I am waiting to see what the lord and master has to say about my other favorite author,JKR, revealing Dumbledore's sexual preference.Both write fantasy involving young people(I won't say FOR young people because I don't believe it is).Both put a great deal of their own values into their own works.A common thread for me is also the extent to which I fully admire their own personal behavior. I would be hard pressed to think of two other people I admire without reservation.
What will OSC say?
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
I doubt he'll say anything.
Posted by Tara (Member # 10030) on :
I concur.
Posted by Kelly (Member # 9576) on :
I've only read the first book of the Alvin Maker series, so I could be wrong, but doesn't Alvin turn out to be gay?
Posted by Qaz (Member # 10298) on :
He always seemed more grim and worried to me.
Posted by Farmgirl (Member # 5567) on :
Kelly - you definitely need to read the rest of the series.
Posted by Tara (Member # 10030) on :
quote:Originally posted by Kelly: I've only read the first book of the Alvin Maker series, so I could be wrong, but doesn't Alvin turn out to be gay?
No. But some characters in Songmaster are. I don't think it's that big of a deal to him...
Posted by Puffy Treat (Member # 7210) on :
A character in his Earth series was gay as well.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
quote:Originally posted by Puffy Treat: A character in his Earth series was gay as well.
As was a character in Songmaster.
Posted by I Am The War Chief (Member # 9266) on :
I find it interesting she makes this information known AFTER all the books have been written. If this was such an important aspect of his life why not write about it? If it doesnt matter why come out now? Either way im suspect of her motives. . .
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
quote:If this was such an important aspect of his life why not write about it?
Probably because it wasn't a particularly important aspect of his adult life.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
It wasn't an important part of this story she was writing, which was about Harry.
Posted by DDDaysh (Member # 9499) on :
I doubt he'll have anything much to say about it. Most people I know are of the "and we care why?" philosophy.
Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
He might have an opinion on the responsibility of an author to be truthful and consistent within the world that they have created. I could see him having a beef similar to what Dagonee has said, about it weakening the moral relevancy of his flirtation with the dark side.
Though I guess I can see one other piece of the puzzle, which is if his trusting Snape was rooted in his own turnabout. But again, if she didn't give us that in the books, so what?
Posted by Omega M. (Member # 7924) on :
I agree with a recent essay in Time that even if accept Dumbledore's gayness as canonical, what gay person would want him that way? He never comes out to anyone and his closest friends are teenage boys!
Posted by PSI Teleport (Member # 5545) on :
Pshaw. He never comes out to Harry Potter or Rita Skeeter. That's all WE know.
Posted by soccer-head (Member # 11044) on :
JKRowling didn't say it in the books because she wanted to make it as shocking as possible.
And I don't think OSC will really care all that much about it.
What'll happen now, though, is a bunch of fantasy writers'll start writing 'token gay' characters--but what will it really accomplish? I seriously doubt anyone will honestly change his or her opinion on gay marriage because they found out Dumbledore or any other character in fiction is gay.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
quote:What'll happen now, though, is a bunch of fantasy writers'll start writing 'token gay' characters
Do you really think so? Why? It's worth noting that many spec-fic writers have already thrown in a fair number of "token gay" characters. Do you think they were an influence on Rowling?
Posted by vwiggin (Member # 926) on :
Maybe she was influenced by the Tolkien gay characters.
Posted by Razputin (Member # 9522) on :
quote:Originally posted by soccer-head: JKRowling didn't say it in the books because she wanted to make it as shocking as possible.
I think she did not mention it in the book or earlier because she did not want to influence books sales, can you imagine all the book burnings if she admitted that he was gay years ago? Smart move. JK, waiting to way after the final book release... so hypocritical...
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
quote:JK, waiting to way after the final book release... so hypocritical...
In what way is it hypocritical?
I'm having a hard time seeing why it's even pertinent.
Posted by Noemon (Member # 1115) on :
quote:Originally posted by Razputin: I think she did not mention it in the book or earlier because she did not want to influence books sales, can you imagine all the book burnings if she admitted that he was gay years ago?
I can't quite decide whether you're arguing that controversy drives down book sales, or that Rowling was trying to make sure that fewer of her books sold.
Posted by Clumpy (Member # 8122) on :
The only thing that saddens me is that this might impact the ability of some to enjoy the books.
She "revealed" the information in the least deliberate way possible. It's not a significant part of the story. It only influences one tiny plot point, which would work even without this information.
