This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
My facebook has been ablaze with the War of the Rings of Power, and by that I mean Amazon putting out tons of propaganda to indicate that everyone is racist for not liking the the Rings of Power, followed by half of the people saying no that doesn't make us racist, and the other half saying they just don't like it because it's a bad show. A similar thing is going on for the Little Mermaid, too. Alas, that these evil days should be mine.
The thing that strikes me is that no one is saying the obvious. To me, and I'll guess to many others, I really don't mind diversification of media. Or, that is to say, I wouldn't mind it, if it weren't for the fact that it's now the norm, it's practically mandatory for any show that doesn't want to be cancelled by internet SJWs, it's crammed down my throat everywhere, and it's turned into a major moral issue where half the audience browbeats the other. I feel like I'm being subjected to someone else's religion.
But that woke audience always comes back to "Why are you against black people playing roles? What are you, racist?" Well, no, I honestly don't think I'm racist. But in the position I'm put in, I get that I am taking actions that a racist would. The only difference is that a true racist would be against black people being cast no matter what, and I am only against it being mandatory and moralized. But since we live in this world, where it is mandatory and moralized, does that mean that there's nothing that would really satisfy me short of black people not being cast?
I don't quite think so. Another point that the woke audience comes to is "They clearly just thought that Halle Berry was the best person to play Ariel". And really, I think the answer to that is, no, they clearly prioritize diversity casting. She is black and they want to cast lots of black people because it scores them points with the woke crowd (and possibly also because it drums up controversy, which may be good for business). And then on top of that, they thought she'd be fine for the part. I don't know how I can prove that, but it just seems evident to me that diversity casting for its own sake is something that is being given high priority. In some limited cases, it's possible to prove it, such as with Ryan Condal, the showrunner for House of the Dragon who indicated that they cast black people to play Valerians explicitly for the purpose of diversity-washing. However, I'm guessing that Condal regrets saying that outright, because it's not a good look. It gives the other side ammo and also casts doubt as to whether the people hired really would have earned the spot on merit alone.
At this point. I don't really know what it would take to convince me that most castings of black people are not just to fill a quota. But this puts me in a tough spot, because I don't really want to be racist in action, even if I know I'm not in thought.
Why can't the production studio be looking at the demographics of the customer base and decide that hey some %age of our customers are black, and so they may relate to the story better and spend money on it if we include more/any black characters?
I've barely read LOTR but unless whiteness was a critical part of the story it seems fine to change skin color. It's a movie about, like, whole different species of humanoids right? Different skin colors should be well within bounds?
I agree a lot of productions feel like they're bending over backwards to include more races and it comes off as cheap and woke fearing (see: children's books), but the more basic business case seems valid too.
EDIT: I've not seen the show nor have I read the books and I mostly watched the original movies with 'drinking game' style interest, so pardon my ignorance. I see from the responses that the sprinkling of racial diversity is done in a clearly cheap and ham-fisted way. Thank you to everyone who took my question seriously.
The problem is that most people understand both a) how different phenotypes happen (non-interbreeding populations subject to different sexual and evolutionary selection) and b) what happens when different phenotypes live together (mixing). To have things like the dwarf dude with his unremarked on black dwarf girlfriend, your world needs to have a bunch of historical migration from far away that was either very recent, or else post-migration there were (and perhaps still are) social barriers to intermarriage.
In the former case, it's interesting and notable - dwarf dude with a distant foreigner wife. In the latter case it's also interesting and notable - why were there social barriers to intermarriage? Do they still exist, or is dwarf dude defying convention? Whatever this backstory is, it's not Tolkien. It's not even any flavor of British that existed while Tolkien was alive.
Yes. There are black people in Tolkien. They come from far away, ride oliphants and their nation allied with Sauron in LOTR. They did not migrate to Gondor en masse several hundred years ago.
Probably a few of them did visit on occasion. But when foreigners visit in medieval times it's not a "ok it's a black guy, so what?" kind of event. The backstory of the world influences things. Consider the travelogues of Ahmad ibn Fadlan or Ahmad Ibn Rustah: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ahmad_ibn_Fadlan https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ahmad_ibn_Rustah
A visit to the Volga Bulgars results in much complaining about how they pray incorrectly (most of ibn Fadlan's book). A visit to the Rus involves all kinds of remarks on their poor hygiene and what perfect physical specimens these tall blonde people are. This is quite literally a vital part of LOTR. The hobbit characters, coming from a region coded as the English countryside, witness how big and strange the rest of the world is and have reactions quite similar to Fadlan or Rustah.
Imagine that instead of globohomo - which is likely familiar to you - we actually had a very different flavor of cultural imperialism. Suppose at some point, with no real explanation, Elrond and Galadriel start praying the Salah. Then on some journey perhaps some hobbit characters are starving but still refuse to eat pork offered by the dwarves, protesting that it is not halal. Then Celebrian starts explaining Islam to the dwarves, being generally awesome, and the first season ends with the dwarves saying "La ilaha illa Allah, Muhammad rasoolu Allah."
