News Martin-Green: Star Trek And Diversity
- Thread starter AutoAdmin
- Start date
- Status
Oh, yeah, youtube comments. Who doesn't love them.
For those, who love The Flash: Read the comments on the newest episode on imdb. They're a treat too.
I think the diversity in Star Trek is more related to the stories and the world it depicts than in the casting. All those strange new worlds and civilizations, including the main cast and characters like Worf, Data, Spock, Odo, Garak, The Doctor, Chakotay, etc. All those various ways to view life and the nature of reality itself. I think it's what she meant.
That's something of a backwards reading of the issue. People aren't saying 'things are good if they have people like me in them', they're saying 'I'd like to see people like me in good things'. Having an underrepresented group as a major character in a successful and well written show is a big deal if you don't see yourself depicted on TV all the time. Having another stereotype or a poorly written character is not.
We're not there yet, that's what's happened to it. And we won't get there if we continue to accept the default character is a straight white male.
It's a good thing they didn't cast Ben Affleck as Black Panther.
Jokes aside, your point is well illustrated in the reaction some had to Idris Alba cast as Roland Deschain,
mind you, it wasn't a large number, but it was enough to leave me scratching my head, as if being white or black had anything real to do with the guy's character in the book, but there were still some getting their knickers in a knot over it.
GTFO really?
Didn't know or hear about that. Theater's history going back since forever is absolutely riddled with cross gender and cross ethnic casting,
some people exist to complain about anything.
Didn't know or hear about that. Theater's history going back since forever is absolutely riddled with cross gender and cross ethnic casting,
some people exist to complain about anything.
Yeah, there were a lot of noise about the Potter play
. As for Idris Elba in Gunslinger, I haven't read the books, but to me he was far and away the best part of the film (though I would never have found it a surprise that he'd be good in it)
Exactly. Some groups have been represented so much that they don’t even think about it. It’s just normal to them. Now they can’t comprehend that others aren’t happy with it and see them as being unreasonable to expect the most basic level of inclusion.
I think that's always the idea. I don't think many sit down and say "lets write a show with a diverse cast whether it sucks or not"
But sometimes it does seem that certain things are just checked off a list. Being first means little to me personally, I don't care if star trek does this or that "diverse thing" now, back then or whatever, as long as it's done honestly and with a good believable execution when they do it.
One of the reasons I enjoy Voyager is because Janeway is a convincing Captain who just happens to be female. Not a female who just happens to be a Captain. It matters that she was written (at least to me) to be an enduring, strong role model of a 'Captain'. Yet if it had been a male in the role it would've fitted as well, though I would argue that men and women though equal, can (but don't have to) draw upon their specific strengths that may be influenced by their gender. I stress I don't want to stereotype but the writers as an example with Janeway allowed her to be a little hands on in my opinion, without it being untoward. Dare I say it but she became a sister, a mother and an Amazon warrior if necessary. Those little pats on the back and hugs were very Janeway and it might have been harder to portray a male being fatherly that way. The writers and Kate's portrayal did at times make her gender a real plus, without messing with the story.
Story first though.
Story first though.
Having diversity and good stories are not mutually exclusive. It can be both, it can even open up new opportunities for good stories that weren’t available before. But people don’t want to hear that. Especially here.
That is correct. Diversity can actually enhance a story. At the end of the day we are looking at characters and protagonists in whatever glorious form they take.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with diversity for the sake of diversity. The alternative is white male only. Why not specifically hire women and racial minorities (and others) for roles? Do you have any idea of the number of years where casting calls included the caveat; white only or white male only? That used to be the default setting in TV and movie productions.
Shaonda Rhimes once made a big stink about casting agents sending nothing but white actors for roles in her shows. Apparently unless race is specified, casting agents automatically assume white actors are are being requested.
And why would you think that if minority actors win a role, it would not be based on their acting abilities and suitability for the role, but rather for the color of their skin? Any idea of the number of white actors that have been cast in roles over more qualified minorities, just because that actor was white?
The belief that when you see a show with a number of minority actors and women in roles previously thought to be for 'white men', that these actors got their roles because of their skin color or gender is both racist and sexist. Same for those who would think that this type of show is trying to make some sort of "statement" because it is using minorities and women in roles thought to be for white men. .
If one is white and male, this is an easy statement to make. It's not so easy when the default setting has been white male for the first 50 or so years of TV, and you're not white male..
Applying Dr. King's dream in this way is disingenuous at best. The way it is applied here is based on a false equivalency. In television and movies, if all things were equal, you'd maybe have a point, but that is not the case. Minorities and women continue to be way under represented in TV and movies. This is an industry, as are many others, where in order to look beyond the "norm", it takes a conscious effort.
Lin Manel-Miranda didn't get Hamilton cast the way he did by simply asking for an actor to play George Washington, or Thomas Jefferson. He had to be "specific". And, I would add, in doing so he created one of the greatest pieces of theater art, ever.
Last edited:
You are entirely correct that having diversity and good stories are not mutually exclusive. And indeed it can be both, but unfortunately that does not always occur.
A blatant example from the recent past was the huge loss in book sales that Marvel Comics suffered when its' quest for more diversity came at the cost of a lot of lousy stories -- at least as measured by the fact that people stopped buying their books in large numbers.
Thankfully, that has not always been the case. As I said elsewhere, the new Supergirl show changed the Jimmy Olsen character into a suave African American love interest for the heroine, and most viewers loved it. It also had a prominent lesbian relationship that was completely canonical with the existing comic stories. That show has been successful and is still going.
And likewise, at least as far as I can tell, Discovery is doing pretty good and IMHO has a nice diverse cast.
But as with the Marvel misstep, it is completely legitimate for a fan to fear that a beloved franchise might change to something that they no longer enjoy if the people in charge are so focused on some social message that they forget that people turn to them for entertainment first and foremost.
Sounds more like an issue with writing than diversity. Ultimate Spider-Man replaced Peter Parker with Miles Morales and he’s been a successful and popular addition. He’s even been hinted at in the current Marvel films and an animated movie about him is in production. Miles had even recently joined the mainstream Marvel universe under the title Spider-Man. So I highly doubt it has anything to do with social messages and more about compelling characters and interesting stories, something that comics are struggling with. So maybe you should blame bad writing and an over reliance on “event comics” instead of diversity.
Oh, it definitely was bad writing to blame. It's just that in many of the Marvel missteps that the writers tried to shield themselves behind a "diversity screen" to deflect criticism of their substandard stories. There's no need to up your game and write more entertaining books if you have the ready-made response of "My critics are all just intolerant bigots." after all.
Lots of people try to blame their lack of talent on others.Oh, it definitely was bad writing to blame. It's just that in many of the Marvel missteps that the writers tried to shield themselves behind a "diversity screen" to deflect criticism of their substandard stories. There's no need to up your game and write more entertaining books if you have the ready-made response of "My critics are all just intolerant bigots." after all.
Well, Dax did have that kiss...
- Status
Similar threads
- Poll
