Okay. You. Stop with the joke that’s in your head right now. I know you and I know what you’re thinking. And I don’t mean what you think I mean with the title of this post.
So let me explain myself.
Here I am, a married woman of a certain age, and an avowed Harry Potter fan. So of course you realise that the publicity pictures of Naked Dan Radcliffe–Harry Potter in the movies–would find their way to me somehow. (And no, I’m not going to link to them from here, because they are of questionable legality in the United States, him being 17 and all.)
Being a married woman who took a couple fine arts classes, I’ve seen a few naked men in my time. The male reproductive organ isn’t new to me by any stretch (ha!) of the imagination.
Being a person who goes to the movies on occasion, I’m also aware that actors and actresses routinely appear in more than one role (if they’re both good and lucky.)
Thing is, one of the things that I believe has made the Harry Potter franchise so successful across all generations is the fact that it tables discussion and exploration of sexuality in favour of other themes. So much of modern fiction (even Young Adult literature) is now so overtly sexualised that it has become very difficult to find entertaining books about themes like courage, honesty, friendship, romance and sacrifice without bringing the question of sex into play. With Harry Potter, JK Rowling created a world where the sexuality of characters was wholly incidental to the telling of the tale.
Of course, that hasn’t stopped the sexualising of the series from any number of fanfic authors, wistful virgin teenagers and others. But that fanfic exists in its own ghetto and doesn’t encroach upon the canon experience.
Dan Radcliffe’s twig-n-berries, on the other hand, does. He’s the face of Harry Potter and still appearing as Harry in at least one upcoming film. I know he doesn’t want to be typecast as Harry Potter forever, but to mind as long as he is still playing Harry Potter, he is associated with that role. And flashing a picture of “his” (or some photoshopped model–the jury is still out on that) penis around the internet casts a bit of a red light upon what should be a non-sexualised experience.
I think it may be old-fashioned of me, but I do believe there is a time and a place for sex and the expression of sexuality. I think now is perhaps not the time and Harry Potter newsgroups are perhaps not the place for Dan Radcliffe’s sexuality to be so overtly explored.
Ironically, the play which started this whole thing, Equus**, is all about the psychic pain of passion and teen sexuality and the force of nudity.
**In case you haven’t seen it, I’ll offer my one-sentence summary:
“I have no life so I made up a fixation about horses and then tried to have sex in front of the horses and couldn’t get it up so I poked their eyes out and now this shrink thinks my fantasy horse world is cool.”
I like Peter Shaffer a lot, but I have always profoundly disliked this play.
You do realize that the title of this post is going to be a perv magnet…
or some photoshopped model–the jury is still out on that
Not really caring to see Dan Radcliffe naked, I probably haven’t seen all the pictures that are out there, but the one frontal nude image I’ve seen (black and white, him with the horse) is definitely a photoshop, and not even a good one.
As an old broad, I saw the picture and was sort of just creeped out.
I refuse to make a wand joke here.
Is he 18 yet?
Because when he does 18 than I will have a comment.
It’s long been beyond my ken why actors fearing they’ll be typecast want to try to SHOCK folks into realizing that they’re indeed not Harry Potter/Fox Mulder/Judy Winslow (from “Family Matters”). If you’re good at your craft, you’ll get roles other than what you’re commonly recognized for. Plus, you’ll get respect, Mr. Radcliffe et al, instead of strangers from Burma to Blountville gawking at your privates.
Although I must admit that I was briefly a member of the Old Women Strangely Fascinated by That Little Boy Club, I was completely ooked out by the bath scene in the film GoF because he is still a child. It alarmed me that the director chose to linger so creepily on Myrtle trying to peek (which was not the tone in the book), and it was clearly to pander to the “Hey, Dan, Boxers or Briefs” crowd. Those actors are all still children, and capitalizing on their nascent sexuality is sickening; publicists and agents creating opportunities for more Pamela Rogers-type antics is equally nauseating.
