Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    okay cool, so what? its a historical tv show to replay the past, but we dont need to have every single detail exactly as they did back then cos otherwise if we were doing it exactly as it was in the tudors or whenever this is set then:
    -technically tvs wouldn't be around so tbh it wouldn't have been recorded
    -everyone would be dying from diseases
    -and a million of other tiny differences that nobody cares about so chill, this isn't cultural appropriation its simply a woman who got the part because shes a great actress...
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BeastOfSyracuse)
    As is Queen Margaret in Henry VI, Part 1. It's a Shakespeare play, not a documentary. The Queen Margaret in this play isn't the actual Queen Margaret, it's a fictional character.
    It saddens me that I've had to scroll this far down the page to find the first shred of common sense
    • TSR Support Team
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    TSR Support Team
    (Original post by NickLCFC)
    You're putting words into my mouth. I'm not saying they can't be involved in the works of Shakespeare.
    This is an adaptation of Shakespeare, you're saying they shouldn't have been cast because they're not white. How exactly are you not saying they can't be involved in Shakespeare?
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    If the YouTube comments are anything to go by, there is outrage over a Black woman being cast as a medieval queen.

    Speaking of historical figures, that recent Christian Bale Exodus movie had an almost all White cast portraying Ancient Egyptian characters. This happens more often than it does the other way round.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Stiff Little Fingers)
    This is an adaptation of Shakespeare, you're saying they shouldn't have been cast because they're not white. How exactly are you not saying they can't be involved in Shakespeare?
    All I'm saying is that I think real historical figures should be represented accurately. That means I think Queen Margaret should be played by a white actress. The comment I was replying to was suggesting that I implied non-white couldn't be involved in the works of Shakespeare as a whole. I've never said anything along those lines. I'm sure there are plenty of other roles that 'people of colour' could fill.

    Not to mention this whole situation doesn't actually bother me that much anyway. I'm not gonna lose any sleep over it.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    This is stupid.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (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:




    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.

    She isn't really really black, the BBC and the UK/US wouldn't be able to cope with really black characters on their TV screens.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    whoopi goldberg as matilda

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

    Actually it reads like "Game of Thrones:"

    In 1139 Matilda crossed to England to take the kingdom by force, supported by her half-brother, Robert of Gloucester, and her uncle,King David I of Scotland, while Geoffrey focused on conquering Normandy. Matilda's forces captured Stephen at the Battle of Lincolnin 1141, but the Empress's attempt to be crowned at Westminster collapsed in the face of bitter opposition from the London crowds. As a result of this retreat, Matilda was never formally declared Queen of England, and was instead titled the Lady of the English. Robert was captured following the Rout of Winchester in 1141, and Matilda agreed to exchange him for Stephen. Matilda became trapped in Oxford Castle by Stephen's forces that winter, and was forced to escape across the frozen River Isis at night to avoid capture. The war degenerated into a stalemate, with Matilda controlling much of the south-west of England, and Stephen the south-east and the Midlands. Large parts of the rest of the country were in the hands of local, independent barons.
    Offline

    17
    Lol ITT: people that normally complain and call it 'PC gone mad' when SJWs rage about white actors playing historically non white characters are raging and ******** themselves about a black woman playing a historically white person.

    Who actually gives a **** about the skin colour of the actor/actress? Just so long as they're good enough and the race of the character isn't integral to the role (ie MLK)
    But who cares if the gods of Egypt movie was all white or Jesus was played by a white man?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Another)
    It saddens me that I've had to scroll this far down the page to find the first shred of common sense
    Cheers dude. There are genuine reasons for people to get upset about the marginalisation of English culture, but this isn't one of them.

    The 1996 Baz Luhrman version of Romeo and Juliet was set in a modern setting, if I recall correctly Thibault was black. Nobody complained because Romeo and Juliet is a play, it can be reinterpreted in countless ways.

    This whole issue seems like a storm in a teacup, and rather philistine in its disposition
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BeastOfSyracuse)
    Cheers dude. There are genuine reasons for people to get upset about the marginalisation of English culture, but this isn't one of them.

