Fantastic Beasts The Crimes Of Grindeldore?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 1 жов 2024
- Examining Grindeldore the pairing of Gellert Grindelwald and Dumbledore as a ship; as well as examining the furor surrounding it and the latest Fantastic Beasts sequel...The Crimes Of Grindelwald.
Patreon: / shippersguide
Want To Know More?
Is Carry On Harry Potter Fanfiction?
• Is Carry On Harry Pott...
Harry Potter And The Enchantment Of Draco Malfoy?
• Harry Potter And The E...
Harry Potter - Draco Dating Hermione?
• Harry Potter - Draco D...
Return To Hogwarts - Scorbus
• Return To Hogwarts - S...
Banner Artist Site -
neoeva122.weeb...
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Social Media:
Instagram: / shippersguidetothegalaxy
Twitter: / shippersguide
I say this as a queer person, that I think this incident in particular has been blown out of proportion given that it is a five movie series. I honestly doubt Grindelwald and Dumbledore will even share screen time together (unless there are flashbacks) until the final movie of the series, given it is canon that Dumbledore avoided ever confronting Grindelwald until that final confrontation in 1945. So it would be rather difficult to "explicitly" portray a gay relationship that...isn't really a relationship at this point in their story.
I also think fans should note that Dumbledore is not "good" representation in the sense that we usually want to see it. His relationship was tragic and unhealthy, if it ever was even a relationship at all. He clearly does not have a healthy acceptance of his own sexuality and I don't think JKR ever intended to fully explore that. I think it was something incidental to the character in her eyes, a part of him but not all that salient in the story she wants to tell. And I think, to a degree, that is still true. JKR is not trying to tell a gay love story- she's just telling a story in which one of the characters happens to be gay. She's interested in story and character before all else- representation is pretty clearly not high on her radar.
This can be a good and bad thing. Good in that we're seeing a very complex, morally gray character with a very different sort of relationship history and unique backstory- that just happens to be gay. An author more concerned with representation might not have been so bold. But it's bad because when it really comes right down to it, Dumbledore just isn't a healthy example of a gay character. He was never intended to be. Representation was never really considered when the character was created, and JKR was almost certainly not thinking about any social implications (as we see them today) of having this character be gay.
The reason I'm still okay with all this when many others aren't, is because I value story a little more than the concept of representation itself. I don't want to see queer characters that are trying too hard to be perfect representation, or were thrown into a story because fans demanded they see some gay representation the authors weren't prepared to provide. If representation is going to exist, I'd rather it be "problematic" characters that are part of a complex and compelling story than have it be "too" perfect and pandering.
I'd take a hundred Dumbledores over even one live action Lefou from BatB. And I'd prefer a thousand ships like Grindeldore than something as obviously pandering as Ruby Slippers was from OUAT. Sure, the latter two were more "explicit" and arguably less problematic. But, lbh- they kinda sucked.
But that's just one bi lady's opinion.
So I have always come at this issue from a different perspective, 1 I think most people don't consider. As a High School teacher, I can tell you the last person I discuss my personal relationships with is my students. I have never expected to see an out and proud Dumbledore, because that would just be highly unethical. Not because of his sexuality, but because it would be highly inappropriate for a teacher to announce their relationship status to their students.
"Of course I care about your struggles with Herbology Harry, but lets stop and talk about how I had to fight a duel with my ex-boyfriend and send him to prison." Not something that would be appropriate.
As for the Fantastic Beasts Time, I can't see Dumbledore being public about a romantic relationship with the most wanted criminal in multiple countries. I don't really think that would be good for him. "Why of course I know that man, Officer. He was my ex-boyfriend and we made such great plans together when we were young." "Really Professor, would you like to come down to the station to discuss this further?"
Representation is a good and important thing, but forcing that representation into a portion of the story where it would not make sense, or break the actual plot would harm that representation. That would be the truest of pandering.
Praxagora Thesmophora not to mention saying 'ex-boyfriend' would have got Dumbledore thrown in jail during WWII anyway.
Dragon Landlord that would be definitely true in the muggle world, but I'm not making any assumptions about the wizarding world yet. Particularly as they have a black woman being president in a country where she wouldn't have been able to vote in no-maj world.
I completely agree with you!
I expect Dumbledore's sexuality to be as explicit as any British man's was in the 1920's.
My head cannot sees their relationship very much like that of the Thinker and his wife on CW's The Flash.
I was never bothered with the fact the J. K. Rowling revealed Dumbledore's orientation outside the books. He works at a school with children. At what point would it have been appropriate to drop that? I had a gay teacher once and I only found that out years after high school via Facebook. Teachers (and principals) don't talk about that sort of stuff with students.
Shadow1Yaz , Thanks!
Well, we found out about Lupin's relationship with Tonks, didn't we?
I want a fix it/fluff fic where Grindelwald falls in love with Dumbledore and repents. A possible pivot point being that Ariana is injured instead of killed.
I feel that there’s a discussion to be had about “pandering” and how that accusation has become so vague enough to work.
You wanna discredit a LGBT+ ship or a character who isn’t white? Claim it’s all “pandering” and call it a day. No need for further discussion. You have throughly “owned” your opponents in one fell swoop.
matt0044 that would be a good discussion.
A Wrinkle In Time was less silly and more character-driven. But yeah, it often seems like people don't WANT to seem like they're advocating for the "White As Default" mentality but want to dress it up as something more... acceptable to today's society.
Fans need to back down when it comes to writers. Harry Potter is HER creation and she alone controls it.
THIS!
ON GOD
Correct, in my opinion she can do whatever she wants and when it becomes too much for me I'd just turn away from hp with no struggle, but wouldnt complain
I used to take all her stories as canon, until the release of The Curse Child. I just felt like she sold out, given that she didn't write it, but her name was on it and the advertisement claimed it was the 8th book. I don't think she should be harrased online, but it's definitely disappointing that she keeps adding to the canon to her benefit. Or at least, it seems that way.
Starkid took full advantage of Dumbledore’s sexuality in their potter musical series.
rogvortex58 OML YESSSS i need to rewatch that they have better lgbtq+ rep😤✊ (cause voldy and whatever his name is lol)
Panic! at the. idk Squirrel?
that-nerdy-hufflepuff Quirrel yes lmao
I don't mind this ship, as everyone dose stupid stuff when young (hopefully not nazi stupid but yer). But what really bugged me was that she said that it was unrequited, and he'd never had a successful relationship. Why dose the only canon gay person have to be life long celibate.
There's something very beautiful about it to me. I mean... He fell in love one time for good and it never went away, so he was never with someone else. That kind of love is epic and beautiful and yeah totally tragic, and really only exists in books and poems. It's not around these days really anymore in a world where the divorce rate is like 48%.
xcrstfallenstrx That kind of love is still around now in many couples that stay together till old age. And high divorce rates could still mean that people get remarried and have that kind of love, sorry if that sounded lectury but I wanted to say it
I think people need to lay off creators, just because you like something that they created doesn't mean that you can get angry just because they have an opinion or a headcanon that you don't like, you don't like the choice that the creator made? That's a You Problem, not a We Problem and certainly not the creators problem. The more fandoms do this and start to fight creators over subtext or headcanons the less that creators are going to want to talk to the fandom. As a fandom I think we definitely have an image to uphold and it's %100 is our responsibility to give it a good image even though that is extremely hard with a fandom as big as Harry Potter.
(I'm using "You" as a broad term)
Also I don't understand why people were so shocked about Dumbledore being gay, I remember having discussions with my Mum and sister and one of the topics that came up was: "Something is going on with Dumbledore and this Grindelwald guy, he kind of sounds like he was in love with him..." So when it came out I wasn't really that shocked by it.
People are just a bit disappointed that there's going to be no representation in the movie whatsoever. Even if there was a bit where Newt got annoyed about having to do Dumbledore's work and someone else said "If you can't face Leta, why would he face Grindelwald?" and the line is censored in China, it would be different than full on denial from the staff.
I wasn't actually talking about the up coming movies, I was talking about the books and J.K Rowling, but what I said still stands.
He said that it wouldn't be "explicit" which means to stated clearly and in detail, leaving no room for confusion or doubt, I don't think a line like "If you can't face Leta, why would he face Grindelwald?" would count as explicit, so we might get a line similar to that, just because Dumbledore isn't shouting from the roof that he's gay and in love with Grindelwald doesn't mean we aren't going to see anything in the next 4 movies.
Arunima Tiwari YES! I hope we do get rep cause poc and women get great rep in Harry Potter but lgbtq+ no... :((
My best friend who was a big fan of the hp franchise just literally found out last week that Dumbledore was gay when I told her. It was a fun conversation from then on.
I believe her that she always envisioned Dumbledore as gay, basically from the fact that he was never shown to have ever had feelings for a woman, and I’m not saying for certain that JKR was using stereotypes of gay men in Dumbledore’s character development, and if she did it could well have not been intentional, and given the time period if it was intentional she may not have known the implications and could hold very different views today, for all we know. But I think Dumbledore was described as somewhat stereotypically ‘gay’
Gindeldore, at least bookwise, comes across as a summer fling to me so idc if it's worked into the movies or not. As for showing Dumbledore's orientation, everyone needs to remember the story's time setting. Pre and during WWII could be deadly to openly gay people.
blak_kitten i thought it was bad enough Rowling completely ignored the Bombings when she covered Voldemort's childhood, but since it's obvious they're trying to work both the muggle and magical world in these movies i'm hoping they pay closer attention to the real history of the time.
Dragon Landlord I've got a feeling they're trying to more so this go around. At least my fingers are crossed.
Oh, I'm so glad you did this one! Fascinating ship, not only in terms of the actual relationship (though definitely that too) but also all the issues and complexities surrounding it. There's lots to discuss here and I think you did a great (and as always, admirably balanced) job covering it. Personally, I'm firmly of the opinion that Rowling wasn't pandering when she said what she did - I think for better or worse, it's very clear that Rowling has her own ideas about these characters and she won't change them to please anyone. There's both good and bad in that (she can be kind of deaf to criticism sometimes), but I think she very clearly is genuine.
