I am so happy. There is a gay - Triumph & Tragedy

[sistermagpie]

No: HPFGUIDX 178148

Susan:
> Yippie!
> 
> The only letter I EVER wrote to an author was a three page one 
> pleading with J.K. Rowling to include a lesbian, gay or bisexual 
> character. (The term "homosexual" by the way is considered 
offensive 
> by most lesbians and gay men, and I wonder why some people use it 
so 
> persisitently. I know some people are unaware that it's 
offensive...I 
> guess that must be the reason.)
> 
> The transcript does NOT say "unrequited love"..it says Dumbledore 
> fell in love with Gellert Grindelvald....Period.

Magpie:
This is interesting just in how it shows how opposite reactions can 
be. When I read you say you pleaded with her to put in a lesbian, gay 
or bisexual character my instinctual response was--sorry you didn't 
get your wish. Because the only references to...same sex romantic 
love? Is that better?--are three negative comments that are intended 
to cut down other people. And lots of heteronormative marriage and 
babies. Saying the Dumbledore was gay in an interview is certainly 
fine with me--I had mentally imagined this ship as canon to begin 
with (and you're right, she just said he was "in love with him" and 
didn't say one way or the other whether they had an affair or didn't, 
I was reading an article that put its own spin on it)--but I consider 
canon what's in the actual story in the books and that's it. There's 
lots of romances that influence the plot in HP that we hear about, 
why keep this one a secret? We don't need to know that Dumbledore was 
in love with GG for the story to make sense--the book gives us other 
things that are explicitly brought up that explain everything. If 
that's part of his motivation I really don't get why it wasn't in 
there. It seems like if it were a straight romance it'd be in there.

Susan:> 
> I wonder why it disturbs some people SO much to think that 
Dumbledore 
> might have made love with Gellert Grindelvald....when it doesn't 
seem 
> to disturb anyone about Tonks and Lupin? Hmmmmmm...

Magpie:
Not sure--who's disturbed by the idea they might have had sex? I 
would guess it was because Grindenwald was Hitler and having sex with 
Hitler is more disturbing than having sex with a good person who's 
can change her hair color or a good person who is a werewolf?

Susan:
> 
> I applaud J.K. Rowling - the rest of the transcript talks about how 
> the whole book is about tolerance, and how she thinks that that's 
why 
> SOME people don't like the books.....

Magpie:
LOL! She actually said that? Wow. Yeah, people who don't like the 
books just can't take those tough lessons on tolerance contained 
therein. If you don't like the books you're probably anto-tolerance.

Susan:
> 
> By the way, who decided that interviews are not canon? If they 
> aren't, they shouldn't be being discussed on this list, right? What 
> if she writes it down and publishes it -- does it get to be canon 
> then? What about the encyclopedia.

Magpie:
Well, I've decided it, for myself; I guess everybody has to do what 
makes sense to them personally. That's the way I am about all books, 
pretty much. The story is the story. I rarely look up author 
interviews when reading a book. If the author clarifies something and 
I happen to read it and it makes sense to me I'll incorporate it--I 
already pretty much considered Dumbledore/Grindenwald canon so that's 
not hard for me to accept, but Neville marrying Hannah? Ron having 
one job or another? Those are random things she said in an interview. 
Not in the book=not canon. If somebody argued with me that Dumbledore 
*wasn't* in love with Grindenwald I'd have to say their view is 
perfectly possible given canon because for some reason that romance 
was hidden as motivation in ways other romances were not.

-m