Wednesday, October 24, 2007

Dumbledore: No Comment

I started to write a brief essay on J.K. Rowling's revelation on the sexual feelings of one of the characters in Harry Potter, from a Philosophy of Fiction angle (yes, there is one). But after several hundred words I realized, who cares? Probably not readers here.

So let us ignore the author's attempts to say more than she said. Let us ignore her mucking around these books that have been written. Let her and George Lucas re-write their great works and confuse what was once clear. Let her opine about the characters she created and drum up controversy. But do let the works stand as written. If she feels she didn't say all that needed to be said, she's either a poor writer or wanting more cash, because clearly the story is over.


  1. Rev. Eric J Brown said...

    Let us assume for a moment that being a "progessive" sort you wanted to include a well respected adult figure who was homosexual in your book - thus banishing negative stereotypes.

    So the old man. . . who shows unusual interest in children. . .who Harry always feels is watching over him. . . probably isn't the best choice. This is to say nothing of his having the most powerful wand in history and being in love with the wizard analog of Hitler. Not wise.

  2. Ezekiel said...

    It is a strange and sad commentary on society when sexuality and sexual relationships "must" come into everything. So what if Dumbledore had a long and deep relationship with a male -- that doesn't mean it was "gay." Nor is it necessary for every male or female to have some highly charged romantic interest!

    As you say, forget the commentary, and let the works stand

  3. Christopher D. Hall said...


    Flppshppp... That was the sound of my spit take. Pretty funny!

  4. Christopher D. Hall said...


    Yes! I was also thinking about the tradition that Dumbledore as a character falls in with, the monkish seer, the prophet, the Wise Man. Think of Gandalf, of Obi Wan and so forth. I know in some of the Arthurian legends Merlin is, randy, but in most he, too, is seen as nearly sexless.

    "Monkish" is key, here. We live in a culture where celibacy is inconceivable, where monasticism is invisible, and so most folks do not have a sense of life that does not involve sexual intimacy at all.

  5. Anonymous said...

    I was so disappointed in this. I have truly enjoyed the Harry Potter story and have admired Ms. Rowling for her talent and gift. Too bad she had to go and destroy that adulation with such an obviously transparent pandering move. Flppshppp... indeed. Give me a break - can you spell m-o-r-o-n?

  6. Doorman-Priest said...

    Well, send me the hate mail now, but I was pleased she did it. I sort of wondered a bit during the series, but the point is that it really doesn't matter. If you think it does explain because I don't get it. I'm certainly not convonced by anything said so far.


  7. Anonymous said...

    Doorman - no hate mail. Not me. No way.