How Thor breaks down racial barriers in Asgard

[darkwing_duck1]

Because Marvel can't sell that film? Because they aren't making that film?

And that's our problem why?

Because as you have been told a number of times they are making a film about Thor the Marvel character who is loosely based (unless the original Asgard has spaceships in it? and Thor's mother was Gaea rather than the slightly different Jord?) on Thor the mythological figure not a film about Thor the mythological figure.

The point was that the people throwing around the "because the comics made some changes to the mythology we can change whatever we want from the comics " charge couldn't even get the fact that Thor IS Odin's son right (whether by Jord or by Gaia).

If you and your white power buddies want that film, go and finance it.

Prove that either myself or my friends are "white power" supporters. My friend whom I quoted would laugh in your face, as he's likely the LEAST racist person I have ever known.

Can't you support your position without making ad hominem attacks on people you don't even know?

 

[Neroon]

When charges of "racist" and "white power" and mocking of others POV along with other less than glowing terms start being tossed about, it's time for the thread to have a time out. Everyone take a bit of time to cool down. This is a highly charged topic that is not served in the least by these kinds of insults, no matter which side you may be on.

Thread closed TEMPORARILY while we have time to consider this:

I am loath to close. We are not enemies, but friends. We must not be enemies. Though passion may have strained it must not break our bonds of affection. The mystic chords of memory, stretching from every battlefield and patriot grave to every living heart and hearthstone all over this broad land, will yet swell the chorus of the Union, when again touched, as surely they will be, by the better angels of our nature.

Abraham Lincoln's first inaugural address​

 

[Red Ranger]

Did you freak out as much when James Rhodes took over as Iron Man in the comics?

No.

Or that the Justice League cartoon chose to have the African-American John Stewart as Green Lantern? I hope so!

Strike Two!



Strike Three, you're OUT!



A little uncomfortable with the Jesus imagery in general and not a fan of Madonna herself, but the race of the actor playing the saint had nothing to do with either.



Hold on there, hoss! I have ZERO to do with Metzger or any other AN/White Supremacist group. I have not been, am not now, nor will I ever a subscriber to their "agenda".

^Red Ranger's argument is utterly ridiculous anyway.
Nobody was bothered by Rhodey taking over as Iron Man or black Vulcans or Lanterns or anything like that. Why ? Because they weren't taking Tony Stark or Spock or anyone and making them black, they were different people!

This.

More from my friend:

So, first off, they shot themselves in the foot by making that claim. Thor really IS Odin's son

Second, their argument assumes that my objection to the casting of a black actor in the role of a Norse god is based in a prejudice against black people in general, which they have no other information to support. But, it's a general assumption one would expect of someone who can't get Thor's lineage right.

They mistake abuse of willing suspension of disbelief with political forwardness.

Instead of trying to incorporate a black man in a white people's mythology, why not start advocating the popularity of an African or Moorish pantheon instead.

How many of them can name a single African god?

Or even a single loa?

The gentlemen doth protest too much, methinks.

 

[Kegg]

Instead of trying to incorporate a black man in a white people's mythology, why not start advocating the popularity of an African or Moorish pantheon instead.

Possible criticisms, if we're talking about the comic book, only we're not. We're talking about a movie based on the comic book; to accept that idea is valid at all you have to accept you're talking about a version of the myths that has been rewritten to accomodate pulp narratives. The filmmakers would probably need a similar comic book series available for the comparison to be apt; but there is not.

But it does ignore the central point; if the believer is offended, logically it would be with the comic as much if not moreso than the film. To not be offended by the comic book's extensive reworking and reinvention of the mythos but be offended by the film casting a black man is, well, bizzare to say the least.

 

[darkwing_duck1]

Did you freak out as much when James Rhodes took over as Iron Man in the comics?

No.



Strike Two!



Strike Three, you're OUT!



A little uncomfortable with the Jesus imagery in general and not a fan of Madonna herself, but the race of the actor playing the saint had nothing to do with either.



Hold on there, hoss! I have ZERO to do with Metzger or any other AN/White Supremacist group. I have not been, am not now, nor will I ever a subscriber to their "agenda".



This.

More from my friend:

So, first off, they shot themselves in the foot by making that claim. Thor really IS Odin's son

Second, their argument assumes that my objection to the casting of a black actor in the role of a Norse god is based in a prejudice against black people in general, which they have no other information to support. But, it's a general assumption one would expect of someone who can't get Thor's lineage right.

They mistake abuse of willing suspension of disbelief with political forwardness.

Instead of trying to incorporate a black man in a white people's mythology, why not start advocating the popularity of an African or Moorish pantheon instead.

How many of them can name a single African god?

Or even a single loa?

The gentlemen doth protest too much, methinks.

Translation: you've been owned, game, set, and match, but you won't admit it.

If you have any proof either me or my friend is lying, post it. Otherwise shut up.

Instead of trying to incorporate a black man in a white people's mythology, why not start advocating the popularity of an African or Moorish pantheon instead.

