Ok, that's it...
I'm posting my opinions on the whole "Dumbledore is gay" shenanigans that have been going on. I would have written it sooner, but... y'know. Raging wildfires and all that fun stuff going on out here has kind of had me distracted.
As a forewarning, this is a rant. Not against JKR, but rather some of the reactions I've seen among members of the fandom. And in case it wasn't obvious, these are just my opinions. Feel free to disagree and/or think that I am a complete and utter moron.
First things first, Jo did not randomly blurt out this fact. Read the transcript, people. She was asked a question, and responded to it. However, from the way people are reacting, you'd swear the question was about Harry and Ginny's kids' full names, and her reply was, "James Sirius, Albus Severus, and Lily Molly. Oh, and Dumbledore was gay!"
Look, a fan asked her if Dumbledore was ever in love, and she responded honestly by saying that yes, he was in love with Grindewald, and that he was gay. She had a reason for saying it.
Second, it does not appear that she decided to make Dumbledore gay on a whim. Again, read the transcript. She stated that, "My truthful answer to you... I always thought of Dumbledore as gay." Also note what she said when she saw how well fans were taking it: "If I'd known it would make you so happy, I would have announced it years ago!" (emphases are mine)
Hardly sounds like something she decided on last week.
For those who are wailing that this means that these are no longer children's books... please. First of all, nothing precludes children's literature from having gay characters, and second, it's not in the books anyway.
To those in denial, you might as well get over it. He's gay, so what? He's also her character and she has the right to decide what his sexuality was. You aren't the author of these books, and, as much as you may love these characters, they don't belong to you any more than they belong to me. Pretending none of this happened isn't going to make it go away.
Finally, to those who are bitter that Dumbledore's sexuality was not made clearer in the books, I can understand where you are coming from. I was always disappointed by the lack of gay characters or mentions of the discrimination they go through. It would have been a great message to GLBT fans. After all, the books are about tolerance and accepting people for who, not what, they are, correct?
But then I stopped and looked closer. See, the only kinds of discrimination we see in the books are unique to this world. Dean Thomas* and Hermione Granger get discriminated against because of their heritage and called "mudblood", but they do not face discrimination for being black or female. Nor do we see any examples of religious discrimination.
* Yes, I know that Dean is technically a half-blood. However, since he never knew his birth father and was raised by muggles, he is going to be treated as a muggleborn by the wizarding community.
It's possible that Anthony Goldstein was Jewish and that the Patil twins were Hindu. I'm sure that Jewish and Hindu fans would have loved to see characters that they could identify with as well. I'm sure that female fans could have related more towards Hermione if she had to struggle against sexist attitudes, or that black fans would have been able to sympathize more with Dean if he had faced racism in the Wizarding World.
For that matter, we never saw any characters who were interracial, from divorced families, or were born out of wedlock. I don't recall seeing any characters in wheelchairs or suffering from mental disorders like ADD or OCD. Not only were there no little people in the books, but JKR has outright said that they do not exist in this world. (How would you have felt if she had said that about GLBT people instead?) No blind characters. No deaf characters. I can't even recall any characters who were left-handed.
These are all things that various readers of the series could have identified with on, have seen their friends and classmates and family members deal with. Yet none of that was present. What did we have? We saw bigotry against muggles, muggleborn wizards, werewolves, half-giants, goblins, houselves, and so on. None of which exists in our world.
If kids whose parents are divorced didn't have characters like them, should we really be complaining so much that we didn't see any gay characters either? Yes, it would have been nice, but there are a lot of types of people that were left out in these books, people who face difficulties and discrimination as well.
Also, please remember that these books are about Harry and his fight against Voldemort. Not Dumbledore and his relationship with Grindewald. Dumbledore is important as he relates to Harry and Harry's fight, but to have gotten in-depth into his sexuality would have been unnecessary. Add to that the fact that Dumbledore was quite secretive when it came to his personal life and feelings. He didn't even tell Harry the truth when the latter asked him what he saw in the Mirror of Erised.
"I knew my brother, Potter. He learned secrecy at our mother's knee. Secrets and lies, that's how we grew up, and Albus... he was a natural."
--Aberforth Dumbledore (DH, ch. 28)
It may also be worth mentioning that Dumbledore was born in the late 1800s and spent most of his life living in a world where gay people had to hide themselves in order to avoid persecution. If I had seen what he must have growing up, I would admit that I would be wary of coming out of the closet as well. And I certainly would not have done so to a teenage boy who was not only a student of mine but who I was also attempting to aid in his efforts to defeat an evil megalomaniac.
