Dumbledore’s outing gives text new meaning - books - MSNBC.com

So, evidently some reader asked JK Rowling a question (what was asked is not in the article), that prompted her to explain that Dumbledore is gay. The article links to a discussion hosted on MSNBC for people's thoughts on the subject.

Not that we'll ever know for sure, but if in JK's original thoughts about her universe of characters this was always the case, I have no issue with her 'outing' her character. There is speculation that she basically made it up as a stunt to get more publicity, which could be true as well.

There were a number of comments in the MSNBC discussion forum where people said they'd owned the books and seen the movies, but would be getting rid of the books and would ban the movies from their house now that JK has said this about Dumbledore. I'd like to hear everyone's thoughts on the subject, but especially if there is anyone of this opinion, I'd like to hear the logic behind it. The words in the books have not changed, and how Dumbledore is portrayed has not changed, so... why?

I personally don't care what the sexuality of any of the characters are, and seeing as it's not a big part of the story for a large number of the characters, it's fine that it hasn't been said outright, but like I said, if it's REALLY part of the original Dumbledore she thought up, I don't think it's that big a deal. Especially since she evidently made it a point to leave it out of the books altogether.

So... R&R away... heh

I don't get what people are fussing about, honestly. It's a character in a book, for crying out loud. Some people are bigoted idiots, though, I guess.

I was shocked to see it in the news, but I thought it might make an interesting conversation topic here. Like you, I don't really care.

I was shocked to see it in the news, but I thought it might make an interesting conversation topic here. Like you, I don't really care.

Oh, yeah, it is an interesting topic. I was just making that comment about the people that are freaking out about it and wanting to ban the books. Don't they have anything better to freak out about?

For those who have kept up with JKR post-Deathly Hallows, it's not a big surprise that she's made yet another revelation. In several interviews she has revealed details about many characters in the books, both major players and those only mentioned once or twice. Here's a direct quote from one of her first interviews after DH came out:

Harry Potter, who always voiced a desire to become an Auror, or someone who fights dark wizards, was named head of the Auror Department under the new wizarding government headed by his friend and ally, Kingsley Shacklebolt.

His wife, Ginny Weasley, stuck with her athletic career, playing for the Holyhead Harpies, the all-female Quidditch team. Eventually, Ginny left the team to raise their three children — James, Albus, and Lily — while writing as the senior Quidditch correspondent for the wizarding newspaper, the Daily Prophet.

Harry's best friend Ron Weasley joined his brother, George, as a partner at their successful joke shop Weasley's Wizard Wheezes. Hermione Granger, Ron's wife and the third leg of the series' dark wizard fighting trio, furthered the rights of subjugated creatures, such as house-elves, in the Department for the Regulation and Control of Magical Creatures before joining magical law enforcement squad. The couple had two children — Rose and Hugo.

Luna Lovegood, Harry's airily distracted friend with a love for imaginary animals who joins the fight against Voldemort in the Order of the Pheonix, becomes a famous wizarding naturalist who eventually marries the grandson of Newt Scamander, author of Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them.

So while this particular detail JKR revealed about Dumbledore may have been a surprise to some, it was certainly not startling that she gave details that were only alluded to in the books. She has also said that she's toying with the idea of writing an encyclopedia of sorts that would provide all the details about all her characters; histories, backgrounds, what happened to them between the last chapter of DH and the epilogue, etc. I personally would wait in line for that one too.

Since this is R&R and we like different views here...I will venture out as probably the lone person on the planet that dislikes Harry Potter books as books for children.

I think they are way to dark and got even more so as the series progressed. I am not sure at what age they would be acceptable, but a least a teenager or late preteen? Dumbledore's sexuality would be a concern for me if it was elaborated on in the books, but I dont think it is.

But I am a mother who censors what I allow my child to watch, listen to and wear. That will always be the case...she can make choices as it is age appropriate for her.

