Originally posted by Ushgarak
First of all, the parallels with Pocahontas do not stand up to scrutinity; Dances with Wolves or Ferngully is better.Secondly, yes, because the Pocahontas story is exceptionally racist and was part of a culture used as justification for 'civilising' the native AMeircans.
So, if a white man, in real life, were to help an indigenous people from a real threat, would that be considered racist?
I think you are confused as to what happened in real life. What happened in real life is that John Rolfe brought a girl from the Americas back home, taught her to be like a European and then paraded her around basically saying "Look at this! These people can be made to be just like us! Isn't it great?"
Short of a massacre, it was about as racist as you can get,- saying that the only way these people could have value was in that they could be made to be exactly like Chrisitan whites.
There was no defending against a common threat at any point.
That's the basis of Pocahontas, so that's hardly a defence of Avatar.
Originally posted by inimalist
no, but how is that relevant?
It is relevant because stories get distorted depending on the agenda of a storyteller. Remember that old saying?
"History is writen by the winners"
That's what Shaky was moving....
Avatar story is nothing new...since we've seen relative story tellers from Pocahontas and Dances with Wolves.
"Without the whites you people are BACKWARDS"
On a side note...I'm really SORRY if I'm shifting the topic. But come on man! Racism and fiction is a very broad discussion.
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
So, what is the remedy?
to which issue?
do we want people to stop being offended by inadvertent references to things that happened in the past or do we want people to be so sensitive to racial and cultural issues that they no longer produce anything that might challenge people?
I don't even know if I see a problem. It is unfortunate that such common story-lines in our culture are based on items previously used to justify oppression, but we probably shouldn't throw out some of our oldest rhetorical devices just because some can find offense with them.
What is problematic, I suppose, is that Cameron wasn't attempting to be transgressive with the film. The antagonists are clearly supposed to be "Imperial America", but beyond that, he has said there is no real political message behind the work, because he wanted to make it appealing to all audiences. That he could include such obvious allusions to stories that have impacted the lives of people still living without that being the intent shows a total lack of understanding of "others".
Obviously, the best thing we can do is discuss the issue rationally. Like I said earlier, it surprises me that white people seem much more enraged by the potential racial connotations of the film than do minorities.
Originally posted by WickedDynamite
It is relevant because stories get distorted depending on the agenda of a storyteller.
exactly
thus, it is irrelevant if a single white man ever helped any non-white people. The stories themselves represent the topic of discussion, their origins and validity unrelated to how they are used in the social setting to justify policy and action.
Originally posted by inimalist
to which issue?do we want people to stop being offended by inadvertent references to things that happened in the past or do we want people to be so sensitive to racial and cultural issues that they no longer produce anything that might challenge people?
I don't even know if I see a problem. It is unfortunate that such common story-lines in our culture are based on items previously used to justify oppression, but we probably shouldn't throw out some of our oldest rhetorical devices just because some can find offense with them.
What is problematic, I suppose, is that Cameron wasn't attempting to be transgressive with the film. The antagonists are clearly supposed to be "Imperial America", but beyond that, he has said there is no real political message behind the work, because he wanted to make it appealing to all audiences. That he could include such obvious allusions to stories that have impacted the lives of people still living without that being the intent shows a total lack of understanding of "others".
Obviously, the best thing we can do is discuss the issue rationally. Like I said earlier, it surprises me that white people seem much more enraged by the potential racial connotations of the film than do minorities.
I'm sorry, I should have made my self more clear.
So, what what do you do to fix a movie like Avatar so that it is not racist?
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
I'm sorry, I should have made my self more clear.So, what what do you do to fix a movie like Avatar so that it is not racist?
I'm of a totally different mindset
you can't avoid such allusions, so don't just do them without any awareness. I'm not saying Cameron should have done anything different with his work, I'm just saying that we should then be open to discussing the potential interpretations of it.
there are clearly different types of "racism". That probably isn't even the correct term in this instance.
My point, I suppose, is a reaction to those who seem to think any time people feel oppressed by mainstream society it is their own fault, as if modern culture is racially inert. My complaint would be that Cameron didn't push the issue enough, or that it was an unconscious subplot, not that it could be racist.
