Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 24, 2018 21:44:30 GMT
I have defended this story before, and feel that a few marker points are worth bearing in mind.
Consider a white middle class acting company portraying other cultures. Olivier 'Blackface' as Othello. John Bennett 'Yellowface' as 'Li H'sen Chang'. They are portraying respectfully characters of strength and equals of any other man. That to me cannot be within my definition of racist.
I tried listening to BF Sarah Jane Smith: Mirror Signal Maneuver, and was offended by the patronising stereotype of the Indian Taxi Driver. That to me seemed more racist and irritating. I found it offensive and have yet to listen beyond that point.
Let's please bear in mind that Talon's is an evocation of late 19th C fiction. We are allowed within it's script to pass judgement of the prejudices of the time, as intelligent viewers.
As Indian cast members of 'It Ain't Half Hot Mum' have always maintained, that particular programme poked equal to more fun at the British Army conscripts. Talon's has it's fun with Cockney stereotypes, but not wit the Chinese community.
Are we no longer permitted to caricature groups of people? It is a cartoon/penny dreadful visage, but who is being upheld as superior in this creation of Robert Holmes?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 24, 2018 21:50:44 GMT
That's not what I'm getting at it though I know the racial stenotypes are inappropriate , but Talons is a great story in spite of them IMO, but now general Fandom thinking seems to be if you like the story, your endorsing the stereotypes so that's you "Wrong!" F*** what other people think! I'll enjoy what I want to enjoy... and The Talons of Weng-Chiang is classic Doctor Who. Sure, it could have been casted differently, but a lot of stuff went on in 60's & 70's TV that probably wouldn't make the grade now. That doesn't mean we should turn our back on some great Doctor Who stories just because the world has changed.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 24, 2018 21:53:14 GMT
No, people shouldn't apologise for liking something, that's pretty stupid. What people should do, however, is stop trying to make excuses for the serial. It doesn't matter how much context someone can give ("Ooh, but it's a Fu Manchu pastiche!"), the result is still offensive to a great number of people. I'm usually the first on the 'Context' bandwagon, but even that doesn't excuse. In fact it makes it worse because A) There's a good reason why Fu Manchu has been a dead porperty. B) Doctor Who already had cast Asian actors in Asian roles before this, like in Mind of Evil six years earlier. There's even Asian actors in Talons! There was no excuse in 1976/77 on Maloney's part not to find an Asian to play Chang. Chris did a great job, in terms of being mancing, but he's still a white guy with yellow paint and taped slant eyes. You can't get around that, and it's irritating because, Talons' quality aside, it's really the only out and out stereotype of this nature in Classic Who: they at least had sense not to do red faced Native Americans or grass-skirt cannibals.
Well I suppose the reason they cast Bennet wasn't because of a lack of Asian actors, but because they wanted to evoke the Fu Manchu films of the 60s, in the same way The Tomb of the Cybermen casts George Pastell to evoke the Mummy movies.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 24, 2018 21:57:48 GMT
I have defended this story before, and feel that a few marker points are worth bearing in mind. Consider a white middle class acting company portraying other cultures. Olivier 'Blackface' as Othello. John Bennett 'Yellowface' as 'Li H'sen Chang'. They are portraying respectfully characters of strength and equals of any other man. That to me cannot be within my definition of racist. I tried listening to BF Sarah Jane Smith: Mirror Signal Maneuver, and was offended by the patronising stereotype of the Indian Taxi Driver. That to me seemed more racist and irritating. I found it offensive and have yet to listen beyond that point. Let's please bear in mind that Talon's is an evocation of late 19th C fiction. We are allowed within it's script to pass judgement of the prejudices of the time, as intelligent viewers. As Indian cast members of 'It Ain't Half Hot Mum' have always maintained, that particular programme poked equal to more fun at the British Army conscripts. Talon's has it's fun with Cockney stereotypes, but not wit the Chinese community. Are we no longer permitted to caricature groups of people? It is a cartoon/penny dreadful visage, but who is being upheld as superior in this creation of Robert Holmes? That's not what I'm getting at it though I know the racial stenotypes are inappropriate , but Talons is a great story in spite of them IMO, but now general Fandom thinking seems to be if you like the story, your endorsing the stereotypes so that's you "Wrong!" F*** what other people think! I'll enjoy what I want to enjoy... and The Talons of Weng-Chiang is classic Doctor Who. Sure, it could have been casted differently, but a lot of stuff went on in 60's & 70's TV that probably wouldn't make the grade now. That doesn't mean we should turn our back on some great Doctor Who stories just because the world has changed. These are exactly the kinds of views on the matter that I find tiresome. Things can be both good and racist. The racism in Talons is purely aesthetically driven to provide entertainment, not to cause offence so of course there's a great story behind it. Even if Chang does have his character redeemed, it doesn't matter. In Chang's case it's not the character himself that matters, but the casting and makeup decisions they took. The real racism present in Talons is down to the consistent stereotyping of all Chinese characters as evil or duped in some way or another, and the fact that the Doctor embraces these racist attitudes fully, without ever once questioning them.
