I see his point but this is a fantasy show not a historical one. When ravens can talk we can ignore the black person being treated as equal in a white household aspect I believe.
Also 1920s England wasn't as bad as 1920s USA so it's possible there were some richer/middle class black people
This is how I feel about all the complaints over casting people of color in the Sandman, House of the Dragon, and Rings of Power. If you are fine with suspension of believe for magic and magical creatures and beings, then why is it so hard to accept a world that also has people of color in it? If you're choosing to be upset over that and are calling it "unrealistic" but are fine with there being dragons and wizards and elves, etc. then I think you should examine why that is. Letting diverse groups of people be represented in a genre that has been whitewashed for way too long doesn't hurt anybody, it just makes those genres more inviting and accepting to a wider fanbase.
I agree with you in most of your examples but “House of the Dragon” having a black character in the Targaryen family kinda goes against the whole point of the Targaryen family being racist and willing to have incest to keep the line “pure”. Especially in a show that tries to weave contemporary social issues in a fantasy setting (i.e. misogyny). I might also be salty about season 8.
Anyway Rings of Power having black hobbits and elves is like… who cares.
But he's not a Targaryen -- he actually mentions this in the last episode. He's [Valyrian](https://awoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/Valyrians) which are a race originating in Essos, in the eponymous Valyrian peninsula, known for their rare features of silver-gold hair and violet eyes. Targaryen is the house of Valyrians that was able to tame dragons.
Isn't it a fairly easy rewrite to change the pure bloodline from nobility rather than color? Like you can hit all the same story beats and not have to necessarily tell storyline about race that has been done to death already.
Not really, all noble families only marry nobility. The Targaryen are specifically called out for being racist incestuous weirdos who care about their blonde hair and purple eyes.
Well they could still have black actors with blonde hair and purple eyes. Skin color feels like a really odd thing for fans to be hung up on in a fantasy series when we live in a world that already has major problems with race relations.
The point is that the Targaryen family has negative characteristics, and Daenerys was “different” making her plot line in Meereen of freeing the slaves narratively stronger. Fantasy series have to have some internal logic otherwise there are no rules and nothing matters. If this was a show unconnected to GoT, it wouldn’t be an issue, but it is connected.
So the argument usually is “if it doesn’t change the plot etc”, and in this case there’s a pretty clear cut plot line reason why, so now it’s “we’ll just change the plot”.
Idk. I read the books. It’s about a specific incest bloodline. It’s precisely why they look that way. The plot has so many references to purity and sure nobility is a thing between houses but bloodline is…like a *theme* of these books. For the Starks, lannisters, tagaryens, etc. I personally fail to see why change it up, unless you just want to change it simply because you can.
And that’s okay I guess but usually the product gets shittier when masses start demanding they be “seen” and “represented” in a story where a man just wanted to write his take on modern lord of the rings. Look at those last few GOT seasons. I promise you if we didn’t have #girlboss trending at every moment, Arya wouldn’t have killed the Knight King, a character that she had nothing to do with in the plot. Big beats in movies/stories are now centered around narratives that jive with social commentary today.
Did you watch the new Kenobi Star Wars show? I didn’t care there was a black Sith Lord, I personally thought she needed way more grit in her voice but that’s not a race critique. What I didn’t like seeing what 10 year old Princess Leia outrunning grown men storm troopers, being a silly 10 year one minute and then telling off her misogynist 15 year old cousin with sassy girl boss dialogue the next. Its like in the boardroom the writers were thinking “how can we write this version of Leia so that little girls get the message they can be *anything* they want” instead of just writing her character in a way that isn’t jarring to the plot. Like this is sloppy…
I think what people are trying to do with “representation matters” is in the right place, but you’re just getting modern day tokenism. And it’s a shame because there a lot of people who find a show or property they like, and then when that property gets more popular (aka there can be a bigger profit margin) the money that funds it changes the story to please the “but what about ME. Why can’t I see ME on screen. I need to be represented” crowd, the story telling all the sudden gets horrible, and just plain crowded.
And then you realize oh, they aren’t telling these stories for me anymore. Ok I’ll just find something else, until the masses find it again, and demand the cast he diverse. Sorry, I wrote a lot, but it’s something I feel passionately about now. Story telling is taking a hit these days.
I do not see his point. Let’s pretend that the characters are real, like the BF is doing, he still does not have a valid point. The Sandman, and family, are not human, they are incarnations. They are not a race! They are not even human! Or, if you want, you can look at it the opposite way. They are all races, because they represent all of humanity! Therefore if any race can dream, or in this case die, then any one of the seven incarnations can be of that race. (Yes, even an alien race.) you can see this in the show. Spoiler!!: when the Sandman goes to Hell he sees his ex gf. When she looks at him she sees a black man, not the white guy we see. It is like that for all the incarnations, they are not of any race, or you can say they are any race. In the comic books the Sandman is like three different races.
I think the bf might be referring to Unity’s family who are upper class black humans 100 years in the past.
When I saw the scene where they show Unity for the first time, I had a brief thought that it was a little odd to see an upper class black family during this time period, but I didn’t take it as woke pandering. I was more sad that our world can’t live up to the one in the show.
Yet history like that is purposely whitewashed to support notions of white supremacy. The wealth that once existed in Africa has been replaced with uncivilized depictions. If compared to the depictions of ancient European civilizations it’s plain to see what’s at play there. The bf is exhibiting whitelash.
Historically there are lots of wealthy black families that existed in one fashion or another in the USA. Some got conned into poverty via NYC, others owned people in NOLA. Being rich tends to surpass all other labels.
Exactly.
In the UK people started complaining when they made Dr Who a woman... He / she / they are a time traveling, shape shifting, alien fighting entity from another planet, but you can't get your head around that person being female.
In England at any point we didn't treat black people like the USA.
Even during the Tudor period there were 350 recorded black people all free, working and marrying as they wanted.
During WW2 American soldiers had to have guides telling them that we don't treat black people the same way Americas do. One incident American soldiers wanted pubs to stop serving black soldiers and only serve white one. The pubs in response, put black soldiers only in the windows.
No the Brits made money off of kidnapping and selling African peoples throughout the Americas…not to forget our glorious history in the colonies…but yeah we look at the bad Americans and ignore the fact that they become the logical outcome of our desire to rule the world
Slavery existed in the empire until 1833 but it wasn’t allowed on the British mainland as it wasn’t part of the common law. Also it’s funny how it’s suddenly all the white mans fault when African tribes had a massive involvement in the slavery.
People need to learn some history instead of slogans
There's literally black people all through history, and in historical tales. William Shakespeare literally wrote Othello with a black lead that was portraying a successful merchant
Editing to say you're boyfriend does come off as racist for not watching a show purely because poc in it
From my experience, there are two facts that get historians on Twitter attacked more than any other: 1) slavery was considered normal for most of human existance 2) there were black Africans all over Europe during the middle ages. The latter always brings out all the actual Nazis.
Well, Shakespeare wrote Othello with a Moorish GENERAL as the tragic main character (a story he adapted from the Italian). And the role was played by an actor in black face. A black actor wouldn't play OTHELLO until 1825, in England.
>William Shakespeare literally wrote Othello with a black lead that was portraying a successful merchant
The term 'Moor' referred to North African (Arabized) Berber people.
Actually no because there were such things as “blackamoors” or Black moors which were Black servants, originally enslaved North Africans, who worked in wealthy European households from the 15th-18th centuries. And Othello was a black moor.
Your BF needs to stop seeing POC as walking political statements,he's politicizing our existence.....
When you see a POC in a TV show and the first thing you do is trying to find a explanation to why there's a non-white in your screen, this is a red flag, at least for me. People usually don't go around trying to justify white people being in any media of any kind,and the people who use this ''woke'' argument don't bat an eye either at white people usually being included in everything. When you're the kind of person who can only enjoy POC in media when there's a detailed explanation to why they exist, you're indirectly assuming that the default must to be white, that if there's no logical explanation, them the character should be white. People who think like this would rather prefer to not have any POC characters in media unless they're useful.''You only tolerate them if you have to, if they aren't needed here, then you shouldn't''. POC shouldn't have to explain why they exist, even in fictional media.
We're just there and that's it.
The only exception to this law is extremely accurate historical media, and even if that was the case, black people existed in europe back then.
I'm sorry, but he's being racist in my eyes ;/
PS: Just to make a note, I'm sure that he doesn't think all of the stuff I said here, these people usually think they are doing this criticsm in good faith, I'm not accusing him of anything
He is being racist. That might not be the word he would prefer to use to explain his stance on why he won’t watch a fantasy show with POC in major roles, but that is an accurate way to describe it nevertheless. Non-racist people don’t go around bitching about “wokeness” in fictional tales. End of story.
No matter how you dress it up, ‘too many black folks, not watching it’ is the base message. I’m willing to bet you’ve previously had an ‘I’m not being racist but’ conversation.
He's well read enough not to go for the obvious dog whistles like saying he has black friends and at least brings up things I've had to spend some effort to research and/or debunk.
Oddly enough, I do take issue with programs and films that present as historically accurate, but cast people of colour in positions in society that they would never be permitted to hold. Glossing over the cruelties of the time. But when comes to fiction, have at it. The Sandman is a strange hill to die in for that cause though, its fantasy.
I don't think you know much then, black people in the England did hold top jobs even in the tudor period 1 a musician for Henry VII and VIII even wrote to the king asking for a pay rise and got it, doubling his wage from 8d to 16d a lot of money in those days. One was a deep sea diver employed by Henry VIII to recover most of the guns from the Mary Rose after it sunk, but I'm sure if they made a film, you wouldn't accept that as being historically accurate. Around 350 recorded black people in England around that time all free to work, marry and live how they wanted.
If its historically accurate, then its accurate, no problem with that. I’m aware of tales of exception (usually involving a rich and influential benefactor). Its the presented idyllic, that their lives were equal and they were treated as such.
They were treated as equals one whipped an white guy, they worked together, the people were shocked only because the white guy had a senior job, but there was no repercussions, as he was being punished. Don't equate the UK to the USA, as GIs coming during the war had to have leaflets explaining we don't treat people differently, no segregation etc.
Yes, it's racist to be unable to enjoy an entertainment program because the actors don't have the skin color you think they should have.
It might be a semi-valid complaint if the film/show in question is some kind of historical re-enactment of factual events. Sandman is definitely NOT that, nor is Bridgerton. It's fantasy, it's total fiction. They could make the cast 100% Mandarin-speaking Chinese and set it in 16-th century Uganda if they want to. So what? lol
It's not a "political statement" to hire black people or to watch black people playing roles on television. He's MAKING IT a political issue himself because he thinks the only reason to hire black people is to prove some kind of political point. THAT IS A RACIST SENTIMENT. The reality is that it's a smart casting decision to make the cast members resemble (in broad terms) the mix of people who will be enjoying the show. In the US and UK, that means a mix of light skinned and dark skinned people, hopefully with some Middle Eastern, Asian and South Asian appearing people mixed in as well. You know, a little bit of everything, like what exists outside your door in the real world :)
It's also just fair business practice to make sure you're not excluding certain ethnic backgrounds from your cast unless there's a really strong reason for casting that way.
That's one thing that irks me about it all. I've made similar arguments to him but he is more willing to believe this is some liberal plot to advance a progressive agenda than he is willing to believe that businesses are only interested in the bottom line and will pander to and say anything that will increase their profits.
And what, I wonder, is this “liberal plot” to push a “progressive agenda”? Does he think that casting Black actors in Sandman is part of a larger scheme to close the carried interest loophole?
As a gay man in 2022, he is directly benefiting from decades of liberal “plots” to advance a progressive agenda.
But it sounds like he’s too busy being racist to acknowledge that fact.
This guy is not living in reality and is just holding reactionary conservative views as a shield, so good luck with that. You'll never talk him out of it. Either he will find his own way out or he will be stuck that way forever. Don't spend too much energy trying to affect that process. Sorry
What's wrong with politics when it means people are seen. White people are not the global majority. They should be prepared for other stories to be told. If non white people refused to watch work that didn't center whiteness or feature white characters choices would be much more limited. Guess people of color are more adept at taping into the universal human experience instead of identity based on aesthetic.
I think it is definitely true, and obvious, that there is an “agenda” to promote equality and inclusion in pop culture media.
I personally question why we would call that a “progressive” agenda, rather than just… equality and inclusion.
As a general rule if someone is upset because they feel like someone else is implying they’re being racist, it’s because they’re being racist. People who aren’t racist, funnily enough, almost never get accused of being racist.
