Random Dumbledore-ish Thoughts

Having read some comments on the web responding to JKR's announcement that she has always thought of Dumbledore as gay (which I was totally there for, and am (bias alert) totally for) can I just say the following?

1. Gay does NOT equal pedophile. Sweet Jesus, people. C'mon.
2. I sincerely doubt that JK Rowling is concerned about boosting her sales numbers.
3. I was there, and, while we, in the audience, speculated about how long it would take to hit teh internets, the AP? BBC? NPR? Really? (And did I mention I was there).
4. The books are written from a point of view - specifically - Harry's. If Harry doesn't see something (with I believe only one exception - "The Two Prime Ministers" chapter) neither do we. Harry is prolly not real worried about Dumbledore's sexuality (perhaps because he has many other qualities?). Dumbledore can be gay and it can be something that wouldn't make it into the books.
5. It makes sense in context of the books, particularly book 7. (And, see 4 above).
6. There are pretty broad hints as regards bestiality in the books and THIS is what has people's knickers in a twist?

Hopefully, if you care I texted you

(sorry if I missed you) but I was totally there tonight when Jo (I suddenly feel comfortable now calling her 'Jo' after 1.5 seconds in front of her and being now the proud possesor of a signed copy of Deathly Hallows (Bloomsbury version, if you please)) announced that Dumbledore was gay - mad cheers and applause greeted this announcement, which was in response to a young girl asking, since (paraphrase from memory) Dumbledore is so convinced of the power of love in the HP series, whether Dumbledore himself had ever found love. (Yes, and re-reading the Dumbledore/Grindelwald passages in this context JKR suggests will now be appropriate - noting particularly that Dumbledore finally met someone as intelligent as he).

After a lovely, charming, and nigh on wine-sodden dinner with the superb Professor B, I returned to M&M's - compelled to see if this wee bit of my life had made the news (as I type at 1:40a.m. EST - and yes - totally has). Loving my life at this exact moment! And loving that, in the same way My Own Private Idaho let me approach Henry V in a new way, this revelation lets me approach Deathly Hallows in a new way.

Sigh. Happy.

The Fruits of Obsession, or, Holy F*cking Sh*t!

In a nearly unprecedented event (for anything remotely similar I must return to my 1976 triumph in the coloring contest sponsored by the Colorado Springs Gazette, wherein I won 2 tickets to The Slipper and the Rose. Yes, the Richard Chamberlain musical.) Anyways, I was shocked yesterday to pick up a phone message from Vicki at Scholastic, informing me that I was one of the winners in this sweepstakes. JK Rowling. Carnegie Hall. October. JK Rowling. I had totally forgotten I filled out an entry, way back during the peak of Deathly Hallows mania. JK Rowling. Carnegie Hall. JK Rowling.

Holy f*cking sh*t!!!!

Strongly Worded Letter

Sent by me today to the NYT (letters@nytimes.com - feel free to send 'em more) upon learning that they published a review of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows today. Thursday. Before it is released!

To whom it may concern;

I am writing to express my extreme disappointment with your decision to publish a review of the Harry Potter book before it's publication date.

As I am sure you are well aware, to many of the fans, this isn't just another book; it is both a phenomenon and a shared experience. I am nearly 40 years old, and have been reading the books for 10 years now. I have eagerly anticipated each new release, I've read essays on theories regarding what might happen and discussed theories with my friends, I've scheduled time to reread the entire series to prepare for book seven. And, increasingly, I've been spending an absurd amount of energy avoiding spoilers.

Now that the book has shipped and there was a risk of spoilers becoming available thanks to dishonorable retailers willing to break their word and indulge in disgusting opportunism, I have had to take drastic steps. I do not go onto any unknown website. I avoid all website that might allow user comments. I am not listening to radio stations, and I am not watching television. In short, I have devised a miniscule list of those few media outlets I thought I could trust not to engage in the sort of 'haha - look what we found out!' tactics surrounding the last Harry Potter adventure.

Needless to say, my miniscule list of trusted media outlets originally included the New York Times.

