could be one of the reasons why he delayed confronting Grindelwald, which had a cost of many thousands of lives. I mean, I would really have preferred the only gay crush in Harry Potter to be something less catastrophic and life shattering, considering that the book is very focused on showing love overall as a positive and constructive force. < / thoughts on yaoi >
True. But I think Jo was trying to show that Dumbledore was mega-flawed and stupid as a youth, much like Harry himself, hence the whole Grindelwald subplot (even without the gay twist). I can see her reasonings for it, I just wish she had thought it through to the point where she would have noticed that the only gay relationship in her books is really twisted and evil. But, on the other hand, Jo never said anything about him never having a relationship with anyone else... A part of me hopes that more details about that will come out in subsequent interviews.
I really don't think Rowling meant to portray homosexual relationships negatively by this. Actually I don't think the gay relationship itself is "twisted and evil", just the person he had it with. If Grindelwald had been a woman, a really evil witch who killed thousands of people, and Dumbledore was once in love with her, that wouldn't have been construed as an attack on heterosexual romances - just showed that Dumbledore wasn't perfect. Even very thoughtful people, like Ms. Rowling, can't think everything through. For that matter, neither can I.
Well of course she didn't mean anything negative by it, and nobody is saying that this is an "attack" on homosexual romances or anything. It's just something that happened to fall into a tiresome cliche, and that cliche (the only homosexual romances portrayed are always twisted and evil) sends a message, whether unintentional or not. Which is dissappointing, of course.
The comparison to heterosexual romances doesn't work. The reason is that, in all forms of literature and film, we already have all sorts of diverse portrayals of all sorts of heterosexual romances, whether healthy, unhealthy, or anywhere in between. BUT in our current body of literature and film, we have very, very few portrayals of homosexual men and homosexual romances - and the vast majority of those are portrayed as sick, unhealthy, and twisted. (For a recent example, look at the Persians in 300.) Which is why it's tiresome every time another example pops up.
Again, nobody is saying that Jo is deliberately insulting or attacking gays or anything. It's just dissappointing that, even though it was courageous of her to out Dumbledore, it's still frustrating that so far there's only been on canonically gay relationship in the Potter books, and that relationship is a textbook stereotype of a gay relationship. I'm 100% sure that there was no harm intended on Jo's part. But that doesn't change the fact that it's still dissappointing.
That is interesting. I've never seen 300, but I think I understand what you mean. I can understand your disappointment too. I guess because most people are not homosexual, heterosexual romances are explored more in literature, healthy, unhealthy and otherwise. I think the answer is for concerned homosexual authors, or those who symphasize with them, to write their own literature exploring gay relationships. Still, I think Dumbledore of all people being gay should be a positive thing for gay people, if anything. If Voldemort had been the only gay man in Harry Potter, there'd really be trouble.
Honestly, I think it's a joke. JKR has been known to be very tongue-in-cheek in her interviews, and I totally wouldn't put it past her to pull something like this on her crazy fans.
Besides, we all know Lupin and Sirius are the only really gay HP characters....^.~
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Just kidding.
no subject
Of course, I'm sure all the Dumbledore fan fic people are just gloriously happy.
no subject
I'm going to have to re-read the whole thing now and look for clues!
no subject
It's mainly because, whatever Dumbledore felt for GG had the most disasterous results consequences in the whole book, aside from the actions of Voldemort.
It seems to be implied Dumbledore's conflicted feelings could be one of the reasons why he delayed confronting Grindelwald, which had a cost of many thousands of lives.
I mean, I would really have preferred the only gay crush in Harry Potter to be something less catastrophic and life shattering, considering that the book is very focused on showing love overall as a positive and constructive force.
< / thoughts on yaoi >
no subject
Pun not intended.
no subject
no subject
The comparison to heterosexual romances doesn't work. The reason is that, in all forms of literature and film, we already have all sorts of diverse portrayals of all sorts of heterosexual romances, whether healthy, unhealthy, or anywhere in between. BUT in our current body of literature and film, we have very, very few portrayals of homosexual men and homosexual romances - and the vast majority of those are portrayed as sick, unhealthy, and twisted. (For a recent example, look at the Persians in 300.) Which is why it's tiresome every time another example pops up.
Again, nobody is saying that Jo is deliberately insulting or attacking gays or anything. It's just dissappointing that, even though it was courageous of her to out Dumbledore, it's still frustrating that so far there's only been on canonically gay relationship in the Potter books, and that relationship is a textbook stereotype of a gay relationship. I'm 100% sure that there was no harm intended on Jo's part. But that doesn't change the fact that it's still dissappointing.
no subject
I guess because most people are not homosexual, heterosexual romances are explored more in literature, healthy, unhealthy and otherwise. I think the answer is for concerned homosexual authors, or those who symphasize with them, to write their own literature exploring gay relationships.
Still, I think Dumbledore of all people being gay should be a positive thing for gay people, if anything. If Voldemort had been the only gay man in Harry Potter, there'd really be trouble.
no subject
Okay, I got carried away. Nonetheless, this makes Harry Potter a lot more amusing than it really is (I'm not a fan of the series).
no subject
Besides, we all know Lupin and Sirius are the only really gay HP characters....^.~