JK Rowling has revealed that Albus Dumbledore, from the Harry Potter series, was gay.
| The Advertiser newspaper, Sunday 21 October 2007, South Australia wrote: |
| Harry poter fans, he rumours are true: Albus Dumbledore, master wizard and Headmaster of Hogwarts, is gay. JK Rowling, authoer of the mega-selling fantasy series, outed the beloved character yesterday while appearing before a full house at Carnegie Hall in New York. After reading briefly from the final book, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, she took questions from the audience members. She was asked by one fan whether Dumbledore finds "true love". "Dumbledore is gay," the auther responded to gasps and applause. She then explained that Dumbledore was smitten with rival Gellert Grindewald, who he defeated in a battle between good and bad wizards. "Falling in love can blund us to an extent," she said of Dumbledore's feelings, adding it was his "great tragedy". |
Do you think this will effect the books, or change the way that people look at the books?
Last edited by Hogwarts on Sun Oct 21, 2007 4:54 pm; edited 1 time in total I think it probably won't affect how people see him... Everybody already loves his character and he is dead now anyway...
Yup. This wont change my opinion about Dumbledore.
In fact this may actually be good, and in long term help the gay community get more acceptance.
I have no idea, never watched or read, any of the stupid Harry Potter crap. This just gives me more reason not to. I hate fads with a passion, and yea the Harry Potter series is a fad. And from what I've heard a really sad excuse for a book as well.
| coolclay wrote: |
| I have no idea, never watched or read, any of the stupid Harry Potter crap. This just gives me more reason not to. |
The fact that the press reacts stupidly to a book or author does not mean that the book and author are stupid themselves.
| coolclay wrote: |
| I hate fads with a passion, and yea the Harry Potter series is a fad. |
Calling something a fad implies that it's undeservedly popular, and will only be around for a short time. How are you going to know it doesn't deserve to be popular if you refuse to read it? How can you know that it will go the way of pet rocks and acid washed jeans when the books have been so widely read for years now, and the last one was just released?
Not all but many of the best books of all time were very popular from the moment they were published. Shakespeare was popular when his plays came out and has remained so to this day; is he a fad too? Does his writing deserve to be dismissed as well?
Last edited by patasarriba on Tue Oct 23, 2007 8:43 pm; edited 1 time in totalIts oft quoted and probably accepted by Rowling that the readers of Harry Potter are growing up with him. But what about the 10-11 year olds who are discovering Harry for the first time. I hope without it being awkward for them that they learn to accept that the world is full of different people and thats why it is so beautiful. Btw, if Dumbledore's gay, Voldemort's downright asexual!
I think it will because when I see a movie I will check whether Albus Dumbledore is showing dislikes to females.
@coolclay: Go away. Not your topic? Then please leave, we didn't asked for your opinion about HP but about how that knowing Dubledore is gay or not would affect you reading or watching the movie. But you don't read or watch it anyway so why reply?
It really doesn't bother me at all. It does make for an interesting discussion for parents to have with their kids.
What bothers me is all the attention this is getting, there is genocide occurring in Africa, Turkey threatening to invade Iraq, etc. and people just care about Britney and Dumbledore.... what a world.
I was stating that it doesn't matter to me whether some make believe character named Dumbledore is supposedly gay or not in some make believe world. There is no need to be rude, everyone is allowed to have there own opinion the last time I checked.
Great post Lumberjack, there are much more important things to worry about, and discuss then the sexual orientation of a make believe person! Oh, and another thing why the heck is a post about something so unimportant and having nothing to do with the world, in the world news sections?
| mathiaus wrote: |
Please do not double post. Use the  button instead!
|
It does get a lot of attention doesn't it? Which is why JK Rowling -i think- outed him now, instead of in one of the books. This fact could have cast a shadow on the story.
We all know Rowling had the complete story (roughly) in her head long before she finished the first book. And if you've read a Harry Potter you would agree with me that 'timing' in story telling is Rowlings area of expertise.
And Dumbledore being gay has nothing to do with the story. It's just a detail. Like Filch having a cat and not a dog, or Trelawny drinking Sherry and not Vodka. It's a nice change to see a gay character whose sexual preference is not his main characteristic.
