J.K. Rowling’s revelation that Hogwarts headmaster Albus Dumbledore is gay has prompted widespread comment, most of it from people who were happy that she’d done it.
There are not enough gay characters in literature, the argument runs, especially in children’s books, which reinforces the view that being gay is unusual and not normal.
Rowling herself has said the Harry Potter books are a prolonged argument for tolerance and an end to bigotry.
Back in the 1980s the portrayal of gay parenthood in the children’s book “Jenny lives with Eric and Martin” caused an uproar in Britain and played a major part in the Conservative government’s decision to pass legislation which prohibited the “promotion” of homosexuality by local government in schools, libraries and other public places (known as Clause 28). In the U.S. “Heather has two mommies” became a similarly publicised book.
More than 20 years later Clause 28 has long gone and gays and lesbians enjoy a much more open lifestyle in many countries. So why is the revelation that a character in popular children’s book is gay still such big news? Do we need more gay characters in children’s literature? What do you think?
Trackback
103 comments so far
Previous | 6 | 5 | 4 | 3 | 2 | … 1 | Next
Tony,
- Posted by John G.Why so homophobic? If someone’s gay, what’s the big deal.
I think she was presured by the news reportes and to get them out of her way, told me then that he was gay. If you read the book, he had a girlfriend who died and he decided to stay alone, I lot of people do that, so there is nothing wrong with been single all your life.
- Posted by John G.-EMD
My responce: which book was that said in? I don’t remember it.
P.S. I’m NOT doubting you, and am merely curious.
This revelation was actually previewed with this video.
Dumbledore is in there- can you find him?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UAeT4Il7V 2U
- Posted by Will MushkinThis will have the gays rubbing their hands together with glee. I won’t be watching any more Harry Potter movies or reading any more of the silly books. No do I want my kids reading about witches, wizards and “fairies”.
- Posted by TonyI think she was presured by the news reportes and to get them out of her way, told me then that he was gay. If you read the book, he had a girlfriend who died and he decided to stay alone, I lot of people do that, so there is nothing wrong with been single all your life.
- Posted by EMDTechnically this is JK’w world, not ours. We are simply along for the wonderful (in my opinion) ride. These characters are amazingly complex with a life of their own and JK had to fully imagine that world. Of course she couldn’t include every detail. But those unwritten details are what made the characters so rich and human and believable.
She answered a question honestly. Unless the person who asked the question was a “plant” in the audience, how can that be considered a PR stunt.
She didn’t say “Dumbledore is gay” she said that she thought of the character as gay and this obviuosly added to the complexity of the story. There is much more overt “sexuality” discussed in regards to the heterosexual characters.
In the end you are free to imagine the characters any way you want. If it truly bothers you that JK envisioned Dumbledore as gay, then don’t think of him that way. It’s not explicitly discussed in the book, so make up your own mind.
JK is not the only one with an imagination!!!
- Posted by michelle FrankeWietske: I agree. There might not’ve been any evidence given as to wether he was gay, but none was given as to wether he was straight. And some people are straight out being homophobic.
- Posted by John G.Mmmm…, people seem to think that love and sex are the same thing. It may come as a surprise to a lot of those people, but writing about a character that the author assumed was gay (falls in love with same-gendered people) is a lot different from describing a explicit sex-scene. But there is no such description in this (supposed) children’s book, gay, straight or bi!
- Posted by WietskeIn the end most characters in (children’s) books are people how are either in love or have the ability to be. Do we corrupt or children with this? Of course not! That would be like saying their parents can’t show they love one another, couse this would promote heterosexuality (if anything at all it would promote heterophilia to be exact, unless you have sex in front of your kids, but people don’t seem to make that distinction anymore either). Homophilia exist in our world just like heterophilia. It would only be more realistic if there were a few more gays in (kids) books.
I personally never thought of Dumbledore as being sexual at all, kind of like Father Christmas. But if somebody had asked me the question I would probably have said it would be most likely that he was bi. Not judging on the physical, but on character. On what a person is like on the inside (to use a hopeless cliché). I find it easy to think of Dumbledore as being able to love anybody, despite there gender, but I do find it hard to thinking of him as having sex at all!
People in the Bible belt need to grow up and get an education, for one thing. You don’t “promote” a sexual orientation. It’s not a choice. At what age did you choose to be heterosexual, and what homosexual experiences did you have before hand to allow you an informed decision? One’s sexual orientation does not diminish their ability to be a role model, foster intelligence or hold capacity for humanity and compassion. (Although it seems religion sure does) So what if Dumbledore was gay? Jesus was a cross-dresser.
- Posted by MechelleOh and one more thing. Those of you who are whining about it being a children’s series and that sexual orientation shouldn’t be included, I don’t recall an outcry of protests whenever Harry kissed Cho or in the books there were relationships ongoing between heterosexual characters.
Why wasn’t sexual orientation such a huge deal then? Hmmm? Puleeeze…your rants aren’t for “the welfare of the children”. Your rants are out of intolerance and prejudice that you spout off from your own insecurities.
- Posted by MechelleJames Baxter says…
“if the author chosses to make dumbledore gay, he’s gay. end of story.”
