Harry Potter & the Deathly Hallows discussion ***SPOILERS!!!***

[Lila64]

 

[BVS]

I think JK Rowling was pretty stupid to taint (yeah, I said it) the Harry Potter series with bringing up Dumbledore´s sexuality like that. I´m just glad it´s not really in the books because I would have a difficult time explaining to my children why Dumbledore is bent over and taking it like a man. JK Rowlin should´ve quit while she was winning.

I think the stupidity lies in the fact that anyone would be considered tainted because of this. I also think it's stupid to think that if it was mentioned in the book doesn't mean there would be a graphic scene about it. Are you going to mention to your kids how Cinderella "is bent over taking it like a" woman?

 

[Dalton]

I think the stupidity lies in the fact that anyone would be considered tainted because of this. I also think it's stupid to think that if it was mentioned in the book doesn't mean there would be a graphic scene about it. Are you going to mention to your kids how Cinderella "is bent over taking it like a" woman?

You've had that dream too?

 

[BVS]

 

[Kiki]

I think JK Rowling was pretty stupid to taint (yeah, I said it) the Harry Potter series with bringing up Dumbledore´s sexuality like that. I´m just glad it´s not really in the books because I would have a difficult time explaining to my children why Dumbledore is bent over and taking it like a man. JK Rowlin should´ve quit while she was winning.

I think thats reading in to it way to much. If she ever had come out and made it known for whatever reason in the series or if it's ever put in to a spin off series of the magical world, in passing, it's definetly safe to say she'd never cross that line of putting an actual scene like that in the book. I think you have to remember that she does know she was writing these books first and foremost for children.

 

[DreamOutLoud13]

I think JK Rowling was pretty stupid to taint (yeah, I said it) the Harry Potter series with bringing up Dumbledore´s sexuality like that. I´m just glad it´s not really in the books because I would have a difficult time explaining to my children why Dumbledore is bent over and taking it like a man. JK Rowlin should´ve quit while she was winning.

I'd be more worried about explaining to my hypothetical children why it's okay for Ginny and Dean Thomas to snog their faces off eachother (in HBP) in the school corridors, but that I don't want them doing that at school (would you?) than about having to "explain" something that's not even in the books. Then again, if I had children, I would raise them to accept alternate sexualities as normal relationships

 

[redhotswami]

I think JK Rowling was pretty stupid to taint (yeah, I said it) the Harry Potter series with bringing up Dumbledore´s sexuality like that. I´m just glad it´s not really in the books because I would have a difficult time explaining to my children why Dumbledore is bent over and taking it like a man. JK Rowlin should´ve quit while she was winning.

do you not know what "unrequited" means? never in the books, did she say anybody was having sex. you see babies, you see snogging. but she never said anything about sex. dumbledore didn't get to even share the love he had with him, so why are you now jumping to such an irrational conclusion?

 

[Dalton]

Can we get back to Cinderella getting bent over? Thanks,

 

[Kiki]

Can we get back to Cinderella getting bent over? Thanks,

you're ruining Cinderella for me!!!

 

[Varitek]

I think the stupidity lies in the fact that anyone would be considered tainted because of this. I also think it's stupid to think that if it was mentioned in the book doesn't mean there would be a graphic scene about it. Are you going to mention to your kids how Cinderella "is bent over taking it like a" woman?

Exactly. Frankly, I think people who are bothered by this and now claim they can't read their favorite books in the same way ever again are getting what they deserve. Dumbledore's sexuality was never explicitly discussed. The books are from Harry's point of view, obviously, he didn't really care about any of his teachers' sex lives or sexuality, nor should he have.

I think this piece of information makes perfect sense and enhances the story. It makes me more sympathetic to Dumbledore's prolonged blindness to Grindelwald's vast shortcomings. Also, I really like the theory I've read now that Doge was probably in love DD with or maybe for a time DD's partner.

 

[Kiki]

The books are from Harry's point of view, obviously, he didn't really care about any of his teachers' sex lives or sexuality, nor should he have.

exactly. What kid worries about that anyway? These are more than likely reasons she didn't put it in to the book. And besides that....its the way she percieves her characters. If anyone didn't pick up on it or didn't think it made more sense, etc. why should her coming out and saying this now ruin the books for people?

Like Vari said, I think it makes more sense and if you want to "shelter" kids or not explain this part of the world to them yet, then don't offer up the information to them. Yet another reason JK more than likely didn't come right out and say it to everyone.

 

[Dalton]

Am I the only one who keeps laughing everytime someone uses the word "taint" while discussing a characters sexuality?

Ok. I'm done now ....

 

[BonosSaint]

Are you going to mention to your kids how Cinderella "is bent over taking it like a" woman?

Or that the Prince had a foot fetish.

 

[Kiki]

Am I the only one who keeps laughing everytime someone uses the word "taint" while discussing a characters sexuality?

Ok. I'm done now ....

yes




























but you make me laugh

 

[UnforgettableLemon]

I for one just wonder what this is going to do to Harry Potter fanfic.






Okay, not really. I think it's cool that DD was in love with another man. I'm all for depth, and it's not something obvious in the books that the kids are going to be forced to confront just by reading it. If parents choose to bring this up with their kids, though, it's a great way to talk about love getting in the way of judgment.

Why is it we can discuss love between straight people without suggestion of sexual activity but not between gay people? Gah.

 

[major_panic]

Ok, so Dumbledore was gay.

So what?

If anything, it just makes his actions make that little bit more sense...


Especially his keeping Harry at arms distance for most of the novels

 

[Saracene]

I think it's cool that DD was in love with another man. I'm all for depth, and it's not something obvious in the books that the kids are going to be forced to confront just by reading it.

I'm all for depth too, but it kinda irks me when the authors add the depth to their books retroactively through interviews and such, instead of dealing with it where it really counts, i.e. their writing.

 

[UnforgettableLemon]

I'm all for depth too, but it kinda irks me when the authors add the depth to their books retroactively through interviews and such, instead of dealing with it where it really counts, i.e. their writing.

I'll have to re-read things, the suggestion may be there, or she may just be betraying her own ideas as a writer and diminishing the ambiguity in a bad way. Regardless, the statement itself does not bother me in the least.

 

[Dalton]

 

[bonocomet]

 

[UnforgettableLemon]

Yes, but have you ever encountered Joseph Campbell's "Hero With a Thousand Faces"? Lucas pulled these archetypes and structures from older myths, and practically worships Campbell. Star Wars, while i love it, is just as derivative.

 

[Dalton]

Yes but is there an internet picture about that in a funny format?

 

[UnforgettableLemon]

 

[major_panic]

 

[Kiki]

that's awsome Dalton!