Wasn't it kind of pointless for J.K. Rowling to release that Dumbledore is gay?

Question

I mean why would she say it now?

Answer 1

I am a bit bemused at some of the things that others have said about it, and JKR's alleged motivations.

I don't think that JKR has an agenda, or is seeking more publicity. I think it speaks to the popularity of the series and the amount of emotional energy that fans have put into the books, that it became a big story.

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 scholar 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

http://www.cnn.com/2007/SHOWBIZ/books/10...

Answer 2

It was pointless, unnecessary, selfish and ridiculous.

She said it now because the HP limelight had dimmed. What better way to brighten the light so that she could push her own agenda through than by bringing controversy to the series by saying that Dumbledore is gay.

Now after Rowling gets everyone talking about HP again, she says, "Oh, by the way, I will be giving away 6 rare copies of some books I wrote and I will be auctioning off the 7th one for charity. The book is called The Tales of Beedle the Bard and it will not be published."

Now all the hardcore fans of HP starts BEGGING her to publish the book on a grand scale. Then Rowling says, "OK, if you all insist. I'll do it just for y'all." Cha-ching!

The hypocritical git.

Answer 3

Yeah that is kind of pointless. I was shocked when I heard that he was gay. I think she should have said it when the books were still coming out, but then that would have changed a lot of people opinions about the book and maybe she was afraid that less people would read it because he was gay. Other than that I have no clue.

Answer 4

You're so right! It was pointless! Anyone that's seen the movies and read the books knows that it doesn't matter if Dumbledore is gay, it only matters how tough, wise, and kind he was. The only people that truly care about that kind of useless gossip are the people that truly aren't fans of the books, they just want something to talk about.

Answer 5

well she didn't just decide to tell everyone for the hell of it. at a book reading someone asked her why dumbledor never got married and she replied "well, i always felt that dumbledore was gay" but people turned it into this big thing...........get over it, would people have prefered that he had big old sweaty hetero sex in the book? (cause personnaly i wouldn't) either way he's dead now.

Answer 6

It's not that she staged a conference just to let off this huge blow. A reporter simply asked her why we have never heard a love interest in Dumbledore's life. He was gay all along, she just never thought it a huge deal to publisize. What's the difference anyway. If she just announced he was straight, oh my! "nothing would happen". Assuming this day in age she hopes it would not be an issue, and good for her for showing diversity and equality in her writing.

Answer 7

i think that in her head it was just a part of his character, the way she developed the history of all the characters in her head and they each had a personality and story behind them. it was something very minor, but it gave her a reason for him to have no wife, kids, etc. it also was just a part of his character that set him apart from all the other characters, even if it didn't play that big a part in the book. that's just how she felt he should be in her head, so that's how he was and it's how he was all along, even though the reader couldn't really tell until she told us.

Answer 8

She is a plagiarist and this just shows she a bad writer. If she was good, she wouldn't have needed to tell us. What a propped up hack. Look into the settlement her publishers paid out to old lady she ripped off Harry from. Larry Potter was the original title. She couldn't even come up with a name or title.

Answer 9

yes it is

She said it as a political statement that "gays can be normal good people"

But It fails becuase the label "Gay" has nothing to stick on in the character presented in the books

Answer 10

I think it was kind of pointless because the only reason he's gay is because she said he was. But who cares the books are still awesome!