Harry Potter and the Cursed Queerbaiter

Queer baiting, a term coined by fan communities, means to present hints of queer themes within your text ambiguously without the intent of bringing them to fruition later on within the plot. This is done with the sole intent of bringing in a queer audience, a community that is often starved of queer content and so hang onto the smallest hint of what could turn into a queer story. When talking about these issues, I think it is important to look into what queer baiting is.

Queer baiting is not having two same-sex characters who have a close intimate friendship, especially when their sexuality has already been disclosed as heterosexual within the text. For example, John Watson and Sherlock Holmes' relationship, from the BBC series Sherlock (2017), can not be claimed as queer baiting because they are known to be two heterosexual characters. And although they could be claimed homoerotic at times, there are many themes within the text which can explain this. For example, Sherlock’s lack of social knowledge, or the nature of their partnership. Watson's interest in women also helps!

Queer baiting is showcasing a close, borderline romantic, intimacy between two same-sex characters while keeping an ambiguity on their orientation and sexual interests. Throughout the text, the characters will share touches and glances only for one of them to end up within a heterosexual relationship by the end of the narrative unexpectedly. 

Even within the queer community, there is an argument about what classes as queer baiting. Killing Eve (2018), a show about an MI6 agent who becomes obsessed with the workings of female assassins, has often been accused of queer baiting. I would personally disagree. This programme is very queer in its content. Oxana, the assassin, is very obviously, and very often, depicted as bisexual on screen and this part of her character has never been shied away from. People say that because the two main characters of Eve and Oxana are yet to get together that they are stringing queer people along, whereas, I would argue that this is less to do with a lack of commitment to queer content but rather to do with the fact that OXANA IS AN ACTUAL MURDERER and so the narrative gets in the way of moving their relationship further along too quickly.

While another show like Riverdale, I would argue, uses queer baiting as a technique to gain viewers. Twice within its trailers for its episodes, a queer kiss has been depicted only for viewers to find that the kiss is hetero-normatively explained away when it comes to watching the full episode. For example, within season one, two women, Betty and Veronica, were shown passionately kissing within a trailer, only for this kiss to be explained away by having it be a stunt to gain attention while auditioning to be cheerleaders; much more for shock factor rather than queer plot. A more recent example of this within the marketing of this show is found within the promo trailer for The Great Escape, two men are shown to share a kiss; one of the characters gay and the other straight. 

While the kiss within the trailer is shown to be quite passionate, when it came to the episode the kiss was very non-consensual with the gay character, Joaquin, kissing a straight character, Archie, as a “distraction” before stabbing him...because a kiss is obviously an important part to any stabbing. Although it could theoretically be explained that the kiss was a distraction if the stabbing occurred while their lips were touching, the fact that Joaquin pulls away and then practically announces he is about to injure Archie kind of defeats the point of needing a distraction, therefore leaving the kiss as nothing more than a tactic to gain interest from a queer audience.

Now that I have explored what queer baiting means, I want to apply this to the text that I am truly excited to analyze in reaction to this theory. Harry Potter and the Cursed Child has been widely accused of queer baiting by many audiences, with readers commenting on the fact that the characters of Albus Potter and Scorpius Malfoy didn’t get together actually left them shell-shocked because it seemed like the path that the novelised stage-play was leading.

A trope of many relationships within queer texts, especially between male homosexual characters, is the awkwardly flustered introductions upon their first meeting. One of the characters will often be shown tripping over their words, struggling to speak as they are overwhelmed with this new feeling. There are many examples of where this can be seen within today's media, a few great examples being the meeting between Alec and Magnus in Shadowhunters, the meeting of Ely and Bruce the Second in Naomi and Ely’s No Kiss List (Cohn and Levithan, 2007) or the flustered way in which Simon reacts to Bram’s comments about oreo’s within Love, Simon (2018). Harry Potter and the Cursed Child use this same trope too, within act one scene three, when Albus and Scorpius first meet. The extract reads:

Albus: Albus. Al. I’m – my name is Albus… 

Scorpius: Hi Scorpius. I mean, I’m Scorpius. You’re Albus. I’m Scorpius. And you must be… 

ROSE’s face is growing colder by the minute.

Rose: Rose.

Scorpius: Hi Rose. Would you like some of my Fizzing Whizzbees?

