Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
x Turn on thread page Beta

Outrage Over Martin Luther King Being Portrayed By A White Man watch

Announcements
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Source: http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2...tor-university

    Ohio university production of Katori Hall’s The Mountaintop featured a white and black actor as King, which Hall says was ‘disrespectful’ and a ‘disservice'
    The casting of a white actor as Martin Luther King in an Ohio university production of Katori Hall’s acclaimed play The Mountaintop was “a disservice to not just Dr King but an entire community”, the playwright has said.

    Hall wrote an essay for the African American cultural website the Root on Monday about Kent State University’s production of her play, which dramatizes the night before King was assassinated in 1968.

    Hall told the Guardian that director Michael Oatman’s decision to double-cast the six-show production with a black actor and a white actor as King went “deeper than just casting a white man in the role of MLK”.

    “I just really feel as though it echoes this pervasive erasure of the black body and the silencing of a black community – theatrically and also, literally, in the world,” she said.

    Oatman, who like Hall is black, said in a statement in August promoting the play that he chose a white actor for the production “to explore the issue of racial ownership and authenticity”.

    It's funny that whenever the libtards complain and campaign to have white characters changed to match their agenda, they justify their actions in the name of equality. Yet, here we have a perfect example of what MLK truly intended:


    "I look to a day when people will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character."


    Okay, maybe for the sake of the play they should have cast a black person, but the people complaining about this have truly shot themselves in the foot this time. These are the same type of people who'd complain if a black guy portrayed Hitler or rejoice that James Bond was made into a black character, purely because of skin colour.

    Moreover, there is rarely any complaints about a straight guy playing a homosexual, why does it only garner criticism when it's to do with race?
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Its whitewashing - do u even know what Martin Luther King stood for? For people of his race to be recognized as people and this just does that opposite, and how can this 'white actor' even begin accurately portray MLK's struggles when they were mostly centered on race?
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    This is more politically correct than having a black actor play him.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    James Bond is a fictional character whose race was never specified in the books, therefore the race of the actor who plays him doesn't matter. Martin Luther King was a real black man, therefore in the interests of accuracy it does matter that the actor who plays him is black.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    bruh... isn't it what he stood for that matters and not his skin colour? why you people gotta be like this man

    why can't we live in harmony and stand for the same thing? we are all standing behind MLK and his message and we all have a dream no matter if we're Asian, White, Black, Mixed, Simpsons, idgaf - can't we function together as a race? I bet he would be pissed at you guys for this -_- smh

    If it was the other way round and a white guy was represented by a black actor no one would say anything... why?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cranbrook_aspie)
    James Bond is a fictional character whose race was never specified in the books, therefore the race of the actor who plays him doesn't matter.
    It didn't need to. His history defines who he is (Royal Navel Reserve during WW2)

    But Fleming did actually picture him for us



    But PC washing any story just makes people look stupid and slightly desperate.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Evening)
    Source: http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2...tor-university




    It's funny that whenever the libtards complain and campaign to have white characters changed to match their agenda, they justify their actions in the name of equality. Yet, here we have a perfect example of what MLK truly intended:


    "I look to a day when people will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character."


    Okay, maybe for the sake of the play they should have cast a black person, but the people complaining about this have truly shot themselves in the foot this time. These are the same type of people who'd complain if a black guy portrayed Hitler or rejoice that James Bond was made into a black character, purely because of skin colour.

    Moreover, there is rarely any complaints about a straight guy playing a homosexual, why does it only garner criticism when it's to do with race?
    James Bond is a fictional character. There is no reason for him to be white. Unless you think only a white man can be a British spy and only a white man can save the world from crazy megalomaniacs and bang a ton of hot women.

    Adolf Hitler ? First off, surprisingly there has not been a major Hollywood movie made about Hitler. He has featured in smallish movies and the odd mini series, and guess what ? Each time he was played by white man.

    A white man cannot play a black man as historic as Martin Luther King. The man's race had everything to do with who he was and what he fought for. I would be just as angry if a black person portrayed Winston Churchill, Charles Dickens or Marie Curie. Why? Because it's not historically accurate.

    And if race does not matter then I wanna see Beyonce play Marilyn Monroe or Princess Diana.

    Happen. Not. Gonna.

    Not only would not black people be allowed to play non-fictional white characters. People throw a fit if black people play fictional characters. You only need to see the way people are losing their minds over the black male lead in the new star wars movie with their #BoycottStarWarsVII trending over twitter.