Leaving out the question of real-world beliefs, I respect the right of an author to write their own story. There are layers to a story beyond what's printed in a book.
That said, I'm sympathetic to the point of view that revealing the information in the story would have impacted the series more significantly, in controversy if not in book sales. She handled it well. If the kid hadn't asked the question we might have never known.
Posted by Puppy (Member # 6721) on :
Noemon, does controversy drive sales of children's books? I'm asking seriously ... I could see the genre functioning as an exception to the rule, at least in some cases.
Posted by Noemon (Member # 1115) on :
I'm not sure, Geoff, but while the Harry Potter books may be written for children (and by the end of the series I'd say that that's continuing to be the case is debatable), their actual audience is much, much broader.
Posted by Sterling (Member # 8096) on :
quote:Originally posted by soccer-head: What'll happen now, though, is a bunch of fantasy writers'll start writing 'token gay' characters--but what will it really accomplish?
Why? Because Dumbledore's sexuality played such a crucial role in the success of the series? </irony>
My understanding is that the only reason it came up at all is one of the movies was going to have mention of a prior relationship of Dumbledore's with a girl, and Rowling felt the need to correct that from her own private knowledge of the characters and their motivations.
She's admitted a certain amusement at the notion that this revelation might aggravate a small extremist religious base, but mostly because those are the same people who were aggravated that the books "promoted witchcraft". Beyond that amusement and a devotion to fidelity in her vision of her characters, I really don't see any huge "agenda" here.
I doubt Card will care one way or another. I don't doubt he knows more about many of his own characters than is obvious on the page.
Posted by soccer-head (Member # 11044) on :
quote: Why? Because Dumbledore's sexuality played such a crucial role in the success of the series? </irony>
No. Because JK Rowling's announcement was met with 'prolonged applause' and praise, as well as more attention towards the books and movies. I sure don't doubt the ability of fantasy writers to grab on to every chance of easy fame.
quote: Do you really think so? Why? It's worth noting that many spec-fic writers have already thrown in a fair number of "token gay" characters. Do you think they were an influence on Rowling?
Admittedly, I haven't read enough s-f to have a real answer for this, but I wouldn't say so. I don't even think Rowling meant to have a 'token gay' character, but just to make a statement.
Posted by Objectivity (Member # 4553) on :
The only way this makes a difference is if you think that gay people do nothing more than walk around all day long doing things to say in some way, "Look at me, I'm gay."
Unless you're friends with someone outside of work and they confide in you, or they have pictures of family in their office (which even then is questionable) there is no way of knowing if someone is gay or straight simply by being around them.
Dumbledore was gay. How would his not being gay have affected how he interacted with Harry and the others. It wouldn't have. Rowling could just as easily have said the Dumbledore was an alien learning about the planet. It wouldn't only matter if that aspect of the character affected others in the story.
Posted by String (Member # 6435) on :
quote:Originally posted by vwiggin: Maybe she was influenced by the Tolkien gay characters.
What characters?
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
She knew all along that being gay was part of the character she created. She probably never would have said anything about it had someone not asked her directly about Dumbledore's love life. Once asked, she answered. I honestly don't get what the fuss is about. I mean, the person who asked it was specifically asking about part of Dumbledore's life that didn't show up in the book. Had she said, "Yes, Dumbledore had a romance at one point", would the complainers be complaining the way they are now? I doubt it. Their objection has nothing to do with the fact that it wasn't mentioned in the book and everything to do with thinking "gay = icky".
Posted by steven (Member # 8099) on :
"What characters?"
I think it was a play on words, "Tolkien/token".
Posted by Stephen Sunday (Member # 10466) on :
How can anyone even CARE about this issue?
Posted by String (Member # 6435) on :
durga.
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
quote:Originally posted by Lisa: She knew all along that being gay was part of the character she created. She probably never would have said anything about it had someone not asked her directly about Dumbledore's love life. Once asked, she answered. I honestly don't get what the fuss is about. I mean, the person who asked it was specifically asking about part of Dumbledore's life that didn't show up in the book. Had she said, "Yes, Dumbledore had a romance at one point", would the complainers be complaining the way they are now? I doubt it. Their objection has nothing to do with the fact that it wasn't mentioned in the book and everything to do with thinking "gay = icky".
So true... She's always known he was gay from the very beginning of creating him. Well, not exactly.. it takes some time to shape a character.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
quote: I could see him having a beef similar to what Dagonee has said, about it weakening the moral relevancy of his flirtation with the dark side.
