A couple of thoughts about JKR’s last interview.

[elanor_x]

The question: Did Dumbledore, who believed in the prevailing power of love, ever fall in love himself?

JKR: My truthful answer to you... I always thought of Dumbledore as gay. [ovation.] ... Dumbledore fell in love with Grindelwald, and that that added to his horror when Grindelwald showed himself to be what he was. To an extent, do we say it excused Dumbledore a little more because falling in love can blind us to an extend, but he met someone as brilliant as he was, and rather like Bellatrix he was very drawn to this brilliant person, and horribly, terribly let down by him. Yeah, that's how i always saw Dumbledore. In fact, recently I was in a script read through for the sixth film, and they had Dumbledore saying a line to Harry early in the script saying I knew a girl once, whose hair... [laughter]. I had to write a little note in the margin and slide it along to the scriptwriter, "Dumbledore's gay!" [laughter] "If I'd known it would make you so happy, I would have announced it years ago!"

 

Now I want Voldemort to be gay too! That would explain both his desire to touch Harry in GoF (joking) and the gayest quote ever about Cedric (serious now) (from IMDb): "[Walking over to Cedric's body and pushing his face aside] Awww, tsk, tsk, tsk... such a handsome boy." Plus he had never paid much attention to women in any way and the beautiful Bellatrix's crush seemed to be "unrequited". :)

 

As for Dumbledore, I have seen many fics pairing D/McGonagall, which made sense before DH. I didn't think about this aspect of his life much prior to DH, but when I did think I felt it was a pity such great person didn't have a family. Pity she couldn't simply say "Dumbledore was in love with Grindelwald" without adding the word "unrequited" and let her fans imagine to their hearts' content. Personally I have never thought for a moment he was gay and perceived his taste in clothing as a personal quirk, like Luna's. [When sistermagpie wrote: "Nothing like this man had ever been seen on Privet Drive. Yeah, yeah, he’s the oldest drag queen ever. The street ought to make up a plaque commemorating this momentous visit." in her recap of the first chapter of PS, I never imagined it to be literally true]. Perhaps, I was a little thick – sistermagpie joked about it in her recaps, in Harry Potter American Idol fan video put long before DH’s release the song, chosen for D, included words “boys”, “touch” and “Michel” [don’t know its name]. Sure those were jokes, but people had to (sub) consciously get this vibe to joke about it in the first place. Btw, V’s song was “I feel pretty… so pretty… and gay”, but with him I get this vibe too. :)

 

After reading montavilla's comment in sistermagpie's post - "be "signaled" gay by wearing purple in flashbacks", I felt... unpleasantly, not because of D's sexual orientation, but due to the way it was depicted. Do you think JKR made him wear such clothing since PS to subtly hint he was gay or was it supposed to be a portrayal of a quirky, genius but slightly mad headmaster in earlier books & she got this idea only in DH? Or both? How much each, then?

 

Her "I would have told you earlier if I knew it would make you so happy” strikes me as too naïve to be true.

Imo she hasn’t revealed it ealier for the same reason she couldn’t put D/G sex scenes in her books, to get the hint just Google “banning Potter books”.(Looking at beautiful pictures is too an option:   (*)) Laura Mallory and the likes of her would not only claim the books are an "evil" attempt to indoctrinate children in the Wicca religion, but that they are a very effective popularisation and propaganda of homosexuality, reaching the smallest children! With the “epitome of goodness”, according to JKR herself, being gay and working with small children! And being our young, male hero’s mentor! Now, after the series’ end, she can tell that more freely just as a little throwaway fact, without the fans/children’s parents speculating/being afraid of it being as much as hinted at within the yet unpublished books. Btw, I really don’t think V being revealed as gay would be met with the similar opposition. As for Harry being one, well… the books would be banned in all schools/countries, were they published at all. Or am I mistaken? 

(*) From my Summery Executions: "So, HP died and went to hell. There he finally met his parents. Of course, all Potters went to hell, since they practiced Satanism: conjured, flied on brooms, brew different potions, etc. Well, the church prohibits any use of sorcery."

 

In answer to the question "Did Hagrid marry?" Rowling replied that sadly, no. The half-giant had a flirtation with a giantess but she found him "a tad unsophisticated" and the relationship never went forward. In response to the audience's groans of dismay, Rowling said, jokingly, "O.K., I'll write another book." And when the audience continued to express disapproval added, "at least I didn't kill him."

Other minor characters, according to Rowling, came to happier ends. Neville Longbottom, Harry's meek and hapless classmate, married Hannah Abbott, another classmate.