    People may think this nothing, but about 100 years from now when we're all dead, young kids will probably be taught that MLK was a light coloured man. Then 100 years from then that he was an actual white man. They fix history to always make themselves the victors.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by z33)
    bruh... isn't it what he stood for that matters and not his skin colour? why you people gotta be like this man

    why can't we live in harmony and stand for the same thing? we are all standing behind MLK and his message and we all have a dream no matter if we're Asian, White, Black, Mixed, Simpsons, idgaf - can't we function together as a race? I bet he would be pissed at you guys for this -_- smh

    If it was the other way round and a white guy was represented by a black actor no one would say anything... why?
    That's exactly my point and you've answered your own question. It's what he stood for and not the colour of his skin, his own efforts and merits which defined him. People who are focused on a white man portraying him are undermining his very arguments.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PrincePaul353535)
    James Bond is a fictional character. There is no reason for him to be white.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PrincePaul353535)
    That's a drawing of Ian Fleming's Bond. Not a real person.
    We've already establish he's fictional

    but that is who Fleming had in mind.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    What a stupid decision. King was a real person. Where were you when people were getting pissed off over speculation of the new James Bond getting played by a black man? Surely we should base the casting over "the content of one's character" (lol).

    Regardless, race is the central theme of MLK's campaign, whereas action is the central theme for Bond, this the outrage is incomparable.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    That is stupid tbf bunch of goons.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BaconandSauce)
    Unless you're claiming that Sean Connery, Niven, Lazenby, Roger Moore, Timothy Dalton, Brosnan and Daniel Craig are all doppelgangers of the picture you have posted, there is nothing more to discuss.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    When I first started reading "libtards who complain" I knew I would see James Bond and I knew I would laugh.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheArtofProtest)
    Unless you're claiming that Sean Connery, Niven, Lazenby, Roger Moore, Timothy Dalton, Brosnan and Daniel Craig are all doppelgangers of the picture you have posted, there is nothing more to discuss.
    Yes I am.

    That is Bond draw by the author.

    PC wash as much as you like doesn't change this fact.
    Online

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by z33)
    If it was the other way round and a white guy was represented by a black actor no one would say anything... why?
    I think it's because black people are in the minority. There are lots of roles for white people, but for black people there aren't very many. It therefore makes sense to change some characters from white to black, but the other way round wouldn't make sense as roles for black people are scarce anyway.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Evening)
    Source: http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2...tor-university




    It's funny that whenever the libtards complain and campaign to have white characters changed to match their agenda, they justify their actions in the name of equality. Yet, here we have a perfect example of what MLK truly intended:


    "I look to a day when people will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character."


    Okay, maybe for the sake of the play they should have cast a black person, but the people complaining about this have truly shot themselves in the foot this time. These are the same type of people who'd complain if a black guy portrayed Hitler or rejoice that James Bond was made into a black character, purely because of skin colour.

    Moreover, there is rarely any complaints about a straight guy playing a homosexual, why does it only garner criticism when it's to do with race?
    Portraying MLK as a white guy is pretty much the same as writing a play about Hitler and portraying him as a Jew.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by lonyeka)
    I think it's because black people are in the minority. There are lots of roles for white people, but for black people there aren't very many. It therefore makes sense to change some characters from white to black, but the other way round wouldn't make sense as roles for black people are scarce anyway.
    That's a fair point maybe black people are the minority but tbh if you're a good actor, you're a good actor regardless of your race - there are many amazing black actors both male and female, and it's a bit discriminatory to give a role to a black person rather than a white person just because they wanna fulfil a quota about giving equal opportunities. If the white guy is better suited to the role - he should get it. Simple as. It's about the meaning and emotion and how it's conveyed - and some people do it better than others, nothing to do with race
    Online

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by z33)
    That's a fair point maybe black people are the minority but tbh if you're a good actor, you're a good actor regardless of your race - there are many amazing black actors both male and female, and it's a bit discriminatory to give a role to a black person rather than a white person just because they wanna fulfil a quota about giving equal opportunities. If the white guy is better suited to the role - he should get it. Simple as. It's about the meaning and emotion and how it's conveyed - and some people do it better than others, nothing to do with race
    That's true but it won't stop the way people in the black community feel. I think the main issue is that they cast a white person as MLK junior who was very influential in bringing about equality within America. If they just cast a white person for a random black role it wouldn't be as big of a thing. It's the fact that the role was that of Martin Luther King. Besides racism is a touchy issue for black people especially in america, what with all the racists police officers. I just think they should have cast a black person.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Awesome. When will they recast "12 years a slave" with a white leading role?
 
 
 
Poll
Do you agree with the proposed ban on plastic straws and cotton buds?
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.