Your synopsis of Equus is spot-on, by the way. Even absent the “Harry Potter Nekkid!” aspect of it now, I can’t abide the animal abuse.
Did you catch him on Extras?
The HP fanfics are disturbing. Especially the ones about Snape. I won’t go near those.
As for Daniel’s meat n two veg… I’ll wait till after the final movie to go look for pictures. I think he’s a hottie now but I’m with you – I certainly don’t need to see him bare all just yet.
but the one frontal nude image I’ve seen (black and white, him with the horse) is definitely a photoshop, and not even a good one.
That’s the one I’ve seen. I’ll admit I didn’t look closely enough to examine it. I did notice that whomever they used was not circumcised.
I saw the picture and was sort of just creeped out.
I wasn’t creeped out, per se. Irritated, but not creeped out. What did creep me out was that some jerk posted the link to it in a couple of my Harry Potter literary discussion groups. Groups which are frequented by kids as young as 13.
I also don’t think DR & his publicity crew realise how much this photo will be used as bait by eager pedophiles interested in getting 13 year old girls to talk about sex.
It’s long been beyond my ken why actors fearing they’ll be typecast want to try to SHOCK folks
I don’t get it either. And it frequently bites them in the hindquarters later.
Your synopsis of Equus is spot-on, by the way.
Thank you. I have a shorter one (Boy worships horses, Doctor worships boy, neither can have an erection) that I often use. I think Shaffer tried to accomplish something with Equus that just missed the mark. Fortunately he captured the essence of those themes much more elegently in Amadeus a few years later.
Did you catch him on Extras?
Yes, and I thought it was pretty funny. It still skeeved me a bit though, how they are exploiting his sexuality.
I think the problem with Equus – a play which I am quite fond of, by the way – is that people are too focused on the nudity aspect when that is a very minimal part of the actual play. This play came out just after Oh! Calcutta! and Hair were making onstage nudity kind of a fashion statement. The nudity in Equus is quite different indeed – it’s not about shock; it’s essential to the character’s vulnerability in that moment and the shame that leads him to blind the horses.
People I know who have seen the play in previews – many of whom have somewhat inappropriate crushes on him (as do I, no need to be shirty :P) – have had far more to say about Radcliffe’s outstanding performance and pretty much nothing to say about his … fun parts. It is not written, nor I understand is it being performed, in any kind of titillating way. Unfortunately, the media in general do not understand that.
I’m seeing this play two weeks from Friday, and I’m quite excited and anxious. I’ve heard nothing but fulsome praise about the production, and Daniel in particular, and I can’t wait to experience it.
And yeah, I’m pretty sure that’s a photoshop job, too.
I think the problem with Equus – a play which I am quite fond of, by the way – is that people are too focused on the nudity aspect when that is a very minimal part of the actual play.
In my case my personal problem with it is that I think Shaffer’s understanding of the psychology was both infantile and overstretched. It reminds me of dorm room conversations with pretentious art majors. The only subtlety he achieves is with the sexual transferrence of the doctor. Equus teeters on the brink of being a great play but never achieves the heights of Shaffer’s later work, in my opinion.
The nudity in Equus is quite different indeed – it’s not about shock;
No, the nudity IN THE PLAY isn’t about shock. But the publicity FOR THE PLAY clearly has been.
I’m seeing this play two weeks from Friday, and I’m quite excited and anxious. I’ve heard nothing but fulsome praise about the production, and Daniel in particular, and I can’t wait to experience it.
I am jealous of your trip, but not of your having to sit through that monstrous play twice.
No, the nudity IN THE PLAY isn’t about shock. But the publicity FOR THE PLAY clearly has been.
Indeed. I can understand them wanting to prepare people for what a divergence this will be from HP, and that may be what they claim they’re trying to do. But it smacks of “sex sells” to me. I kid you not, when those pictures were released, I witnessed three or four people making posts saying essentially “Okay, that’s it – now I HAVE to spend several hundred dollars to fly to London and see this play.” I couldn’t help thinking that if they were truly interested in the play, they wouldn’t have waited for pics of a naked 17-year-old to make that decision.
