The gaiety of DumbledoreThe author of the Harry Potter series has revealed that Dumbledore, one of its favourite characters, is gay. How should readers react? J.K. Rowling has declared that one of the favourite characters in her Harry Potter books, Dumbledore, is gay. Asked in New York’s Carnegie Hall if Dumbledore found true love, she replied: "Dumbledore is gay", adding that he had fallen in love with Gellert Grindelwald, but that Dumbledore was "terribly let down" when Grindelwald became more interested in the dark arts than good, and so Dumbledore went on to defeat him in a duel. The listening fans, initially stunned by the announcement, soon started clapping and cheering. This reaction and counter-reaction is not surprising. Homosexuality is a difficult subject for people to deal with.
Christians often find it difficult. Only a couple of weeks ago an elderly couple in England became ineligible to foster children after they refused to sign a contract with the local authorities which would have required them to tell children as young as 11 that gay partnerships were just as acceptable as heterosexual marriages. This was a great pity, as they had fostered 28 children quite successfully. In the UK, at least, Christian churches are often criticised for being "homophobic". Let us look for a moment at Christianity and homosexuality. It is not too easy to express the Christian attitude to homosexuality, partly because homosexuality has become a battleground in recent decades.
Christianity takes sexuality seriously but does not consider it the most important thing about human nature. Human beings are human beings: persons, first and foremost. They also have sexuality. But sexuality does not make them good or bad. What is important is the use they make, as free and responsible persons, of what God has given them, which includes their sexuality. When it comes to homosexuality, Christianity does teach that it is a negative factor, for the simple reason that, if it is given free rein, it leads to an unnatural use of sexuality. But, in saying this, Christianity is not writing off people with that tendency. Each and every one of us is made up of many factors, both positive and negative, talents and weaknesses. Furthermore, a positive factor, such as a high IQ, can be used negatively, to tyrannise over others. And vice versa: cancer sufferers can turn their misfortune into a way of serving humanity, raising sums for cancer research. A consequence of this teaching is that it is wrong for people to make a virtue out of homosexuality, as it would be wrong to do so out of other shortcomings, such as deafness, blindness, weakness of character, bullying, irascibility, etc. So, Christianity does not encourage the present fashion of "coming out", and making an open declaration of one’s homosexual leanings. Especially, Christianity considers it wrong, a form of abuse, to force people to make such declarations. One thing is being sincere with oneself, and with those whom one chooses to open one’s heart to in spiritual guidance; another thing is broadcasting one’s defects. This could be a form of inverted pride (an inversion of the pride of telling everyone about one’s good qualities). To counter these tendencies, Christianity encourages the practice of the virtue of humility. Coming more specifically to homosexuality, experience shows that men who have this tendency often have certain qualities, some positive, others less so: sensitivity, kindness, gentleness, a need to be appreciated, a certain tendency to get over passionate about things, or petulance. While taking this into account, Christianity does not take the matter excessively seriously. It tells such people: "It’s no big deal. You have to fight, like everyone else does. You will have some areas in which you find the fight harder; in other areas which other people find difficult you may have no difficulty. Be of good cheer. Your strength is not in yourself, but in God." Perhaps it would be good to add that Christianity teaches clearly that virginity is a perfectly normal calling, and that men and women do not have to have sexual intercourse in order to be fully human. This teaching has been somewhat forgotten in a society that considers everyone must be given contraceptives because all are assumed to be "sexually active". In such a society, it would seem unfair to deny to homosexuals their right to sexual pleasure. But that is not the Christian view. Now, coming to Dumbledore, the headmaster of Hogwarts school. If his author and creator tells us he is gay, what does this mean? First of all, is Dumbledore “gay”? A simple answer is, “Yes, the author says so.” But it is not so simple. Until these comments of hers we have had seven books in which Dumbledore has played a prominent part and there has no been no mention that he is gay. Now Rowling has told us he is. The evidence she gives is that he had fallen in and out of love with Gellert Grindelwald. If we read the relevant passages in the seventh book of Harry Potter, Chapter Eighteen, we find that the information comes from a suspect source, the notorious scandal-mongering Rita Skeeter. (However it has to be admitted that Rowling, despite having considerable misgivings about journalists, does seem to use Skeeter as a way of transmitting sensitive information or suggestions to her readers). We are told that