I haven't read Harry Potter, but...
I have seen a couple of the films and I've been following the furore surrounding JK Rowling's throwaway announcement that the character Dumbledore was gay. This post started as a comment on Gatochy's blog post on the issue, but I decided I was angry enough about it (and I'd written enough!) for it to merit a post on my own blog.
I agree with Mariana totally. I think that an author has no right to make claims about a character's background unless he or she actually writes it in the book. An author writing a novel has their hands on the levers and dials of the reality they've created. Once the book (or series) is finished, they lose that level of access. In a way the readers are then handed the controls, allowed to adjust the reality in their own minds by filling in the gaps left by the author with their personal interpretations of the characters.
It's part of the "magic" of books. In a strange way the more you leave out of a creative medium the more richness you leave for the audience to put in. It's often said that radio has better pictures than TV, because they exist in the listener's mind. In that sense, books are greater than both television and radio, because nearly everything exists in the reader's mind.
A gay Dumbledore would have been an impressive and courageous plot element, and you're free to now imagine Dumbledore as a closeted and celibate homosexual if you so wish, but it wasn't written into the books so it's no more "official" than me saying that I think Sherlock Holmes wore lady's undies.
I agree with Mariana totally. I think that an author has no right to make claims about a character's background unless he or she actually writes it in the book. An author writing a novel has their hands on the levers and dials of the reality they've created. Once the book (or series) is finished, they lose that level of access. In a way the readers are then handed the controls, allowed to adjust the reality in their own minds by filling in the gaps left by the author with their personal interpretations of the characters.
It's part of the "magic" of books. In a strange way the more you leave out of a creative medium the more richness you leave for the audience to put in. It's often said that radio has better pictures than TV, because they exist in the listener's mind. In that sense, books are greater than both television and radio, because nearly everything exists in the reader's mind.
A gay Dumbledore would have been an impressive and courageous plot element, and you're free to now imagine Dumbledore as a closeted and celibate homosexual if you so wish, but it wasn't written into the books so it's no more "official" than me saying that I think Sherlock Holmes wore lady's undies.
It's regrettable that none of the character's in that vast universe she created is gay, but for better and for worse that was her decision. I guess now she isn't feeling good about it. Maybe she got letters from disappointed fans who wish she could have given them a role model.
She can always write about it in her next books (there are going to be next books, aren't there?) Why not let these characters alone.
OK then.
Ever watched a directors cut of a movie? Well how DARE they change things, they've released it already, it's in the viewers hands...
Untold plot points are common in books, even more common (I'd guess) in series?
Or are we really talking about the lack of gay characters in HP?
But the director isn't changing things, he's making a new movie based in large part on the old one. Telling a slightly different story with the same building blocks. There are often people that still prefer the older version of the story. For example, the version of Star Wars where Han shot first. :-)
I'm not bemoaning the lack of gay characters in HP, I couldn't give a hoot to be honest, it would be like complaining about the lack of gay characters in the Famous Five. What I am annoyed at is the way Rowling's announcement has been treated as "gospel", suggesting that the readers should go back and re-interpret a character based on information that wasn't in the books. Fine, if JK wants to release an "Author's Cut" of the books with Dumbledore given a Quentin Crisp bouffant, then she's totally entitled to. I'm guessing some people will still prefer the old version. :-)
And no, I don't know why we're having a serious discussion about this either, I've got much bigger things on my plate at the moment. ;-)
We are having a discussion about it BECAUSE WE CAN!
I dont think she was stringing us along... I've heard she has quite a lot of backstory worked out for a lot of the characters for a forthcoming Harry Potter Encyclopedia thingy.
Post a CommentPermalink Subscribe to comments: this post | all posts
<< T*Blog Home