Monday, October 29, 2007
Ano, Dumbledore? Bakla ka? Hindi, si JK lang nagsabi niyan?! 'Wag kang maniwala! Hindi ako naniniwala!
Ako lang ba ang hindi natutuwang bading si Dumbledore? Well, siguro hindi. Kasi akala ko nu'n, ako lang ang Pilipinong hindi nagagalit kay Teri Hatcher sa pang-iinsulto niya sa mga Pilipino sa isang episode ng Desperate Housewives. Ang iniisip ko nu'n, "Poor doctors who left the country to work in America. Inaapi kayo. Kawawa naman kayo....(mga putang ina niyo! haha!)." Turns out ang mga hinahangaan kong kolumnista na tulad nina Michael Tan at Conrado de Quiros eh hindi rin ganu'n ka-sensitive.
Anyway, kagabi, isang thought-provoking discussion ang nag-ensue dahil nga sa isyu ng kabaklaan ni Dumbledore. Sabi kasi ni Nana, at nagpadala pa siya ng isang article this morning mirroring her sentiments, dahil nga si JK Rowling naman ang nag-imbento kay Dumbledore, kapag sinabi niyang bakla ang matandang wizard na'yon, bakla nga 'yon. Hmmm...napaka-valid na point. In fact, I kinda felt that I believed that supreme control of authors over their characters even beyond the text up until this Dumbledore-is-a-gay! issue came up. Feeling ko, puwede siyang thesis ng isang Literature student: Hanggang saan puwedeng idikta ng isang author ang buhay ng kanyang mga characters?
Ang feeling ko kasi, bound within the text ang power niya over her characters. Meaning, kapag isinulat niya, siyempre 'yun na. Sinulat niyang wizard si Dumbledore, eh, 'di wizard nga siya. Pero kapag labas na sa text, tulad na lang nangyari sa declaration ni JK Rowling about Dumbledore's sexuality, what she says is a mere inference about the character. It may be considered a stronger one by virtue of her being the author of the character, but a mere inference just the same. In boldly declaring: "He is my character. He is what he is and I have the right to say what I say about him," JK is right in the sense that she does have the right to say what she said about him. But it's only a right; not necessarily right. Dumbledore isn't what he is, in this case, just because she says so and because he is her character.
In fact, sa isang article about the issue, she never said that Dumbledore is gay. She is quoted as saying that she "always saw Dumbledore as gay." It's a world of difference, especially kung kabaklaan ng isang tao (kahit pa fictional) ang pinag-uusapan - is he gay or did someone just see him as gay.
After the release of the last and final book in the Harry Potter series, JK Rowling chat with fans and answered questions about what happened to the characters. Well, her inferences here are not at all controversial so tinanggap ko na lang siya na parang epilogue to the epilogue ng Deathly Hallows.
But for her to say na bading si Dumbledore months after?! Para siyang League of Filipino Governors na biglang lalantad at sasabihing sila ang nagpamudmod ng pera sa mga bagong governors. Last I heard milyung-milyong libro ang nabenta at isa na si JK sa pinakamayamang Britons ngayon so hindi ko alam ang motivation niya for stirring up this controversy. For one, hindi essential sa istorya kung bading man si Dumbledore o hindi. Unlike, say, 'yung kanyang inference na naging Auror nga si Harry Potter after all, dahil sa book ilang beses na sinabi na pangarap nga ni Harry maging Auror. 'Yun parang it made sense. Pero ang kabadingan ni umbledore...Saan galing 'yun??
OK lang naman talaga kung bading pala talaga si Dumbledore pero dapat meron siyang ipapakitang proof na ganu'n nga. Otherwise, it is not a statement of fact, but of an opinion: "she always saw Dumbledore as gay." Ngayon, kung meron siyang maipapakita sa book somewhere na naghi-hint na talaga ngang bading si Dumbledore, then brilliant talaga siya. Kung wala naman, opinyon lang niya 'to.
Isang example ng magandang paghi-hint ng isang truth about a character: 'yung final episode ng Sopranos. Bigla na lang nag-fade-to-black 'yung screen na akala ng ibang viewers biglang nag-off-the-air 'yung show just at the end of the program. 'Yun pala sadyang nagdilim and after a few seconds nag-roll na ang credits. Nalito ang mga tao kung ano talaga'ng nangyari sa main character. 'Yung mga creators hinayaan lang ang mga tao na mag-infer ng kanilang sariling conclusion.
