MovieChat Forums > Merlin (2009) Discussion > Doesn't black people get offended?

Doesn't black people get offended?


This tv-series is utter crap. It is inaccurate in all ways - not just to the Arthurian Legends - but also to silly things as breastimplants (no they didn't exist during those times), modern values, and bla bla.

However, when the producers decide to rape the story and introduce serveral black people to the line-up; my big wonder is what do black people think? How would they react if Mel Gibson was cast as Martin Luther King and Tom Cruise played Malcolm X?

Is this a matter of political correct affirmative action gone completely wrong?Or am I a damn racist (such a nice word to throw at people) for implying that it is ridiculous to cast Guinevere as a black woman?

Come on flame me ;)

reply

It's more ridiculous that they cast an ugly woman as Guinevere, than the fact that she is black.

reply

It is relevant to the story to make MLK and Malcolm X black. They are also real people. Was Guinevere real? I thought she was just a legend.

Anyhow, I have Shakespearean plays where characters were black and they most likely wouldn't have been had it been real life.

reply

Doesn't black people get offended?
Probably not as much as English speakers do trying to read your post. But I cut you some slack on the language since you're clearly dim-witted and ignorant of things like, I don't know, history.

-----
WORDS MEAN THINGS!

reply

Racist!

If I'm not back in 5 minutes...
Just wait longer..

reply

Gwen in show does not get ill-treated so no it's not racist. Merlin's not racist.

reply

My point wasn't that.

You may not know, but Merlin, King Arthur and the rest of the characters in the show are based on semi-religious English legends (England being a country, and not a reference to the language). There were no black people in England 1500 years ago, and if there should have been one, he/she would have been quite the attraction!! But. There were no black people. No proper historical evidence to suggest there were a single black person in England before the year 800.

Anyway - with that little detail cleared out. I think that if I was black person I would feel offended by watching a show where they suddenly cast a black person in a role that OBVIOUSLY should have been a white person. I would be thinking "Oh, shove your political correctness up your arse!".

Furthermore I would consider it a bit of a taunting of someones religious beliefs. If we portrayed Jesus as a homosexual or a black woman, I am sure it would cause quite some raised eyebrows! Not to mention if we made another holy man with a name starting with M and ending in ed, into a flaming homosexual.

Suppose I just think it's lame.. :)

If I'm not back in 5 minutes...
Just wait longer..

reply

I'm curious as to how you came up with the year 800 as a starting point for the presence of Black people in England. Why "not a single one" before and at least some (or so I suppose you mean?) in the 9th century? Why not the 4th or the 6th?

I'd say the 4th: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1254187/Revealed-The-African-queen-called-York-home-4th-century.html

I do understand your broader point, even if I do not agree with it, I was just puzzled by your dating. I was hoping it was based on some archaeological evidence I have not heard of before.

"Occasionally I'm callous and strange."

reply

I base that on Hal Foster's Prince Valiant :o) No.. it was a qualified guess. I also know that Danish history starts talking about England at this time - first viking raid in 797.

Just because we find one potentially blackish woman that resided in England during the Roman times, I will still claim that a black person was more rare in England in "Arthurian Times" than an albino is in Africa. It simply makes no sense to cast black people in these roles.

What pisses me off is, that by using this sort of political correctness you are creating and hanging on to racism. I appreciate that in the US people might be racist - but this show is shown across the world and it is cringe worthy to see that Americans still use affirmative action like that.

It's a-historical and not only is there no evidence that Guinevere should have been black, it is border lining on mocking a small religion. You don't need to take existing myths and make them political correct. Make up your own *beep* Harry Potter could have been a black homosexual woman for all I care - but hands off history!


If I'm not back in 5 minutes...
Just wait longer..

reply

I base that on Hal Foster's Prince Valiant :o) No.. it was a qualified guess. I also know that Danish history starts talking about England at this time - first viking raid in 797.


I don't see how the Viking raids relate to the presence or absence of Black people in England prior to that, or after that for that matter. Still puzzled.

And how are Americans using affirmative action in this show? It is a British show, made by British television.

You certainly don't "need" to do anything when making a show, except follow your creative urge. But more importantly to me, you don't need to go with history when writing a fantasy. The crux of the problem, to me, is that historical fiction these days being rather popular, people expect it even outside the field of historical fiction. Historical Arthurian legend is a possibility, and some novels have been very successful in that field. The 2004 King Arthur movie by Antoine Fuqua attempted it as well, and it was partly successful. But why judge this TV series on grounds of historicity, or why focus on Black Gwen as a historical issue, when nothing in the series is historical? Neither the plot, nor the costumes, nor the settings are historical. So either, on the grounds of historicity, you hate everything about it, or you don't think twice about Black Gwen, because she's just one bit of inaccuracy in the midst of plenty.

"Occasionally I'm callous and strange."

reply

@jakeslev


You keep talking your BS, but clearly you haven't even bothered to find out whether black people existed in medieval times in Britain,so you have nothing to back your claims up with. You thinking or believing there were no black folks in that tie period dosen't mean it isn't true. Since you are too lazy to even do that, I did. Not shut up and read here:


http://www.blackhistoryheroes.com/2010/05/africans-in-medieval-england .html

There you have it. Now kindly shut up and move on to something else, please.

reply

did you just send me a link to a free Google Blog written by some political aggressive hoot?

too funny. too dumb.

Are you a negro you yourself? And do you think that the word "negro" is evil? It means black.

If I'm not back in 5 minutes...
Just wait longer..

reply

activista,

Don't waste your time with that ignorant boob, jakslev.

He/she/it desperately wants to believe that white people are the only people in the world.
He/she/it desperately wants to believe that only white people have ever had money or power.

This is a mentally challenged individual who is incapable of reading or understanding written material.
I posted 4 links to reliable sources that document the existance of wealthy black people in Britain since the 300's, at least.

What does a person like this do with that information?
Negate it.
Erase it from their memory.
Alter it, in their mind, to something that makes them more comfortable.
He/she/it is deeply unhappy. Join me in pitying him/her/it.

You might like these:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1254187/Revealed-The-African-queen-called-York-home-4th-century.html

http://www.wondersandmarvels.com/2013/04/ivory-bangle-lady.html

Black Roman soldiers
http://www.wellcome.ac.uk/News/Media-office/Press-releases/2007/WTX035560.htm

http://www.englandsnortheast.co.uk/HadriansWall.html

reply

DarknLovely, I'm all for putting down biased racists and I find the story of the Bangle Lady truly fascinating and unjustly little known; but your first link to Black Roman soldiers leads to an error page and the second one doesn't mention Black Roman soldiers. It does mention North Africa as one of the places of origin for some of the garrisons, but North African does not equal Black. Any chance you might fix the first link or copy-paste what the article said, if you have saved it somewhere?

"Occasionally I'm callous and strange."

reply

pol-edra,

Thanks for letting me know, I didn't realise the articles are no longer there because I originally posted them here YEARS ago! I didn't save them.
Here are some more:

Beachy Head sub-saharan African female remains, radio carbon dated 200 - 250AD
http://www.culture24.org.uk/history-and-heritage/archaeology/art474162-beachy-head-lady-was-young-sub-saharan-roman-with-good-teeth-say-archaeologists

African genes in white British. The surname is Revis, as revealed in other news articles.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6293333.stm

Same subject, a little more info.
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn11018-genes-reveal-west-african-heritage-of-white-brits.html#.VXFjQN14WrU

Evidence of black people in York (once Roman settlement). Dunces like jakslev won't comprehend this, it uses words that are more than 4 letters long.
http://www.academia.edu/215491/MIGRATION_AND_DIVERSITY_IN_ROMAN_BRITAIN_A_MULTIDISCIPLINARY_APPROACH_TO_THE_IDENTIFICATION_OF_IMMIGRANTS_IN_ROMAN_YORK_ENGLAND
They make a distinction here between European, African and Egyptian.
African, here, is defined as black (with the inherent mix that black Americans have).

It states that 'crania demonstrated the greatest resemblance to the American black reference samples of the 19th and 20th centuries, perhaps reflecting a similar degree of genetic admixture in these populations.'

Those buried at Railway site were of higher social status than those buried at Trentholme site

Black trumpeter, Henry Blank, 1509
http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/pathways/blackhistory/early_times/blanke.htm

Article showing the intermingling of black and white was fairly commonplace amongst a certain class.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/british/empire_seapower/black_britons_01.shtml

Researcher found documented evidence of free black people in Britain in the 1500's
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/oct/17/slavery-black-history-month

Black people in the Elizabethan period 1558-1603
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-18903391

Documentation of black people in the 1500's
http://www.history.ac.uk/gh/baentries.htm

Ignatius Sancho, 1729-1780, author, composer, actor, merchant
http://www.brycchancarey.com/sancho/

Olaudah Equiano, 1745-1797, writer, merchant and abolitionist
http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/historic_figures/equiano_olaudah.shtml

Cesar Picton, 1755-1836, wealthy merchant

Dido Elizabeth Belle, 1761-1804, Aristocrat
Bi-racial daughter of Admiral Sir John Lindsay and a slave mother.
http://www.theguardian.com/film/filmblog/2014/jun/11/belle-amma-asante-historically-accurate

William Cuffay, Chartist , 1788-1870
http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/historic_figures/cuffay_william.shtml

There is evidence of black people in Britain since at least 200AD. In all of these eras, they socialised, traded and married the indigenous British population. I'm not sure why that upsets these racists so much. Perhaps it's the fact that some of these black people achieved much more in their lives than any of THEM could ever hope to.

reply

Thank you for the many links. I didn't read thoroughly everything as much of it is too "recent" for my field of interest (Antiquity- Dark Ages- Middle Ages), but I did, thanks to you, happen on several articles concerning the Ipswich man -who was probably African but not Black, as far as forensic science has been able to determine). I didn't know about him and found the subject very interesting. Apparently there's a BBC documentary about this discovery in their "History Cold Case" series, I will try to find it online.

For those who might find this interesting as well:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1275339/He-African-strong-jaw-bad--So-doing-Ipswich-year-1190.html

http://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/pressreleases/stories/2010/05_may/02/history.shtml

"Occasionally I'm callous and strange."

reply

O Boy.. Why didn't I see this last summer? Well, that is hilarious. At what point have I ever said that there was never 1 black person in Northern Europe in "the olden days"?

I merely asked if it wasn't a little bit over board and too political correct to cast black people in roles like Hollywood does? Having a token black person in every film seems patronizing to humanity.

Then the next thing is the fact that they change legends, history and religions by suddenly casting people that in no way resemble the general perception of a given character.

I - for one - would find it completely ridiculous if they cast Tom Cruise as Martin Luther King!

And think about it. Forget your silly US-American history. Negros or black people were not treated in the same horrible way you treat(ed) them in Europe. So get over your self. But, imagine Selma or Malcolm X with a few white people mixed into the storyline?! Racist movies like these might be documenting reality, but at the same time they are stirring up hate and tension. Maybe - seen from a political correct and relativistic point of view - the best thing would be to have at least 50% of the black posse being white?

Racism works both ways. And again. I don't live in your backwards part of the world! If you say black or negro in my part of the world, we all think about Eddie Murphy and big dicks. So *beep* you!

Love,

jakslev

If I'm not back in 5 minutes...
Just wait longer..

reply

What's ridiculous is that anyone can possibly believe the FAIRY TALE that there was ever an all white place in this world. That is the fantasy. Black people have been the first people everywhere on the planet. Your education is sorely limited.

The ONLY fantasy is that there was ever an all white place on the planet...you know...the one that appears on TV and movies where casting directors decide who is living and who doesn't exist. The TRUE FACT is that the oldest people on the planet are BLACK...everyone else came after.

QofH3arts

reply

that's such a stupid argument I find all over the place now...

How many thousands of years was this supposed it happenned? Do you know there is the same probability monkeys are our ancestors, of all of us? Following your own silly logic, we should have a considerable number of monkeys in each movie, is it? Some of them could play legendary white characters, others black characters. But wait wait wait wait, we forgot to negotiate with the Chinese, they may expect their own quota as well...

...Imbecils.

reply

fully agree with the OP. In fact, this happens consistently with plenty of movies and TV series coming from Hollywood lately. I asked a similar question on the Once Upon a Time forum, when I've seen a black Lady Marion or Lancelot, and later a black Portuguese Gueneviere.

And it's either the Hollywood Jews are plaing a dirty game here with a mass of uneducated blacks. Or the black community simply doesn't care and they do today what the "bad white man" did to them in the past: they paint their face in black, when playing historical white characters. And they end up looking ridiculous.

reply

and BTW, I'm watching episode 3 now and the girl (Gwen) looks simply ugly, nothing about the race (by comparison, Sanaa Lathan is a goddess).

reply

So you get upset with anachronisms like breast implants. Does this mean you hate stone castles, knights in plate armor, chivalry, and courtly love as they have no place in 5th Century Britain?

Also you're incredibly ignorant over not knowing the difference between a real person who we have photographic evidence of what they looked like (Martin Luther King Jr.) and legendary characters whose appearance changes in each telling.

Don't you lay a hand on my Sasquatch!

reply

you smell of pee. take your racism back to donald trump and lick his fake teeth. ftw

If I'm not back in 5 minutes...
Just wait longer..

reply

[deleted]

What's it like being a racist a hole who thinks anyone who is darker than snow is black?

As I grow older, I pay less attention to what people post, I just watch their avatars.

reply

What do you mean? Are you such a racist hole?

If I'm not back in 5 minutes...
Just wait longer..

reply

I agree with much of what pol-edra said.

jakslev - I don't see your initial question as being racist. But you suggesting that changing Gwen's skin color is akin to having a white actor play MLK is a large jump. And you also make certain remarks that are quite immature and only lend to invalidate your point of view. (As a side note, I have no idea why you think any of the women have breast implants. None of them look to have fake breasts in the slightest, their breasts are pushed up from their costumes.)

If Gwen were strictly a historical figure based on a 100% factual person, than changing her skin color might bother me a little by being inaccurate. But this version of the tale has been changed in many ways.... so many of the tellings of this story are different anyway. I see Gwen's color only as a way to change a dynamic in the story, much like making Arthur and Merlin the same age. It's not meant to be pandering to black people, or somehow making black people feel better by being included. It's just simply shinning a different light on a old character.

Maybe we should view it as the show being color blind and choosing an actress regardless of color, rather than choosing one specially to push one agenda over another.


"I'm trying to see things from your point of view but I cant stick my head that far up my ass."

reply

Wow! I don't know how you managed to single out my posts from this huge thread but thanks for the nod. And thanks for your well-articulated, rational post. ;)

"Occasionally I'm callous and strange."

reply



"I'm trying to see things from your point of view but I cant stick my head that far up my ass."

reply