How very convenient. Well, we are here to tell you, no can do. See, we have to factor that other people like these Fantasi dramas too and wish to see themselves. Go do a bit of homework. Most of these tales anda so Cinta and that we love, didn't originate with you. anda adapted them from various cultures anda perceive as other. Right, onto Reality's rather excellent dissertation:
~~~
Query: "Why is a black actor playing a white character?"
Or, the I am a member of The Society For Historical Accuracy In Shakespeare.
Once again I am Membaca just how “wrong” it is for a black actor to be portraying a ‘white’ character. In this instance the ‘offence’ has been caused sejak the casting of Sinqua Walls as Lancelot in the tunjuk ‘Once Upon a Time’. And the reason for it being so very wrong, historical realism, because black people never ever existed before the 16th century, apparently.
Firstly, the history of black people in Eropah did not start with the transatlantic slave trade. Whilst it benefits some to reduce the history of black people in relation to Eropah to 16th century racial enslavement, an undisputed significant period of which the effects are still being felt today, but not the whole story. The history of Eropah is neither mono-racial nor mono-cultural, there has been a black presence in Eropah and specifically Britain (the origin of the Arthurian legends) dating back to Roman times and possibly pre-Roman times. The lack of awareness of the presence of black people in Eropah before the mid 1550s is unsurprising, as it’s has been overlooked sejak historians and social scientist until very recently. History is the history of white males. Please understand that the past is much lebih complex and varied, than the myths of it, often represented to us as history. In all the bias and every ism, take a close look at what is been taught to anda and the history buku anda are reading.
Secondly, the argument against the casting of black actors in ‘white’ roles sejak pointing to a lack of historical realism is a curious one, when the discussion centres on the portrayal of fictional characters. Lancelot is a fictional character not a historical character. He is part of a story which is a facsimile of reality, where the reader and viewer relate to the human drama of it, for the emotional and intellectual impact but at the end of the hari it’s not real. So arguing about the skin colour of a fictional character that did not exist whilst ignoring such realisms as magic, Naga and other absurdities anda suspend your disbelief for, is indeed an interesting take in the fight for historical realism. Tell me, where was your outrage against Disney for its anthropomorphism, I mean Robin hud, hood as a fox, Friar Tuck as a mouse, how is that for historical realism? Now let’s talk about pissing all over historical realism, Charlton cold dead hands Heston as Moses, John Wayne as Genghis Khan, Angelina Jolie as Marianne Pearl, all the white actors in ‘21’ as the Asian MIT students the story was based on and so on. So I guess the lack of historical realism only upsets you, when a: it’s a black actor in the role and b: when the characters are not historically real.
Thirdly, and finally and perhaps importantly, racism is fundamentally about privilege and power. White people have the privilege of seeing themselves overrepresented in all types of media and across the spectrum from good to bad. People of colour are under-represented sejak the media and when they are, the media influences how they are perceived. So the casting of black actors in roles previously dominated sejak white actors not only corrects the imbalance of under-representation but also provides greater opportunities for actors of colour in roles that they were otherwise historically barred from.
Also, what is important to remember is that the casting of POC in traditionally white cast roles is a reflection of our culture and values today and the fact that people still need to present cultural hegemony along ethnic hegemony because anda can’t relate to another human being who doesn’t look like anda is sad and limits the human experience.
~~~
Query: "Why is a black actor playing a white character?"
Or, the I am a member of The Society For Historical Accuracy In Shakespeare.
Once again I am Membaca just how “wrong” it is for a black actor to be portraying a ‘white’ character. In this instance the ‘offence’ has been caused sejak the casting of Sinqua Walls as Lancelot in the tunjuk ‘Once Upon a Time’. And the reason for it being so very wrong, historical realism, because black people never ever existed before the 16th century, apparently.
Firstly, the history of black people in Eropah did not start with the transatlantic slave trade. Whilst it benefits some to reduce the history of black people in relation to Eropah to 16th century racial enslavement, an undisputed significant period of which the effects are still being felt today, but not the whole story. The history of Eropah is neither mono-racial nor mono-cultural, there has been a black presence in Eropah and specifically Britain (the origin of the Arthurian legends) dating back to Roman times and possibly pre-Roman times. The lack of awareness of the presence of black people in Eropah before the mid 1550s is unsurprising, as it’s has been overlooked sejak historians and social scientist until very recently. History is the history of white males. Please understand that the past is much lebih complex and varied, than the myths of it, often represented to us as history. In all the bias and every ism, take a close look at what is been taught to anda and the history buku anda are reading.
Secondly, the argument against the casting of black actors in ‘white’ roles sejak pointing to a lack of historical realism is a curious one, when the discussion centres on the portrayal of fictional characters. Lancelot is a fictional character not a historical character. He is part of a story which is a facsimile of reality, where the reader and viewer relate to the human drama of it, for the emotional and intellectual impact but at the end of the hari it’s not real. So arguing about the skin colour of a fictional character that did not exist whilst ignoring such realisms as magic, Naga and other absurdities anda suspend your disbelief for, is indeed an interesting take in the fight for historical realism. Tell me, where was your outrage against Disney for its anthropomorphism, I mean Robin hud, hood as a fox, Friar Tuck as a mouse, how is that for historical realism? Now let’s talk about pissing all over historical realism, Charlton cold dead hands Heston as Moses, John Wayne as Genghis Khan, Angelina Jolie as Marianne Pearl, all the white actors in ‘21’ as the Asian MIT students the story was based on and so on. So I guess the lack of historical realism only upsets you, when a: it’s a black actor in the role and b: when the characters are not historically real.
Thirdly, and finally and perhaps importantly, racism is fundamentally about privilege and power. White people have the privilege of seeing themselves overrepresented in all types of media and across the spectrum from good to bad. People of colour are under-represented sejak the media and when they are, the media influences how they are perceived. So the casting of black actors in roles previously dominated sejak white actors not only corrects the imbalance of under-representation but also provides greater opportunities for actors of colour in roles that they were otherwise historically barred from.
Also, what is important to remember is that the casting of POC in traditionally white cast roles is a reflection of our culture and values today and the fact that people still need to present cultural hegemony along ethnic hegemony because anda can’t relate to another human being who doesn’t look like anda is sad and limits the human experience.
