Posted by: Steve | October 22, 2007

Why Is This Not Surprising?

J.K. Rowling has revealed that Dumbledore, a hero of the Harry Potter books and headmaster of Hogwart’s academy, is gay.

Actually on second thought, this is surprising. It just lends credence to those who think that at best, Harry Potter is pop-culture junk, not the literature of Christian allegory that the HP apologists keep trying to convince us it is.


Responses

  1. Well, I’m one of those HP readers who thinks that there is significant Christian content in the books, but I respect that others don’t find that content convincing enough to warrant spending their time on the books. I found the following essay on the whole Dumbledore-as-Tinky-Winky fiasco enlightening:

    http://hogwartsprofessor.com/?p=198

    YM, as they say, MV.

    Pax!

  2. Drew! You’re alive!

  3. By God’s grace, yes. And after almost of month of pneumonia, I am also stir-crazy. But tomorrow, God willing, I will attend my first TLM!

  4. I have never understood Harry Potter-mania. I adore books and am an avid reader, but have no interest, simply on a literary level, of reading Harry Potter.

  5. So what?
    His homosexuality was never an issue in the books.
    My daughters never picked-up on it and were surprised to hear it.
    It’s not like she was tryinng to make some ’statement’ about homosexuality in the books.
    If the character is homosexual, he was certainly very discreet about it.
    And I still do not see how this “revelation” has ANYTHING to do with the merits or problems with the books whatsoever.
    Homosexuality is and was always a prevalent factor in English society. They have just approached it differently as a society.

    And finally, the issue of homosexuality (just by itself, without any ‘agenda’ attaching) certainly has not hurt or been cause for condemnation for that greatest of Catholic novels of this century, Brideshead Revisited.
    And THAT brilliant opus was rife with it! As well as adultery, betrayal, and alcoholism.

    I still think you are looking for strawmen here.
    Considering what I have pointed out with Evelyn Waugh, what exactly is your point in bringing this up?

  6. Edward,

    I think my point was crystal clear. It’s evident that this revelation was not relevant enough to the story for it to have been made apparent in the narrative, so why is it being announced now?

    It wasn’t a question that was asked, and the question that did prompt the answer could have been answered in a different way.

    It is therefore surpising, considering the criticism Rowling receives from Christians for her themes, that she would make this revelation that seems to offer a retrospective on one of the heroes of the books that casts light on a disturbing character trait. Authors create their characters, and there is a choice involved in what shape those take.

    Making this type of choice and revealing it so willingly strikes me as rather odd.

    Regardless, Potter is pop culture, not classic literature. I don’t see why so many are so eager to be apologists for the cause.

    Some day, if I can scrape up enough interest, I’ll actually read the books so I can form a more thorough judgment. Until then, it remains my prerogative to be at least suspicious of the themes they contain – whether these are explicitt, implicit, or revealed after the fact.

  7. Actually, Steve,
    The issue was raised in response to questions about an old and youthful relationship that the Headmaster of hogwarts and a fellow student of his had while they attended together.
    My daughters discovered this when looking for clues.
    They DID seem very involved with each other, but my girls just put that down to their being very close friends.
    Rowling was just informing curious fans with the revelation.
    Looking at it now, it is transparent to the wise and knowing; but over all, it is quite delicately and discreetly handled in the story as a whole.
    I hope this will shed some light for you upon the reason behind the revelation.


Leave a response

Your response:

Categories