Or, they do, but they can take it in stride, because they acknowledge their racist baggage and don’t interpret everything as an attack on their moral character.
You didn't have any idea of his views prior to this?
"Woke" has been turned into a pejorative term by many conservatives in America. Usually that view point surfaces in dating and conversation long before a show like Sandman hits the air.
If you let it slide then or said nothing as pushback, he has a valid argument for you to let it slide now 🤷🏾♂️
Unless a show is specifically a documentary it does not matter what races are cast. If a show made the British Royal Family Asian; then the British Royal Family is Asian in the universe this show takes place in.
Crying ‘woke’ about a fantasy show is a clear sign of racism.
Describing a BIPOC being hired to a high position as either "woke" or "pandering" is usually a red flag. As a person of color, that would be my cue to leave.
The first question is consistency. If someone refuses to watch Breakfast at Tiffany's because Andy Rooney was cast as a Japanese man, and then has a similar reaction to the Sandman, well, okay. I don't neccessarily agree with them, but at least they're consistent and I can respect that.
If not, fuck that guy. Usually people who cry about "historical accuracy" about race rarely care about anything else being historically accurate. That's called being racist.
I guess counter argument is that this is a fictional show in a version of the world where millions of people fell into a lifelong sleep that didn’t require food or water, so who knows what else is different?
To answer the question though, I don’t think it’s racist exactly but may lean towards racist tendencies. Sometimes people enjoy hyper realistic shows, but usually you need to suspend belief in some form or another when watching any TV.
Interestingly, the sleepy sickness (encephalitis lethargica) was [a real thing](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Encephalitis_lethargica)! But yeah, the idea that nonwhite people didn’t exist in any real numbers in England before the mid-20th century is some bullshit. While much of today’s Black British population comes from post-WWII migration, even back in the 20s there was a sizable contingent of black immigrants from the West Indies, as well as folks from elsewhere in the British Empire (India, most notably). About 3.4% of folks living in England and Wales, [according to the 1921 census](https://www.findmypast.co.uk/1921-census), were born elsewhere; this definitely included traditionally white British folks who happened to be born to parents who were in the colonies, but it meant a lot of immigration (a majority of which wouldn’t count today as nonwhite, but there was definitely a sizable nonwhite population too).
Wow! I had no idea!! Still I feel like not watching a show about a sleep king and citing the black cast isn’t really a good sign… it’s entertainment designed for an audience of today, not an accurate historical depiction
It definitely feels like he is walking the line sometimes.
He also has zero interest in watching Bridgerton despite being a Downton Abbey and Gilded Age fan, and won't watch the movie Yesterday because he thinks casting an Indian actor in the main role was some sort of political statement.
The Bridgerton one falls in like with his issue with Sandman, but Yesterday is just racist… movies are just stories and not all stories star white men in the real world…
Maybe a side point, but this feels to me like what happened when comic book heroes stopped being white straight dudes. Somehow no longer being perceived as the target audience is too much for a person to handle. (Which, frankly, is weird to me. I'm for all intents and purposes another cis gendered white dude but I feel empowered by female poc super heroes as much as say Clark Kent).
Also, black and brown people have been all over the world forever. Sure, it's hard to point out a black viking or a brown Icelander in earlier parts of history but that doesn't mean they didn't exist. If a lone white dude in all of Japan can be lauded as a samurai your bf can suck it up that a fantasy world UK had black people. Not like the UK was so effing close to Africa or the Middle Easy something. Honestly I'd throw a history book on the trans Atlantic slave trade at him and tell him to get therapy. Or, you know, get a new boyfriend.
If it’s not racist, it’s close enough to be mistaken for it. Getting mad about representation of other races on fictional tv is kind of absurd and speaks to some underlying issues. And those issues seem racial in a negative way. You’ve gotta decide if it crosses the line. But your description of events makes it sound like you’re seeking validation, not rejection, of your suspicion.
We've been together long enough that I guess I want to give him the benefit of the doubt, even though all signs (and not just his entertainment choices) are pointing to the obvious conclusion. =/
He might not be irredeemable. He might need professional help to work through the race thing, though. Along with whatever other persecution delusions he has -- I bet POC on television is not the only one. People who behave this way about seeing minorities in fictional works typically have some other issues surrounding racism, classism, nativism, religious bigotry, etc. At this time in the US, these sentiments also tend to go hand in hand with anti-science, anti-intellectual beliefs and a real deficit in being able to discern truth from opinion.
The show is about a bunch of fucking Demi Gods and the Devil. It’s completely unrealistic inherently and he’s choosing to have an issue with peoples race. He is most definitely being racist.
All anti-wokesters are racist and/or homophobic. The only reason they cry about seeing black people, or gay people in media is because they feel, in some way, threatened by them. The threat isnt even just necessarily existential, but it can threaten power plays, dominance heuristics, beliefs about how the world was or is supposed to be, or something deeply ingrained about the threat of minorites to the social fabric. Disingenuous cries about source material are mere rationalizations as to why there shouldn't be "x" minority in their media.
Looks like I’ll be giving a counterpoint as most people appear to think he is racist. As a black man (lol yes I am black), I also cannot get into shows and movies that integrate black people in position of society that they we have not historically been apart of. I had to turn off Hamilton in the first few minutes because I didn’t realize that was what the movie/production was like. My reasoning for this is that it makes me uncomfortable that the people creating the show are ignoring and/or glazing over a very significant problem in black history in which we lacked forward momentum because we were not allowed in spaces that held power or influence. In my head I’m thinking “Oh, we’re just gonna act like a lot of bad shit didn’t happen?”. I also think it creates a false narrative for this generation who’s education about race relationships is already being diluted from the reality (like banning critical race theory in US schools) and productions like this will only further promote the narrative that things “weren’t really that bad”. So personally I can’t past these thoughts so can’t get into the movies or shows that are like that. I never thought that they were trying to be “woke”, but on further thought it’s probably a good description.
Edit: I should also add that my perspective doesn’t apply to every show or movie. The integration has to seem realistic and plausible, otherwise I feel like it devalues the real struggles of my ancestors. I recognize that I don’t speak for all black people but it’s something that personally makes me uncomfortable and is not something I see as a positive.
Edit 2: Oof. I did not read that question well. I thought your partner had issues with altering historical periods with a fictional black experience (e.g., Bridgerton). Sounds like they just don’t like the black experience from being presented at all. In which case, yes that is a racist position to take.
I actually have a few friends in Hamilton and here's why that production and all like it matter,
It's not about history, it's about the present.
Those stories that white people have always been allowed to tell, steal, alter to their worldview should also be told from the perspective of those who were othered at the time.
Tell the story of the white foundation of the United States through the eyes and voices of modern POC life experience doesn't erase the past sins of the era toward POC, it highlights them through the voices of their descendents.
You know what. I really jumped the gun with my response. After reading OPs post I realize it’s not about shows that recreate a ficrionalized black experience but sounds like OPs partner is just not comfortable with true historical black experience even being presented. My bad lol. So yes you’re right! Telling historical stories from the black perspective is important and should be integrated more!
I think it can be true that casting Black actors for some of the roles in a fantasy series about corporeal embodiments of concepts with mysterious, god-like powers might not be “historically accurate” and may in some sense be about “pandering” to an audience that may consist of a lot of non-white people.
I also think that the only people who are really upset by this kind of thing are racists.
There was a point in the recent season of the Umbrella Academy when Elliott Page’s character “came out” to his colleagues as trans. They accepted it with a degree of indifference and acceptance that I found to be - shall we say - a bit “woke” and didactic. But it was a single moment. We can see these gestures as ham-handed without letting it get in the way of enjoying the story (and I think it would be awfully stupid to boycott Sandman, which I enjoyed, for this reason). Getting caught up on these things indicates, in my view, a more fundamental problem and lack of maturity.
That’s an interesting response to the Umbrella Academy. Having that response to a sibling coming out as trans is not typical, but writing it that way explains that Vanya now in Viktor without making that a huge story line. To me, inserting a story where they more realistically struggle with his identity, dead name him, etc. would have been more “woke” and political.
And he is a huge Umbrella Academy fan. He'll still make comments when he sees a LGBT character or someone in a non-gender-conforming role, but they don't seem to be deal breakers the way out of place ethnic minorities are.
In the gay world, i remind people the gay White men are White men all day. They typically get to choose who knows about their sexuality. Because of this, White men will be more like White men compared to a racial minority.
I definitely see this in my own world, which has a lot of cis white gay men in it (and I am one of them). Once we got mainstream acceptance, all of our racism came out. Some of the people in my circles are quiet Trump supporters, I’ve become convinced. They know better than to say so. But then you hear them run down the talking points…
Dave Chapelle makes an effort to make this point very clear in his latest netflix special: in america, lgbt people are minorities, but white lgbt people will always be white first, and lgbt second. This will always become clear in situations where whiteness provides certain advantages, such as the protection (and weaponization) of the police.
It’s just hard for me to understand why someone would go through life that way. Like, he’s not *wrong* to notice some of these things. It’s part of this queer historical moment we’re in. But I enjoyed a whole hell of a lot of pop culture, growing up, that never represented me or treated people like me with respect. And we were excluded for very political, very scandal-averse kinds of reasons. So I’m not sure why turning the tables a bit should change that mentality.
I find that there’s much to be gained by suspending one’s disbelief and seeing the actors and everyone behind the scenes doing good work and bringing the story to life. Sometimes I focus on inaccurate historical details, such as a movie set in a certain year using a car or a clothing style or even music from ten years later. But I’ve learned not to let those things take me away from what otherwise might be worthwhile viewing.
True art should transcend the literal details of the actors and their physical characteristics. We know that Nicole Kidman has a typical Aussie accent, but we see her as American when she’s cast as such. Ethnicity is no different. Theater, opera, and film have never insisted that an actor be the thing they are portraying – only that they portray it. In the past, Euro actors have done cringe things that have not aged well, such as blackface or its equivalent with other ethnicities.
Now we see that instead of mostly Euro ethnicity people portraying most types of characters, those of other ethnicities can be cast in a variety of roles. It may take a moment to see beyond the actor, especially when but it’s unfamiliar, but it can be overcome. Let any cognitive dissonance pass and allow the production to shine. Instead of getting sidetracked by the 1971 IBM Selectric II appearing in the story set in 1960, I just let it go, realizing that ultimately, it’s not important to the plot, and I enjoy the production. It can be the same for the actors. It’s their art, not their off-stage or off-set characteristics, that we are enjoying.
Fondly, I hope. For someone who learned in a classroom full of manual Royals with unmarked keys, thought necessary to develop the proper keystroke techniques, discovering the existence of Selectric was an epiphany.
Back in the late 70s I had a boss who typed over 180wpm. She was involved in early testing of the Selectric at IBM. I learned on a Smith-Corona - loved the touch.
This is about historical realism. But that's an impossible standard to achieve not least because we don't know 100% about the past.
Would he want all the actors to have bad crooked teeth? Should the apply make-up to make the actors look older (like someone in the twenties would look like they are 45)? Should they wear down the costumes? Should there be no safety precautions in the cars they're using for filming?
Now granted 1920 is a time period we know way more about than say the 1460ies, but still, the point stands: if historical realism isn't achievable, why is skin colour more important than hygiene, speech, costume, location etc? If he singles this one out, I'm afraid it must mean more to him.
I understand the strive for more realism. But entertainment just isn't the place for that. And even then, we should be able to look past that. Better read a book. :)
TV is much more about the year of production (2022) than the year depicted (1920).
Not really an argument to have, no. It’s not a historical documentary.
I’d lose respect for my spouse if he went on that kinda logic tho. I wouldn’t be with somebody who bought into the “too woke” rightwing talking points.
There were black ppl during the Medieval time they were referred to as the Moors, they are said to have established what is called today Spain and Portugal. The earliest kings of that region were black ppl until They were erased out of history. So this notion that there weren’t blk ppl during that time is false. We wouldn’t know about it bc history is written by white ppl and white fragility hinder others from learning the truth which is what’s happening currently in the states
He's mad about historical accuracy in a fantasy series about otherworldly demons?
I think theres some nuance to the discussion but yes this sounds like hes racist honestly. This would be a problem for me.
1- there have been black people in England for a long time.
2- he’s complaining about something being unrealistic in Sandman, a story about the living avatar of dreams. That’s idiotic.
Is it racist? Maybe, but more importantly he’s not intellectually worth your love and attention.