For what it's worth, she did seem to hint at his sexuality oh-so lightly when the subject of his friendship with Grindewald came up. I can think of many people (and, for the record, many of them are not slashers) who raised their eyebrows and wondered if it was just friendship going on between the two. If it was only Grindewald's brilliant mind that attracted Dumbledore, or if there was something more. Something that would explain why Dumbledore would allow himself to be blinded to Grindewald's true nature.
It's a bit off topic, but since I've been seeing it mentioned a bit in connection with this... Those who are claiming that JKR only married off Remus and Tonks due to fans thinking that Remus was getting it on with Sirius... does anyone have any proof? Yeah, I felt like the Remus/Tonks relationship was rushed too, but I cannot find any evidence whatsoever that they were thrown together as a knee-jerk homophobic reaction on JKR's part. For all we know, she had been planning for Remus to get married before book three was even written. I love SB/RL as much as you guys, but I don't think it's fair to make this claim when we really don't know how and why JKR decided to have Remus and Tonks end up as a couple.
Besides, if JKR has no issues with Dumbledore being gay, I have a hard time believing that she have married off Remus and Tonks because she didn't like fans thinking that Remus was gay.
Also slightly off topic, but those who feel that JKR should not be releasing any new information after the books have been published... As long as fans keep asking her questions, she will probably continue to give answers. It isn't going to stop any time soon. If you're bothered by it, then perhaps the best thing to do would be to stop reading the interviews with JKR. People differ in their opinions as to whether or not an author should reveal more information after the books are published. Just because your opinion on the matter differs from JKR's does not mean that what she is doing is wrong. These are her books, and she has a right to answer fan questions if she wishes.
I'll admit, I'm happy about this announcement. I'd rather have her reveal a character to be gay after the series is done than to have absolutely no gay characters at all. (Or, worse yet, to have an anti-GLBT author.) Would I have been happier if it was revealed within the context of the books? Sure. Could she have made it a bit more clear, so that those who knew what to look for would have realized what Dumbledore was? Perhaps.
However, what's done is done. And it really doesn't seem worth it to get all riled up over a series of books in which I had absolutely no control. So I'm going to take the good and leave the bad.
Besides, it amuses me to no end that the slashers were right... at least about Dumbledore/Grindewald. Hell, that's more than the Harry/Hermione fans can say! ^_- (And the fandom always seemed to take the H/Hr fans a lot more seriously than it did the slash fans.)
Finally, in case you haven't read it, there's a great interview between The Leaky Cauldron and Sean Lund of GLAAD available here that I would recommend.
As a forewarning, this is a rant. Not against JKR, but rather some of the reactions I've seen among members of the fandom. And in case it wasn't obvious, these are just my opinions. Feel free to disagree and/or think that I am a complete and utter moron.
First things first, Jo did not randomly blurt out this fact. Read the transcript, people. She was asked a question, and responded to it. However, from the way people are reacting, you'd swear the question was about Harry and Ginny's kids' full names, and her reply was, "James Sirius, Albus Severus, and Lily Molly. Oh, and Dumbledore was gay!"
Look, a fan asked her if Dumbledore was ever in love, and she responded honestly by saying that yes, he was in love with Grindewald, and that he was gay. She had a reason for saying it.
Second, it does not appear that she decided to make Dumbledore gay on a whim. Again, read the transcript. She stated that, "My truthful answer to you... I always thought of Dumbledore as gay." Also note what she said when she saw how well fans were taking it: "If I'd known it would make you so happy, I would have announced it years ago!" (emphases are mine)
Hardly sounds like something she decided on last week.
For those who are wailing that this means that these are no longer children's books... please. First of all, nothing precludes children's literature from having gay characters, and second, it's not in the books anyway.
To those in denial, you might as well get over it. He's gay, so what? He's also her character and she has the right to decide what his sexuality was. You aren't the author of these books, and, as much as you may love these characters, they don't belong to you any more than they belong to me. Pretending none of this happened isn't going to make it go away.
Finally, to those who are bitter that Dumbledore's sexuality was not made clearer in the books, I can understand where you are coming from. I was always disappointed by the lack of gay characters or mentions of the discrimination they go through. It would have been a great message to GLBT fans. After all, the books are about tolerance and accepting people for who, not what, they are, correct?
But then I stopped and looked closer. See, the only kinds of discrimination we see in the books are unique to this world. Dean Thomas* and Hermione Granger get discriminated against because of their heritage and called "mudblood", but they do not face discrimination for being black or female. Nor do we see any examples of religious discrimination.
* Yes, I know that Dean is technically a half-blood. However, since he never knew his birth father and was raised by muggles, he is going to be treated as a muggleborn by the wizarding community.
