Dumbledor outed- by JKR!
#41
Darq Ali Wrote:Some people crave attention in any form.

Rowling doesn't strike me as the kind who needs to resort to hot-button ticket items to generate attention. As I said above, simply announcing an extremely limited run of Potterverse-related books has already generated attention.

Quote:If 'the good of the kiddies' . . .

Sorry, is this a statement Rowling made? I don't recall her making such a claim, but since it has been placed in quotes, I'm confused. Or are you quoting someone else within this thread?

Quote:To "out" DD is to give a reason for prejudiced adults to ban the book, and all its possible positive influences.

Agreed, which is why I don't think that's her reason.

Quote:To which I may add: Banning something is a good way to get kids to read it, of course, as when Umbridge banned the Quibbler edition with Harry's tale of LV's return, of course.

You can't have your Cauldron Cakes and eat them too; this contradicts your "Better to say nothing" argument. Either it's better to stay silent to get the audience to read about her gay character on the sly; dubious at best given the complete lack of referential information on Dumbledore's sexuality. Or it's better for her to make these statements, be banned, and then magically attain more readers because of the ban. Can't be both. :eek:

Quote:O.K., maybe that is the motive: To encourage wider readership and -re-reads looking for signs of DD's gay status.

Perhaps. But there are many less polarizing revelations which could have been made to accomplish this. With the complete lack of any prior hint to Dumbledore's sexuality, in or out of canon, some very tenuous links would have to be made to find these "signs of DD's gay status" anywhere: book, movie, Rowling interviews, etc.
All your base are belong to us.

It could be that the purpose of my life is only to serve as a warning to others.
Reply
#42
I am sorry my points are so unclear.

This train of thought is speculation about motive; that is, we have an event {JKR's speaking out about DD's sexual orientation} which is real. We know what she said, but not why she said it.

One person speculated money as a motive. This idea was examined: Would "Outing" DD actually lead to increased revenue to JKR? We cannot actually know. Neither could JKR actually know, either, but it seems unlikely; because there is no indication that 'gay people' are not reading HP books, and likewise there is no indication that proclaiming DD gay would cause gay persons to suddenly all purchase the books; but it is certainly plain that the homophobic demographic would be given a good reason to boycott the series.

So 'money' as a motive seems unlikely.

What's left? Well, 'gaining attention' is a common motive. This is speculation, but it is a common motive for many. The marks used are not quotation marks, but are used to set off the phrase under discussion.

Does JKR seek attention? I have never met the woman. I note she does press confrences and interviews, and I understand she keeps a website. From this I deduce she isn't shy, and seems to welcome public attention. 'Seems to'; but I grant you, each of those behaviors might simply be part of the marketing package put together by her publisher: 'Do this to help promote sales of your books'. That is common enough in the publishing world, and certainly not all authors relish the exprience. But, plenty of authors never do any of those things, but remain out of the public eye.

"The good of the kiddies" remark:

The books are full of themes of moral instruction. The story has a moral, or many. This seems a purpose to me. It is my intrepretation. If this is a purpose, I said. Again, I don't know JKR, and do not know her purpose, if she has one beyond commercial success. I think 'commercial success' is pretty plain as a motive, because if 'mental excercise for personal satisfaction' were the only motive in writing the series, she'd not have sought publication, would she?

As to the contridiction:

Look, I was examining suggested or possible motives. And yes, the outcomes can be contrary to the suggested reasons. [If one suggests "JKR 'outed' DD for money", one has to examine the probable result of her doing so. Even if more gay people would purchase the books as a result, this must be balanced against the probably boycot by the homophobic crowd. Would there be more revenue? Doubtful.]

That means, I don't think 'money' is the motive.

'Attention', however, is another issue. The woman has plenty of money. But those who crave attention often never have enough, and, as I said, often they don't care in what form the attention comes ......... negative serves as well as positive.

Yes, I heard about the hand-written Tales of Beatle the Bard editions. I was uncertain of their purpose, save to gain attention. Very few will ever see these volumes. Raise money for chairty? She could just give out some money and have done; quietly, without fanfare. 'Attention seeking'? Well, that fits, though I have no direct knowledge of JKR's actual motive or motives, and it may not be among her motives.

My sense is that you reject both 'money' and 'attention seeking' as motives for JKR 'outing' DD. Why do you think she did so?
Reply
#43
Darq Ali Wrote:The marks used are not quotation marks, but are used to set off the phrase under discussion.

Ahhh, gotcha. My friendly advice would then be to use more standard methods of highlighting: bold, italic or underline. Quotes signify, well, a quote, either from the source or from another member, and without specification, makes for a level of confusion that isn't necessary. This is, of course, just friendly advice. You are, by all means, free to reject it.

Quote:From this I deduce she isn't shy, and seems to welcome public attention.

Or she just likes to share with others in the universe that she's created. <shrug>

Quote:"The good of the kiddies" remark: . . . [snip] Look, I was examining suggested or possible motives.

Your argument wasn't in questions, their use indicated contradiction in arguing for one motive over another, and still do.

