Dumbledore is GAY

So, perhaps you haven't heard that J.K. Rowling has decided to "out" Dumbledore, of Harry Potter fame. Turns out that he was madly in love with his friend Grindenwald, the dude that began the descent of magic into the dark side. Apparently, Dumbledore was blinded by love, hence the bad choices he made, and his decision to "repent" by teaching future young magicians.

The response to this has been pretty typical. First, of course, the religious right--much of which already pretty much hated the Harry Potter series--just considers this to be fuel for the hell fires. Most Harry Potter fans are reacting with cautious support (most don't think it really matters).

My opinion? Well, frankly, it's pretty fucking safe to make that announcement NOW, isn't it? All the books are published, she's already made her millions, the contracts are signed for the last couple of movies--what harm can it really do her or the series?

But, of course, if she had acknowledged it earlier it could have helped shaped the attitudes of an entire generation of children to be gay friendly and gay tolerant--and maybe even helped young people that are struggling with their sexuality.

I'm having trouble finding much in the way of linkable reactions in the gay community (which tells me that I really need to be reading more queer blogs). If you know a gay blogger that has commented on this, please post a link in the comments section!

What do you think? Too little, too late? No point? What's your take?

_____________________________________

On a mildly related note, I've gotten a couple of forwarded emails dissing the movie version of one of my favorite books, The Golden Compass. This is what the email says:

You may already know about this, but I just learned about a kid’s movie coming out in December starring Nicole Kidman. I believe it's called The Golden Compass, and while it will be a watered down version, it is based on a series of children's books about killing god (It is the anti-Narnia). Please follow this link, and then pass it on. From what I understand, the hope is to get a lot of kids to see the movie – which won't seem too bad - and then get the parents to buy the books for their kids for Christmas. The quotes from the author sum it all up.

Here's the real deal, folks.

The author IS an atheist. He is a believer in secular humanism. He did not like the Narnia series. He wrote a series of books that share his philosophy. 

But ultimately? This book is no more about religion or "killing God" than the Lord of the Rings books are.

It's a little something called a FANTASY NOVEL (or movie). Your kids will not rise up and try to kill God if they see this movie. Seriously. Get a grip. The "ultimate authority" that is killed off in the book is more like Big Brother in 1984 than it is God. It really isn't directly analogous.

Sigh. We can all get so worked up about stuff, can't we?

Comments

[Yanicka]

When I learned that Dumbldore was gay I told my bitch board (a bitch board is a place where women whine and make friend and really tell it like it is in a in your face kind of way. Well I got flamed because I said that the christian groups would have a fit about that one. I got flamed....badly. Who would have known that a bitch board was that pro-christian. That is a trend I see in the U.S. (I am from canada) I was asked why I didn't laught about wiccans or protestant...well those groups didn't go on the news and burn book (you never, EVER, destroy a book!!!! Even if you don't agree with it) and saying that thinky winky (sp) is gay. So this story made me realised that something is going on in the U.S. When Bush talk about god...the rest of the world roll their eyes...obvisouly people feel differently about it in the U.S. I am not anti-christian...not at all. I wish I believed in ....something but for me when I do pray or go to church...it feel.....faked. So I guess that if god exist he like it better if you believe in the bottom of your heart then just faking it.

As for the golden compass....me and my son will see it!!!! Looks great. I am an atheist but it didn't stopped me from seing Narnia or even the passion (that was a hard movie to watch...i understand the suffering for humanity but good grief!!!)

Sorry this is a long post about nothing LOL

[wndl]

here are a couple queer responses from mombian.com

post: http://www.mombian.com/2007/10/24/from-hogwarts-to-tucker-elementary/ talky blog: http://www.mombian.com/2007/11/01/she-got-me-pregnant-episode-two/

[JuliaKB]

I actually don't mind her only saying it now. I don't think it's that relevant to the story until really book 7, because we don't discover the back story of Dumbledore and Grindenwald until then. And even then it's not that essential whether he was blinded by passion for Grindenwald the thinker or the man. For all the previous books it would've been extraneous to bring it up. I mean why? Because he doesn't have a spouse? Neither does any other Hogwarts prof that we know of. For the first several books there was no love interests at all, and the age of kids she was aiming at was probably not into that yet. Although my perception may be seriously skewed-- I hear from my friends that some preschoolers talk about boy/girlfriends. That hasn't been my personal experience with my daughter, but that's sample size of one, so what do I know.

A different question may be that there never was a gay couple depicted in the series. It is true that it would be hard to come up with how such couple would have magical children, which would be a point of entry into Hogwarts, but there could've been a couple of innkeepers or shopkeepers, or whatever. In the absence of gay-friendly culture in the books it is hard to see the wizarding world as a gay-friendly place. Which of course could have something to do with children, or could have to do with us only seeing a small sub-set of that world. But given what we saw of the wizarding world, I would say that outing Dumbledore before would've seemed very artificial and very much like trying to create an agenda. As is, in the books judging people by what they are (say, mudbloods) rather than who they are, is shown as a trait of the negative characters. Good readers, and their parents, can take that concept and talk about it in a way that transfers it to other types of labeling, be that gay, fat, foreigner, non-christian, whatever.

Sorry for the novel.

[MsPrufrock]

The issue that worries me most about The Golden Compass is that Nicole Kidman has been given yet another acting gig.

[goodsandwich]

I don't know how it could be "too little too late." Just because she didn't risk her personal fortune by talking about it until now? Kids are still going to read the books; people are still going to see the movies. Yeah, maybe it might have helped kids had she done it earlier. More likely, it just would have riled up the adults and maybe gotten projects canceled - further limiting kids' potential exposure to the character. Saying something now, well now the books are out and beloved and readers have to deal with it.

Bottom line is there's no way to please Americans somehow. Either an author is seen as pushing an agenda, or she's seen as playing it safe for her own purposes.

[cat, galloping]

I think it's cheating, not to mention completely stupid to reveal *anything* about your characters outside of the actual book. From a literary perspective, it's completely ridiculous.

The Golden Compass books are *excellent* and I highly recommend listening to the audio versions, which are acted out by a full cast. I can tell you, though, that it definitely does not place god in a positive light! And I might not be remembering this exactly right (I listened to them several years ago), but after subverting the idea of what god is, they do kill him. As a side note, I've heard the movie is not very good, which is a shame.

[Regina]

I agree with JuliaKB up there. Rowling couldn't have outed Dumbledore without explaining about Grindelwald. If she'd done that before the 7th book, and especially before the end of the 6th book, when Dumbledore [ahem] "does what Dumbledore does at the end of the 6th book" (don't wanna spoil it for those who haven't read it yet)... then Harry's doubting of Dumbledore's good character, which is a major theme and plot motivator in book 7 would not have been effectively possible.

And while the books as such (without any openly gay characters) might not have helped any kids who are struggling with their own sexuality, I think that one of the major messages that runs through ALL the books is: be kind to others- no matter who they are.

[Geohde]

My take on the dumbledore thing?

I honestly thought 'so what' at the news. Like you say, it's pretty damn safe to present it as a by-the-way-now-I've-finished remark.

Plus, I mean why does it matter, anyway? Dumbledore could be gay, straight or somewhere in between. I'd still read.

J

[Steph]

This late revelation bothers me a great deal, on a bunch of different levels. When I read The Deathly Hallows (pre-outing) I could totally see the gay subtext around Dumbledore and Grindenwald, but I chalked that up to having lived in the Bay Area for too long :-) It *is* a kids' series, and my sons love the books -- but they are also at the age (9 and 10) where they really feel squeamish about gayness, and I'm afraid that if Dumbledore's sexuality had been revealed earlier that might have negatively impacted their enjoyment of the books. We definitely preach tolerance around here, but they're young and they just don't like the idea of sex, let alone love between same-sex people. It also bothers me that Rowling outed Dumbledore after she had made her billions. Most of all, I'm disappointed at the idea that there are people who will never read HP because there's a gay character.

I just got the anti-Golden Compass e-mail forwarded to me yesterday. That makes just as much sense to me as the Christian morons who dismiss the Narnia books because of the pagan subtext.

[New Kid on the Hallway]

There's an interesting take on Dumbledore being gay here: http://centerofgravitas.blogspot.com/2007/10/homo-pocus.html.

[RainbowW]

okay so dumbledore is gay. ginny likes anal and hermonie gags giving head because ron is so well hung. who cares?

rowling was answering a question at a reading, not making some kind of formal announcement. it wasn't planned or calculated or anything. besides, it had no effect on the story. any good writer has a fair amount of backstory made up that never makes it into the final published book.

and besides ... can you really begrudge her her zillions? i can't. after all, she made that money by creating something new and different and fun, rather than stomping on people and squeezing the life out of her employees and customers alike. remember that she wrote the first book sitting in cafes as a single mom on the dole, and has gone from that to being richer than the queen. that's not bad, imo.