I feel that children enjoy darkness, provided that this is controlled. All those classic fairytales were horribly dark, indeed it can be argued that they were the precursors of these modern teenager horror flicks. Children do seem to have an appetite for the morbid and the grotesque. I personally see no reason to shelter them from this unless they display signs of distress. My nine year old neice used to make up and recount to me the most gruesome stories involving a family of bears. We would write these down, place them in plastic bottles, cap them, and then set them adrift on the lake by the family cottage. As an ageing adult I was kind of surprised by these tales but they gave her great satisfaction. It is a kid thing, I think....

Hey ya'll! Long time no talk!

I've been soooooo soo busy!

On this issue I have to say: I never really thought about any of the character's sexuality because I always think of the books as being for children (even though I know a ton of adults read them).

But it's nice whenever Gay people get more exposure in the mainstream.

Hey ya'll! Long time no talk!

I've been soooooo soo busy!

On this issue I have to say: I never really thought about any of the character's sexuality because I always think of the books as being for children (even though I know a ton of adults read them).

But it's nice whenever Gay people get more exposure in the mainstream.

It's good to see you back, Sunta! We've definitely noticed your absence. :clap2:

This was an interesting article on the whole Dumbledore subject.

I wondered where you ran off to Sunta!!

My DH made a point to make me read the article about this last night, and I guess I'm too oblivious to understand. Who the hell cares about this? Why would you even ASSIGN sexuality to a character like that? I admit, I haven't read the books but I do like the movies (except this last one, it was rather slow).. but who are these people sitting around wondering if Dumbledorf is gay??? I completely missed that part of the focus group, hrmph.

Hey ya'll! Long time no talk!

I've been soooooo soo busy!

On this issue I have to say: I never really thought about any of the character's sexuality because I always think of the books as being for children (even though I know a ton of adults read them).

But it's nice whenever Gay people get more exposure in the mainstream.

Hah! Grrl, we have really been missing your voice. :ranger: In fact we have been talking about you and wondering where you went. It is good to have you back. :biggrin1: Now if only TOM and Carlene would reappear all would be right in the world.

As an avid follower of the harry potter series and my kids also, I think its great that theres a bit of controversy to the whole story.

And that Rowling is continuing to give us a bit of a followup to the story.

And I think its rather cool that Dumbledore was gay. And I appreciate that it wasn't thrown at at us in a blatent way like so many other medias have done.

As for about the people that are freaking out about it and wanting to ban the books.

I would really love to shoot those kinds of people. We are suposed to live in a free country with the right to freedom of speech and expression. And banning books over some of the paltry things they have is just silly. Especially since just about anything done/created/spoken can and will offend someone somewhere. It should be up to the parents to decide what books they want their kids to read. Not someone else.

My daughter is a huge HP fan, and she advised me that someone asked JK why dumbledore never married and why he didnt know that the wizard who used the deathly hallows symbol ( cant remember his name) was bad, and her answer was that he was in love with him.

My sis is in a same sex relationship and so is my BIL, so it wasnt anything that shocked my kids as it is part of normal life to them.

Nina

And I appreciate that it wasn't thrown at at us in a blatent way like so many other medias have done.

How has the media thrown it at you in a "blatant" way?

How has the media thrown it at you in a "blatant" way?

I don't know if she meant it the way I interpreted it, but I felt that was basically a criticism of the way the media generally presents homosexuality. You know, gay men being extremely effeminate and obsessed with interior design and lesbians being very butch and masculine. That even though JKR saw Dumbledore as a gay man, she didn't characterize him as the stereotypical gay man. Instead, he was characterized like most REAL gay people, not a caricature of a gay person.

I don't know if she meant it the way I interpreted it, but I felt that was basically a criticism of the way the media generally presents homosexuality. You know, gay men being extremely effeminate and obsessed with interior design and lesbians being very butch and masculine. That even though JKR saw Dumbledore as a gay man, she didn't characterize him as the stereotypical gay man. Instead, he was characterized like most REAL gay people, not a caricature of a gay person.

Exactly what I meant. I think in my lifetime I have met only one gay person out of many including my own brother and ex, that could even start to fit the so called stereotype and I met that one in my interior design class lol.