In fact, I think if she had been pandering, we might well not be having the issues we are now with the fight for explicit representation. I think when Rowling said what she did, she thought she was just filling in some interesting detail about a character’s backstory - similar to the info she released about McGonagall’s tragic romantic past on Pottermore (those Hogwarts profs aren’t very lucky in love, are they?) She probably didn’t think it would be a big deal to fans one way or another whether the added info ended up making it into the actual canon.
I also think the atmosphere being what it was at the time, she was walking a line in terms of what she thought she could get away with. Just saying what she did caused a huge controversy and backlash from homophobic critics, even though she hadn’t included anything in the actual books. She may well have thought that she couldn’t write about Dumbledore’s sexuality in the books, even if she’d wanted to. (Whether she was right about that or not is a different matter - at her level of success and popularity, she might have been able to get away with it. But then again, that might have been more than her publishers were willing to risk even with such a successful series.) So maybe she thought confirming it in an interview was the most she could do to make Dumbledore’s sexuality explicitly canon.
But plain and simple, I think she also underestimated what representation would mean to fans and, to this day, I think she largely sees it as fans being whiny or entitled when they demand a higher standard of representation. She sees fans being upset that Dumbledore’s sexuality won’t explicitly be addressed in the next film, and all it means to her is that they’re throwing tantrums over a movie that isn’t even out yet, that’s part of a larger series with several installments to go. She’s not entirely wrong - it would be more fair for fans to wait and see. But she’s not being entirely fair either. She’s not understanding that there are fans who have been waiting decades to see themselves represented in this universe, who keep hoping and hoping and feel that they’re let down at every turn. She’s not understanding how much it would mean to some fans to see that people like them have a place in this universe that they love. She’s not understanding that even a small confirmation like “No, it’s not explicitly addressed in this movie, but we’ll be going into more detail about that in the next one” would mean the world to these people. I don’t think she gets how big these stakes feel to some people or why they get so emotional about it.
There's also the added issue that while explicitly addressing Dumbledore's sexuality would be a definite step in the right direction, you'd still be left with the huge problem that if you stop there, the sole representation of a gay relationship in the series would be this incredibly destructive, negative, possibly one-sided horrorshow. So in a sense, showing Dumbledore and Grindelwald's relationship canonically would solve one problem but also create new ones. I think you'd have to at least somewhat balance things out by showing more positive gay relationships as well. So the HP-verse has a very long way to go in terms of representation, and explicitly showing Dumbledore and Grindelwald's relationship would only be the start, IMO.
by, "Explicitly gay." does he mean Dumbledore's sexuality isn't going to be brought up, or is Dumbledore not gonna be all in your face about it? since clearly he isn't going to have any actual romantic interest. and Grindelwald and Dumbledore really can't have any real screen time together. since you know. Dumbledore was going to great lengths not to cross paths with Grindelwald. frankly, I'd rather it just not come up at all. he shouldn't be talking to the man he is confirmed to love, possibly still to this day. he can't have someone else in his heart since to me that would cheapen his feelings for Grindelwald. and lastly, it would just be disrespectful the the community and the character if there was a scene where he's just, "Oh yes. I'm gay." and then nothing else about it after that. I'm not opposed to gay characters what so ever. in fact Grindledore is one of my all time favorite ships. both gay and straight.
pandering, considering her history with representation in her story (black Hermione) but I don't really care that much because I consider Sirus and Remus a more interesting ship
I’m a published author myself, so I may have a bit of a bias, but I don’t think the fans have any right to dictate what happens with the story or characters.
Only the author has that right.
Art is not a democracy.
Yes, but fans always have the right to like or dislike any choice an author makes.
That being said, it still stands that the opinion of the audience doesn't matter as much as most people would like to think (when it comes to writing and the plot of a story at least). Of course negative reviews and a grand amount of disliking can and will contribute towards or even be the cause of a downfall for whatever was written, but speaking from life experience in general: The positives far out weigh the negatives. In which case, for every person that would dislike any choice an author makes, there is likely two more who adore that choice.
I don’t agree completely with you. As an author (can I call myself that already I don’t know but I do write and people do read my stories) I sometimes know exactly where my story is going but that doesn’t mean I don’t listen to the readers and their ideas of what they want to happen. I like to hear their ideas and I sometimes choose to write them! But people should be nicer and propose their ideas, not impose them
I feel like while criticism is OK, I feel like it's dangerous line. Fandom interference can ruin the very thing people love, even if ir's something popular within said fandom, like Olicity and Korrasami for example.
Dumbledore's sexuality isn't that however and I kinda think it adds to his charecter.
Honestly, I really think was blown way out of proportion. At the end of the day does cannon really matter all that much? I really like that JK likes to interact with fans, she's one of the few that bother nowadays. If her head cannon doesn't match yours it shouldn't be that big a deal.
I completely agree!
AGREE!!!!!!!
Of course it matters when it changes soooo much
I literally HATE how Dumblebore looks in Crimes of Grindlewald. Young Dumbledore is supposed to have long or short RED hair... Gellert literally looks 170 years old with that hair tho.
you do the best videos of ships. I was waiting for you to talk about this one. but Im suprised you haven't done a video of supercorp. you could do a hour long video on the controversies and fandom of that ship.
