Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows (SPOILERS)

[incognito]

maddiemoo said:

I guess I just never really thought of him in a relationship with anyone -- he seemed more asexual to me.

If anything, I wish that Rowling had gone with this explanation. Mainly because I really hate how anytime someone is not portrayed as being in a relationship or ever having been in a relationship, all the gay rumors start. It's annoying and cliché.

I've mentioned before my unpopular opinion re: canon (i.e. the only stuff that counts as canon is what has been officially published). So to me, Dumbledore's sexuality is not a part of canon because it was never explicitly addressed in the books. In my world, he will continue being asexual.

[susyhomewrecker]

I always wondered if Dumbledore was gay, but I never thought she would openly say so. Like so many other vague plot points or details in the books (like Aberforth's inappropriate goat charms), I thought she would leave that open to interpretation because she didn't want to confuse young children or give the religious zealots more ammunition. I agree with BoroKat, though; if your kids are old enough to deal with the violence, deaths, and bigotry that these books confront, then they're old enough to know that sometimes boys like boys and girls like girls.

Mainly because I really hate how anytime someone is not portrayed as being in a relationship or ever having been in a relationship, all the gay rumors start. It's annoying and cliché.

I understand what you mean, but I don't think that's the case here. Dumbledore probably had relationships with other men besides Grindelwald, but we didn't know about the majority of Harry's teachers' love lives anyway. Hagrid and Lupin had girlfriends/wives and Snape loved Lily, but the only reason we know about that at all is because in some way, they helped progress the story. Dumbledore's sexuality is just one facet of a very complex character--a facet that wasn't integral to Harry's story.

I'm glad she waited to reveal this, because if she hadn't, I think many readers would have never finished the series, and the subsequent books would have been released under a cloud of controversy. It's sad to say.

[Malle Babbe]

That thought crossed my mind as well, Susy California. However, it puts an interesting twist on the whole issue of why Dumbledore had such trouble getting the Ministry of Magic to take him seriously on the issue of Voldemort's return. Was his intimate relationship with Grindelwald widely known, and his credibility in doubt? And if so, was it due to him being gay, or a follower of Grindelwald?

Thing is, gay characters in fantasy fiction in general, and fantasy geared towards young adults is isn't really new. I read Mercedes Lackey's Valdemar novels 20 years ago, and her stuff featured gay and lesbian characters, and one trilogy centered on a gay protagonist. Granted, Rowling's books got out of the fantasy market and into the mainstream, so she's breaking through on that front.

[susyhomewrecker]

I don't think anyone knew about Dumbledore and Grindelwald, nor that anyone knew that Dumbledore was gay (except for maybe a few Order members). Rita Skeeter's book stirred up a lot of shit in DH, and that wouldn't have happened if DD and GG's friendship was common knowledge. I still think the Ministry chose not to believe him because Voldemort's return was inconvenient for Fudge.

I'm reading the fallout on LJ right now, and I'm baffled by these people. Some people are still offended it never came up in the books, some people think JKR is staging a publicity stunt (as if she needs to), and some people are saying this trivializes homosexuality. WTF.

Oh, and as for Neville and Hannah Abbott, how freakin' cute is that? Clearly I loves me some Neville (see avatar) and I'm glad he's got a family and a job he likes and is good at. Hannah was a Hufflepuff who shows up in most of the books; she joins the DA and, I think, is there at the Battle of Hogwarts fighting against Voldy and the Death Eaters--so she and Fierce!Neville are a good match.

[baseballgirl]

Dumbledore on the new People magazine cover.

;D

[kostgard]

That cover is pretty funny. I especially like the bit about the Hermione sex tape.

I do wonder if Rowling almost regrets revealing this, because of the huge reaction. Over at The Leaky Cauldron, they posted a video of a press conference in Canada where Rowling got some award for allowing/asking that her book be printed on ancient forest-friendly paper or something like that. Anywoo, nearly every other question was about the big Dumbledore reveal. She politely answered all the questions, but she seemed a bit weary, and I wanted to smack the journalist who asked the last question. She was obviously very young, and seemed to think that she was going to blow the lid off this whole thing or something and was really rather rude.

She asked Rowling why she didn't reveal this about Dumbledore in the books. Rowling first said that a lot of it had to do with the big ending (Dumbledore's connection to Grindelwald and the darkness from his youth) and she didn't want to tell that part until the end of the story. So reporter girl sasses back, "Oh, so for you the end of the story is at a press conference?" At that point it seemed Rowling was getting a bit miffed, but she did answer that it was in the book (and if you read that chapter, it really is), though not explicitly stated. She said that a child would probably just see a friendship there, while a sensitive adult would probably pick up that there was an infatuation there.

