User Banned (2 Weeks): Inflammatory false equivalencies surrounding race representation, history of severe infractions.
That's your opinion, man. Should I push the "white actor for Black Panther is good" as fact then? That's equally stupid.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Ciri in Netflix Witcher series probably won't be white
- Thread starter Potterson
- Start date
This is probably the best post I've read on this so far.
+1
I hope there is no uproar, no matter the outcome, and everyone just enjoys the show. Yeah right though...
I think that for the people who actually care about ethnicity in relationship to the character and fiction, context should be important.
If the point is that Ciri should be polish because of some national pride for an important piece of Polish literature, I can't say that's a sentiment I would approve of, but I can respect it.
But if we look at ethnicities in context, then we need to look at the source material.
Jack Ryan may be explicitely white in the books, but making Jack Ryan black would be a complete non-issue. He's still an american man. Sure a part of his background will change, but any resistance on the matter would be rightfully looked at as suspicious.
Making James Bond black is, again, perfectly possible. But as a british man, some extra context and care put in the character's backgroud may be warranted (or not, as GB is one of the european nations with the strongest traditions in diversity).
If we were to adapt the Brothers Karamazov and we decided to make Alexei black, then critics would have a lot more ground to protest - the character is fictional but he's placed in an historical and geographical context where him having a different ethnicity than white would, at least, feel forced.
But the Witcher is a work of fantasy fiction. There is no historical accuracy to respect and more importantly, even if the novels do assign ethnicities to the characters, being a fantasy world you can alter those freely. In a fantasy context, asian people don't need to come from the east, black people don't need to come from the south and the quasi-HRE equivalent doesn't necessarily have to be made by proto-caucasians. As long as Ciri's ethnicity makes sense in the fiction (ie, it's aligned with her father's and the country her father is the ruler of), then she can be anything. If they want to have her be played by a black actress, they just have to make the rest of the characters match. You can have Nilfgaard be predominantly black, if you want. It's fantasy. You can have black people as the guys who wear heavy armors, ride horse and use artillery if you want. That's one of the beauties of it, you have zero reasons to make the fantasy fiction respect real-history or "tropes".
And if you need evidence that "black people as knights" can be rad, I give you Terry Crews in full plate:
Wow the ageism.
Henry Anvil isn't much younger than Zoe so what's the issue?
Ciri is a teenager. Unlike her skin colour her age is important.
To me the Witcher world does seem similar to our world. Where Nilfgaard being to the south in the Witcher world would be akin to the south of Poland which would be the Middle East or Southern Slavic countries (or Italian based on Nilfgaard being Roman) . Hence CIri being preferrably of either race and Middle Eastern especially being a lot less common. After that I'd just prefer the less common pick, without saying one is better than the other.
Edit: I said Asian, because that would be close enough at least.
For the adult Ciri in the game, yep that would work. But they're casting for a much younger Ciri now, 13/14yo.
I doubt he'd care if she was Japanese so long as she looked like she was.
I'm guessing his logic is the same in both cases. He prefers the character to look like they belong in the setting - in this case, Medieval Europe (High Fantasy).
Personally, I don't think twice about high fantasy settings with "weird" diversity, because those settings usually have actual races in them like Dwarves, Orcs, etc. which greatly offsets differences in skin color.
Still though, I get what he's saying and I think you're being unfair. The setting is clearly European.
Again, literally no one is making the argument that aesthetic is more important than characterization. I've already stated that, and your response is to double down on that fallacious argument. C'mon bruh.
Both of these aspects of a portrayal are not mutually exclusive; it's not one or the other, they can both occur. My point is that there is nothing inherently wrong with wanting both. It doesn't mean racism unless the reasoning is racist. People are creatures of habit and like things as they know them.
Going off discussion a bit now though, even characterization shouldn't be seen as sacred. Many characters throughout history have been improved both visually and/or character wise through later adaptations. Janet/Margot from The Magicians is a perfect example of altering characterization for the better. Something doesn't need to be 100% accurate in any capacity to be good or even better.
These reasons were lacking in your first post that I responded to. Please know that I wasn't trying to spin your words to crucify you, it was genuinely how you came across at first.
Was Ciri ever described in the books? I'd imagine her as white considering the story takes place in a fictional version of medieval Central/Eastern Europe, but if the sauce material never definitely described her, it's fair game.