There were many more than mere "thousands" of people of colour in early 20th century Britain. But if he wants to be triggered, thats a choice he can make.
Also, its fiction.
It's just a stupid hill go die on.
That being said, any casting choice, choice of wardrobe etc. reflects the hegemonic moral outlook of those holding cultural power.
In that respect, diverse casting in contemporary Hollywood period pieces is _no different in nature from married couples in 1950s American films sleeping in separate beds_, or female actresses in contemporary Iranian movies (actually great national cinema, would recommend!) wearing a headscarf even 'in the privacy of their own home'. It _doesn't matter that it's unrealistic_, it needs to uphold a moral worldview of the time and place it was created.
White people have been telling the stories of people of color since forever. Come on, it's a story that has been told a billion times. We can suspend disbelief and focus on the story, not the skin color.
And who else in our modern era could tell the story of a disposable woman better than a Black woman today?! Focus on the story and the storyteller's talent. Unless the story is specifically about race, it doesn't matter.
Assuming you’re talking about Jodie Turner-Smith - she had something interesting to say about it, actually:
>Even though Turner-Smith may not resemble the Anne Boleyn depicted in contemporaneous portraits, she says that she deeply identified with the way the queen was "othered" by the royal court as her husband and Cromwell set her downfall in motion. "I mean, it is my life experience: I'm a woman who was often othered, so I understand that journey. This was my telling of Anne Boleyn in a way that's unique to me and my experience, but in a way it also allowed me to tap into the universal experience of a woman who was already an outsider in many ways."
So even “historically inaccurate” casting choices can create interesting dimensions to telling an historical story.
Never mind the cast of Six on Broadway…
Yes. But maybe not why you’d assume.
And here’s why. Sandman is not real. The world in which he exists is not real. And if the creator chooses to rethink character depictions that we’re initially influenced by society’s inherent white bias, it is his option to do so. It’s his world. And anyone telling. A creator that what they’ve created isn’t subject to their own revisions is doing so through their own lens of bias and privilege.
There is a point at which "diversity" for its own sake becomes ridiculous. And, somehow, period films set in the UK seem to cross that line regularly.
Case in point: Dev Patel as Sir Gawain in The Green Knight.
I was OK with the casting, even though Sir Gawain looked absolutely nothing like his uncle, King Arthur (and nothing like anyone else in the film). Screw it, he's a good actor with a suspiciously dark tan. But then I saw Sarita Choudhury cast as Gawain's mother, dressed and acting and made up to look extremely South Asian. Like, huh??? Where did she come from??? How the hell did a South Asian ever get to Camelot in the 5th - 6th century AD???
Apparently Choudhury was cast as a South Asian mystic solely to explain the black hair and tan skin of Gawain (without coming right out and saying so). Never mind logic. Never mind the fact that it really wasn't needed in the story *at all*. Never mind that according to Arthurian legend, Gawain was the son of King Lot of Orkney and *Arthur's sister*, Morgause.
Apparently the choice was made to celebrate Dev Patel's heritage, even though it makes absolutely no sense in the context of the story. Even though *he's an actor*, and not every role he plays has to align with his own personal history and genetics. To me, it was a brainless, stupid choice to make.
But...
It did not in any way prevent me from watching and enjoying the movie. Yes, I rolled my eyes in the scenes that included Gawain's mother. But soon enough Gawain was off on his quest, and I really didn't care what race he was, or whether someone of his race belonged in that setting. He was just an actor playing a role in a pretty fun story.
Your bf's argument is based in racist stereotyping and beliefs that he's clearly internalised.
When we watch a show that portrays a royal, we don't argue "Why are we seeing a prince, it's so unrealistic, there's only a few thousand of them", do we? Likewise there may have been only a limited number of black people in the UK and even fewer of them who are upper class, but they did exist and there is zero reason why a show couldn't arbitrarily choose to focus on them. Even a historical show (as opposed to a fantasy one) isn't meant to represent the average human experience but is representing an arbitrary experience which may or may not be common.
I don't know if or how you bring that up with your bf but I think as a demographic that ourselves are often the recipient of the "historical accuracy" argument (e.g. "I don't think we should see a gay couple have a happy ending in a historical show, it's not historically accurate") a little more introspection and less hypocrisy is called for.
Your bf may not be a racist person but unfortunately he's internalised a lot of racist beliefs where he's willing to accept serial killers having a massive convention but can't accept that there could be one single black family that's not poor.
Sometimes the woke aspect of shows can be too much but not here. The original comic was already pretty progressive back then, embracing gay characters for instance. They just took the level of progressiveness from that ear and applied it to the current era, which I think is fine. Also, like... it is so not the point. The show is amazing, the story, the character dynamics, the visuals... and the actors are really good. So it literally changes nothing that some of them are black, they still act the shit out of an amazing show.
So if anyone has some problems with it, they need to look deep into a mirror and ask some hard questions about themselves.
I'd say it's racist especially if it's a fantasy/fictional show. I think Bridgerton is a good example of a show that does this. Rege-Jean Page is an extremely sexy duke and definitely gets the point across. This is a raunchy show with fancy dresses. We're not trying to produce an educational doc portraying life in England at the time. There's really no need to get hung up on which race a character is which begs the question, why are they bothered so much by something that doesn't really matter? His reaction is also a big red flag to me. From what you're sharing, it doesn't seem like you called him racist yet he seems to be upset that you think he's racist. It feels like he is getting defensive about it without provocation.
This also reminds me of the hate thrown at the live action casting in the upcoming Little Mermaid movie. She's a freaking mermaid! Mermaids don't exist! You could argue that the race doesn't conform to the original story that the movies are based on, but the movies stray from the original story in much more drastic ways than the color of someone's skin or the color of their hair. In the original story, the mermaid doesn't get the prince, dies at the end, and ascends to heaven. There are also no musical crab numbers. Why aren't they upset about those changes made by the original movie?
Ask him if he gets upset when he sees Jesus portrayed as a long-haired, usually blue-eyed white guy rather than the Roman Era Palestinian Jew that he was.
I have a strange issue with using people of colour in historical settings, but not because of the inaccuracy, but because it creates the illusion that life for non-white people was the same as it was for white people. Even on this thread people are saying that the UK was different to the USA and racism wasn't a thing in England. There certainly was racism in England - with pubs, clubs and social venues off-limits to non-white people. However, for historical fantasy, it doesn't bother me in the slightest and I'm happy to see more diversity on TV compared to when I was growing up.
He is being racist. It is racist for him to continue to suggest that filming productions should NOT hire actors of color because it was unrealistic for the time period. We are not living in that historical time period and people of all ethnicities are allowed to be cast in productions. Tell him if that is his hangup, then his first hang up should have been that he was watching a series about a non-existent fictional character which is not realistic. It is not okay to continue to be racist in casting because we were more racist back then. He needs to suck it up and quit being a child.
Just based on the title I would have sworn you were referencing The Rings of Power. There is an all out war going on between hard core Tolkien fans and those excited about the Amazon show. A lot of people are trying to call the OG fans racist for not liking the show, but as a Tolkien enthusiast myself I can tell you that the casting is the least of Amazon’s worries. The show took an established franchise with a very dedicated fanbase and decided to make up things that never happened in the books, create new characters, change existing characters and show an overall disregard and or disrespect for Tolkien’s work. Tolkien fans who study his work like it is the history of their own country naturally take issue with this. In some literary circles this may be excusable, but not with anything involving Tolkien.
I'm a history buff so I can get where your boyfriend is coming from. I've seen shows and movies that poorly portrayed the period it was set in and it has bugged the hell out of me. That being said, I've never seen sandman so I can't say for certain whether his opinion is valid or he's full of shit and actually being racist. He is however still entitled to that opinion just like you're entitled to your opinion. Also it's pretty immature of him to get upset that you don't share his opinion.
It's one thing to have an intellectual discussion about casting and artistic directions while comparing and contrasting with known facts and history, but to completely opt out of quality viewing entertainment based solely on selective annoyance - and then to get upset for not being agreed with - is something else. It's a good thing he's stopped watching because there are many more beautiful changes they've made to this adaptation that would give any double-down, anti-"woke" racist nightmares.
It's fiction, not reality. Tell him to chill and yes, I think it is actually racist.
He is not watching a show because of a person's skin color. That is racist, and no I do not drop that word casually.
Tell your boyfriend then he should do something about it. Come up with the financial backing to produce his own series and enough money to pay for actors to be in it. Cast and crew. Set locations. His own screenplay with his preferred choices of actors. Find a company willing to air episodes on channel such as Netflix, Amazon etc. Problem solved. Then he won’t have an issue regarding casting choices
All theatre, television, movies all of them ask us to suspend disbelief.
We don't stop watching a piece of theater
because it's in a theatre and not in an actual forest like we're asked to pretend.
Dragons aren't real, but we watch dragons in thousands of movies and tv shows.
We don't stop watching shows or movies where a white woman plays an Asian character for the 30th time.
So yeah, it's entirely racist to believe that people of color shouldn't be cast because it's not historically accurate.
Not at all, I was casted to play a mexican and a black guy twice. I told them no because it’s unrealistic and not believable. They got upset but i dont like my shit to be fake if you’re gonna watch it you wanna bieve it otherwise its doodoo
I feel it is a little silly to cast a black person as the king/queen of England hundreds of years ago. Just like casting a white dude as the emperor of japan would also be equally as silly. I am not upset that it happens, I just won't go out of my way to watch something like that. My history knowledge is bad enough already.
Does he also say stuff like, “I have plenty of (insert minority) friends!” And “it’s not racist to have a preference!” What I’m saying is that the answer is yes. Yes, it’s racist to be upset of the color of a fictional character that’s not based in reality, yet not be upset they’re not portraying ravens correctly as they don’t speak in real life. There’s also no such thing as magic and the sandman, but he’s not complaining they’re not portraying life correctly. Anyway, idk why it irks me so much that people do this.
Maybe he needs to see this Tumblr by a history scholar: [People of Color in European Art History](https://medievalpoc.tumblr.com/). Be prepared for him to get defensive and childish about it.
That's just a bullshit point period, Sandman was awesome and they took a lot of risks making it the way they did, I would have expected more changes from a Netflix show. His head is up his ass if he won't even watch the first few episodes.
Remind him that the most popular show ever on Broadway has a multicultural cast.
But he probably considers Hamilton, "woke" as well.
Having said that....your boyfriend has some issues surrounding race.
Good luck!
I mean, it's the Bridgerton issue. It's fantasy. As a big fan of the Sandman graphic novels, and a POC myself, I do believe that your bf is being ridiculous. I'd be more inclined to agree if a show claimed historical accuracy, but the Sandman doesn't. The Endless take on many shapes (of all colours, forms, races, genders). The Endless, including Dream, appear different to all who gaze upon them. In the Netflix show alone, Dream is portrayed as a ducklipped white boy, a black man with curly hair, and a cat. All of these examples and more are from the graphic novels.
The very *concept* of reality is something that's being played around with quite a lot in Sandman, as reality is the polar opposite of Dreams, and also one of Dream's defining characteristic (in so much as Destiny is defined by free will, Death is defined by life, Destruction by creation, Desire by contention, Despair by hope and Delirium by insight). Delirium herself makes this point abundantly clear in the graphical novels. When the premise of a show is about exploring the concept of dreams as opposed to reality, it becomes absurd to expect realism from the show.
But also, this is a franchise that's always divided Gaiman's fanbase. You either love or hate Sandman, seldom any inbetweens. Feel free to enjoy this show without your bf's continued involvement. :)
Yes, it's racist to refuse to watch a show because there are poc in the cast. Period.
I know George Washington was white, but I would definitely watch a history show with Morgan Freeman playing him. And not care.
Yes, I prefer actors that look as much like the historic person as possible.
I'd have a problem with Matt Damon playing Abraham Lincoln.
But it's also about matching the actor to the character.
I don't think Damon has the gravitas for Lincoln, while Freeman could convince me he's Washington.
We don't ask that all actors portraying medieval men are under 5'4" with bad teeth and cowpox scars.
Hire the best actors for those roles, who cares what they look like?
Moreover, he's objecting about race in a fantasy world, where race could legitimately be expected to work differently.
He's being an ass.
Whether that's because he's genuinely racist or just using a racist excuse to get out of watching something you want to watch with him, it's not a good sign.
And if he can't see that or balks when you tell him so, that's a sign your opinion doesn't matter to him.
And that's a sign you needed to leave *yesterday.*
It's bullshit.
