Thorongil Posted February 22, 2022 Author Share Posted February 22, 2022 33 minutes ago, velo army said: Bit of a Godwin here. "Banning" is a poor and emotive choice of words. Male actors weren't "banned" from playing Amazons in Wonder Woman, they just weren't cast as that would have been a bit silly. As I said, the ire of the fans is mostly that they just want what Tolkein wrote put on screen. The characterisation of them being right wing racist types is I think a bit simplistic. People who have grown up reading certain books tend to claim ownership over them. Whether you agree with that or choose to sneer at that is up to you. It makes no difference, it's just what folk do. I don't know much about Norse Mythology, but I don't know if there are any black characters in it. Black vikings? Sure, but Tolkein based his novels around a very white world. You see it as craven to stay faithful to his vision, and I think that is harsh. I would say that if a particular author's world (and all author's worlds are imaginary) doesn't chime with the political sensibilities of the age, then pick another text. I’ve been reading Tolkien for 32 years. I just don’t see this “white world” you refer to in his writings. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
velo army Posted February 22, 2022 Share Posted February 22, 2022 6 minutes ago, Thorongil said: I’ve been reading Tolkien for 32 years. I just don’t see this “white world” you refer to in his writings. Fair enough mate. I haven't read him at all. I was just objecting to the sneering characterisation of Tolkein fans as being out of order for being miffed at their beloved work having the ethnicity of characters changed as the ones I had listened to had provided justification based on the works themselves. I have read plenty of other fantasy and if you do change certain things (like the ethnicity of a character, especially without explanation based on the rules of the world inhabited) you compromise the integrity of the world in which the characters are set. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted February 22, 2022 Share Posted February 22, 2022 Have to say I did resent Jack Reacher being portrayed by a hobbit. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thorongil Posted February 22, 2022 Author Share Posted February 22, 2022 6 minutes ago, velo army said: Fair enough mate. I haven't read him at all. I was just objecting to the sneering characterisation of Tolkein fans as being out of order for being miffed at their beloved work having the ethnicity of characters changed as the ones I had listened to had provided justification based on the works themselves. I have read plenty of other fantasy and if you do change certain things (like the ethnicity of a character, especially without explanation based on the rules of the world inhabited) you compromise the integrity of the world in which the characters are set. The only non white characters we know of so far are newly created for the show. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
velo army Posted February 22, 2022 Share Posted February 22, 2022 1 minute ago, Thorongil said: The only non white characters we know of so far are newly created for the show. Yes, it would appear so. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thorongil Posted February 22, 2022 Author Share Posted February 22, 2022 10 minutes ago, velo army said: Yes, it would appear so. I’m not looking to overly condemn those views. Some of them are held sincerely and don’t remotely come from a bad place. I just disagree. If you look back on this thread you will see I am myself a bit of a purist and was being criticised because I wouldn’t like to see non-binary Noldor or bi-curious balrogs. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
velo army Posted February 22, 2022 Share Posted February 22, 2022 15 minutes ago, Thorongil said: I’m not looking to overly condemn those views. Some of them are held sincerely and don’t remotely come from a bad place. I just disagree. If you look back on this thread you will see I am myself a bit of a purist and was being criticised because I wouldn’t like to see non-binary Noldor or bi-curious balrogs. This is the crux of the argument I was making. The characterisation of critics of the introduction of ethnically diverse dwarves and elves as racist is unfair as a lot if the criticism I've heard is grounded in the integrity of the world built by its creator. I'd be interested to hear how you enjoy it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted February 22, 2022 Share Posted February 22, 2022 Quote Tolkien, describing Harfoots in the Lord Of The Rings, stated that "they were browner of skin" and also "they moved westward early" which may be seen as why Harfoots were absent in the films so far. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RandomGuy. Posted February 22, 2022 Share Posted February 22, 2022 5 hours ago, velo army said: The criticism I've read has been fairly well put and centres around Tolkien's world already being well defined. You say it's a fantasy world. It is, but in fantasy world building is arguably the most important thing. Well aye, but I don't remember anywhere near this fuss when LOTR films started changing/removing characters/events from the books. A man's part was removed and handed to a woman in the first LOTR film. Characters appearances were changed from how they were described in the books, most prominently Sauron, yet nobody seems to complain about that? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FairWeatherFan Posted February 22, 2022 Share Posted February 22, 2022 8 minutes ago, RandomGuy. said: Well aye, but I don't remember anywhere near this fuss when LOTR films started changing/removing characters/events from the books. A man's part was removed and handed to a woman in the first LOTR film. Characters appearances were changed from how they were described in the books, most prominently Sauron, yet nobody seems to complain about that? The internet was a different place over 20 years ago. There were plenty of debate back then in the small corners of the internet that existed in the fandom. Not sure how much of the message boards exist from back then, but you can start working back from the main fansite's article archive for specific examples. https://www.theonering.net/torwp/main-archive/page/2400/ 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thorongil Posted February 22, 2022 Author Share Posted February 22, 2022 4 hours ago, welshbairn said: Harfoots in the written text were just a branch or tribe of actual hobbits alongside the Stoors and Fallowhides rather than proto-hobbits as they are being used in the series. Hobbits might have existed in the 2nd age but no records speak of them until the 3rd Age. I don’t think the Second Age series needs hobbits but at the same time I’ve no objection to it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thorongil Posted February 22, 2022 Author Share Posted February 22, 2022 2 hours ago, RandomGuy. said: Well aye, but I don't remember anywhere near this fuss when LOTR films started changing/removing characters/events from the books. A man's part was removed and handed to a woman in the first LOTR film. Characters appearances were changed from how they were described in the books, most prominently Sauron, yet nobody seems to complain about that? Well Glorfindel, an elf rather than a man but yeah. I’m a big fan of Glorfindel but I think that switch really worked in the film other than removing some of Frodo’s power as it was he who verbally challenged the Nazgûl from the back of Asfaloth in the book. Overall a good change and an example of good adaptation. There was no point in introducing Glorfindel as a character in the film as we weren’t going to see him again other than in the background at the wedding. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted February 22, 2022 Share Posted February 22, 2022 24 minutes ago, Thorongil said: Harfoots in the written text were just a branch or tribe of actual hobbits alongside the Stoors and Fallowhides rather than proto-hobbits as they are being used in the series. Hobbits might have existed in the 2nd age but no records speak of them until the 3rd Age. I don’t think the Second Age series needs hobbits but at the same time I’ve no objection to it. It was more the bit about Tolkien mentioning brown skinned hobbits that was the point of my quote. If true it kind of demolishes the whites only universe theory. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thorongil Posted February 22, 2022 Author Share Posted February 22, 2022 4 minutes ago, welshbairn said: It was more the bit about Tolkien mentioning brown skinned hobbits that was the point of my quote. If true it kind of demolishes the whites only universe theory. He also repeatedly describes Sam Gamgee’s hand as “brown”. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FairWeatherFan Posted February 22, 2022 Share Posted February 22, 2022 27 minutes ago, Thorongil said: Overall a good change and an example of good adaptation. There was no point in introducing Glorfindel as a character in the film as we weren’t going to see him again other than in the background at the wedding. So close to getting Arwen at Helm's Deep. I doubt some people would have recovered from that. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thorongil Posted February 22, 2022 Author Share Posted February 22, 2022 7 minutes ago, FairWeatherFan said: So close to getting Arwen at Helm's Deep. I doubt some people would have recovered from that. Indeed. Helm’s deep was different in the movies but still great. I fully accept Jackson’s reasoning for sending Haldir and an army of elves into that. And Eomer rather than Erkenbrand riding to the rescue makes sense for the purpose of the movie. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
invergowrie arab Posted February 22, 2022 Share Posted February 22, 2022 Some Europeans retained dark skin pigments as little as 10,000 years ago. So there is no reason whatever to suppose that characters in Norse mythology are purely white. Even in Tolkien's world the Haradrim are specifically described as being different ethnicities including black. I don't remember anyone meaning about the Haradrim being portrayed as such in the films. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bully Wee Villa Posted February 22, 2022 Share Posted February 22, 2022 Anyone getting themselves into a state because there might be a Black Hobbit on the television is a bit weird. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BFTD Posted February 25, 2022 Share Posted February 25, 2022 Looks like the OP was right about this becoming a "sad wokefast". What a shame. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Detournement Posted February 26, 2022 Share Posted February 26, 2022 On 22/02/2022 at 19:10, welshbairn said: It was more the bit about Tolkien mentioning brown skinned hobbits that was the point of my quote. If true it kind of demolishes the whites only universe theory. You can have two white people where one has browner skin. 'White' skin also gets browner/pinker/whiter depending on the weather. Don Henley isn't singing about a black girl in Boys of Summer. Tolkien included evil African and Asian races but they are obviously going to ignored by a 2020s adaptation. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.