I swore when this first broke I would not blog it, as I thought it patently absurd.  But I also had the sinking feeling that too many people would not let it be, and that I would end up seeing so much stupid bloviating that I would feel compelled to take my shot at it.

And here we are.

I am speaking of the news that JK Rowlings has decided that master Wizard Albus Dumbledore was gay.

Rowling: Potter's Dumbledore Gay

Harry Potter fans,  the rumors are true: Albus Dumbledore, master  wizard and Headmaster of Hogwarts, is gay. J.K. Rowling, author of the mega-selling fantasy series that ended last summer, outed the beloved character Friday night while appearing before a full house at Carnegie Hall.

After reading briefly from the final book, "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows," she took questions from audience members.

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."

Acknowledging that this is her story, and she can make Dumbledore a transformed troll or tell us he has a wart on his butt if she chooses, I just don't see the point.  I don't see any references, any hints or any plot devices to suggest anything of the sort. 

Had their been, wouldn't Rita Skeeter have outed him in her book?

Unless of course you concede that an older man who is single and shows no attraction to any woman around him has to by definition be gay, and frankly that is simply too simplistic to be valid.

What about a man who dedicates himself to his life's work and sacrifices all else for that?  Is he gay too?  By that definition are all Priests and Nuns Gay?   How about Gandalf? Or Bilbo Baggins for that matter.

I have a personal theory.  I have to note that in all 7 books there is not one single reference, or even a hint of a character who is gay, at least not that I can find.  So I personally think this was her nod to that exclusion.  After spending 10 years priming our imagination with her world behind our world novels, she perhaps realized that something (besides art) was missing. 

And now she not only fixed it, but she did so in grand style, making the most beloved character gay.

And....wait for it....yes, here they come, her come the Fanatics!!!

Harry Potter and the Gay Wizard: The Secret Behind the Story (Emphasis added)

What a difference a day makes. Jo Rowling came out of the closet this week—or at least her creation, Albus Dumbledore, did. Take note, Potter fans everywhere, that Rowling—in her great wisdom—has revealed to the world that the wisest, kindest, most powerful (and famous) senior  wizard in literary history is gay.  The Headmaster of Hogwarts prefers men.  According to Rowling, “I always thought of Dumbledore as gay. . . . Dumbledore fell in love with Grindelwald [a bad wizard he defeated long ago], and that added to his horror when Grindelwald showed himself to be what he was.” [1]  Exactly why homosexuality is vital to her story, Rowling never reveals.  She never explains her need to address sexual preference in a book aimed at children.

So what was the purpose of the bombshell Rowling dropped during her interview at Carnegie Hall?  Why did she out the beloved Dumbledore?  The single answer is that Harry Potter and the Gay Wizard publicly throws all the weight of Rowling’s influence (not to mention her millions) behind the cause of Gay Rights . . . a cause we now know she proudly champions.

What a stand for diversity!  What a triumph for gay people everywhere!

What egg on the face of “Christian” supporters  like Christianity Today, a publisher of feel-good articles like, “Why We Like Harry Potter” (2000). Christianity Today recommended Potter because “Rowling’s series is a Book of Virtues with a preadolescent funny bone. Amid the laugh-out-loud scenes are wonderful examples of compassion, loyalty, courage, friendship, and even self-sacrifice. No wonder young readers want to be like these believable characters. That is a Christmas present we can be grateful for.”  [2] 

Harry Potter as a “Book of Virtues?”  In what reality?

Rowling’s agenda has always been clear: she sees nothing wrong with Witchcraft; in fact, she glorifies all of its dark details by wrapping them up in the shiny tissue paper of fantasy.  The occult is a lucrative business, and Rowling knows this better than anyone else. She’s made hundreds of millions of dollars working and playing in the wonderful world of the occult.

Witchcraft is the heart and soul of Harry Potter; it always has been and it always will be.  But like any other deception fostered by Satan, it is beautifully dressed in the biblical virtues admired by so many.

