DH already told us why, Dumbledore was scared that Grindelwald saw who killed Ariana and he couldn't bear the thought that it was actually his curse that killed her which Grindelwald would exploit so he only stepped in at the very end.

 

I agree that they should acknowledge their relationship beyond some vague subtext at some point, but it's planned as a five film series, right? This is only part two, and canonically speaking, a few years before their post-Arianna meeting.

 

I don't think that's the whole of it either, but I disagree that it needs a lot of justification beyond the fact that Dumbledore had simply hoped it would never really come to that and delaying confronting the closest thing he ever had to a brother/partner. If the HP books taught us anything it's that Albus was a man with human flaws, and not wanting to hurt loved ones- despite how deserved or necessary it might seem, is something that rings true with most people, I think.

 

Even when discussing the series Aberforth is forgotten.

 

Well let's be realistic here, a goat is the sexiest farm animal there is, ranked just above the farmer's daughter and way, way above the sheep.

 

First off, nowhere in Canon was it ever even remotely implied that Dumbledore and Grindelwald ever was in any sort of romantic relationship. From the books and from Rowling herself we know that they were friends, Albus fell for Gellert, the latter recognized this and used it to ensure and maintain Dumbledore's support, then their friendship came to an end and we all know how.

So we should not expect what was never there to be acknowledged. That'd just be stupid.

That being said, secondly, who said that they're not going to acknowledge that Dumbledore was once head over heel in love with Grindelwald? The new trailer? Watched it yet? Not pointing at you right now, but some fans seem to be half expecting a makeout session between the two, which would be completely out of character for both Dumbledore and Grindelwald and serve no purpose in the story whatsoever. And it kind of annoys me.

Also... Zombie: Nowhere in Canon was it ever even remotely implied that Aberforth's interest in goats was in any way sexual. And the thought is disgusting. And the fact that so many people are subscribing to the theory is disturbing...

 

Albus/Gellert OTP.

They were totally crossing wands. Priori Incantateming. Casting Patronus in the woods together. Practising Engorgio with great zeal.

They were boning, is what I'm saying.

 

The burden of proof is on you, mate. What's the source for this assertion?

 

People are going ballistic over the whole gay thing because JK said it in an interview, which I personally see as the beginning of her social media retcon fest. It was never in canon. I don't buy the "it's not in canon because it's not relevant to Harry's POV" defense. There are plenty of details in the books that are irrelevant to the story and Harry's POV.

I don't care one way or the other. At the end of the day, it's always going to be easier to demand representation than create your own content.

 

Even if we accept Rowling's retcons (Which is getting harder to do over the years), wasn't Dumbledore's love for Grindewald always unrequited? I was always of the opinion that their relationship never progressed anything past friendship and that Grindewald probably didn't even know Albus's true feeling for him.

Heck, I think even Albus didn't know until years after Grindewald's imprisonment when he had some time for self reflection.

 

Word of God.

 

That said, I would totally be on board with Grindlewald being a cock-tease straight guy.

Promising things to Dumbledore to keep him within his power as they went further into the 'greater good' but not actually having any romantic feeling for dumbledore.

I don't see why what sorrows is saying and the interpretation that it was unrequited need be mutually exclusive. Have Dumbledore explicitly gay for Grindlewald, and have Grindlewald more ambiguous. You can have the homosexuality be transparent but still have the love story be unsuccessful.

I think in HPverse, where love is true it's generally quite a positive, redemptive force and Dumbledore pushes that message. With Snape and his unrequited love it was enough to turn him against Voldemort. A contrast in Dumbledore where it almost led him wrong, and did not redeem Grindlewald at all, that I could see that as an interesting exploration, particularly In how it influences a lot of his later views regarding Voldemort and Harry, and Snape etc.

I'd quite like to see a Dumbledore whose ideals are contrary to his lived experience. If anything it would enhance the idea that he is truly an exceptional man, despite his flaws.

 

Relevant video on the topic of LGBT representation. It's long, but I didn't think it was a waste of time. Found it randomly, it's interesting. Mobile link because I'm on my phone.

 

Dumbledore is wearing high heels in the first chapter of PS. Just sayin'.