I like Harry Potter and have read all of the books, and I've always thought that the series was worth analyzing as literature because J. K. Rowling put, in my opinion, many references to modern-day political issues into her stories. But I found her revelation this weekend that Dumbledore is homosexual was a little, well, retarded, frankly.
On one hand I admit that having a great hero in children's literature be recognized as gay is great for gay rights. But as an English major, I find it rather insulting to have an author tell this to me directly when there is absolutely no basis for this in the characterization of Dumbledore. Rowling never touches on his past or personal life until the final novel, and even then his "friendship" with the evil wizard Grindelwald (omg this post is so gay, btw) doesn't feel like anything other than a friendship. It's a children's book, so there's (understandably) a lack of sexual situations, but still: there are plenty of characters in English and American literature whose sexual orientation is analyzed, and that's because there's some textual basis for it. For Rowling to come out (heh) and say, months after the series has ended, that Dumbledore was gay seems like a manipulative and political move that is completely unnecessary, even as a publicity stunt.
Do you think Michael Gambon is going to play this character differently now that there's a "subtext?" Blah.
Related:
Fan's ponder Dumbledore outing [CNN]
No comments:
Post a Comment