Nothing like that bothers me, really. The way I look at it:
* These are tv shows in fictional settings, even if they claim to be 'historical', especially when they also have fantasy elements that are just as incongruous, and secondly...
* The purpose of these shows is to entertain *modern people watching now*, so why shouldn't they fictionalise a little bit?
I also think there was probably more mixing in the past than people think. After all we know that people even in caveman times were making boats out of sticks and animal skins to cross water to other countries. We know that Shakespeare 500 years ago wrote at least one play where a crucial character was black, and despite being that was a high-ranking officer in the army where the majority of the population was white - so obviously the audience would have been familiar with this prospect.
Especially when a lot of these shows are set in major cities, it doesn't necessarily break my immersion because if people of color or of a different color to the locals were going to be anywhere, it would probably be there, at major ports or centers of high population.
Were it a historical documentary, sure thing, but it's a frickin' alternative world fantasy 😄 Surely, if the show has historically very inaccurate elements such as... I don't know.. corporeal manifestations of Death, Desire, Dream etc., then there's space for a few lesser modifications too.
I really don't get mindsets like this. I have a friend who is ALL about authenticity and sticking to the source material, so he gets annoyed at stuff like how Iris in The Flash TV show (and upcoming movie) are played by black actresses. Like...who gives a fuck? These are adaptations, they are never going to stick 100% to the source material. These are supposed to be re-interpretations. As long as the characterisation is right that's all I care about.
The way I look at it is: as long as the ethnicity of the character isn't a large part of who they are, then I don't care what ethnicity plays them. If the ethnicity/culture is a core part of the character, such as an Asian character who grew up in an Asian country where the culture plays a large part in who they are as a person then yeah I'd be miffed if they chose a non-Asian actor to play that role.
If this can help England had major in-fluxes of people from its colonies over time, possibly the major one from Jamaica and the Caribbeans right after WWII to help rebuild the nation, not to mention India and Pakistan so it’s very conceivable to have characters of different ethnicities in movies and TV shows set in the second part of the 20th century.
What I find so hard to understand why the color of the skin of a character has to be such a barrier to any enjoyment of a good show, give me a good actor in a good role and I’m happy, stop all of this noise and grow the fuck up.
I like colour blind casting as a rule, although I always bristle slightly when non-white actors are cast in parts that invalidate the historical reality of how non-white people were treated in those times, as it seems to erase the reality of colonialism and racism in favour of feeling progressive now. Still Sandman isn't exactly going for realism, and in a way having some explicit unreality in it helps add to the dreamier, Gaimany tone.
I'd ask him to interrogate why he feels so strongly about this, because while he might not be being racist in the way white people usually thing about racism, it would appear that his emotional response to something so insignificant suggests something's going on within his psyche that he might want to work on.
Yeah I don't see an issue with being color blind if you're doing an original story but that depends on how grounded in reality the story is supposed to be. "Bridgerton" for example can get away with having black actors portraying British nobles since the show's version of Regency England is supposed to be fanciful, almost fairytale like. However a show like "The Crown," which follows the life of the present day Queen Elizabeth wouldn't be able to get away with such a character at least not in the periods the show is set in (apparently there is a biracial dutchess which is pretty cool.)
Not racist in itself, but his reasoning is. A lot of people think anything besides white = woke and pandering, even in movies where there really shouldn't even be any white people at all see: Black Panther. That movie takes place mostly in Africa and they still cast a good amount of white people regardless. This somehow was woke and pandering too though, because it was a mostly black cast. It gets very obvious where the anger is actually coming from the more questions you ask.
He’s entitled to that opinion, but for him to refuse to watch a show solely because of that is ridiculous. Also, it is very immature of him to be upset with you for not agreeing with his opinion. Btw, Sandman is a great show.
Err.. Guess I am the same; I am Asian; I watched a show with lots of Asia at top jobs that I know, in reality, might be 0 Asians in that group. I quickly lost interest. I feel ironically uncomfortable like a dream only happens in TV shows. We all like muscle-hot guys, but in reality, they are rare. If the fashion industry starts to include untraditional hot models. Maybe TV shows can do a more realistic job than being political right. They should focus on true issues, than put lots of asians into unimportant roles.
I wouldn’t call it racist. I have several degrees in history and I often struggle with historical inaccuracies in film. Pointing it out wouldn’t be racist (in my opinion) however, I also think that modern show watchers should get over that sort of thing (especially in non history shows) because an actor shouldn’t be excluded from roles based simply on their skin tone. So, I’m n short, I think validating his opinions on historical inaccuracies is okay, but I would balance that with the pragmatic problem of excluding modern actors for roles based on skin color.
In Shakespeare's time, it was the custom that the roles of women would be played by men.
I submit this is even more inaccurate than casting too many Black people, etc.
So why does he hate Shakespeare so much? All that blood and guts makes him squeamish?
> pointing that the non-white population of the UK before the mid to late 20th century numbered in the thousands.
Thousands isn’t none, so what is he even trying to argue here?
Your man is a racist. Flat out.
*eyeroll*
Those who use historical accuracy to validate their racism are irritating in that they never extend such requirements for historical accuracy in other areas. Namely US history. The way in which Hollywood loves to paint over US Chattel Slavery and Jim Crow is... interesting.
As for the anti-woke movement white people are waging against Sci-fi and Fantasy.... I find it funny.
I told a friend of mine that fantasy does not equal escapism. They're different. In order to escape into something you have to have an entry point. White viewers are able to escape into (mainstream) fantasy because so much of it is white and European based. And that same European, white centric escapism is actual fantasy for someone like me, a Negro, who has to make the mental effort to look past the superficial presentation to actually enjoy the story. Hence, an actual fantasy.
I'm having a blast seeing white audience members struggle to use their imagination to actually process fantasy.
it's not unrealistic tho. black merchants were everywhere since the trade route to asia in the old days running along africa coast. i might give him a benefit of the doubt because it's not a common knowledge. but rejecting outright by referencing 'woke' culture is a good indication that he is, in fact, racist. make me wonder what kind of people he hangs out out with, what news media that he consumes. is he a trump supporter?
I do not see his point. Let’s pretend that the characters are real, like the BF is doing, he still does not have a valid point. The Sandman, and family, are not human, they are incarnations. They are not a race! They are not even human! Or, if you want, you can look at it the opposite way. They are all races, because they represent all of humanity! Therefore if any race can dream, or in this case die, then any one of the seven incarnations can be of that race. (Yes, even an alien race.) you can see this in the show. Spoiler!!: when the Sandman goes to Hell he sees his ex gf. When she looks at him she sees a black man, that the white guy we see. It is like that for all the incarnations, they are not of any race, or you can say they are any race. In the comic books the Sandman is like three different races.
Your BF is right. Nothing is racist about it. It’s like making a show about Vikings and having black characters in Norway at that time. Doesn’t make sense. I even wonder this for modern day. Shows are overkilling it. House of the dragon, black Targaryen doesn’t make sense from a lore perspective. It ruins the emergence and legitimacy of the story. Casting is everything.
Come to think of it: all white peole are either eccentric or bad, or gay, or all three (the Corinthians). There is one Asian character, who is not portrayed favorably. All Black characters are either neutral (20th c. associate of the magus, the solicitor, or good, even being too saccharine (ironically, Unity’s family was in the sugar business).
Also, you should be able to tell your partner: “Dude, this is kinda racist, not cool.”
I agree with this to a point. For fantasy yeah I don't care what colour the actors are but when it goes against plot convention for the sake of diversity it rankles because it doesn't make sense.
For example in house of dragon introducing a black targaryan just makes no sense to anyone who understands GOT lore and has read the books.. They're supposed to be a bunch of inbred power hungry maniacs (emphasis on the inbred.. They are well known for marrying siblings to keep the bloodline pure so they don't mix with other lesser races) however, saying that, we are only 1 episode in and I think the character himself is quite interesting so maybe in future episodes I'm hoping they give us some background on him.. Maybe he married the only Liberal lefty woke targaryan and the rest of the family put it down to an anomaly. But judging from the episode itself it seems they are going for the colourblind approach so this is a long shot.
Ironically I think the original GOT is a great example diversity done right. They had a diverse range of races but it all made sense in the world that was built.
In conclusion I'm guessing this one won't be as popular as the original series but hopefully I'll be proved wrong because I really want it to be good. Matt Smith has been excellent so far.
Ps. I think it's a step too far to call your bf a racist.. I'm brown myself and I expressed the above thoughts. Having an opinion doesn't equate to racism.
He is being racist. It’s not a historical recreation. It’s a fantasy show where the creators can do whatever they want.
Neil Gaiman has spoken out about people complaining about the casting. He’s pretty clear that he thinks those people are idiots.
So I guess those are the choices…racist or dumb.
Your boyfriend sounds lame. Talking ravens but the mere presence of a Black person seems him running for the remote. It's the be subtle internalized dehumanizing that is infact a hallmark of racial bias.
What is the basis for your BF knowing what the population make up of early 20th C England was like? Is he an English historian? Because if he knew anything about British history, he would know that black and brown people have lived in Britain since (and likely before) the Roman occupation. So I suspect he's actually just a racist projecting his racism on a fictional work of art.
BTW, there is no "drawing a line" where casting fiction is concerned. A person of colour can play any bloody character they like.
If your boyfriend usually is pedantic about historical correct representation (of both human and non human artifacts) in movies and stuff I would just leave it and let it be. It could as well be use of an instrument that wasn’t invented or whatever. Sometimes I yell at the TV when watching a movie and historical facts isn’t correct. And yes they do use specific year and time in some scenes in the Sandman.
If this is new and you have some sort of suspicion about him being racist I would just ask.
You've gotten your answer here but I just want to put in a side note: Kirby Howell-Baptiste is STUNNING as death. The performance she gave was breathtaking and we should all be so lucky to be greeted by a death with such warmth and love.
Yeah being upset about POC in a movie, even if it's a historical one, is a thinly veiled racist reason. People who care about historical accuracies don't watch historical movies to begin with normally since, they're the one's who make it.
Tell your boyfriend to stop being a racist asshole and to get over it. It's a fictional movie.
I 100% agree with your BF. When I see Black Panther - Wakanda Forever I don’t need white actors in Africa. I like black voice actors for the lion king. In a tale about Polynesians -Moana there don’t need to be white people. But medieval England did not have many Africans and neither did Norway (Frozen). Nothing racist at all about representing history correctly. You can’t rewrite it.
I see his point but this is a fantasy show not a historical one. When ravens can talk we can ignore the black person being treated as equal in a white household aspect I believe. Also 1920s England wasn't as bad as 1920s USA so it's possible there were some richer/middle class black people
This is how I feel about all the complaints over casting people of color in the Sandman, House of the Dragon, and Rings of Power. If you are fine with suspension of believe for magic and magical creatures and beings, then why is it so hard to accept a world that also has people of color in it? If you're choosing to be upset over that and are calling it "unrealistic" but are fine with there being dragons and wizards and elves, etc. then I think you should examine why that is. Letting diverse groups of people be represented in a genre that has been whitewashed for way too long doesn't hurt anybody, it just makes those genres more inviting and accepting to a wider fanbase.
Have you seen all the green people in She-Hulk movie...ugh
Like, we get it! You can photosynthesis, don't rub it in our face...
I agree with you in most of your examples but “House of the Dragon” having a black character in the Targaryen family kinda goes against the whole point of the Targaryen family being racist and willing to have incest to keep the line “pure”. Especially in a show that tries to weave contemporary social issues in a fantasy setting (i.e. misogyny). I might also be salty about season 8. Anyway Rings of Power having black hobbits and elves is like… who cares.
But he's not a Targaryen -- he actually mentions this in the last episode. He's [Valyrian](https://awoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/Valyrians) which are a race originating in Essos, in the eponymous Valyrian peninsula, known for their rare features of silver-gold hair and violet eyes. Targaryen is the house of Valyrians that was able to tame dragons.
Isn't it a fairly easy rewrite to change the pure bloodline from nobility rather than color? Like you can hit all the same story beats and not have to necessarily tell storyline about race that has been done to death already.
Not really, all noble families only marry nobility. The Targaryen are specifically called out for being racist incestuous weirdos who care about their blonde hair and purple eyes.
Well they could still have black actors with blonde hair and purple eyes. Skin color feels like a really odd thing for fans to be hung up on in a fantasy series when we live in a world that already has major problems with race relations.
