Wednesday, October 24, 2007

Evidently J.K. Rowling has stated the "Dumbledore" character from her book series is gay. She is calling it a "prolonged argument for tolerance."

I would like to note that I have neither read any of her books, nor do I intend to read them, nor do I think they will be remembered in 100 years as great literature. Now, let's think critically about her announcement:
  1. If nobody picked up on the evidently completely lacking subtext that Dumbledore is gay, can it possibly matter?
  2. If his being gay is not a plot point, what function does announcing this *outside* the context of character development serve? Does she need some explanation for a totally shocking and out-of-character gay orgy in her next novel?
  3. Since Dumbledore is a fictional character, why would anyone care whether or not he is gay? If Bambi is a transsexual deer, does it matter?
  4. How is this supposed to teach people who disagree with a gay sexual lifestyle tolerance? I'm especially thinking of the Christian right, who might pose an argument like, "If you don't find out that someone is a murderer until you've known and liked them for a long time, does it unmake them guilty of murder?"
  5. If being gay is part of his character, wouldn't it have been helpful for the actor who plays Dumbledore to know this before making the movies that have been made? Ponder this phrase: "What's my motivation?" This leads me to believe the author is just pulling things out of a sunless crevice in order to stay within the media spotlight.
No matter how many pop books or astonishingly yawn-able character developments she hacks, she will never be remembered like Tolkien.

No comments: