Good question.
It's not like Dumbledore being gay is a big deal. I mean, it's not like it's going to piss off the Christians any more than it already has. I think Rowling did that by putting that "evil magic stuff" in the books.spoiler (click to show/hide)Still, hilarious that Harry Potter is basically an allegory. He fucking dies and rose again to save the magic world. Sounds familar to me.[close]
Good question.
It's not like Dumbledore being gay is a big deal. I mean, it's not like it's going to piss off the Christians any more than it already has. I think Rowling did that by putting that "evil magic stuff" in the books.spoiler (click to show/hide)Still, hilarious that Harry Potter is basically an allegory. He fucking dies and rose again to save the magic world. Sounds familar to me.[close]
The books are filled with religious allegories lol
My problem with this is that it was never hinted at in the book - it's like she's just fucking with people. I don't care that he's gay, but it just seems like a cheap thing to do.
Good question.
It's not like Dumbledore being gay is a big deal. I mean, it's not like it's going to piss off the Christians any more than it already has. I think Rowling did that by putting that "evil magic stuff" in the books.spoiler (click to show/hide)Still, hilarious that Harry Potter is basically an allegory. He fucking dies and rose again to save the magic world. Sounds familar to me.[close]
The books are filled with religious allegories lol
My problem with this is that it was never hinted at in the book - it's like she's just fucking with people. I don't care that he's gay, but it just seems like a cheap thing to do.
Yeah.
FYI, I'm a HUGE fan of the books (unlike the majority of this forum), and I think that just randomly saying Dumbledore is gay is just a publicity stunt. Give it up already. The books are over, just write something else and stop being an attention whore.
But that's why it's so funny.Good question.My problem with this is that it was never hinted at in the book - it's like she's just fucking with people.
It's not like Dumbledore being gay is a big deal. I mean, it's not like it's going to piss off the Christians any more than it already has. I think Rowling did that by putting that "evil magic stuff" in the books.spoiler (click to show/hide)Still, hilarious that Harry Potter is basically an allegory. He fucking dies and rose again to save the magic world. Sounds familar to me.[close]
Deathly Hallows changed everyone's perspective on Dumbledore and his actions. This revelation tells me nothing about him, and just seems like mind trickz
Cosign. This bitch will probably make a HP8 at this point.
Saying Dumbledore is gay is like saying that Han Solo was an anti-semite. Where the fuck does it come from? dumdledore never did anything gay. Who cares. Its a moot point. Its irreverent.
the squealing of slashfic chicks all over the internet was a disemboweling sound I won't soon forgetI remember when people got so upset that sargon or whoever that wizard from LOTR was came out.
the squealing of slashfic chicks all over the internet was a disemboweling sound I won't soon forgetI remember when people got so upset that sargon or whoever that wizard from LOTR was came out.
Saying Dumbledore is gay is like saying that Han Solo was an anti-semite. Where the fuck does it come from? dumdledore never did anything gay. Who cares. Its a moot point. Its irreverent.
Ian McKellan has been out for at least a decade.I know, but the average person didn't know who he was until LOTR.
:lolIan McKellan has been out for at least a decade.I know, but the average person didn't know who he was until LOTR.
rowling was giving a speech on the books and then she mentioned that dumbledore was gay.like just randomly "oh yeah, dumbledore is gay. next questions please..."???
from maf's thread:rowling was giving a speech on the books and then she mentioned that dumbledore was gay.like just randomly "oh yeah, dumbledore is gay. next questions please..."???
In front of a full house of hardcore Potter fans at Carnegie Hall in New York, Rowling, sitting on the stage on a red velvet and carved wood throne, read from her seventh and final book, "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows," then took questions. One fan asked whether Albus Dumbledore, the head of the famed Hogwarts School of Wizardry and Witchcraft, had ever loved anyone. Rowling smiled. "Dumbledore is gay, actually," replied Rowling as the audience errupted in surprise. She added that, in her mind, Dumbledore had an unrequited love affair with Gellert Grindelwald, Voldemort's predecessor who appears in the seventh book. After several minutes of prolonged shouting and clapping from astonshed fans, Rowling added. "I would have told you earlier if I knew it would make you so happy."
She didn't mention it in the books because its not directly related to Harry. Hagrid's backstory did not exist for its own purposes, Harry did have to know about it. These parameters have to be established from the character's creation because they affect the character, but were not mentioned because they do not affect Harry.
Also, there is no negative impact from this (aside from part of the mystery of Dumbledore being gone). The idea of challenging some readers who had preconceptions of Dumbledore to now to have either renounce him or accept the new facts is not negative, political or no.
I think this was innocently slided in.
EDIT: Actually thinking about it some more it would be socially motivated, not politically. Also, thinking about it some more, no one complained when Dumbledore gave us social motivation to care about one another, to the point of dying for someone.
I mean, the series is titled "Harry Potter" not "Other main characters extraneous background information: and the Philosopher's Stone."
Reading interviews with her in general she does give out some interesting background information that only she would know though. It's not like she mulled the thought in her head at the last minute, she did give a reason why she thought of Dumbledore as a gay character by bringing up another character that she already mapped into the little universe in her head she created.
Tim Schafer would tell you the mark of making a good story is knowing things about the characters you create that really wouldn't matter to the person who is playing the game, but help build depth of character that just wouldn't be present if you didn't know that about them as you were creating them.
Same thing with a book. Or book series. Tolkein himself reveals a lot of information through appendices that if you just went through the books you wouldn't get all the information about a character or event. They are important to the story of the world he created, but not so much to the events of the main story.
As for Rowling, I remember one time she answered an esoteric question about Quidditch pretty easily because she already mapped that scenario out in her head, but it didn't make sense to put it in any of the main stories. It wasn't about Harry and his friends, it was extraneous background information. I mean, we only get some background information about Snape in Book 5 because Harry was there, and we were with Harry.