Imagine my shock when I went on Mugglenet.com this morning - a website which is determined not to publish spoilers - and discovered that you have decided to publish a review of the book. I have, clearly, not read the review, and I have, also clearly, removed you from my list of trusted media outlets in this instance.

I'm frankly appalled that The Grey Lady, the paper of record, has taken this opportunistic, tabloid-worthy step, and I felt it necessary to write and express my displeasure.

The World Shrinks Even More

I've had to reduce the websites I can look at by one - Mugglenet reports:

"After receiving an early copy of Deathly Hallows from an unnamed bookstore, the New York Times has posted a review of the book which also contains a few plot details."

So - no newspapers, TV or radio until Sunday, basically.

Two Days!

Here is the complete list of websites I will go on over the next 2 days:

Yahoo
Hotmail
Mugglenet
Leaky Cauldron
Televisionwithoutpity (but not the forums)
Brides
NYT

That is all. I feel that such draconian measures are becoming necessary to avoid even the whiff of a spoiler.

Hardly a Ringing Endorsement

"At the Northeast warehouse, copies [of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows] had about as much chance of escaping as a prisoner at Azkaban." or so said this article.

May I just say - Sirius, Bellatrix, Barty, Rodolphus...

I've gone on serious internets lock-down to avoid even the whiff of a spoiler.

My New Wallpaper

Libraries get the books early, so they can catalog them - I grabbed this photo off Mugglenet.

4/11/24/52 to go - Squeee!

For Ding.

In response to her comment way below.

I put it up here without any extended discussion or analysis because, frankly, I'm (in the words of Veggie Tales) 'shocked, and a little embarrassed.'

I'm not sure I even want to know if this leads to a revision of Ding's analysis of Mr. Radcliffe in Order of the Phoenix as "'warmer than 'meh' and slightly less heated than a full-fledged 'hot'" because, again with the shocked and a little embarrassed here.

Update

I've given in to myself, and, while not exactly re-reading - I'm going back and just reading the theory parts to clean up items - for example this morning I was reviewing McGonagal's actions in Book 5 and trying to figure out exactly how a foe-glass works.

In other news, I saw Order of the Phoenix again last night - it works even better the second time - things slow down enough for analysis - and it stands up to analysis.

This I Believe

Despite having had a lovely weekend, including a meet up with some fab blogger-chicks and a day of crafts n' fun with M-Bee, I find myself entirely incapable of concentrating on anything not Potter related. However, I've already done the re-read - more than once - in the last 4 months. I tried to start the re-read again, but discovered, to my chagrin, that I have Theories. I didn't mean to develop Theories, but now I cannot do another re-read because I am just looking for support for my Theories.

I blame the essays at Leaky Cauldron and Mugglenet. I'm not usually a Theory sort of girl - I'm generally content to just let the author tell me what happens, and I can't move off canon once it is set.

However, I thought it would be helpful (to me, anyway) to throw the Theories out here so that they are out of my head (except for who I'm afraid might die - I don't want to get to a point where I *believe* someone might die - I am comfortable only in going so far as to be particularly scared for some people). Anyway:

I believe Snape is good.

I believe, albeit sadly, that McGonagall is Voldemort's Most Loyal Servant.

I believe that James was not killed inside the cottage in Godric's Hollow.

I believe that Neville will survive and will become the Herbology teacher at Hogwarts when Professor Sprout retires.

Depending on the time of day, I believe that either (a) Snape or (b) Neville's father, was the person in the cottage in Godric's Hollow when Lily was killed.

I believe that Lily created the potions shortcuts written down in Snape's old textbook.

I believe Lily and Snape were friends, and that Lily brought Snape home to visit over one holiday. I believe Snape is the 'awful boy' that Petunia remembers.

I believe that the curse that Harry survived was not Avada Kadavra, but rather was the spell which creates a horcrux - however, I also believe that Harry is not a horcrux.

I believe the theories of alchemy are important to the whole series.

I believe Nagini is not a horcrux.

Also, gratuitously, and still in the thrall of the movie last night (although that is why it is at the front of my head - it is a consistent underlying belief that I have) I believe Alan Rickman is both a genius and hot.