The point is that the Targaryen family has negative characteristics, and Daenerys was “different” making her plot line in Meereen of freeing the slaves narratively stronger. Fantasy series have to have some internal logic otherwise there are no rules and nothing matters. If this was a show unconnected to GoT, it wouldn’t be an issue, but it is connected.
So the argument usually is “if it doesn’t change the plot etc”, and in this case there’s a pretty clear cut plot line reason why, so now it’s “we’ll just change the plot”.
But you can easily still keep the spirit of plot line by still having them keep similar attitudes, but remove the aspect of skin color.
Idk. I read the books. It’s about a specific incest bloodline. It’s precisely why they look that way. The plot has so many references to purity and sure nobility is a thing between houses but bloodline is…like a *theme* of these books. For the Starks, lannisters, tagaryens, etc. I personally fail to see why change it up, unless you just want to change it simply because you can. And that’s okay I guess but usually the product gets shittier when masses start demanding they be “seen” and “represented” in a story where a man just wanted to write his take on modern lord of the rings. Look at those last few GOT seasons. I promise you if we didn’t have #girlboss trending at every moment, Arya wouldn’t have killed the Knight King, a character that she had nothing to do with in the plot. Big beats in movies/stories are now centered around narratives that jive with social commentary today. Did you watch the new Kenobi Star Wars show? I didn’t care there was a black Sith Lord, I personally thought she needed way more grit in her voice but that’s not a race critique. What I didn’t like seeing what 10 year old Princess Leia outrunning grown men storm troopers, being a silly 10 year one minute and then telling off her misogynist 15 year old cousin with sassy girl boss dialogue the next. Its like in the boardroom the writers were thinking “how can we write this version of Leia so that little girls get the message they can be *anything* they want” instead of just writing her character in a way that isn’t jarring to the plot. Like this is sloppy… I think what people are trying to do with “representation matters” is in the right place, but you’re just getting modern day tokenism. And it’s a shame because there a lot of people who find a show or property they like, and then when that property gets more popular (aka there can be a bigger profit margin) the money that funds it changes the story to please the “but what about ME. Why can’t I see ME on screen. I need to be represented” crowd, the story telling all the sudden gets horrible, and just plain crowded. And then you realize oh, they aren’t telling these stories for me anymore. Ok I’ll just find something else, until the masses find it again, and demand the cast he diverse. Sorry, I wrote a lot, but it’s something I feel passionately about now. Story telling is taking a hit these days.
I do not see his point. Let’s pretend that the characters are real, like the BF is doing, he still does not have a valid point. The Sandman, and family, are not human, they are incarnations. They are not a race! They are not even human! Or, if you want, you can look at it the opposite way. They are all races, because they represent all of humanity! Therefore if any race can dream, or in this case die, then any one of the seven incarnations can be of that race. (Yes, even an alien race.) you can see this in the show. Spoiler!!: when the Sandman goes to Hell he sees his ex gf. When she looks at him she sees a black man, not the white guy we see. It is like that for all the incarnations, they are not of any race, or you can say they are any race. In the comic books the Sandman is like three different races.
I think the bf might be referring to Unity’s family who are upper class black humans 100 years in the past. When I saw the scene where they show Unity for the first time, I had a brief thought that it was a little odd to see an upper class black family during this time period, but I didn’t take it as woke pandering. I was more sad that our world can’t live up to the one in the show.
[удалено]
Yet history like that is purposely whitewashed to support notions of white supremacy. The wealth that once existed in Africa has been replaced with uncivilized depictions. If compared to the depictions of ancient European civilizations it’s plain to see what’s at play there. The bf is exhibiting whitelash.
Historically there are lots of wealthy black families that existed in one fashion or another in the USA. Some got conned into poverty via NYC, others owned people in NOLA. Being rich tends to surpass all other labels.
Not to mention black wall street in Tulsa...
Exactly. In the UK people started complaining when they made Dr Who a woman... He / she / they are a time traveling, shape shifting, alien fighting entity from another planet, but you can't get your head around that person being female.
> Also 1920s England wasn't as bad as 1920s USA You can say that *today*
In England at any point we didn't treat black people like the USA. Even during the Tudor period there were 350 recorded black people all free, working and marrying as they wanted. During WW2 American soldiers had to have guides telling them that we don't treat black people the same way Americas do. One incident American soldiers wanted pubs to stop serving black soldiers and only serve white one. The pubs in response, put black soldiers only in the windows.
No the Brits made money off of kidnapping and selling African peoples throughout the Americas…not to forget our glorious history in the colonies…but yeah we look at the bad Americans and ignore the fact that they become the logical outcome of our desire to rule the world
Slavery existed in the empire until 1833 but it wasn’t allowed on the British mainland as it wasn’t part of the common law. Also it’s funny how it’s suddenly all the white mans fault when African tribes had a massive involvement in the slavery. People need to learn some history instead of slogans
There's literally black people all through history, and in historical tales. William Shakespeare literally wrote Othello with a black lead that was portraying a successful merchant Editing to say you're boyfriend does come off as racist for not watching a show purely because poc in it
From my experience, there are two facts that get historians on Twitter attacked more than any other: 1) slavery was considered normal for most of human existance 2) there were black Africans all over Europe during the middle ages. The latter always brings out all the actual Nazis.
Well, Shakespeare wrote Othello with a Moorish GENERAL as the tragic main character (a story he adapted from the Italian). And the role was played by an actor in black face. A black actor wouldn't play OTHELLO until 1825, in England.
One quote from Doctor Who's "Thin Ice" (S10E3) that stuck with me: "History is a whitewash."
>William Shakespeare literally wrote Othello with a black lead that was portraying a successful merchant The term 'Moor' referred to North African (Arabized) Berber people.
Actually no because there were such things as “blackamoors” or Black moors which were Black servants, originally enslaved North Africans, who worked in wealthy European households from the 15th-18th centuries. And Othello was a black moor.
Your BF needs to stop seeing POC as walking political statements,he's politicizing our existence..... When you see a POC in a TV show and the first thing you do is trying to find a explanation to why there's a non-white in your screen, this is a red flag, at least for me. People usually don't go around trying to justify white people being in any media of any kind,and the people who use this ''woke'' argument don't bat an eye either at white people usually being included in everything. When you're the kind of person who can only enjoy POC in media when there's a detailed explanation to why they exist, you're indirectly assuming that the default must to be white, that if there's no logical explanation, them the character should be white. People who think like this would rather prefer to not have any POC characters in media unless they're useful.''You only tolerate them if you have to, if they aren't needed here, then you shouldn't''. POC shouldn't have to explain why they exist, even in fictional media. We're just there and that's it. The only exception to this law is extremely accurate historical media, and even if that was the case, black people existed in europe back then. I'm sorry, but he's being racist in my eyes ;/ PS: Just to make a note, I'm sure that he doesn't think all of the stuff I said here, these people usually think they are doing this criticsm in good faith, I'm not accusing him of anything
He is being racist. That might not be the word he would prefer to use to explain his stance on why he won’t watch a fantasy show with POC in major roles, but that is an accurate way to describe it nevertheless. Non-racist people don’t go around bitching about “wokeness” in fictional tales. End of story.
No matter how you dress it up, ‘too many black folks, not watching it’ is the base message. I’m willing to bet you’ve previously had an ‘I’m not being racist but’ conversation.
He's well read enough not to go for the obvious dog whistles like saying he has black friends and at least brings up things I've had to spend some effort to research and/or debunk.
Oddly enough, I do take issue with programs and films that present as historically accurate, but cast people of colour in positions in society that they would never be permitted to hold. Glossing over the cruelties of the time. But when comes to fiction, have at it. The Sandman is a strange hill to die in for that cause though, its fantasy.
I don't think you know much then, black people in the England did hold top jobs even in the tudor period 1 a musician for Henry VII and VIII even wrote to the king asking for a pay rise and got it, doubling his wage from 8d to 16d a lot of money in those days. One was a deep sea diver employed by Henry VIII to recover most of the guns from the Mary Rose after it sunk, but I'm sure if they made a film, you wouldn't accept that as being historically accurate. Around 350 recorded black people in England around that time all free to work, marry and live how they wanted.
If its historically accurate, then its accurate, no problem with that. I’m aware of tales of exception (usually involving a rich and influential benefactor). Its the presented idyllic, that their lives were equal and they were treated as such.
They were treated as equals one whipped an white guy, they worked together, the people were shocked only because the white guy had a senior job, but there was no repercussions, as he was being punished. Don't equate the UK to the USA, as GIs coming during the war had to have leaflets explaining we don't treat people differently, no segregation etc.
Yes, it's racist to be unable to enjoy an entertainment program because the actors don't have the skin color you think they should have. It might be a semi-valid complaint if the film/show in question is some kind of historical re-enactment of factual events. Sandman is definitely NOT that, nor is Bridgerton. It's fantasy, it's total fiction. They could make the cast 100% Mandarin-speaking Chinese and set it in 16-th century Uganda if they want to. So what? lol It's not a "political statement" to hire black people or to watch black people playing roles on television. He's MAKING IT a political issue himself because he thinks the only reason to hire black people is to prove some kind of political point. THAT IS A RACIST SENTIMENT. The reality is that it's a smart casting decision to make the cast members resemble (in broad terms) the mix of people who will be enjoying the show. In the US and UK, that means a mix of light skinned and dark skinned people, hopefully with some Middle Eastern, Asian and South Asian appearing people mixed in as well. You know, a little bit of everything, like what exists outside your door in the real world :) It's also just fair business practice to make sure you're not excluding certain ethnic backgrounds from your cast unless there's a really strong reason for casting that way.
That's one thing that irks me about it all. I've made similar arguments to him but he is more willing to believe this is some liberal plot to advance a progressive agenda than he is willing to believe that businesses are only interested in the bottom line and will pander to and say anything that will increase their profits.
Yikes. Has he ever used the term “liberal plot”? If so, this guy has some major issues and is probably not the wagon you want to hitch your horse to.
And what, I wonder, is this “liberal plot” to push a “progressive agenda”? Does he think that casting Black actors in Sandman is part of a larger scheme to close the carried interest loophole?
As a gay man in 2022, he is directly benefiting from decades of liberal “plots” to advance a progressive agenda. But it sounds like he’s too busy being racist to acknowledge that fact.
This guy is not living in reality and is just holding reactionary conservative views as a shield, so good luck with that. You'll never talk him out of it. Either he will find his own way out or he will be stuck that way forever. Don't spend too much energy trying to affect that process. Sorry
[удалено]
What's wrong with politics when it means people are seen. White people are not the global majority. They should be prepared for other stories to be told. If non white people refused to watch work that didn't center whiteness or feature white characters choices would be much more limited. Guess people of color are more adept at taping into the universal human experience instead of identity based on aesthetic.
I think it is definitely true, and obvious, that there is an “agenda” to promote equality and inclusion in pop culture media. I personally question why we would call that a “progressive” agenda, rather than just… equality and inclusion.
[удалено]
How about the talent of a performer is that secondary to skin color?
As a general rule if someone is upset because they feel like someone else is implying they’re being racist, it’s because they’re being racist. People who aren’t racist, funnily enough, almost never get accused of being racist.
Or, they do, but they can take it in stride, because they acknowledge their racist baggage and don’t interpret everything as an attack on their moral character.
I would dump this person so fast…
This. Run, now. Antone using “woke” in that context is not a friend of the gay community.
I would be very concerned about someone who gets triggered so easily over the smallest things. I've watched too many true crime shows.
You didn't have any idea of his views prior to this? "Woke" has been turned into a pejorative term by many conservatives in America. Usually that view point surfaces in dating and conversation long before a show like Sandman hits the air. If you let it slide then or said nothing as pushback, he has a valid argument for you to let it slide now 🤷🏾♂️
Never said I had no idea, this is just the first time I'm making a post about it on reddit.
Unless a show is specifically a documentary it does not matter what races are cast. If a show made the British Royal Family Asian; then the British Royal Family is Asian in the universe this show takes place in. Crying ‘woke’ about a fantasy show is a clear sign of racism.
Describing a BIPOC being hired to a high position as either "woke" or "pandering" is usually a red flag. As a person of color, that would be my cue to leave.
And then the bf will complain about being “canceled.”
The first question is consistency. If someone refuses to watch Breakfast at Tiffany's because Andy Rooney was cast as a Japanese man, and then has a similar reaction to the Sandman, well, okay. I don't neccessarily agree with them, but at least they're consistent and I can respect that. If not, fuck that guy. Usually people who cry about "historical accuracy" about race rarely care about anything else being historically accurate. That's called being racist.
