The biggest example ever of distorting a historical ''characters'' race is Jesus. He is portrayed as white in Europe and North/Soth America when in actual fact he was (if he existed) an arab, brown skinned man. But centuries of revisionism and Europeon cultural influence essentially race swapped him into being a white as milk figure whose image is plastered all over church glass paintings, portraits and mosaics. People genuinley believe he was white. You think some Christians today would be accepting of a brown Jesus? Hell no. White Jesus feeds into their distorted understanding of history and where the character came from, and in some instances gives them the seedlings of white saviour complex and white supremacy. Amidst racial tensions between whites and brown skinned Arabs in todays world, keeping the source race of Jesus brown would have lessened conflict for sure. Jesus was born as a brown middle eastern arab. Any depiction of him in paintings or movies should be accurate to that. If it isnt, then its factually wrong. And this is where we are at now. Centuries of white Jesus has made us believe he was white and that is wrong.
In the same way, Superman was created white. He is a product of early 20th century American creation, born in a homogenous society. Changing his image to an ethnic depiction would be factually wrong. Stop trying to change history for inclusionism.
Things change, as you say. But not for the better. If they really want to cast a black Superman, or a black Ariel, either promote a classically black character or a original one that has their own identity instead of stealing it from another.
Your argument about fantasy fiction is a non-starter. These characters are more real and will leave a lasting legacy that will outlive 95% of people today.
Your arguments are all over the map and seem to indicate a tacit acceptance of that which is not so for the sake of popularity... And history has never shown that to be a bad idea, right? Or not... Seriously I don't get what your point is.
And the rest... You legitimized the race bending of a religious/historical figure of great importance (again... You're all over the map) and are ****ting bricks over completely and totally fictional creation of which 100% there can be no doubt of their fictional nature. Which again, I point out how stuff got changed, adapted and imported all throughout what some might call "The Cannon" of our modern society. Merlin as an example is an import into the Arthurian legends representing the Druids. Arthur would himself at the start be a Romanized general or war chief. Lots of what we consider iron clad stories had all kind of cultural and race bending occuring. If there weren't racial/cultural changes made to a host of myths and fairy tales you wouldn't have had the ones we grew up with in the first place. Knowing that NOW I ask why the supposed "purity" of the original tales doesn't amount to any outrage of turning a wide variety of cultural products into something else representative wise?
The stories changed, as, sorry, do religions and how people conceptulize them over time. And if they don't they die out. Say a change is made that doesn't fly with the intended audience... Then that version fails. You and I suffer no material harm if that happens. Shocking given the attitudes and language thrown around for **** like this. But it seems some of ya'll absolutely do need to be reminded of this no matter how resentful it makes you feel.
So... Acknowledging that there are stories and myths that have and will "live" (and go through often RADICAL change as they do so...) is a given.
That someone unironically typed out that these characters are "more real" than the majority of people alive today showcases a rather stunning lack of a grasp on meaning, language, respect for your fellow human beings and their existence not to mention their struggles and inner life... All because the corporation that own a cartoon decided that the fiction of a mermaid that hold no real world logical weight what so ever could be played by a person of brown skinned descent?
This is the argument being employed here? Really? No preamble about being poetic or talking figuratively? Just point blank... Ariel is MORE real than say, your mother? Or the people you work with? More real than the loved ones every body in the world has lost?
This... THIS came to your mind as a legitimate reasoning?
Uh... Huh...
It's not my fault that there is a very loud and very large segment of fans online who, given the language and attitudes employed almost daily, lack the perspective of what the difference between comforting fiction that we hold dear to our hearts is AND THE LIMITS of acting and thinking as though they have an equal weight in any fashion as, well, actual reality. Reboots, reimaginings, race bending, gender swapping... It seems there is a very vocal group online across a wide spectrum (Right/Left, young/old, male/female, Coke/Pepsi, matter/anti-matter, KFC's/Popeyes...) who really need to be told that these things do you no physical harm, so can we talk about these things with a shared perspective of their actual nature first before we even begin to discuss the pros or cons of changing something that likely already went through some huge change multiple times before?
Cuz fanboys/girls... If we cannot take the inherent step as ADULTS and understand that these things are fiction and unbound ultimately by both logic or our personal feelings it would be a great start.
If on the other hand someone is over the age of... I'll be generous and say... 19? If you are older than that and you cannot reckon emotionally with how this is all made up bull****? Then I got nothing for you. You've given your emotional connection to things that are not so a place of primacy in your psyche. I cannot and am under no obligation to respect that.
