| Rowling provokes Potter fans (12/07) | | Print | |
| Written by Angel Au-Yeung | |
|
“I always saw Dumbledore as gay,” J.K. Rowling, author of the epic Harry Potter series, recently announced in Carnegie Hall. Let the chaos begin.
Although the crowd greeted the announcement with stunned applause, not everyone was roused to a standing ovation. On The O’Reilly Factor, Bill O’Reilly stated that Rowling is a “provocateur” and she “is going to let all Hell break loose.” I wholeheartedly agree. Rowling’s recent outing of Albus Dumbledore, one of the most beloved and pivotal characters in her bestselling seven-book series has justifiable outrage for true Harry Potter fans. In a time of extreme political correctness — to the point where Wal-Mart cannot sell stockings that say “Merry Christmas!” without riots and lawsuits — Rowling should have known better. In order to make such an accusation, an affront to Dumbledore’s honor, she must have had a hidden motive. Rowling may have been called the “greatest living British writer” by Book Magazine, and she may be the leading contender for Time’s Person of the Year, but her fame is clearly declining. We all know that the only title she cares for is People’s Entertainer of the Year. The only way to beat Angelina and Brad? Why, by stirring up some crackpot controversy and declaring Dumbledore’s allegiance to the gay community, of course! Many, however, imagine Rowling to have had some “greater purpose.” Rowling claims that her books aim to promote tolerance. While the struggle between Muggles (non-magic people), Muggle-borns (wizards and witches born to Muggle parents) and Purebloods (wizards and witches born to magical parentst) may seem to showcase the injustices of discrimination, Dumbledore is obviously superior to Muggles and non-Muggles alike. Really now, we are talking about Dumbledore here, the man who gave up his left hand and his life to save Harry and the rest of the wizards from Lord Voldemort. He can make chintz chairs appear out of thin air! Announcing Dumbledore as gay is thus completely inappropriate. Life is hard enough without pretentious authors instilling bad morals and values in their readers. Some might say that Rowling chose to make Dumbledore the center of this controversy to prove that sexual orientation does not affect a person’s ability to do good. But this idea is beyond preposterous. Look at Lance Bass. A member of the phenomenally popular boy band N*Sync, he came out of the closet this year. His obvious desire to find 15 more minutes of fame has only slandered the N*Sync legacy. This has earned the band a spot on the List of Forbidden Musicians in the Christian clergy, and many have said “bye bye bye” to the band by burning their records. Bass is not the only public figure to bring shame. Lesbian Mary Cheney, daughter of Dick Cheney, the vice president of the free world has brought only shame and embarrassment to her father’s white, red and blue doorstep, sullying a preciously unblemished reputation. And must we not forget social studies teacher Steve Schmidt of our very own Lowell High? Because of his flamboyancy, many of his students are getting unspeakable fours on their Advanced Placement exams. To make the Harry Potter situation even more preposterous, Rowling said that Dumbledore falls in love with his childhood friend, Gellert Grindelwald, an intelligent but ambitious wizard who goes over to the Dark Side. He hesitates to duel him — even though he was obviously a threat to wizardkind — because “falling in love can blind us to an extent.” Ms. Rowling, why would readers want romance and love in a series that is purely spells, wands and other such magical entities? Sure, Harry’s parents died when he was a young child and it was a driving motivation for everything else he did in his life, and yes, love is what ultimately defeats Lord Voldemort, and I guess one of the biggest cliffhangers of book six was whether Ron Weasley and Hermione Granger would finally get together, but forget all that! The books are about magic! Dumbledore is a no-nonsense type of man, an all-knowing sage, a leader, a great wizard. Humanizing him with romantic side stories is unrealistic. When has a great leader in the history of mankind ever had a human side? Is it not enough for Dumbledore’s legacy to be a powerful wizard? With an outrageous scandal like this, Dumbledore may instead be remembered in history — not Harry Potter history, but real-life history — as one of the first main characters in a children’s fantasy series to be outed. He might even be used as an example years from now to promote tolerance and discourage discrimination and violence. What a disaster! If Rowling really is trying to teach her readers good morals, then she should just keep it simple. Dumbledore is heterosexual, and he killed Grindelwald for the good of mankind. A nice, clean-cut, easy decision. None of this confusing and awkward sacrifice of personal desires for the common good. None of this open acceptance of anyone for who they are. What possible lesson could a young reader find in that? |
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|
to listen.