|
|
|
Post by nucleusofswarm on Aug 24, 2018 22:01:10 GMT
I'm usually the first on the 'Context' bandwagon, but even that doesn't excuse. In fact it makes it worse because A) There's a good reason why Fu Manchu has been a dead porperty. B) Doctor Who already had cast Asian actors in Asian roles before this, like in Mind of Evil six years earlier. There's even Asian actors in Talons! There was no excuse in 1976/77 on Maloney's part not to find an Asian to play Chang. Chris did a great job, in terms of being mancing, but he's still a white guy with yellow paint and taped slant eyes. You can't get around that, and it's irritating because, Talons' quality aside, it's really the only out and out stereotype of this nature in Classic Who: they at least had sense not to do red faced Native Americans or grass-skirt cannibals.
Well I suppose the reason they cast Bennet wasn't because of a lack of Asian actors, but because they wanted to evoke the Fu Manchu films of the 60s, in the same way The Tomb of the Cybermen casts George Pastell to evoke the Mummy movies. Even then, it's still a ropey defense (and I'm as big an apologist for early twentieth century pulpy literature and icons as you'll get), since Fu's the only character given this specific 'addition': Dracula is not played exclusively by East European actors (or German, if you count Nosferatu) like Lugosi, or even try to copy his accent, as a counter example.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 24, 2018 22:30:18 GMT
I have defended this story before, and feel that a few marker points are worth bearing in mind. Consider a white middle class acting company portraying other cultures. Olivier 'Blackface' as Othello. John Bennett 'Yellowface' as 'Li H'sen Chang'. They are portraying respectfully characters of strength and equals of any other man. That to me cannot be within my definition of racist. I tried listening to BF Sarah Jane Smith: Mirror Signal Maneuver, and was offended by the patronising stereotype of the Indian Taxi Driver. That to me seemed more racist and irritating. I found it offensive and have yet to listen beyond that point. Let's please bear in mind that Talon's is an evocation of late 19th C fiction. We are allowed within it's script to pass judgement of the prejudices of the time, as intelligent viewers. As Indian cast members of 'It Ain't Half Hot Mum' have always maintained, that particular programme poked equal to more fun at the British Army conscripts. Talon's has it's fun with Cockney stereotypes, but not wit the Chinese community. Are we no longer permitted to caricature groups of people? It is a cartoon/penny dreadful visage, but who is being upheld as superior in this creation of Robert Holmes? F*** what other people think! I'll enjoy what I want to enjoy... and The Talons of Weng-Chiang is classic Doctor Who. Sure, it could have been casted differently, but a lot of stuff went on in 60's & 70's TV that probably wouldn't make the grade now. That doesn't mean we should turn our back on some great Doctor Who stories just because the world has changed. These are exactly the kinds of views on the matter that I find tiresome. Things can be both good and racist. The racism in Talons is purely aesthetically driven to provide entertainment, not to cause offence so of course there's a great story behind it. Even if Chang does have his character redeemed, it doesn't matter. In Chang's case it's not the character himself that matters, but the casting and makeup decisions they took. The real racism present in Talons is down to the consistent stereotyping of all Chinese characters as evil or duped in some way or another, and the fact that the Doctor embraces these racist attitudes fully, without ever once questioning them. Racism to me is where other cultures or races are portrayed as being inferior to ones own. I suppose that's why so many alien cultures in SF are mirrors to ones own bar costumes, so as to avoid such accusations. Look at how the English are portrayed in press and cultural comment abroad and you may see far more prejudice than we permit to others. I do, and it is hurtful. We are a very tolerant and diverse nation and our sentiments are not always reciprocated by others. But do we harangue them for always evoking historical stereotypes of the British Empire? They do, and we try to accommodate that, as we have many apologists. Do you recognise any element of racism in the way that the English have become de-facto villains in so many Films from Hollywood and beyond? Do you see no offense in this? It is just as lazy that North Korea or Russia remain the default Villains in Hollywood films, yet the Chinese are no more the bad guy's in Talon's than Jago and Litefoot are Imperialist warriors. Just pawns in a game. Let us not be so sensitive to this. What I am saying is that a wider viewing of cultural portrayals betrays a more pronounced vein of casual prejudices, of which we are less guilty of. A wider perspective is not tiresome, I am afraid, but there are far more distinct examples of Racism in popular culture of which get off far too lightly.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 24, 2018 22:33:40 GMT
It's astonishing to me that, with everything going on in the world at the moment, some people take time to be offended over the casting in a Saturday tea-time show from over 40 years ago.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 24, 2018 22:42:58 GMT
