Gay Critics of Harry Potter Should Back Off

When Harry Potter author J.K. Rowling "outed" Hogwarts headmaster Dumbledore in October, I expected homophobes to be up in arms. They were. One person posted on a Harry Potter board that the news made him want to throw all of his Harry Potter books away. Another said it made her sick to her stomach. Pretty immature reactions, granted, but not completely unexpected from people who think it is their business to police what other people do in their bedrooms.

The criticisms that did startle me were the criticisms that immediately began flying from the gay community--my community. I should have suspected it of course. I've never yet seen a movie or book that made reference to gays that wasn't bashed by other gays. For instance, when the movie Philadelphia came out, gay critics complained because Tom Hanks and Antonio Banderas didn't get it on. When Claire of the Moon, which contained an extremely erotic scene between two women, was released in theaters, those same critics complained it didn't have enough plot and portrayed lesbians only as sexual beings. Every attempt to portray a human gay or lesbian character has been met with cries of homophobia, and it needs to stop. We'll never find a perfectly generic gay or lesbian hero, and if we did, we'd probably be bored to tears. All of the greatest characters in fiction, gay and straight alike, have imperfections, sometimes significant imperfections.

So what are gay critics saying about Albus Dumbledore? First, they're complaining that the character is dead (sorry to all of you who haven't yet finished the sixth book in the series). This complaint has a history. It's true that for a long time in books and movies, homosexual characters often met some form of lethal punishment for their sexual orientation. (A woman in the movie The Fox actually had a tree fall on her, another woman in The Children's Hour committed suicide.) But this was clearly not Rowling's intent for Dumbledore. He died--as did a great many of his heterosexual colleagues--facing the most evil wizard ever born. His death was not a reflection of his sexual orientation but rather a reflection of his self-sacrificing commitment to the community where he lived and worked. If he had been the only character who died, I might get my feathers a little more ruffled, but since he was one of literally dozens, I can't think his death shows any heterosexism on Rowling's part.

Second, gay critics are complaining that Dumbledore never had a relationship in any of the books. This criticism is a little more valid until you realize that Rowling rarely discussed the personal lives of the teachers at Hogwarts. We know Snape was straight because he lusted after Harry's mother. We know Hagrid was straight, because he went after Madame Maxime. Both these relationships were necessary to further the plots of the books. But honestly, what do we know about McGonagall's husband? Or Professor Flitwick's wife? Or Mad-Eye Moody's whatever? For that matter, Rowling never stated that McGonagall had a husband or Flitwick a wife. It simply wasn't vital to the story, and since the book is written from the point of view of the students, and the last thing most students want to think about is their teachers expressing any kind of sexuality, the topic just never came up. So, no, I don't think it's fair to say that Dumbledore was cheated out of a personal life in a way that other teachers weren't.

A third, related complaint is that Dumbledore never officially came out in any of the books. Again, I can understand this one. It would have been nice to turn to page seven hundred and something and point to a line where Dumbledore says, "I am gay." But the fact that Dumbledore did not come out before his untimely demise does not mean that he was torn up by shame over his sexual orientation. In Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Dumbledore's brother tells Harry that he and Dumbledore learned to keep secrets at their mother's knee. And as one might expect, Dumbledore keeps all kinds of secrets from Harry, often with disastrous results. To have Dumbledore openly announce his sexual orientation to his students might score a few points for political correctness but would be completely out of keeping with the elusive character Rowling had developed. But Dumbledore let readers know in his own sly way. Remember when he came to defend Harry before the Wizengamot in The Order of the Phoenix? A flick of his wand, and he created a "squashy chintz armchair" to sit on. Sorry, but that's way too much style for a straight guy.

Finally, and I can't believe this came from a member of the gay community, at least one gay critic has complained about Dumbledore's relationship with Harry, as if his being gay somehow makes their closeness improper, as if gay men are incapable of nurturing children in a non-sexual way. If you didn't think there was anything wrong with Harry's relationship with Dumbledore before the venerable professor was outed, there's nothing wrong with it now. Dumbledore was and is nothing more than a mentor and father figure to Harry, and as Harry named one of his children after Dumbledore at the end of The Deathly Hallows, it seems he also remembered their friendship with fondness.

So I say to the gay community--to my community--back off Dumbledore. No, he's not perfect. He was never intended to be. What he is, is an overwhelmingly popular character in an overwhelmingly popular fantasy series. And for all his faults, he's one of us! Let's not pick the guy's carcass for his imperfections, let's welcome him, or his spirit, or whatever, lovingly into our tribe.