J. K. Rowlings, what was the point of making Dumbledorf....?

Question

gay?

Seriously. What was the point?

Hey little willow, the mighty oak doesn't need your advice. I know what category you fall into too.

Answer 1

I don't think that JKR has an agenda, or is seeking more publicity.

According to the story I read, she had told the writer of the screenplay for HBP that Dumbledore was gay because there was mention of a female love interest in the screenplay and she had to set them right. Having done that, she might as well have made it public, since it would have eventually come out anyway--she could control when and how it was done. and in any case, this story came out because she was directly asked if Dumbledore loved anyone.

Throughout the series, we know Dumbledore as a tireless and seemingly single-minded fighter against Dark Wizards (at least from Harry's perspective; we do have to remember that Albus is also a great teacher, an alchemist, and important theoretical Wizard--remember the tools and instruments he made himself). But how did Albus become that way?

We learn much about this in DH, with Arianna's story, Aberforth's story and the story of the friendship between Dumbledore and Gellert Grindelwald. In reading DH, it was clear that Grindelwald seduced Dumbledore on a number of levels; intellectually, ideologically, and, by JKR's new revelation, emotionally. We don't know if that seduction was sexual as well, and I'm not sure it is important for us to know.

The revelation completes the picture for us of a man who felt betrayed, injured by one he loved, ashamed at how far he went from rational thought and behavior, how far he really was from what he thought he was.

The up shot is that we now know more completely Dumbledore's motivations for fighting Dark Wizards--his shame at his own tangential contribution to Grindelwald's career, his reluctance to fight him, and, when Voldemort rose, his determination to not to repeat his prior mistake of inaction and to fight Voldemort from the start.

So in summery, It was part of the way JKR viewed Dumbledore and understood him. I don't think it was something that would have come out voluntarily--more likely something that would have made a scholarly article 50 or 60 years from now after she was gone and literary scholars had access to her full notes (assuming she left them to be investigated).

BTW, there is some inkling of this in DH, where Rita Skeeter talks about devoting a chapter in her book about Dumbledore to the Dumbledore/Harry relationship. This is not to say that there was anything improper--but that JKR did put out a hint.

wl

Answer 2

The only purpose that makes sense to me is that when she created the character, she decided he was gay. When she was asked a direct question about it, she responded honestly.

Do people honestly think she did it for attention, or more money? First of all, she is going to be firmly in the public eye at least until the last movie is made. If this was happening two months after the last movie hit the theaters, maybe this argument would have a shred of credibility. Second of all, if she never earned another penny in her life, she would still have more money than she could ever hope to spend in two lifetimes. She is worth more money than the Queen of England. Book sales? Attention? That simply makes no sense.

What does make sense is being true to a character she created. She has been living with these people for a lot longer than we, the readers of her books have. She said she always knew he was gay. Changing that fact to avoid a bit of controversy would be the pointless act. Not to mention the fact that one of the most important themes of these books was tolerance and understanding. Did everyone fail to notice the struggle against Muggle and half-blood discrimination that was all over the last few books? If she always thought of him as gay, and then didn't share that fact when asked, it would make her a huge hypocrite.

Answer 3

I'm not really sure, but I think it was a great political move whether she meant it to be or not. She has tremendous literary credibility and the world spotlight is still on her for creating such a phenomenon with her story. Maybe she thought it was apparent and someone asked for clarification? I don't know. But her saying that such a kind and wise and powerful character was gay kinda goes to show the point that gay people are often misinterpreted. Dumbledorf wasn't portrayed as the media often portrays gay people. I don't know what you think of the gay lifestyle, but she most definitely made a point. You can't judge.

Answer 4

Why does there have to be a point? Dumbledore was gay. So what?

Harry is short sighted, Hermione is smart, Ron is hot tempered. All those things are part of the story without BEING the story.

It's just another characteristic, which tells a little more about the character, may reveal some motivations, but essentially changes nothing.

If you read the books and enjoyed them, why should knowing this make any difference at all?

Cheers :-)

Answer 5

I don't understand it either. What is more I don't understand how the question of a fictional character's sexuality was even raised. It was never stated in the books and I'm beginning to think adults should leave children's books to children. I mean really, we've got stupid adults worrying if a teletubbie is gay. I think people should get their minds off their genitals and their own hang ups and let a story be a story.
In answer to your question though I believe it is all about marketing and sales. The more controversy created the more people will buy just to look for signs of his gayness. Hey, Christmas is coming...buy, buy, buy!

Answer 6

It's a good question, because literally speaking, there is really no purpose. On the one hand, if it was a major factor, it wouldn't have been a shock to the people who read it because they would be able to have seen it in the story. On the other hand, if it isn't important to the overall story, which it doesn't seem to, then why bring it up at all? If she really wanted to portray that in the stories, she failed. I'm confused on many levels as to why she decided to do it.

Answer 7

I hate the Harry Potter books so, naturally, I should use this to mock the series. However, I would have to agree that there is no point. Diversity in media does not always have to have a message. One black guy does not have mean "the" black guy and one gay wizard does not have to mean "the" gay wizard. He's just gay and, like in real life, there doesn't need to be an explanation to it.

Answer 8

To make it more representative of society that's like saying why make Kingsley Shacklebolt black it shows your ignorance and possible prejudice. It is good of J K Rowling that she did so but i knew there would be hostility how sad that in 2007 we still have such narrow minded bigotry.

Answer 9

Maybe she felt the need to stir up some controversy whether because she felt she needed to get some talk about her book or she supports gay rights.

Answer 10

To get people that might not have purchased the book yet to go get a copy. Its all about better sales.