An Open Letter to JK Rowling

Dear Ms. Rowling,

You said Albus Dumbledore was/is gay. And you went on to explain how he actually loved Gellert Grindelwald, and how that made him blind to that wizard's Dark Magic leanings. My question for you is, why would you say this now, if it was irrelevant to the books' plots?

Let's ignore for the purposes of this discussion the inflammatory nature of this statement to your fans who are devout Christians, Jews, Mormons, or Muslims. Instead, let's look at the target audience for your books--kids. While the later books are long, they are books that are read by your average 8 to 10 year olds, plus or minus a few years. Is it really necessary to sexualize the books for this age of child? Isn't it bad enough that kids are barraged by our sex-saturated media and the aggressive politicization of bedroom behavior? Do you have to detract from what is a children's story by extemporizing publicly about all the adult characters' sexuality?

And don't think that adults won't be poring through your books for any hint that Albus had an overly fond interest in Harry, either. This is the age of sex scandals in the Catholic church, victims suing over priests molesting them, and the "man-boy love" association. The second someone finds a sentence like, "Dumbledore patted Harry fondly" or some such, someone will claim it's an indication of an unhealthy relationship between Dumbledore and Harry. After all, Rita Skeeter hinted at it, so it MUST be true...where there's smoke there's fire and all that, right? People will be blogging about this being the real reason Harry was getting so angry with Dumbledore during the later books--he was getting too old for Dumbledore's tastes, etc. Think I'm exaggerating? Just take a look here at the discussion...it's already there. So now the Dumbledore/Harry mentor relationship is questionable, which sours all of the books.

I can't fathom what motives you had for outing Albus. Were you not concerned that Dumbledore is now going to be used as another poster child in the outspoken political gay movement? It took about two nanoseconds for t-shirts and all sorts of slogans to be invented, and no doubt worn at gay pride parades and protests all over the world. I can only assume that at best this doesn't bother you, to see one of your beloved (and assiduously defended from copyright infringement, if your lawyers' previous actions are any indication) characters reduced to a strawman. At worst I could ascribe political motives and an attempt to force your own socio-political views on your reading audience, which, if it is the case, I frankly find despicable from an author of children's literature. Kids have enough of a hard time learning how to sort through all the socio-political debates when they are teens and their brains are developing the ability to reason and use logic. Younger than that, and they are capable only of concrete knowledge, and not able to question why or how. If I were being cynical, I could say this is the point.

Further, why does there have to be some sort of "explanation" for the fact that Dumbledore was single? What is wrong with never marrying? Our society has the unfortunate habit of speculating about sexuality when adults choose not to marry, and shame on you for feeding it. It's okay to be single! Are we now to speculate about Sprout and McGonagall, as they, too, are unmarried?

Lastly, it does irritate me that so much "backstory" is being given out left, right, and center about the characters and their continuing lives, etc. When I finish a book or a series of books, I expect the words, "THE END", to really be THE END. To have an author continue to drip out information that was obviously irrelevant to the story is annoying at best and pandering at worst. I don't care if Neville Longbottom married Hannah Abbott. I don't even remember who she is, she is such a minor character in the books. I have no opinion on Hermione's career choices, or Ron's, or Harry's. And I really don't give a crap about Albus Dumbledore's sexuality. The thing is, all of the above are irrelevant to the story. There's a reason you didn't put it in the books--because it is irrelevant. If it was too irrelevant to be included, then isn't it too irrelevant to discuss with fans? Isn't there enough meat in the books themselves to talk about for ages? When you give out all of these meaningless bits, you ruin people's own ideas about the characters. That's the best part of books--you have your own vision of the characters, and what they were like eating dinner or chatting with friends at the pub, or growing up, or as parents or grown-ups. When you start feeding out your ideas, you rob your readers of the joy of imagining their own endings and stories. And that, frankly, disappoints me the most. For all of the above reasons, I'm disappointed in you, Jo.