Dumbledore and Grindelwald had met as teenagers (17 and 16 years old) when Grindelwald had come to stay in Dumbledore’s village of St Godric’s Hollow. They “took to each other at once”, both of them being precocious wizards: “They got on like a cauldron on fire”. They plotted to take over the world (a suitably teenage dream), but split up after barely two months, when Dumbledore’s sister Ariana died and Grindelwald “fled the country hours after the girl’s death”. They never met again, and neither of them ever “referred to this brief boyhood friendship in later life”. Skeeter adds what could now be interpreted as a hint of something else: “However, there can be no doubt that Dumbledore delayed, for some five years of turmoil, fatalities and disappearances, his attack upon Gellert Grindelwald. Was it lingering affection for the man, or fear of exposure as his once best friend, that caused Dumbledore to hesitate? Was it only reluctantly that Dumbledore set out to capture the man he was once so delighted he had met?” However, the obvious interpretation is (a) that the scandal that Skeeter had in mind was the fact that Dumbledore had been friends with one of the “Most Dangerous Dark Wizards of All Time”; (b) that the intensity of their friendship is typical of a phase which many young persons go through, and, in the absence of other information, is not in any way indicative of homosexuality. But, despite the lack of evidence, let us assume that Dumbledore is gay, since the author has told us so. In that case, the first thing we notice is that Dumbledore does not tell us about it. In this, his behaviour is consonant with Christian teaching. He keeps the matter to himself. He appears to be unmarried, but this does not mean he is homosexual. If one looks at the other teachers at Hogwarts, several of them seem to be unmarried – Professors McGonagall and Snape among them. The tradition of single teachers is a perfectly well known tradition and Hogwarts seems to be no exception. Dumbledore is kind, he is thoughtful. He is trusting. He is discreet (for instance, he does not reveal that Sirius is an Animagus). He is forgiving and understanding, intelligent and talented. He wants to pass on his expertise to others. He is considered the best headmaster the school has ever had. The author has recently said that she sees him as having frailties, "quite a Machiavellian figure" and, in his hands, "Harry has been a puppet to an extent". It is not clear how much this actually comes out in the books. Certainly Harry frequently complains that Dumbledore has left him in the dark – but isn’t that a typical teenage complaint against parents and elders? What is certain is that Dumbledore makes friends with Harry (as he has done previously with Hagrid) and is constantly protective towards him. But there is never the slightest indication of impropriety in their relationship. All this is consistent with a person with homosexual tendencies and, if his tendencies are under control, with good Christian behaviour. We see here how right Christianity is in not discriminating against such people. Dumbledore (if he is gay) curbs his tendencies in that direction, something we have all have to do with our own negative tendencies. We can conclude that the information that "Dumbledore is gay", coming as it does after the last book in the series has been published, does not really add to or take away from our knowledge and appreciation of him as a person. In this sense perhaps it would have been better for the author not to have mentioned the fact. But, given that we have been told it, we should neither praise him nor condemn him for it. It is also doubtful whether it would be useful to delve into the seven books for clues of his homosexual tendencies. We should see him as he is (by and large a highly attractive character) and let this late information provided by the author remind us that people with homosexual tendencies can be very effective members of society, as Dumbledore is in leading the struggle against Voldemort. As Dumbledore might have said "What makes a person is not so much what qualities he has, as the good use he makes of them." This positive approach to Dumbledore’s possible homosexuality needs to be put in context. It assumes there is no consented homosexual intercourse; because such activity (like all impurity) degrades both individuals and society. Nowhere does Rowling speak of such behaviour, while at the same time she is very good on friendship, one of the strongest attractions of the Harry Potter books. Friendship is not the same as homosexuality. Part of the problem of those who seek to promote homosexuality is a refusal to recognise the distinction and the hint that, in condemning consented homosexual behaviour, Christianity is condemning friendship. True friendship is a treasure. Andrew Byrne is a Catholic priest in London. |
relatedarticlesmorebythisauthorfreeupdates |
Comments (49)
John Thomas said...I heard the view that Rowling had made the comment tongue-in-cheek, to play up to her New York audience, who, being very “Liberal”, serious, and naive, swallowed it whole (gayness a “good thing”, of course) - and that the joke was on them. If this is true, then Andrew Byrne has also somewhat taken Rowling’s comment at face value. But, as suggested by this article, does it matter? Dumbledore gay? Who knows?, who Cares!