I always find these threads funny, where you guys get extremely PC and brand whoever would be unhappy with this change a racist.
I'm fairly certain Ciri is described as an individual with pale skin and ashen hair. It is a major character point. It's also how she is able to evade her pappy...blending in with the populous.
Racial diversity just for the sake of it, especially when interpetting an existing story and universe, never goes well with the fans. I bet if you were to change Black Panther into White Panther, shit would get so hot the whole movie would be dropped.
In anycase, I just hope they get a decent actress for the role.
I'm fairly certain Ciri is described as an individual with pale skin and ashen hair. It is a major character point. It's also how she is able to evade her pappy...blending in with the populous.
Racial diversity just for the sake of it, especially when interpetting an existing story and universe, never goes well with the fans. I bet if you were to change Black Panther into White Panther, shit would get so hot the whole movie would be dropped.
In anycase, I just hope they get a decent actress for the role.
She's described as having pale skin, a trait common with Cintrian royalty.
What? It happens all the time.
Fan4stick and Dark Tower are two off the top of my head.
Her looking like the people of the region helps her blend in. Don't nitpick my sentences to fit your argument please.
Thank you, I'm just weird like that haha.
I get that, and I do apologize for not stating that clearly enough. It was part of the larger debate though, and I thought the order made it obvious enough it wasn't stated from a racist viewpoint.
If Roland can't be Eastwood it does not matter who he is played by and Elbe is a good actor so what.
Because it was Michael B Jordan's fault Fan4stic was a bad movie? Why were either choice "forced diversity"?
Furthermore, you fail to understand why this is a problem in the first place and think it's just a numbers game
Having a diverse cast would make me more interested in this, looking forward to seeing who they cast. Anyone that has a problem with this might as well come out and say what they really think.
The Witcher isn't based on medieval Europe in the first place in terms of setting or racial demographic. Humans come from another world (our future after we've destroyed the planet) and travel to that world. That's way's there's futuristic technology like gene manipulation and mutagens. It's why talking about the humans being particular race was always nonsense.
OP
OP
That's the same thing for you?
History of these two races are so different. The sociological aspect is different. Ciri being white is just Ciri being white. BP being black is symbolic. It can't be different.
Jesus, I'm so naive thinking this is simple stuff. Aparently not.
It matters to fans of the series. Edris Elba is a very good actor, love the dude. But they should have not strayed so from the source material.
Because Johnny Storm and Sue are biological siblings. The movie changed up their entire bio. Yes it was an already bad movie made worse because of unneeded changes.
What exactly is the problem that I'm missing?
User Banned (1 Month): Referring to inclusivity and diversity efforts as forced. Junior account.
I think the real solution to this problem is more things like Black Panther. It's not that there's a problem with diverse casts or that stories should be segregated, but it needs to be possible to tell stories without forcing diversity when it doesn't fit.
I don't think it'd be as big of a problem to cast an all-white Medieval Europe or Ancient Greece if there were plenty of great shows in settings that weren't also mostly white. That's not to say that a black person should never be shown in a castle, just that we shouldn't demand it.
To be clear: A future where there are only "Movies with black people for black people" and "Movies with white people for white people" would be horrible. What I'm saying is that "Movies with everyone for everyone", "Movies with black people for everyone", and "Movies with white people for everyone" would be ideal.
I don't think it'd be as big of a problem to cast an all-white Medieval Europe or Ancient Greece if there were plenty of great shows in settings that weren't also mostly white. That's not to say that a black person should never be shown in a castle, just that we shouldn't demand it.
To be clear: A future where there are only "Movies with black people for black people" and "Movies with white people for white people" would be horrible. What I'm saying is that "Movies with everyone for everyone", "Movies with black people for everyone", and "Movies with white people for everyone" would be ideal.
Last edited:
"Why do ou guys always label anyone who'se unhappy with POC being represented in media as racist?"
"Also, allow me to present this false equivalence that equates the struggle of black representation in films with the complete opposite situation because my brain is currently not comprehending the idea that context matters. This totally does not trivialize the significance of a film like Black Panther, no racist btw."
You're right they shouldn't have strayed from the source material so much. But Roland being black was the least of the straying they did. That film was utter garbage and an insult to fans of the books but that was nothing to do with a black roland.
I really think I would prefer they cast Slavs in most roles, but with this budget that was never on the table and more diverse casting comes with the territory.