To clarify just a little, my concern was not that Dumbledore being gay weakened the moral relevancy of the dark side flirtation, but that telling the Grindelwald story with Dumbledore's unrequited love for him would weaken the story.
Posted by CRash (Member # 7754) on :
Love turns you evil. This we learned from the storytelling genius of George Lucas. Posted by String (Member # 6435) on :
quote:Originally posted by CRash: Love turns you evil. This we learned from the storytelling genius of George Lucas.
word.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
quote:Originally posted by String:
quote:Originally posted by vwiggin: Maybe she was influenced by the Tolkien gay characters.
What characters?
Probably the two eccentric "lifelong bachelor" hobbits, Bilbo and Frodo.
Posted by steven (Member # 8099) on :
I dunno, I just always think of hobbits as sort of asexual. For that matter, I have a hard time thinking of any of Tolkien's characters as having sex lives.
Posted by ClaudiaTherese (Member # 923) on :
I can see Shelob breeding.
Wait.
Thanks so much, steven.
Posted by steven (Member # 8099) on :
I try.
Posted by ClaudiaTherese (Member # 923) on :
*laughing aloud
Posted by steven (Member # 8099) on :
Posted by James Schindler (Member # 11273) on :
When I heard what she said about Dumbledore she ruined all the books for me and she destroyed his name, I believe that she never should have said his sexual preference because he died anyway
I believe that she is using this as a ploy to get more publication about the books and possibly get more readers.
OSC is right about not expressing his opinion on this matter because there is a possibility that it might ruin his name by something he says
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
Considering the stances he's taken on homosexuality in the past, I seriously doubt that if he had something to say he'd refrain.
Posted by Sterling (Member # 8096) on :
quote:Originally posted by James Schindler: I believe that she is using this as a ploy to get more publication about the books and possibly get more readers.
No. It only came up at all with regard to elements in a script for one of the movies that needed to be changed to be accurate to the author's vision. If this was about publicity, it would more likely have been brought up elsewhere, and earlier.
The woman is literally richer than the Queen of England. If the next two movies fail, she'll still be fine. It's rather hard to imagine that she stirred this particular hornets' nest. At least, intentionally.
quote:OSC is right about not expressing his opinion on this matter because there is a possibility that it might ruin his name by something he says [/QB]
If Card ever "ruins his name" about anything, I doubt it will be a matter this trivial.
Posted by Razputin (Member # 9522) on :
Wow, step away for a week and I lose my chance to defend my comments... OK, a tad late but anyhow...
quote:Originally posted by Scott R: In what way is it hypocritical?
I'm having a hard time seeing why it's even pertinent.
I feel it is deceptive in that she revealed his sexual preference after the books were all published. If it was important enough to mention now, why not earlier?
As for its pertinence, it isn't, this character's sexual preference had no role in the story so should never have been mentioned. He is asexual...
quote:Originally posted by Noemon: [QB]I can't quite decide whether you're arguing that controversy drives down book sales, or that Rowling was trying to make sure that fewer of her books sold.
I am just arguing that she should have revealed his preference earlier but didn't IMO simply to avoid controversy and potential loss of sales.
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
quote:I feel it is deceptive in that she revealed his sexual preference after the books were all published.
It's not deceptive. You yourself said that the character's sexuality wasn't a question; that it wasn't even pertinent. For her to have been deceptive, an expectation would have to have been set.
This wasn't hypocrisy; nor was it deception. This was an author revealing something about a character that no one knew, or expected, that had no bearing on the books at all.
I can't really say why his homosexuality wasn't revealed earlier; but I don't recall there ever being a chance for it. Or a need for it. When the question about his relationships came up, she answered it-- that question did not arise in the books.
Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :
There's no way she could have revealed this information without objection. If she had included it in the book, given how wildly unimportant it was, people would have cried foul that she was pushing an agenda on children. Saying it after the fact gives rise to the complaints we've all heard recently.
The only way out was either to make him straight, or to never tell anyone.
Posted by Noemon (Member # 1115) on :
quote:Originally posted by Razputin:
quote:Originally posted by Noemon: I can't quite decide whether you're arguing that controversy drives down book sales, or that Rowling was trying to make sure that fewer of her books sold.
I am just arguing that she should have revealed his preference earlier but didn't IMO simply to avoid controversy and potential loss of sales.
If you're making that argument, you're starting from the assumption that controversy causes book sales to decrease. You're mistaken in thinking that this is the case.