-- | Friday, 2 November 2007 at 10:11 pm
Mariusz Wesolowski said...Father Byrne is absolutely right when he stresses the fallacy of totally identifying a human being by his/her sexual preference (which is only a part of our overall makeup, and quite often not an unchangeable part at that.) As for J. K. Rowling and her jumping on the bandwagon of political correctness, what else’s new? She is only a mediocre producer of trendy books who (and which) will be most likely forgotten in a decade or two (if you doubt it, look for example at the list of the past winners of the Nobel Prize in literature...)
Canada | Friday, 2 November 2007 at 10:59 pm
David Page said...Father Byrne said: “What is certain is that Dumbledore makes friends with Harry (as he has done previously with Hagrid) and is constantly protective towards him. But there is never the slightest indication of impropriety in their relationship.”
Why would there be impropriety in their relationship? Why did he slip that little gem into the middle of his article? Harry was a child. If dumbledore was straight, and his friendship was with Hermione, would he include such a remark? It is a tactic of anti-gay Christians to equate homosexuality with pedophilia. It brings everything else he said into question.
United States | Saturday, 3 November 2007 at 7:37 am
Barbara Padolina said...Thank you, Fr. Andrew, for this wonderful article! I and some of my children have read the whole series of Harry Potter books, and enjoyed them tremendously. I was so disappointed when Rowling did make this disclosure about Dumbledore being gay. It was completely unecessary. I appreciated the strong emphasis on friendship in the series, and the author’s recent revelation really does nothing to add value to the story . Your article helps put things in better perspective for me to explain to any of my kids about Dumbledore and homosexuality from a Christian point of view.
Canada | Saturday, 3 November 2007 at 7:40 am
B.N said...One good thing about post-Modenism, no matter what Rowling says it doesn’t matter.
But seriously, I read the whole series and never once labelled Dumbledore as homosexual, just an extremely eccentric, fantastic old man. Children can read this book safely, just don’t go in with a mind to make him gay and he doesn’t have to be. Besides, nothing in Christianity condemns the inclintion of homosexuality, only the practise of it, and there is no evidence that Dumbledore ever surcomed to his feelings if such feelings existed.
Australia | Saturday, 3 November 2007 at 9:41 am
Jovi Dacanay said...The presence of a deep, selfless friendship among two males is seen as most noble and dignified in English literature. This can be perceived in the characterization and description of the friendship between Antonio and Bassanio in Shakespeare’s Merchant of Venice. A parallelism in the friendship between Dumbledore and Grindelwald, and, Bassanio and Antonio can be observed.
While experts in English history and literature somehow do not characterize such deep friendship as showing homosexuality, post-modern authors describe it as such.
Philippines | Saturday, 3 November 2007 at 4:57 pm
angela shananahan said...Hm...I always wondered why he wears his beard with that nice ribbon around it.Talk about a storm in a goblet!
-- | Saturday, 3 November 2007 at 5:37 pm
Francis Phillips said...David, don’t you think you might be over-reacting to Andrew Byrne’s article because of your own prejudice against the Catholic Church? The phrase ‘little gem’ is unnecessarily contemptuous.
You think the remark would not have been included if it concerned a heterosexual adult and child: alas, I think Andrew Byrne might well have issued a similar caveat. Why? because in our fevered, suspicious, sexually-dominated society it is (almost) not possible to describe an innocent friendship between an adult and a child - whatever the orientation. Perhaps it is different in Boston. In the UK, no teacher or official can ever touch a child to comfort them in distress. I have a friend, a respectable married woman and head-teacher. She tells me that when she is interviewing a child she now always leaved her door wide open or has another teacher present - in case of allegations of ‘abuse’. It was not so when she began teaching 40 years ago. You should read the remark in this context.
-- | Saturday, 3 November 2007 at 7:08 pm
Dale O'Leary said...I think that Rowlings may have decided, in keeping with her idea of teaching tolerance, to make Dumbledore “gay” but her understanding of the development and manifestation of same-sex attraction in males was inadequate. She was therefore unable to write a believably “gay” character, which is why every one was so surprised at her announcement. What she described was intense adolescent friendship gone awry. The death of Dumbledore’s sister lead to a life of regret. The shame kept him from taking action earlier and motivated his future course of action.