Possible criticisms, if we're talking about the comic book, only we're not. We're talking about a movie based on the comic book; to accept that idea is valid at all you have to accept you're talking about a version of the myths that has been rewritten to accomodate pulp narratives. The filmmakers would probably need a similar comic book series available for the comparison to be apt; but there is not.

So he has a point, but you're going to try to ignore it on a technicality...right...

But it does ignore the central point; if the believer is offended, logically it would be with the comic as much if not moreso than the film. To not be offended by the comic book's extensive reworking and reinvention of the mythos but be offended by the film casting a black man is, well, bizzare to say the least.

1) Re-read what he said. He said he DID have an issue with changing Thor's parentage, but (as he put it to me)that he enjoyed the generally respectful tone of the comic overall.

2) There is a vast difference between making a relatively minor change (Odin/Gaia vs Odin/Jord) that really doesn't affect the character portrayal all that much and changing a fundamental aspect of the character (in this case changing his race in an inappropriate manner).

 

[Lapis Exilis]

2) There is a vast difference between making a relatively minor change (Odin/Gaia vs Odin/Jord) that really doesn't affect the character portrayal all that much and changing a fundamental aspect of the character (in this case changing his race in an inappropriate manner).

How is changing Thor's parentage from two Norse gods to a Norse god and a Greek goddess (Gaia is completely, entirely and nothing other than Greek) relatively minor? And it's not changing the character's "race" - Heimdall is not suddenly an African god - it's changing the character's skin color. He's a god, his skin color could be green and it wouldn't really mean anything because he's not human, not born on earth and has nothing to do with earthly races.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Will Sif have golden hair in this movie?

 

[Greg Cox]

Another advantage to casting this guy, besides the fact that he presumably rocked his audition, is that he will be more visually distinctive, instead of just being another bearded white guy in armor. It will make it easier for casual viewers to distinguish Heimdell from Baldur, Fandral, Volstagg, and the others.

Whatever works . . . .

 

[darkwing_duck1]

2) There is a vast difference between making a relatively minor change (Odin/Gaia vs Odin/Jord) that really doesn't affect the character portrayal all that much and changing a fundamental aspect of the character (in this case changing his race in an inappropriate manner).

How is changing Thor's parentage from two Norse gods to a Norse god and a Greek goddess (Gaia is completely, entirely and nothing other than Greek) relatively minor? And it's not changing the character's "race" - Heimdall is not suddenly an African god - it's changing the character's skin color. He's a god, his skin color could be green and it wouldn't really mean anything because he's not human, not born on earth and has nothing to do with earthly races.

Gaia, as presented in the comic, is NOT "Greek", she is the living embodiment of Earth. If anythiing, she is a pan-pantheonic figure.

And yes it IS changing Heimdall's "race". In both mythology and the comic, Heimdall is indisputedly, absolutely, 100% white skinned. He is never portrayed as dark-skinned, be it Moorish, African, or otherwise.

Put simply, the Norse gods look like Norsemen, not Asians, Africans, Hindi, or any other ethnic group. To case cross race is nothing more than a cheap publicity stunt, and patently offensive to the race replaced, and condescending to the replacement race.

 

[Greg Cox]

^ Worked fine on XENA and HERCULES and the new MERLIN tv series.

This sort of non-traditional casting is nothing new. Modern audiences have been accepting it for years now. The fact that Guenevere is played by a black actress in MERLIN hasn't stopped the series from being a big hit in the UK--where you might expect people to be sensitive about the Matter of Britain.

A couple of black Viking space gods won't hurt the THOR movie one bit.

 

[Lapis Exilis]

2) There is a vast difference between making a relatively minor change (Odin/Gaia vs Odin/Jord) that really doesn't affect the character portrayal all that much and changing a fundamental aspect of the character (in this case changing his race in an inappropriate manner).

How is changing Thor's parentage from two Norse gods to a Norse god and a Greek goddess (Gaia is completely, entirely and nothing other than Greek) relatively minor? And it's not changing the character's "race" - Heimdall is not suddenly an African god - it's changing the character's skin color. He's a god, his skin color could be green and it wouldn't really mean anything because he's not human, not born on earth and has nothing to do with earthly races.

Gaia, as presented in the comic, is NOT "Greek", she is the living embodiment of Earth. If anythiing, she is a pan-pantheonic figure.

And yes it IS changing Heimdall's "race". In both mythology and the comic, Heimdall is indisputedly, absolutely, 100% white skinned. He is never portrayed as dark-skinned, be it Moorish, African, or otherwise.

Put simply, the Norse gods look like Norsemen, not Asians, Africans, Hindi, or any other ethnic group. To case cross race is nothing more than a cheap publicity stunt, and patently offensive to the race replaced, and condescending to the replacement race.

Put simply, "Gaia" is a Greek word, and the use of the word Gaia to represent the living embodiment of the earth is part of Greek mythology, not Norse, not pan-pantheonic - Greek. Only. Exclusively. Not even vaguely related etymologically or mythologically to anything that is even in the general vicinity of Norse according to 2000 years of written and oral tradition. In fact, I don't believe the Norse anthropomorphized the earth at all, so the very concept is foreign to their mythology and is wholesale imported from the Greek tradition.

If you can accept that the comic can rewrite Gaia to be Norse, or somehow beyond the boundaries of the Norse pantheon so that her inclusion is a "minor" revision, then I don't follow why you can't accept the movie rewriting the Norse gods to include more than one skin color. What is the difference between these two changes?

 

[Greg Cox]

Will Sif have golden hair in this movie?

Is Sif even in the new movie? I believe the female lead is Jane Foster, played by Natalie Portman.

A character whom, it might be pointed out, appears nowhere in the traditional myths.

Heresy!

 

[Checkmate]

Put simply, "Gaia" is a Greek word, and the use of the word Gaia to represent the living embodiment of the earth is part of Greek mythology, not Norse, not pan-pantheonic - Greek. Only. Exclusively. Not even vaguely related etymologically or mythologically to anything that is even in the general vicinity of Norse according to 2000 years of written and oral tradition. In fact, I don't believe the Norse anthropomorphized the earth at all, so the very concept is foreign to their mythology and is wholesale imported from the Greek tradition.

Uhm. You should probably look up Fjorgyn and/or Jord sometime before you start ranting like that.

Just sayin'.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Will Sif have golden hair in this movie?

Is Sif even in the new movie? I believe the female lead is Jane Foster, played by Natalie Portman.

A character whom, it might be pointed out, appears nowhere in the traditional myths.

Heresy!

Heimdall is black! Sif isnt golden haired! (or in the movie) Next they'll be making Thor blond and clean shaven!!!!
Heresy is too small a word!!!!!!

 

[Lapis Exilis]

Put simply, "Gaia" is a Greek word, and the use of the word Gaia to represent the living embodiment of the earth is part of Greek mythology, not Norse, not pan-pantheonic - Greek. Only. Exclusively. Not even vaguely related etymologically or mythologically to anything that is even in the general vicinity of Norse according to 2000 years of written and oral tradition. In fact, I don't believe the Norse anthropomorphized the earth at all, so the very concept is foreign to their mythology and is wholesale imported from the Greek tradition.

Uhm. You should probably look up Fjorgyn and/or Jord sometime before you start ranting like that.

Just sayin'.

While both the words "Jord" and "Fjorgyn" are variants of Norse words for "earth", neither of the mythological entities so named are equivalent to the concept captured by the name Gaia. For example, Jord, the more commonly known name of the mother of Thor, is associated with the earth, but she is not the earth itself - which Gaia is. Jord is also a jotun and born of other entities. Gaia is the primordial earth, has no parents since she is the creatrix of the Greek pantheon, and has no human-like form (I did mispeak when I said anthropomorphized - which the Norse did and the Greek did not, so I applied that word where it did not belong in reference to Gaia) which was what I said regarding importing the concept of "Gaia", unless the comic has a female person walking about named Gaia and then it is more the situation that they simply gave Jord a Greek name. I'm not particularly familiar with the comic, so I don't know which it is.

But even if Jord were exactly equivalent to Gaia, it wouldn't change the main thrust of my "rant", as you call it, which is - why is it acceptable to import another culture's goddess into the Norse mythology of the comic book Thor, but not okay to import another culture's skin color into the Norse mythology of the comic book Thor? That is, after all, the subject of the debate at hand. Do you have an opinion on that question?

 

[Broccoli]

He's playing a god. They can look like whatever you want them to look like. This isn't like casting John Cho and Chris Rock to play JFK and RFK.

I would see that movie.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

I don't remember the Norse mythologies extended to the modern era, either.

Exactly, which is why it's nonsense to appeal to the original mythology to justify racist objections to non-traditional casting.

^ Worked fine on XENA and HERCULES and the new MERLIN tv series.

This sort of non-traditional casting is nothing new. Modern audiences have been accepting it for years now.

Exactly. This is a settled argument and has been for a while (except, perhaps, in the mythical "unreconstructed South").

 

[Hermiod]

The gentlemen doth protest too much, methinks.

That's your argument ?

How about explaining your nonsensical comment about James Rhodes taking over as Iron Man, for starters ?

 

[Trent Roman]

Exactly, which is why it's nonsense to appeal to the original mythology to justify racist objections to non-traditional casting.

Hey, watch how broadly you cast those aspersions. My point was, and remains, that the mythos should strive to be true to the cultural context. And yes, if Marvel's Asgard has spaceships, I'd like those kept out of the film too. Realism is obviously a futile goal in a fantasy film, but I'm generally of the opinion that naturalism makes for better superhero films.

Fictitiously yours, Trent Roman

 

[Hermiod]

I don't remember the Norse mythologies extended to the modern era, either.

Exactly, which is why it's nonsense to appeal to the original mythology to justify racist objections to non-traditional casting.

When I read through a thread full of comments about "white people this, white people that" from people who then claim the moral high ground and start calling others racist the only thing I can do is laugh.

My argument against casting purely iconic characters (such as Superman and Captain America) with actors who do not look the part has always been about respect for the artists who created them and not patronising minorities by throwing them a bone. Go find some racism in that, I dare you.