 

JKR surprised me here with her lucidity, I thought Hagrid & Maxime would be married in the epilogue, unless one of them died, despite people commenting on their unsuitability. I hope Neville’s fans are happy now – some of them complained about Neville not getting a family before.

 

She told the press that she would not retire and would continue to write, though not just yet. "I will always write but I do feel as if I'm on vacation. For the first time in 10 years, I don't have a deadline," she said, explaining that she didn't know which genre she would choose next. "I'm spending time with my kids and I'm really enjoying that."

 

Both despite and due to HP’s drawbacks, I really enjoyed being in this fandom, reading meta, deathtocapslock recaps, speculating about the books. May be I am pessimistic, but imo JKR won’t write anything even close to being as enchanting as HP, and will be remembered for it, as Doyle – for Sherlock Holmes. Do you think HP books will be remembered as long?

 

Just a few quotes from this article, which I liked (especially, “Harry’s flaws” part, even thought I can’t grasp what she means here, does anybody?)

 

*Jo replied that Harry did not consult with Dumbledore’s portrait for 3 reasons: 1)The portrait was not available as it was at Hogwarts, 2) Dumbledore didn’t want to tempt Harry with the Hallows but wanted him to learn of them slowly due to Harry’s flaws and 3) it was too easy and there wouldn’t be a plot.

 

 *When asked why she chose Molly to kill Bellatrix she replied that she wanted to 1) show that Molly was an extremely talented witch even though she spent most of her time in the kitchen, and 2) she wanted to compare the obsession Bellatrix had with Voldemort with Molly’s maternal love for her children.

 

*Then next question is one that many fans have answered themselves in reference to the Basilisk and why did it not kill Voldemort’s soul in Harry. Rowling stated that Harry was not destroyed beyond repair because Fawkes was around to heal him but later was conveniently absent when other Horcruxes were destroyed.

 

*Donna, from the very top of Carnegie Hall was next in line and after sprinting down the stairwell she breathlessly asked "What was the careers after graduation of James, Lily, Sirius and Lupin?" Jo said Lupin was unemployable and impoverished because of his condition and that James, Lily and Sirius were employed full-time in the Order of the Phoenix (James was rich and that’s how they lived.)  

 

*In answering a question about Neville and finding love, Jo said that he married the landlady from the Leaky Cauldron which happened to be Hannah Abbott, and that living above the Leaky Cauldron would have impressed his students at Hogwarts.

 

Comments

[baeraad.livejournal.com]

Ye gods. I think I just got a tiny little shred of respect for Rowling. Now I feel dirty. ^_^;

Was Dumbledore's behaviour supposed to be a hint? Maybe. Or maybe it started out as just a quirk, and then she realised that it would fit. Either way, I'm amazed Rowling is even willing to admit that homosexuality exists, let alone ascribing it to her God-figure. (and I do appreciate the fact that that's really going to stick in the craw of the fundies, heh heh...)

Honestly, these people who think that HP is pro-Wicca propaganda... do they actually know anything about Wicca? (or about Satanism? Two very different things, those) I do, and there's really no connection that I can see. I mean, flying on broomsticks? That's got nothing to do with real witchcraft and everything to do with seventeenth-century superstition.

[indongcho.livejournal.com]

Maybe this will make you feel better (and clean). Sure, Rowling was willing to say that Dumbledore is gay, but she was too wimpy to put it in the books, and she portrayed him in the books as flamboyant, which is a particularly annoying stereotype.

[kadaj010.livejournal.com]

Do you think JKR made him wear such clothing since PS to subtly hint he was gay or was it supposed to be a portrayal of a quirky, genius but slightly mad headmaster in earlier books & she got this idea only in DH? Or both? How much each, then?

That is what I thought, and I think she is just making these things up as she goes along.

[montavilla.livejournal.com]

I'm sorry if my comment lessened things for you.

Since you asked, I doubt that JKR decided Dumbledore was gay in DH, or because it would be good publicity or anything like that. I'm sure that just part of his character from the beginning.

I'm probably being way too hard on Rowling. She should get some credit for having a gay Epitome of Goodness and Wisdom. I'm sure she'll get heat for it. Apparently, this is a headline item on the morning talk shows?

I'm also sure that she didn't tell the audience Dumbledore was gay in order to make headlines, but because it was true. I can't help noticing, however, that she did tell an audience that was likely to react positively. She probably would have gotten a much different reception if she had been in a different part of the country.

My negative feelings about the revelation have a lot to do with the present moment we live in--and popular culture as it exists now. In fifty years this isn't probably isn't going to be a big deal, because, hopefully, being gay won't particularly matter. But right now it still seems important to show gayness as something that doesn't need to be hidden from the reader--even if it is from the other characters in the story.