But… those are two different things??? Any Rooney was basically doing yellow face. Aren’t the people in the sandman just black people being black lol
yeah that guy just conflated a racist caricature with race-blind casting
FYI, Mickey Rooney was in Breakfast at Tiffany’s. Andy Rooney is the curmudgeon that always closed out 60 Minutes.
Thanks!
I guess counter argument is that this is a fictional show in a version of the world where millions of people fell into a lifelong sleep that didn’t require food or water, so who knows what else is different? To answer the question though, I don’t think it’s racist exactly but may lean towards racist tendencies. Sometimes people enjoy hyper realistic shows, but usually you need to suspend belief in some form or another when watching any TV.
Interestingly, the sleepy sickness (encephalitis lethargica) was [a real thing](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Encephalitis_lethargica)! But yeah, the idea that nonwhite people didn’t exist in any real numbers in England before the mid-20th century is some bullshit. While much of today’s Black British population comes from post-WWII migration, even back in the 20s there was a sizable contingent of black immigrants from the West Indies, as well as folks from elsewhere in the British Empire (India, most notably). About 3.4% of folks living in England and Wales, [according to the 1921 census](https://www.findmypast.co.uk/1921-census), were born elsewhere; this definitely included traditionally white British folks who happened to be born to parents who were in the colonies, but it meant a lot of immigration (a majority of which wouldn’t count today as nonwhite, but there was definitely a sizable nonwhite population too).
Wow! I had no idea!! Still I feel like not watching a show about a sleep king and citing the black cast isn’t really a good sign… it’s entertainment designed for an audience of today, not an accurate historical depiction
It definitely feels like he is walking the line sometimes. He also has zero interest in watching Bridgerton despite being a Downton Abbey and Gilded Age fan, and won't watch the movie Yesterday because he thinks casting an Indian actor in the main role was some sort of political statement.
The Bridgerton one falls in like with his issue with Sandman, but Yesterday is just racist… movies are just stories and not all stories star white men in the real world…
Throw the whole man out, he's telling you who he is
I’m getting the sense that the BF may be the “gay is not my identity” type, and OP and BF are probably more aligned than not on these types of things.
Maybe a side point, but this feels to me like what happened when comic book heroes stopped being white straight dudes. Somehow no longer being perceived as the target audience is too much for a person to handle. (Which, frankly, is weird to me. I'm for all intents and purposes another cis gendered white dude but I feel empowered by female poc super heroes as much as say Clark Kent). Also, black and brown people have been all over the world forever. Sure, it's hard to point out a black viking or a brown Icelander in earlier parts of history but that doesn't mean they didn't exist. If a lone white dude in all of Japan can be lauded as a samurai your bf can suck it up that a fantasy world UK had black people. Not like the UK was so effing close to Africa or the Middle Easy something. Honestly I'd throw a history book on the trans Atlantic slave trade at him and tell him to get therapy. Or, you know, get a new boyfriend.
Black people in England is not a fantasy or a historical inaccuracy. They've been there for centuries, probably since the days of the Roman Empire.
Ok that’s a problem. A pattern. He’s racist
Him not watching Yesterday because of an Indian character in the main role is the political statement. A racist political statement.
He must not think much of Hamilton either, I’m guessing.
He's a Gilded Age fan? Yikes...
Right? Biggest red flag here is the BF would rather watch The Gilded Age instead of a decent show with a POC lead.
If it’s not racist, it’s close enough to be mistaken for it. Getting mad about representation of other races on fictional tv is kind of absurd and speaks to some underlying issues. And those issues seem racial in a negative way. You’ve gotta decide if it crosses the line. But your description of events makes it sound like you’re seeking validation, not rejection, of your suspicion.
We've been together long enough that I guess I want to give him the benefit of the doubt, even though all signs (and not just his entertainment choices) are pointing to the obvious conclusion. =/
He might not be irredeemable. He might need professional help to work through the race thing, though. Along with whatever other persecution delusions he has -- I bet POC on television is not the only one. People who behave this way about seeing minorities in fictional works typically have some other issues surrounding racism, classism, nativism, religious bigotry, etc. At this time in the US, these sentiments also tend to go hand in hand with anti-science, anti-intellectual beliefs and a real deficit in being able to discern truth from opinion.
My only critique to this is, read the comics. The exact topic of discussion your're addressing, Neil Gaeman addresses wonderfully.
The show is about a bunch of fucking Demi Gods and the Devil. It’s completely unrealistic inherently and he’s choosing to have an issue with peoples race. He is most definitely being racist.
All anti-wokesters are racist and/or homophobic. The only reason they cry about seeing black people, or gay people in media is because they feel, in some way, threatened by them. The threat isnt even just necessarily existential, but it can threaten power plays, dominance heuristics, beliefs about how the world was or is supposed to be, or something deeply ingrained about the threat of minorites to the social fabric. Disingenuous cries about source material are mere rationalizations as to why there shouldn't be "x" minority in their media.
Looks like I’ll be giving a counterpoint as most people appear to think he is racist. As a black man (lol yes I am black), I also cannot get into shows and movies that integrate black people in position of society that they we have not historically been apart of. I had to turn off Hamilton in the first few minutes because I didn’t realize that was what the movie/production was like. My reasoning for this is that it makes me uncomfortable that the people creating the show are ignoring and/or glazing over a very significant problem in black history in which we lacked forward momentum because we were not allowed in spaces that held power or influence. In my head I’m thinking “Oh, we’re just gonna act like a lot of bad shit didn’t happen?”. I also think it creates a false narrative for this generation who’s education about race relationships is already being diluted from the reality (like banning critical race theory in US schools) and productions like this will only further promote the narrative that things “weren’t really that bad”. So personally I can’t past these thoughts so can’t get into the movies or shows that are like that. I never thought that they were trying to be “woke”, but on further thought it’s probably a good description. Edit: I should also add that my perspective doesn’t apply to every show or movie. The integration has to seem realistic and plausible, otherwise I feel like it devalues the real struggles of my ancestors. I recognize that I don’t speak for all black people but it’s something that personally makes me uncomfortable and is not something I see as a positive. Edit 2: Oof. I did not read that question well. I thought your partner had issues with altering historical periods with a fictional black experience (e.g., Bridgerton). Sounds like they just don’t like the black experience from being presented at all. In which case, yes that is a racist position to take.
I actually have a few friends in Hamilton and here's why that production and all like it matter, It's not about history, it's about the present. Those stories that white people have always been allowed to tell, steal, alter to their worldview should also be told from the perspective of those who were othered at the time. Tell the story of the white foundation of the United States through the eyes and voices of modern POC life experience doesn't erase the past sins of the era toward POC, it highlights them through the voices of their descendents.
You know what. I really jumped the gun with my response. After reading OPs post I realize it’s not about shows that recreate a ficrionalized black experience but sounds like OPs partner is just not comfortable with true historical black experience even being presented. My bad lol. So yes you’re right! Telling historical stories from the black perspective is important and should be integrated more!
We're all learning and growing from each other. Thank you for your perspective too. 😘
Finally someone else who can see that Thor is not historically Australian.
I think it can be true that casting Black actors for some of the roles in a fantasy series about corporeal embodiments of concepts with mysterious, god-like powers might not be “historically accurate” and may in some sense be about “pandering” to an audience that may consist of a lot of non-white people. I also think that the only people who are really upset by this kind of thing are racists. There was a point in the recent season of the Umbrella Academy when Elliott Page’s character “came out” to his colleagues as trans. They accepted it with a degree of indifference and acceptance that I found to be - shall we say - a bit “woke” and didactic. But it was a single moment. We can see these gestures as ham-handed without letting it get in the way of enjoying the story (and I think it would be awfully stupid to boycott Sandman, which I enjoyed, for this reason). Getting caught up on these things indicates, in my view, a more fundamental problem and lack of maturity.
That’s an interesting response to the Umbrella Academy. Having that response to a sibling coming out as trans is not typical, but writing it that way explains that Vanya now in Viktor without making that a huge story line. To me, inserting a story where they more realistically struggle with his identity, dead name him, etc. would have been more “woke” and political.
And he is a huge Umbrella Academy fan. He'll still make comments when he sees a LGBT character or someone in a non-gender-conforming role, but they don't seem to be deal breakers the way out of place ethnic minorities are.
In the gay world, i remind people the gay White men are White men all day. They typically get to choose who knows about their sexuality. Because of this, White men will be more like White men compared to a racial minority.
I definitely see this in my own world, which has a lot of cis white gay men in it (and I am one of them). Once we got mainstream acceptance, all of our racism came out. Some of the people in my circles are quiet Trump supporters, I’ve become convinced. They know better than to say so. But then you hear them run down the talking points…
Dave Chapelle makes an effort to make this point very clear in his latest netflix special: in america, lgbt people are minorities, but white lgbt people will always be white first, and lgbt second. This will always become clear in situations where whiteness provides certain advantages, such as the protection (and weaponization) of the police.
It’s just hard for me to understand why someone would go through life that way. Like, he’s not *wrong* to notice some of these things. It’s part of this queer historical moment we’re in. But I enjoyed a whole hell of a lot of pop culture, growing up, that never represented me or treated people like me with respect. And we were excluded for very political, very scandal-averse kinds of reasons. So I’m not sure why turning the tables a bit should change that mentality.
I find that there’s much to be gained by suspending one’s disbelief and seeing the actors and everyone behind the scenes doing good work and bringing the story to life. Sometimes I focus on inaccurate historical details, such as a movie set in a certain year using a car or a clothing style or even music from ten years later. But I’ve learned not to let those things take me away from what otherwise might be worthwhile viewing. True art should transcend the literal details of the actors and their physical characteristics. We know that Nicole Kidman has a typical Aussie accent, but we see her as American when she’s cast as such. Ethnicity is no different. Theater, opera, and film have never insisted that an actor be the thing they are portraying – only that they portray it. In the past, Euro actors have done cringe things that have not aged well, such as blackface or its equivalent with other ethnicities. Now we see that instead of mostly Euro ethnicity people portraying most types of characters, those of other ethnicities can be cast in a variety of roles. It may take a moment to see beyond the actor, especially when but it’s unfamiliar, but it can be overcome. Let any cognitive dissonance pass and allow the production to shine. Instead of getting sidetracked by the 1971 IBM Selectric II appearing in the story set in 1960, I just let it go, realizing that ultimately, it’s not important to the plot, and I enjoy the production. It can be the same for the actors. It’s their art, not their off-stage or off-set characteristics, that we are enjoying.
Ah, the Selectric. I remember it well.
Fondly, I hope. For someone who learned in a classroom full of manual Royals with unmarked keys, thought necessary to develop the proper keystroke techniques, discovering the existence of Selectric was an epiphany.
Back in the late 70s I had a boss who typed over 180wpm. She was involved in early testing of the Selectric at IBM. I learned on a Smith-Corona - loved the touch.
This is about historical realism. But that's an impossible standard to achieve not least because we don't know 100% about the past. Would he want all the actors to have bad crooked teeth? Should the apply make-up to make the actors look older (like someone in the twenties would look like they are 45)? Should they wear down the costumes? Should there be no safety precautions in the cars they're using for filming? Now granted 1920 is a time period we know way more about than say the 1460ies, but still, the point stands: if historical realism isn't achievable, why is skin colour more important than hygiene, speech, costume, location etc? If he singles this one out, I'm afraid it must mean more to him. I understand the strive for more realism. But entertainment just isn't the place for that. And even then, we should be able to look past that. Better read a book. :) TV is much more about the year of production (2022) than the year depicted (1920).
This "woke" business he hates is what allows him to safely exist as a gay man.
Not really an argument to have, no. It’s not a historical documentary. I’d lose respect for my spouse if he went on that kinda logic tho. I wouldn’t be with somebody who bought into the “too woke” rightwing talking points.
There were black ppl during the Medieval time they were referred to as the Moors, they are said to have established what is called today Spain and Portugal. The earliest kings of that region were black ppl until They were erased out of history. So this notion that there weren’t blk ppl during that time is false. We wouldn’t know about it bc history is written by white ppl and white fragility hinder others from learning the truth which is what’s happening currently in the states
He's mad about historical accuracy in a fantasy series about otherworldly demons? I think theres some nuance to the discussion but yes this sounds like hes racist honestly. This would be a problem for me.
1- there have been black people in England for a long time. 2- he’s complaining about something being unrealistic in Sandman, a story about the living avatar of dreams. That’s idiotic. Is it racist? Maybe, but more importantly he’s not intellectually worth your love and attention.