Anyway, i hope they will make no (forced) reference to this in any of the movies.
I have not read any Potter book but I've seen the movies and it seems to me it's a fad. Any way who cares if a character in a novel is gay or not if it's not important to the plot?
But remember this silly stuff is for children not for adults.
patasarriba's remote comparison with Shakespeare made me laugh. FYI Shakespeare was not a writer of books. Plays are to be acted on stage not to be read! 
(Anyway most people were illiterate during his time).
And I agree with rein about timing, publicity, ...
Publicity through controversy always increases sales! I honestly think this could have a positive impact for the gay community. No problem with that!
Just gives the crazy religious people one more reason to burn/ban the books. Personally, I think it was simply a publicity stunt by Rowling just to get the last smidget of attention the book could get.
Does it really matter? I mean it came from the author's mouth, so technically only the author has the creative rights to their work. If people are fuming or criticizing a character's sexual orientation, there's one simple answer: Don't read the book. If you did read the book, it wouldn't have changed your perception before because its in the past. It only changes the present and future.
I really don't think it was necessary to have Dumbledore even have a sexual preference. It is unimportant to the story and I think Rowling said that just to get publicity. It really doesn't affect my opinion of the character in any way because I won't be thinking about his sexuality when I read about Dumbledore.
| liljp617 wrote: |
| Just gives the crazy religious people one more reason to burn/ban the books. Personally, I think it was simply a publicity stunt by Rowling just to get the last smidget of attention the book could get. |
Does it matter getting more money if she already got enough? I kinda thought that adding details to a story might just lead to a more interesting experience of reading a book for a change. For many the books are already unforgettable, now that number has only been increased. | Flakky wrote: |
| liljp617 wrote: | | Just gives the crazy religious people one more reason to burn/ban the books. Personally, I think it was simply a publicity stunt by Rowling just to get the last smidget of attention the book could get. |
Does it matter getting more money if she already got enough? I kinda thought that adding details to a story might just lead to a more interesting experience of reading a book for a change. For many the books are already unforgettable, now that number has only been increased. |
Did I say it mattered? I couldn't care less about the books or what she does...it's her business. Don't assume I was condemning her when I wasn't in any way. The thread asked for opinions, I gave mine.Everyone please calm down, otherwise I will be forced to close this thread.
Now, my personal opinion:
First, I dislike how people claim that something is bad when they've never actually experienced it. Like for example, not reading the Harry Potter series yet already having opinions on it. Read it to find out, and not rely on what other people have to say, whether they put it in a negative or positive light.
You have your own mind, make your own decision.
Now, about Dumbledore being gay.
The fact that he is gay has no real relavance in the storyline. However, a question was asked as to why he never found true love, and J.K.Rowling gave her answer. If Harry or any other character had asked him in the book, I'm sure J.K.Rowling would of just said that he was. The point is, she never wrote it in the books, and some smart person for the first time asked about Dumbledore being an old man without a partner. To me, him being gay is of no real importance. What is important to me however is the fact that he killed the man he loved.
This is coming from a gay guy.
There's been very small clues as to his sexuality. The fact that a ex-wife/partner has never been mentioned. But also, little slightly femanine traits, like for example him enjoying knitting and other pastimes that are not usually associated with being a stright male.
And like someone previously mentioned, it gives another reason for outragous religious beliefs to burn the books. Maybe their follows are just jealous because it supposed the number of copies of the Bible and other well-known religious books (apparantly) ?
Have you guys heard about the guy who had Dumbledore tatoo's on his back and now everyone tease's him | puRe wrote: |
| Have you guys heard about the guy who had Dumbledore tatoo's on his back and now everyone tease's him |
ooooh poor thing hahahaha.... anyways the book is published and the series is over! why is evryone going gagaga over this? i still dont understand! lol | liljp617 wrote: |
| Flakky wrote: | | liljp617 wrote: | | Just gives the crazy religious people one more reason to burn/ban the books. Personally, I think it was simply a publicity stunt by Rowling just to get the last smidget of attention the book could get. |
Does it matter getting more money if she already got enough? I kinda thought that adding details to a story might just lead to a more interesting experience of reading a book for a change. For many the books are already unforgettable, now that number has only been increased. |
Did I say it mattered? I couldn't care less about the books or what she does...it's her business. Don't assume I was condemning her when I wasn't in any way. The thread asked for opinions, I gave mine. |
What I meant was, what if she earned 100,000$ for the extra publicity, would it actually count for her because she has a lot more than that. It would be only a fraction. And sorry if I was rude, it wasn't my purpose.I'm a little bit done with Harry, the series being finished, so I hadn't heard so much.
