Another Possibility For the HOA

[Andrew the Great]

Ha ha!

Vinlend!?!?!?!  LOVE IT!

Yeah... That pretty much made my day.

[Qarlin]

Dear oh dear oh dear... That's like making them celebs.

But I don't think the child is going to happen in the third book. Totally could, though. Not going to rule it out completely.

[GreenMonsta]

I MUCH agree with Sanderson's blog about this, and I DON'T think you should criticize Rowling for a character being who he is.

Oh dont get me wrong miyabi I agree. I was sure I posted along with this that the statement had nothing to do with the eventual outcome and didn't affect the way we saw the character therefore making the statement was pointless. Rowling did it for publicity her final book came out and the magic was gone so she figured a way to bring attention back to Harry Potter.

[Miyabi]

See, you ARE criticizing her.  She didn't do it for publicity.  If you read her interviews and that particular one.  She was ASKED if Dumbledore was ever with anyone and she said Grindlewald.  In any case this is WAY off topic.

[Comfortable Madness]

See, you ARE criticizing her.  She didn't do it for publicity.  If you read her interviews and that particular one.  She was ASKED if Dumbledore was ever with anyone and she said Grindlewald.  In any case this is WAY off topic.

It very well may be off topic but no matter what she said in an interview she did it purely as a publicity stunt. The fact that Dumbledore was gay has nothing to do with the story in any way.  Neither Greenmonsta nor I are criticizing her for Dumbledore's sexuality but we are merely pointing out that Rowling did it only to sell more books.

[VegasDev]

I don't think she did it for publicity because the books didn't really need it and it may have had a negative affect on sales if anything. She merely answered a question about Dumbledore falling in love.

[Comfortable Madness]

I don't think she did it for publicity because the books didn't really need it and it may have had a negative affect on sales if anything. She merely answered a question about Dumbledore falling in love.

Just for reference sake here is the quote from Newsweek:
In front of a full house of hardcore Potter fans at Carnegie Hall in New York, Rowling, sitting on the stage on a red velvet and carved wood throne, read from her seventh and final book, "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows," then took questions. One fan asked whether Albus Dumbledore, the head of the famed Hogwarts School of Wizardry and Witchcraft,  had ever loved anyone. Rowling smiled. "Dumbledore is gay, actually," replied Rowling as the audience erupted in surprise. She added that, in her mind, Dumbledore had an unrequited love affair with Gellert Grindelwald, Voldemort's predecessor who appears in the seventh book. After several minutes of prolonged shouting and clapping from astonished fans, Rowling added. "I would have told you earlier if I knew it would make you so happy."

The fact that her books were already uber-popular does not prove that this was not a publicity stunt. Simply put "Greed knows no bounds" and it really doesn't have to be about money. She is practically queen of England due to her popularity over seas and someone with that much fame tends to only want more.....

As far as the negative effect goes heres another cliche for ya "There is no such thing as bad publicity". While yes some people/groups would be against buying her novels based solely on the fact that a character may be gay but the overall buzz her comments made, imo, would outweigh any negative effects.

[VegasDev]

So when she was asked, at the very same event, whether Neville ever fell in love and she responded that he marries Hannah Abbott and lives above a the leaky cauldron, is that to appeal to drunks? I suppose when they also asked if Hagrid gets married and she responds that the giantess thought he was cute but he was just too unsophisticated, that she is making an appeal to fat single men who get turned down on the internet.

The shame that she would go to such lengths to sell books. :rolleyes:

[Reaves]

well she can hardly make every single character gay can she? lol jk

this is probably going a bit far so you'll have to forgive me, but how would feel if after all three novels were published you found out Kelsier was supposed to be gay? or bi i suppose i should say.

[VegasDev]

well she can hardly make every single character gay can she? lol jk

this is probably going a bit far so you'll have to forgive me, but how would feel if after all three novels were published you found out Kelsier was supposed to be gay? or bi i suppose i should say.

Well, other than the fact that when I reread the books I might accidently give him a slight lisp, I wouldn't care either way. I don't read books for their sexual preference, I read them for their character development and actions. It's not like he was rubbing down Ham or anything.

[Comfortable Madness]

So when she was asked, at the very same event, whether Neville ever fell in love and she responded that he marries Hannah Abbott and lives above a the leaky cauldron, is that to appeal to drunks? I suppose when they also asked if Hagrid gets married and she responds that the giantess thought he was cute but he was just too unsophisticated, that she is making an appeal to fat single men who get turned down on the internet.

The shame that she would go to such lengths to sell books. :rolleyes:

Hmmm....I sense a little sarcasm there. You're completely missing my point though. It's not that she is trying to appeal to any one specific group. I believe her point was to cause a stir, a lot of public buzz, in order to sell more books or increase her already immense fame.

And yes I do view it as pretty shameful.

[Reaves]

well she can hardly make every single character gay can she? lol jk

this is probably going a bit far so you'll have to forgive me, but how would feel if after all three novels were published you found out Kelsier was supposed to be gay? or bi i suppose i should say.

Well, other than the fact that when I reread the books I might accidently give him a slight lisp, I wouldn't care either way. I don't read books for their sexual preference, I read them for their character development and actions. It's not like he was rubbing down Ham or anything.

Exactly!! The orientation of the character literally has no effect on the plot or character development, why make such a major change to the life, backstory, and history of the character when it is not foreshadowed or referenced anywhere in the book?
EDIT : unless of course you count the purple suit he wore in book six.

[GreenMonsta]

Agreed with Madness and Vegas, I dont think the idea of any character being gay has an effect on me, in the end it comes down to the characters and what they do. I also feel that Rowling did it for the notariety and publicity no matter what her interview said. Who cares if Dumbldore was gay he was and is still one of the best characters I've read about.

Even if it was true that Dumbledore was gay why not have hints if your going to come out and say it anyway. I think she may have at one point viewed the possabilities of Dumbldore being gay but decided against it for some reason and left it out. Then after the books fate was sealed and all the books came out she decided to drop the bomb. If you ask me it all sounds kind cowardly. She waits until the statment has the least effects on sales (because everyone already bought her books) and then comes out with a statement attempting to come off as brave.

[VegasDev]

I just want to make sure I have this straight. When she is asked about whether Hagrid or Neville find love (or any other multitude of questions), it's ok to answer with full disclosure, but when asked about Dumbledore she should keep quiet or simply answer 'yes'. Then if she is asked 'Who did he love' how should she respond so that it doesn't appear she is looking for even more attention because her 280 million isn't enough money?

[Comfortable Madness]

I just want to make sure I have this straight. When she is asked about whether Hagrid or Neville find love (or any other multitude of questions), it's ok to answer with full disclosure, but when asked about Dumbledore she should keep quiet or simply answer 'yes'. Then if she is asked 'Who did he love' how should she respond so that it doesn't appear she is looking for even more attention because her 280 million isn't enough money?

Full disclosure is just fine. I think I can speak for a couple of us here when I say that it is not that she disclosed any type of fact but that she did the exact opposite. What I'm saying is that I believe in the beginning Dumbledore was not gay.  She simply fabricated that near the end to create a buzz.....

Additionally you keep bringing up how she has a boatload of money already and that she doesn't need more as proof that this is not possible. You really don't understand the concept of greed do you?