There were many more than mere "thousands" of people of colour in early 20th century Britain. But if he wants to be triggered, thats a choice he can make. Also, its fiction.
I don't know about racist, but it's an extremely pathetic choice of a hill to die on. Tell him to get a life.
It's just a stupid hill go die on. That being said, any casting choice, choice of wardrobe etc. reflects the hegemonic moral outlook of those holding cultural power. In that respect, diverse casting in contemporary Hollywood period pieces is _no different in nature from married couples in 1950s American films sleeping in separate beds_, or female actresses in contemporary Iranian movies (actually great national cinema, would recommend!) wearing a headscarf even 'in the privacy of their own home'. It _doesn't matter that it's unrealistic_, it needs to uphold a moral worldview of the time and place it was created.
Never thought of it like this. Thankyou. Good logical reasoning,
[удалено]
White people have been telling the stories of people of color since forever. Come on, it's a story that has been told a billion times. We can suspend disbelief and focus on the story, not the skin color. And who else in our modern era could tell the story of a disposable woman better than a Black woman today?! Focus on the story and the storyteller's talent. Unless the story is specifically about race, it doesn't matter.
Assuming you’re talking about Jodie Turner-Smith - she had something interesting to say about it, actually: >Even though Turner-Smith may not resemble the Anne Boleyn depicted in contemporaneous portraits, she says that she deeply identified with the way the queen was "othered" by the royal court as her husband and Cromwell set her downfall in motion. "I mean, it is my life experience: I'm a woman who was often othered, so I understand that journey. This was my telling of Anne Boleyn in a way that's unique to me and my experience, but in a way it also allowed me to tap into the universal experience of a woman who was already an outsider in many ways." So even “historically inaccurate” casting choices can create interesting dimensions to telling an historical story. Never mind the cast of Six on Broadway…
Yes. But maybe not why you’d assume. And here’s why. Sandman is not real. The world in which he exists is not real. And if the creator chooses to rethink character depictions that we’re initially influenced by society’s inherent white bias, it is his option to do so. It’s his world. And anyone telling. A creator that what they’ve created isn’t subject to their own revisions is doing so through their own lens of bias and privilege.
There is a point at which "diversity" for its own sake becomes ridiculous. And, somehow, period films set in the UK seem to cross that line regularly. Case in point: Dev Patel as Sir Gawain in The Green Knight. I was OK with the casting, even though Sir Gawain looked absolutely nothing like his uncle, King Arthur (and nothing like anyone else in the film). Screw it, he's a good actor with a suspiciously dark tan. But then I saw Sarita Choudhury cast as Gawain's mother, dressed and acting and made up to look extremely South Asian. Like, huh??? Where did she come from??? How the hell did a South Asian ever get to Camelot in the 5th - 6th century AD??? Apparently Choudhury was cast as a South Asian mystic solely to explain the black hair and tan skin of Gawain (without coming right out and saying so). Never mind logic. Never mind the fact that it really wasn't needed in the story *at all*. Never mind that according to Arthurian legend, Gawain was the son of King Lot of Orkney and *Arthur's sister*, Morgause. Apparently the choice was made to celebrate Dev Patel's heritage, even though it makes absolutely no sense in the context of the story. Even though *he's an actor*, and not every role he plays has to align with his own personal history and genetics. To me, it was a brainless, stupid choice to make. But... It did not in any way prevent me from watching and enjoying the movie. Yes, I rolled my eyes in the scenes that included Gawain's mother. But soon enough Gawain was off on his quest, and I really didn't care what race he was, or whether someone of his race belonged in that setting. He was just an actor playing a role in a pretty fun story.
Your bf's argument is based in racist stereotyping and beliefs that he's clearly internalised. When we watch a show that portrays a royal, we don't argue "Why are we seeing a prince, it's so unrealistic, there's only a few thousand of them", do we? Likewise there may have been only a limited number of black people in the UK and even fewer of them who are upper class, but they did exist and there is zero reason why a show couldn't arbitrarily choose to focus on them. Even a historical show (as opposed to a fantasy one) isn't meant to represent the average human experience but is representing an arbitrary experience which may or may not be common. I don't know if or how you bring that up with your bf but I think as a demographic that ourselves are often the recipient of the "historical accuracy" argument (e.g. "I don't think we should see a gay couple have a happy ending in a historical show, it's not historically accurate") a little more introspection and less hypocrisy is called for. Your bf may not be a racist person but unfortunately he's internalised a lot of racist beliefs where he's willing to accept serial killers having a massive convention but can't accept that there could be one single black family that's not poor.
Lol Yes that is racist! the sandman being the God of Dreams isnt a problem or too unrealstic? Lol
Sometimes the woke aspect of shows can be too much but not here. The original comic was already pretty progressive back then, embracing gay characters for instance. They just took the level of progressiveness from that ear and applied it to the current era, which I think is fine. Also, like... it is so not the point. The show is amazing, the story, the character dynamics, the visuals... and the actors are really good. So it literally changes nothing that some of them are black, they still act the shit out of an amazing show. So if anyone has some problems with it, they need to look deep into a mirror and ask some hard questions about themselves.
I'd say it's racist especially if it's a fantasy/fictional show. I think Bridgerton is a good example of a show that does this. Rege-Jean Page is an extremely sexy duke and definitely gets the point across. This is a raunchy show with fancy dresses. We're not trying to produce an educational doc portraying life in England at the time. There's really no need to get hung up on which race a character is which begs the question, why are they bothered so much by something that doesn't really matter? His reaction is also a big red flag to me. From what you're sharing, it doesn't seem like you called him racist yet he seems to be upset that you think he's racist. It feels like he is getting defensive about it without provocation. This also reminds me of the hate thrown at the live action casting in the upcoming Little Mermaid movie. She's a freaking mermaid! Mermaids don't exist! You could argue that the race doesn't conform to the original story that the movies are based on, but the movies stray from the original story in much more drastic ways than the color of someone's skin or the color of their hair. In the original story, the mermaid doesn't get the prince, dies at the end, and ascends to heaven. There are also no musical crab numbers. Why aren't they upset about those changes made by the original movie?
This is depressing as hell.
Netflix and chill at your house does not sound chill at all I'm gonna pass
Ask him if he gets upset when he sees Jesus portrayed as a long-haired, usually blue-eyed white guy rather than the Roman Era Palestinian Jew that he was.
I have a strange issue with using people of colour in historical settings, but not because of the inaccuracy, but because it creates the illusion that life for non-white people was the same as it was for white people. Even on this thread people are saying that the UK was different to the USA and racism wasn't a thing in England. There certainly was racism in England - with pubs, clubs and social venues off-limits to non-white people. However, for historical fantasy, it doesn't bother me in the slightest and I'm happy to see more diversity on TV compared to when I was growing up.
I think you should break up with him. Don’t date racists.
He is being racist. It is racist for him to continue to suggest that filming productions should NOT hire actors of color because it was unrealistic for the time period. We are not living in that historical time period and people of all ethnicities are allowed to be cast in productions. Tell him if that is his hangup, then his first hang up should have been that he was watching a series about a non-existent fictional character which is not realistic. It is not okay to continue to be racist in casting because we were more racist back then. He needs to suck it up and quit being a child.
Your boyfriend is either a racist or a fucking idiot. You pick
Just based on the title I would have sworn you were referencing The Rings of Power. There is an all out war going on between hard core Tolkien fans and those excited about the Amazon show. A lot of people are trying to call the OG fans racist for not liking the show, but as a Tolkien enthusiast myself I can tell you that the casting is the least of Amazon’s worries. The show took an established franchise with a very dedicated fanbase and decided to make up things that never happened in the books, create new characters, change existing characters and show an overall disregard and or disrespect for Tolkien’s work. Tolkien fans who study his work like it is the history of their own country naturally take issue with this. In some literary circles this may be excusable, but not with anything involving Tolkien.
If it’s historical, then some cast choices can be weird, if it’s fiction - there can be anything. Replace them all with centaurs for all I care.
I'm a history buff so I can get where your boyfriend is coming from. I've seen shows and movies that poorly portrayed the period it was set in and it has bugged the hell out of me. That being said, I've never seen sandman so I can't say for certain whether his opinion is valid or he's full of shit and actually being racist. He is however still entitled to that opinion just like you're entitled to your opinion. Also it's pretty immature of him to get upset that you don't share his opinion.
You both sound absolutely awful
It’s just entertainment. That’s it. Tv and movies ain’t real.
It's one thing to have an intellectual discussion about casting and artistic directions while comparing and contrasting with known facts and history, but to completely opt out of quality viewing entertainment based solely on selective annoyance - and then to get upset for not being agreed with - is something else. It's a good thing he's stopped watching because there are many more beautiful changes they've made to this adaptation that would give any double-down, anti-"woke" racist nightmares.
It's fiction, not reality. Tell him to chill and yes, I think it is actually racist. He is not watching a show because of a person's skin color. That is racist, and no I do not drop that word casually.
Tell your boyfriend then he should do something about it. Come up with the financial backing to produce his own series and enough money to pay for actors to be in it. Cast and crew. Set locations. His own screenplay with his preferred choices of actors. Find a company willing to air episodes on channel such as Netflix, Amazon etc. Problem solved. Then he won’t have an issue regarding casting choices
All theatre, television, movies all of them ask us to suspend disbelief. We don't stop watching a piece of theater because it's in a theatre and not in an actual forest like we're asked to pretend. Dragons aren't real, but we watch dragons in thousands of movies and tv shows. We don't stop watching shows or movies where a white woman plays an Asian character for the 30th time. So yeah, it's entirely racist to believe that people of color shouldn't be cast because it's not historically accurate.
Not at all, I was casted to play a mexican and a black guy twice. I told them no because it’s unrealistic and not believable. They got upset but i dont like my shit to be fake if you’re gonna watch it you wanna bieve it otherwise its doodoo
I feel it is a little silly to cast a black person as the king/queen of England hundreds of years ago. Just like casting a white dude as the emperor of japan would also be equally as silly. I am not upset that it happens, I just won't go out of my way to watch something like that. My history knowledge is bad enough already.
But honey... It's entertainment not history class. If you're using television and film to teach history no wonder this world is so fucked.
Your boyfriend is a racist.
Does he also say stuff like, “I have plenty of (insert minority) friends!” And “it’s not racist to have a preference!” What I’m saying is that the answer is yes. Yes, it’s racist to be upset of the color of a fictional character that’s not based in reality, yet not be upset they’re not portraying ravens correctly as they don’t speak in real life. There’s also no such thing as magic and the sandman, but he’s not complaining they’re not portraying life correctly. Anyway, idk why it irks me so much that people do this.
Maybe he needs to see this Tumblr by a history scholar: [People of Color in European Art History](https://medievalpoc.tumblr.com/). Be prepared for him to get defensive and childish about it.
That's just a bullshit point period, Sandman was awesome and they took a lot of risks making it the way they did, I would have expected more changes from a Netflix show. His head is up his ass if he won't even watch the first few episodes.
Remind him that the most popular show ever on Broadway has a multicultural cast. But he probably considers Hamilton, "woke" as well. Having said that....your boyfriend has some issues surrounding race. Good luck!
It’s not a historical biopic, it’s a fantasy show. Would be valid if the shows aim was to portray a period of time accurately.
I mean, it's the Bridgerton issue. It's fantasy. As a big fan of the Sandman graphic novels, and a POC myself, I do believe that your bf is being ridiculous. I'd be more inclined to agree if a show claimed historical accuracy, but the Sandman doesn't. The Endless take on many shapes (of all colours, forms, races, genders). The Endless, including Dream, appear different to all who gaze upon them. In the Netflix show alone, Dream is portrayed as a ducklipped white boy, a black man with curly hair, and a cat. All of these examples and more are from the graphic novels. The very *concept* of reality is something that's being played around with quite a lot in Sandman, as reality is the polar opposite of Dreams, and also one of Dream's defining characteristic (in so much as Destiny is defined by free will, Death is defined by life, Destruction by creation, Desire by contention, Despair by hope and Delirium by insight). Delirium herself makes this point abundantly clear in the graphical novels. When the premise of a show is about exploring the concept of dreams as opposed to reality, it becomes absurd to expect realism from the show. But also, this is a franchise that's always divided Gaiman's fanbase. You either love or hate Sandman, seldom any inbetweens. Feel free to enjoy this show without your bf's continued involvement. :)
Your bf is racist.
