I find the "If I'd known..." comment a bit disingenuous, myself. Otherwise, I'm pleased. I don't have my book in front of me -- is Snape's love for Lily explicitly romantic or sexual? I mean, we know there's serious depth of feeling and he resents James, but does he actually say, "She should have chosen me" or that Harry should have been his son or anything like that? Actual question -- I don't remember.

Well, there's a lot of time spent in Harry's head and I heard Dumbledore's tale again. I now know what made Dumbledore the way he is. I've also learned the origins of the Deathly Hallows and how James ended up with the cloak. Then Harry goes back to his body or rather wakes up as he was already in his head.

It turns out that Voldemort collapsed as well. I take this to mean that the creature wasn't the fragment of Voldemort's soul that was in Harry but rather Voldemort himself. Voldemort has mangled his soul so much that he has become that creature, while Harry is in perfect condition. Anyhow, then Voldemort has Narcissia make sure Harry is dead. Bad move on Voldemort's part. Why have someone you've been treating like crap take care of something that important? Dude should have sent Bellatrix. OTOH, Voldemort then performs the crucio curse which should have revealed Harry living status had it worked. Interesting that it didn't work properly, I'm not sure why that would be. I feel like I should know the reason, but I can't really think of anything that makes sense.

Then Voldemort has Hagrid carry Harry out of the woods. That's just the sort of thing Voldemort would do. It would be sad if Harry was actually dead. Hagrid tries to make the centaurs feel ashamed and the Death Eaters yell insults at them. The centaurs must have a role to play yet, nobody gets away with insulting centaurs except Hagrid.

Anyhow they get out of the woods and Voldemort announces that Harry is dead, lies about the circumstances of Harry's death, and tells them that anyone who resists will be killed along with their family. The lying about Harry's death felt like a low blow. Anyhow that's pretty much where I left off. They are advancing toward the castle with Harry in display.

I now know what made Dumbledore the way he is.

In light of the ongoing conversation, I'd have to say he was born that way. (:

is Snape's love for Lily explicitly romantic or sexual?

Well, not much IS explicitly romantic or sexual on an adult level, it's a kids book. We get hidden snogging, flinging into of arms and snogging, whistful musings on peoples' hair and the one time we heard the password "mollywobbles".

I'd assume Snape had all sorts of hair sniffing and snogging thoughts about Lily but the story doesn't go there because we don't get the interior feelings of the grown ups so much.

I guess I mean, is Snape's love for Lily more explicitly romantic than Dumbledore's love for Grindelwald?

Whether it is or not, we're culturally conditioned to read it that way.

I guess I mean, is Snape's love for Lily more explicitly romantic than Dumbledore's love for Grindelwald?

I don't think Snape's love was written explicitly, but I don't think it WOULD be written explicitly. I assume it was fully romantic.

And like Dana said, we tend not to assume a gay romance unless we're told there is one. NOW it looks all kinds of gay to me.

The thing I'm having fun with is the Dumbledor hating crowd. I always took their objection as primarily classist, now I wonder if it was homophobic too (or if in wizard world gayness is just too normal for that to be an issue)

I don't blame Rowling for avoiding the whole gay politics thing. She's writing about a boy wizard facing down an evil that is in all probability going to kill him. If she adds in "Oh, and Dumbledore's gay"--which is irrelevant to Harry--she's got to deal with all the reaction to that. It's an interesting character note to Dumbledore, but not necessary to the plot. Whether it was a romantic/sexual relationship or a personality dominance relationship doesn't change the fact that Dumbledore was firmly in Grindlewald's power for quite a while.

Whether it is or not, we're culturally conditioned to read it that way.

Yes, I know we are. My question really was factual, not point-making.

I really don't understand the hubbub over Dumbledore being gay. It's not in the text, and unless she writes another book in the Potterverse, it probably never will be. 100 years from now it will merely be a footnote in the annotated Potter, and not much else.

I agree with Kate and others that her statement is fairly worthless. Maybe she said it to get "gay points" now without having to earn them textually, or maybe it was just an off the cuff mention of a character trait that has about as much meaning as knowing Dumbledore's favorite color or flavor of tea.