If you do not believe this format of interpretation is true, check out the scholarship on Little Red Riding Hood from the sociological, psychological and spiritual levels; none of which require that the literal level be historically factual at any time.

I think that choosing to focus on inter-racial marriages signals JKR’s intent that it is about something else, something more contemporary. I think the Professor is correct to so attribute – given the data that we have. His understanding of the uses of literature is as keen as his observations of symbols! JKR is “looking along” the lines of inter-racial marriage to illuminate current matters.

That said, I think JKR does an excellent job of positively portraying heterosexual couples and the natural state of marriage as between differing sexes. To be fair, Voldemort is the product of an “unnatural love” and Harry is the product of a “natural love” and Snape is product of something in-between, a “natural love” gone unnatural. There is plenty of material for thought in the text with regard to the vagaries of heterosexual experiences of love and the outcomes to reflect on the consequences of beginning in any other place. Once again, the text comes to the rescue within the Harry Potter series.

Though BtB is a portion of the Potterverse, it is by no means the bulk of it. Only the Tale of Three Brothers is properly canonical, after all. I think JKR exercised her authorial prerogatives very astutely to get readers to look along rather than looking at in this arena. She is not a symbolist writer only when she agrees with what I happen to think are proper interpretations of those symbols. She makes me re-think my SOP (Standard Operating Protocol) to be sure, but that doesn’t mean that I change my mind. After all, I don’t agree with every analysis of LLR either!

Gentlemen, you both make a great team within the Potter uiniverse.

There is much to point out on the evils of racism, classism and when we are talking Wizard-Muggle marriage, I believe JKR is pointing to two different racial/ people groups when Dumbledore refers to “blood-lines”, which one cannot achieve between two persons of the same sex.

The larger issue here in this commentary that I’m surprised no one has hit on yet is “censorship”. Both Dumbledore and JKR are vehemently opposed to any form of censorship either in Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry or in the Muggle city library.

I agree with you John that Dumbledore’s commentary can be read as a discussion on gay marriage. This is especially true if you look at JKR’s progression on the gay Dumbledore from Carnegie Hall to now. She started out as “thought of Dumbledore as gay” and then she started to see the reaction she got and her opinion while it didn’t change it evolved. It is probably easiest to see it as commentary on interracial marriage, but that’s not the discussion of our time. As far as marriage rights are concerned, same sexed couples are topic of the day especially for progressives like Ms. Rowling.

The Dumbledore/Malfoy battle is about marriage as a civil right. There is only one of those battles in the streets today that you read about in the papers or online every day. It’s not about miscegenation or generic prejudice.

It’s also not anything that can be demonstrated conclusively or argued to a point of definite resolution without a statement from the author (think Severus Snape’s allegiance HP1-6 or ‘Shipping HP1-5). It resembles Ms. Rowling’s support of CHLG, which I think is her pointer for those with eyes to see to her support of a pro-choice position on abortion (it has been asserted that the cage children exist because of the prohibition on abortion and birth control in Romania before regime changes in the 90s). No one needs to talk about that unstated but implicit thumbs-up on abortion because CHLG is doing important, life-changing and life-saving work that people of different sides on the abortion issue can and do support.

But it’s there. I’m just grateful that the author is subtle enough in declaring her political positions that it doesn’t take over the discussion of her work or obscure the value of her charitable efforts.

I can’t see the reference to gay marriage either. The connections you make, John are:

1) Malfoy is talking about marriage,
(2) Ms. Rowling has “always thought of Dumbledore as gay,” and
(3) this is the point of conflict in the political-social sphere at the moment.

The Malfoys and the rest of the so-called Purebloods have always deplored “mixed” marriages because they lead to half-blood wizards, who are seen as second class, or inferior. We have received this message since the beginning of the series, from the first time Malfoy called Hermione “mudblood”. But the message is not about marriage, or racial purity; it’s about racism and prejudice, and their opposite: equality and tolerance.

Homosexuality is only one of a thousand ways human beings discriminate against each other. Race, religion, language, economic status, class, gender. In the Potterverse itself we also have many forms of discrimination: Muggle blood vs Pureblood, wizard vs non-wizard, wizard vs elf. And these forms of discrimination are explicitly named in the text. On the other hand, we have no evidence that homosexuality is discriminated against in Potterverse; mainly because JKR does not “name” homosexuality. The forms of discrimination that are identified as wrong are racial; homosexuality does not fit that description.

Gay rights, homosexuality is a source of conflict in the human world right now. But so are many other issues. If you look around who’s killing whom most often, and for what reason, you still come up against the Hutus and the Tutsis in Rwanda and Congo, the Arabs against the non-Arabs in the Sudan, and countless tribes battling each other in Somalia. It’s tribal, racial and religious. Discrimination against gays is not up there in terms of numbers of victims.

I think that JKR speaks against all forms of prejudice and discrimination. I think that the evidence that she speaks especially about discrimination against homosexuals in particular is not very strong.

Why can I not log off this blog? I keep getting a “try again.” Help!

But then, as the kitties would think, I’m just there to keep the food bowls full…

So I think John’s correct to suggest that Rowling, writing as a 21st century fairy tale teller, probably did have this on her mind. But of course she wasn’t going to write it into the story itself. It’s not an issue she’s ever raised within the Wizarding World itself.

It’s not because of personal preference. I agree with Adam, Shan and Pat. I feel this is trying to squeeze a size 8 foot into a size 5 specifically designed shoe. And the shoe can’t hold it.