|
Sorry, wendy ... but I think in a series targeted at tweens and young adults (nevermind that it long, long ago became clear that the audiences was all ages, all nationalities, all people of entire frelling earth) ... it would have been more responsible for Rowling, with no obligation mind you, to counteract one character's stated intention to smear Dumblefore with allegations of gay pervdom, to declare that his being gay does not mean he's a pedophile. This would be the proper thing to do for an audience of tweens and teens.
Furthermore, and this is solely my artistic opinion, the episode with Grindlewald would have been made far richer if it were made clear just why Dumbledore had such an uncharacteristic lapse of moral judgment.
Really no big deal one way or the other. But I'm beginning to understand why this has caused a brohaha (and not a haha brohaha either). In legal parlance, she opened the door. She put that nasty gay perve smear into the dialogue of a character, and it appeared in a published Harry Potter book. All this stuff about her not having to bring every character's backstory into the books is now moot, imo. She brought it in.
She just did not take the opportunity to best serve her considerably large youngster audience by countering the loathed gossip character's smear with an enlightened portrait of one of the most revered wise men in literature.
|