Blotan Hunka
Master Black Belt
- Joined
- Dec 15, 2005
- Messages
- 1,462
- Reaction score
- 20
Im of the "eh..who cares?" crowd. Loved the books. Never cared or thought about AD's love life.
Dumbledore ....
- Thread starter michaeledward
- Start date
Well I thought about it ... but know a lot of schoolteachers and professors who never marry and/or never have children.
As for the rest of your statement, I agree - couldn't care less, really.
CoryKS
Senior Master
AD is Schrodinger's Homosexual - if the book is closed, he is neither gay nor straight.
Don't know what that means, but I think it's silly to speculate on the orientation of a fictional character. I was able to cope with the hot, knowing looks between Frodo and Sam, I can cope with this.
Don't know what that means, but I think it's silly to speculate on the orientation of a fictional character. I was able to cope with the hot, knowing looks between Frodo and Sam, I can cope with this.
Well that's the problem ... when Tolkien written the trilogy he wrote about a very strong close bond of friendship between Sam and Frodo. There was nothing more to that.
However it translated badly into film or due to today's increasing pro-gay society the looks exchanged between the actors was IMO mis-interpreted as loving/knowing looks rather than fondness of a loyal, close (hetrosexual) friends. Remember Sam always had a torch for Rosie Cotton the barmaid back at the Shire, and he eventually married and started a family with her.
Same with Merry and Pippin who, in the novels each married and had children.
Both had a close loyal bond but nothing sexual.
If Tolkien had meant for that to be then he would've elluded more to that in his writings. He was a very detailed author and wrote several times of the closeness of the four hobbits of the fellowship.
People are reading what they WANT to read into it. Maybe I am too but I've been reading The Lord of the Rings Trilogy (including the prequel "The Hobbit") annually for the last 18-20 years. I can be dense but I'm not THAT naive to have missed something along those lines if it were in there. :lol:
But as far as Rowling mentioning the sexual orientation/preference of Dumbledore this late in... I can't see any relevantcy to the story/plot at all. Especially considering that he died at the end of book 6 and only spoke to Harry in spirit. I'd have to agree that it's a (redundant) marketing ploy to appeal to the gay audience which were already enamored by the whole story anyway to begin with. Don't think they needed any help in liking the books anymore than they have. Several of my gay friends are big Potter fans and the fact that there's no "open" gay characters throughout the series doesn't bother them at all.
So why bring up a dead character's orientation... especially since the story is finished.
See, I always thought there was a mad love triangle between Padfoot, Snape and Moody. 
Blotan Hunka
Master Black Belt
- Joined
- Dec 15, 2005
- Messages
- 1,462
- Reaction score
- 20
I think its a smart marketing maneuver. Be all inclusive to draw a bigger market.
Like she needs it.
CoryKS
Senior Master
bydand
Senior Master
See, I always thought there was a mad love triangle between Padfoot, Snape and Moody.
Oh, now you see, that right there is just... Eeeewww. Glad you didn't mention wormtail in that mix, I would have had to go shower just to feel clean after reading something like that.
CoryKS
Senior Master
See, I always thought there was a mad love triangle between Padfoot, Snape and Moody.
I see you've been reading the fan fiction.
Well I did have my suspicions. But after giving his LEFT hand for his master instead of his RIGHT ...
As for the other three, though, oh the possibilities. Fur, potions, a crazy eye ... *raises eyebrows*
OP
michaeledward
Grandmaster
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2003
- Messages
- 6,063
- Reaction score
- 82
- Thread Starter
- #32
I have not read the books. As a family, we have listened to the Jim Dale readings of the books, while traveling in the auto. When I have attempted to read the books, I find they did not have half the appeal of hearing the stories. (Especially as read by Mr. Dale).
What is apparent, from the books, the story arc, and the interviews that Ms. Rowling has given, is that the world and characters have been pretty fully developed prior to publishing.
While it may not be necessary for us to know that Ms. Rowling viewed the character as a closeted homosexual, I believe it may have been important for her to know that.
I think the idea that she is spinning the story that way now, as a ploy to increase market share, is ridiculous. I don't know that she would be able to recongize the difference in her wealth on the basis of this knowlege. It would be, I believe, too little impact, on to large a body of wealth.
... and, after the round of applause that greeter the announcement in New York, she is reported as saying something like "if I knew, I would have told you sooner.".
What is apparent, from the books, the story arc, and the interviews that Ms. Rowling has given, is that the world and characters have been pretty fully developed prior to publishing.
While it may not be necessary for us to know that Ms. Rowling viewed the character as a closeted homosexual, I believe it may have been important for her to know that.