It's astonishing to me that, with everything going on in the world at the moment, some people take time to be offended over the casting in a Saturday tea-time show from over 40 years ago. Thanks - I feel calmer now for that. At least we aren't arguing over Brexit..
|
|
|
Post by sherlock on Aug 24, 2018 23:05:05 GMT
The thing with the recent Talons debate is this has been blown way out of proportion. The Time Team do comment on the racism, they also clearly enjoy the story in spite of it. They are even asked if it were to be re-shown today should anything be cut out and they say no (Emphasising the importance of showing mistakes from the past). The editor politely argues the case not to judge by the standards of today in his column (opinions on that take may vary, as Cornell demonstrates). There's no major rift present in the pages of DWM.
Then Twitter came along and suddenly it's the biggest rift in fandom since...the last one.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 25, 2018 0:02:59 GMT
The thing with the recent Talons debate is this has been blown way out of proportion. The Time Team do comment on the racism, they also clearly enjoy the story in spite of it. They are even asked if it were to be re-shown today should anything be cut out and they say no (Emphasising the importance of showing mistakes from the past). The editor politely argues the case not to judge by the standards of today in his column (opinions on that take may vary, as Cornell demonstrates). There's no major rift present in the pages of DWM. Then Twitter came along and suddenly it's the biggest rift in fandom since...the last one. It’s odd because at its core the debate isn’t about Talons. It’s about whether Marcus Hearn was right to undermine the Time Team’s views by sticking his own at the front of the magazine.
|
|
|
Post by barnabaslives on Aug 25, 2018 0:15:41 GMT
In Chang's case it's not the character himself that matters, but the casting and makeup decisions they took. I probably agree with this, I certainly couldn't even begin to defend the main casting decision - but I think to be fair part of that argument might also be extended to the entire original series for having a general deficiency of diverse persons, and even further to television programming in general. The real racism present in Talons is down to the consistent stereotyping of all Chinese characters as evil or duped in some way or another, and the fact that the Doctor embraces these racist attitudes fully, without ever once questioning them. Ironically, the history of duped Caucasians in DW is probably much more illustrious, and The Doctor isn't necessarily known for overturning history even when it's repugnant. For whatever it's worth, I certainly didn't get the idea that all Asians are easily duped. I thought Talons actually managed to be surprisingly sensitive in spite of itself - there's that remarkable and extremely thought-provoking part where Chang touches on diverse persons of the time sometimes having expectations placed on them to behave in a stereotypical manner. It's subtle - I think it's sort of just mentioned in passing - but it's very powerful. Also, Chang has a habit that I'm tempted to jump on myself as being horribly stereotypical and I suppose the story really could have done without it, but that too is probably as capable of provoking thought and empathy as it is of feeding stereotypical views - by the time that comes out in the story I rather like Chang and I really feel for him about it, and recognize it as being another terrible struggle that many Asians actually faced. It may be incredibly quaint in ways, but I still think Talons is much better at tearing down stereotypes than at propping them up. There's also the question of what to do about if I felt differently, maybe my efforts would still be better focused on recognizing and challenging prejudice in the here and now than, I dunno, pressing the BBC to issue a formal apology for a 40-year-old episode of a notably open-minded TV series?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 25, 2018 10:43:21 GMT
F*** what other people think! I'll enjoy what I want to enjoy... and The Talons of Weng-Chiang is classic Doctor Who. Sure, it could have been cast differently, but a lot of stuff went on in 60's & 70's TV that probably wouldn't make the grade now. That doesn't mean we should turn our back on some great Doctor Who stories just because the world has changed. These are exactly the kinds of views on the matter that I find tiresome. Things can be both good and racist. The racism in Talons is purely aesthetically driven to provide entertainment, not to cause offence so of course there's a great story behind it. I find this wanting to judge everything from the past by today's standards more than tiresome. Live for today and maybe help change the future, but the past is the past and can't be changed. Nobody can change The Talons of Weng-Chiang, and neither should they. It's classic Doctor Who and one of the best Doctor Who episodes ever made. Is it racist? Of course it is, but by TV standards in 1977 it didn't stand out as being offensive to Chinese people, and for years the main reason The Talons of Weng-Chiang got criticism in fandom was because of the giant Rat! We all know better now, but it still shouldn't stop people from enjoying The Talons of Weng-Chiang.
