![[info]](https://www.insanejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small}
So, J.K. Rowling has come out and said that the greatest Headmaster in Hogwarts history was gay:
Now, I think it's a great thing that Rowling has come out and said that Dumbledore was gay, and yet in some ways I'm as disappointed as when Joss Whedon decided Willow* from Buffy the Vampire Slayer was gay.
Over the course of the Harry Potter books, we've seen a variety of relationships. Lupin and Tonks married in the face of discrimination. Harry and Ginny and Ron and Hermione met their future spouses while in high school. Hagrid had feelings for Madame Olympe. An entire sub plot of the fourth book revolved around kids asking others out on their first dates. Snape loved and sacrificed for Lily.
And all of those characters were heterosexual.
I suppose you could say that Dumbledore's sexual orientation doesn't matter, and not discussing it explicitly in the books just shows how orientation isn't a big deal. That just feels very cheap to me in some way. Orientation does matter in this world. It absolutely shouldn't, but we're not living in a utopia. By revealing Dumbledore's homosexuality after the books are written--and not dealing with it on the page--Rowling gets to avoid a more mainstream homophobic backlash during the original run of the books and gets to insert a gay character after the fact.
In other words, I'm glad that we've got an example of a great, strong, vitally important character who isn't defined and limited by his homosexuality, but I'm disappointed that, yet a-fucking-gain, the gay character's sexuality is relegated to subtext.
Thoughts?
*I thought it was great to see a lesbian in a basic cable television show who was for the most part portrayed as a real person and not a caricature, but, honestly, a lesbian Wiccan? In an otherwise well developed character, could you get more stereotypical?
She was asked by one young fan whether Dumbledore finds "true love".
"Dumbledore is gay," the author responded to gasps and applause.
She then explained that Dumbledore was smitten with rival Gellert Grindelwald, whom he defeated long ago in a battle between good and bad wizards. "Falling in love can blind us to an extent," Rowling said of Dumbledore's feelings, adding that Dumbledore was "horribly, terribly let down".
Dumbledore's love, she observed, was his "great tragedy".
Now, I think it's a great thing that Rowling has come out and said that Dumbledore was gay, and yet in some ways I'm as disappointed as when Joss Whedon decided Willow* from Buffy the Vampire Slayer was gay.
Over the course of the Harry Potter books, we've seen a variety of relationships. Lupin and Tonks married in the face of discrimination. Harry and Ginny and Ron and Hermione met their future spouses while in high school. Hagrid had feelings for Madame Olympe. An entire sub plot of the fourth book revolved around kids asking others out on their first dates. Snape loved and sacrificed for Lily.
And all of those characters were heterosexual.
I suppose you could say that Dumbledore's sexual orientation doesn't matter, and not discussing it explicitly in the books just shows how orientation isn't a big deal. That just feels very cheap to me in some way. Orientation does matter in this world. It absolutely shouldn't, but we're not living in a utopia. By revealing Dumbledore's homosexuality after the books are written--and not dealing with it on the page--Rowling gets to avoid a more mainstream homophobic backlash during the original run of the books and gets to insert a gay character after the fact.
In other words, I'm glad that we've got an example of a great, strong, vitally important character who isn't defined and limited by his homosexuality, but I'm disappointed that, yet a-fucking-gain, the gay character's sexuality is relegated to subtext.
Thoughts?
*I thought it was great to see a lesbian in a basic cable television show who was for the most part portrayed as a real person and not a caricature, but, honestly, a lesbian Wiccan? In an otherwise well developed character, could you get more stereotypical?