Bad writers can impose their will on characters, but when a good novelist creates a character, that character takes on a life of its own. I think this is what happened between Rowlings’ intention and the actual novel.
United States | Saturday, 3 November 2007 at 11:21 pm
That Lesbian Down The Street said...Heh^^ I’ve thought this about a lot of mercatornet authors, but you have the privilege of hearing it directly from me.
I don’t like you. Not at all.
Of course that doesn’t matter much. But I just had to get it out. First, I’d like to say: If you’re reading -my- article, scroll up a little and read David Page’s^^ I would’ve made the same point, but he did it earlier and more eloquently than I could have. Congrats to David^^
Your article seems well thought-out, nicely put together, intelligent, etc etc etc....
seems.
Too bad that’s only an illusion.
If you think one way, you’ll remain thinking that way at the end of the article. If you think homosexuality is a sin, you’ll come away from the article with a few more excuses to yourself on why you hate homosexuality. If you think homosexuality is just fine, you’ll come away from the article thinking that the author is an arse.
Oh, and I have to call you on this tidbit.
“Homosexuality is a difficult subject for people to deal with.”
People, or Christian People? I’m fine discussing it. It’s only when people start condemning it that I get angry.
That said, I -am- angry right now… and when I get angry, I get sloppy. I withdraw myself from this debate for whatever amount of time it takes me to calm down. Maybe I’ll come back, but that’s in the air right now.
Continue to make sensible arguments, people.
Have a nice day^^
-- | Saturday, 3 November 2007 at 11:46 pm
Kevin Aldrich said...C.S. Lewis could not have written a more reasonable and insightful essay!
Looking at the matter from a different point of view, once a work of fiction is written, the author has no more authority to determine the meaning of the story than anyone else. The author’s intention is, of course, interesting and informative, but what matters is what the author has actually put into the story. In other words, everything is to be decided, finally, from the evidence within the text. Rowling has no more right to declare Dumbledore gay than I do to say that he is not. Or rather, it depends on who can marshal the best argument from within the text itself.
United States | Sunday, 4 November 2007 at 12:37 am
Rob said...Thank you Father Byrne for such a wonderful article. The qualities of men being good friends, ("sensitivity, kindness, gentleness") and protecting those that they love should and are not purely homosexual tendencies. They are essential qualities to the human person.
It is unfortunate that some parents will overeact to this announcement and prevent their children from reading this great series. The themes of friendship, love, and self sacrifice are prominent subjects throughout.
United States | Sunday, 4 November 2007 at 3:23 am
Jim said...My take on the inclusion of the sentence “But there is never the slightest indication of impropriety in their relationship.” is that it appears quite natural, even to be expected, considering that the whole question here is based on the assumption that the author is stating something that is true?
David, your reaction, or interpretation, is what has drawn my response. You wrote: “It is a tactic of anti-gay Christians to equate homosexuality with pedophilia.” Does not your personal experience in Boston validate the correlation between homosexuality and pedophilia? Were not the victims of Priest pedophiles all boys? With the hope of not having this taken the wrong way let me be clear ... this does not say that all homosexuals are pedophiles.
United States | Sunday, 4 November 2007 at 4:58 am
Gregory Haddock said...Though it’s all post facto, I think that JK Rowling wrongly identifies Dumbledore as being “gay”, even though she has created the character. This term has been appropriated by some men and women of homosexual tendency to express not a tendency but an attitude with regard to it. Since the books are all we have to go on, then all we can allow is that the author intended to make this character as one having homosexual leanings. He is obviously not “gay”, since the series never presents him in that light.
Canada | Sunday, 4 November 2007 at 5:17 am
Rosemary Kite said...Thank you, Andrew Byrne from the bottom of my heart for this honest attempt to put praise where praise is due and truth where truth is due!
As a Roman Catholic who loves the Roman Catholic Church with all her heart, at the very same time as she loves each and every gay and lesbian person who has ever crossed her path in life, all I can say once more is THANK YOU.
Thank you for bringing the voice of reason back into the public forum on this critical and sensitive issue. Thank you for your efforts to keep the doors of dialogue, not only ajar, but vastly, widely open!
Sincerely,
Rosemary Kite
United States | Sunday, 4 November 2007 at 5:47 am
Page 1 of 4 : 1 2 3 > Last »