"Harry Potter fans, the rumors are true: Albus Dumbledore, master wizard and Headmaster of Hogwarts, is gay. J.K. Rowling, author of the mega-selling fantasy series that ended last summer, outed the beloved character Friday night while appearing before a full house at Carnegie Hall."
See:
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20071020/D8SCUJG00.html
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
Hmmmmmmm.
In my own opinion, there is nothing wrong with being gay. in real life, or as a character trait.
While it's true that Rowling certainly can say he was gay ( the only one who could say that ), another opinion of mine is that it was a poor choice to do so, after all was said and done.
Her word is law in such things, and to drop what any rational person would know to be a bomb like that is irresponsible ( at best ) with the gift of joy she's given to so many people.
I detect penile fear.
This makes me think of the classic debate in Lit classes, what shall we look for in literature: authoral intention or reader response? If the author means for a character like Dumbledore to be gay but doesn't express this explicitly enough in the books itself, does it matter at all to the reader's conception of Dumbledore? Ought we to take JK Rowlings word on something like this, or once the books are "done" and sold do they become independant things that we must judge on their own without her explaining or clarification?
If Rowling makes a pronouncement that doesn't seem out of the bounds of what is -possible- in her world ( "Ron actually had -three- heads! Really!" ), then it seems to me that any of my thoughts counter to her own feel revisionist... not hers.
It feels right to me that the creator still has ontological control over the creation; a DM to worlds s/he creates, Tolkien to Middle Earth, Roddenberry to the Federation, Lucas to a galaxy far far away, and so on.
If Rowling were to write a new novel detailing and affair between Dumbledore and Grindelwald when they were younger, would it would be less "real" or legitimate than the existing body of work?
Is there any rationality or legitimacy in accepting the first body of work but not the second, if you so desired, even though the author clearly desired to tie them together?
The books, or the stories, rather, aren't "done" until she heads to the misty King's Cross in the sky. Until then, she can -say- they're done, but the next day write a story set in the world, and it adds to the mythology.
[If Rowling were to write a new novel detailing and affair between Dumbledore and Grindelwald when they were younger, would it would be less "real" or legitimate than the existing body of work?]
This is an interesting point in that my initial thought is to agree. If an author wrote an addendum to a book, the addendum would seem as authoritative as the original text.
However, Star Wars fans routinely reject Lucas's revisions to the original trilogy. For example, they reject the fact that Han met with Jabba in "A New Hope" because that scene did not occur in the original version. Likewise, fans reacted with outrage when Steven Spielberg
wanted to digitally replace all the guns in "E.T." with flashlights.
One could distinguish those situations from the Dumbledore revelation on the grounds that Rowling is clarifying while Lucas and Spielberg were altering. Yet, with such little evidence from the books (perhaps unnoticed evidence exists which will now take on new meaning), Rowling's move appears to be adding a new twist to the Harry Potter universe.
Moreover, until it is written, I am less inclined to accept it as gospel.
All that being said, I'm in Pete's camp. Rowling can add whatever she wants so long as it isn't contradicted by the text or flat out insane.
Three additional points:
First, in one of Aharon's earlier stories, he subtlety hinted at an off-screen character being gay, and none of us picked up on it. Maybe Rowling hinted at it and no one picked up on it.
Second, much like black actors like to play roles in which race is not an issue (I am a doctor, not a black doctor), perhaps Rowling wanted to pen a story with a gay character in which sexuality didn't matter.
Third, I wonder if the homophobes will complain that a young boy spent too much time alone in personal lessons with a gay headmaster.
did anyone notice that the question was not where is dumbledore's female interest. the question was does he find true love... I believe that J.K. Rowling hates gay people and believes them to be incapable of love.
Hater
Post a Comment