Considering the time period of Fantastic Beasts and what Dumbledore grew up in, I'm not surprised if he'd be a closeted gay man. Also fandoms need to chill if they're getting to the point of making creators want to close off.
The fantastic beasts take place in the 1930's - 1940's dumbeldor can't be openly gay
I always assumed that the wizarding world wouldn’t have the same type of prejudices that muggle societies do.
Probably unpopular opinion but I feel like the fan perception of material has gotten out of hand. I understand really like a material and it making a large impact in your life but that doesn't mean you own it. At the end of the day the fan didn't make the original material so why do they think they get to control it? I'd actually love an explanation as I feel like the ones that have crossed this line are outliers and not the majority. They're just louder than the rest cause they want to be. I can't believe we've gotten to the point that someone can feel entitled enough to threaten another persons life just cause a precious ship isn't more obvious in a show/movie/book. It honestly makes me so sad to see videos about fandoms I like having to spend 5 minutes saying "please don't go attacking the writers of (insert shoaw) or (insert original pitcher) themselves." Fans need to realize things get edited, oked by multiple people, and sometimes altered to be able to allow the biggest audience possible. Especially with movies and shows!
I hope it gets better or I'm worried that cons will turn into glorified markets. (Even though I work on the vendors side) I still love this channel and the community at large
Great perspective.
I didn’t know about that comment that she said kids could see him as just Dumbledore’s “friend.” Considering there are kids who are gay, acting as if heteronormativity should be the default as a child is harmful. Kids also internalize homophobia if people who aren’t straight are “Othered.”
These new movies aren’t her responsibility, but her acknowledgement that she knew of Depp’s abuse but doesn’t care (worded of course in a better way), was too far. It’s not hard to disagree with anyone abusing their partner/spouse as okay!
JK said it out loud and has to deal with what happens next. That's just the reality. I do like the idea of a complicated relationship between Grindelwald and Dumbledore. Guess we'll find out what happens as we go through movies 2-5.
i saw picture of Anne rice. I remember in the late 90s or early 2000s, people were afraid to write fan fiction of her characters because she had threaten to sue. That why lot of people started putting disclaimer in their fiction. I hope you do discussion of Louis/Lestat, that was my very first slash .
As much as I'm disappointed in Rowling as of late (supporting Depp, cultural appropriation), I still find the tragic story of Dumbledore and Grindelwald compelling, but wish we had more...but the 90s/ early 2000s were a different time. Maybe we should stick to fandom, and hope to see similar stories that are more diverse in the future...
What’s the cultural appropriation that Rowling did?
Don't forget the re-tweeting of TERFs.
McKenzie Eby Basically EVERYTHING involving Native Americans in her bit about magic in North America.
Brian Webber Oh GOD, did she really? Ugggggh.
When I think about this ship I just think Cherik! 😂 There's so many similarities. Surely I'm not the only one? 😅
💚🐍 I’m a proud Slytherin 💚🐍
I was told once by an author, as an aspiring author, 'if you don't know a characters favorite ice cream flavor you don't know them well enough to be writing about them'. This is a universal truth for a writer. The characters we create are alive for us, and while there may be things that form a characters personality not everything is going to be mentioned. So I don't think it was pandering at all. When this was announced we have mostly seen Dumbledore in a school. It would be totally unprofessional for this to be mentioned to a student, and any peers if they had known him for a prolonged period of time (given his age) would know already or at least suspect, so it wouldn't really need to be announced. Plus, how much of your private life do you actually share with your co-workers?
And really... I don't go around introducing myself by saying:
I'm Remy, I'm bisexual, I was in love with an abusive jerk who tried to kill me once, but now I've moved on, and you are?
Inclusion is great and everything as someone who is several minorities all in one, it really is great, but I don't understand this need to strip a character or even ourselves down to nothing but our sexuality. We are a sum of parts, not just one thing, and if you had to pick just one part of you why would you pick your sexual preference? Why wouldn't it be something like I'm an artist, or I love to cook, or I am a total bookworm? In the end no one knows the characters better then JK, so it's really for her to decide how his story is revealed and who he is. Yes, as fans we can have a preference and even share that with her, but it's still for her to say. This is the exact reason fanfiction/vidding exists in the first place. So fans can let the stories play out how they wanted.
Agree! Agree! I can only hope JK doesn't change what she had originally planned to appease the new crtics
so not only is he the only official gay character we know of he is gay so it could be more tragic? Did I get that right...?
That...is worse...than his sexuality just being bait. :/ well, great.
