More than a decade after the publication of the final Harry Potter novel, and nearly eight years after the final film, J.K. Rowling insists on continuing to add not just to the Wizarding World franchise, but minute details about the beloved characters’ sexual lives.
In a special feature interview for the Blu-ray release of the spinoff film “Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald,” Rowling decided to expound on the relationship between the aforementioned wizard and Albus Dumbledore, affectionately remembered by millennials at the grandfatherly genius who mentors young Harry.
“Their relationship was incredibly intense. It was passionate, and it was a love relationship. But as happens in any relationship, gay or straight or whatever label we want to put on it, one never knows really what the other person is feeling. You can’t know, you can believe you know,” said Rowling. “So I’m less interested in the sexual side — though I believe there is a sexual dimension to this relationship — than I am in the sense of the emotions they felt for each other, which ultimately is the most fascinating thing about all human relationships.”
I have so many questions, but mainly, why? Why would Rowling divulge details absolutely no one was asking for?
Actually, scratch that; apparently not no one.
In a tweet with 125,000 likes, Eric D. Snider mocked, “J.K. Rowling Confirms Some Characters in Her Books and Movies Are Gay Everywhere Except in the Books or the Movies.” In a response with 8,000 likes, an anonymous user commented, “I’m sick of Rowling and her half-assed inclusivity. It doesn’t count if she’s telling us after the fact. That’s not being an ally. That’s trying to get brownie points.”
Harry Potter isn’t meant to be realistic in its demographics so that it looks like England. It’s about magic. It’s literally a fantasy novel for children who couldn’t care less about how torrid any love affair is.
Rowling’s target audience doesn’t want to hear about a 150-year-old wizard’s ex-boyfriend; they simply want to read about magic and battles and mythical creatures and adventures. They don’t want to hear extraneous sexual details, coming in the form of pure fan service to a segment of society that will never find her sufficiently woke.
Perhaps the latest blowback can convince Rowling just to leave the story to print and let us relive our childhoods in peace.
— By Tiana Lowe
