Author Topic: It's not always racist.  (Read 5344 times)

Offline Pugnate

  • What? You no like?
  • Global Moderator
  • Forum god
  • *
  • Posts: 12,236
    • OW
It's not always racist.
« on: Sunday, December 28, 2014, 04:17:48 AM »
So guys this blog is really irritating. Have a quick read:

http://blogs.tribune.com.pk/story/25522/the-new-james-bond-might-be-black-so/

What do you think? I am going to write a counter-argument. I discussed this on the writer's Facebook who has completely lost it as far as I am concerned.

"Modern racists take great pains dressing their transgressions intelligently and making
their prejudice less conspicuous. The giveaway is the interminable,
illogical mumbling against an African-American president or a black
British actor; and a self-conscious, pre-emptive ‘clarification’ that
the statement is not racist."

That sort of describes this blogger himself

The character was written as white, not black. Why not write a new character? I mean it is racist if you don't want a black person for a job they qualify for because you feel the black person won't be able to do the job due to their skin color, but here, they don't qualify for the job because the character was white. There is a difference but I feel the guilt associated with racism is being used to win the argument.

Again, why not write agent 008 or 009?





Offline Quemaqua

  • 古い塩
  • Administrator
  • Forum god
  • *
  • Posts: 16,498
  • パンダは触るな。
    • Bookruptcy
Re: It's not always racist.
« Reply #1 on: Sunday, December 28, 2014, 09:28:24 AM »
Yeah, that's just fucking stupid. I love Idris Elba and think he would make a fantastic Bond, probably better than many, but that doesn't mean not wanting him in there is racist. I don't care much about Bond either way, as I've never been a fan and have seen very few of the movies, but the character is distinct and iconic, and I absolutely hate when they pull shit like this. Not because of racism, but because that's not who the character is. Is it "important"? No, it isn't. It's a fictional character and ultimately who really gives a shit, but at the same time, when a character is supposed to be something, I don't think it's cool to swap out race or gender or anything else. If the character isn't iconic, that's another thing. Or if race ultimately has no bearing on the story or character, and the character can suitably be played by anyone with the talent to do it. But in this case, while the latter may be true, the former is still a problem.

I get irritated enough just when they cast different people for the same roles in movies. When Batman all of a sudden has a different love interest in Dark Knight from the one he had in Batman Begins, that shit is irritating. It's jarring and unpleasantly inconsistent. Or when someone suddenly has a new girlfriend or daughter or husband in a TV series, even though it's supposed to be the same person.

That said, I think in this case it's somewhat more justifiable. Bond has never been taken all that seriously, and it's become a thing to have different people play him over the years. Idris Elba is a cool, suave dude, and one with some great acting chops that would probably make a Bond role for him a ton of fun. I can see the appeal given that the character himself, despite being ultra-iconic, isn't really that important as a person. His identity is more in what he does, not who he "is". Given that, in this case I might make an exception, but again, I've never been a fan so I'm probably not qualified to say that. I think the whole Bond thing is pretty stupid, to be honest.

Either way, though, I would absolutely not consider this sentiment racism. To want to protect a beloved character's identity is only natural, and wanting to change it is pretty unnatural. Wanting Bond to be a white Scot like he's always been is not a racist sentiment. That's who Bond is and always has been. That's going to be important to many people not so much as a virtue of their desire to see a particular race, but to maintain the integrity of a pre-existing character they love.

天才的な閃きと平均以下のテクニックやな。 課長有野

Offline Cobra951

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 8,934
Re: It's not always racist.
« Reply #2 on: Sunday, December 28, 2014, 09:31:12 AM »
James Bond is white.  Little orphan Annie is white.  Who's next, Maria von Trapp?  Here's an angle for you, Pug.  Find an established black character, and make him white.  Let's see the reactions to that.

Anything that favors white over black is racism, and anything that favors black over white is justice.  That makes the Caucasian race the politically downtrodden, ironically, and nobody sees that as racism.  Let's systematically dilute them out of everything, always make them the bad guys, because of course, blacks can never be bad guys.  Let's make the whites the butt of every joke, because of course, blacks can never be anything but street-smart cool.  And now, let's chip away at every positive fictional character until they're all black, because anyone who opposes that is a racist.

Fuck that.  Call me a racist.  Go ahead.  I have this hispanic card to play, and it's a sad fucking world where a WASP has no say at all.  How's that any better than the historic disenfranchisement of blacks?

Offline nickclone

  • Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 1,271
Re: It's not always racist.
« Reply #3 on: Sunday, December 28, 2014, 11:43:09 AM »
Bond is a fictional character, he may be based on an actual person, but he isn't real. If white people can play Moses, Cleopatra and Genghis Kahn, why can't a black dude play 007?

