[ SECRET POST #4789 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #4789 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.



__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.









Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 03 pages, 54 secrets from Secret Submission Post #686.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

yeah when it comes to things like this i'd rather the creator be up-front and admit that they just didn't think about it properly/consider it much at the time. it's still not the best reason sure, but i am much more forgiving of outright honesty, than acting like there was some ~greater reason~ for it when we all know that's bollocks.

[(Anonymous)]

I don't think what Rowling did with Dumbledore was even really objectionable, in itself. It'd be better if she had addressed it in the text, but OK, she didn't, fine.

What annoys me is people acting like she did address it in the text, or like there's no possible way she ever could have addressed it in the text.

[(Anonymous)]

+1

[(Anonymous)]

I think there's enough in the last book to support her claim that she had always considered Dumbledore gay. A lot of people picked up on the subtext even before she said anything. But then of course a LOT of people picked up on Sirius/Remus, too, despite her not intending them to be read that way. So I'm not saying the text is at all clear on Dumbledore/Grindelwald, or that it's some great representation, but I also don't think it was an afterthought for her.

[(Anonymous)]

If "a lot of people" in fandom supposedly picked up on subtext, I take that with a big grain of salt. Fandom has a tendency to see lots of things through slash goggles and they also tend to think that absence of a het relationship/love interest is proof that there's gay smoke AND gay fire.

[(Anonymous)]

It was always the author's intention for the smoke and the fire to be gay, and also the fire is mixed-race.

[(Anonymous)]

That's a very good point about Sirius and Remus. I'd argue that textually there's a LOT more evidence for them than for Grindelwald/Dumbledore, if we're going solely by what was actually written.