16:28 Omg is that tweet real? XD That's so cool that she answered that
I am one of those who thinks this really is an overreaction. As a writer myself, while I appreciate feedback about my works (love and need it in fact) I do not and should not and indeed cannot allow others to dictate my content. It happens a lot, even amidst (or example) a relatively obscure play which has had six productions so far--my theatrical adaptation of CARMILLA by Joseph Sheridan Le Fanu. The furor in this and other cases, like my own, seems all too often an example of ignoring whole chunks of context. Now, I'm not gay, so to some extent I must tiptoe around this issue, out of respect for my own ignorance, my own lack of full context of that experience. Yet for me, reading DEATHLY HALLOWS made me strongly suspect Dumbledore was gay long before Rowlings' announcement. This is background. Yeah, some more LGBTQ content would be more welcome, but Rowlings' own response about such abuse hurled at her about an interview she did not give, about a script the abusers have not read or seen, which is one section of a five part story rings fundamentally true. In quote Neil Gaiman to those who make demands of the author of GAME OF THRONES "George R.R.Martin is not your bitch." Even if you have criticisms of her work or her opinions or her actions, nothing she has done has justified this vast wave of disappointment and judgment. I emphasize that word--nothing. Mind you, I'm not rejecting fan expectations, hopes and fears. Content creators have different creative processes, some of which demand just ignoring the audience. Okay. Accept that. Most of us I think listen and try to take that into account. Failing to do so can result in a totally justified emotional backlash, such as Joss Whedon and others suffered at the death of Tara on BTVS (although subsequent claims of his "misogyny" are another severe overreaction), the death of Lexa on THE 100 and frankly the pandering/teasing involved in the production of SUPERGIRL (which frankly is a symptom of a very problematical approach to all sorts of things in that show). Fans should have a voice. They need to raise that voice, and the fact they have done so marks something kinda wonderful and beautiful in the growth of social media! But fans, like writers, are human. To quote a favorite writer, John Green, "Truth resists simplicity." Sweeping condemnations like those aimed at Rowling and Whedon go beyond legitimate criticism (the latter no doubt at least somewhat deserved in some ways--nobody is perfect and if we rightly criticize Shakespeare then everyone else is fair game dontcha think?). They too often come across as the howls of those who aren't really in favor of diversity or open dialogue but simply demand a rigid orthodoxy of opinion. I remain convinced most fans are not like that, but much as with religion it is the loud ones who get all the attention and so create the wrong impression. We forget this (and we do) at our peril. Okay, clicking off the soapbox now.
BTW, interesting thing I noticed - as discussed starting at 6:30, JKR's said in the past that she doesn't think Grindelwald reciprocated Dumbledore's feelings and merely used them to his advantage, whereas Yates at 9:45 says "they fell in love with each other's ideas, and ideology, *and each other*". I'm not sure if Yates just misspoke, if that's a minor retcon, or if JKR and Yates interpret the relationship slightly differently. (Personally, I do think it could be a bit of both - Grindelwald definitely manipulated Dumbledore, but that doesn't mean he didn't feel anything genuine. Even JKR's said that he was "as dazzled by Dumbledore as Dumbledore was by him", after all. Maybe part of the tragedy of their relationship isn't just that Dumbledore's feelings led him down such a dark path, but that Grindelwald's could have led him down a more positive one if he'd let himself be open to that.)
Jesus, not all gay people scream it at the top of their lungs or walk around wrapped in a rainbow flag. In every day life most straight and gay people look and act exactly the same. He is gay. He fell in love with a truly evil man and was traumatized. It happens.
Grindeldore reminds me a lot of cherik
Were the attacks to JK deserve?
Absolutely NO, it is sad to see we live in a world were people think they are entitled to what they want just because the author is as involved as JK and I just hope this doesn’t discourage her for the future.
HAVING SAID THAT, Is hard to argue that she handle Dumbledore’s sexuality well, because she didn’t. You can’t just throw a grenade like that in the middle of a fandom with no follow up and expect things to go smoothly.
Maybe one day will live in a world were queerness doesn’t have to be acknowledge to exist, like straight relationships now a days, but as of know all she did was throw a bone to her audience without a thought as to what this may represent for a lot her reader, no wonder people were disappointed.
She does not the deserve to be attack and fans have no right to feel entitled of her world, but representation is needed and it’s disappointing to be tease without a delivery.
Harrassing creators, in ANY WAY is gross and creators shouldn't stand for it. Without them that work would not exist, and so, even if it is problematic, you should be grategul for it, and bot try to push your own agenda onto them, and thus impeding their own creativity. That said... unfortunately I don't think the world is ready for a queer charecter in such a big franchise. I wish it was, but it isn't. The big companies are too scared of the backlash...
Who cares about Dumbledore's it's it's irrelevant to the movies to the books Dumbledore is who he is
my opinion, feel free to read my essay... its only like two paragraphs... im sorry... its not well written...
I think its getting ridiculous, I have seen so many youtube videos about how JK is problematic. But I would just like to say, the directer, a straight man who was probably raised to be very much straight no mater how 'accepting' he says he is, probably thinks of explicit as kissing, 'I love you's, etc. not just checking someone out or poorly hidden emotions. im not saying this is the absolute case, but it is a possibility that we need to factor in. just, his idea of explicit and ours may differ. (Ie. my dad gets uncomfortable when two men kiss on screen, but he isnt homophobic... i think, its just how he was raised)
also I hate that the fans of the series almost immediately turned on her... I have my issues with her, and maybe she is pandering. I love that JK interacts with her fans in such a positive way, its far better than Anne Rice's interactions with her fans! People are so over dramatic and when they read a sliver of a sentence about something that is possibly untrue about anyone (I mean I heard Johnny Depp was cleared of charges but they still go after him, although idk how true that is, I try and avoid news as often as possible... it just makes me sad) they never do the research into it and basically judge the situation by the usually opinionated information they get....