Offline Cobra951

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 8,934
Re: It's not always racist.
« Reply #4 on: Sunday, December 28, 2014, 11:55:38 AM »
Bond is a fictional character, he may be based on an actual person, but he isn't real. If white people can play Moses, Cleopatra and Genghis Kahn, why can't a black dude play 007?

Because he is Ian Fleming's detailed creation in modern history, not some ancient mythical figure that nobody really knows where he or she sprang from, or what they looked like.  To change his ethnicity is a fucking political power play, and no more.  I have no problem with, say, a Jew playing Jesus Christ.  That would be a hell of a lot more accurate than having some blue-eyed blond guy take on the role.  Cleopatra, I'm sure we can find a gorgeous Egyptian woman for that role.  It would be perfect.  Genghis Khan, same deal.  There is no shortage of Mongol descendants.

Offline K-man

  • Post-aholic
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,966
  • HOW'S IT FEEEEEL IDOL
Re: It's not always racist.
« Reply #5 on: Sunday, December 28, 2014, 12:26:43 PM »
White guys get cast in ethnic roles all the time.  In fact the proposed casting for the live-action Akira movie doesn't contain a single person of Asian descent.  Exodus:  Gods and Kings, anyone?  Or Mr. Yunioshi being portrayed by Mickey Rooney in Breakfast at Tiffany's?  Not only was he a white guy playing a Japanese person, it was a wholly racist depiction.  Jake Gyllenhaal in Prince of Persia?  Oh hey, Johnny Depp as Tonto.  I could go on and on and on.

I have absolutely no problem with this.  At all.

Offline Pugnate

  • What? You no like?
  • Global Moderator
  • Forum god
  • *
  • Posts: 12,236
    • OW
Re: It's not always racist.
« Reply #6 on: Sunday, December 28, 2014, 12:35:51 PM »
I don't agree with those casting choices either. I am just saying that for someone to prefer Bond to remain a white dude is not simply racist. It's just a matter of preference.

Offline Quemaqua

  • 古い塩
  • Administrator
  • Forum god
  • *
  • Posts: 16,498
  • パンダは触るな。
    • Bookruptcy
Re: It's not always racist.
« Reply #7 on: Sunday, December 28, 2014, 12:40:00 PM »
The point here is that those other choices were also clearly wrong. That kind of shit is weird and negligent, especially when the representations are inaccurate or racist in and of themselves. I don't like this any more with white people than with any other ethnicity. If a character's ethnicity is at all important either to the character's persona or the role they play, it should be preserved. If it isn't (which again I think is debatable in this case ... I can see a case for Idris Elba as Bond, but that's likely because I don't give a shit about Bond's legacy), then yeah, who cares. But in general I think if your character's ethnicity doesn't actually matter at all, it's probably a very two-dimensional character without any real depth. Which is sort of my opinion of Bond, which is why I think you could pretty much have anyone play him and it'd be fine.

Don't lynch me, Bond fans!

天才的な閃きと平均以下のテクニックやな。 課長有野

Offline Cobra951

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 8,934
Re: It's not always racist.
« Reply #8 on: Sunday, December 28, 2014, 03:00:04 PM »
Your post is basically right.  You don't care about Bond, and I can understand that.  But the rest of what you said should ring as truth to anyone.  Is it all of a sudden wrong for a character to be white, without some sort of leftist challenge?  That's just as much bullshit as Johnny Depp playing Tonto (by the way, whose name itself is offensive, because it means "dummy" in Spanish; it's reputed to be a joke from some of the people involved--Tonto, kemosabe/"que no sabe"--a dummy and someone who doesn't know anything).

I'm all for remaking every work of fiction where white guys played characters of other ethnicities because of racism.  Have at it.  But two wrongs don't make a right.

Offline nickclone

  • Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 1,271
Re: It's not always racist.
« Reply #9 on: Sunday, December 28, 2014, 03:24:26 PM »
I don't agree with those casting choices either. I am just saying that for someone to prefer Bond to remain a white dude is not simply racist. It's just a matter of preference.

I agree, but I think that Bond's actual character isn't/shouldn't be based on race. Would a black Bond really be that detrimental to the franchise? Personally, I think Dainel Craig sucks as Bond. I think Idris Elba would be leagues better and would kill it. Not to say Bond has to be black, but don't just find some white guy guys cause he's...well...white.

Offline gpw11

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 7,180
Re: It's not always racist.
« Reply #10 on: Sunday, December 28, 2014, 03:27:50 PM »
Bond is a fictional character, he may be based on an actual person, but he isn't real. If white people can play Moses, Cleopatra and Genghis Kahn, why can't a black dude play 007?

I agree with this to a point. Mainly in the "I don't give a shit" category. I really could care less if the actor playing any of these historical characters comes from the appropriate background and I personally don't have a problem with switching the race of a well known fictional character - it's just not that important to me.  

