On Mon, 22 Oct 2007 15:06:03 -0000, RC Freya <ynanakidul@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
wrote:
<snip>
>As far as Dumbledore goes, if she wanted to hint at (or mention) his
>gayness, wouldn't she have brought it up in the discussions of
>Grindlewald? Wouldn't Dumbledore have said something about
>sacrificing love for the Greater Good? Or gotten philosophical about
>love and its potenital? This is someone who beat you over the head
>with the idea of love conquering all things, including great evil.
>Yet he couldn't change Grindlewald through his own love? There's
>massive irony (and inconsistency) there, and a few pages devoted to
>that instead of the Most Boring Camping Trip Ever would have added
>some depth to the book.
Actually, I read some quotes in an article today that seemed to hint
at Dumbledore's sexuality. Apparently Grindelwald's ideas "inflamed"
young Albus. However, going back and finding quotes like this is just
Monday morning quarterbacking. One can interpret anything in
hindsight.
>If Rowling cared about "authenticity" on Dumbledore's sexuality as
>much as she claims she now does, she (or the producers) should have
>found a way to get Ian McKellan as Dumbledore from the start. No
>offense at all to Richard Harris, who was fabulous, but I always
>thought Ian McKellan would have been perfect as Dumbledore. And since
>he's the only openly gay actor I can think of in that demographic, it
>should have been automatic.
>
As good as McKellen is, he probably wouldn't want to be keep playing
wizards ad nauseam. He can do that in his sleep.
I've always thought Peter O'Toole would make a good Dumbledore. But I
also think Gambon has done a respectable job stepping into Harris's
shoes.
Todd
|