It's a bit sad for me, because Dumbledore's full of so many other good characteristics. His extreme tolerance for other magical creatures, as long as they are also good. There will be an implication that such benign views are because he is gay. There seems no sexual innuendo in any of Dumbledore's talks with Harry, or anybody else.
I'm really glad there is no gay push in the stories themselves.
I've read all 13 HP books (7 in English, 6 is Slovak) and am looking forward to the 14th.
As a father of 4 kids, I think it's important for civilization to have, as its ideal, the man-woman marriage for life nuclear family. Meaning bachelors, married or not, are all less ideal (than me??? than my ideal me, anyway).
Good vs. evil is not just for kids. Promiscuous sex is seldom "good", even if it's pleasurable, but it's not evil. Killing an unwanted human fetus IS evil, in a way that drunk driving killing somebody else isn't -- adoption is an alternative.
Wumingsden, I liked your comment disliking people claiming something's bad when they've never actually experienced it.
Then I started to wonder if you meant disliking gay sex without trying it.
Now I remember some early, negative homosexual experiences I had as a teenager, and I wonder how many other men had similar negative experiences, but are too embarrassed to talk about it.
Finally, I recall the recent Catholic Church problems of gay clergy, and sex with boys, and wonder if JKR would answer the question: How many underage boys did gay Dumbledore have sex with?
There have been a large number of Catholic priests who have died of AIDS.
As I understand it, among priests it had been OK to be a non-practicing gay -- attracted to same sex but being celibate. This seems to be the character model JKR uses.
Now ... back to Naruto! When Harry Potter meets Pokeman in Manga! (=comics action fighting good vs. evil)
You honestly think that because he's aparrently gay he's also a paedophile? Even then, I'm still a bit miffed as to how the goings-on of the Catholic church relate to HP. 
Do you guys think this is going to affect the last movie? 
| Vladalf wrote: |
| Do you guys think this is going to affect the last movie? |
I think it will but not much. Maybe a hint will be given for 4 seconds and not mentioned afterwards.what what??? i i dont know... whats that????
| TomGrey wrote: |
I'm a little bit done with Harry, the series being finished, so I hadn't heard so much.
It's a bit sad for me, because Dumbledore's full of so many other good characteristics. His extreme tolerance for other magical creatures, as long as they are also good. There will be an implication that such benign views are because he is gay. There seems no sexual innuendo in any of Dumbledore's talks with Harry, or anybody else.
I'm really glad there is no gay push in the stories themselves.
I've read all 13 HP books (7 in English, 6 is Slovak) and am looking forward to the 14th.
As a father of 4 kids, I think it's important for civilization to have, as its ideal, the man-woman marriage for life nuclear family. Meaning bachelors, married or not, are all less ideal (than me??? than my ideal me, anyway).
Good vs. evil is not just for kids. Promiscuous sex is seldom "good", even if it's pleasurable, but it's not evil. Killing an unwanted human fetus IS evil, in a way that drunk driving killing somebody else isn't -- adoption is an alternative.
Wumingsden, I liked your comment disliking people claiming something's bad when they've never actually experienced it.
Then I started to wonder if you meant disliking gay sex without trying it.
Now I remember some early, negative homosexual experiences I had as a teenager, and I wonder how many other men had similar negative experiences, but are too embarrassed to talk about it.
Finally, I recall the recent Catholic Church problems of gay clergy, and sex with boys, and wonder if JKR would answer the question: How many underage boys did gay Dumbledore have sex with?
There have been a large number of Catholic priests who have died of AIDS.
As I understand it, among priests it had been OK to be a non-practicing gay -- attracted to same sex but being celibate. This seems to be the character model JKR uses.