(Thorne, Rowling, Tiffany and Rowling, 2017)

Within this scene we see these tropes play out. Upon first talking to each other, both Albus and Scorpius trip over their words as they introduce themselves, the implication being that the two boys fluster each other. The fact that they are flustered over each other, is then backed up by the ease in which Scorpius manages to talk to Rose. Albus is the source of his flustered-ness. It has been argued that the fact that they fluster each other is because of who the other's parents are but we learn later on in the same scene that Albus does not know Scorpius is a Malfoy at first, meaning that could not be a reason for his flustered-ness. It could also be argued that if parentage played a part in Scorpius’s flustered-ness that he would be just as flustered talking to Rose as he knows very well who Hermione Granger is. There is a reason that these two boys are flustered over each other, one that doesn't affect Scorpius' ability to talk to Rose? 

Another trope that plays out within Queer narrative is that there is an implication that the friendship shared between the two central characters isn’t quite the same as other friends, that it holds a different meaning; whatever that may be. We can see this within texts such as the novel Date Me, Bryson Keller by Kevin Van Whye or a television show like Society (2019). This same trope plays out in the Cursed Child in act one scene four where it is written:

Harry: Are the other kids being unkind? Is that it? Maybe if you tried making a few more friends – without Hermione or Ron I wouldn’t have survived Hogwarts, I wouldn’t have survived at all.

Albus: But I don’t need a Ron or Hermione – I’ve – I’ve got a friend, Scorpius, and I know you don’t like him but he’s all I need.

Harry: Look, as long as you’re happy, that’s all that matters to me.

(Thorne, Rowling, Tiffany and Rowling, 2017)

Here we see the implication that the friendship of Scorpius and Albus somehow differs from the other friendships shared at Hogwarts, both past and present. It is implied here that their friendship somehow differs from Harry’s friendship with Hermione and Ron when they were in school, even though they are fairly similar in terms of their narratives. Meeting for the first time on the Hogwarts Express. Check! Becoming members of the same house. Check! Their meetings are almost identical, so why does Harry imply they are so different? It could be argued that Harry is saying this because Scorpius is a Malfoy but why wouldn't he just come out and say that? It is also implied that Scorpius is not just a friend within Albus' reply. When he says he doesn't need a Ron or Hermione, what does he mean? Surely, if Scorpius was his best friend then he would be comparable to Ron or Hermione? What is this implied difference? We also see within this extract that Albus has trouble with calling Scorpius a friend, tripping over the line. There is also an implication that comes with the words ‘...all I need…’, one that goes beyond the perimeter of the average friendship, especially within teenage years. And finally, Harry uses the line ‘as long as you’re happy’, a common phrase used when a child comes out to their parents.

As we roll into act two of the play we start to see these queer tones in a much more on the nose way. Albus and Scorpius' relationship is explored much more, and their relationship is put to the test in multiple ways. By this point in the narrative, Albus has become friends with a girl named Delphi, and we see that Scorpius is very affected by Albus’ newfound friendship. Within act two scene four it says:

Scorpius appears at the back of the stage. He looks at his friend talking to a girl – and part of him likes it and part of him doesn’t.

(Thorne, Rowling, Tiffany and Rowling, 2017)

This extract is one of the more obvious examples of queerbaiting within the Cursed Child. There are so many things to talk about within these short lines. The first that I would like to talk about is the reference to the fact that Albus is talking to a girl. Why is this so important? Why is the word girl so specifically used? There is no reason for it to be so specific. People argue that Scorpius is just jealous that Albus is making a new friend, but if this is so then why not mention Delphi by name? Why not say ‘he watches his friend talking to Delphi…’? This isn’t the first time that Scorpius has ever seen Delphi, they have talked on many occasions before this point and have quite a friendly relationship. It is implied that his jealousy towards Delphi is more than a threat to their friendship, but rather because she is a girl. 

It is also argued that Scorpius can sense the fact that Delphi is a bad person, but again I would argue: what would that have to do with her being a girl? And why would half of him like the fact that Albus is talking to her if he can sense how bad she is? It is much more arguable that this plays as a comment of Scorpius’s sexuality, a tactic used to grasp the reader's attention and get people talking, than that he was simply jealous of Albus’s new friend. If that was so, gender would play no part in his feelings.