Sam Bryant Totally agree with your 2nd paragraph but one little thing on the first paragraph about the definition of explicit.
I study and work as an actor so I have a little insight that's a bit different. Mostly when talking in media the term explicit they mean interaction of a sexually charged nature ie anything past making out. Now due to the rating of the movies none of that would be in there regardless. In which case the director might be referring to very charged dialogue. And considering the tike period it's set in being queer wasn't allowed thus for accuracy it wouldn't be there.
It could also be the director has problems with kissing but I just wanted to point out that might not be the casd
I believe in JK Rowling
the longer she keeps harry patter in the public the more money she makes off of book sales and tie-in deals.
To be honest, I don't really see the appeal of WolfStar. I find Grindledore to be far more interesting (regardless of canonicity). As for pandering, that (in my opinion) has to do more with how the relationship is handled than just simply having a gay character or relationship.
I feel like the woman is human and her presence on twitter is just fine. If people are harrasing her then she has a full right to defend herself. Just because she is famous does not mean that she has to be calm and take bullsh*t.
As for the pairing of Grindlewald and Dumbledore; I don't support it simply because it is unhealthy and that Grindlewald directly or indirectly killed Dumbledore's sister. I support lgbtq but not this relationship.
PS I totally agree with Rowling. I myself have never understood people's obsession with Malfoy. It's like crushing on Dudley. Both were equally horrible. And yes they improved later on but still... Bullies.. I don't like them, whether they are tall, blond or fat and whatever the hell Dudley's hair colour was.
Great video though! Covering all sides thoughtfully as always. I love this channel.
Do Gradence or Gramander next for HP, they're the top two ships in Fantastic Beasts.
It would be interested too see your thought on the ship of Taakitz (Taako and Kravitz from The Adventure zone)
The biggest problem with this ship was that J. K. Rowling created it. I would have never ever in a million years taken Dumbledore as gay, I was really young when this announcement came about and not only that I actually come from a country where homosexuality is still illegal. For someone like me at that age it was really hard to accept this fact, but I had to because she as an author has weight in her creation as someone said in the comments below art is not a democracy, so I had to accept something I at that time didn't find acceptable.
Well then I grew up, times changed drastically, at least the world over, and my open opinions began to change for the better. So now comes the question about what happens when something that might have played a part in making me more accepting is not realised in canon?
The question is not of this movie gives any nods to Dumbledore being gay what if none of them do? And in that context, in this newly engraved canon version of Dumbledore where does J. K. Rowling's revelation from years ago stand?
I think that is where the problem lies that J. K. Rowling's readers where children who are now adults they didn't have opinions then but the opinions they do have now were in ways shaped by her works, to that extent her responsibility increases in a way. This might all turn out to be nothing but it still remains that even in 2018 a mainstream movie will not showcase a gay relationship even a closeted unrequited one.
We don’t even know how the Dumblewald case happened.!!! Can’t we just learn the facts before the complaints?
JKR was not pandering when she revealed Dumbledore to be gay and that be was in love with his best friend, Grindlewald, during her reading of her books at Carnegie Hall. There she revealed to a predominantly young adult gathering how she always felt about the character. When I learnt of that reveal, it made sense to me, how Dumbledore talked of Grindlewald to Harry, and the fact that almost every year the man donned like a boss rather feminine flamboyant hats at Hogwarts gatherings and I realized I had always readily accepted Dumbledore as Dumbledore.
The tale of Grindlelore is a cautionary love story. Dumbledore lost everything, (his sister died, his relationship with his brother became permanently strained), he lost almost his soul by allowing himself to be seduced by the powerful and idealistic object of his affections and the entire world both the magical and non-magical and their relationship to each other, would have been a far different place had he completely yielded; had he not decidedly gone against the man he loved. That’s how you write a tragic romance. It’s literary genius that serves powerfully as a cautionary tale.
That being said, I know it was one-sided and it will not be “romanticized” with ample screen time and “moments” but we will get to explore how the two characters handled Dumbledore’s feelings and the effect of said feelings on their making certain decisions.
I’m glad you brought up the parallels with that relationship to that of Bellatrix and Voldemort. The adoration and loyalty is present in both dynamics. I’m happy to be able to explore the way Dumbledore handled himself in the five movie saga.
It broke my heart in the seventh book that Dumbledore’s dirty laundry was splayed out for all public to see, the media continuing to attack him, even those who knew him from his younger years. Dumbledore was an obsession by the masses (art imitating life) though he was already dead and would not be left to rest in peace.
This all while Harry was clinging to his admiration of Dumbledore and the slivers of hope Dumbledore left the trio with a diminishing trail of breadcrumbs to save the world from another fascist, Voldemort. The media even attacked the pure trusting relationship Dumbledore had with Harry as “strange” and “weird” alluding to pedophilic and irrational reasons as to why Dumbledore would trust a teenager with such responsibility. (That was even alluded from the fourth book; that was no news to me.) As readers / movie-enthusiasts, we know that kind of relationship did not happen and had not ever happened. With all these rumours, and with all the trio kept finding out more and more about Dumbledore, sifting through his history without much to confirm on whether things were facts or rumours, really made the trio’s struggle internalize for me - did this man, their figure of wisdom and power, really care about them, as people were trying to convince them that he didn’t?
