This discussion is now closed.

Check out other Related discussions

BBC Cast a Black Woman as a Historical English Queen.

What about a Mongolian playing a Chinese person, or a Nigerian playing a Ugandan? Can an English Queen be played by a Greek woman? Can an English Queen be played by someone with a Scottish accent? Where does one draw the line when it comes to historical realism?

Reply 221

username1969391

OP

14

Original post by The Epicurean

What about a Mongolian playing a Chinese person, or a Nigerian playing a Ugandan? Can an English Queen be played by a Greek woman? Can an English Queen be played by someone with a Scottish accent? Where does one draw the line when it comes to historical realism?

Just the correct colour of skin for said historical figure. Nationality isn't really relevant.

Reply 222

Ddma

If you had a drama set amongst a Zulu tribe would it be ok to have half the tribe white .... No that would be stupid , so was this . Complete tokenism

Reply 223

Wōden

15

Original post by The Epicurean

What about a Mongolian playing a Chinese person, or a Nigerian playing a Ugandan? Can an English Queen be played by a Greek woman? Can an English Queen be played by someone with a Scottish accent? Where does one draw the line when it comes to historical realism?

Oh come on, don't be so dense. There is a big difference between casting somebody of a visually similar ethnicity and casting somebody of a blatantly different race. The former works fine in a film context, the latter is just jarring and obvious tokenism.

Reply 224

goldenshades

19

Original post by The Epicurean

What about a Mongolian playing a Chinese person, or a Nigerian playing a Ugandan? Can an English Queen be played by a Greek woman? Can an English Queen be played by someone with a Scottish accent? Where does one draw the line when it comes to historical realism?

Rebecca Ferguson, a Swedish actress, played an English queen in the White Queen. A mixed race boy played Dodger in Dickensian. No one had anything to say about them, so get over it.

(edited 7 years ago)

Reply 225

goldenshades

19

Original post by silverbolt

This does bug me.

I have no issue with historical drama/fantasy casting non white actors in roles that are not specific. I.e not casting Idris Elba as Henry the eighth But in an actual historical drama, then keep the ethnicity accurate (seeing as your putting so much money into things such as sets and costumes)

It's a show. Everyone know that Margaret of Anjou was white; having a black woman play her isn't going to change the fact that she wasn't.

Reply 226

The Epicurean

17

Original post by Wōden

Oh come on, don't be so dense. There is a big difference between casting somebody of a visually similar ethnicity and casting somebody of a blatantly different race. The former works fine in a film context, the latter is just jarring and obvious tokenism.

It's not a matter of being dense. I am merely asking where the line should be drawn. In fact, some "visually similar ethnicities" might be offended by such a comparison, so that might not necessarily happen without causing offense either.

I've heard many people, who having watched some Hollywood films, have complained about horrific attempts to impersonate English accents. How essential is an authentic accent when it comes to realism?

Anyway, it is ultimately down to the producers. They should have full control of artistic creativity, and should be free to decide for themselves. If you don't agree with their choice of actor, you don't have to buy or watch their production. If they don't wish for their production to be entirely historically accurate, then that is their choice.

Original post by goldenshades

Rebecca Ferguson, a Swedish actress, played an English queen in the White Queen. A mixed race boy played Dodger in Dickensian.

I was merely asking the question of how far people are willing to push the concept of historical realism.

No one had anything to say about them, so grow up.

This is a debate forum. It is meant to provide a platform through which people can ask questions and debate topics. If you don't wish to engage in a debate and don't wish to see people asking question, you don't have to enter this forum.

Original post by Ddma

If you had a drama set amongst a Zulu tribe would it be ok to have half the tribe white .... No that would be stupid , so was this . Complete tokenism

Let us assume that Genghis Khan had visited Iceland and it was a major incident in the history of their country. If they were to put on a production of this story, would Iceland (a country which is like 98% white) have to hunt down and find an East Asian person just to play the role of Genghis Khan?

(edited 7 years ago)

Reply 227

JezWeCan!

11

Now you can invoke Godwin's Law if you like. And fair enough.

But you ain't ever going to see Hitler played by a black dude on a BBC TV drama. That is all I am sayin... :smile:

Reply 228

StrawbAri

17

Original post by Wōden

Oh come on, don't be so dense. There is a big difference between casting somebody of a visually similar ethnicity and casting somebody of a blatantly different race. The former works fine in a film context, the latter is just jarring and obvious tokenism.

How is it tokenism?
What if she was the most talented actress that auditioned for the role?
The skin color of the person should not matter unless their race was an integral part of the plot.

White actors can play ancient Egyptian gods and a black woman can be an English queen.
Honestly if this is what upsets people in this day and age then what hope is there for the future.

