A literary (and I use the word loosely) non-sequiter, at best.

As important as if Rowling had said that Harry was a Democrat and Snape was a Republican and Slithering House was Skull & Bones, etc.

OK, JK.

A fictional character being outed?

About as interesting as saying "Harry Potters' favorite ice cream is rocky road."

Heterosexuals are just so self centered that anytime its discovered that a hero is a gay man or woman they must be discredited.

If you disagree with me read the posts in this thread. What a load of crap I've waded through.

I am pro gay-rights progressive, and a parent who read the Harry Potter books along with my son. I found Rowling's revelation that Dumbledore is gay to be extraneous, and a bit of a let-down.

The article quoted here stated that readers of the Harry Potter books insinuated that Dumbledore was gay -- merely because his personal life was not described? I don't see that Dumbledore is exceptional in that respect. The personal lives of MOST of the Hogwarts school faculty are not described. Those details were not crucial to the story, so Rowling was of course inclined to leave them out. Should we conclude that Professors McGonagall or Trelawney were lesbians, since we never met their husbands?

The Harry Potter book series is one long paean to tolerance. We see characters interacting positively with each other, without regard to their race or gender. We see that characters who try to pull rank, based on their supposedly superior bloodlines, are corrupt and immoral. In light of these facts, one could argue that leaving the issue of gay rights out of the Potter books was an oversight.

Still, the gay subtext that Rowling has revealed for Dumbledore isn't nearly as interesting or crucial to the story as it was in, say, Alfred Hitchcock's film "Rope." There was plenty of energy surrounding the relationship between Dumbledore and Grindelwald -- their youthful elitism, and the quest for artifacts of great power -- without adding a sexual dimension.

So, while making Dumbledore a gay character ex post facto might be a morally courageous thing to do, it's a literary mistake.

Maybe this was just J K 's way of saying, I am DONE with the Harry Potter thing. It consumed 17 yrs of my life, I made over $1 billion $ off of the series, and I am done... I will now move on to writing adult books... HAH

I get a kick out of those who say that they loved the books and the character... Until they found out that he's Gay!

Tell us again how non-bigotted you are!

I am an admirer of Rowling for her amazing writing skill. I've read the entire series and I'm now 59. However, she disappoints with this characterization of Dumbledore. It seems unnecessary to vocalize. I have great empathy for the gay community as my best friend and closest relative are gay men. But I just don't why she had to draw attention to it. Frankly, it is not consistent with the way she drew the characters. The Dumbledore anecdote with the figure she says he loved was very small in the sum of things. Sexuality isn't a mainstay of the books, despite childhood crushes that appear. Yes, in the end Harry and Ginny marry, etc. But the focus of the book is on loyalty, friendship, and the battle between good and evil, not who you sleep with.

Slapping the Religious Right Republicans in the face on the way out the door is a new way to exit for a writer.

Professor Backdore.

What a lovely gesture by Ms. Rowlings. In societies where the most vile playground slur is that someone is gay, she takes a fairy tale hero and merely by applying the name to her imaginary figure, raises the stature of homosexuality to the potentially admirable and acceptable. I know this will turn many people against her and her works. I wish those people could recognize the true good she is performing.

Why is a character's sexuality important in a children's book? As a child development specialist, I wondered why these books were put in the 9 - 12 year old section of the book stores to begin with. And I came to the conclusion that Rowling is rather sadistic when she killed 2 of her comic relief characters (Dobby & Fred) in her last book. Now she's telling little kids that Dumbledore is gay? Why? In what way is this character's sexuality important to a children's story? Can you imagine Tolkien doing this after he wrote Lord of the Rings? It's as if Rowling just wants to flip all her readers the finger. I'm detecting some major passive aggressiveness on Rowling's part.

stupid media people--how can any of us take you seriously when you waste our time interviewing comics as a candidate--the repug candidates offer more laughs!!!

Better late than never. Yay!
http://doodlewhore.blogspot.com/2007/10/yep-dumbledores-gay.html

And of course, Dumbledore wanted to work with kids.
Harry, look out for his magic wand!

I just think J K wanted to show that she was done with the Harry thing, really wanted no more of it, kissed it off so to speak. The Harry thing consumed her life for 17 years and she now wants her life back, so how better to get it back, turning off 'some' people to the books. I still think they were well written and look forward to the 6th and 7th movies (where SNAPE rules)... heh heh