Log in

No account? Create an account

The Past | The Previous

Speaking at Carnegie Hall on Friday night in her first U.S. tour in seven years, Rowling confirmed what some fans had always suspected -- that she "always thought Dumbledore was gay," reported entertainment Web site E! Online.

Rowling said Dumbledore fell in love with the charming wizard Gellert Grindelwald but when Grindelwald turned out to be more interested in the dark arts than good, Dumbledore was "terribly let down" and went on to destroy his rival.

That love, she said, was Dumbledore's "great tragedy."

"Falling in love can blind us to an extent," she said.

The audience reportedly fell silent after the admission -- then erupted into applause.

Rowling, 42, said if she had known that would be the response, she would have revealed her thoughts on Dumbledore earlier.

Look, am I the only one who thinks this is fucking wank?

Seriously, did the world go stupid? "Oh, I didn't say Dumbledore was openly gay in the books, or have an openly gay, happy character, but now that they're done, by the way, Harry's father figure was gay. Also, unhappy. Tragic loss. It happens. He didn't want to talk about it much, so I didn't need to write it. Look, I would have mentioned it earlier, but I was afraid you'd all hate me for it, and that would ruin my cash the series."

Come on.

This is not an admittance to be applauded, this is weak. This is seriously weak, after the thought morality said to get some love and not actually engage in anything. The t-shirt should say "How Many Main Characters are Openly Gay and Happy in Harry Potter?" and "I Wrote Dumbledore Slash Where He Fucks Harry in the Ass. What Did You Do, Rowling?"

The collective stupidity of Rowling and her fans and the world is pissing me off over this. I wasn't going to say anything, cause I thought I didn't care, but then I saw this t-shirt, and saw a site that hold sold seven thousand of them, and I realised I cared enough to make this post, look down my nose at all of you who are behind this move, and say, "You're all fucking morons, die now and let my precious air be."



( 50 Soaking Up Bandwidth — Soak Up Bandwidth )
Page 1 of 2
<<[1] [2] >>
Oct. 23rd, 2007 11:09 am (UTC)
You're not the only one.

Like nearly everything JKR says or writes, she may mean well, but it doesn't stand up to scrutiny.
Oct. 23rd, 2007 11:15 am (UTC)
so long as i'm not alone. this is all i ask.
(no subject) - lucius_t - Oct. 23rd, 2007 01:29 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - benpeek - Oct. 23rd, 2007 03:00 pm (UTC) - Expand
Oct. 23rd, 2007 12:32 pm (UTC)
my first reaction was 'great. another fucking jerk who thinks that queers belong in the closet.'
Oct. 23rd, 2007 03:00 pm (UTC)
nah, she just doesn't want happy elderly gay men.
Oct. 23rd, 2007 12:37 pm (UTC)
I can't speak for Rowling, but most of the reactions I've seen from Potter fans have been along the lines of wondering why this wasn't in the books. So no, you're not alone.
Oct. 23rd, 2007 03:01 pm (UTC)
yay! not alone!
Oct. 23rd, 2007 12:57 pm (UTC)
Fucking wank, yes.
Oct. 23rd, 2007 03:01 pm (UTC)
see how i'm not alone here?
Oct. 23rd, 2007 01:06 pm (UTC)
Look, first point, I think almost anyone who's ever read a book would agree that JK Rowling isn't the greatest writer, thinker, or literary creator who's ever picked up a pen.

But why bemoan Rowling's failure to strike at oppressive sexual orthodoxy now? It's not as if her work has ever confronted any other systematic oppression. In particular, the HP books brutally enforce every one of Britain's class stereotypes.

That's why people like the HP books ... they let you get cosy with your prejudices, unlike the real world.

I don't get the impression Rowling made a huge deal of this, although I'm sure she was aware her ripples would turn into a fan tsunami.

Anyway, the core texts of fanfic basically have to be deluded conservative rubbish, otherwise there's nothing for the slashers to "subvert".
Oct. 23rd, 2007 03:03 pm (UTC)
But why bemoan Rowling's failure to strike at oppressive sexual orthodoxy now?

cause someone made a t-shirt.

you know, that's actually the reason for this post. i hate that t-shirt and all it encompases. except, you know, the pro gay bit.
(no subject) - brendanconnell.wordpress.com - Oct. 23rd, 2007 02:14 pm (UTC) - Expand
Oct. 23rd, 2007 03:01 pm (UTC)
i assumed they were all retarded.
(no subject) - mattdoyle - Oct. 23rd, 2007 03:07 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - mattdoyle - Oct. 23rd, 2007 03:07 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - (Anonymous) - Oct. 23rd, 2007 08:52 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - brendanconnell.wordpress.com - Oct. 23rd, 2007 08:53 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - benpeek - Oct. 24th, 2007 12:57 am (UTC) - Expand
(Deleted comment)
(no subject) - benpeek - Oct. 24th, 2007 12:57 am (UTC) - Expand
Oct. 23rd, 2007 02:38 pm (UTC)
Yeah was just saying this at dinner tonight - it's pretty lazy writing - do the characterisation in interviews post writing the book.