Originally posted by inimalist
exactlythus, it is irrelevant if a single white man ever helped any non-white people. The stories themselves represent the topic of discussion, their origins and validity unrelated to how they are used in the social setting to justify policy and action.
But as you well know...history does tend to repeat itself. So there will be similar events happening in the future. The origins are very indeed valid and important.
As mythologist Joseph Campbell said once (and Shaky you going to love this) :
"A hero is someone who has given his or her life to something bigger than oneself."
That is the basis of the story....however, storytellers these days care more about what color of skin the hero happens to be.
Originally posted by WickedDynamite
hero is someone who has given his or her life to something bigger than oneself."That is the basis of the story....however, storytellers these days care more about what color of skin the hero happens to be.
I dont understand your point...
are you saying that the film is entirely racially inert?
Originally posted by inimalist
I'm of a totally different mindsetyou can't avoid such allusions, so don't just do them without any awareness. I'm not saying Cameron should have done anything different with his work, I'm just saying that we should then be open to discussing the potential interpretations of it.
there are clearly different types of "racism". That probably isn't even the correct term in this instance.
My point, I suppose, is a reaction to those who seem to think any time people feel oppressed by mainstream society it is their own fault, as if modern culture is racially inert. My complaint would be that Cameron didn't push the issue enough, or that it was an unconscious subplot, not that it could be racist.
I think we are in agreement on this issue.
Originally posted by inimalist
I dont understand your point...are you saying that the film is entirely racially inert?
Arrrghhh!!!!....see, I CAN'T get any further in that direction....as you saw Ush wants us IN TOPIC. Therefore, I cannot go any further.
Honestly, any discussion with a Racism tag attach to it is too broad to discuss....we need approval or otherwise...warning will be given.
It is better to just drop the subject. Since limits to the discussion have been impose.
Originally posted by WickedDynamite
See, I can't argue with you because then I be will bringing a TON of material (which serves as proof) that will no longer be on topic.Therefore I can't argue any further.
I have to step down.
You could open a thread on the topic and bring out that material. I'd be interested since I don't quite follow your 50 - 80% claim.
Originally posted by Ushgarak
I think you are confused as to what happened in real life. What happened in real life is that John Rolfe brought a girl from the Americas back home, taught her to be like a European and then paraded her around basically saying "Look at this! These people can be made to be just like us! Isn't it great?"Short of a massacre, it was about as racist as you can get,- saying that the only way these people could have value was in that they could be made to be exactly like Chrisitan whites.
There was no defending against a common threat at any point.
That's the basis of Pocahontas, so that's hardly a defence of Avatar.
I think people mostly compare it with Disney's Pocahontas, which is somewhat similar to Avatar. You probably know that though on second thought and were solely replying on the historical perspective.
Originally posted by WickedDynamite
Arrrghhh!!!!....see, I CAN'T get any further in that direction....as you saw Ush wants us IN TOPIC. Therefore, I cannot go any further.Honestly, any discussion with a Racism tag attach to it is too broad to discuss....we need approval or otherwise...warning will be given.
It is better to just drop the subject. Since limits to the discussion have been impose.
An answer to inimalist would be totally on topic, no?
Anyways, I read an interesting article about the "white guilt" aspect of Avatar and a comparison with District 9, which I though was pretty good.
http://io9.com/5422666/when-will-white-people-stop-making-movies-like-avatar
I haven't seen District 9, but in concept this part made a lot of sense to me.
"Think of it this way. Avatar is a fantasy about ceasing to be white, giving up the old human meatsack to join the blue people, but never losing white privilege. Jake never really knows what it's like to be a Na'vi because he always has the option to switch back into human mode. Interestingly, Wikus in District 9 learns a very different lesson. He's becoming alien and he can't go back. He has no other choice but to live in the slums and eat catfood. And guess what? He really hates it. He helps his alien buddy to escape Earth solely because he's hoping the guy will come back in a few years with a "cure" for his alienness. When whites fantasize about becoming other races, it's only fun if they can blithely ignore the fundamental experience of being an oppressed racial group. Which is that you are oppressed, and nobody will let you be a leader of anything."