All this culminates into Snape’s realization (from Snape’s perspective at least) that Dumbledore was raising Harry as a “pig for slaughter” to Voldemort which when Harry triumphed over Voldemort, Dumbledore praised Harry as a “brave, brave man” rightfully so.
Dumbledore is such a gorgeously intriguing character made more complicated by how privately he kept his life and how he locked away his mistakes that haunt him nightly. That’s the Dumbledore I think people will begin to see in this five movie saga. I see evident parallels of how he treated Harry with how it shows he is treating Newt. “I can’t go against Grindlewald, Newt. It has to be you.” Really, Dumbledore? How so?
I’m happy JKR herself is writing this screenplay (the woman never ceases to amaze, especially in the talent department) and is working with a select crew she trusts, so she has that kind of control on how the story is told. Because I’m really intrigued even more so now as an important part of the story does seem to centre around one of my favourite grey characters, Dumbledore.
That became an essay. Thanks so much for your videos and how delicately and respectfully your explore ships canon and non-canon. You are one of the few people I trust with ships in literary works I hold near and dear to my heart.
- I've never understood why some people believe that all representation must have said character be 'the good guy'. No group is composed of 100% Good/noble/righteous angels from the heavens. There will always be good and evil in every group and both should be able to be written about. As a young black woman I do not mind when black characters (female or not) are written as the bad guys just as I do not mind them being the good guys. It shows that we are all only human. Imagining black characters as only being able to be portrayed as 'the good guys' is very dull to me. Give me Good, Evil or Neutral, I just want them well written.
- I believe the creators have full control over their works and should be able to portray their characters/story however they see fit as it is THEIR characters/story. I do believe in "treat others as you would like to be treated" and the last thing I would want is a herd of strangers yelling at me about how they would like to control/push MY story THEIR way. I also feel that fanatics are not entitled to anything going their way. The creator has every right to make the story what they envisioned as it is their work. The only obligation I can imagine placing on a creator is to have a completed story by the end of their run.
Yaaaassss ♡♡♡
Honestly I feel that parts fandom is just way too MUCH. I mostly stay out of it.
Jk Rowling is the best person I now right now ✋🖐👋 down ⬇
What I would’ve liked to see in the mirror would be old Dumbledore and Grindelwald together. I think that would make more sense because it would should that Dumbledore desires a future with Grindelwald. The way they used the Mirror of Erised in this movie was more for exposition, and it didn’t work the way it did in the books. How could Dumbledore desire making a blood pact with Grindelwald if he already made one? That would have made more sense as a flashback.
I think, Dumbledore saw the making of the blood pact, because, for him, it is a memory that symbolizes the closeness him and Grindelwald once had, and was maybe one of the most intimate moments of their short relationship (to me, that scene almost looked like a kind of engagement or marriage, really). In the present, with Grindelwald terrorizing Europe and all, I think Dumbledore doesn't see a future for them or thinks it's impossible; all he knows is that he still loves and desires him (which is why he sees the present Grindelwald) and wants to have the intimate and close nature of their past relationship back (which is why he sees that memory). That's the way I understood it, anyway. :)
that netshirt is sexy, I gotta get one of these for my girlfriend
I love this ship so much thx for covering it
It shouldn't be the story or anything major but if you are going to make that claim, just make a couple lines about it and move on. I don't see how that is too much to ask for. It worked for Deadpool 2.
That being said, there is certainly people who are way too entitled about it.
I never took Rowling's initial statement back in the day as canon because for me canon is what's on the page in this case. To paraphrase one of my favourite reviewers. You don't get credit for something you didn't put in the book because...you didn't put it in the book. And that's what bothers me about Yates' announcement because now there is a chance to put this in the material proper and at this point in time it appears to not be being taken. And that's disappointing even though I'm one who was never invested in the ship itself because now it does look like you wanted credit for having diversity in your work, but don't want to face the hardships of actually putting diversity in your work.
And you don't have to be 'explicit' in the depiction. I think LOK handled this very well with Korrasami where the characters grow more close to each other over time and while yes the creators did state the pairing was official outside of canon when the time came to add to the canon they pushed the relationship even more in the text. Despite the negativity that did come out in response they owned that decision. So I sympathize with those that were invested in the pairing and what that representation would mean for them and once again are being told by mainstream media no you can't have this. Although that does not mean you should go blast Rowling on Twitter. Screaming all in caps just makes any legitimate point you may have had look like nothing more than a temper tantrum. The creator is allowed to do anything they want with their work and we as fans are allowed to agree or disagree with the direction taken while still being civil about it.
