2007-10-20 07:51:31 · 16 answers · asked by realitycheck 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
IT'S ANOTHER MOVE TO GET YOUNG CHILDREN TO BE
TOLERANT OF GAYS. IT'S AS BAD AS "HEATER HAS TO MOMMIES". LET KIDS FIGURE THIS OUT FOR THEMSELVES & STOP TRYING TO INDOCTRINATE THEM.
2007-10-20 09:36:25 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 4⤋
The whole basis of the Harry Potter series is to explain the process of coming of age, accepting things each other for who they are (muggles, mudbloods, witches, squibs), and learning the value of coming together to create a better world to live in.
Dumbledore has always been seen as a skilled and charismatic leader. With all of the negativity about homosexuality in the world today she created a character that has been gay all along - and made him a hero. People who are into the series have long suspected the Albus might be gay, but there was never any confirmation. By outing him she has finally created an openly gay, powerful hero.
Now the Christian establishment will have another thing to scream and holler about - but the reality is that this character has never done anything that would be viewed negatively. His past was a bit tainted but he redeemed himself going on to be the greatest leader the school ever knew.
It's fiction - but well thought out fiction - and it forced people to think about things that they may be uncomfortable with.
2007-10-20 15:10:59 · answer #2 · answered by Susie D 6 · 2⤊ 2⤋
I wondered the same thing.
And then I thought of an excerpt I read of a letter Jane Austen wrote to a relative saying that she's seen a painting of one of her characters, remarking, she was even wearing her favorite color. (That is, she saw a portrait that fit her image of that character to a t.)
No one in the book were the character's favorite colors mentioned.
For good writers, their characters are real and vivid and have much more to them then they are able to put into the books; they take on lives of their own, as it were.
Joss Whedon, for instance, talks about writing Buffy scripts often as "letting the characters speak."
So there's that.
Then, I gather, in making the next movie, the director wanted to have Dumbledore romantically involved, so Ms. Rowlings had to point out that he's gay.
In a way, it's important, as it was his crush on that bad wizard he eventually had to fight that had blinded him to his evilness. (The one he knew in his youth, Grim-something.)
As that's an important plot-point, though, I wonder she didn't say it in the actual books.
Maybe it took her so long because she didn't want to give the wing-nuts who already hate her for the magic and such to howl all the more.
I admit I wondered, too, when I first read it, but the more I think about it, the more sense it makes.
Besides, the good men always turn out to be gay.
sigh
;-)
2007-10-20 21:56:21 · answer #3 · answered by tehabwa 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Writers typically have much more 'back story' than they use in the completed book.
They also don't necessarily plan each character with a list of attributes - if imagination made Dumbledore gay, or if he was based upon a real person, then it probably drove a part of that back story and had to stay.
2007-10-20 15:06:49 · answer #4 · answered by oohhbother 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
That would seem to suggest that she wants to continue the franchise. There are still movies that are schduled to be made so it could boost the interest of the growing older audience interest in the Harry Potter franchise. It could also mean she is interested in continuing writing books related to the franchise even though the main series has been completed. Its definetley a publicity stunt to get more interest in the franchise but what she wants to do with it from here now that the main series of books is finished is unclear.
2007-10-20 14:58:20 · answer #5 · answered by Super Tuesday 3 · 3⤊ 0⤋
A not so obscure attempt by the author to send a message of inclusion to the homosexuals coming of age in Harry's era.
2007-10-20 14:59:17 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 2⤋
You can't expect a story with a plot like Harry Potter to have a completely happy ending. Only place you can get that is the kids channel, or baby books... It just wouldn't be a valid story without casualties and twists, I thought there should have been more.
2007-10-20 15:00:01 · answer #7 · answered by PrinceofPersia 2 · 1⤊ 3⤋
Who knows? Does there have to be a purpose? Maybe she just thought that a character in the books ought to reflect more of the reality of society. Why is it such a big deal? As though children don't already know that gays exist. If she made something evil out of being gay would that be more acceptable? I guess ignoring it altogether is preferable to both for some people, which is sad in itself.
2007-10-20 14:59:53 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 5⤋
who cares
he died in the last book I read so it doesn't matter
anyway its a fictional character and jk probably "outed" him to increase market appeal to the gay and lesbian community
I can see no other reason for it
2007-10-20 15:05:29 · answer #9 · answered by 1 free American 5 · 3⤊ 1⤋
I wondered the same thing. Why would it matter to her whether a character in her children's book is going to be gay or straight? Next, is she going to announce that the little girl is a lesbian? What is the point?
2007-10-20 14:59:29 · answer #10 · answered by MadLibs 6 · 5⤊ 3⤋
He must love to say the name. Sort of rolls off the tongue. Dummbledooore....
2007-10-20 14:58:04 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 1⤋