OoP: Sirius as close as we're going to get to a gay character?

[kiricat2001]

No: HPFGUIDX 65492

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Kirstini" <kirst_inn at y...> 
wrote:
> 
*********************************************************************
> 
*********************************************************************
> 
*********************************************************************
> 
*********************************************************************
> > Laura says:  OOP, US Hardcover, p. 642
>  
>  - - - 
>  He [Sirius] was very good-looking; his dark hair fell into his 
eyes 
>  with a casual sort of elegance neither James's nor Harry's could 
> ever have achieved, and a girl sitting behind him was eyeing him 
> hopefully, though he didn't seem to have noticed.
>  - - -
>  
>
> 
> Kirstini (me):
> It's funny, but I read this passage as suggesting (ever so subtly) 
> that Sirius wasn't really interested in girls.

Well, she *was* sitting behind him...

 I remember reading 
> Abigail's pre-OoP theory that Bill Weasley was going to turn out to 
> be the first "out" character in the series - obviously Ms Delacour 
> has scorched that one a bit - and I thought it was a really 
> interesting theory, but unlikely to happen in the Pottersverse, 
> where JKR likes to keep things fairly safe. It would be fantastic, 
> but I wonder if Sirius, not noticing girls (ever, not just in the 
> Pensieve) and unswervingly devoted to James, and therefore 
certainly 
> with the *potential* to be read as an encrypted homosexual 
character 
> is as close as we're going to get. 

Oh, there are a whole slew of us who are convinced that Sirius and 
Remus have been a item for years!  I mean, come on.  The dog-wolf, 
moon-star business, Lupin's good boy to Sirius' bad boy -
"Lupin was the good boy, he got the badge."  It just seems to fit 
(for some of us). Oh, and Mrs. Black calls Sirius an abomination.  
You just know it's because she doesn't approve of his boyfriend!

However, not much mention is made of most of the adults' 
relationships. The Weasleys and the Dursleys are the only parents we 
see with any regularity.  Parents of students are mentioned and 
occasionally seen, but we know nothing about the significant others 
in the lives of any other adults - Lupin, Sirius, Moody, the 
professors and staff at Hogwarts. So, there isn't a huge body of 
material to examine.

There is, of 
> course, the defence wheeled out again and again, "not in a 
> children's book". Why on earth not? 

JKR has had the Dursleys says things that imply disapproval of 
homosexuality.  I forget which book it is, but Vernon says something 
to the effect that Dudley's not going to be some "nancy boy."  And 
now in OoP, when Dudley taunts Harry about his Cedric nightmares, he 
says "Who's Cedric - your boyfriend?"

You know he's not genuinely concerned.  He's trying to pick on Harry. 
I would like to think JKR has odious characters say odious things 
that reflect their odious beliefs as a way of illustrating how 
hateful intolerance is, without beating people over the head with it.

> Personally, I feel that the characters in the Pottersverse tend to 
> stick to prevalent social hegemonies, Molly Weasley as 
> housewife/domestic goddess being a prime example. However, as OoP 
is 
> the first time that we learn of women having careers outside the 
> traditional fields of teaching and the domestic sphere, Darrin's 
> beloved Madame Rosemerta apart, perhaps there is potential for a 
> broadening discussion of sexuality in the later books.
> What does anyone else think?

I think there is always the potential, but I believe the issue of 
sexuality will always be a low level sort of thing. And not 
necessarily because JKR might be worried she'd alienate some of her 
audience if sexuality is discussed.  My sense, here at the end of 
OoP, is that it's not a high priority. I think it will continue to 
bubble under the surface.

Marianne