And maybe I'm ultra-sensitive and maybe I'm hypocritical. I've been writing this Snape epic, which you may have noticed me pimping yesterday at Snapedom. I've just gotten through the Marauder's school era and I had a few gay characters among the students.

Every scene I wrote, I wrestled with how significant to make their relationship. For example, I have Emmeline Vance and Amelia Bones as a couple. I knew when I introduced Emmeline that she and Amelia would be a couple. So, then I had to decide whether that was going to be subtext or text. I decided to make it text early on by showing them necking in order to "signal" that they were girlfriends (it's kind of weird for me to say lovers when they're teenagers) and to use Snape's nonreaction to them as a signal that it's not a big thing among the kids at Hogwarts.

But when you hide it from the reader, it sort of puts Dumbledore's gayness (which JKR seems to view as no big deal) in the same category as Aberforth's beastiality and Fenrir's pedophilia. These are all things that the adults can pick up as subtext, but would go above the heads of children. I can see (quite plainly!) why you'd want beastiality and pedophilia to go over the kids' heads. But when you do that with a gay character, the subtle message is that it's something shameful that ought to be hidden from kids.

And when your answer to the question, "Did Dumbledore ever love anyone" is "I always saw Dumbledore as gay," then the implication is that gay love isn't actually love, but a barrier to it. I know that JKR didn't leave it there, but went on to explain about Grindelwald. But even then, there's "unrequited" factor she puts in--so that Dumbledore was gay, but then he didn't actually practice it.

Which is saying, like the military, that gay is okay to be, but it isn't okay to do.

[montavilla.livejournal.com]

I'm coming back to apologize, because I see from a transcript quote that JKR didn't use the word "unrequited," but says simply that Dumbledore fell in love with Grindelwald and then felt "terribly let down" by him.

So, I'm imposing my own prejudices onto JKR here, which is very unfair of me. But I still think that she didn't need to make Dumbledore's sexuality subtext.

[elanor-x.livejournal.com]

I'm sorry if my comment lessened things for you.
Don't be. I read other posts, which made clear that a) it's not canon b) (quoting fictualities) the love of his life was not only tragic but dangerous: dangerous to Dumbledore and the entire wizarding world. The resonance left in readers' minds may be an association between "gay" and "dangerous" and "must be repressed." She wrote a wonderful post here: http://fictualities.livejournal.com/83620.html [very interesting comments too] Quirky clothing is nothing in comparison. :)

I can't help noticing, however, that she did tell an audience that was likely to react positively.
Yes, I read about people in Leaky Cauldron forums claiming the books had been ruined for them. In another lj somebody complained she hadn't made Voldemort gay, if she wanted to present such character, proving my theory that considerably fewer people would complain in that case. Somebody noted that she told that only not little time after releasing the last book, read: the profits aren't going to be hurt too much.

I've been writing this Snape epic, which you may have noticed me pimping yesterday at Snapedom...to use Snape's nonreaction to them as a signal that it's not a big thing among the kids at Hogwarts
No. I am not sure of ever visiting Snapedom. Using Snape's nonreaction as a signal is a good idea, albeit not canonical since we have seen Snape taking points from a kissing couple during the ball in GoF. Can you give a link, please?

But when you hide it from the reader, it sort of puts Dumbledore's gayness (which JKR seems to view as no big deal) in the same category as Aberforth's beastiality and Fenrir's pedophilia.
Imho, Dumbledore's gayness was much better hidden than Aberforth's beastiality. In GoF we learn about Aberforth doing questionable things with a goat. Everybody in fandom seemed to get that (including me), while the revelation about D was a surprise for numerous fans. Imo Aberforth's beastiality is canon in ways in which Dumbledore's gayness is not, and I can't imagine fans complaining about books being ruined and being so surprised, had she explicitly told us that about D's brother. (She almost had in that interview - it truly was an ANVIL-hint!)

As for "unrequited", she didn't say it was requited either. It could be either way, which means more possibilities for fanfic. :)

[artystone.livejournal.com]

We were supposed to know DD was gay because he wore brocade and a purple suit. The fact we've all been snickering about that for literally years just proves how hamfisted she's being now.

[sunnyskywalker]

I've been wondering about Dumbledore's clothes too. I mean, lots of wizards wear clothing that's flamboyant by the local Muggle standards, but purple velvet seems like it's on the flamboyant side even for them. Fudge might have a lime-green hat, but he also has a pinstriped suit, you know?

On the other hand, it does seem like older wizards in general go for the outrageous robes, so maybe the only reason Dumbledore's wardrobe sticks out is because he's a more major character.