I dont think that we should be so quick to make that statement. Where does the authority of the story lie. Does it the authority belong to the author, the reader, or within the text itself. James seems to think that the author has complete and utter control on the interpretation of the text. The problem is this. The “harry potter” canon is closed. The books, as far as we know, are over. Dumbledore has take shape and stands as a literary figure in our minds. Rowlings post-canonized statements about him only reflect the what is real within the book if you give her all of the authority within the text.
- Posted by AndrewWhat if rowling said that Harry Potter is actually a girl, or that the magic in the book was just a a mixture of chemistry and a better understanding of physics. Would her readers accepts that?
Anyways, the point is this. I think that once the story is over, Dumbledore steps out of her hands and becomes a person on his own. If she says he’s gay, so what. The story doesn’t say that. We all have to determine that on our own. The fact that he is gay is only her interpretation of the text.
james: you said it better than I could. If she had said he was straight, there’d be nothing like this. Also, everybody’s relating being gay to sex. As if Dumbledore was going to try and seduce Harry. Paranoia.
- Posted by John G.J.K. Rowling gave us clues from the start. I think her emphasis on how he dressed (rather oddly colored clothing even for a Wizard) was the biggest clue. Do I really care? No. To me, Dumbledore was just another wizard, albeit a great one. It’s just part of who he is. Nothing to get worked up over so I don’t really think anyone should have a problem with it.
And to someone who said that not being able to reproduce isn’t normal, what about all the women who have to adopt or have someone else carry a child for them? How is that unnatural? Or the men who just can’t produce enough spermatozoa to impregnate a woman?
- Posted by AprilMy god! the whole issue of her saying he is gay, and not mentioning it in any of her books. Would people have the same outcry if she came out and said that one of the characters was born out of wedlock, or came from a broken home, or was a mass murderer?
- Posted by jamesDoes it really matter? Its not in the books, so reading them will have no impact on the reader.
I think people are letting their prejudices come out.
Response to: “I thought what was normal for every living being was to be able to reproduce? Therefore homosexuality is not normal and unusual…”
You’re right! Go tell all those post-menopausal women to stop having sex, the goddamn perverts.
- Posted by kaiI will not stand for this rediculous promotion and acceptation of homosexual propaganda. Simply by placing this gay character in her story, Rowling has effectively said, “Hey, it’s ok. It’s natural. You probably didn’t even notice. See? It’s not that bad.” Well, it is that bad. I don’t care how you justify it, but homosexuality is wrong and it is an abomination to God. Teaching to children as though it is an acceptable part of life is wrong. Certainly, children should be taught to love the homosexual just as he should love any other person, but the child should also be taught that homosexuality is not normal. We see the awful affects this principle has had on children of gay parents. God intended for a man and woman to be together as a perfect balance for the child. This balance disentigrates in a gay family. I can’t believe the number of Christians that allow their children to read these books. It is unfortunate, but once again quite natural in this day where all must be tolerated.
- Posted by MikeAdam…
- Posted by BjornAre you serious?? You really thought that Parvatti Patil and Cho Chang were white kids. If this is the case I think the Harry Potter books may be a bit above your reading level. I would suggest the “Dick and Jane” series.
What does it matter? His sexuality, if you read the books, has [b]nothing[/b] to do with the storyline. Nothing. Your child will find out about gay people one day, and shouldn’t live in “fear” of them.
- Posted by John G.I find this one thing disturbing: how people on this board admittedly shield themselves (and their kids) off from what’s uncomfortable to them, and this only adds to their ignorance. They refuse to get to know people that are gay out of fear that what they’ve been taught about them through stereotypes and authority might be actually be wrong. Now that this experience has been forced upon them by Rowling’s recent comments, many have hard time reconciling how Dumbledore can be “good” while still being gay. But how else are ignorant people going to confront their preconceived notions if not voluntarily? Of course, many of you are angry, but is it really because of Rowling’s comment, or because you might have been unfair in judging people?
It’s mainly the people have been unfairly judged and stereotyped in the past that realize the shear cost of ignorance to everyone, including those that unfairly judge. That’s the sad part: as long as the ignorant are ignorant, they will never know. Plus, they demonize the people who dare try to enlighten them.
- Posted by anti58“As for you Toby, why does Paris Hilton continue to appear in public doing whatever it is she does? She has enough money to live whatever life she wants. Ditto any celebrity. Publicity stunts aren’t always just about money.”
I’m sorry, Ryan, but I have to disagree. The Paris Hiltons of the world are far different than billionaire authors. Hilton has no real claim to fame except to ensure that she remains famous, and that is why she does publicity stunts; otherwise, no one would pay attention (and whatever she is hocking would make less money).
Besides, famous people remain famous as long as others follow them around and photograph them and so on. Ms. Rowling has people lining up to see her wherever she goes, to ask her about her art, in particular (as opposed to who she’s dating, who she’s wearing, etc.). While it is possible that she is a big attention seeker, I somehow doubt that she saved this nugget to make headlines flow; headlines flowed from her releasing the nugget.
- Posted by Toby K. Stoddart