[Sherry]

Despite my admiration for JK Rowling, even though I'm not a fan of the HP series, I guess my question regarding Dumbledore is, Who Cares if He's Gay?

I feel as though I'm a part of a generation whose homophobic parents made us rebel into tolerance. I guess Dumbledore being gay has as much impact on me as if he, say, had blonde hair or had a penchant for Rap.

No big to me.

[akeeyu]

I'm a big old Atheist, so clearly I'm not the biggest expert on religion, but what the fuck?

If it's possible to 'kill God', wouldn't that mean that God is not in fact omnipotent and therefore not God?

Are the belief systems of the religious wackos really so fragile that the mere existance of The Wrong Novel can destroy them?

[akeeyu]

And before I get all kinds of flamed, I do not think all religious people are wackos. I respect everybody's right to believe in God, Shiva, The Flying Spaghetti Monster, or what have you.

However, the people who get all wrapped up in these hysterical anti-book-of-the-moment campaigns? I think they're wackos.

[legalmama]

I read an interesting article in a magazine about it, by an author who I think is gay. It was either Time Magazine or something like that. I can't remember now.

He was disappointed that she hadn't mentioned it until now, also, but even more disappointed that Dumbledore never had any romantic relationship, never appeared to have even had a date, in his long, long life, except for the one with what-his-name, the evil guy who started it all. And there were no other gay characters, despite J.K. Rowlings efforts to have a diverse group of characters. He thought the whole effort was pretty half-assed.

[Photographer Lori]

Totally not related to this topic...but...I am using Firefox and your left hand column is invisible until you scroll the mouse over it. (categories etc)

[Melessa]

I kinda thought there was something between him and Grindenwald based on the wording of a letter from Dumbledore, but then I thought it must be my overactive imagination. Poor McGonagall, she spent her whole adult life hung up on an 'unattainable man.' Rowling seems to write pretty deep histories for her characters even though they never make it completely to her book pages (her website shows a few of these, Dean Thomas in particular). So I think DD was always gay in her mind, and that she happened to share that with the rest of us when she felt the time was right.

[Laura]

okay so dumbledore is gay. ginny likes anal and hermonie gags giving head because ron is so well hung. who cares?

EXACTLY rainbowW LOL... either you like the books or you don't.

as a parent i decided years ago i would read anything that my kids wanted to read, first. these books are ENTERTAINMENT, FANTASY, and plain old FUN to read.

I have found some awesome stories due to my descision to read first ... and am glad that we are blessed with such amazing talents out there in this world.

[Hetty_Fauxvert]

I really couldn't give a rat's ass what Dumbledore's sexuality is. But it offends the livin' crap out of me from a literary standpoint that this so-called writer feels the need to ANNOUNCE this (hello? can we say major?) character point instead of freakin' writing it into the books!!!! Excuse me, but that is the last resort of a mediocre writer: "Oh, listen guys, I forgot to write this in but guess what? The character is really (whatever)!"

Whooptido. Write it in the book next time, lady. I will NOT be reading these books to my boys when they are old enough, simply because I think they're completely mediocre. I'll stick with E. Nesbit and Kipling and "The Hobbit," thank you!

[jax]

This is an extremely calculating move: books already sold; movie deals signed; controversy re. movies always good promotional tool but no so much for books and it's a huge opportunity lost.

[Katie W]

Like someone else said, she didn't really make an announcement, someone asked her if Dumbledore had ever been in love/married (I can't quite remember), and that was when she revealed she'd thought of him as gay. That story line wouldn't have fitted in to the 7th book so she was right to leave it out. From her website there are all sorts of character details she's decided not to include. For example did you know Crookshanks was part magical creature (I forget which one?)

As for the Golden Compass I hope none of my friends forward me that email, or I will have to say things that will mean they might not like me anymore! You have the right to be Christian, I have the right to be Aetheist, you don't have the right to try and convert me and tell me my view is wrong. I'm really looking forward to the film, I just hope they've done a good job of it!