|
|
lidar2
Castellan
You know, now that you mention it, I actually do rather like Attack of the Cybermen ...
Likes: 5,811
|
Post by lidar2 on Aug 25, 2018 10:56:20 GMT
That's not what I'm getting at it though I know the racial stenotypes are inappropriate , but Talons is a great story in spite of them IMO, but now general Fandom thinking seems to be if you like the story, your endorsing the stereotypes so that's you "Wrong!" F*** what other people think! I'll enjoy what I want to enjoy... . This
|
|
|
Post by thethirddoctor on Aug 25, 2018 10:57:06 GMT
The thing with the recent Talons debate is this has been blown way out of proportion. The Time Team do comment on the racism, they also clearly enjoy the story in spite of it. They are even asked if it were to be re-shown today should anything be cut out and they say no (Emphasising the importance of showing mistakes from the past). The editor politely argues the case not to judge by the standards of today in his column (opinions on that take may vary, as Cornell demonstrates). There's no major rift present in the pages of DWM. Then Twitter came along and suddenly it's the biggest rift in fandom since...the last one. It’s odd because at its core the debate isn’t about Talons. It’s about whether Marcus Hearn was right to undermine the Time Team’s views by sticking his own at the front of the magazine. Even more embarrassing is it's an apology in the same issue. He didn't even wait for letters of complaint, and respond to them in a later edition. He didn't have to respond, or even print the Time Team review.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 25, 2018 11:02:39 GMT
It’s odd because at its core the debate isn’t about Talons. It’s about whether Marcus Hearn was right to undermine the Time Team’s views by sticking his own at the front of the magazine. Even more embarrassing is it's an apology in the same issue. He didn't even wait for letters of complaint, and respond to them in a later edition. He didn't have to respond, or even print the Time Team review. 'Thank you, Brigadier. But do you think for once in your life you could manage to arrive before the nick of time?'
|
|
|
Post by nucleusofswarm on Aug 25, 2018 14:37:02 GMT
These are exactly the kinds of views on the matter that I find tiresome. Things can be both good and racist. The racism in Talons is purely aesthetically driven to provide entertainment, not to cause offence so of course there's a great story behind it. I find this wanting to judge everything from the past by today's standards more than tiresome. Live for today and maybe help change the future, but the past is the past and can't be changed. Nobody can change The Talons of Weng-Chiang, and neither should they. It's classic Doctor Who and one of the best Doctor Who episodes ever made. Is it racist? Of course it is, but by TV standards in 1977 it didn't stand out as being offensive to Chinese people, and for years the main reason The Talons of Weng-Chiang got criticism in fandom was because of the giant Rat! We all know better now, but it still shouldn't stop people from enjoying The Talons of Weng-Chiang.It can't be changed, but trying to cut off discussion with a handwave will only lead to not truly learning from mistakes. The fact that racewashing is still problem in modern media with works like Ghost in the Shell more recently shows that we haven't fully learned the lessons of Talons, and we still have a ways to go. I'd also be wary of saying ' in 1977 it didn't stand out as being offensive to Chinese people', given their relative lack of prescence and platform at the time meaning they probably had few to no means of communicating upset. That's a slippery slope that does not end in a happy place, let me tell you.
