(no subject)
Oct. 23rd, 2007 09:12 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
selene_13So, every newspaper is picking up the "Dumbledore (here 'Perkamentus') revealed as gay!". Big news, people... *raises eyebrow*
*sigh* It might have been more, you know, progressive, if JKR had mentioned it in the actual book. But, noooo, she'll keep her books nice and clean for kiddy/conservative market (why create a controversy for bigoted people to fall over), then reveals characters' sexual identities after all is said and done and everyone and their dog has spent their money on the book.
Lame.
If she was really okay with it all, then why didn't the text simply tell us that DD had a crush on Grindelwald and was disappointed instead of being just best friends. I bet if Grindelwald had been a Grindelwanda it would've been mentioned. It could've been an easy line to throw to Harry, who could have just reacted normally to such plain news.
And when she was asked if DD had a great love of his life, she could have just randomly said that he had a partner for thirty years but he died of the fibbertigibblets when he was 102 or something instead of making "a statement" about it.
It feels like she's going "oooh, look at how accepting and open-minded I am" now that it's safe since the series is finished and it can't be canon anymore. Just... really lame.
She should have just had a student same-sex couple randomly flit by in text or outed Sirius and Remus or something. ;)
*sigh* It might have been more, you know, progressive, if JKR had mentioned it in the actual book. But, noooo, she'll keep her books nice and clean for kiddy/conservative market (why create a controversy for bigoted people to fall over), then reveals characters' sexual identities after all is said and done and everyone and their dog has spent their money on the book.
Lame.
If she was really okay with it all, then why didn't the text simply tell us that DD had a crush on Grindelwald and was disappointed instead of being just best friends. I bet if Grindelwald had been a Grindelwanda it would've been mentioned. It could've been an easy line to throw to Harry, who could have just reacted normally to such plain news.
And when she was asked if DD had a great love of his life, she could have just randomly said that he had a partner for thirty years but he died of the fibbertigibblets when he was 102 or something instead of making "a statement" about it.
It feels like she's going "oooh, look at how accepting and open-minded I am" now that it's safe since the series is finished and it can't be canon anymore. Just... really lame.
She should have just had a student same-sex couple randomly flit by in text or outed Sirius and Remus or something. ;)
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2007-10-26 04:51 am (UTC)And especially what I heard her say that any grown up reading it would have realized DD was in love with G.. WTF? We have plenty, exponentially more canon for HH and it never was. Why would then I read subtext for this? Grrr.
no subject
Date: 2007-10-26 07:57 am (UTC)And now she's going all Whiney McWingeabout how "DD is my character and I can say what I want!" in response to the discussions that have flared up. Well, yeah sure, naturally, but other people are going to have opinions about your text, whether you meant it that way or not. I thought that was the beauty of it? She's so spoiled. Should we stop writing essays about the meaning of Shakespeare or Blake because they're not alive anymore to tell us what's what? o_o
Anyway, she really should just STFU. The Death of Imagination carries on and on...
Did you see this link?
http://www.salon.com/books/feature/2007/10/23/dumbledore/index_np.html
Good essay about Rowling's chattiness and inability to just let us make up our own minds. It's true, if JKR has so much more to say about the story, then why doesn't she just write another book?