Is that the reason why he likes birds?
J.K. Rowling revealed this secret when she appeared before a full house at Carnegie Hall. A young fan asked if Dumbledore finds “true love” and Rowling answered simply, “Dumbledore is gay”.
She further explained that Dumbledore is smittened with none other than rival Gellert Grindelwald, whom he defeated in a duel before.
Read the entire news article here.
I don’t mind if he’s gay. Actually, if he is a real person, I would have been glad if he does come out of the closet for real. But will this revelation cause another ruckus among religious groups who are against homosexuality? If you will remember, a lot of Christian groups and even deluded parents protested against the publication of Harry Potter books because it allegedly promotes witchcraft (which I think is a lot of B.S.) and that it make sorcery and witchcraft enticing to the reader. Why don’t these people just stop being obsessed about meddling with how other people decide to live their lives and just focus on how to enrich their own in whatever ways they find it right and fit for them?
And so now, with Dumbledore out of the closet, will groups protest again and push for banning the Harry Potter books from children’s libraries just because they think these books “promote” or “encourages” homosexuality?
Oh, please. Not again.
October 20th, 2007 at 19:48
I was shocked when I’ve learned about this. This is so bizarre. I don’t care if Dumbledore is gay, it’s not a big problem to me but if I were JK Rowling, I would have made Albus a heterosexual.
October 20th, 2007 at 20:03
Shocker! I had my doubts but I never really voiced them out loud…good thing she “outed” Dumbledore after the 7th book. Personally, I don’t really think it’s a big deal but imagine the furor his sexuality would have caused.
October 20th, 2007 at 20:27
Honestly, I almost fell off my chair laughing when I read about this.
Then again, does it matter? More so, I’m not even a Potter fan. The reactions though would be very intersting to watch by.
October 20th, 2007 at 21:10
I don’t think it matters. I don’t think Dumbledore would have behaved differently had he been gay or straight. I think he’s just a good person who cared for Harry and what is good tremendously.
For me, there was no need for JKR to state that fact.
October 21st, 2007 at 7:31
Speaking as a Christian, I don’t think Dumbledore’s being gay should have any additional effect on the merits of the Potter series as material unfit for young Christian readers in the eyes of some Christians. The Christians calling for a boycott of the material would be hard-pressed to use this latest piece of evidence, because I think the Potter series contains little information or textual evidence that supports Dumbledore engaged in a gay lifestyle.
If more Christian groups decide to fan the flames, I say let ‘em. Freedom of speech allows them to do that, and they certainly don’t speak for the majority of Christians, including my wife and me, who enjoy the Potter series.
I do agree with Em that Rowling needn’t have said that. (What good does it do an author to say, well, in my mind, he’s gay, or she had an affair, or there was a sixth toe? For as long as it’s unpublished in the book itself, there’s little point to bring up might’ves, should’ves, or possiblys.) Only for PR: how desperate is Rowling to sell more books or create more buzz now that the series is over?
October 21st, 2007 at 11:16
what dumbledor is gay! shocking. what till my nieces find out. not that it matters but i think most harry potter fans will be shocked. there was no hint of his “gayness” in the movies, was there?
October 21st, 2007 at 15:28
I don’t see how Dumbledore’s sexual orientation changes things. It doesn’t affect his characterization. It might have had Dumbledore confessed that he is gay in any of the 7 books and done something that was exclusive to homosexuals, but none of that happened. For me, the fact that JK Rowling revealed Dumbledore’s homosexuality AFTER the publication of the 7 books shows that this detail is insignificant. It doesn’t matter if he’s gay as long as he’s got a good heart.
October 22nd, 2007 at 14:17
to Christian:
I was surprised but I don’t mind if Rowling thinks of him as a homosexual when she wrote his character. He’s still a good guy.
October 22nd, 2007 at 14:20
to psychogoddess:
“imagine the furor his sexuality would have caused…”
— yup, some people will think of it as big deal and since the Harry Potter series has been wrought with controversies from start to finish because some people questions the “morality” that this book is teaching or missing. I just hope that these people will not make mountains out of a molehill.
October 22nd, 2007 at 14:21
to jhay:
Well, then I hope you didn’t hurt your butt falling off the chair
Yup, it would be very interesting to see the different reactions to this piece of “news”.
October 22nd, 2007 at 14:23
to Em Dy,
Yup, it might be an insignificant fact but I think Rowling revealed it because she wanted to be honest with her thoughts regarding the books. Maybe she just wanted to share how she thought of Dumbledore as she wrote the books.