I watched a couple of bits of Amadeus (the movie) last night, by the way. Salieri’s commentary on “Contessa perdono” from Figaro (perhaps the most gorgeous piece of music ever) is a thing of beauty. And the dication of “Confutatis” from the Requiem is just … genius. I can’t hear that piece without savoring each of the elements in the score.
i agree with you.
im sorta young i guesss. but rather mature for my age.
and i went to google and typed in daniel radcliffe to get a picture for my myspace, because hes incredibly gorgeous. but what popped up was the picture of him naked with that horse.
i find it a bit disturbing, and kinda weirded out. It makes you want to dislike harry potter when your a huge fan. Although you can tell its photoshopped. Me not really seeing a penis (like i said im young) i can tell its photoshopped. But it makes me loose a bit of respect for daniel.
Well, just a couple weeks ago, a student in my university, posted a nude picture of harry potter. no, not just top, the whole thing. I was disturbed, when i saw the picture, i was totally shocked when i saw this image, i thought it was just a bound of rubish. if yuo want to see the picture, email me at radcliffegregory@yahoo.com. well, thanks for taking the time and reading my comment on all of this.
One of my friends send me that photo as a prank INTITLED “H.P. AND IS NOT LOVECRAFT”…
I can only say he has a small pecker XD…
My little sister (13yo) was sitting by my side when i scroll down the pic and she stars giggleling while saying a wand joke “didn´t know his magic wand was a so compact one” then whe laught to death a few minutes… but them again my 13 year old sister look at it… she was a fan of that movie… she still is but now she give me this look every time the movie is on the tv and we start laughing and when our parents ask why we just keep laughing but louder…
Anyway i´m a concerned older brother (17yo) from argentina (i apology if my english is not that good i don´t get to practice it enought)…^_^…
[…] the dozen or so hits a day I get on the whole Battlestar Galactica / Bob Dylan mashup. And the Harry Potter’s Penis thing. Other posts, though, surprise me. I don’t know if they’re insecure girls or […]
it’s really a no brain-er. he is a man. he has a penis. if you don’t want to look at it, don’t see the play. or click off the site that is showing it. grow up and use i statements. instead of….harry potter this, or daniel radcliffe that…..say “i don’t like penises because….”
Well, Hexbender, let me explain something about magic wands for the benefit of both you and your sister. The “magic” thing about them is that their size when stored away is not always related to their size when they’re fully deployed ; ).
That’s what their magic is about. Oh yeah, right there is that other thing…
Interesting – and you have used Penis in your title of a post that argues against sexualisation? What purpose does that serve, apart from some clever titillation?
I have no problem with the male genitals, after all i´m a male and well you get the idea, my problem is my little sister looking at it, luckily she toke it well and make joke about it, the problem came when she start asking questions about it… uncomfortable questions… anyway, after that she want it to learn every thing about that area, where the babys come from (like she didnt know alrready), the hair growing in weir places, etc, etc… but she did´nt learn it from school and not from our parents… “THE TALK” like you call it, was my job to do it, she when directly to me, not mom, not dad, not health class, she asked me, and explaining all this matters to your 13yo little sister was nothing funny… the fluid part particulary, the wet dreams, masturbation, “boy and girl; boy and boy; girl and girl”… believe me it wasn´t something i ever imagine nor ever want to do… she even ask me if i alrready had “some” and if i enjoy it, and if my partner enjoy it… i wasn´t gonna share my sex life experience with my little sister, so i play the “genttlemen never tells” card and get out of it… NEVER AGAIN!!!
ONE E-MAIL, ONE PRANK, ONE PIC… THE MOST EMBARRASING AND AWFUL TALK OF MY LIFE…^_^…
I wasn’t creeped out, per se. Irritated, but not creeped out. What did creep me out was that some jerk posted the link to it in a couple of my Harry Potter literary discussion groups. Groups which are frequented by kids as young as 13.