What does everyone think of JK Rowling's latest revelation?

Question

She told fans at New York's Carnegie Hall that Albus Dumbledore is actually gay and was "smitten" with his rival Gellert Grindelwald. Was she right to do this, given that the Harry Potter series is aimed at children?

http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30100-1289212,00.html

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/7053982.stm

Answer 1

It honestly doesn't matter who the book's target audience is. The book is full of murder and deceit as well. No one questions whether this should this be aimed at children. It's a matter of free speech. JK Rowling has the right to make her characters anything she sees fit.

Though, I must say, I'm a little sad by the news. I always thought there was a close relationship with Dumbledore and McGonagal. I had hoped their long friendship would lead to more. Though, with Dumbledore's death in HP6, my hopes were dashed for this long ago.

It does make the whole Dumbeldore/Grindelwald story make much more sense. I never could figure out why Dumbledore liked Grindelwald, why he let him get away with so much, or why he let him live. It all makes sense now; Dumbledore was in love

Answer 2

Maybe she was just having a bit of a wind up at the expense of the media?

Children are far more aware of homosexuality these days then when I was a boy. Then it was simply a case of ridicule and of course an insult. Today's' children have expanded it and it is now an 'art form' in terms of cruelty. Certainly the term 'gay' has been taken away from the homosexual community and now forms a term of abuse. It seems to have backfired as a method of achieving parity. Still if old Albus helps JK meet the needs of PC whilst producing a very enjoyable series of books to read fine by me. If he advances tolerance all well and good. It would be nice to think that gross people like Tatchell might finally let us all live our lives without having to constantly do a double take on everything.

Answer 3

I think it shows how much detail Rowling put into her series of books. She envisioned Dumbledore as a gay character, which allowed her to write him in a certain way, but she didn't go into detail about his previous relationship with Grindelwald, probably because she was writing for children.

I also think it's overly cynical to accuse her of seeking publicity/money on this one. She was answering a fan's question. Also, since she had requested an edit from the script on HP6, removing references to past relationships with women for Dumbledore, the info that she wrote him as gay was bound to come out sooner or later.

I like the fact that Rowling envisioned Dumbledore as gay, but never made any point of it in the books. It was just a facet of his character, but nothing to make a point about. She didn't make a point of saying most of her characters were straight, so she didn't make a big deal of Dumbledore's orientation either.

I think Slughorn was gay, too.

Answer 4

I don't think there is a bloody thing wrong with it and people need to stop associating fictional characters with real life people.

So she "outed" Dumbledore. Oh well! It was her character to do with as she pleased! If anyone knows anything about writing any sort of character story, you very well know that you must know every last intimate detail of your character to make them believable to your audience. If she made him gay that was her call and no one else really should have much to say about it. I seriously doubt it was a "horrible promotional stunt gone awry".

Puhleeeze! It is a book, it is a fictional character and she wrote it, made the money for it and why not? Why should she be smacked on the hand for doing something she has a passion for? Isn't it the dream of all aspiring authors to sell books like mad like she did? What about Stephen King, Tolkien and anyone else who has written epic novels?

Just be a fan or don't be a fan. It is quite as simple as that.

Answer 5

I was a little taken aback when I first saw the picture of Rowling that went with the AP story for Yahoo... she looks liked she's had the full Hollywood treatment. I mean she looks fine, but not much like she looked before... pity.

So I read the story with its flash headline feeling some trepidation, and sure enough, it seems Rowling is dancing with someone who steps to the beat of the dollar.

I think she has taken a cheap shot at a badly thought out publicity stunt, and though she may deny it later, the words did come out of her mouth. Gay is fine; books are fine; movies are okay... but to try to sell them all together at the very end of a game is a bad stunt, a poor move, and I'm sorry she did it.

Answer 6

Well that latest revelation will only give her critics another thing to add to their other criticism- about witchcraft being the theme of her stories. But you have to admit she had loads of kids worldwide actually READing and excited about books, so she deserve credits for that. She is certainly an excellent writer.

Answer 7

If its not in the books its, not there at all.

Would Tolken tell us Gandalf was gay 3 months after publication ?

to, tsh_s
No one got it though did they, therefore not in the books.
Ok, fine if she wanted him gay but is not mentioning it just a cop out to avoid controversy and possibly low book sales over the issue?

Rowling has in fact been highly offensive to gay people not daring to rock the boat with this 'revelation' untill well after the release date. Double standards of the highest order.

Answer 8

Im pretty sure the series was origionally intended for adults, children just enjoyed its as much

Answer 9

Its fine. Kids are quite accepting of people loving ine another. It is only made sordid by epople interpretations of what they feel is right and wrong

Answer 10

I'm a big HP fan but honestly, i think it's just another media hype for commercial purposes...