It's possible that Anthony Goldstein was Jewish and that the Patil twins were Hindu. I'm sure that Jewish and Hindu fans would have loved to see characters that they could identify with as well. I'm sure that female fans could have related more towards Hermione if she had to struggle against sexist attitudes, or that black fans would have been able to sympathize more with Dean if he had faced racism in the Wizarding World.
For that matter, we never saw any characters who were interracial, from divorced families, or were born out of wedlock. I don't recall seeing any characters in wheelchairs or suffering from mental disorders like ADD or OCD. Not only were there no little people in the books, but JKR has outright said that they do not exist in this world. (How would you have felt if she had said that about GLBT people instead?) No blind characters. No deaf characters. I can't even recall any characters who were left-handed.
These are all things that various readers of the series could have identified with on, have seen their friends and classmates and family members deal with. Yet none of that was present. What did we have? We saw bigotry against muggles, muggleborn wizards, werewolves, half-giants, goblins, houselves, and so on. None of which exists in our world.
If kids whose parents are divorced didn't have characters like them, should we really be complaining so much that we didn't see any gay characters either? Yes, it would have been nice, but there are a lot of types of people that were left out in these books, people who face difficulties and discrimination as well.
Also, please remember that these books are about Harry and his fight against Voldemort. Not Dumbledore and his relationship with Grindewald. Dumbledore is important as he relates to Harry and Harry's fight, but to have gotten in-depth into his sexuality would have been unnecessary. Add to that the fact that Dumbledore was quite secretive when it came to his personal life and feelings. He didn't even tell Harry the truth when the latter asked him what he saw in the Mirror of Erised.
"I knew my brother, Potter. He learned secrecy at our mother's knee. Secrets and lies, that's how we grew up, and Albus... he was a natural."
--Aberforth Dumbledore (DH, ch. 28)
It may also be worth mentioning that Dumbledore was born in the late 1800s and spent most of his life living in a world where gay people had to hide themselves in order to avoid persecution. If I had seen what he must have growing up, I would admit that I would be wary of coming out of the closet as well. And I certainly would not have done so to a teenage boy who was not only a student of mine but who I was also attempting to aid in his efforts to defeat an evil megalomaniac.
For what it's worth, she did seem to hint at his sexuality oh-so lightly when the subject of his friendship with Grindewald came up. I can think of many people (and, for the record, many of them are not slashers) who raised their eyebrows and wondered if it was just friendship going on between the two. If it was only Grindewald's brilliant mind that attracted Dumbledore, or if there was something more. Something that would explain why Dumbledore would allow himself to be blinded to Grindewald's true nature.
It's a bit off topic, but since I've been seeing it mentioned a bit in connection with this... Those who are claiming that JKR only married off Remus and Tonks due to fans thinking that Remus was getting it on with Sirius... does anyone have any proof? Yeah, I felt like the Remus/Tonks relationship was rushed too, but I cannot find any evidence whatsoever that they were thrown together as a knee-jerk homophobic reaction on JKR's part. For all we know, she had been planning for Remus to get married before book three was even written. I love SB/RL as much as you guys, but I don't think it's fair to make this claim when we really don't know how and why JKR decided to have Remus and Tonks end up as a couple.
Besides, if JKR has no issues with Dumbledore being gay, I have a hard time believing that she have married off Remus and Tonks because she didn't like fans thinking that Remus was gay.
Also slightly off topic, but those who feel that JKR should not be releasing any new information after the books have been published... As long as fans keep asking her questions, she will probably continue to give answers. It isn't going to stop any time soon. If you're bothered by it, then perhaps the best thing to do would be to stop reading the interviews with JKR. People differ in their opinions as to whether or not an author should reveal more information after the books are published. Just because your opinion on the matter differs from JKR's does not mean that what she is doing is wrong. These are her books, and she has a right to answer fan questions if she wishes.
I'll admit, I'm happy about this announcement. I'd rather have her reveal a character to be gay after the series is done than to have absolutely no gay characters at all. (Or, worse yet, to have an anti-GLBT author.) Would I have been happier if it was revealed within the context of the books? Sure. Could she have made it a bit more clear, so that those who knew what to look for would have realized what Dumbledore was? Perhaps.
However, what's done is done. And it really doesn't seem worth it to get all riled up over a series of books in which I had absolutely no control. So I'm going to take the good and leave the bad.
Besides, it amuses me to no end that the slashers were right... at least about Dumbledore/Grindewald. Hell, that's more than the Harry/Hermione fans can say! ^_- (And the fandom always seemed to take the H/Hr fans a lot more seriously than it did the slash fans.)
Finally, in case you haven't read it, there's a great interview between The Leaky Cauldron and Sean Lund of GLAAD available here that I would recommend.