    The 1996 Baz Luhrman version of Romeo and Juliet was set in a modern setting, if I recall correctly Thibault was black. Nobody complained because Romeo and Juliet is a play, it can be reinterpreted in countless ways.

    This whole issue seems like a storm in a teacup, and rather philistine in its disposition
    I agree, she is a fantastic actress and will no doubt make the role her own. I don't like the politics surrounding it, i.e. the BBC's obsession with diversity for diversity's sake, but given the actress and how it probably won't affect the drama, I will just be happy to watch it.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Grand High Witch)
    I agree, she is a fantastic actress and will no doubt make the role her own. I don't like the politics surrounding it, i.e. the BBC's obsession with diversity for diversity's sake, but given the actress and how it probably won't affect the drama, I will just be happy to watch it.
    I don't think it was PC for PC's sake... it would have been far easier for them to just cast a white actress. I'm certain it was based on the fact she's an astonishingly talented actress
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    They're doing it to make some kind of statement. No casting agent would have a black woman play an actual English Queen because she 'looked' right for the role. It wouldn't make any sense. Oh BBC...
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dandaman1)
    They're doing it to make some kind of statement. No casting agent would have a black woman play an actual English Queen because she 'looked' right for the role. It wouldn't make any sense. Oh BBC...
    King Alfred the Great sent an embassy to India (I kid you not).
    So perhaps Alfred was slightly asian.
    So perhaps an Asian Alfred could be historically accurate-ish?
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    No one seems to be bothered the patron saint of England was not English, never been to England and did not speak English.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Quantex)
    Nothing but social justice warriors getting their knickers on a twist and looking to complain about the BBC. How often have white people portrayed non-White people? It's happened so frequently that many British kids grew up believing Jesus resembled a Swedish hippy.
    Social justice warriors are the ones who would applaud the BBC.
    And the point is not the casting, but the hypocrisy. Everyone rightly criticises when a story gets westernised or 'whitewashed', but when it's the opposite apparently we can't complain and shouldn't complain because karma or something.
    People shouldn't be chastised over complaining about double standards.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Maker)
    No one seems to be bothered the patron saint of England was not English, never been to England and did not speak English.
    What possible relevance could this have?
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by pol pot noodles)
    Social justice warriors are the ones who would applaud the BBC.
    And the point is not the casting, but the hypocrisy. Everyone rightly criticises when a story gets westernised or 'whitewashed', but when it's the opposite apparently we can't complain and shouldn't complain because karma or something.
    People shouldn't be chastised over complaining about double standards.
    Whether it's hypocrisy or not depends on who is saying it, as well as why they are saying it.

    Some of us in this thread have been putting forward an essentially conservative argument for including people who only have recent ancestry in this country, in particular non-whites, in an important part of English culture.

    I'm not enough of a narcissist to assume that you pay attention to my posts, but the last thing I am is an SJW, and I'm pretty sure I criticised the people who were *****ing about the oscars on this very forum.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by pol pot noodles)
    Social justice warriors are the ones who would applaud the BBC.
    And the point is not the casting, but the hypocrisy. Everyone rightly criticises when a story gets westernised or 'whitewashed', but when it's the opposite apparently we can't complain and shouldn't complain because karma or something.
    People shouldn't be chastised over complaining about double standards.
    Do you not remember people complaining about Idris Elba playing Heimdall in Thor or the mere notion of him playing James Bond? Or John Boyega playing a stormtrooper in The Force Awaken? or Michael B Jordan playing Johnny Storm? or Samuel L Jackson playing Nick Fury?

    I've seen way more a double standards in people arguing against this sort of casting, sayings "PC gone stupid", "diversity for diversity's sake" to complain about casting a typically white role with a minority, then use those same arguments to try argue with people upset that a role associated with an ethnic minority gets played by a white person.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (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?
    Because there generally needs to be a degree of historical accuracy for people to get immersed in a historical drama. I don't get why this is such a difficult concept for some people to grasp.
 
 
 
Poll
Do you agree with the PM's proposal to cut tuition fees for some courses?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.