A key controversy with the Fantastic Four movie(which is confirmed to be a bust btw given early reviews) is the race-bending of the Human Torch-normally a white character-into a black character played by Michael Jordan. Proponents of these shifts have argued that cast changes such as this creates space for diversity in fictional medius, opponents of course, argue it as just another example of "political correctness" "destroying" traditional fictional roles and archetypes. Yet as I examine the forms as to which this debate takes place, I have often felt that the debate is less on race-bending being inherently good for representation and that the real debate is whether racebending is enough to make popular culture more inclusive, or could it be used to perpertuate sterotypes of it's own or even be a cover for tokenization.
Within the context of racebending, proponents of this cast change argue that because Fantastic Four is disconnected from the MCU, there is no way of having Michael Jordan land roles such as Black Panther or Luke Cage, all of which are colored superhero roles in the comics. According to The Mary Sue, Hollywood has often marketed colored roles for whites, this was evident by the snubbing of Selma in the Academy Awards, the portrayal of Jennifer Lawrence as the olive-skinned Katniss in The Hunger Games, and Scarlett Johansson as the Japanese Motoko Kusanagi in Ghost in the Shell. This process, known as whitewashing takes over the limited space people of color have to exist in the entertainment industry as complex, multifaceted individuals, and then closes that space entirely by reimagining these characters as white.
With that in mind, race-bending is seen as an alternative to create room for diversity and fairer representation, a way of taking back from the roles that the media gives to whites on the sole purpose of their "whiteness". As such, the casting of human torch it has been argued, is significant in that it allows for representation in a media that gives none, this being the case in that Marvel, even in the main film universe-despite doing racebending to create room for secondary characters to be played as colored such as Nick Fury-has primarily focused their movies on white superheroes(Thor, Iron Man, Captain America) and aliens(Guardians of the Galaxy), and has also gone with the traditional narrative of Peter Parker as Spider-Man over Miles Morales once Spider-Man was reclaimed. Therefore, racebending of traditionally white roles could help create room for people of color to exist on screen.
With that said however, is it enough to just racebend a character to increase diversity in the media and to challenge traditionally white roles; or is there more that needs to be done to give the colored and the marginalized roles To do so we must first go through the concept of tokenism. The concept of tokenism is the policy and practice of making a perfunctory gesture towards the inclusion of members of minority groups. For instance including a token employee to a workforce usually is intended to create the appearance of social inclusiveness and diversity (racial, religious, sexual, etc.), and so deflect accusations of social discrimination and lack of inclusiveness.
When this context is applied to the racebending of characters such as the Human Torch(played by Michael Jackson), the belief that the character would help expand diversity becomes more problematic. We learn in Jonny Storm's backstory that Sue Storm/Invisible Woman was adopted by Human Torch's father and that she was the adopted member of the family along with a young Mr. Fantastic/Reed Richards and young the Thing. However this in itself, if you look at the relations of the characters in the comics is very problematic in regards to perpetuating tokenism and sterotypes associated with racial identity and representation. That is because while Johnny and his father are black, Sue is cast as a white woman to "justify" her being adopted. This raises some disturbing implications as to the nature of "inclusiveness" with the Fantastic Four as it implies that being the female lead, she can't be the same ethnicity as the Human Torch to keep them related-so she has to be adopted too. It is even more jarring as far as representation is concerned considering she is the romantic interest of Reed Richards/Mr. Fantastic AND is a white woman adapted by a black family. When we consider this factor in the debate on racebending the Human Torch we see less of a genuine desire to push for more openness and representation and more of the perceived "need" for a white, hetero, "attractive", female role to be the female lead and the love intrest; thus having the Storms be racebent in this scenario be tokenizing to stifle any criticism of the casting as "dominated by whites".
I will admit that in this context I have not watched the Fantastic Four so while this caving in to the narrative of the "white female love intrest lead" is a clear worrying sign that what is occuring here is tokenizing over genuine representation, I cannot judge the movie without more information of what happens in it. But that does not mean we who watch it should just brush this off and say it's "the thought that counts". We have to understand that comics have been driven by social values perpetuated by the darker aspects of nerd and hollywood culture that lives off sterotypes such as giving "traditional" plots(ie: white guy saves the world and gets the girl) and and being biased torwards "traditional" descriptions of superheroes as white and popularizing these superheroes over colored and female ones. In the comics the character of Johnny Storm is rash and quick to anger. With the casting of him by a black actor, it is up to the viewer to discern how it may be problematic. As we see movies such as Fantastic Four we have to ask ourselves questions such as....
- Are the media perpetuating images of blacks and the racialized as "rash and quick to anger in contrast to whites" by imparting the Human Torch's characterization?