Quote:But those who crave attention often never have enough, and, as I said, often they don't care in what form the attention comes ......... negative serves as well as positive.

I've yet to see an example of Rowling seeking attention through negative means. If you could provide one, this argument might have merit. Barring that, this dragon won't hunt.

Quote:I was uncertain of their purpose, save to gain attention. Very few will ever see these volumes. Raise money for chairty?

She still does give to charity. This was an opportunity to inspire others to give to charity by owning a very rare peice of the Potterverse.

Quote:My sense is that you reject both 'money' and 'attention seeking' as motives for JKR 'outing' DD. Why do you think she did so?

It's not even your sense. I've stated above and outright that I believe, perhaps naively, that Rowlings motives are exactly as she stated them, "My truthful answer to you . . . I always thought of Dumbledore as gay." She was asked a question, stated the answer, provided her thoughts on the answer, and that's it. This was a minute or two within a Q&A session that lasted an hour or two. It wasn't the focus of the discussion, and she didn't call a press conference to reveal this information. As she concludes, "If I'd known it would make you so happy, I would have announced it years ago!"

That sums it up for me, and I haven't seen an argument that dissuades me from this straight-forward motivation.
All your base are belong to us.

It could be that the purpose of my life is only to serve as a warning to others.
Reply
#44
RobRoy Wrote:But why? To what end? To prompt book-burnings? Alienate a segment of the reading audience? Prevent another segment from ever reading and enjoying the work because of hyper-vigilance?

That seems counter-intuitive, especially given that Rowling can make news by releasing an extremely limited edition printing of a Potter-verse related book.

But again: Me = incredibly naive.

Acting the devil's advocate here (ie, I don't subscribe to this interpretation but would like to draw your attention to an alternative explanation)

is it maybe possible that she enjoys baiting her enemies. That is, if you know there are a bunch of folks out there who boycott your books but burn them nevertheless (not sure how to interpret that contradiction), doesn't it serve them just right to make them even more angry by saying things you know they will dislike so they burn your books just a bit more..

And in doing so get you back in the news?
Reply
#45
Reply
#46
I was able to see and hear J.K. Rawlings in a presentation in Radio Music Hall, New York City, August 2006... well before the 7th book came out ["Harry, Carrie and Garp"]. J.K. Rawlings answered questions from the audience. I assume that these questions were arranged in advance, as only select people were asked to come up, and they all read their questions. One of the questions was from Salman and Milan Rushdie. As an answer, She sighed, and refused to give away some plot point. I doubt that she is that good an actor. She seemed genuinely sorry to not be able to answer.

So.... In my humble opinion:

Some reporter, adult, child, or other questioner, just came out and asked:
"Is Dumbledor gay?"

And she humbly answered the question: "Yes."

* * * * *
Being the type of writer that J.K. appears to be, and the audience she was writing for; teachers are "sexless and ageless". They don't have any lives outside of school. No spouses, partners, children nor parents. When the child goes home the teachers are fozen in time, suspended until the next time the child sees them.

This is a young childs view.... a very young child. As the child ages, and to my mind 17-18 year old children have adult views of the world, that innocence disappears. Teachers can have fights with their children, parents & partners. Teachers can have religious beliefs and drinking problems. A teacher can have a bad day.

I always assumed that the first book was written for an 11 year old. The second book for a 12 year old, and so on. I have recently been asked by an anxious parent about his 8 year old reading book 5 or 6 or even book 7. Those are rather scarry, and I suggested that he have his child read to him (to the parent that is).

I don't fault J.K. for not providing clues to the backgrounds of any of the characters. After all, these books are titled HARRY POTTER AND, and we are getting the life of Harry Potter.
Irene
Reply
#47
Irene Wrote:This is a young childs view.... a very young child. As the child ages, and to my mind 17-18 year old children have adult views of the world, that innocence disappears. Teachers can have fights with their children, parents & partners. Teachers can have religious beliefs and drinking problems. A teacher can have a bad day.

Yes. Exactly. Dumbledore gains in complexity as Harry and friends are able to perceive more. More as adults?

Quote:I always assumed that the first book was written for an 11 year old. The second book for a 12 year old, and so on. I have recently been asked by an anxious parent about his 8 year old reading book 5 or 6 or even book 7. Those are rather scarry, and I suggested that he have his child read to him (to the parent that is).

Exactly again. I might read the first two books to my son as he grows older, they seem on par with The Hobbit age-wise. After that they do tend to get into the messier aspects of adolescence and I don't know that they would be as enjoyable. Rowling aged her books nicely along with her audience. I'm not certain she was thinking of generations of readers post-series. Just telling a good story well.

Quote:I don't fault J.K. for not providing clues to the backgrounds of any of the characters. After all, these books are titled HARRY POTTER AND, and we are getting the life of Harry Potter.

Writer's prerogative, as my father always said. S. Andrew Swann, on his blog, addressed this and stated that many good authors have a deeper understanding of their characters than they put in the books. Putting it all in the books would bore an audience. Understanding the character's response is important to creating a realistic story with depth.
Houston . . . we have a problem.
Reply

MYCode Guide

Forum Jump: