Why do the books (and movies) never actually say Dumbledore is Gay?

Why does Dumbledore never tell anyone he’s gay? Why does it never come up?
Well, the answer depends on what media analysis lens you are using to answer that question.

Hello! Welcome to the party. Today, I want to talk about Doylist and Watsonian analysis and how those can be used to tackle a variety of different media questions. I know, it seems thrilling, but it’s not as dense as it sounds.

Closed Captions available.

[CC-jgcp]

This is why all those skimpy outfits on kids in anime can’t be totally justified with “oh but she CHOSE to wear that” or “oh but her POWERS require it” because, maybe you can agree with those sentiments as headcanons, but when people are seriously critiquing these things they’re really critiquing the AUTHORS choice. Sure, characters can make choices for themselves on a textual level, but on a metatextual level someone has always made them make those choices, and in the context of critique ignoring that isn’t useful

[Stephen-Fox]

Incidentally, I detest the excuse I keep seeing made for her that 'since she was writing the books in the 90s, she couldn't possibly have made Dumbledore any more explicitly gay in the books' - Very glad you pointed out in a text blub towards the end that his homosexuality doesn't come up because JK didn't want it to come up.

She was writing in the UK, during the time period when the children's television show Grange Hill had a gay teacher in it. Children's literature gets way more leeway for representation, especially of sexualities, than children's television. She could have absolutely had a line where Dumbledore mentions his ex in the context of being his ex. Particularly when conversing with Harry about his ex.

[gabbyabbott]

I just feel like Rowling only said Dumbledore is gay as a late disingenuous gesture to appear modern and “woke”. She didn’t think of his sexuality until after she wrote and published the books. That how I feel as a bisexual woman anyways. If there are actual quotes backing up Dumbledore’s sexuality, please share them.
Edit: however I feel like the situation could be rectified in the new movie coming out by giving Dumbledore a loving boyfriend.

[slavmetal]

JKR never intended to make him gay. She may have thought it when writing the character, but it was never meant to be textual. Instead of just admitting that her books are not very diverse and moving on, she had to "play woke". Dumbledore is convenient -- he's old and not really a main character. If she'd said that, I don't know, Ron was bi, it would have been harder to lie about why it never came up. The whole "Harry is oblivious and the book is from his perspective" argument is bs; as you so well explained, he doesn't notice because JKR never wrote him noticing. She could have very easily added a "I loved him" in the King's Cross scene, or she could have had Harry overhear an adult mention it (a device the books frequently used). She simply never intended to.

[aname]

dumbledore wore a fucking dress and dread knitting magazines in the movies.

[valeriavagapova]

Just wanted to say, thank you so much for captioning your videos! It's rare to see it on smaller channels especially. This is the first video I'm watching of yours but I will definitely check out more.

[samsmith]

I thought jkrowling announced dumbledore was gay in order to to piss off homophobes....because the first time I read the text, I did not read anything gay into it, but presumed dumbledore had lost a good friend. It was not until rowling made the gay announcement, I could read back the text and go, “ yeah. Ok. It can be read as losing your love interest, too.” Just for added depth of character sake, i (personally) would Liked to have read overt evidence of dumbledore being gay. As it stands, if Rowling did not make the comment, his sexuality would not even have crossed my mind.

[SantosAl]

Harry Potter didn't need to mention that dumbles was gay, however Fantastic Beasts needs it if Grindelwald and Dumbledore are an important part of the story.

[isabellacross]

It was a last minute thought and also to please people, she should have written it in the books implying that he is gay

[joedo]

I feel like Rowling made it up, after she was successfull and couldnt go wrong with anything. So it feels a bit shady. Especially since he isnt gay in the 'new movie'

[lintwizardly]

This is such a great video! I never knew the proper definitions for Watsonian and Doyalist analysis before but as someone who's interested in being informed and knowledgeable about how i consume and talk about film and literature they're really helpful terms that you've expressed with concise and famillar examples.

[dylanlewis]

I think it’s just that Rowling didn’t intend to make him gay. She revealed that fact once things started winding down. Now that people know Dumbledore is gay, they look for that evidence in the books, and they see it. But if someone reads the books, without that knowledge, they won’t really see any hints at him being gay. We see what we want to see.

[codde]

wow I just found your channel and I love it! Very good analysis, very easy to understand. Subscribed.

[BadgerPride]

Thank you for such a great summary of the main issues. I want to like the Fantastic Beasts series but this decision not to bring up the giant dragon in the room is really putting me off of going to see the next film.

[deadman]

Because he wasn't until Rowling decided he was. The first scene in _Philosopher's Stone_ has him blushing and getting all twitterpated when a witch compliments him. He also had pretty flagrantly heterosexual body language around witches in the first movie. Now, maybe he was supposed to be bi. That would work. And that's sort of gay these days, though back in the 1970s and 1980s bisexuals were treated terribly by gay people, who sneeringly said, "Pick a side!" It was a serious political battle to get the B in the alphabet soup. L got to be first because political lesbianism or at least the pretense thereof was so popular in the inaccurately named _second-wave_ feminism. Whatever. In any case, Dumbledore was definitely not exclusively or even primarily homosexual.

Most likely, Rowling's declaration that he was gay was part of the process of becoming a TERF and political blowhard, which rather ironically is just another recrudescence of the values common in that _second-wave_ feminism.

[bimboification]

I thought she announced Dumbledore’s sexuality BECAUSE of Fantastic Beasts. But he’s not going to be shown actually loving his bf in the movie, even though it’s a prequel? That doesn’t make any sense, especially when the public is now getting accustomed to minority films such as Black Panther, Wonder Woman and Love Simon. Yes, we want LGBT representation, but someone should tell Rowling that this isn’t how you do it. Also, homophobic backlash definitely shouldn’t have been an issue for Rowling. The series was already insanely popular, and she gets enough backlash from weird Christian parents bc of “hooo fictional magic is bad for children”. It’s pretty clear she’s just pulling this out of her sleeve.

[jackdrawsold]

actually, (in case nobody has said this) the reason steve burns left was because he had to. he was going bald, and since they didn't want the character to age, steve had to move on to new things. I'm sure he was also ready to move on, but the balding was the real reason.

[JupiterFilmsInc]

I think she didn't reveal it initially because she didn't want to damage the books' reputation as children's literature. If she had said so initially, many parents probably wouldn't have allowed their children to read the books.

[MrParkerman]

She said it was so "More Worldy" people could see him as gay, but young children could see it as him just making a friend, something like that.

[DiseasedDreams]

I always considered Dumbledore as more of an asexual. Someone who is more focused on teaching others about magic, than making sexual relationships.