Posted by docmagik (Member # 1131) on :
I think OSC prefers to weigh in on a scale.
Posted by Stephen Sunday (Member # 10466) on :
Besides, Dumbledore never struck me as a "bottom."
Posted by Razputin (Member # 9522) on :
quote:Originally posted by Lyrhawn: There's no way she could have revealed this information without objection. If she had included it in the book, given how wildly unimportant it was, people would have cried foul that she was pushing an agenda on children. Saying it after the fact gives rise to the complaints we've all heard recently.
The only way out was either to make him straight, or to never tell anyone.
Exactly my point. Very well put!
quote:Originally posted by Noemon: If you're making that argument, you're starting from the assumption that controversy causes book sales to decrease. You're mistaken in thinking that this is the case.
In the case of homosexuality and children's books, I think you are very wrong. I believe that a high percentage of American parents would never had allowed their children to read these books if there was a gay character. American parents can't even deal with the idea of their kids seeing a woman's nipple on public TV for Christ sake.
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
Why would she do this for publicity when she's already got one of the most popular books ever. I doubt there is little she can do to make them more or less popular. Writers have a whole history of characters in their head that never makes it to the finished book. The complete history of Sirius Black comes to mind.
Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
I think if he were going to do it, he would have done so by now. Though I had a dream about either a young Sirius Black or Teddy Lupin, I'm not sure which, but he was totally hot. He looked like a mix between Billy Zane and the guy from Big Fat Greek Wedding. I know that's probably hard to picture.
Posted by Stephen Sunday (Member # 10466) on :
Harry Potter is lame.
Posted by Noemon (Member # 1115) on :
quote:Originally posted by Stephen Sunday: Harry Potter is lame.
You make a pursuasive argument.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
You're such a pushover.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
Some people call that "being agreeable."
Not me. But, you know, some people.
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
Harry Potter is not lame.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
Nope. He was a pretty good athlete, according to the books.
Posted by Noemon (Member # 1115) on :
quote:Originally posted by Scott R: Harry Potter is not lame.
That makes a lot of sense too! Now I don't know what to think!
Posted by LadyDove (Member # 3000) on :
The announcement made me a bit sad because I'd always had hopes for him and McGonagall.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
quote:Originally posted by LadyDove: The announcement made me a bit sad because I'd always had hopes for him and McGonagall.
Had Mr. Card written the Potter books that might still be on the table. Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
You mean with Dumbledore being long dead, or in terms of ...oh, right.
Posted by LadyDove (Member # 3000) on :
lol, Nah, I'd always hoped that they'd had love for one another, but chosen not to act on it because of their positions in the school. I don't recall that any of the teachers were married or acknowledged an SO; something that JKR never really explained. Because I was looking at it in that context, the revelation about Dumbledore seemed very odd to me.
Does anyone recall a teacher w/an SO or children at Harry's Hogwarts or JKR explaining why the teachers were single?
Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
Maybe it's because as a kid, you tend to view all the adults in your life as asexual drones, besides parents?
I guess drone isn't really the best word there. "Worker bees" makes more sense.
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
Hagrid and Olympe, or whatever her name was.
Posted by PSI Teleport (Member # 5545) on :
I always assumed that the teachers being single was directly related to the fact that they are teachers at a boarding school. I don't know anything about Great Britain's educational system but I wonder if boarding school teachers frequently have families living with them.
Posted by DDDaysh (Member # 9499) on :
Did anyone else ever dream of going to an old fashioned English or New England boarding school? I know I always did as a kid, because stories always made them sound so cool. Of course, the ones I wanted to go to were generally all boys, so that was a bummer!
Posted by Constipatron (Member # 8831) on :
i doubt card's going to say anything. after all, he includes gay characters in his books. as for rowling, there's NOTHING in the harry potter story that suggests overtly or covertly that dumbledore's gay. in fact, rowling's reply to the press about it was very underwhelming. she said the whole series is about tollerance (and i'm assuming about homosexuality, since it's a recent topic). if that were the case, then she should've actually MADE it an issue in the books. personally, i won't pick up another one of rowling's books, not because one of her characters was gay, but because her answer to the criticism she's receieved was so ineptly done that i've lost respect for her as an author. she's a good author, i'll admit, so is osc, but both have books i'd rather not read like card's earlier short stories and his latest horrible empire..... anyway... morrissey says it best: "reader meet author in the hope of hearing sense but you may be feeling let down by the words of defense..."
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Blushing]](graemlins/blushing.gif)
durga.
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
word.
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)