That would be...weird, right? It would probably be for people to complain that whatever this is, it's some very strange bastardization of Tolkien that's about nothing more than spreading Islam.
Religion is categorically different from what we got in RoP.
It'd be just as weird if you replaced all your Islamic hypotheticals with Christian ones, even though they're more familiar to Americans and much more closely aligned to Tolkien's actual setting.
A better comparison would be...I dunno, Enlightenment democracy. Imagine every time anyone makes a decision in the show, it's a vote. Travelers, merchants, soldiers, it's just the default. When Aragorn meets the hobbits they demonstrate "consent of the governed" and at the end he renounces kingship for a new government.
That'd be a change that spits on Tolkien's original themes. (I'm pretty sure it's also what happened in the last episode of Game of Thrones?) It'd suck, but in a different sort of way than importing religious terminology and rituals from our world. I think this is more in line with the characterization and plotting messes from RoP.
More options
Context Copy link
I love this illustration of your point.
And with that in mind, if your fictional example shows a LotR bastardized to spread Islam, what is the current bastardization hoping to spread? It's part of the push to completely remove any notion of a white nation from our culture, history, and public consciousness. They don't want you to even be capable of imagining it.
The history of our nations is being rewritten. All our cultural cannon is being discarded or "reimagined". All new art needs to be meticulously assessed and retooled by our new cultural overlords in the DEI industrial complex before it's released for consumption.
We are moving through a true "year zero" event. Preserve anything you care about from the before times. Preferably hard copies, in your home.
Don't you think you're being a bit hyperbolic?
Last I checked, the Second Age wasn't a big part of American history. Casting a set of fictional characters poorly (?) is not culture erasure. Literally nothing has been changed about the existing 20+ hours of Tolkien movies, or the books, or the impact on public consciousness. The biggest harm is that a bunch of people are sitting through a shitty TV show.
As best as I can tell, there's not even any evangelizing like OP's example! The diverse casting is aggressively not important to any plot events. Galadriel isn't teaching the benighted folks of Middle-Earth about inclusivity, she's teaching them not to rely on boats if they want to make someone the Valar’s problem.
This is a far cry from the thought policing about which you are wringing your hands.
I don't think I'm being hyperbolic at all. Also
It was required reading for me in English class, way back as a freshman in highschool. Lord of the Rings is every bit a part of the western cannon as many classics. And it probably had a larger cultural impact than many as well.
But back to the defense of my hyperbole. Look, even a year ago I'd agree with you. Then a bunch of Dr Seuss books got unpublished more thoroughly than I thought possible. Ebay wouldn't let people "profit off racism" and delisted them. Amazon did the same. Libraries pulled them. They will never be printed again, and are blacklisted from all the largest markets.
Knowing this can be done, I fear what happens next. Because at this point it's impossible to believe all this censoring isn't a slippery slope. Cloudflare banned The Daily Stormer and promised to never do it again. Then they did it again with 8Chan. Then they promised they absolutely wouldn't do it again with Kiwifarms, and in fact regretted doing it with Stormer and 8Chan. Then they did it again with Kiwifarms.
It's basically a given all but the most milquetoast, middle of the road republicans will be banned from Facebook, Twitter and Youtube. And even the Ben Shapiro's of the world are on notice.
Blizzard straight up took away people's original versions of Warcraft III and replaced them with a far shittier version. That was the first time a "remaster" straight up replaced the original in your digital game library. I believe Eidos followed suit, then chickened out when people complained. But the day where that is the norm is coming.
It's completely impossible to get a legitimate, good copy of the original Star Wars Trilogy, and that was just Lucasfilm, and now Disney, straight up giving zero fucks and only feeling like publishing the adulterated version, which seems to continue to be adulterated with every release.
Disney permanently memory holed the Michael Jackson episode of The Simpsons from streaming, syndication and even DVD box sets.
I have zero faith that any of this will suddenly halt and reverse course. I believe absolutely that this will continue, and probably accelerate in pure spite if Republicans start winning offices in numbers again. I believe many works risk being lost forever, or becoming so extremely marginalized they are like Song of the South, or the Star Wars Christmas Special. Or the lost episodes of Dr Who. Or all the silent films which were lost when studios decided to just chuck em. Supposedly Cleopatra from 1917 was an amazing film. It's lost forever.
All this has happened before, and it can happen again. I used to believe "The internet never forgets". But as I actually attempted to find things I assumed had to be out there somewhere I found myself coming up empty. And that was, I assume, completely without this ascendant force of digital monopolist and cultural vandals purposely attempting to memory hole things.
Alas, the pirates will probably be the ones to keep such things alive.
Maybe! But how long until the open and neutral infrastructure of the internet turns against them? How long until DNS, ISPs and even VPNs decide pirates are engaging in "spreading hate" and more aggressively hunting them.
What you say? Surely not VPNs! Their whole advertising pitch is keeping you safe from the watchful eyes of your ISP. Why the hell not? Google's motto used to be "Don't be evil". What a difference time makes.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link