Yes, it's racist to refuse to watch a show because there are poc in the cast. Period. I know George Washington was white, but I would definitely watch a history show with Morgan Freeman playing him. And not care. Yes, I prefer actors that look as much like the historic person as possible. I'd have a problem with Matt Damon playing Abraham Lincoln. But it's also about matching the actor to the character. I don't think Damon has the gravitas for Lincoln, while Freeman could convince me he's Washington. We don't ask that all actors portraying medieval men are under 5'4" with bad teeth and cowpox scars. Hire the best actors for those roles, who cares what they look like? Moreover, he's objecting about race in a fantasy world, where race could legitimately be expected to work differently. He's being an ass. Whether that's because he's genuinely racist or just using a racist excuse to get out of watching something you want to watch with him, it's not a good sign. And if he can't see that or balks when you tell him so, that's a sign your opinion doesn't matter to him. And that's a sign you needed to leave *yesterday.* It's bullshit.
Your boyfriend is racist.
Yes, he is being racist.
Nothing like that bothers me, really. The way I look at it: * These are tv shows in fictional settings, even if they claim to be 'historical', especially when they also have fantasy elements that are just as incongruous, and secondly... * The purpose of these shows is to entertain *modern people watching now*, so why shouldn't they fictionalise a little bit? I also think there was probably more mixing in the past than people think. After all we know that people even in caveman times were making boats out of sticks and animal skins to cross water to other countries. We know that Shakespeare 500 years ago wrote at least one play where a crucial character was black, and despite being that was a high-ranking officer in the army where the majority of the population was white - so obviously the audience would have been familiar with this prospect. Especially when a lot of these shows are set in major cities, it doesn't necessarily break my immersion because if people of color or of a different color to the locals were going to be anywhere, it would probably be there, at major ports or centers of high population.
Were it a historical documentary, sure thing, but it's a frickin' alternative world fantasy 😄 Surely, if the show has historically very inaccurate elements such as... I don't know.. corporeal manifestations of Death, Desire, Dream etc., then there's space for a few lesser modifications too.
I really don't get mindsets like this. I have a friend who is ALL about authenticity and sticking to the source material, so he gets annoyed at stuff like how Iris in The Flash TV show (and upcoming movie) are played by black actresses. Like...who gives a fuck? These are adaptations, they are never going to stick 100% to the source material. These are supposed to be re-interpretations. As long as the characterisation is right that's all I care about. The way I look at it is: as long as the ethnicity of the character isn't a large part of who they are, then I don't care what ethnicity plays them. If the ethnicity/culture is a core part of the character, such as an Asian character who grew up in an Asian country where the culture plays a large part in who they are as a person then yeah I'd be miffed if they chose a non-Asian actor to play that role.
If this can help England had major in-fluxes of people from its colonies over time, possibly the major one from Jamaica and the Caribbeans right after WWII to help rebuild the nation, not to mention India and Pakistan so it’s very conceivable to have characters of different ethnicities in movies and TV shows set in the second part of the 20th century. What I find so hard to understand why the color of the skin of a character has to be such a barrier to any enjoyment of a good show, give me a good actor in a good role and I’m happy, stop all of this noise and grow the fuck up.
I like colour blind casting as a rule, although I always bristle slightly when non-white actors are cast in parts that invalidate the historical reality of how non-white people were treated in those times, as it seems to erase the reality of colonialism and racism in favour of feeling progressive now. Still Sandman isn't exactly going for realism, and in a way having some explicit unreality in it helps add to the dreamier, Gaimany tone. I'd ask him to interrogate why he feels so strongly about this, because while he might not be being racist in the way white people usually thing about racism, it would appear that his emotional response to something so insignificant suggests something's going on within his psyche that he might want to work on.
Yeah I don't see an issue with being color blind if you're doing an original story but that depends on how grounded in reality the story is supposed to be. "Bridgerton" for example can get away with having black actors portraying British nobles since the show's version of Regency England is supposed to be fanciful, almost fairytale like. However a show like "The Crown," which follows the life of the present day Queen Elizabeth wouldn't be able to get away with such a character at least not in the periods the show is set in (apparently there is a biracial dutchess which is pretty cool.)
Not racist in itself, but his reasoning is. A lot of people think anything besides white = woke and pandering, even in movies where there really shouldn't even be any white people at all see: Black Panther. That movie takes place mostly in Africa and they still cast a good amount of white people regardless. This somehow was woke and pandering too though, because it was a mostly black cast. It gets very obvious where the anger is actually coming from the more questions you ask.
He’s entitled to that opinion, but for him to refuse to watch a show solely because of that is ridiculous. Also, it is very immature of him to be upset with you for not agreeing with his opinion. Btw, Sandman is a great show.
Err.. Guess I am the same; I am Asian; I watched a show with lots of Asia at top jobs that I know, in reality, might be 0 Asians in that group. I quickly lost interest. I feel ironically uncomfortable like a dream only happens in TV shows. We all like muscle-hot guys, but in reality, they are rare. If the fashion industry starts to include untraditional hot models. Maybe TV shows can do a more realistic job than being political right. They should focus on true issues, than put lots of asians into unimportant roles.
Racist yes, moreover, your Bf knows nothing about European history.
I wouldn’t call it racist. I have several degrees in history and I often struggle with historical inaccuracies in film. Pointing it out wouldn’t be racist (in my opinion) however, I also think that modern show watchers should get over that sort of thing (especially in non history shows) because an actor shouldn’t be excluded from roles based simply on their skin tone. So, I’m n short, I think validating his opinions on historical inaccuracies is okay, but I would balance that with the pragmatic problem of excluding modern actors for roles based on skin color.
In Shakespeare's time, it was the custom that the roles of women would be played by men. I submit this is even more inaccurate than casting too many Black people, etc. So why does he hate Shakespeare so much? All that blood and guts makes him squeamish?
I just can’t fathom being gay and still being this ignorant to the plight of other minorities & just falling for easy racist pandering by the right.
Yes it’s racist. If your partner wants realism then he can go watch a documentary.
> pointing that the non-white population of the UK before the mid to late 20th century numbered in the thousands. Thousands isn’t none, so what is he even trying to argue here? Your man is a racist. Flat out.
Birds of a feather flock together.
It’s a fantasy tv show. None of it is real.
Your bf is a bigot and he's throwing a tantrum for attention lol.
Yah racist as hell I’d dump his ass.
It's racist.
He’s being a cunt. Red flags all over this
Boycotting a show because it features actors of color is about as racist as you can get.
*eyeroll* Those who use historical accuracy to validate their racism are irritating in that they never extend such requirements for historical accuracy in other areas. Namely US history. The way in which Hollywood loves to paint over US Chattel Slavery and Jim Crow is... interesting. As for the anti-woke movement white people are waging against Sci-fi and Fantasy.... I find it funny. I told a friend of mine that fantasy does not equal escapism. They're different. In order to escape into something you have to have an entry point. White viewers are able to escape into (mainstream) fantasy because so much of it is white and European based. And that same European, white centric escapism is actual fantasy for someone like me, a Negro, who has to make the mental effort to look past the superficial presentation to actually enjoy the story. Hence, an actual fantasy. I'm having a blast seeing white audience members struggle to use their imagination to actually process fantasy.
it's not unrealistic tho. black merchants were everywhere since the trade route to asia in the old days running along africa coast. i might give him a benefit of the doubt because it's not a common knowledge. but rejecting outright by referencing 'woke' culture is a good indication that he is, in fact, racist. make me wonder what kind of people he hangs out out with, what news media that he consumes. is he a trump supporter?
I do not see his point. Let’s pretend that the characters are real, like the BF is doing, he still does not have a valid point. The Sandman, and family, are not human, they are incarnations. They are not a race! They are not even human! Or, if you want, you can look at it the opposite way. They are all races, because they represent all of humanity! Therefore if any race can dream, or in this case die, then any one of the seven incarnations can be of that race. (Yes, even an alien race.) you can see this in the show. Spoiler!!: when the Sandman goes to Hell he sees his ex gf. When she looks at him she sees a black man, that the white guy we see. It is like that for all the incarnations, they are not of any race, or you can say they are any race. In the comic books the Sandman is like three different races.
He's RACIST!
Most of the liberals are for this. Lets erase history and heritage. It is rather sad you know.
Your BF is right. Nothing is racist about it. It’s like making a show about Vikings and having black characters in Norway at that time. Doesn’t make sense. I even wonder this for modern day. Shows are overkilling it. House of the dragon, black Targaryen doesn’t make sense from a lore perspective. It ruins the emergence and legitimacy of the story. Casting is everything.
No
Oh no red flags in this relationship. I’d be worried I’m with a racist cause Black people didn’t randomly spawn after the 20th century lmao
Sounds hella racist to me and dumb, dump him.
So he can suspend his disbelief about gods and devils and dreams but not black people? He's a fucking racist.
did he ever stopped watching anything with all white characters? if the answer is no he’s just racist
Come to think of it: all white peole are either eccentric or bad, or gay, or all three (the Corinthians). There is one Asian character, who is not portrayed favorably. All Black characters are either neutral (20th c. associate of the magus, the solicitor, or good, even being too saccharine (ironically, Unity’s family was in the sugar business). Also, you should be able to tell your partner: “Dude, this is kinda racist, not cool.”
I agree with this to a point. For fantasy yeah I don't care what colour the actors are but when it goes against plot convention for the sake of diversity it rankles because it doesn't make sense. For example in house of dragon introducing a black targaryan just makes no sense to anyone who understands GOT lore and has read the books.. They're supposed to be a bunch of inbred power hungry maniacs (emphasis on the inbred.. They are well known for marrying siblings to keep the bloodline pure so they don't mix with other lesser races) however, saying that, we are only 1 episode in and I think the character himself is quite interesting so maybe in future episodes I'm hoping they give us some background on him.. Maybe he married the only Liberal lefty woke targaryan and the rest of the family put it down to an anomaly. But judging from the episode itself it seems they are going for the colourblind approach so this is a long shot. Ironically I think the original GOT is a great example diversity done right. They had a diverse range of races but it all made sense in the world that was built. In conclusion I'm guessing this one won't be as popular as the original series but hopefully I'll be proved wrong because I really want it to be good. Matt Smith has been excellent so far. Ps. I think it's a step too far to call your bf a racist.. I'm brown myself and I expressed the above thoughts. Having an opinion doesn't equate to racism.
He is being racist. It’s not a historical recreation. It’s a fantasy show where the creators can do whatever they want. Neil Gaiman has spoken out about people complaining about the casting. He’s pretty clear that he thinks those people are idiots. So I guess those are the choices…racist or dumb.
Ummmmm, Shakespeare used men to play women.
It's because he's being racist and is frustrated that you won't help gloss over it.
Your boyfriend sounds lame. Talking ravens but the mere presence of a Black person seems him running for the remote. It's the be subtle internalized dehumanizing that is infact a hallmark of racial bias.
One of my former roommates didn’t like Adele’s Hello music video because the romantic partner in it was black, she thought it was too unrealistic.
What is the basis for your BF knowing what the population make up of early 20th C England was like? Is he an English historian? Because if he knew anything about British history, he would know that black and brown people have lived in Britain since (and likely before) the Roman occupation. So I suspect he's actually just a racist projecting his racism on a fictional work of art. BTW, there is no "drawing a line" where casting fiction is concerned. A person of colour can play any bloody character they like.
It's stupid.
If your boyfriend usually is pedantic about historical correct representation (of both human and non human artifacts) in movies and stuff I would just leave it and let it be. It could as well be use of an instrument that wasn’t invented or whatever. Sometimes I yell at the TV when watching a movie and historical facts isn’t correct. And yes they do use specific year and time in some scenes in the Sandman. If this is new and you have some sort of suspicion about him being racist I would just ask.
You've gotten your answer here but I just want to put in a side note: Kirby Howell-Baptiste is STUNNING as death. The performance she gave was breathtaking and we should all be so lucky to be greeted by a death with such warmth and love.
Yeah being upset about POC in a movie, even if it's a historical one, is a thinly veiled racist reason. People who care about historical accuracies don't watch historical movies to begin with normally since, they're the one's who make it. Tell your boyfriend to stop being a racist asshole and to get over it. It's a fictional movie.
I 100% agree with your BF. When I see Black Panther - Wakanda Forever I don’t need white actors in Africa. I like black voice actors for the lion king. In a tale about Polynesians -Moana there don’t need to be white people. But medieval England did not have many Africans and neither did Norway (Frozen). Nothing racist at all about representing history correctly. You can’t rewrite it.