J.K. Rowling Outs Dumbledore

[estesbob]

Oh yeah, sorry, it’s California. When this thread got moved I haven’t been keeping up with it. Just all these little jabs, constantly, pushing pushing pushing the normalization of homosexuality

Dumbledore zaps the love his life and has him put in prison for the rest of his life. Later on he gets his left hand blown off, swallows some water that makes him deathly ill and then gets killed and tossed off the top of the castle. Sure does make homosexuality look glamorous to me.

 

[Joe_5859]

Dumbledore zaps the love his life and has him put in prison for the rest of his life. Later on he gets his left hand blown off, swallows some water that makes him deathly ill and then gets killed and tossed off the top of the castle. Sure does make homosexuality look glamorous to me.

I don’t think the issue is that it makes it look glamorous so much as heroic. If one of the most respected characters in the book can be gay, then it would seem to be okay (or even good) for anyone.

I’m not saying that this is what everyone (or even most people) will think, but it seems likely that some will. I think that is where the concern is.

When you add this to the mix of our already permissive culture in regards to the “gay” lifestyle, it’s just one more voice wearing down on people’s resolve.

 

[Keikiolu]

I don’t think the issue is that it makes it look glamorous so much as heroic. If one of the most respected characters in the book can be gay, then it would seem to be okay (or even good) for anyone.

I’m not saying that this is what everyone (or even most people) will think, but it seems likely that some will. I think that is where the concern is.

When you add this to the mix of our already permissive culture in regards to the “gay” lifestyle, it’s just one more voice wearing down on people’s resolve.

The only way that an SSA Dumbledore could be a good thing is if he is portrayed as a non-homosexual-act practicing person. As a chaste person.

Unfortunately, this is left as an ambiguous fact.

To leave it as ambiguous is to leave the value of Chastity ambiguous.

To leave that ambiguous impression in the minds of children is a great scandal.

…though, it might prompt them to find disambiguation of this question from their parents…!

…then again, what is the age where it’s appropriate to have to disambiguate this question?

And that is the cowardice, and treachery, of JK. She has trumped the decision of parents with her decision to foist this issue on those parent’s children, and doing so by subterfuge, by slipping the bomb into the child’s room diguised as a “fairy tale” purporting to help children like reading.

How can the tactics and effects of the suicide bomber be seen as good?

 

[dixieagle]

I placing a link to an article i just read about the Harry Potter Books, I’ve not read any of the books…seen all the movies…now I may have to go buy the series and see what the fuss is about.

news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071020/ap_on_en_ot/books_harry_potter

The fuss is about…nothing, nada, nil.

 

[dixieagle]

Well you could be right. There might be all sorts of hidden sexual perversity in these books. Personally Ive always wondered about the time Umbridge spent in the woods with the Centaurs …

Quite a mental image there.

 

[dixieagle]

I don’t think the issue is that it makes it look glamorous so much as heroic. If one of the most respected characters in the book can be gay, then it would seem to be okay (or even good) for anyone.

I’m not saying that this is what everyone (or even most people) will think, but it seems likely that some will. I think that is where the concern is.

When you add this to the mix of our already permissive culture in regards to the “gay” lifestyle, it’s just one more voice wearing down on people’s resolve.

“Heroic” may be right…in that, despite the inclination, he apparently did not act upon it…just as the Church requires.

 

[KCtheMommy]

So in an attempt to lighten the mood a bit.

Picture this – DH comes home from work yesterday and announces to me, in his best afeminite/lispy voice, resplendent with the limp wrist (his way of telling me a fact without the kids knowing to which “fact” he is referring to) and MIND YOU he is in his Navy Uniform:

“SO did you HEAR Dumbledore is a bit poofy?”

“Uhm where have you been? I’ve been debating this for TWO DAYS on CAF now!”



So I clued him in to the facts and all the arguments. I think it was kind of anti-climatic to him, here he thought he had a great revelation. It’s not so fun to discuss soemthing with your wife she’s already hashed over and beat to death…or rather read other people beat it to death!

He just rolled his eyes and went a changed his clothes.

I just wish I had that on video!!!