I think the idea that she is spinning the story that way now, as a ploy to increase market share, is ridiculous. I don't know that she would be able to recongize the difference in her wealth on the basis of this knowlege. It would be, I believe, too little impact, on to large a body of wealth.
... and, after the round of applause that greeter the announcement in New York, she is reported as saying something like "if I knew, I would have told you sooner.".
:lookie: ... no ... (rep points for the first person who can make the SNL reference) :lol2:
- Joined
- Feb 11, 2003
- Messages
- 9,998
- Reaction score
- 206
Caver,
Everyone knows Hobbits are gay. Thats why lady hobbits Date orks.
Everyone knows Hobbits are gay. Thats why lady hobbits Date orks.
That's something to consider...
It may have been something that SHE needed to know to write the books. I know some writers have to very carefully plot out details well beyond what they'll actually include in a book. L. E. Modesit has clearly plotted out much more of the back story in several of his series than he has writted so far -- and clearly had much of this done before The Magic of Recluse. (In fact, when I first read it, I started hunting for the book or books I missed!) The same thing with the Liaden Universe created by Steve Miller & Sharon Lee. Others run with it as it goes... I think Piers Anthony is an example of this, based on his writings about writing. I also remember other writers telling how characters took on a life of their own.
But we, the readers, don't always need to know all of this, or all the backstory of the book!
I think the crucial question is, are the author's intentions part of the story? Are they crucial to the abstract object which the narrative constitutes? Here's an example of the same question in another guise: do we need to know what Beethoven's naturalistic intentions were to grasp the structure and musical meaning of the Pastoral Symphony? The logic of tonality, melody and theme and variation are really what the 6th Symphony exhibits, and denotes. Beethoven's images of shepherds, shepherdesses, harvest celebrations and thunderstorms isn't in the least relevant to the 6th as a muscal structure: it's the score which tells the story, not the rather prosaic storyline that Beethoven supplied for it. The Harry Potter epic is similarly the score which JKR composed; how could her private attitudes about the characters—to the extent that they did not take the form of plot or character components—actually be considered parts of the story at all?
In exactly the same way, the idea that JKR's intentions, views, attitudes and so on actually affect the logic of the story after the fact, so to speak, seems to me without any foundation. Suppose she announced, in another interview, that she had always viewed Fred and George as 20th century wizard versions of the Greek heroic twins Castor and Pollux. Exactly what would this tell us about their role and actions and so on in the story?? It might tell us a good deal about JKR herself, but everything that we can legitimately infer about the story JKR has told is contained in the story, which Castor and Pollux have no connection to whatever.
Mozart is said to have hated the flute. He wrote little for it, but what he did write is as transcendently beautiful as anything he wrote for the violin or any other instrument. Knowing that he hated the flute, will this change our perception of his magnificent flute concerti? An author is allowed to entertain little private ideas about her characters, just as we are, but once she's put down the pen and the story is told, her intentions, and ideas, however they may have expedited creating the tale, are not part of the story unless they've played a role in the story itself. If anyone can identify some component of the saga which makes no sense unless we assume AD was gay... then the picture changes, sure. But no one has actually pointed out anything remotely like that on this thread so far.
In exactly the same way, the idea that JKR's intentions, views, attitudes and so on actually affect the logic of the story after the fact, so to speak, seems to me without any foundation. Suppose she announced, in another interview, that she had always viewed Fred and George as 20th century wizard versions of the Greek heroic twins Castor and Pollux. Exactly what would this tell us about their role and actions and so on in the story?? It might tell us a good deal about JKR herself, but everything that we can legitimately infer about the story JKR has told is contained in the story, which Castor and Pollux have no connection to whatever.
Mozart is said to have hated the flute. He wrote little for it, but what he did write is as transcendently beautiful as anything he wrote for the violin or any other instrument. Knowing that he hated the flute, will this change our perception of his magnificent flute concerti? An author is allowed to entertain little private ideas about her characters, just as we are, but once she's put down the pen and the story is told, her intentions, and ideas, however they may have expedited creating the tale, are not part of the story unless they've played a role in the story itself. If anyone can identify some component of the saga which makes no sense unless we assume AD was gay... then the picture changes, sure. But no one has actually pointed out anything remotely like that on this thread so far.
Dumbledore? Not Snape?
According to Rowling, Snape loved Lilly all his life to the extent he could love no other.
But see my theory on Padfoot, Snape and Moody.
Hmm, I would've thought that female Hobbits dated/mated with Dwarf men because "... there ARE no Dwarf women..." according to Gimli speaking to Eowyn while enroute to Helms Deep (The Two Towers movie).
It's been a year or two since my last read-through, but I thought he told her that Dwarven women were often mistaken for Dwarven men? It was the Entwives that were "missing."
Similar threads