Not another mention of the Wiedźmin TV series, please
Would the series not being anywhere near as sexist as the source material be a no no too or? What's the limit on where you stray too far?
It would kind of become important if they differ from everyone else. If all nilfgaardians are poc Ciri would then easily become identifiable as nilfgaardian to any common villager.
Oh boy.
It does play a part, in picking a black actor they had to change the story up since Roland (from my understanding) hailed from a certain lineage. That was gone so they had to work around it.
Obviously the movie had bigger problems but the change does have a bit of a part to play in it.
I'm gonna be super generous and take this at face value:
The thing that you're missing is that *different* is not *worse*. Making Sue and Johnny adopted rather than biological siblings has 0 relevance on any of the stuff that makes the relationship what it is. They can act exactly like regular ass siblings. Absolutely nothing important to the essence of the characters is altered by improving the overall representation of the cast. Fant4stick had a lot of issues, but MBJ as Johnny definitely wasn't one of them.
By the same token if they go through and make The Witcher setting (which is, again, worth noting, fictional) less white, they've improved representation and cost themselves nothing at all in the process. Nothing about Ciri's character relies on her being white, specifically.
Change isn't bad in and of itself.
This is Rue all over again.
Ciri doesn't have to be white. She has to match the ethnicity of her father, and that's about it.
Ciri doesn't have to be white. She has to match the ethnicity of her father, and that's about it.
I'll just ask this question again:
The thing about the source material having to matched 100% by adaptations, (especially since this is the witcher we're talking about), is absolutely misguided.
What if some Nilfgaardians are PoC and some aren't and some humans are PoC and some aren't? They don't have to just alter one small group.
Examples? I honestly do not remember it being that bad, but I was 16.
Including a mix of races in a historical fantasy in my head always plays out something like Robin Hood (Kevin Costner movie). Morgan Freeman is shown to come from a completely different continent, from a totally different culture. Every other line from him is about how the buildings are alien and weird, the food is terrible, the weapons suck and he prefers his own, the weather sucks. He sticks out like a sore thumb, and is instantly identifiable to literally everyone. I found that to be really interesting and a cool addition to the story.
But I have a feeling they will just pretend it's not an issue in this. For me it breaks immersion in the world. I guess we'll see how the final product turns out.
Sure, I think it's complete bullshit. Plenty of segments in the book that describe her as being white. In addition to the fact that it's also completely moronic to handwave any kind of response as 'lol, racist'.
Let's say they cast a black girl to play Ciri. Now Pavetta and/or Emhyr need to be changed as well. Seeing as Ciri's looks are attributed to her Cintrian (cintran?) family but also her Lara Dorren lineage, it's gonna have to be present there as well. Unless you really want to keep the rest constant and just change Ciri for the sake of 'just cause'.
I wonder what kind of shitstorm would be unleashed if they decided to cast a white male for the role of Lando in episode 9 (thank fuck it's Billy Dee Williams). Being black isn't integral to Lando as a character (unlike some other examples that are immediately refuted) - so you wouldn't have a problem with that, would you?
So she is white in the game and not in the books? That makes sense then! I was confused because I thought she was white not like I give a damn either way but that's pretty crazy that the world was supposed to be super diverse and I didn't feel that way playing Witcher 3. Correct me if I'm wrong but I don't remember a single non white person in that game that was humanoid.
Changing characters to flatter new political trends is shitty. I want white Clark Kent, I want black John Stewart, I want black Storm, etc. Am I asking too much?
If you want "diversity" make new characters. Don't change existing ones.
How exactly is it a major character point?
Also, lol @ that Black Panther comment. That's not the same thing and you know it.
So it would make even more sense for there to be diversity in the world of the Witcher
They still are biological siblings. And it's not like adaptations don't do interesting and unusual changes, some of which overtake the original design in popularity. Hell, the real problem was the lack of chemistry between the two actors to sell the sibling angle, not the angle itself.
And even then, you still haven't adequately explained why Michael B. Jordan made the movie worse in terms of being the brother to Sue Storm.
You're missing the most important fact: context matters. Outside historical and cultural underpinnings surrounding a work matter just as much despite people wanting to pretend they don't. That's why people who say "why not a White Panther" are being criticized.
I disagree, that is almost always the reason most book to movie adaptations turn out trash.
So yes, it should be 100% but as long as the characters (including their bio and appearances) the overall story and theme remain identical to the source material I'm a happy camper.