 

[Joe_5859]

“Heroic” may be right…in that, despite the inclination, he apparently did not act upon it…just as the Church requires.

You can certianly choose to explain it that way. That’s what I would do if my kids (once grown) ever read the books and asked about it. But as Keikiolu pointed out above, that fact is left ambiguous regarding an issue that definitely doesn’t need more ambiguity in today’s culture. That is the concern. It is also possible to interpret it that he may have acted upon it off the page.

 

[Keikiolu]

…{snip}…

He just rolled his eyes and went a changed his clothes.

I just wish I had that on video!!!

Heh heh,… I think the “crestfallen” reaction has GOT to be THE funniest one that people do,… if it’s not on a serious topic, of course.

I love the “droop” of realization that you’ve been “stumped”.

…TOO funny…!

 

[Joe_5859]

I think this comes down to two schools of thought in regards to literary criticism:

The first school of thought says that what the author says outside of the book is inconsequential. If you can’t demonstrate something from the text as given, then it isn’t there.

The second school of thought says that what the author says outside the book is extremely relevant. She wrote the books, she created the fictional universe, so what she says about it is true, regardless of how evident it is in the text.

If you subscribe to the first school of thought, this new “revelation” means nothing. If you subscribe to the second school of thought, then this is a very big deal.

My concern isn’t for the people in the former school so much as the latter, particularly those who are not well-formed in their faith.

 

[estesbob]

The only way that an SSA Dumbledore could be a good thing is if he is portrayed as a non-homosexual-act practicing person. As a chaste person.

Unfortunately, this is left as an ambiguous fact.

To leave it as ambiguous is to leave the value of Chastity ambiguous.

To leave that ambiguous impression in the minds of children is a great scandal.

…though, it might prompt them to find disambiguation of this question from their parents…!

…then again, what is the age where it’s appropriate to have to disambiguate this question?

And that is the cowardice, and treachery, of JK. She has trumped the decision of parents with her decision to foist this issue on those parent’s children, and doing so by subterfuge, by slipping the bomb into the child’s room diguised as a “fairy tale” purporting to help children like reading.

**How can the tactics and effects of the suicide bomber be seen as good? **

Another good example of gross overreaction. One poster says Dumbledore’s sexuality needs to be discussed to prevent kids who are questioning their sexuality from committing suicide. Now we have a poster who compares JK Rowling to a suicide bomber. Go figure

 

[Keikiolu]

Keikiolu;2878161:

The only way that an SSA Dumbledore could be a good thing is if he is portrayed as a non-homosexual-act practicing person. As a chaste person.

Unfortunately, this is left as an ambiguous fact.

To leave it as ambiguous is to leave the value of Chastity ambiguous.

To leave that ambiguous impression in the minds of children is a great scandal.

…though, it might prompt them to find disambiguation of this question from their parents…!

…then again, what is the age where it’s appropriate to have to disambiguate this question?

And that is the cowardice, and treachery, of JK. She has trumped the decision of parents with her decision to foist this issue on those parent’s children, and doing so by subterfuge, by slipping the bomb into the child’s room diguised as a “fairy tale” purporting to help children like reading.

**How can the tactics and effects of the suicide bomber be seen as good? **

Another good example of gross overreaction. One poster says Dumbledore’s sexuality needs to be discussed to prevent kids who are questioning their sexuality from committing suicide. Now we have a poster who compares JK Rowling to a suicide bomber. Go figure

The only reaction to JK I would suggest is to avoid supporting her in any way.

Is that overreaction?

My stating my opinion as to her “motives” and her tactics is simply what I see in what she’s done.

How am I “unsupported” in describing her as one who sells something to a hungry and innocent audience as one thing, then changes that thing into something else which is “explosive” after having insinuated it into where the “shrapnel” would do most harm (due to the emotional connection formed by the “likability” of the thing [story/characters])…?

I, most likely, agree with you that it’s a great teaching opportunity, but the problem with THAT is the ambiguity of not being able to definitively SAY that Dumbledore is a non-practicing SSA person.

Only the creator of a work is authoritative about the facts of their work,… and to leave such a major ambiguity as an ambiguity is to leave room for the creator being percieved as being a scandal monger.

