J.K. Rowling Outs Dumbledore

[THutch04]

I don’t know how much my opinion matters since I haven’t read the books but have seen the movies (the ones that are out at least). I don’t see where it was necessary to announce that Dumbledore was gay. I don’t really understand how his orientation makes a difference in the story line. If he is supposed to be homosexual though, he is living a celibate life, so there is no immorality. I really do think that the series has a lot of good values that aren’t necessarily incompatible with Catholicism.

 

[Consecrated]

Two children who will be denied the opportunity to read one of the great Children’s series of all time. My daughters have read the books And neither has run out and taken up magic or started a lesbian affair. Neither suddenly decided Homosexual behavior was okay. Perhaps as because I didn’t overly protect them.

Oh my… I think that children (most likely mine included) “denied the opportunity to read one of the greatest Children’s series of all time” will survive and even flourish. There are many many MANY (did I say many?) other books out there for children that are 1000 times better in every way than “Potter”. Although this makes me sound like a literary snob, “Potter” is* IMHO*, quite simply, brain candy.

 

[koryp]

If he is supposed to be homosexual though, he is living a celibate life, so there is no immorality. I really do think that the series has a lot of good values that aren’t necessarily incompatible with Catholicism.

I agree that there are indeed a lot of good values in the books. And it’d be great if J K pointed out that Dumbledore chose celibacy because the alternative is intrinsically evil… But J K says that

Dumbledore was “horribly, terribly let down.”
…
Dumbledore’s love, she observed, was his “great tragedy.”

… I dunno, maybe I’m misreading what she’s saying and her character does recognize his feelings are disorderly. But then why doesn’t she say that rather giving the movement another high-profile reference to use as justification? I have thought before that she seems to hide her position on moral issues to induce intrigue for the sake of… ?!

• Kory

 

[estesbob]

Oh my… I think that children (most likely mine included) “denied the opportunity to read one of the greatest Children’s series of all time” will survive and even flourish. There are many many MANY (did I say many?) other books out there for children that are 1000 times better in every way than “Potter”. Although this makes me sound like a literary snob, “Potter” is* IMHO*, quite simply, brain candy.

They will grow up, Read the Harry Potter books and yell Mommyyyy!!!, We had problems in my day also. I had to deal with Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, Wookies and the Transformers. I also firmly believe That Barney And the Care Bears Need to be marched out, Stood against the wall And shot.

I hope you’re not considering letting them read The Lion .the Witch and the Wardrobe It is a very traumatizing and very immoral book. Children abandoned by their parents,Put a scary mansion where there is little love and they are watched over by a mean governess. They end up in a fantasy world where there are hints of bestiality and women are portrayed as cold Hearted Witches.There are also has terrible scenes of childen killing & maiming others with broadswords , all in the theory that the ends justify the means. Makes Harry Potter look like the Cat in the Hat

 

[estesbob]

She has said there will be no more books relating to the Harry Potter storyline. It’s over. Although there are rumours of sort of an encyclopedia or a history. Personally, I hope she explains how the heck a woman like Lily fell for a creepy like James. SOMETHING big had to happen, and he would have had to change a lot!

Could be but remember Ian Fleming and Arthur Conan Doyle both killed off their characters only to be hounded by fans until they continued the series.

 

[Delphinus85]

Could be but remember Ian Fleming and Arthur Conan Doyle both killed off their characters only to be hounded by fans until they continued the series.

This is true! I don’t know if she’ll cave though. I remember before the 7th book came out I was so sure she was gunna kill off more people than she did so that no one will try to use her characters or continue the storyline after she is gone. I think she may write other books related to the Harry Potter world, and possible a prequel, but I don’t know. I hope so. The 7th book actually came out on my wedding day, so my new husband and I read the book on our honeymoon in our cruise suite. It was so cool but we were both so sad that this would be the last book. We miss not having another one to look forward to.

 

[estesbob]

This is true! I don’t know if she’ll cave though. I remember before the 7th book came out I was so sure she was gunna kill off more people than she did so that no one will try to use her characters or continue the storyline after she is gone. I think she may write other books related to the Harry Potter world, and possible a prequel, but I don’t know. I hope so. The 7th book actually came out on my wedding day, so my new husband and I read the book on our honeymoon in our cruise suite. It was so cool but we were both so sad that this would be the last book. We miss not having another one to look forward to.

Yes I guess she could have done what they did in the moivie “The Departed” Definitely no chance of a sequel there.

 

[FishMonger]

Those who are concerned that a gay Dumbledore may have a bad effect on kids might want to consider the effect of the two guys down the street who act perfectly normal, mow the lawn, wash the car, play softball, go to work, and are gay.

