Fury over Black Hermione Granger
- Status
Neonchameleon
Legend
A billionaire playboy invented in the time of Jim Crow and who looks like a useless high society fop IMO could not have been black at the time he was written. And it would be an unusual casting choice to make him one even now unless you were translating a lot of the story.
On the other hand Miles Morales written in the 21st Century is IMO much more true to the initial character of Spider-Man than Peter Parker as portrayed by either Tobey McGuire or Andrew Garfield - and a big part of that is that Morales is non-white. Peter Parker was a very definite picked on outsider by virtue of the fact that he is a nerd (even in NYC). Putting on the Spider-Man mask amongst other things means that the wearer can be anyone and although Spider-Man has to deal with a mountain of crap he doesn't have to deal with the crap Peter does when not wearing the mask. When Andrew Garfield's Spider-Man in particular (Tobey McGuire's isn't so bad in a lot of ways) takes the mask off he's a decently respected middle class nerd on the verge of a scholarship (rather than the 2002 class field trip) in the age of the internet. Changing the race of the character and so how he fits into society actively makes him truer to the original themes of Spider-Man than keeping his characteristics the same and allowing society to move on.
There is a claim that the same works with Hermione Granger - that a black Hermione is in one world subject to racism and in the other no one cares that she's black, instead they call her a mudblood. The more things change...
Also Rowling is deliberately vague about character appearances and has gone on record saying that different readings of appearances are fine - she's deliberately vague so that people can identify with their surroundings. It takes, to most of the way through the fourth book (and the fourth book is a brick) before that line about white skin appears (before that all we know is that she's darker than Ron - and Ron is a redhead with freckles, which means extremely pale skin). But then it takes until the Half Blood Prince before Blaize Zabini is identified by either gender or skin colour (which blows up the theory that you can assume the default is white).
No problem! It was my fault for not being clearer.Okay, I THOUGHT that's what you meant, but I wasn't sure. Thanks for clarifying.
I think a Black Batman could be interesting. Aren't there always scheming politicians in Gotham ready & willing to label the Batman as a dangerous vigilante/menace for political gain? This becomes a lot more plausible//relevant/hamfisted-metaphoric-but-in-good-way if it's an example of dog-whistle politics.
Ryujin
Legend
Well here you are: Brampton Batman. He's a good Samaritan, in my town, who does appearances and daily patrols.
http://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/brampton-batman-shows-off-his-new-batmobile-1.1940242
Tonguez
A suffusion of yellow
Valador
First Post
In most situations, things like this annoy me. I hate when people play with the identities/race of well established characters. There's a few reasons.
It seems like companies are doing this more and more to fake a public image of being politically correct, or in the same vein, attempt to avoid being labeled "racist" due to a "lack of diversity."
A lot of people argue that minorities need heroes and characters that they can relate to, especially for children, to look up to as role models, etc. I fully support this. HOWEVER, I believe that companies should create new, original characters rather than reskin existing characters. It's lazy and insults peoples intelligence. "Here you go black people, we recycled an old white character for you. Enjoy." instead of "Here you go black people, we created this amazing hero just for you, with your greatest desires in mind."
It feels like affirmative action for fictional characters now. You can't make any kind of product without having at least one of every race present. Even in situations where it would make no sense to have a minority character, people still complain. For example most Disney movies based on stories that originated from Europe or the British Isles, etc. Brave is a good example. It would make very little sense to have a bunch of random minorities in that film, but someone somewhere is offended.
Taking a white character thats been around for decades and turning him into a homosexual or minority, simply because that's the PC thing to do now, is freaking stupid. No one has any respect for these creations and instead turn characters into tools for pandering to certain groups for profit.
So because someone gets butt-hurt and feels left out, I have to watch a character that I've possibly grown up with, get mutated into something so far from what I grew to love. But hey, it's okay as long as we're taking away from white people and not from someone else, otherwise that would be racist. Any time a white person would play a minority people would cry out "white washing", yet when the tables are flipped it's praised and anyone who thinks differently is called racist. Nice double standard.
This goes for gender as well. "Hey, we should try to steal money from women too, let's make ____ into a woman!"
It seems like companies are doing this more and more to fake a public image of being politically correct, or in the same vein, attempt to avoid being labeled "racist" due to a "lack of diversity."
A lot of people argue that minorities need heroes and characters that they can relate to, especially for children, to look up to as role models, etc. I fully support this. HOWEVER, I believe that companies should create new, original characters rather than reskin existing characters. It's lazy and insults peoples intelligence. "Here you go black people, we recycled an old white character for you. Enjoy." instead of "Here you go black people, we created this amazing hero just for you, with your greatest desires in mind."
It feels like affirmative action for fictional characters now. You can't make any kind of product without having at least one of every race present. Even in situations where it would make no sense to have a minority character, people still complain. For example most Disney movies based on stories that originated from Europe or the British Isles, etc. Brave is a good example. It would make very little sense to have a bunch of random minorities in that film, but someone somewhere is offended.
Taking a white character thats been around for decades and turning him into a homosexual or minority, simply because that's the PC thing to do now, is freaking stupid. No one has any respect for these creations and instead turn characters into tools for pandering to certain groups for profit.
So because someone gets butt-hurt and feels left out, I have to watch a character that I've possibly grown up with, get mutated into something so far from what I grew to love. But hey, it's okay as long as we're taking away from white people and not from someone else, otherwise that would be racist. Any time a white person would play a minority people would cry out "white washing", yet when the tables are flipped it's praised and anyone who thinks differently is called racist. Nice double standard.
This goes for gender as well. "Hey, we should try to steal money from women too, let's make ____ into a woman!"
Last edited:
Homicidal_Squirrel
Adventurer
That's interesting. Why do you feel that making Hermione, or any other character not-white is "taking away" from White people?
Maxperson
Morkus from Orkus
Probably because it's the prevailing sentiment of the country. Can you imagine the outcry if a group of white people called itself The Race? La Raza (The Race) is acceptable, though, because a minority is calling itself that. Or the outcry that would happen if a bunch of white people went around protesting that White Lives Matter. The shout of racism would echo so loudly the country would implode. Minorities get a pass on racism all over the place.
Kramodlog
Naked and living in a barrel
If you ignore that they are protesting their second class status, that statement is totally accurate.
Valador
First Post
Because if the shoe was on the other foot, that's exactly what people would say. Any time a white person does anything that can be perceived as non-white, they get slammed for "stealing my cultural identity." There was a case not too long ago where a white teenager was slammed because of the way she braided her hair. A lot of African American people were up in arms about how white people are stealing their culture away from them, etc. as if they owned a patent on freaking braids. It doesn't stop at hair. It spans into other areas as well, such as fashion, music, etc. However, if you take something established as white, then it is expected to be given freely to others without saying a word.
The truth of the matter is that reverse racism is a bigger problem than the perceived presence of racism from whites. I'm to be held accountable for the actions of some white people from hundreds of years ago, that I have no connection to. I'm supposed to feel some kind of "white guilt" because people claim they're still "second class" citizens. Tons of minorities immigrated here and have been hugely successful. My wifes family came here from Mexico and have been successful. We have a black president. We have people of color making a hell of a lot more money than I do in multiple industries.
- Status
Similar Threads
- Locked
