Dumbledore or whatever

Disclaimer: I have never read any of the Harry Potter books, not because I think they're stupid, but because I'm not a fan of the genre. I have nothing against them, other than the fact that they're evidence of the incredibly lopsided book industry, in which 10 writers own castles and everyone else is grateful for the chance to hustle for gas money at near-empty chain-bookstore readings. But this sad situation is not Harry's fault per se.

Now: John Cloud has an entertaining and insightful piece about the Dumbledore-is-gay story. He raises good points from the perspective of the gay and lesbian community.

But my problem with this is philosophical--does she really think she can just say something's true about a character in a series of books that are already published? Twentieth-cenutry literary theory is famously obtuse, but the main takeaway, as any college English major knows, is that Rowling's perspective on the sexuality of a character--un-addressed in the book itself--is no more valid than yours or mine. (Okay, maybe more than mine, you no doubt have at least read the books.) Interpretive authority belongs to readers, communities, the text itself--not just or even especially the author.

Of course, as any Tolkien aficionado knows, immersing yourself in an invented world can make an author a bit murky as to the lines between fantasy and reality. No doubt Rowling considers the question in the context of actual speculation about a person she knows very well. This is one of the reasons I don't like fantasy literature--I'd always rather read an author who is just as committed to and immersed in her characters, but whose characters seem more immediately (NOT metaphorically) relevant to the real world than, say, a hobbit or a wizard or a benevolent and sacrificial lion.

But again, I can't judge HP, because I've never read it...