October 22nd, 2007 at 14:30
to ganns:
“If more Christian groups decide to fan the flames, I say let ‘em. Freedom of speech allows them to do that…”
— I don’t think anyone could stop them anyway. It’s just that I don’t think they ought to be pushing for a collective action against the books because not everybody is offended by it. What I’m referring to was that time when a group of parents picketed and protested in front of a public library, saying that the library OUGHT to take the Harry Potter books off the shelves because it’s immoral or enticing kids to be more interested in witchcraft. While it is their right to protest, I don’t think it is also their right to meddle with how other people should be seeing the Harry Potter books. How about those kids who have access to that library and wants to read Harry Potter books and their parents permit them to do so? Should they be affected by all the protest and not be able to read the books they want to read just because some group decided that it’s immoral to be reading such? If certain people don’t want their kids reading Harry Potter books, then just tell their kids not to. That’s what I meant by meddling with other people’s lives.
I don’t think Rowling revealing Dumbledore’s sexuality is just a PR stunt, though. As a writer, she may just be sharing intimate thoughts about a character she wrote with fans whom she thinks also wanted to know more about the characters she wrote. I’m actually glad that she shared that information. Yes, it is probably an insignificant fact that couldn’t affect the story, but it’s a fact, nonetheless, about one of HP’s adorable characters.
October 22nd, 2007 at 14:33
to monaco:
I don’t think there are any references to Dumbledore’s sexual preference in the books. It’s just interesting to note that is how Rowling thinks of him.
October 22nd, 2007 at 14:36
to Frances,
Yup, I agree. But still I’m glad that Rowling shared that little secret with us.
October 22nd, 2007 at 15:03
Maybe she plans to write a new series, a prequel of sorts: Albus Dumbledore and the Prisoners of Azkaban. Just kidding!
October 22nd, 2007 at 15:09
To Frances:
“Maybe she plans to write a new series, a prequel of sorts: Albus Dumbledore and the Prisoners of Azkaban.”
— Now that’s naughty. Hahaha :p
October 22nd, 2007 at 18:38
Shocking. Really. If ever someone comes up to me and says, “Do you know that Albus Dumbledore’s gay?”, I will not believe him. But the words coming from JK? Shocking.
October 22nd, 2007 at 20:07
Hey, that’s great, we can come up with Potter fan fiction where male students, now adults, accuse Dumbledore of sexually assaulting them during their student years, and then it turns out that it’s another one of the Malfoys’ plots. LOL
October 23rd, 2007 at 0:04
to Arlo:
Just don’t get “shocked” for too long.
October 23rd, 2007 at 0:10
to Jon Limjap:
Or this is better: Dumbledore is accused by one of the female students for sexual harassment and he wins the case for proving he’s a homosexual and incapable of having sexual relations with a person of the opposite sex. Haha.
October 23rd, 2007 at 0:38
Hi Prudence,
hilarious isn’t it? Who cares. Do you? I don’t care…it’s fiction for goodness sakes. Cut me a break…
I relinked into you by the way! Have a great day!
October 23rd, 2007 at 1:02
to Ev Nucci:
Yup, it’s quite hilarious for one part. I can imagine the reactions of the audience when J.K. Rowling blurted it out. That would be one Kodak moment. I’d say though that I care, not because I’m bothered about it but because I like the character and the Harry Potter story so I want to know stuff about the characters.
Thanks for visiting my blog!
October 24th, 2007 at 0:19
It’s interesting to know how a writer consider such details of the characters when creating the scenes in their stories.
Imagine what would happen had Rowling thought of Prof. McGonagall as a lesbian
October 24th, 2007 at 5:45
It´s only christians, muslims and judeén that are upset. So what if he´s gay? We live in the year of 2007 and people don´t belive in God anymore.
October 24th, 2007 at 9:12
The church should finally grow up and accept that God looks at the person, not his sexual orientation.
October 24th, 2007 at 21:19
to kotsengkuba:
“Imagine what would happen had Rowling thought of Prof. McGonagall as a lesbian…”
I don’t think it would matter really. Hehe. She’s still be rigid and straight
October 24th, 2007 at 21:23
to Fotograf:
I wouldn’t agree that people do not believe in God anymore. I’d be more specific in saying that a lot still do believe in God and have the delusions that their God meant them to fight for his reputation, even if it meant killing other people in the process. Now that’s the sad part.
But I’d agree to what you said, “so what if he’s gay?” Yup, his homosexuality shouldn’t make a difference whether he’s a good or bad person. His sexual preference isn’t the measure of his morality.
October 24th, 2007 at 21:24
to Schumey:
“God looks at the person, not his sexual orientation…”
— I’m not sure what God does or thinks, but if He really exists, yup, I think he wouldn’t judge a person based only on his sexual orientation.