Well, if you define it as “relegating it to a simple love story”, I guess it might weaken it, but there’s no reason the love story had to be at all simple, there’s no reason it had to be an actual love story instead of Dumbledore just having feelings that caused him hesitation or anguish over the course of their interactions, etc.

Basically, while I think the guy might have kind of a point, he’s not automatically right. Just like the other stuff, it only cheapens the story and whatnot if you choose an interpretation that cheapens it.

However to relegate this complex relationship to a simple love story makes, in my opinion, the story much weaker overall. It makes Dumbledore much less of the wizard who could always think coolly and find the most logical and best solution to a matter and makes him a scorned lover… totally different dynamic.

much of Dumbledore’s true character development occurred in Book 7.  in Book 7 you learn that he is NOT the wizard who could always think coolly and find the most logical and best solution to a matter - gay or otherwise!  in fact, you begin to learn that in part during Book 6.

without rereading the passages, but going by memory, Dumbledore’s infatuation with Grindelwald actually makes more SENSE to me.  it explains why someone like Dumbledore, though admittedly power hungry, would also suddenly be swayed to believe in wizard supremacy as being “For the Greater Good” (which may as well have been called the “wizarding final solution"). 

it also explains why it took so long for Dumbledore to go after Grindelwald to defeat him and bring him to justice.

in other words, it pretty much explains everything Dumbledore did in relation to Grindelwald that seemed otherwise out of character.

those are the only topics for which Dumbledore’s “infatuation” (as JKR has called it) with Grindelwald even would come into play that i can think of off the top of my head.

this is, of course, is simply IMHO.

Gotta go with Jo Jo here. Where this dude came off thinking that Dumbledore acted “cooly” is beyond me. In book 7 you come to see him as a person, not as this authority figure.  You see he had serious flaws, and did the best he could to overcome them.

His infatuation with Grindelwald really does explain why he went along with the bonehead things that Grindelwald wanted to do. Even without knowing about the infatuation, just his willingness to be party to anything G wanted disputes this idea that he always thought cooly and logically. 

I think this is the crucible that helped shape Albus, and make him the logical thinker he seemed to be. But even with the logical reasons for doing what he did, there was always that kernal of concern for everyone involved.  He cared deeply about Harry, as if he was the son he never had. But realized that they were at war with a foe that had no qualms at wiping out everyone without even blinking an eye. So he did what was needed, and in book 7, you see the toll it took on him.

To make what happened with G just the responce of a “jilted lover” demeans what Albus had to do to bring his friend to justice.  Does that mean if my ex fiance, who lied, stole and cheated from me suddenly trys to take over the world, and I stop her, am I only doing it because she cheated on me with a pothead?

Sorry for the dissertation.....lol

Whether it cheapens the story or not I’m not sure, as I haven’t read the last book. That being said, I have found it hysterical that people are getting so hot under the collar about such a trivial detail unimportant to the specific stories she was writing.

I’m about 75% sure that Rowling didn’t expect such an uproar (both in favor and against) the moment before “the big reveal"… I mean, if you’ve ever written fiction before (especially something as detailed as HP), you know how you create back stories for characters in your head without explicitly going into boring detail about inconsequential facts that don’t further the story? Imagine if someone that read your work ever made a wrong assumption about a certain character; wouldn’t you correct them?

So basically this proves that lolcats can be used in almost any (it not every) situation?

Cat image macros can defuse any situation.

I can’t even bring myself to even consider the possibility of beginning to care about this issue.

Depends on what you mean

What ErikTheRed said…