- Does the character of Johnny Storm have more negative stereotypes attributed to them or does he have equally problematic positive ones, or both that dominate the character in contrast to the white characters?
- Is his character arc driven by these sterotypes?
- Is the fictional medium trying to "speak" for female, racialized or queer identities through these characters
- Does this character have any agency or do the white characters speak for him?
- What sort of character development does this character have compared to the other characters? Is his characterization deliberately presented as weaker or deliberately not given a chance to progress in contrast to the white characters?
This critical examination exposing the truths behind rhetoric revolving around more diversity, and if they truly "do what they" preach or hypocritically create new inequalities and stereotypes through their depictions are needed if for the fact that we will hear from the media about diversity and inclusiveness as the years pass, and we have to discern for ourselves if they are telling the truth. For instance with Star Wars Episode VII we have a woman and two men of color in the leading role, tying to what Kathleen Kennedy's said about increasing the role of women in the franchise. On a surface level this may seem welcoming, in particular due to the fact that while the now-defunct Expanded Universe of Star Wars has a feminist bent to it through the passing of the bechdel test in several episodes of the Clone Wars 2008 cartoon and the introduction of strong female characters such as Mara Jade and Ahsoka Tano, this bent is undermined by the fact that these characters are often "attractive white women" or "exotic alien women" over any portrayal of women of color or queer identities.
Yet the current record of the Star Wars Cinematic Universe in moving away from dominant narratives has been....spotty at best. The character of Sabine in the animated series Star Wars Rebels, an Asian Mandalorian saboteur fighting the Empire, has been criticized as a flat character solely used to appeal to a specific demographic. While the character herself has received lots of character development to the point where I know people willing to consider her one of their fan favorites(in part because of how Star Wars Rebels is made by Dave Filoni, whom also produced the Clone Wars with George Lucas for the Star Wars EU, a show which had given significant charcter development for all the characters involved) the record is further complicated with the racebending of Han Solo's love intrest in the original Expanded Universe; in that instead of the white female Bria Tharen as Han Solo's ex-girlfriend--but reimagined as his estranged wife for the purposes of the SWCU, we have a woman of color, Sana Solo, revealed as Han Solo's estranged wife.
While the latter in theory is welcoming for the creation of storylines allowing for more representation of women of color in Star Wars, in practice, when the events of the Star Wars film canon is considered, the inclusion of Sana Solo becomes problematic. That is because as the story of the Star Wars Marvel comics is set between Episodes IV-V, we know that Han will end up with Leia by episode VI; this really raises questions about how women of color are introduced into Star Wars if all her role appears to be causing romantic drama between a white couple whose relationship is developing, all for the purpose that since Han and Leia have absolutely no issues whatsoever, Sana Solo is there simply to be another obstacle to their relationship and stir up drama as the Romantic False Lead preventing an iconic white couple from getting together. When the story progression for the Original Trilogy is brought into mind, the appearence of Sana Solo has less to do with any desire for "greater inclusion" and more of the exploitation of a tokenized interracial marriage(Han and Sana) to further the relationship of two white characters(Han and Leia) by the author of that specific issue of Marvel's Star Wars comic for the SWCU through the creation of drama where there was none beforehand either in the films OR the original Expanded Universe(in the EU novel Rebel Dawn, set before Episode IV, Bria was killed in the battle where the Rebels steal important Death Star plans from the Empire, meaning there was no competition between Leia and any women from Han's past).
Conclusion:
With all these new characters appearing that turn out to be problematic tokenization of marginalized identities by a dominant narrative forces in the media and in the entertainment industry, how do we uproot or challenge these depictions? With that question in mind, I admit I cannot fully speak for identities of which I am not a part of, but I feel that as we critique what these developments really mean we should understand that the source of the problem is how the entertainment industry and the media is perpertuated by values often catering to whites by write male authors and directors who want things like comics or movies to remain mired in sterotypes biased torwards specific major roles for whites, with tokenization applied whenever they get into trouble for lack of inclusiveness without any substantial challenging of dominant narratives. To challenge this, we need to endorse more diversity in the media as pushed forth by writers, in particular female writers of all color, orientation and creed, to write stories challenging and tearing down sterotypes and narratives in fiction that favor white roles and disenfranchising what is seen as "apart" from that worldview. As such, when all of this is taken into the context of racebending, it can be seen that while racebending can create the surface appearence of "change" and "inclusiveness" in fictional mediums, it might be problematic on its own through the use of tokenization over substantial challenging of sterotypes, and as a result, more transformative measures may be needed.
No comments:
Post a Comment