No one on here is denying Talons' stature as a great story. In fact, most of those Twitter commenters, I guarantee, won't deny it either, but as Chips said, the things we love can and do have flaws and they should be open to discussion. Birth of A Nation is a vital part of film history that revolutionized the medium, but it's also intellectually and morally bankrupt, even back in 1916 when both black and white viewers complained and called D.W. Griffith out (so much so, he made Intolerance as a apology).Not acknowledging such, or saying 'well its too late' is at best, disingenious, and at worst, tone deaf and disrespectful.
Should you or anyone stop liking Talons? No, absolutely not. I haven't and I don't think I ever will. But I'm not going stop people from voicing their concerns if they want. Discussion works both ways: if a wonky rat is fair game, so is a white guy in yellow paint surrounded by real Asian actors. It's not delegitimising, it's just being honest.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 25, 2018 16:46:52 GMT
Is it racist? Of course it is, but by TV standards in 1977 it didn't stand out as being offensive to Chinese people, and for years the main reason The Talons of Weng-Chiang got criticism in fandom was because of the giant Rat! We all know better now, but it still shouldn't stop people from enjoying The Talons of Weng-Chiang.I'd also be wary of saying in 1977 it didn't stand out as being offensive to Chinese people', given their relative lack of prescence and platform at the time meaning they probably had few to no means of communicating upset.
No, I can say it... as I was 11 when I watched The Talons of Weng-Chiang on BBC NI in 1977, and it didn't stand out as being offensive... I didn't even pick up on the naff Rat! People of that age back then didn't watch TV to try and find something to find fault with. If anything in Doctor Who was offensive to anyone, it went over our heads. Whether races had a presence or a platform was not on the radar of most 11 year olds back then. That's only something we become aware of as we get older and become more educated.
I have no problem with people discussing racism in a 40+ year old episode of Doctor Who, but I do have a problem with the viewpoint - that some hold - that if you enjoy The Talons of Weng-Chiang then you are wrong, as it's racist. To that I say, bull***t.
|
|
|
Post by nucleusofswarm on Aug 25, 2018 18:01:00 GMT
I'd also be wary of saying in 1977 it didn't stand out as being offensive to Chinese people', given their relative lack of prescence and platform at the time meaning they probably had few to no means of communicating upset.
No, I can say it... as I was 11 when I watched The Talons of Weng-Chiang on BBC NI in 1977, and it didn't stand out as being offensive... I didn't even pick up on the naff Rat! People of that age back then didn't watch TV to try and find something to find fault with. If anything in Doctor Who was offensive to anyone, it went over our heads. Whether races had a presence or a platform was not on the radar of most 11 year olds back then. That's only something we become aware of as we get older and become more educated.
Okay, but that doesn't counter what I said. You're still framing it around your own experience, and I'm talking about something broader.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 25, 2018 18:15:42 GMT
No, I can say it... as I was 11 when I watched The Talons of Weng-Chiang on BBC NI in 1977, and it didn't stand out as being offensive... I didn't even pick up on the naff Rat! People of that age back then didn't watch TV to try and find something to find fault with. If anything in Doctor Who was offensive to anyone, it went over our heads. Whether races had a presence or a platform was not on the radar of most 11 year olds back then. That's only something we become aware of as we get older and become more educated.
Okay, but that doesn't counter what I said. You're still framing it around your own experience, and I'm talking about something broader. Well obviously I can only talk about my own experience! It was 1977, there wasn't that much connectivity back then. It was a simple time and our world was tiny. On Saturday evenings you watched a bit of TV, ate your supper, and then went to bed!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 25, 2018 19:12:47 GMT
I think his point is if asian people had seen it, they may have took offence to it just the same as black people watching songs of the south would have found offence in that. However unlke today where everybody can go on twitter and voice there opinion, that was impossible back then.
I dont think many people, if any are denying how good the story is, the time team didn’t. But it is racist and its fine to address that amd shoul be. Context makes things justifiable but it shouldn’t be an excuse to say it was okay because, well it wasn’t
|
|