Yes
No
I just wonder why J.K. Rowling said this after the seventh book? I mean, why did she destroyed the character of Dumbledore, the Headmaster of Hogwarts and the only man Voldemort feared, and made him gay without even adding some important parts to the story? You're right that it added nothing to the story and I don't know the reason behind it.
Click here to take the stupidity test.
that is so repulsive, it hurts. the thing that made dumbledore so inspiring was exactly the fact that he always seemed above the average day-to-day controversies and hassles. i can't imagine what she was thinking if she said such a thing; saying he's gay isn't going to make his character more complex, it's just going to objectify it. until 5 minutes ago i held that character in high esteem, now all i can think about is his "maddening, impossible love and antagonistic desires that marred his life". great. oh, the cultural diversity of it all.
*sighs* Why did JKR made Dumbledore gay?? It's just so... impossible to think, y'know. I never thought that he is when I was reading the whole Potter series until she told us.
Click here to take the stupidity test.
you know what? i don't care what she's gonna say now, she can say dumbledore's gay, harry is transsexual and ron's mother is actually a lesbian, with the pretext they're all "such wonderful people", i won't care and not really listen too much to it.
at least she didn't ruin the books
Well, yeah, I guess...
Click here to take the stupidity test.
Who the hell cares? All the books are completely average.
Hell is other people.
~Jean-Paul Sartre, "No Exit"
I can't say that I understand it either. Not that he's gay, I had kind of thought about it while reading the last 2 books, but why actually say it now.
But then, if the HP series is targeted to the younger audience, can you imagine what would have happened if she had mentioned it in one of the books? It's bad enough that some people think that it's a book on witchcraft and should be banned, which is completely silly.
And if she was specifically asked about it and had already formed a complete idea on Dumbledore's character then it's her right, as the author, to say so.
I can't believe she made it up on the spot.
And no, it doesn't change the books at all for me. It just adds more information on one of the characters which isn't really necessary to know but does no harm to the overall series.
Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed by the things that you didn't do than by the ones you did do. So throw off the bowlines. Sail away from the safe harbor. Catch the trade winds in your sails. Explore. Dream. Discover. ~ Mark Twain
(Yes! 100th voter!)
I believe the whole series is overrated. And to think she's got rich off of it.
com-pas-sion (n.) [ME. & OFr. <LL. (Ec.) compassio, sympathy < compassus, pp. of compati, to feel pity < L. com-, together + pali, to suffer] sorrow for the sufferings or trouble of another or others, accompanied by an urge to help; deep sympathy; pity
Dostoevsky Forum!
I totally agree with Faith. I am in my mid 40's and I truly enjoyed the harry Potter books. It seems to me the people that didn't like the books are snobbish.
I don't think she "destroyed" Dumbledore's character, and his being gay doesn't change my opinion of the series in the least. I simply think it's unnecessary to know his sexual preference, and feel the JKR only did it to prove to "fandom" that she was capable of having a gay character in her books. *shrugs*Originally Posted by Gadget Girl
But, that's just my opinion.
Outing Dumbledore was entirely not needed. In some ways I think it takes away from being able to read things into the actions within books. I was never struck by the realization that he was gay, but if others were, great. They were on the money and I didn't see it. I don't really care one way or another, I just don't see why it was necessary to make a statement about it. Other authors don't normally go around making statements about the characters in their books, and I feel a little robbed that Rowling has. I like to form my own "images" in my head about the characters in the books I read, and to have someone tell me what a character is and isn't is bothersome. It leaves little to my own imagination, and that isn't any fun for me. It makes me wonder if she is trying to keep the books in the public light by revealing things like this just to increase sales. What other surprises about the characters will she reveal in the future????
To me, J.K.Rowling didn't ruin the character of Dumbledore or the Harry Potter series in general... She ruined her reputation, to me. Who cares about Dumbledore's sexuality? I mean, the way she developed characterization was great and everything, but after the book, who cares? To me, if Dumbledore was gay or not, he is still the same character. So there was absolutly no need for this.
I intend to live forever...
so far so good.
Yes, I think JK destroyed her reputation instead of Dumbledore. I admit that changing Dumbledore's sexuality adds nothing to the books and I'm glad about that. She can do whatever she wants 'cuz she's the author, but I don't get it why she has to say this whole thing.
You said there's no need for this, but we're still discussing it!Unless after my post, no one will post back.
Click here to take the stupidity test.
outing dumbledore, in my opinion, was just to keep the spotlight on her. for the last 10 years there has been this strain and need for her to reveal info about the next book - she doesnt hold that power anymore.
i never suspected dumbledore to be gay, i suppose the thing with him and flamel may make sense, i think they were written about just as good friends though. why make the person that has the most power in the book (ulitimately after harry) gay? what does this acheive to the author? there is nothing explored about this with any other aspect of the book.. so it just seems something that was said to get a rise out of the media....
just my 2c
Gritty, you are also right. When I was reading the last book, I thought to myself, 'if this is the seventh and final book of the HP series, then why it has so many missing, unexplained parts that would support the previous ones?' I was finishing the book that time, 'I guess there will be an eighth book for JKR to explain everything', but when I checked an HP site, they said she will make an HP encyclopedia to explain the whole lot of questioning. I guess she's doing this so that the HP mania wouldn't end.
Click here to take the stupidity test.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote