Film undercurrents relating to racism

[ShyBoy]

Just looking at a great article which basically says the Star Wars movies are better than the Lord of The Rings ones :)
here (http://www.salon.com/ent/movies/feature/2002/01/09/lotr_starwars/)

But anyway, that's not the point, my point is that in the article it points out that both films have a strange underlying message (probably unintentional) in which black things are bad, white things are good. Without being an expert on Lord of the Rings, gandalf comes back as 'white' and is simply speaking, 'better' than his grey self. Whereas Saruman the evil guy is the 'dark' lord.

Same with star wars, come to the 'light' side, darth vadar having a black mask, all of that. Of course, it could be between light (illumination) and darkness, which is a slightly different argument. But anyway - if you look at a lot of books or films or media in general, dark things are commonly evil and light things are good. Might not be racist at all, but it does bare a similarity to old prejudices in our society doesn't it?

anyway, don't shout at me, I know I'd get called an idiot for posting this by some people who don't agree, I'm not sure if I agree, I very much doubt it was intentional, just our society's portrayal of light and dark, good and evil, fair skinned and dark skinned, seem to all 'link up' with eachother.

[Teh_Gerbil]

Its on old thing dating back to the days when people didn't understand night and day. Day = Light, White, Good. Night = Dark, Black, Bad, when thing like wolves howl. These were often though to be related to the Devil.

Its hardly Racist. You could add Chess here too, then.

[Dear Wendy]

Well, White has always been a symbol for good, while black has been a symbol for bad. I doubt it relates to skin color.

Though Tolkien is said to be one of the bigger racist authors.

[ShyBoy]

Its hardly Racist. You could add Chess here too, then.

But chess doesn't make a distinction between good and bad, just different sides, and which side goes first. I wasn't calling it racist, merely picking up on something I read in article which by and large does fit for a lot of things.

One thing I ask you though: how can you be sure it's an old thing dating back to night and day? I mean, we can guess, but none of us were alive in 20,000 BC or whatever, so if in present day films black is associated with evil we can't solely attribute it to some people a long time ago being afraid of the dark.

[ShyBoy]

Though Tolkien is said to be one of the bigger racist authors.

Just did a little search and dug up this Guardian Article (http://film.guardian.co.uk/lordoftherings/news/0,11016,852217,00.html) - I don't know what you feel about that, the page i found it on had a link to a right wing analysis (http://rightwing-analysis.blogspot.com/2003_07_01_rightwing-analysis_archive.html#105881631236778777):
Monday, July 21, 2003
Okay, I may have said yesterday that I will not comment on the article I linked to, but it's been getting on my nerves, and I need to vent some steam.

The Guardianista's article starts with:

"Maybe it was the way that all the baddies were dressed in black, or maybe it was the way that the fighting uruk-hai had dreadlocks, but I began to suspect that there was something rotten in the state of Middle Earth."

He infers that since the enemy is in black, they represent black people. How very typical for a liberal to identify race in everything they see before them. The uruk-hai are in black actually because it represents darkness, as in evil. He goes on:

"Perhaps Dubya's war on terror is making me a bit uneasy, or maybe it's just good old-fashioned Guardian-reading imperial guilt, but there was something about watching a bunch of pale faces setting off into the east to hack some guys with dark faces into little bits that made me feel a little queasy."

Yes, it's good old fashioned Guardian-reading imperial guilt. The guilt that means that you are guilty of any wrongdoing committed by any of your fellow countrymen, even though you had absolutely nothing to do with it. Guilt by association, also demonstrated in an article I had mentioned over a week ago. An article that, suprise suprise, also appeared in the Guardian.

And as for the imperial white man vs. the native dark man, that is utter nonsense as well. Tolkien was no racist. Far from it. He was asked by a German publishing company in the late 1930s if he was an Aryan. Tolkien responded, saying that this question was clearly meant to establish if he was a Jew, and that he was unfortunately not a member of that gifted race. Tolkien was also disgusted by how blacks were treated in South Africa, and roundly condemned apartheid long before it became fashionable to do so. He was also strongly opposed to the British Empire. Some racist.
Worse to come, though.

"This genetic determinism drives the plot in the most brutal manner. White men are good, "dark" men are bad, orcs are worst of all. While 10,000 orcs are massacred with a kind of Dungeons and Dragons version of biological warfare, the wild men left standing at the end of the battle are packed off back to their homes with nothing more than slapped wrists".

The 10,000 orcs were not massacred, they were killed in combat because they chose to fight to the end. If they surrendered, they would have been sent packing like the wild men. Besides, the wild men are not dark, as stated in the article. They were once noble men, corrupted by Saruman. Just in the same way that the elves were corrupted into orcs, showing that evil is capable of corrupting even the most pure.


"This is no clash of noble adversaries like the Iliad". No, but it is a grand clash between good and evil, two concepts that the intelligensia have yet to come to terms with.

"This is no story of our common humanity like the Epic of Gilgamesh". This is a story of our common humanity, of many peoples coming together to fight against the evil that would enslave them.

"It's a fake, a forgery, a dodgy copy". A fake? How so? A forgery of what? A copy of what?

This is a truly silly article, worthy of much ridicule. It's not all that suprising, though. Lord of the Rings has been disliked by the literary elite ever since it was published. Not suprising, because it deals with good and evil locked in struggle, something that liberals find hard to believe in since they cannot differentiate between the two.
Permanent Link
posted by Raff
@ 8:38 PM

[Kentish]

Though Tolkien is said to be one of the bigger racist authors.
Where did that come from? :eek2:

If you look hard enough and analyse something to death, of course you will see hidden messages.

Racism I think not.

[Kentish]

But chess doesn't make a distinction between good and bad, just different sides, and which side goes first.
But white always goes first...so white is better than black?
One thing I ask you though: how can you be sure it's an old thing dating back to night and day? I mean, we can guess, but none of us were alive in 20,000 BC or whatever, so if in present day films black is associated with evil we can't solely attribute it to some people a long time ago being afraid of the dark.
In which case we should forget about what the author meant, and simply take it at face value...?

[Jim V]

If you want to see a quick overview of some of the arguements then watch Malcolm X, the scene is prison with the dictionary gets it all across

[Teh_Gerbil]

But white always goes first...so white is better than black?

My point, should have put that though. My bad!

You can, as said by Kentish, get any hidden message across if you want to. Backwards songs, anyone?

Oh, and, if we can't know about old times by not being there, are you suggesting Archeology is useless? That might not be for shooting people, that bow and arrow at all!

[groovechampion]

Deary me...Of course its not racist.

[ShyBoy]

Oh, and, if we can't know about old times by not being there, are you suggesting Archeology is useless? That might not be for shooting people, that bow and arrow at all!

Not at all, however show me the archaelogical evidence (or other historical evidence) that reinforces your point. Otherwise, it is just a statement without substance. I see where you're coming from and myself would come to the same conclusion at face value but we can't prove it was true, without evidence.

We can see messages in anything if we choose to look hard enough - this is true, I watched a recent documentary about this guy who supposedly by looking through the old testament could predict the future because of certain cipher patterns :confused: or something like that. However, this is a fairly blunt 'symbol' I guess you could call it, evil = black, good = white.

I mean, there are other similarities like this in fiction that have no bearing on reality - thin people with chiselled features and often 'cruel' or inquisitive or have very active minds etc, large people with rounded features are often slow, cumbersome and good-hearted. This is contradicted more often, to date I can't remember a 'good' side that was represented by black, or a 'bad' side represented by good. Well, perhaps the matrix, as neo + friends wear black, but everyone wears black to an extent in that :chin:.

[Dear Wendy]

Where did that come from? :eek2:


Discussed his background in class.

[Kentish]

Discussed his background in class.
Any basis in fact that you'd like to share?

[Dear Wendy]

Any basis in fact that you'd like to share?

Can't remember too much of it, will ask tomorrow and see if other's can.

[Born Slippy]

Discussed his background in class.

Tolkien rasict? He was born and at times lived in Africa.

[Man Of Kent]

Tolkien rasict? He was born and at times lived in Africa.

Oh weel. Case closed then. Afterall there has never been any racists in Africa. Especially not in the south...

[Man Of Kent]

Just looking at a great article which basically says the Star Wars movies are better than the Lord of The Rings ones :)
here (http://www.salon.com/ent/movies/feature/2002/01/09/lotr_starwars/)

Well, duh! You need an article to tell you that?

Of course, it could be between light (illumination) and darkness, which is a slightly different argument.

I think that's the most likely explanation. Either that or racism is so ingrained in us all that we cannot see something so subtle...

[Tim the Enchanter]

Tolkien rasict? He was born and at times lived in Africa.

So what? I don't know if he was or wasn't a racist, but just because he lived in Africa doesn't determine it either way.

[Aladdin]

Oh weel. Case closed then. Afterall there has never been any racists in Africa. Especially not in the south... :D

Well, duh! You need an article to tell you that?
Mmm... I don't agree. Star Wars are something special and always will be, but as for which one is 'better' (if we're talking about 'quality' that is) well... it has to be said that Star Wars is, erm, rather 'challenged' in the acting and scripting departments. But that should be in another forum...

[Tommo100]

What about Snooker?

The black ball is worth 7 points and yellow worth 2 and pink 6.

Is this saying that blacks are superior to europeans and everyone is superior to the chinese.

Its just so racist.

[Tim the Enchanter]

What about Snooker?

The black ball is worth 7 points and yellow worth 2 and pink 6.

Is this saying that blacks are superior to europeans and everyone is superior to the chinese.

Its just so racist.

I know an Asian acquaintence who I've had many an argument with over religion and society etc. since he got very heavily into Islam recently. One claim he came out with a while ago was that snooker/pool is racist because the aim of the game is to use the white cue ball to remove the black ball from the table ie. earth. He really genuienely believed this.

[Tommo100]

ROFL.

Really doesnt surprise me though :D :D :D

Loves the point earlier in this thread about Chess being racist because the white player went first, absolutely superb and had me in stiches for a while :thumb: :D

[Man Of Kent]

Mmm... I don't agree. Star Wars are something special and always will be, but as for which one is 'better' (if we're talking about 'quality' that is) well... it has to be said that Star Wars is, erm, rather 'challenged' in the acting and scripting departments. But that should be in another forum...

Philistine.

:p

[Aladdin]

The films themselves being racist is rubbish of course.

It cannot be deny that the colour black has always being associated with negativity, evil, death and misfortune, and continues to be so to this day. I'm sure this had no racist origins though- the term was being used in Europe many centuries ago, well before black people lived there in any numbers.

[ShyBoy]

To the Tolkien isn't racist comment: I don't think it means he's anti-black or anything like that; but his story that he writes is inherintly racist. If you're an Orc you're evil, Uruk-Hai is warrior scum, Elves are elevated from everyone else, and Humans are a mismatch. Whats to stop an Orc running away and living in the forest with fairies? Of course, there is his whole background to the story that explains everything, but the fact of the matter is his story says if you're born one thing, that is what you are, you aren't anything else.

[Flashman's Ghost]

The man was a product of his times and class - he was born when the British Empire was at its height, went to one of the better Grammar Schools of his time, volunteered and served honourably during WW1 with the British army.

That class had views which were normal at the time, but would probably be considered (at the very best) borderline racist today.

