Although most of you know my political leanings, I tend to try to avoid political discussion here at the old Jambalaya Cafe. Political bloggers are so much better at this stuff than I am, anyway, and you’re not really coming here to see if I can point you in the direction of a good presidential candidate. anyone but hillary godforbid anyone but hillary Ahem. Did y’all hear something? No? Ok. Me neither.
Anyway, it takes a lot to get me to post something political. But an article in today’s news has me fuming, I mean FUMING. Political correctness, in all its crazyassedness, has finally been taken to a level that I simply. Cannot. Abide.
That’s fine, actually. I honestly don’t care WHAT gets his robes moving. Except that he is a fictional character. So, in that respect, he doesn’t have to have an orientation at all. If he does, fine. If it matters to the story. But it doesn’t, and it didn’t. One simple line, which could have been taken a million ways? Clarified now, after the fact, to a group of kids? For no apparent reason?
The author may have meant well. She may have wanted to open the door to readers who may be dealing with these questions in their own lives. Well, good for her. Because now, some parents are going to have to address some serious questions that they may have wanted to put off for a few more years.
If I’m questioning my own orientation, I don’t think I’m going to look to the Harry Potter series for validation.
Unless I’m a two-hundred-year-old wizard.
October 23, 2007 at 2:07 pm
It was strange and out of nowhere, wasn’t it? My son just shrugged it off – kids his age are so blaise about everything. I don’t see the point of the sexuality interjection either.
October 23, 2007 at 2:24 pm
Gay is not the shame is used to be (thank goodness), but like you said, if it had had ANYTHING to do with storyline it would have been more relevant.
It didn’t, so it’s not.
Relevant doesn’t necessarily equal interesting, but scandal does. Scandal also equals equal publicity. What I do see this being, more than anything, is an invitation for questioning kids to feel good about themselves. There are no other gay characters in these books, as far as we know, so making Dumbledore thus so is not a terrible idea.
Plus, it puts all those fanfic writers on a whole other track, and might finally get them off the whole Snape/Harry thing.
Bottom line? I don’t think that the outing of Dumbledore was necessary. I don’t hate the idea, but I’m not in love with it either. Color me “meh” on the whole idea.
October 23, 2007 at 4:31 pm
I still haven’t read the books, so I am ‘meh’ about it as well.
Personally, I feel guilty for considering that Harry Potter boy – Daniel Whatshisname – Nerd Hot now that he’s legal.
As a result, I can’t really judge the outing of a 200 year old homosexual wizard.
October 23, 2007 at 5:15 pm
I thought it was a given. Robes, wands, geeky teenagers aspiring to be
bitcheswitches? Not that there’s anything wrong with that…October 23, 2007 at 5:57 pm
I am a little upset with Rowling for saying that; it has nothing to do with the storyline and I think it was done to sell more books and/or create controversy.
The conservative Christians who were denouncing the books before will now have even more ammunition, and his or any other character’s gayness is totally beside the point.
October 23, 2007 at 9:26 pm
Maybe he’s a pedophile too. Oh, wait, that hasn’t entered the realm of acceptability, yet. Though I think it’s coming, says NAMBLA and others. And just like Gay, if we don’t accept the inevitability, well, then we’re just Bigots. Who says so? They do.
Was it really germane to the story? A surprise ending after all the books were done? Was he Catholic or Jewish too? Didn’t say, will someone please ask her?
Rowling seems to believe, like other new wealth people, that her mission now is to guide our youth in morality and tolerance because, certainly children’s parents aren’t capable. Thank God for people like her. Can I say God?
October 23, 2007 at 11:00 pm
Yep, I pretty much have no energy on this.
October 24, 2007 at 7:34 am
I went *huh?* too. Where is that relevant to the story line? It seemed more like a publicity thing, also unnecessary.
October 24, 2007 at 7:37 am
So… when I went to that article I noticed that there was an advertisment for unplanned pregnancy assistance from some Catholic group. Now, isn’t the Advocate some big gay publication? Right, so, how many young gays and lesbians find themselves facing the difficult choice of what to do when the stick turns blue in the bathroom before homeroom?
October 24, 2007 at 8:38 am
I honestly don’t care WHAT gets his robes moving
That is the funniest statement I have heard!
Dont you think its strange that she announced that after the book has been released and read !!
Like Karen….I agree that kids nowadays dont get shocked by most things…most everyone they know is gay!
On another topic we won !I know you like bobby Jindal and I do too!
October 24, 2007 at 9:07 am
Just another reason for the far christian right to hate Harry Potter, not only does it promote witchcraft, but it also promotes “the gay”. This may not have been the best idea on Rowlings part.
October 24, 2007 at 9:39 am
Yeah, well . . . The Advocate IS a gay publication, but our newspaper is also called The Advocate. They had to change their web address because the little old ladies were typing in advocate dot com and getting, um, surprised.
October 24, 2007 at 11:29 am
I was also surprised she said that… not that it bothered me, but the series is over. The only sexuality even hinted at in the books was the awkward teen crushes of the students – asking a girl to the dance, etc.
It just doesn’t further the plot or really have any redeeming information toward the overall plot of any of the books. Seems odd to bring it up now.
October 24, 2007 at 5:30 pm
I have a feeling we may be on opposite ends of the political spectrum, but like you, I feel this knowledge was completely unnecessary, and kind of distasteful.
October 24, 2007 at 7:17 pm
Ha Ha, Wordnerd, I didn’t know that. I wondered why it had “2″ in front.
October 24, 2007 at 9:29 pm
Freaking out about Dr. Syn
October 25, 2007 at 8:28 am
Yeah, Brenda, me too! I’m going to post something a little later about it.
October 26, 2007 at 12:28 am
What happened to my comment?
October 26, 2007 at 6:50 am
Does this swishy fictional character have anything to do with me finally receiving my $19.95 mail in Pulitzer?
No?
Don’t care.
In other news, somebody just told me that Ernie and Bert…
Oh the huge manatee!
October 26, 2007 at 9:54 am
I don’t know what happened to your comment, Jenny. WordPress usually doesn’t eat comments like Blogger & Haloscan are known to do. Hmmm.
October 29, 2007 at 6:28 pm
The sexual preference of ANYONE makes no difference to the story so why is it an issue. Personally I think tolerance is a good thing to teach for all people. A little tolerance for people that are different from us or even the same as us helps make the world a better place. Was it appropriate to throw that comment out to children? I would say no. It is up to the parents to try to educate their own children at their own pace especially when it references any type of sexuality.
November 2, 2007 at 12:49 am
You mean you’re not a 200 year old wizard?