The same with uncle Jim and his friend Tom who come for Thanksgiving dinner and gave Gramma the money for her operation.

And don’t forget Susie’s two mommies who seem perfectly normal to all the kids.

These examples are far, far more potent than anything from Hogwarts. There really are lots of upstanding gays in the world, and the kids can see that with their own two eyes. There’s nothing you can do about it. The gays won the battle when they stood up, came out of the closet, and let the world see them as they are.

 

[koryp]

[The Lion, The Witch, and The Wardrobe] Makes Harry Potter look like the Cat in the Hat

I dunno about that, but point taken and I think our perspectives on the content of the books are similar. The difference here is that Lewis didn’t say, “guess which major character is gay!”

You will know them by their fruits. While I don’t think J K is a wolf, and I enjoyed her books, I’m troubled by where she is going with this revelation… to where she is leading her devout fans.

• Kory

 

[Delphinus85]

Those who are concerned that a gay Dumbledore may have a bad effect on kids might want to consider the effect of the two guys down the street who act perfectly normal, mow the lawn, wash the car, play softball, go to work, and are gay.

The same with uncle Jim and his friend Tom who come for Thanksgiving dinner and gave Gramma the money for her operation.

And don’t forget Susie’s two mommies who seem perfectly normal to all the kids.

These examples are far, far more potent than anything from Hogwarts. There really are lots of upstanding gays in the world, and the kids can see that with their own two eyes. There’s nothing you can do about it. The gays won the battle when they stood up, came out of the closet, and let the world see them as they are.

You make a great point. If anything this newest revelation give parents a chance to teach their kids that homosexuals aren’t immoral, bad, evil peopl that must be avoided at all costs like some kind of disease, but teaches them that they are good loving people, that really want to do right. They can show them that they can be friends, and they need prayer to live in the full truth of God’s light as much as any of us do. People who are having premarital sex are just as guilty as homosexuals in that whole “sexual sin” arena.

 

[Gerry_Hunter]

There’s a few possibilities we can consider here, as well as the ones noted so far.

First, we could be dealing with a very bad writer indeed. After all of those books, why was it necessary for her to TELL us that this character was a homosexual, rather than it being obvious from the written text in the novels? Let no one accuse this lady of writing literature, or of mastering character development.

Second, we may be witnessing a sad unraveling of an ego. The series, we were told, is complete. So, exit limelight – unless, of course, something can be done to grab attention. And the more outrageous it is, the more attention it grabs, and the more limelight returns.

Third, maybe sales are sagging, or the negotiations for movie right need a boost?

Anyway, the nice thing about fiction is that you can invent facts. It’s still fiction, mind you, and in this case, really weird fiction. It’s also proof that truth is stranger than fiction, because this declaration, which truly took place, strikes me as very strange indeed.

Blessings,

Gerry

 

[Apryl]

“Tolerance” is a word that sounds good at first, until you consider what you’re tolerating, it’s effect on society in general, and that person’s soul in particular.

Characters in novels do not have souls, so his is not even in question.

We can only react based upon what we were told in those pages were events that took place. In the entire set of books, never did Dumbledore act on his homosexuality.

I think that if we knew a person that may have been ‘homosexual’, but never acted on their homosexuality, and they had souls, we would do well to be tolerant of them.

There inaction, and not making a spectacle of themselves or their lifestyle, would have not affect on society.

(The woman is a billionaire because she knows how to weave story. That’s why we are discussing some throw-away comment she made months after the book was finished)

 

[Apryl]

After all of those books, why was it necessary for her to TELL us that this character was a homosexual, rather than it being obvious from the written text in the novels? Let no one accuse this lady of writing literature, or of mastering character development.

As one who read the books, it was pretty apparent to me that Dumbledore was likely homosexual. I was glad it wasn’t spelled out.

JK Rowling is a great literature writer, and she has mastered character development - in my opinion.

Now, as we get your opinion, care to share whether or not you’ve actually read the books?

 

[Pious_Mat]

Anyone ever consider that from a secular point of view, the Harry Potter books are just poorly written?

Esteemed literary critics, such as Harold Bloom (Jewish and very liberal, by the way) have dismissed it as second-rate literature. It is written in cliches, has poorly developed characters, and rather corny plot twists. The elite of the literary community have dismissed Harry Potter as slick fiction designed to sell, and deviod of any intellectual quality. Rowling says in 700 pages what any decent author would have been forced by conscience to trim down to 150.

