Search Beyond Hogwarts:

Reference Desk:
•	Beyond Hogwarts FAQ
•	Wizard to Muggle Currency Converter
•	Harry Potter Spelling Reference

Pages:  <<  <  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 ...  >  >>

Reader Comments: (Page 7)

Actually I allways thought it was quite obvious. Where was Mrs Dumbeldore? Then we learn about his past in book seven. And a man influenced him most in his youth. The way he discribes his relationship with grindlewald seemed very romantic. And the duel: Why did dumbledore win it, if grindelwald had the elder Wand? Seems like Grindelwald was in love withe dumbledore as well. As we all know Skeeter writes a lot of rubish, she put a few hints to expect this relationship.

And my view on the Harry-Dumbledore relationship: J.k lets skeeter call it 'unhealthy', which means it was healthy and uninfluenced by romantic fealings. Dumbledore was and not a pedophile.

Dumbledores as Snapes love for Lilly is no surprise. J.K. allways knew and it was allways part of the story even if it was not revealed (Why did Snape hate sirius so much and wanted him kissed by dementors in book 3? because he thought sirius had betrayed Lilly).

Posted by Anonymous on October 22, 2007 01:33 AM

I think it is ok that Dumbledore is , but i do not think these revelations add to the beauty of the story, or are really relevant. If JK thought it so important, she should have left more clues, but does it really matter to the story? I don't think she should not reveal any more things, for me, they take away the suspense of disbelief, and reduce it to just a story, while it means so much more to me!

Posted by fliros from Roermond, The Netherlands on October 22, 2007 02:28 AM

When I read the section in DH about Dumbledore's relationship with Grindewald, I actually wondered if he was . The bond just seemed awfully strong, beyond friendship or brotherhood. I don't think he had designs on Harry, as would be the case with any normal man in that situation. I think it was a chance for Dumbledore to experience fatherhood, in a way, which he hadn't had the opportunity to do before, except possibly with young Tom Riddle. We all know how that turned out! Acting as a father to Harry could have been a chance to redeem himself.

Posted by Lin Lin from Boston, Mass on October 22, 2007 04:41 AM

Waterbaby from London - I have noted that none of the teachers at Hogwarts are married. Do you think it's a throwback to the old days when all the teachers were spinsters?

I am hoping that with the end of the Open Book Tour Ms. Rowling STOP giving the back story. There is a reason that all of this minutia was left out of the books; it detracts from the story. Young James from the U.K. was absolutely right when he said that it's up to the individual reader to decide on the unsaid things. Giving out too many details in the aftermath takes that away from us.

Posted by Bnickel from IL, USA on October 22, 2007 06:56 AM

This announcement raises interesting questions about the ownership an author has over characters outside the text. Admittedly, I have not yet read the final book, but I see no indications of Dumbledore's one way or the other in any of the first six. From what I've read on the Web, that pattern continues in book 7.

So the point is, does JKR have the right to announce Dumbledore's -ness outside the text? Well, sure, I guess she does, but does her word carry any more weight than (for instance) if Arnold Schwarzenegger had said it (just to pick a totally unrelated celebrity)?

JKR may have written Dumbledore from the point of view that he was , but if that doesn't bleed over into the story, then it doesn't really matter and can be ignored. It's like having a friend who's . Their doesn't matter - i.e. it just isn't a factor - unless somebody makes it an issue.

Posted by AJF from Texas on October 22, 2007 07:28 AM

AJF: You bring up a very important point.

I think the answer is: JK has every right, as the author of the work, to comment on its contents after it is all done.

HOWEVER, I believe that, now that the books are done, they are in OUR head now, not her's. It is OUR right to completely ignore any statement she says at this point, and let the books stand as they are.

As I've said in other articles here on the site, this site exists, and we discuss these things, BECAUSE the books belong to US now, not JK.

Posted by Dave Haber from Los Angeles, CA on October 22, 2007 07:29 AM

I agree it was a pointless revelation. It did nothing to move the story along or hold it back.

It always seemed to be a flaw in her writing (to me) that none of the Hogwart's teachers were married or had partners. Or if they did, I don't remember reading about them. I mean all those teachers single with no mention of personal relationships? Mrs. Norris and Filch were the closest thing to a married couple Hogwarts had. Also, we don't have even a hint of the wizarding world's view towards people. Perhaps if we had known more about this attitude and the other teacher's relationships, Dumbledore's exclusion might have meant more.

Otherwise, who cares?

Posted by Carol from Bedford, TX on October 22, 2007 07:32 AM

Does Dumbledore being have anything to do with the story? I don't think it does. He was a wise and gentle older man why knew what needed to be done to take out Voldy. Does his being have anything extra to add to the story? No.

Posted by Chris from WWW on October 22, 2007 08:26 AM

All you people saying that it now makes sense confuse me. At what point were we supposed to look for sexual orientation throughout the books? I always thought the books were considered a "mystery" (as stated by Jo herself). At what point where we supposed to look for sexual preferences in the books.

Does the sexual preferences of any of the characters make the story change? Does Jo stating that Dumbledore was diminish from his greatness?

Posted by chris from WWW on October 22, 2007 10:35 AM

I could understand people being outraged if Dumbledore tried to advance Harry in book 6, or something to that extent in book 7, but it didn't. She gave her hints, only as J.K. can, and a few caught it, but most didnt see it coming. Regardless, everyone loved the books, and the story is now complete. Some wanting more, maybe on the gap of years, or for it to continue with a new story...but when Voldermort d, it was finally over. Everyone was content, yet sad, that this journey was now nearly at its end.

Some people are thrilled and others are upset regarding this bit of news. I would just like to remind people that everyone has been asking for more and more, and hence more is given. Now, this proves by far that JK Rowlings is by far one of the best writers of the 20th/21st century. An Author that can make her readers so upset/excited over the fact that one of her most loved FICTION character's is just proves that you really were involved in one of the greatest tales ever told. Whatever your beliefs are, just remember that in the end this is still a memorable journey of 'the boy who lived.'

Posted by Espirito from Weasleys' Wizard Wheezes-Portland, OR on October 22, 2007 10:37 AM

My, how we love to analyze JKR's world. And, Jo knowing how obsessed we are, supplies us with the details we so crave about the people of Potterland. As Jaye from Saskatoon comments, the revelation about Dumbledore's sexual preference shows how thorough this author has been in the creation of a complete world. Other than that, that Dumbledore is didn't seem to have any significance on the story.

Posted by Hannah from Los Angeles on October 22, 2007 10:43 AM

I for one am happy she has outted him. Yes it is a kids book but the kids are growing up and one day hear about people.

This changes nothing about the book or who dumbledore was and is.

Posted by Dumblyz from UK on October 22, 2007 11:05 AM

Pages:  <<  <  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 ...  >  >>