Now ... back to Naruto! When Harry Potter meets Pokeman in Manga! (=comics action fighting good vs. evil) |
You are extremely narrow-minded, but I'll reply to your post none-the-less.
| TomGrey wrote: |
| It's a bit sad for me, because Dumbledore's full of so many other good characteristics. His extreme tolerance for other magical creatures, as long as they are also good. There will be an implication that such benign views are because he is gay. |
Being gay is not a bad characteristic. If anything its a good one, like having tolerance for things. I'll compare the two of us: It sounds to me as if I have more tolerance than you. And I'm gay. But this doesn't mean I have more tolerance because i'm gay, although its obviously likely. If you want to discuss tolerance we can do so in another thread.
| TomGrey wrote: |
| There seems no sexual innuendo in any of Dumbledore's talks with Harry, or anybody else. |
And nor are there any sexual innuendo's about anything else apart from the obvious Harry/Chang.Ginny relationship and such. But I don't consider these to be sexual innuendo's as such. The books are aimed towards children, so there shouldn't be any, whether they're straight or gay.
| TomGrey wrote: |
| As a father of 4 kids, I think it's important for civilization to have, as its ideal, the man-woman marriage for life nuclear family. Meaning bachelors, married or not, are all less ideal |
I believe this is true to a certain extent. However, I would prefer -any- child to grow up with a loving single mother/a loving single father/two loving fathers/two loving mothers/ than to live with a mother and father who are in an unhappy marriage and decide to take it out on their child, therefore there is actually no "ideal".
| TomGrey wrote: |
| Good vs. evil is not just for kids. Promiscuous sex is seldom "good", even if it's pleasurable, but it's not evil. Killing an unwanted human fetus IS evil, in a way that drunk driving killing somebody else isn't -- adoption is an alternative. |
Narrow mindedness. You'd have to consider why the human fetus is killed, it being "unwanted" isn't enough. It could be because they have a severe abnormality, have AID's, is going to be born into the sex trade even.
| TomGrey wrote: |
Wumingsden, I liked your comment disliking people claiming something's bad when they've never actually experienced it.
Then I started to wonder if you meant disliking gay sex without trying it.
Now I remember some early, negative homosexual experiences I had as a teenager, and I wonder how many other men had similar negative experiences, but are too embarrassed to talk about it. |
Thank you.
Hmm. Well no, not really. In general I don't think someone can or should discredit something if they haven't tried it themselves, like eating something for the first time.
That is usually the case, and that includes gay men too.
| TomGrey wrote: |
| Finally, I recall the recent Catholic Church problems of gay clergy, and sex with boys, and wonder if JKR would answer the question: How many underage boys did gay Dumbledore have sex with? |
Being a gay man in the clergy does NOT make you a pedophile, nor in general. There is of course bad publicity around this. I can't be bothered to get any statistics to be honest, but pedophiles are generally straight men, who don't see sex as a barrier, just age. This is why they abuse young girls and young boys. I don't consider pedophiles of this nature to be gay. But this should also be spoken about elsewhere if you wish to carry it on.
| TomGrey wrote: |
| There have been a large number of Catholic priests who have died of AIDS. |
Completely unrelated, even if its true. Non-religious people can have AID's. Straight men, gay men, straight women, lesbian women ... they can all have AID's. Having AID"s doesn't make a bad person, AID's is bad because it kills.
| TomGrey wrote: |
| As I understand it, among priests it had been OK to be a non-practicing gay -- attracted to same sex but being celibate. This seems to be the character model JKR uses. |
Recently a priest was removed from his post because he wanted to have a civil marriage with his partner of 15years. Whether they were both celibate or not, it helds no importance. Being gay is about loving someone of the same sex, not having sex with someone of the same sex.
Being a gay guy -usually-, but not always, gives the person a more caring attitude. Now, I know what your going to say, "so straight guys can't be nice?" This is not what I'm trying to say. I've come across some not-so-nice gay guys in my time, as well as straight guys. My point is gay guys have the tendency to be more female-like, and they actually do care more.
I can't remember what exactly, but the late pope said something about the Harry Potter series was bad for children because it involved witches/wizards, etc. I think however this is unimportant because the storyline is about good vs. evil, with good, for the goodness of love, always coming out on top. Getting children to read like J.K.Rowling has has also never been achieved. | coolclay wrote: |
I was stating that it doesn't matter to me whether some make believe character named Dumbledore is supposedly gay or not in some make believe world. There is no need to be rude, everyone is allowed to have there own opinion the last time I checked.