If that’s how she would allow herself to be seen,… that’s her decision,… and can’t be dismissed as “over reactive” for taking her offered bait.

She’s out to sell books, and promote her “coolness” with her progressive buddies. Pure and simple.

If you want to promote that as a good, go for it.

Mahalo ke Akua…!
E pili mau na pomaikai ia oe. Aloha nui.

 

[Contarini]

Looks like it turns out that Dumbledore is trying to destroy the institution of marriage :\ Article

So there’s basically going to be a lot of "I told you so"s being thrown around. I’m curious to see who still stick by the series, if anyone. It’ll also be interesting to see how many people go from promoting the books for having good moral values to suddenly being spawn of Satan just because of this one detail.

Anyways… post away

It doesn’t much surprise me. But then I always figured Rowling for a liberal British Christian, not an American culture-wars Christian. Unfortunately, conservative American Christians see this in either/or terms.

And as others have pointed out, it’s not as if Dumbledore lives happily in a committed relationship with Professor Flitwick. He is a tragic, lonely character, fitting what one might call the moderate conservative stereotype of gays (the one that I myself tend to hold–i.e., I don’t think worse of someone for being gay, but I do think that being gay is tragic and that ideally a gay person should not seek to express his/her sexual inclinations, so if I think of an admirable gay person I’m likely to think of someone like Dumbledore, a tormented but noble character; I am not of course saying that gay people can’t be moral and happy, which is why I acknowledge that the “tragic homosexual” is a stereotype).

However, I suspect that this is unintentional on Rowling’s part, and that she would not have a moral problem with Dumbledore having a sexual relationship. In many ways I actually think the HP books are more conservative than Rowling consciously intends, because they are steeped in the moral, cultural, and spiritual tradition of Western civilization.

Edwin

 

[CatholicSam]

foxnews.com/story/0,2933,304398,00.html

We will know them by their fruits :nope: (Sorry, couldn’t resist!)

 

[Contarini]

even Rita Skeeter’s The Life and Lies of Albus Dumbledore was completely ignorant of Dumbledore’s same-sex attractions

Well, she (Skeeter) vaguely suggested that his interest in Harry might have had something creepy about it.

Edwin

 

[beckers]

Well, she (Skeeter) vaguely suggested that his interest in Harry might have had something creepy about it.

Edwin

Well then that would make him a pedophile and/or a molester and if Rowlings is trying to “win” over the gay community that is probably not the best way to it. **

 

[estesbob]

foxnews.com/story/0,2933,304398,00.html

We will know them by their fruits :nope: (Sorry, couldn’t resist!)

A t least he wasn’t cruising gay bars looking for Dumbledore

 

[Ahimsa]

Well then that would make him a pedophile and/or a molester and if Rowlings is trying to “win” over the gay community that is probably not the best way to it.

I don’t think Rowling is trying to “win” over anyone. As a liberal Christian, she most likely has no problem with active, monogamous, homosexuality.

 

[Delphinus85]

Well, she (Skeeter) vaguely suggested that his interest in Harry might have had something creepy about it.

Edwin

Remember the source though…it’s Skeeter for heaven’s sake!

I think what she was saying about the Potter/Dumbledore relationship might have echoed the cry of the ministry in book 5. The whole “Dumbledore’s army” thing. Potter as Dumbledore’s loyal minion, or something like that.

Also, a point I think Rowling could be making too, is that just because someone is gay, it means that their whole life revolves around this attraction to the same sex. Maybe she is trying to show that gay people are more than people who have sex with the same gender. There is more to them than that. Suddenly we hear that dumbledore is Gay, and we no longer care what great things he did, just who (if anyone) he got busy with. Why the fixation on sex?

I’m not approving homosexuality, but I think that until we can stop being obsessed with their sex life and reach out to them like we would any other lost person, we’ll never get anywhere.

 

[Contarini]

Remember the source though…it’s Skeeter for heaven’s sake!

Exactly. I was not suggesting for an instant that there was any truth (in the subcreated world of the story) to this hint. I was responding to a post that said that if Skeeter had had any inklings that Dumbledore was gay (by inclination) she would have used it somehow.

It’s not really a subject worth discussing further!

Edwin