Reply 229

nulli tertius

21

Original post by JezWeCan!

Now you can invoke Godwin's Law if you like. And fair enough.

But you ain't ever going to see Hitler played by a black dude on a BBC TV drama. That is all I am sayin... :smile:

Has the BBC ever shown the movie Gandhi to Hitler with Raghubir Yadav as Hitler?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raghubir_Yadav

Reply 230

JezWeCan!

11

Original post by nulli tertius

Has the BBC ever shown the movie Gandhi to Hitler with Raghubir Yadav as Hitler?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raghubir_Yadav

No.

Reply 231

Studentus-anonymous

12

Original post by Chutzpah

Doesn't shock me I know the BBC is full of self hating anti-White cultural Marxists which is why I will never, ever give them a cent.

cultural Marxists

Yeah, about that...

(TL;DR = It's a conspiracy theory.)

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Cultural_Marxism

Cultural Marxism refers to two things:

First, extremely rarely, "Cultural Marxism" refers to the application of Marxist ideology and/or critical theory to social sciences. (Studentus note: Marxism refers to class and society as it refers to economics, if you read Karl Marx's writings you'll note that while he has lots of funny ideas about money and society, race doesn't come into it. Period.)
Second, much more commonly, "Cultural Marxism" is used as a snarl word by reactionaries to red-bait anyone with progressive tendencies. The term alludes to a conspiracy theory in which sinister left-wingers in media, academia, and science are engaged in a decades-long plot to undermine Western culture. Perhaps with some "Sexual Bolshevism" thrown in for good measure.

Hehe.
Snarl words are easy but intellectually hollow.

Yeah. A final thought for you:

The conspiracist usage originated in Nazi Germany, where Kulturbolschewismus ("Cultural Bolshevism") was used as a political term of abuse, as well.[1] The Nazis being the Nazis, they of course often mixed it with their idea that all Bolshevism was a Jewish plot.

So if anyone rants about "Cultural Marxists taking over culture!", kindly remind them that they're literally spouting Nazi propaganda.

Anyway, back to the topic, I'd say it's sorta white-washing, definitely revisionist.

On the other hand it's just another in a long line of TV and movies which cast actors who aren't the ethnicity of the character they portray (blackface, whiteface, yellowface, etc).

As long as my history textbooks aren't trying to make such claims then so be it, the rest is for internet goons to argue over.

Have fun with that, I'll believe you when you say your opinion isn't informed by white supremacy or an innate discomfort around brown people, honest.

(edited 7 years ago)

Reply 232

MrControversial

13

Original post by Vikingninja

Why the **** do people actually care about the skin colour of someone in a role. They gave avatar as an example with them being lighter skinned than the originals, who gives a ****? "sorry guys have to turn you down for the role, too white", that would be racist and ****in ridiculous.

People didn't care when attack on titan live action was played by japanese people rather than Europeans. So why at this?

Would you cast a Wiener dog to act the role of a German Shepard if you had a huge supply of German Shepards?

Race and racial history are an important part of identity so that simply isn't cool to do such things. You might not have a strong group identity but others do and to some extent that's something you ought to have the common courtesy respect where it doesn't impact you. In some cases it is actually a form of racial abuse to deny and attack people's group identity and right to have one.

It wouldn't be cool for me, a non-Muslim, to wear Muslim attire purely for kicks or just because. If skin colour is merely superficial (it isn't entirely and this is a scientific fact) then so are clothes. So why shouldn't the BBC shoot a Nazi era German film where all the Germans are speaking Arabic, wearing Islamic attire and using an star/crescent symbol instead of a swastika?

Me wearing Islamic attire would not be cool but it wouldn't be the end of the world either. It's one of those things like burping out loud around a load of crowded people. It's still uncouth though.

In this case I don't really trust the BBC as they have a bias agenda. I do not think that they are innocent. There are a lot of rules about what is cool and what isn't. This isn't a case where it's particularly cool. The system of unwritten rules is more expansive and complex than those that are written. If Obama on giving a speech opened with a massive burp then started the speech as normal as if nothing happened then half way through did a massive loud fart, continued again as normal to the end a few people would start to question his sanity and request that he go for a psyche evaluation and it wouldn't take there being any written rules for people to come to that conclusion as it is simply natural law, common sense. It's impossible to write down everything so no one bothers unless the need arises.

Times where this is acceptable are where for example you are importing some fable from another place or it would simple be too much bother to hire appropriate actors. In this case the BBC should have no trouble finding appropriate actors so it is really obviously doing something deliberate with this. There is no mystery at all about what the historical character looked like which also poses a mild insult to the dead. It's not pure modern fantasy or absurd comedy but more of a history piece so that makes it more inappropriate. People are right to be moderately annoyed by it and to raise an objection. They can't force the BBC not to do it but you can complain and you can ditch your TV license, don't watch the show, block your kids from the BBC (and take them out of school). With the internet the BBC is potentially on the way out anyway as a national service.

