What Does Harry Potter Mean Now? [80:12-85:12]

However, as is typical for Joanne, the metaphor is clumsy. When Lupin's lycanthropy is made public, he is forced to leave Hogwarts under threat of prejudiced parents fearing their child being taught by a werewolf. But while the text frames this as unfair and ignorant, it doesn't quite frame it as unfounded. And after last night, I see their point. I could have bitten any of you. That must never happen again. Because Lupin can't control his lupine behaviour, his animalistic queerness thus becomes a very real threat to the children Hogwarts, as he himself realizes prior to removing himself from contact with them. We could read Lupin agreeing with this prejudice as internalised shame as well. But the truth is, there is a genuine danger. Werewolves are uncontrollably violent when they transform, which, as academics Tyson, Pugh and David L. Wallace observe, validates the fear that werewolves should not be around children, uncomfortably connecting potters werewolves with pederasty. A connection only worsened by the introduction of Fenrir Greyback, a werewolf who specifically prays on children. In creating this villain, Joanne is drawing upon homophobic fears, which hardly helps destigmatise the illnesses she's allegorising. Gee, thanks for that, Joanne. Then of course, there's Dumbledore. The series is only kind of canonically queer character. Although, I suppose Charlie Weasley could be read as asexual? Charlie had children or married? No, I don't think Charlie's gay. Just more interested in dragons than women. In both cases, their queerness is purely paratextual. It's only mentioned in external sources, like interviews with Joanne. Whereas in the actual books, we never learn anything about Charlie's relationships. And Dumbledore, well, it's not true there's no indication of Dumbledore's homosexuality, but it's flimsy. Of course, there's his brief but intense friendship with Grindelwald, sending each other letters in the dead of night. He's somewhat famed. He has an unapologetic fondness for knitting patterns. Then there's Rita Skeeter implying Dumbledore had an unnatural interest in Harry. Once again, evoking pederasty. Of course, we the reader know this is just sensationalist gossip. But it nonetheless hints at Dumbledore having a secret sexual life that even in narrative characters speculate about. And then there's Dumbledore's close relationship with Elfias Doge, the guy who wrote his obituary, in which he describes having a mutual attraction with Dumbledore as fellow outsiders, an attraction described by Aeberforth with a particular anal connotation. Yeah, it's flimsy. To the point Pue argues, Dumbledore's gayness only exists in spectral form. It's not just obscured from the reader, but seemingly from our protagonist as well. Perhaps because it's something Joanne feels children are best left ignorant of, or perhaps because it might complicate Dumbledore's mentoring of Harry into the traditional male hero, as he leads Harry away from queerness towards heteronormativity. Harry succeeds where Dumbledore failed, and Dumbledore's failure is tied to his queerness. His love for Grindelwald blinded him to danger, leading to the death of his sister and for Dumbledore to give up queerness, becoming apparently chased for the rest of his life. By contrast, Harry does protect the women in his life. He doesn't give in to the temptations of the Hallows, and he's able to surpass death into the heroic afterlife of heterosexual marriage with three kids. It's basically saying, to become the ideal hero, you need to be straight. I only feared that you would fail as I had failed. I only dreaded that you would make my mistakes. I crave your pardon, Harry. I have known for some time now that you were the better man. I admit, it's not great optics, but I don't quite agree with Pew's take. For one, I'm not sure that Harry is a traditional male hero. We'll get to that. But also, I don't think Dumbledore's mentorship has much to do with Harry's sexual maturation into straightness. Pew's main argument relies on this whole analysis of Harry's inner beasts, which I don't buy at all. So, let's not get into it. Where I do agree with Pew is that, in Potter, queerness is conspicuous in its absence. Even though we see a lot of the sexual politics of Hogwarts students, there's never any indication any of them might be queer, which, for a school of teenagers, is weird. And maybe that's a sign of the time it was written? Queer representation in children's media has come a long way. Nevertheless, Pew points out Joanne usually has no qualms about including taboo topics.