There, are however, exceptions as certain characters or historical personalities are deeply integrated with their racial identity - an Asian or Hispanic Malcom X would just be kind of fucking weird and would change the entire narrative.  I don't find that to be the case with 007.

Having said that, I also think it's fucking ridiculous to assume that anyone who may have a problem with a switch like this is racist.  It's ridiculous and cheap (this is clickbait). While I don't care, I can respect that there are people out there who think it's a needless change and that the character should remain closer to the traditional source material.  I can also fully comprehend that they can have this opinion without being bigoted.  The blogger you linked to, however, can not.  Because he's retarded.  

 

Offline nickclone

  • Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 1,271
Re: It's not always racist.
« Reply #11 on: Sunday, December 28, 2014, 04:30:42 PM »
I agree with this to a point. Mainly in the "I don't give a shit" category. I really could care less if the actor playing any of these historical characters comes from the appropriate background and I personally don't have a problem with switching the race of a well known fictional character - it's just not that important to me.  

There, are however, exceptions as certain characters or historical personalities are deeply integrated with their racial identity - an Asian or Hispanic Malcom X would just be kind of fucking weird and would change the entire narrative.  I don't find that to be the case with 007.

Having said that, I also think it's fucking ridiculous to assume that anyone who may have a problem with a switch like this is racist.  It's ridiculous and cheap (this is clickbait). While I don't care, I can respect that there are people out there who think it's a needless change and that the character should remain closer to the traditional source material.  I can also fully comprehend that they can have this opinion without being bigoted.  The blogger you linked to, however, can not.  Because he's retarded.  

 

I think you summed up how I feel about it pretty accurately as well.

Offline PyroMenace

  • Senior Member
  • *
  • Posts: 3,930
Re: It's not always racist.
« Reply #12 on: Sunday, December 28, 2014, 07:12:22 PM »
Yea well said all around. This reminds me of that Ghostbusters news that went around a couple months ago where it was supposedly rumored or announced (didnt look into it enough to confirm) that it was going to be an all female cast. I didn't like the idea, and honestly, I think any new Ghostbusters movie made today is probably going to be pretty terrible regardless of the cast. Anyway, people were up in arms obviously as the internet usually reacts, and the backlash against that backlash is that those people are all sexists. *facepalm*

Offline Quemaqua

  • 古い塩
  • Administrator
  • Forum god
  • *
  • Posts: 16,498
  • パンダは触るな。
    • Bookruptcy
Re: It's not always racist.
« Reply #13 on: Sunday, December 28, 2014, 11:11:13 PM »
Haha ... yeah. I think facepalm is where most of these things usually lead.

天才的な閃きと平均以下のテクニックやな。 課長有野

Offline idolminds

  • ZOMG!
  • Administrator
  • Forum god
  • *
  • Posts: 11,932
Re: It's not always racist.
« Reply #14 on: Sunday, December 28, 2014, 11:30:31 PM »
I imagine an all female cast Ghostbusters would already be available in Japan. Perfect movie for things with tentacles and slime.









The internet has ruined me.

Offline Xessive

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 9,918
    • XSV @ deviantART
Re:
« Reply #15 on: Monday, December 29, 2014, 02:31:52 AM »
Everything I'm thinking has already been expressed here so I'm just going to say "Yes, I concur."

Offline scottws

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 6,602
    • Facebook Me
Re: It's not always racist.
« Reply #16 on: Monday, December 29, 2014, 10:41:47 AM »
I was going to post my thoughts on the issue, but they are basically identical to what Gregg already posted.

Idris Elba as Bond?  Bring it on!  I think he'd be awesome.

Offline ren

  • Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 1,672
Re: It's not always racist.
« Reply #17 on: Monday, December 29, 2014, 04:48:26 PM »
What if Bond was a woman?

I vote yes on both counts.

Offline Quemaqua

  • 古い塩
  • Administrator
  • Forum god
  • *
  • Posts: 16,498
  • パンダは触るな。
    • Bookruptcy
Re: It's not always racist.
« Reply #18 on: Monday, December 29, 2014, 05:13:35 PM »
What if Bond was a woman?

Prolific lesbian.

天才的な閃きと平均以下のテクニックやな。 課長有野

Offline idolminds

  • ZOMG!
  • Administrator
  • Forum god
  • *
  • Posts: 11,932
Re: It's not always racist.
« Reply #19 on: Monday, December 29, 2014, 09:33:02 PM »

Offline Raisa

  • Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 1,248
Re: It's not always racist.
« Reply #20 on: Thursday, April 02, 2015, 12:16:22 AM »
that's.just.wrong.

lesbians give me the creeps.
Taken.

Offline Cobra951

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 8,934
Re: It's not always racist.
« Reply #21 on: Thursday, April 02, 2015, 05:25:20 AM »
Eh.  Resurrected contentious thread.  At least Bond won't be fueling it, for a while.