*chooses her words carefully*
I saw the thing with Dumbledore on Yahoo yesterday...
Yay Neville! Hannah is my second fave Huffie! *steals Nev from Hannah*
I like the questions asked. Partcularly about Remus & Molly. The NLFC members did speculate that Nev might be the own to kill her.

Awesome. I appreciate anything that she says about what happens to the Harry Potter Characters. It would have been good to hear more about Malfoy.

HaHa Good on Dumbledore! I don't think i'll even risk going to see the fanfictions. XD

Although i'm still a fan in mourning. OK, there's a good reason to kill off Remus and Tonks but if she loved them so much why do it? I love Tonks to bits and to be honest. I want to know exactly what happend at her death! And Remus'!.....More Tonks. haha

I liked the question about Molly and Bellatrix. But am I not the only one who thought that Tonks would be the one to kill Bellatrix? I mean, Bellatrix is her aunt, she has good reasons.

Plus, I want to know who killed Ted Tonks.

But still, great interview :D

Wow! Hehe Dumbledore's gay!

I'd just read about Dumbledore being gay in the newspaper.
At first I was like omg, but then I thought, 'that figures'.
And Neville and Hannah? Sweet, lol

How interesting and truthful of her to write characters like Dumbledore...

And I'm kinda disappointed that Neville ended up with Hanna and not Luna!xD

^^Grindledore!! :rotfl:
(I commented on the DD news above)

As for the similarities between Voldemort's (and Grindelwald's) regime and the Nazis: Of course that was deliberate! It was way too obvious and predictable!
(but then the books are for children who might not yet have heard much about that history stuff)

I, myself, am totally disappointed in the DD news. While I am all for gay pride in the real world...I think this is irresponsible of JK. If she wanted one of her characters to be gay, she should have made it known in the beginning. Instead, she waited till AFTER the series, in hindsight to announce this VERY important news. She waited till she made her millions. Had, she outed him in the beginning, I don't think there would have been as many parents that were ok with the books. Mark my words, that the revenue for the next two movies will not live up to the others in regards to cash take. I think DD being gay isn't relevant to the plot and she should have just continued to let people speculate in the fandom arena. That would have been the smart thing to do. I for one, never "saw" any gay tendiencies. As a headmaster, it was the "wise and proper" thing to do to NOT discuss his love life with his students...JK Rowling has really disappointed this fan.

Aww Neville gets with Hannah. I thought that it would be Luna, who does she get with??

I agree. I think if she really wanted to be true to that part of his character, she would have made it known. It doesn't do much good now to say it after the fact, in my opinion. I think she did want to show that being gay wasn't the biggest thing about Dumbledore, which is so great, but if it was important, she should have had it in the books. That's how I feel anyway.

The thing is, though, Otts is that she didn't put it in writing. That's my point. To say it after the fact is, in my opinion, making it look like she said he's gay for the sake of saying he's gay. While I think it's great that she's tackling something else in the category of intolerance and acceptance, I believe it would have been better for that message had she included it in the plot rather than admit it after the fact. No need to throw computers at me. :lol:

Before anyone makes the point, I do realize that had she put it in the actual books, it would have risen more objection to the books, sure. But, had she really wanted it to be relevant, I think she should have included it to make it more truthful. That's all.

Shannon :hello:

I agree with you Shannon. It would have been better if it were actually written in the books-- but I don't think she said for the sake of saying it. It makes a lot of sense that he was gay. I mean... no wife, no children... never even any mention of them...

And of course had she written it, a lot of people would have been like 'NO! Harry Potter is EVIL!' Because people kind of suck sometimes and are too closed minded and unaccepting. Which is ironic since that's the exact thing this book is about and trying to teach people not to be.

Uh-oh. One of my posts was deleted. I'm sorry. Now I feel bad. I must have said something I should have...I wonder what though? >_< Bad Aria! Bad! Sorry SS mods! -grovels-

It doesn't make sense...DD's life was devoted to Hogwarts and the children there....that doesn't classify him as gay....There are many people out there that devote their lives to their work and that doesn't make them gay....You know, single teacher, has a classroom of kids every day...no love life..are we to presume that teacher is gay?? No, we don't. Should it have been needed, and if she felt SO strongly about it when writing Chamber of Secrets, she should have made reference to it then...We could have ALL gotten used to it and accepted it from the beginning and in the END, it would not have mattered. But....she waited till the END...and now we are all left speculating...oh, what was DD really doing, what was DD really thinking..etc etc...see, she gained nothing by outing him...nothing...but she lost my respect...if he was gay, and she wanted him gay, then stand UP and be proud from the beginning, not raise your hand at the end with a hmm hmm, "Uh, DD is really gay..."....That is so bogus.

Truth to be told? Jo has fallen to the basement to me. She just ruined one of my favourite characters.

I agree Ginny, but I take it one step further ...she ruined my most beloved book for me.

Ottery was gonna say something about tolerating authority but he knows better
 

How is Dumbledore's sexuality integral to the plot, anymore than Neville being with Hannah? Though I have to agree that it would have been better to have had it written in the book (it just adds shade to the character) it's nice to have a gay character portrayed so positively in books ... God knows television isn't doing a very good job of it.

