During J.K. Rowlings tour of the U.S. , after her reading of Harry Potter, and the Deathly Hallows, in Carnegie Hall, she was asked by a young fan if Dumbledore was gay.
The Leaky Cauldron, which is prized as J.K. Rowlings favorite fan site will have the transcripts from the NY reading, at Carnegie Hall very soon. As posted on their site however, are the details of her interview in Toronto, Ontario Canada, where she made her next stop and was flooded with queries about Dumbledore.
Until the transcripts come out, there will be a confusion playing on those words, as some say the child was asking if Dumbledore had found love, and other's are saying, that the child asked if he was gay. Is that really important? Yes, to some it is, as it either backs or rejects the argument that J.K. Rowling deliberately threw it in conversation, to cause a rift between Christians and the Gay Community.
Every reporter during her interview, asked what was on everyone's mind. If she really meant it when she said that Dumbledore was gay? She said yes, he is her character and she has the right to say what ever she choses about him. She said there wasn't a need to mention it before, and that she was asked a DIRECT question, to which she specifically replied.
She made a distinct point to let the children in NY, know that she wouldn't stand for WB Studios having Dumbledore have a female past love. She slipped the Director a note, when he had given Dumbledore a female love, which explained why it wasn't a good idea. She had always designed, inside her head, not in her books as of yet, that Dumbledore was gay, and in love with his rival Gellert Grindelwald. She went on to explain how Dumbledore had his heart broken by the bad wizard Brindelwald and thats why Dumbledore has a dark past.
What was listed in her series, was for Dumbledore's brother. It said, in one of her books, that Dumbledore's brother perferred sheep, and got into trouble for casting on them.
She also was quoted at Carnegie Hall, to say that she regarded her books as a, "prolonged argument for a plea of tolerance" and she urged the children in which she read to, to 'question authority'.
(Question authority?) Makes one wonder, don't parents and teachers have it hard enough these days? Or perhaps she was referring to those who ban her books.
She also made reference to the church, that they have not approved of her books, as they claim she promotes witchcraft, and she hoped that making Dumbledore gay would give them one more reason to rally against her series of Potter books. (She has endured book banning over the years.)
After all these years of making Dumbledore a Wizard, a sole fighter for justice against the dark side, why she chose after her last book was completed, to give him a sexual preference is unknown. Does anyone these days really care about that sort of thing? They only care, who the character is, and the focus has always been that of a father figure to Harry.
The crowd at Carnegie Hall had gasped in shock. The internet blogs filled with wonder on why she would bring that up now, when she's not writing anymore books.
Most people assumed Dumbledore and Professor McGonagall were the perfect pair. But it was always implied, like the love affairs in classic movies, you notice tender looks, great respect for one another, but they leave the intimate parts to your imagination, it was always understood they were in love. They delivered Harry to his muggle relatives together, they practically raised him together in Hogwarts. McGonagall is like a mother to Harry, and Dumbledore was thought of like a father. Does changing your mind after a series has completed a wise choice? I guess that's up to the readers.
People are saying that J.K. Rowling is looking to create controversy, because her books have become socially acceptable and the huge shock impact lost its teeth. Others are calling it a pathetic attempt at a publicity stunt, not uncommon for her, as she has on several occassions pulled them, like saying this is her final book, until she has all the kids cry and beg her to continue. Once again, that's up to the people who buy her products, and for her readers to decide.
J.K Rowlings tour of the U.S. took her to Los Angeles, New Orleans, and N.Y., where only school children were invited to hear her read, except for Carnegie Hall, NY.
According the Net Blogs I've viewed, J.K. Rowlings tour of the US, has ended with a lot of questions and mysterious vibes.
What do you think about J.K. Rowling's statement, after all was said and done, was it necessary to bring it up now?
Got an opinion? Leave a comment below and share your thoughts.
Peace out!
Written by: Sacreeta
Here's a link to the Leaky Cauldron, for those interested in J.K.'s favorite fansite.
tweet this!