Great post Lumberjack, there are much more important things to worry about, and discuss then the sexual orientation of a make believe person! Oh, and another thing why the heck is a post about something so unimportant and having nothing to do with the world, in the world news sections?
| mathiaus wrote: |
Please do not double post. Use the button instead!
|
|
yep, totally agree. i've never read the stuff, seen any of the films and yes, it's just another story book.
if we gonna go down that line, why not lets discuss how bilbo did survive all his adventures, mickey mouse is an old man - sorry, rodent - and still looks silly and take up even more newspaper space and air time with nonsence.
mind you, now i'm doing it as well by giving it computer time here. is there a forum for silly stories?
but then i guess so many peoples lives are either so empty or they have their eyes shut so tightly living in their little box that this is actually world news.
cheers
ooooooo
and btw
very slick marketing move by rowling to bring him out now.....
whatever she's gonna write next is gonna sell like the proverbial hotcakes.
cheers | icecool wrote: |
| coolclay wrote: | I was stating that it doesn't matter to me whether some make believe character named Dumbledore is supposedly gay or not in some make believe world. There is no need to be rude, everyone is allowed to have there own opinion the last time I checked.
Great post Lumberjack, there are much more important things to worry about, and discuss then the sexual orientation of a make believe person! Oh, and another thing why the heck is a post about something so unimportant and having nothing to do with the world, in the world news sections?
| mathiaus wrote: |
Please do not double post. Use the button instead!
|
|
yep, totally agree. i've never read the stuff, seen any of the films and yes, it's just another story book.
if we gonna go down that line, why not lets discuss how bilbo did survive all his adventures, mickey mouse is an old man - sorry, rodent - and still looks silly and take up even more newspaper space and air time with nonsence.
mind you, now i'm doing it as well by giving it computer time here. is there a forum for silly stories?
but then i guess so many peoples lives are either so empty or they have their eyes shut so tightly living in their little box that this is actually world news.
cheers
ooooooo
and btw
very slick marketing move by rowling to bring him out now.....
whatever she's gonna write next is gonna sell like the proverbial hotcakes.
cheers |
Seen as you've never read it you can't possibly judge the books or the author.
And her next book is a "political fairytale" aimed for children I do believe. | wumingsden wrote: |
| icecool wrote: | | coolclay wrote: | I was stating that it doesn't matter to me whether some make believe character named Dumbledore is supposedly gay or not in some make believe world. There is no need to be rude, everyone is allowed to have there own opinion the last time I checked.
Great post Lumberjack, there are much more important things to worry about, and discuss then the sexual orientation of a make believe person! Oh, and another thing why the heck is a post about something so unimportant and having nothing to do with the world, in the world news sections?
| mathiaus wrote: |
Please do not double post. Use the button instead!
|
|
yep, totally agree. i've never read the stuff, seen any of the films and yes, it's just another story book.
if we gonna go down that line, why not lets discuss how bilbo did survive all his adventures, mickey mouse is an old man - sorry, rodent - and still looks silly and take up even more newspaper space and air time with nonsence.
mind you, now i'm doing it as well by giving it computer time here. is there a forum for silly stories?
but then i guess so many peoples lives are either so empty or they have their eyes shut so tightly living in their little box that this is actually world news.
cheers
ooooooo
and btw
very slick marketing move by rowling to bring him out now.....
whatever she's gonna write next is gonna sell like the proverbial hotcakes.
cheers |
Seen as you've never read it you can't possibly judge the books or the author.
And her next book is a "political fairytale" aimed for children I do believe. |
over a long life i have learned never to make judgements on others - nobody has rights to judge others. this is something that comes with maturity and we all will get there at some stage.... i wish.
if you read what i said and think about ti you may see that yourself. i agreee with what coolclay said and are only lamenting the worls tendency to pay attention to fantasy instead to the things that affect all our lives - reality.
and it is a good pr and marketing move to make that announcement now. ppl like an active mind - rowling's - and whatever she's gonna write is gonna sell.
cheers