"I hope we can live up to your stereotypes," gay couple on Desperate Housewives after Terri Hatcher says, "I watch cable."

When I first read your earlier statement it seemed to me you were more likely to be offended by the possibility that Jo would make a character gay after the fact to make a political statement than anything you've just said. But who would know a character more intimately than the writer? And what's more, just because Neville has a tattoo of Hermione on his back and he's a biker on the weekends and Jo knows this doesn't mean she has to put it in the book but it doesn't make it any less nice to know ... I don't see you complaining about the N/H revelation. The way some shippers feel about finding out about characters ultimate ships, some people like to know about Dumbledore being gay.

<_< And I would never throw a computer at you Shannon ... I thought you knew me better ... *Teddy suggests using a television* O: It isn't that bad, besides I like Grey's Anatomy.

Who said literature had to be relevant? I think you're just offended Dumbledore's gay and that's perfectly all right, you're a tolerant person, which is somewhat condescending when you're being tolerated but ... I tolerate children and republicans as well as capitalists so :whistle: let's all just learn to tolerate each other instead of learning to accept differences. That was Jo's message. :blink: :erm: No wait a minute ... *takes out the books again*

That was sarcasm by the way Shannon, I'm starting to get the hang of it I think. I can see why its so popular with the kiddies ... :lol:

She's revealing a part of the character. Someone asked about his love life, and she answered truthfully. Dumbledore is gay. Sorry he didn't hit on Hagrid to make that a more obvious point in the books but ... I doubt Jo would be saying this just to be chic or contemporary. If that were the case Hermione would have been a lesbian. It's just who his character was. How many 120 year old people do you know who go on dates? I'm 101 so ... :whistle: besides I'm not dating. I just got out of a relationship ... :cry:

I would have loved Jo to have made it obvious Dumbledore was gay in the books, Eeri and just about everyone else here seems to have caught it in those bits with Grindelwald ... funniest thing I thought the same thing when I read them but :lmao: I've been reading gay couples throughout the books for years I thought it was just my bias again :mwaha: Love's funny.

I think you might be offended because some people might read criticisms of certain regimes into her comments about the Ministry of Magic ... regimes presently in power ... and while you might agree or not with her views she did it it's canon and I respect her enough (even if I don't agree with all her views) to know that she wouldn't just say it to make a political statement. If she'd wanted too she could have donated money to any of a hundred different gay organizations which she always does with charity and no one finds offensive, even though it offends the governments of certain countries ...

Here's a test, if you love Dumbledore less now because he's gay ...

Seriously Shannon I would never throw a computer at you. :cry: I thought you knew me better ...


I agree with Everyone, it should have been in the books, I totally saw it coming but I was shocked to find out Dumbledore was gay *see previous reply* and I totally ship N/L. :lol:

Harry Potter is evil ... don't you go to church Eeri? I mean you should be more accepting of close minded people Eeri. I am. I tolerate them ...

I don't think you said anything wrong Eeri. What did you say? Probably something like ... 'if Dumbledore's gay then who knows who else.' See you can't say things like that since they're not canon. Out of thousands of characters only one can be gay. Really you don't think any of them could possibly be in the closet could you? :gasp: But that would be too real, and like I always said Harry Potter are children's books ...

*Jumps up and down screaming* EXACTLY! I could not have POSSIBLY put the sentiment into better words than that. From what I've read on other message boards, and I'm being completely honest here, the majority os posts I've read do tend to lean towards the "what the heck was the point of her even going there?" side. And they all say the exact same thing, which is, if she was going to make Dumbledore gay, she should've said so in the books! Too much information can ruin a character for some people. I think by her coming out and saying that, she takes away SO MUCH of the mysteries that still surrounded Dumbledore, and IMHO, yes, she did ruin things by being so blatant about it. There are some things much better left in the realm of imagination.

Amen. I actually think it was a bad PR move on her part as well. She already has the Witch-hunters after her to get the books banned, do you have any IDEA what this is going to do? How much she's fanned the flames? I remember when on Buffy, Willow discovered her sexuality, the hate mail that Joss Whedon, Amber Benson & Alyson Hannigan got was astronomical. I think it's a good thing Howlers don't exist in the real world, b/c I get the feeling she'd get a lot.

Honestly, I would have liked to see it in the books. But as a fellow (though unpublished) author, I can see why she didn't. I mean, answering an honest question after the books were written is better than throwing it in there just so that it was in there. I've gone through the books several times in my head, and there really was just no room for it. If it was lazily thrown in there, just to be in there, then it wouldn't have a real impact at all. It would have been like saying "hey, this character is gay just so that I have a gay character." But she didn't do that. What was done was tactful, tasteful, and drove the plot perfectly.

Honestly, if I could find a place in those books that I could have inserted it, and tastefully, with good impact, I would probably be complaining too. And if you think you're a better author than JK, go ahead and try it. Find a place where the impact of it wouldn't be drowned out by tastelessness. But I personally could not find one, and so I'm satisfied with the way things were written.

Yeah, I thought the same thing. "Nah... I'm just reading it that way because that's how I want to read it." lol