At long last, Rowling revealed a bit of the truth behind her billion dollar creation, and surprisingly, she did the Christian world an enormous favor by her perverse revelation: she settled the Harry Potter debate once and for all.

Sigh.  I don't have the time to deal with all the idiotic statements here.  Bottom line, the books are not bad or evil.  Yes, the books have some elements of moral ambiguity.  Not all elements are clearly good or evil.

Well neither all all things in life.  The only thing wrong with the books is that there are too many parents who do not teach their children to discern right from wrong and reality from fiction.

And consider this:  Since most of the spells in the books are in latin, you stand a better chance turning your children Catholic then satanic.

And there are many more complaints like this, even on TV:

O’Reilly: J.K. Rowling Is A ‘Provocateur’ For ‘The Gay Agenda’ Of ‘Indoctrination’

Last Friday, Harry Potter author J.K. Rowling revealed that one of the central characters in the series, Hogwarts headmaster Albus Dumbledore, was gay. Though Rowling says her books are a “prolonged argument for tolerance,” some conservatives attacked the revelation, saying it was “revolting” and vindication for the late Rev. Jerry Falwell’s homophobia.

On his Fox News show last night, Bill O’Reilly joined in the fray, asking if Dumbledore’s outing was part of the “gay agenda” of “indoctrination” of “children.” O’Reilly claimed that by dropping “the gay bomb,” Rowling is a “provocateur” who is “going to let all hell break loose”:

O’REILLY: Now, Dumbledore is not overtly gay in the book.

JORDAN: Absolutely not.

O’REILLY: So you wouldn’t know whether he was gay or not, right?

JORDAN: And in fact, you don’t know anything about the sex lives of any of the teachers.

O’REILLY: Of any of them. Although those wizards, I’m very very suspicious about what they’re doing in their spare time. So, I think, this is my conclusion, is that J.K. Rowling is a provocateur, did it on purpose, and now is going to let all hell break loose.

Frankly while some of his comments are over the top, she very well could have done it for the reasons stated, we just don't know.   And seeing him ont he show, I would bet most of that last bit about spare time was tongue firmly in cheek.  But the haters will roast him for it.

I admit though, it does seem odd to me to ignore the issue utterly through 5 movies and 7 books and thousands of interviews, and they suddenly announce it as an "oh by the way".   Thats why my theory holds true for me

I also think anyone that see this as a 100% positive message about gays is missing the point.  He lived alone unfulfilled. Had she been embracing homosexuality, where is his partner?  Yes we hear that having to kill Grindelwald, whom she says he loved, was so tragic and traumatic he could not love again, but come on, where is the healing power of love for the greatest wizard of all time?

Think about it: her off the cuff reveal is just as shamed faced and hidden as the closet she brought him out of.

Personally, I think it's a stupid point all around.  The books of themselves do not promote anything except gay people living a priestly chaste life.  Heck that should be a plus.

So for whatever reason she did it, it boils down to something that honestly means nothing in the context of this story.

Albus Dumbledore the character is still graced with the deeds he did, the sacrifices he made and the determination he showed in fighting evil.

Being gay did not give or take anything away from it, and frankly the extreme right wingers are gay baiting themselves into ridicule.

This is something better left untouched.

If she rewrites the books to put a gay bathhouse in Diagon Alley, then get upset.

 Trackposted to Outside the Beltway, Blog @ MoreWhat.com, Perri Nelson's Website, The Virtuous Republic, , Adam's Blog, Right Truth, The Populist, The Pet Haven Blog, Shadowscope, Webloggin, Stuck On Stupid, Cao's Blog, The Amboy Times, Conservative Cat, Adeline and Hazel, Pursuing Holiness, Conservative Thoughts, Pet's Garden Blog, Diary of the Mad Pigeon, third world county, The World According to Carl, Blue Star Chronicles, Pirate's Cove, The Pink Flamingo, Dumb Ox Daily News, Right Voices, Gone Hollywood, and The Yankee Sailor, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Trackback URI | Comments RSS