by Shaun Duke

Created on: November 25, 2007   Last Updated: August 30, 2009

Let's face it. Literature is in need of more homosexual characters to act as positive role models to dispense with the otherwise bigoted and ignorant discrimination against the entire gay community, something which Martin Luther King, Jr. himself would do a comedic double-take over. There are plenty of gay characters out there, but it would seem truly effective if such a character were outwardly portrayed as gay in a series as influential and widely loved as the Harry Potter series.

But Rowling, once again, has failed her fans by doing something that is counterproductive. Not too long ago it was considered the norm for homosexuals to hide who they are in order to avoid violence and ridicule. Today, the gay community has jumped forward by leaps and bounds. While a small group may protest, the fact of the matter is that homosexuals can walk out and say "I'm gay" and, for the most part, be regarded with a shrug of the shoulders as if to say "oh, well good for you" and nothing more, a motion which would very well be used on someone who proclaimed "I'm a straight male" in the city streets.

Where has Rowling failed? Where exactly in the Harry Potter books is it clear, and not ambiguous, that Dumbledore is gay? There is not a single hint of it, in fact, and that is where she has failed her fans, not to mention the entire writing community. Dumbledore may very well be gay, but if Rowling had intended to make that clear and a reality, she should have written it into the part. How hard would have it have been to write into the Grindewald scenes that little Dumbly had a crush on his friend? It wouldn't have been hard at all. In fact, two sentences could have done the job. The fact that Rowling waited until after the books had sold and until after she had already secured a definite spot as one of the greatest writers of our time suggests that this is more than simple "well I always thought of it this way". No, Rowling is attempting to play a PC card here. And she's failing at it.

The fact of the matter is, Dumbledore's homosexuality is a step in the wrong direction. Rather that portraying him as a proudly homosexual character, Rowling has instead taken the opportunity to make this character a coward in a world that basically has no indication of having a problem with homosexuals, and put into light that homosexuals, if they want higher positions in society, should hide the fact that they are gay. How is this a step in the right direction? This is going backwards. I was perfectly content with the story as it stood, not because I have a problem with homosexuals, which I don't, but because the story didn't need it. It's useless characterization. Why? Because there's nothing in the books that makes it a reality. We have to rely on Rowling to tell us information that should have been included in the books after the fact. By this account, Rowling is admitting to all of us that she couldn't do her job as a writer. If the information is so vital the story, as she would have us all believe, why not have put it in the story? It could have been a good plot device, certainly, and it could have added considerable depth to Dumbledore. But it's not presented this way and instead we are given Rowling's afterthought.

This would be akin to Tolkien writing Lord of the Rings and after the third book came out saying "I just wanted to say that I always thought of Frodo as being in Entsexual" (or in love with Ents I suppose). Shame on Rowling for her lack of tact and personal integrity.

Learn more about this author, Shaun Duke.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.