Then may ilang avid viewers ang nag-refer sa isang previous episode kung saan sinasabi ng main character na sa tingin niya ang death tahimik lang, hindi mo mararamdaman, basta bigla na lang didilim, "it like cutting to black." Again, it's just a theory but since it's hinted in the text, brilliant at madali siyang tanggapin.
Anyway, kagabi, isang thought-provoking discussion ang nag-ensue dahil nga sa isyu ng kabaklaan ni Dumbledore. Sabi kasi ni Nana, at nagpadala pa siya ng isang article this morning mirroring her sentiments, dahil nga si JK Rowling naman ang nag-imbento kay Dumbledore, kapag sinabi niyang bakla ang matandang wizard na'yon, bakla nga 'yon. Hmmm...napaka-valid na point. In fact, I kinda felt that I believed that supreme control of authors over their characters even beyond the text up until this Dumbledore-is-a-gay! issue came up. Feeling ko, puwede siyang thesis ng isang Literature student: Hanggang saan puwedeng idikta ng isang author ang buhay ng kanyang mga characters?
Ang feeling ko kasi, bound within the text ang power niya over her characters. Meaning, kapag isinulat niya, siyempre 'yun na. Sinulat niyang wizard si Dumbledore, eh, 'di wizard nga siya. Pero kapag labas na sa text, tulad na lang nangyari sa declaration ni JK Rowling about Dumbledore's sexuality, what she says is a mere inference about the character. It may be considered a stronger one by virtue of her being the author of the character, but a mere inference just the same. In boldly declaring: "He is my character. He is what he is and I have the right to say what I say about him," JK is right in the sense that she does have the right to say what she said about him. But it's only a right; not necessarily right. Dumbledore isn't what he is, in this case, just because she says so and because he is her character.
In fact, sa isang article about the issue, she never said that Dumbledore is gay. She is quoted as saying that she "always saw Dumbledore as gay." It's a world of difference, especially kung kabaklaan ng isang tao (kahit pa fictional) ang pinag-uusapan - is he gay or did someone just see him as gay.
After the release of the last and final book in the Harry Potter series, JK Rowling chat with fans and answered questions about what happened to the characters. Well, her inferences here are not at all controversial so tinanggap ko na lang siya na parang epilogue to the epilogue ng Deathly Hallows.
But for her to say na bading si Dumbledore months after?! Para siyang League of Filipino Governors na biglang lalantad at sasabihing sila ang nagpamudmod ng pera sa mga bagong governors. Last I heard milyung-milyong libro ang nabenta at isa na si JK sa pinakamayamang Britons ngayon so hindi ko alam ang motivation niya for stirring up this controversy. For one, hindi essential sa istorya kung bading man si Dumbledore o hindi. Unlike, say, 'yung kanyang inference na naging Auror nga si Harry Potter after all, dahil sa book ilang beses na sinabi na pangarap nga ni Harry maging Auror. 'Yun parang it made sense. Pero ang kabadingan ni umbledore...Saan galing 'yun??
OK lang naman talaga kung bading pala talaga si Dumbledore pero dapat meron siyang ipapakitang proof na ganu'n nga. Otherwise, it is not a statement of fact, but of an opinion: "she always saw Dumbledore as gay." Ngayon, kung meron siyang maipapakita sa book somewhere na naghi-hint na talaga ngang bading si Dumbledore, then brilliant talaga siya. Kung wala naman, opinyon lang niya 'to.
Isang example ng magandang paghi-hint ng isang truth about a character: 'yung final episode ng Sopranos. Bigla na lang nag-fade-to-black 'yung screen na akala ng ibang viewers biglang nag-off-the-air 'yung show just at the end of the program. 'Yun pala sadyang nagdilim and after a few seconds nag-roll na ang credits. Nalito ang mga tao kung ano talaga'ng nangyari sa main character. 'Yung mga creators hinayaan lang ang mga tao na mag-infer ng kanilang sariling conclusion.
Then may ilang avid viewers ang nag-refer sa isang previous episode kung saan sinasabi ng main character na sa tingin niya ang death tahimik lang, hindi mo mararamdaman, basta bigla na lang didilim, "it like cutting to black." Again, it's just a theory but since it's hinted in the text, brilliant at madali siyang tanggapin.
# posted by rey agapay @ 2:41 AM 