[Alison S]

You have to remember, too, that JK Rowling is British. I am 12 weeks older than her and grew up about 100 miles away from her, so I share a great deal of her cultural mindset. America is more different from Britain than we sometimes remember; particularly on issues like sexuality, race (not that we don't have racists, but the emphasis is different, I think), and (sorry, Cecily), abortion.
I read "Deadly Hallows" and realised during it that Dumbledore was gay or at least bisexual - I was really surprised that anyone could read it and NOT realise - I can't count how many books I've read that hint the same sort of thing. There are loads of English authors which imply this about characters rather than state it overtly, from Oscar Wilde onwards.
The British private education system, which both I and my husband were educated in, used to be full of unmarried elderly teachers of both (or indeterminate) genders and sexual orientations, and one of the strengths of the Hogwarts universe is that Hogwarts itself is very recognisable as a British boarding school, familiar to anyone who knows that culture, with the little extra detail of magic. There is a whole real British culture out there that the HP characters fit into, and variations on the conventional heterosexual mould have always tacitly been part of it. I knew lots of benign bachelor university professors just like Dumbledore. I know lots of asexual tweed wearing dog breeders exactly like Aunt Marge. I have also met many of the American equivalents, and they are subtley different. So maybe lots of readers missed the clues or didn't understand the subtext, but that doesn't mean they weren't there.
As others wrote, we know JK Rowling has tomes full of backstory and character details that have never made it into the books - and she just clarified one issue when asked at a question session. Why should she have explictly put it into the books? She has a racially mixed cast of characters, clearly values people according to their characters rather than their other attributes, and clearly writes stories that are true to her own moral code. If it was all about the money, she need never have bothered to finish the series, but I fail to see why she should be castigated for not making Dumbledore more overtly gay. Why should she? He's a character very typical of his real life equivalent, and what school pupil ever wanted to know the intimate details of their teachers' sex lives, whatever they might be? Harry doesn't care what Dumbledore gets up to in bed, or only in the fan fiction, anyway!
As for the "Dark Materials" film (sorry, "Golden Compasses" movie) - I am shaking my head in amazement that anyone could be daft enough to send emails warning people off it. The trilogy is one of the most profoundly moral things I've read. Sure, it criticises hypocrisy and self-interest in organised religion, but then so did Jesus.

[Kristin]

Dumbledore: I have no problem one way or the other with whether a character (or a person) is gay. What bothers me is the "ad hoc" nature of the announcement. From a lit crit standpoint, it bothers me: Dumbledore exists in the pages of a book, which Rowling wrote. If she didn't write his gayness into the book, then it's not in the book, and all the announcements in the world won't change that. If she wants it to be in the book, supported by the text...then she needs to be a better writer, and maybe plan things out a little more thoroughly beforehand. (Mind you, I enjoy her books immensely - and I'm not trying to say she's a poor writer -- but I think it's like students writing essays...you don't get to say, "But I made that point" unless you ACTUALLY made that point. It felt calculated, and sensationalist, and dishonest.

And it bothers me because I don't think it advances the story: I think it's just as interesting (maybe more) for DD to simply have this great friend who betrayed him, to his great and life-altering disappointment. If there was an undercurrent of misguided connection in there, THAT might have been interesting. But it troubles me that we seem incapable of writing and reading strong male friendships without wondering about sexuality. (That's not anti-gay: it's pro-male friendship. Am I making the distinction clear, I hope?)

And I'm reminded of a conversation I had with my dissertation adviser: she cautioned me to not go too far in analyzing one of my characters: "You're starting to talk about her as if you can psychoanalyze her -- but she doesn't exist: there's no psyche to analyze."

OK, rant off. But it was just not NECESSARY. Sigh. OK, rant really off.

[Chickenpig]

I am American, and I always had a feeling that Dumbledore was leaning in a gay direction. I believe that Rowling was right in not making an issue out of his gender preference, mostly because the series was originally intended for young people, although I think the intended audience matured somewhere along the line from about 9-11 to 14ish. Dumbledore also had a close relationship with Harry Potter, which could seem a little weird with the big D being a headmaster and Harry having no parents. (I'm not saying that I think it's weird, only that it could be seen as a little creepy in a priest-father-figure and altar boy kind of way...eeeew)

I for one, think that Rowling has plans to launch a new series about Dumbledore and Voldemort. It just seemed that D was busting out all over in the last book (pun intended)and that she has so much more to say about their past. I bet she has volumes of notebooks filled under her bed right now.

The Golden Compass sounds very interesting. I will read the book before I go to see the movie because it doesn't sound like a particularly good representation of the book.

[JuliaKB]

Went to the movies last night and saw the preview for the Golden Compass. It looked very well done, but since I didn't read the books (yet-- they are on my list now) I don't know how accurately. Told my husband, though, that we are going to go and pay money to see it simply because the fundies are going crazy trying to undermine it. And you know me-- I am likely to do the exact opposite of what fundies want me to do.