Personally, I think Rowling was just adding in her own characterization details, not pandering. As a school professor, Dumbldore never had a reason to discuss his sexuality with his students. That would have been inappropriate. I do hope for more representation in the movies, but I also don't want it crowbarred in if it doesn't make sense to the story. And in the end, it's Rowling's story. If she wants to say something is canon, then fine. If you chose not to believe in that change, fine. It doesn't have to ruin your experience. Just take it like an optional add on. You can enhance your experience with extra information from the creator if you want that information, and if you don't, then be an adult and just ignore it. Don't get all pissy. Life's too short for anger.
when it comes to JKR, I always think of the saying "never meet your heroes", and though I never met her personally, her (social) media presence is sort of inescapable. When I was younger, JKR certainly was my hero. She seemed to be kind and progressive and down to earth and I admired her greatly.
But what I look for in media has changed a lot since I was a teenager. And what JKR puts out nowadays isn't that, unfortunately. For instance, I hate The Cursed Child's very existence and I want it to die! I also think that casting a wifebeater in a movie that is literally about domestic abuse (in a series were domestic abuse is key element of the plot) is an extremely shitty thing to do.
And then, the Grindeldore thing. I don't exactly ship it, actively, but I do think of it as canon and I am very disappointed that it won't be present in the upcoming fantastic beasts films. Plus, I think that it's really hypocritical when people pint to finanial reasons. Like, it's Harry fucking Potter! You coud literally completely unknown actors from an empty field in England and have five non-het, non-cis, non-white couples in the film and people all over the world would still want to see it!
The authors headcanon isn't the same as a fan's headcanon. I wouldn't call it a headcanon at all
Also fans shouldn't expect a book series from the 90's and a movie series set in the 30's/40's to reflect modern ideals and longing for representation.
The love of their live or their sexuality isn't something a teacher talks about with their students and the second world war isn't exactly a time where you would expect someone being out and proud. Also Dumbledore was a person who was very much at the public's attention and a teacher, maybe he just didn't want to cause a potential scandal with his outing, because people don't want gay people teaching their kids.
Deamus on the other hand would've been a great way to show representation
Rowling I feel often just doesn't know what to leave alone or to address. it's sort of become a thing where I just think that she's veering towards Lucas levels and could be dangerously close to becoming a constant revisionist.
Can you do a video on BatFam ships? Especially Jason Todd/Tim Drake? And Stray AU?
Wait, David yates say they fell in love with each other idead, and they fell in love with each other’s, those that means the relationship was not one sided 😱😍 please don’t play with my heart xD
Love this very interesting can’t wait for you next video
But when you have time you should do bluepluse😅😂👌🏼👌🏼
god i just wish it wasnt johnny depp. that being said, can you guys imagine what it would have been like if these movies had been made in the 2000s with depp in the role? people would have lost their minds in a positive way. who here remembers all the depp stans on gaia online
It was total pandering, but honestly. J K Rowling is not some genius to be put up on a pedestal so her tacked on tidbits really don't phase me. She made an amazing world that I adore and characters that I love but her work is not flawless and at the end of the day I try not to let cannon get me down because too many creators want to "play it safe" and not give open representation and think they're being generous with on the side out of cannon attention. I'd prefer them to just be honest and say "we don't want to take the risk that we won't make as much money if we make it official on screen or in the books."
More open minded creators are popping up all the time who aren't so two faced in their works. At the end of the day creators put their work out there and as fans we have the right to do with it as we like when it comes to expressing ourselves and our idea's in the fanbase, but we don't have the right to demand that the creators confirm or agree with our idea's, besides if JK isn't okay with openly representing other orientations in her work do we really care about her opinions? She clearly has a limited understanding of gay culture and wold probably do a shit job representing it in her books anyway so let her stick to her comfort zone where she's safe and cozy.
Great video as always!
That's a very good point. I think a lot of us idolized her too much and now are shocked she's an imperfect person and creator. It's important to remember there will always be flaws in our heroes.
You really need to do a (Chanbaek) shipping video... believe me , a new door will be opened for you.
Yates, trying to make Harry Potter "dark" and no listening to the fans should be no surprise
,we cannot expect her to be perfect cause she is just one person. How can she compete with the ideas and knowledge of tons of fans together, and please everyone
I'm always gonna be mad at the fact that theres not gonna be any grindledore bc i was just so damn exited
The description doesnt mention Dumbledore
Just fyi
I see a pansexual man's signature. 12:22
I'm gonna *cry*.
Kinda hate jkrowling for this tbh
Thank you for all that work, deer 💕
damn, I ship them to dead! :'(
I just wanna see Newt again.......
This is not a ship, this is real.
Where is my Doctor Who at?
A great video ^^
Let's just remember, the author's headcanons are technically the official canon, because they created the characters and worlds. She's being a little annoying, yeah, but it's still her creation.
Its dumb to think Dumbledore should be going around telling everybody he bloody meets that he is (was?) in love with Grindelwald. If there is one thing we know about Dumbledore its that he keeps everything to himself, he doesn't share information unless the situation demands it. There is no reason for him to talk about his past with Grindelwald, or his sexuality. While I expect it will come out at some point in Fantastic Beasts (and I want it to, its a very interesting relationship), it wont and shouldn't be in Crimes of Grindelwald. It would be so out of character for Dumbledore.