Why do I think kids shouldn’t read them? The same reasons kids shouldn’t read gory comic books: they are trash for the mind. Children need to be stimulated and entertained if they’re going to reach their full potential. Far better to give kids copies of books like Treasure Island and The Wind in the Willows.

Maybe there would be a point to the whole “witchcraft” debate if these were well-written books, but they’re not. Rowling isn’t an author, she’s a salewoman. And lastly, I don’t buy this whole “Harry Potter has gotten a generation to start reading again.” Quality of quantity. This is just like saying “illustrated porn-novels have turned a whole generation of middle-aged men back on to reading.”

A hundred years from now, we’ll have forgotten Harry Potter just like we’ve forgotten the “Jack the Ripper” novels of the 19th Century.

 

[koryp]

Characters in novels do not have souls, so his is not even in question.

I don’t want to put words in his mouth, but I think Larry meant we ought not to tolerate the sins of a real person in a similar situation.

I think that if we knew a person that may have been ‘homosexual’, but never acted on their homosexuality, and they had souls, we would do well to be tolerant of them.

If we’re talking about individuals, we are called to love them, not just tolerate them… even if they get on our nerves. But should we ever tolerate a sin? Certainly not. The scenario you describe is quite commendable and we should applaud those who are able to resist temptations toward evil. Though I suppose their success would likely go unnoticed. But, if there’s a party in heaven for the repentent, I suspect there may be for the vigilent as well.

• Kory

 

[FishMonger]

Anyone ever consider that from a secular point of view, the Harry Potter books are just poorly written?

Esteemed literary critics, such as Harold Bloom (Jewish and very liberal, by the way) have dismissed it as second-rate literature. It is written in cliches, has poorly developed characters, and rather corny plot twists. The elite of the literary community have dismissed Harry Potter as slick fiction designed to sell, and deviod of any intellectual quality. Rowling says in 700 pages what any decent author would have been forced by conscience to trim down to 150.

Why do I think kids shouldn’t read them? The same reasons kids shouldn’t read gory comic books: they are trash for the mind. Children need to be stimulated and entertained if they’re going to reach their full potential. Far better to give kids copies of books like Treasure Island and The Wind in the Willows.

Maybe there would be a point to the whole “witchcraft” debate if these were well-written books, but they’re not. Rowling isn’t an author, she’s a salewoman. And lastly, I don’t buy this whole “Harry Potter has gotten a generation to start reading again.” Quality of quantity. This is just like saying “illustrated porn-novels have turned a whole generation of middle-aged men back on to reading.”

A hundred years from now, we’ll have forgotten Harry Potter just like we’ve forgotten the “Jack the Ripper” novels of the 19th Century.

That’s why so few pay any attention to esteemed literary critics.

 

[takers]

Seriously, it’s not. Not in a world that criminalizes preaching the Church’s teachings on homosexuality (check several European countries). Not in a country (USA) where a state just outlawed the use of “husband,” “wife,” “mom” and “dad” in public schools because it might be viewed negatively by gays. There is a much bigger picture here that you, Bob, and many others are turning a blind eye to.

What state just outlawed the use of “husband”, “wife”, “mom”, and “dad”?

 

[koryp]

As one who read the books, it was pretty apparent to me that Dumbledore was likely homosexual. I was glad it wasn’t spelled out.

I read all 7 books and enjoyed them. And I commend JK’s (original) character development of Dumbledore by making him… I dunno… monk-like… Very compassionate, wise, and devoted to his studies. (Except for what she had him advise Snape to do when he realized his condition in Book 6). There wasn’t room for a personal relationship with the character. So I saw absolutely no indication of his sexual orientation. It was simply never brought up in the books one way or the other. I’d love to hear what passages you believe alluded to the contrary. My impression is that JK saw that this new development could be worked in so she can feel them live on in her imagination or whatever. Since we’re dealing with fictional characters, they can evolve forever as long as a development doesn’t contradict anything previous. And, if you’ve seen soap operas, you can go a long way toward making things fit that would otherwise contradict. She can still weave this either way, but IMHO she crossed a line.

As an afterthought, JK could do the same thing with most of Harry’s professors. Would you then say in retrospect, “yeah I thought they were!” It just wasn’t necessary for the story; then nor now!

• Kory

 

[BradW]

Now if Dumbledore had had steamy sex with Mad Eye Moody i might agree with you.

Oh please oh please don’t put pictures in my head…

 

[wisdom_3_5]

That’s why so few pay any attention to esteemed literary critics.

Yes, weren’t they shocked when everyone kept choosing Lord of the Rings, which they deemed “garbage”?