Another trope that plays within queer cinema, and even romance in general, is the action of one character telling another they should stay away from the other as they would be better apart than together, an act that ultimately ends up putting one of them, or both, in danger. We see this within the Cursed child, where it says;

Albus: Just – we’ll be better off without each other, okay? 

Scorpius is left looking after him. Heartbroken.

(Thorne, Rowling, Tiffany and Rowling, 2017)

Heartbroken is the keyword which indicates a queer tone here. Heartbroken is often reserved for genuine loving relationships, mostly family and romantic. It also plays out like a classic break-up scene in a classic romance movie, with the individual that has been dumped watching the love of their life walk away seemingly forever. Although this is a much more subdued example of queer baiting, it is still arguable that this plays into the stereotypes of a romantic relationship than a platonic friendship. For example, when Ron walked away in The Deathly Hallows, there was not much about Harry being heartbroken. It affected Hermione much more. Other places we see this friendship go further than would widely be considered platonic is where it is written:

Albus: …you’re kind, Scorpius. To the depths of your belly, to the tips of your fingers. I truly believe Voldemort—Voldemort couldn’t have a child like you.

Beat. Scorpius is moved by this.

Scorpius: That’s nice—that’s a nice thing to say.

Albus: And it’s something I should have said a long time ago. In fact, you’re probably the best person I know. And you don’t—you couldn’t—hold me back. You make me stronger—and when Dad forced us apart—without you—

Scorpius: I didn’t much like my life without you in it either.

(Thorne, Rowling, Tiffany and Rowling, 2017)

Once again this dialogue turns a tad bit romantic compared to the way that an average male platonic friendship is written. We know that J.K Rowling can write a platonic friendship between two men, Ron and Harry, but Albus and Scorpius' relationship seems to go beyond this. These notions that you make somebody stronger, that you are kept apart by family feuds (very Romeo and Juliet), or that your life is only enjoyable if another person is with you, are all very romanticised. To not enjoy your life without someone next to you is very romantic. Although Harry and Ron shared a bond in the original Harry Potter series, a very close bond at that, it never quite went into these themes. They were friends because they enjoyed each other’s company, and he was the first boy his age that Harry had befriended from the wizarding world. Albus and Scorpius are much more co-dependent. When Harry and Ron had their falling out in The Goblet Of Fire it was a mini-feud of sorts. There was not a notion that Harry would never be happy again if Ron didn't talk to him, although he may have been sad.

As we get to act three within the play, Scorpius and Albus have now been through a rather traumatic experience. After watching loved ones die, and then live again, and then die again, before getting betrayed by a friend they trusted, Scorpius gets the chance to talk with Snape; the dead ex potions teacher at school. The extract in question reading:

Snape: Listen to me, Scorpius. Think about Albus. You’re giving up your kingdom for Albus, right? One person. All it takes is one person.

(Thorne, Rowling, Tiffany and Rowling, 2017)

Within this scene, I am much less concerned with what it said, although it is rather romantic, but rather who said it. Why did they bring back a dead person to give the Scorpius this advice when any other character could have said the same? To look at this it is worth considering Snape’s own story. Snape’s ‘one’ person was Lily Potter, the only woman that he ever loved. After Lily’s death, Snape risked his life and gave up everything to help Harry defeat Voldemort and get revenge for Lily’s death. By having Snape tell this to Scorpius it implies that he sees the same feeling within the boy, that Albus is Scoprius’ one person. Anyone could have told Scorpius that his friendship with Albus was special but coming from Snape it means so much more due to this back story.

And them coming back round to the actual words, to give up everything for one person is very romanticised. It's the kind of plot we see of the rich giving up their fortune for the poor after falling in love, the king falling for the commoner.

And then suddenly near the end of the narrative, Rose and Scorpius are attracted to each other for no reason? Rose was always very cold towards Scorpius and in no way romantic. It's like they had to pick him a love interest out of thin air although Albus would be the much more natural interest. It wouldn't have been bad if Rose and Scorpius had this ever-changing relationship, but they didn't. It's either queerbaiting or bad writing.

Overall, I feel that Harry Potter and the Cursed Child does queerbait. Giving Scorpius and Albus a clear love path, to then ditch it for a straight romance with no build up definitely fits definition. It's not the first time we have seen this for JK. Where is the gay Dumbledore content, huh? Where is it?