However Tolkien wasn't really interested in modern politics. He pretty much regarded that England had been in a decline since the Normans came and the reformation under the Tudors was pretty much the last straw. He was a strong Catholic and never quite forgave C S Lewis for becoming a Protestant (OK he also married an American and wrote the Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe which Tolkien didn't approve of either). He was conservative (with a small c - though I suspect with a large one as well) and gave up car ownership before WW2 as he felt roads spolit the natural beauty of England.

To claim he was just a racist is to not understand the man, his books or the time.

(On films I tend to go with Aladdin - Star Wars will always appeal to the five year old boy in me, but LotR are much better films in so many ways)

[Dear Wendy]

Tolkien rasict? He was born and at times lived in Africa.

South Africa.

Either way, I completely forgot all about this at school today.
Will find out though.
I might be wrong of course, but that was the information we got in class.

[Born Slippy]

South Africa.

Either way, I completely forgot all about this at school today.
Will find out though.
I might be wrong of course, but that was the information we got in class.

You are wrong. I still want to see this evidence though :D

[Jim V]

I can't see how you can avoid an inhierent racism in Lord of the Rings. He's basically writing a myth based on an Anglo-Saxon survivalism. Inevitably that's going to pull in other races opposed to the Anglo-Saxon's. The book and the film both clearly have the Eastern and dark skinned nations as the enemy against the well groomed white men.

So you've got racist imagery but that isn't necessarily the same as a racist message, after all a strong part of the story concerns different races fighting together for a noble cause.

It's also interesting to note the way the third film used lighter skinned villans (such as Gothmog and skin makeup on Serkis as the mouth of Sauron) perhaps as a response to the critcism. Even the rider of the Oliphant seemed to have become white by Return of the King.

Oh and I prefer Star Wars but only because they didn't have the balls to film the Scouring of the Shire (my favourite chapter)

[Blagsta]

Interestingly, Stormfront has a forum devoted to Lord of the Rings. Make of that what you will.

[Yerascrote]

it's all about word connotations is it not...some guy thousands of years ago obviously looked at the two colours and called one white...one black...from that you can make comparisons and links but not racist no.

[wheresmyplacebo]

complete crap im afirad

black symbolised the night which is mysterious and almsot supernatural, whilst we can see in the day and thus are not scared as we thin we see all there is to see

sod all to do with skin colour

im quite sure when they started using black and white to symbolise good and evil that the average person didnt even know black people existt it was that long ago

[ShyBoy]

complete crap im afirad

black symbolised the night which is mysterious and almsot supernatural, whilst we can see in the day and thus are not scared as we thin we see all there is to see

sod all to do with skin colour

im quite sure when they started using black and white to symbolise good and evil that the average person didnt even know black people existt it was that long ago

Someone else has said this already; my response was how can we prove this? How do we know 5,000 years ago black was evil and white was good? It seems to me to be a fairly recent creation. It's like the gollywog thing - he was a nasty creature who was black, nobody thought it was racist, he just happened to be black, but why wasn't he white? Not saying any of the racism is intentional, but perhaps there are links in there.

[Flashman's Ghost]

Whilst the gollywog is now seen as a racist symbol he wasn't supposed to be nasty - Robertsons used to have a smiling golly on their jam.

You can't read today's sensibilities into yesterday's children's toys and books. There also used to be little black sambo and I'm pretty sure there used to be a comic book dog called ******. We wouldn't use them today (and rightfully so) but this is a much because they're patronising more than because Sambo was supposed to be evil...

[Jim V]

The dog was in Dambusters

[MrG]

Someone else has said this already; my response was how can we prove this? How do we know 5,000 years ago black was evil and white was good? It seems to me to be a fairly recent creation. It's like the gollywog thing - he was a nasty creature who was black, nobody thought it was racist, he just happened to be black, but why wasn't he white? Not saying any of the racism is intentional, but perhaps there are links in there.

5,000 years ago the egyptians worshiped ra the sun god

and got scared of anubis the lord of the underworld/darkness