Someone else brought up yellowface and blackface. I don't actually believe these are racist so that's not my belief system and no one has the right to impose it on me. It's very funny that people who argue vehemently that skin colour is superficial are obsessed with enforcing superficial taboos about silly make up, symbols, names and even mustaches. Hitler's power and evil is unparalleled and far reaching even beyond the grave. Being able to ban a style of mustache for over half a century after death takes some serious clout.

However I do agree that particular case was stupid, possibly trivially racist but definitely stupid. I am sure they would have been able to find a real Asian actor without having to make up one to look like it which is less authentic and completely contrary to the intended ends of acting. Anything but the real thing is a poor imitation.

Sophie Okonedo is not black though but half-caste.

(edited 7 years ago)

Reply 233

goldenshades

19

Original post by The Epicurean

It's not a matter of being dense. I am merely asking where the line should be drawn. In fact, some "visually similar ethnicities" might be offended by such a comparison, so that might not necessarily happen without causing offense either.

I've heard many people, who having watched some Hollywood films, have complained about horrific attempts to impersonate English accents. How essential is an authentic accent when it comes to realism?

Anyway, it is ultimately down to the producers. They should have full control of artistic creativity, and should be free to decide for themselves. If you don't agree with their choice of actor, you don't have to buy or watch their production. If they don't wish for their production to be entirely historically accurate, then that is their choice.

I was merely asking the question of how far people are willing to push the concept of historical realism.

This is a debate forum. It is meant to provide a platform through which people can ask questions and debate topics. If you don't wish to engage in a debate and don't wish to see people asking question, you don't have to enter this forum

No, this is the News and current affairs forum. This thread is intended for the use of discussing things; if you don't wish to see people negatively reference your points then you can leave it.

Reply 234

The Epicurean

17

Original post by goldenshades

No, this is the News and current affairs forum. This thread is intended for the use of discussing things; if you don't wish to see people negatively reference your points then you can leave it.

You might want to check again. This is a debate forum. My issue is with your puerile reply of "grow up" because somebody in a debate forum posed question.

(edited 7 years ago)

Reply 235

username1539513

21

Original post by NickLCFC

The new series of the 'The Hollow Crown' on the BBC has cast a black woman (Sophie Okonedo) as Margaret of Anjou. This is an actual historical figure who was the wife of Henry VI and thus was Queen of England from 1445-1461 and from 1470-1471.

See the trailer for the new series:

[video="youtube;W0kO-pVsc3E"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W0kO-pVsc3E[/video]

The only reason I post this is because there always seems to be an outrage when movies/tv shows are supposedly 'white washed'. For example, more recently, Scarlett Johansson was cast as an Asian character in a Hollywood adaptation of a Japanese anime franchise: 'Ghost in the Shell'. There was outrage because this was apparently 'yellowface' (see this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zB0lrSebyng).

That is just a fantasy character however. The difference with this is that it's a real historical figure being represented inaccurately. Just imagine the outrage if someone like Martin Luther King was cast as a white guy.

Is the series a factual documentary or is something else?

Reply 236

sophiamarni

16

12 pages of white people complaining..i'll pass

Reply 237

Underscore__

21

Original post by sophiamarni

12 pages of white people complaining..i'll pass

What an insightful and valuable contribution that was

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 238

HanSoloLuck

2

Original post by Studentus-anonymous

Yeah, about that...

(TL;DR = It's a conspiracy theory.)

Hehe.
Snarl words are easy but intellectually hollow.

Yeah. A final thought for you:

Anyway, back to the topic, I'd say it's sorta white-washing, definitely revisionist.

On the other hand it's just another in a long line of TV and movies which cast actors who aren't the ethnicity of the character they portray (blackface, whiteface, yellowface, etc).

As long as my history textbooks aren't trying to make such claims then so be it, the rest is for internet goons to argue over.

Have fun with that, I'll believe you when you say your opinion isn't informed by white supremacy or an innate discomfort around brown people, honest.

"Cultural Marxism is a branch of western Marxism, different from the Marxism-Leninism of the old Soviet Union. It is commonly known as “multiculturalism” or, less formally, Political Correctness."

This is literally the first explanation when googled and blatantly what the poster was talking about, trying to misrepresent him so as to belittle and make obscure links to Nazism.

Why do you feel the need to be so intellectually dishonest ? Your mask has slipped off, again, and your politically backwards reasoning showing. By all means, just make another reference to Nazis and be on your way.