Dumbledore to stay in closet for new Fantastic Beasts movie


#1

Originally published at: https://boingboing.net/2018/01/31/dumbledore-to-stay-in-closet-f.html


#2

Just like how the school is represented as filled with exclusively heterosexual students (and with no art students, coincidentally enough… no magical dance, painting, scupture, visual arts, etc. courses for Hogwarts).

Glad as fuck I never went to that school! :smiley:


#3

Despite what JK says, his biographies and such make it pretty clear that he was asexual.


#4

Platform 9 3/4, I get it now.
[note sarcasm]


#5

I’m reminded of this factoid from another famous “children’s” movie:


#6

I think JK’s point is that Dumbledore is never called on to express a sexual preference, so his gayness is wholly irrelevant, I mean, which one of your “gay” stereotypes would you like him to fulfil? Renato or Albin? Cop, construction worker, cowboy, biker? Like knowing that your minister is happily married to someone of the same gender, can’t you just know it and move on with your life? It is, after all, the least interesting thing about anyone.


#7

The only plot-connectedness of him being gay is that it maybe explains why he never married. Well not the gayness per se but the fact that the love of his life turned out to be an evil wizard. OTOH none of the teachers are married, so maybe celibacy is required to teach at hogwarts?

But it is a bit silly of JKR to tell people the sexual orientation of some person in her books while it never really plays a part in the stories, that’s true.


#8

That shit don’t play in China. Big budget studio movies can’t have gay characters if they want the Asian $$. Or, if they do have them, they film it in a way to easily edit out the gayness for overseas release (See Sulu in ‘Start Trek Beyond’).


#9

Does it, or is it supposed to have any relevance to the movie plot? If not, who cares?


#10

I only watched the first Harry Potter movie and bits and parts of some of the others… I didn’t even know he was gay.


#11

Well I say, good for them. What would our children think if they saw gay people? They might think there are gay people!


#12

Here’s the thing: it should.

The entire reason that Rowling revealed that Dumbledore was gay was that she was telling his backstory, and a huge part of that was his close and intense relationship with Grindelwald. Their friendship, romance, and betrayal is a story she’s had as part of his history, and this is the film that would theoretically tell that story. Avoiding that makes zero sense for people who’re fans of these characters.


#13

That last tweet and its attendant thread are discussing this cowardly choice as though it was J. K. Rowling’s decision. I know she has some say in casting decisions, but can she really dictate script decisions?

https://twitter.com/heidiheilig/status/958762633884327937?ref_src=twsrc^tfw&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fboingboing.net%2F2018%2F01%2F31%2Fdumbledore-to-stay-in-closet-f.html


#14

Consider the time period he was living in. If you were going off Liberace’s official biography you’d probably come away with the impression he was asexual too.


#15

I’m rather considering the period when Rowling was writing the first books.

The way the world is built, there is little reason for the wizard sphere to hold identical attitudes on sexuality as the muggle culture.


#16

Well, supposedly, she’s writing the script solo, so I’d say yes. But she’s stood her ground pretty solidly where Dumbledore’s sexuality is concerned, so this sounds more like a studio decision.


#17

Their attitudes on some social issues seem positively medieval. (Also their fashion sense and architecture.)


#18

Not focusing on the topic really doesn’t seem like homophobia to me. Maybe she didn’t want to focus on his sexuality as it doesn’t play into the story of this particular movie and/or didn’t want to pander to cliches.


#19

I’m on board with the fashion and architecture, but what exactly do you have in mind in terms of social structure? The politics seem to add up to some odd oligarchic republic operating on bureaucratic principles, there is no explicit nobility (you have old families and pure blood - but no systemic power, fiefdoms or offices awarded on that basis), no (human) serfs, genders are treated quite equally… (Asking a genuine question.)


#20

Well for starters the Wizarding world still has slavery.