Girl reporter was a bit out of line there, to me anyway, and I can see why Rowling didn't flat out say it. You can see it all in that final conversation between Harry and Dumbledore while Harry is in the sort of limbo. Dumbledore said over and over again that deep down he knew that Grindelwald was probably all evil and crap, but he kept making excuses for his behavior and tried to convince himself otherwise. It sounds exactly like someone who knows in his/her heart that the person they are dating is kind of a douchebag, but because you love them you are trying desperately to only see the good and ignore that little voice in the back of your mind that tells you the truth. And we learn all this through a conversation DD has with Harry, so of course he isn't going to come right out and tell Harry "Yes, Grindelwald and I were friends. More than friends, actually. We shared ideas and dreamed of ruling the world, and the lovemaking was passionate yet tender."

I'm just rambling here, but I guess I'm just surprised at the number of people who think she revealed this just to attract more attention or something like that. The lady already has more money than God and it isn't like there still isn't interest in the series, so I don't quite understand that reaction.

Rowling did also mention that a guy came out at that Carnegie Hall event after she revealed that DD was gay, so that's pretty awesome.

[Deleted]

I saw this editorial in Time about how terrible it was that this happened this way - basically by making Dumbledore gay and revealing it in the way she did, it's a huge insult. It kind of irked me though, because he was bitching about how if this was so important, it would have been in the books. And also that by having it happen this way, it shows he was ashamed of it, and he was a troubled, repressed, asexual character, etc, who never went on to have any normal relationships after Grindewald. I wanted to roll my eyes - given that the books are from Harry's pov and up until the last book, were focused on Voldemort, why WOULD we know??? One of my pet peeves with Harry in the last book was how he was always so upset that Dumbledore didn't tell him this or that - what makes the little Pensieve-peeker think it's his right to know any of that in the first place?

I mean, honestly, we have no idea how many other relationships Dumbledore did or didn't have. And even if it turns out he didn't have any, that doesn't make him some defective freak. Some people - gay OR straight - just get so dedicated to a cause that they don't pursue relationships. And far be it from me to say that celibacy is some freakish thing, anyway.

Although, I guess I stopped giving him credibility after his first paragraph:

Yes, it's nice that gays finally got a major character in the sci-fi/fantasy universe. Until now, we had been shut out of all the major franchises. Tolkien, a conservative Catholic, wrote a rich supply of homoeroticism into The Lord of the Rings—all those Men and Hobbits and Elves singing to each other during long, woman-less quests. The books and their film versions feature tender scenes between Frodo and Samwise. But in the end Sam marries Rose Cotton and fathers 13 children. Thirteen! You'd think he had something to prove.

Yaargh - why does tenderness and affection have to mean being gay? And I'm kind of surprised to see that coming from a gay man because it seems to play right into the stereotypes that straight men have to be less emotional because that's what it means to be traditonally 'masculine'. And, what exactly is the correct number of children to have to prove you're not gay? Too little and you obviously weren't interested in your wife, and too many and you're just proving something. This is the kind of comment I used to hear drunk frat boys make after watching The Lord of the Rings - it's so juvenile and...easy. And then in his next paragragh, he goes on to talk about Artoo and Threepio although he did kind of make an interesting point there about how it's more acceptable to present such a character when they are not human.

[chiquita]

from celestina's link

We can only conclude that Dumbledore saw his homosexuality as shameful and inappropriate to mention among his colleagues and students. His silence suggests a lack of personal integrity that is completely out of character.

I can't conclude that. The author of that article needs to get a clue. We don't know what Dumbledore's colleagues knew, and it's not appropriate for a teacher or headmaster to be discussing the details of his or her personal life with a student. Had that relationship been relevant to the fight with Voldemort perhaps he would have mentioned it to Harry, but it's absurd to say that Dumbledore lacked integrity because he kept his private life private from a student. It's not like we know how many boyfriends (or girlfriends) McGonagall had either.

[susyhomewrecker]

I don't understand where people are getting all this "Dumbledore never had a real relationship in 115 years" crap. We learn in the seventh book that there was quite a bit that Harry never knew about Dumbledore; he was obviously very private when it came to his personal and family life, why not his romantic life as well? He could have had other relationships, but Grindelwald was still the love of his life.

Anyway, the fallout from this has been pretty damn amusing. One article I read somewhere said Dumbledore is encouraging people in the closet to come out, which is awesome. Also, David Thewlis says "WTF, I've been playing Lupin gay all along."

ETA: According to Mugglenet, the brouhaha has caused Jimmy Kimmel to spoof Emerson (Mugglenet founder) on his show. Oh, Emerson. Don't flatter yourself.

[Deleted]

LOL...aww, I had a bookcrush on Lupin...

ETA: Aw man, I just remembered that he DIED.