Oh and btw Harry is black and his owl is Asian. WHatever.
Oct. 23rd, 2007 03:04 pm (UTC)
i just think it's wank. if he was gay, and you want to make a point out of it, do it in the seven books.

not, like, some months after the last one was released.
(no subject) - girliejones - Oct. 23rd, 2007 03:13 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - strangedave - Oct. 23rd, 2007 03:44 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - benpeek - Oct. 24th, 2007 12:59 am (UTC) - Expand
Oct. 23rd, 2007 03:09 pm (UTC)
i agree with you. it is total wank. im proud of the fact ive never read this crap.
Oct. 24th, 2007 12:59 am (UTC)
i'm not proud. i just don't care.
(no subject) - mattdoyle - Oct. 24th, 2007 02:42 am (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - benpeek - Oct. 24th, 2007 02:46 am (UTC) - Expand
Oct. 23rd, 2007 03:37 pm (UTC)
I've already ranted about this one, so what can I say, except amen brother. Harry Potter just doesn't matter.
Oct. 24th, 2007 12:59 am (UTC)
Oct. 23rd, 2007 03:41 pm (UTC)
I didn't know.

I also didn't care.

Now I know.

I still don't care.
Oct. 24th, 2007 01:00 am (UTC)
gonna buy the t-shirt?
Dumbledore - (Anonymous) - Oct. 24th, 2007 03:38 am (UTC) - Expand
Re: Dumbledore - benpeek - Oct. 24th, 2007 03:40 am (UTC) - Expand
Oct. 23rd, 2007 05:22 pm (UTC)
In addition to the things you said, it is also confusing to the kids who at one point in time, were her audience. My kids never would have picked up on anything like this from what she WROTE about that relationship, so why bring it up now? Now, it's just confusing, especially to the kids, like mine, who have an open/out gay family member and wouldn't understand why something like that would be coded.

I think she was a coward to do it like this. Wait til the 7th book sells bzillion copies, get all the "well-dones" and then tack it on to the end, to make a statement, but not TOO much of a statement.
Oct. 24th, 2007 01:00 am (UTC)
yeah, the fact that she coded it in is not a cool thing, especially given how many openly uncoded straight kids there are...
(Deleted comment)
Oct. 24th, 2007 01:01 am (UTC)
how'd that sleep go?
(Deleted comment)
(no subject) - benpeek - Oct. 25th, 2007 12:09 am (UTC) - Expand
Oct. 23rd, 2007 07:16 pm (UTC)
Wait - no gags about teaching people how to use their wand?

Man, I actually laughed at the t-shirt, 'cos it's exactly the sort of thing I'd expect to see in some stupid Brighton shop full of tack... but I have no problem with her saying this in retrospect. I mean, she might have had it in the back of her mind, I don't know... actually, I think it's more that I don't care. I never read the books.
Oct. 24th, 2007 01:01 am (UTC)
nah, no wand gags. it just gave me the shits to see people celebrating it.
Oct. 23rd, 2007 09:01 pm (UTC)
No, you're not alone. It's both weak, don't-offend-the-buyers bullshit and an example of the channelling fallacy where writers pretend their characters have an existence outside the words on the page.

Pisses me off.
Oct. 24th, 2007 01:02 am (UTC)
yeah, i didn't think of the bit of characters with a word outside the page. that's always seemed utterly ridiculous to me.
(no subject) - artbroken - Oct. 24th, 2007 01:43 am (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - benpeek - Oct. 24th, 2007 01:45 am (UTC) - Expand
Oct. 24th, 2007 05:38 am (UTC)
I can see your point. The unhappy gay stereotype goes back to Joseph Losey's movie VICTIM with Dirk Bogarde, Murray Melvin's character in A TASTE OF HONEY. If Dumbledore was so wise, why didn't he see through his own glitches, meet Stephen Fry and live happily ever after?
Oct. 24th, 2007 01:04 pm (UTC)
well, cause then she'd have a gay person in her books, that's why.
(no subject) - king_espresso - Oct. 24th, 2007 09:18 pm (UTC) - Expand
Page 1 of 2
<<[1] [2] >>
( 50 Soaking Up Bandwidth — Soak Up Bandwidth )


Ben Peek

Latest Month

October 2016
Powered by LiveJournal.com
Designed by Tiffany Chow