An Actress to play Honor Harrington

yannosh wrote:Rose, I am sorry to say, but you are being reverse racist.

Honor has been repeatedly stated to have nothing in common with Alison BUT the eyes.

That in no for or means makes her a non-caucasian.

I'm not saying Honor should be white. I am saying that excluding white actresses over that reason is JUST as racist as excluding non-caucasians from the roll.

First requirement MUST be ability to pull it off. Beyond that I don't care if they have a inuit transexual for the role. It is all window dressing.

Now, casting all Caucasian cast would be a racist move. But forcing people who have so far been rather more open to working with the fanbase and the author than anyone familiar with Hollywood could hope to expect to thin out the talent pool because most of Hollywood studios mismanage the matter of race of heroes and especially heroines would be plain wrong.

Except white actors don't have a history of being excluded even from roles written for them. Minorities do. Look, I get where you're coming from, but you're wrong.

First of all, Honor is canonically half-Asian - Allison is "of nearly pure Old Earth Oriental extraction." That's a direct quote. So yes, she is half-Asian.

You all know by now that I'm bisexual, right? So I know what it means to be part of a demographic that is constantly and comprehensively erased from media. Let's say, for instance, that Honor was lesbian. I know she's not, but just as a hypothetical. If Honor in the books was written as a lesbian, but in the films she was portrayed as straight, that is the exact same kind of erasure we're talking about here. And, coming from someone who has experienced that kind of erasure, it hurts. And it's cruel. It's not "all window dressing". It's the farthest thing from it.

There are so few roles for minorities as it is - do you have to take this one away from them too, on the old "but what if the white actor can do it just as well?" saw? Well, so what if they can? They can go audition for Star Trek. They can go audition for the next Battlestar Galactica spinoff. They can audition for one of the seventy bajillion Marvel films coming up. They can audition for literally hundreds, if not thousands, of roles written for white actors.

Your argument about Evergreen having to "winnow through" to find actors of Asian descent, as though they were as rare as hens' teeth, just doesn't hold any water. I can think of four actresses off the top of my head who could and would kick butt as Honor Harrington - Kristin Kreuk, Jamie Chung, Olivia Munn, and Moon Bloodgood - without even trying, and that's not including the dozens of other young Asian women who haven't achieved name recognition yet. The idea that finding an Asian or part-Asian actress capable of not only playing Honor but doing her true justice is going to be difficult is ludicrous.

I really don't want to hijack this thread for a social justice debate, but I do suggest you do a bit of research about whitewashing in Hollywood and why it's such a problem. Go read this article. I think it's a good starting point.

And I'd like to ask you just one question: if we were talking about casting a white actor as Queen Elizabeth or Michelle Henke, would this even be a debate?

Rose, I sympathize with your argument but wonder if you're making more of it than needs be? We currently have no idea how the cast will flesh out. Personally they better have diversity on the part of the Manties. On the other hand, if the cast is diverse enough are you making too much ado about it? Especially if they still have her Mother as the tiny woman of Asian descent?

We're not talking about SciFi's abortion of an Earthsea attempt here, where screwing around with people's race changed the message of the story. We just want the best person to play the part.

yannosh wrote:Rose, I am sorry to say, but you are being reverse racist.

Honor has been repeatedly stated to have nothing in common with Alison BUT the eyes.

That in no for or means makes her a non-caucasian.

I'm not saying Honor should be white. I am saying that excluding white actresses over that reason is JUST as racist as excluding non-caucasians from the roll.

First requirement MUST be ability to pull it off. Beyond that I don't care if they have a inuit transexual for the role. It is all window dressing.

Now, casting all Caucasian cast would be a racist move. But forcing people who have so far been rather more open to working with the fanbase and the author than anyone familiar with Hollywood could hope to expect to thin out the talent pool because most of Hollywood studios mismanage the matter of race of heroes and especially heroines would be plain wrong.

It was your use of "reverse racism" that made me want to respond to this, but first I have to say, this video fairly well sums up my views on this mater. Specifically the points:
"White actors playing characters of different races is a thorny issue because A) it means the denial of work to non-white actors for whom choice roles are hard enough to come by, unless your name is Will Smith, Denzel Washington, or you're willing to debase yourself in a Tyler Parry production, and B) it calls to mind the ugly, deplorable history of black face performances in early Hollywood."

In a perfect world, it wouldn't really matter that much, however, we live in this one. In this world, white male cisgender heterosexuals have an advantage over basically everyone else, and anybody who falls into three of those categories have an advantage over people who fall into two or fewer of them. Over the last fifty or so years, we have made huge steps towards true equality, but we have not gotten there yet.

Taking one of the many many traditionally white roles in most movies, and casting a black man in it, (i.e. Heimdall in Thor) is very much a different thing that taking one of the rather fewer roles written for a minority and casting a white person in it. And it is even worse taking a canonically minority role and casting a white actress.

Now mind you, I am not saying companies should promote somebody simply because of the color of their skin, however, in a visual media, when a specific race is called for, be it black, Asian, Hispanic or any thing else, casting a white actor in it is racist.

As for "reverse racism," there is no such thing. The definition of racism is prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone based on his or her race. The very fact that racism against whites is labeled "reverse racism" is, in and of it self, racist.

And I agree with Rose's point. Nobody would even consider casting a white woman for QEIII, and what is so different about a white woman playing Honor?

BrightSoul wrote:On the other hand, if the cast is diverse enough are you making too much ado about it? Especially if they still have her Mother as the tiny woman of Asian descent?

In my opinion that would be even worse. A white woman with an Asian mother? That would basically be saying, "Yep we know she should have some Asian in her, but F*@K it, who needs 'em." I mean, a casting choice like that would get a lot of publicity, but not the kind you want.

There are very few roles for Asian actors and actresses that are not foreigners or geeks, taking a strong, self-confident ships captain away from them? That is racist, no two ways to look at it.

You people want to talk about oppressed minorities?
Not quite the same bu-ut - Try living and growing up in Serbia with a very obvious Croatian last name during and after the fallout of Yugoslavia. Try enduring people refusing to allow your croatian great-grandfather to be buried on your local cemetary because he was a guard at Jasenovac - who cares about the fact that he smuggled out and aided the escape of serb prisoners. Including my father's other grandfather.

No, it is not quite the same as issue of race. But I do understand what discrimination is, painfully so. So, please don't condescend.

And, rose, the issue about Beth and Mike? Yes, it would still be a debate. So long as the cast is Multietnic, the matter of individual roles being done by specific races is window dressing. Would it be nice if everyone is as close as they are canonicaly? Yes. Even heck yes. But does that mean that physical description should be held over talent? Heck to the power of googleplex NO!

And, my friend is married to a chinese woman and their son would beg to differ against your point. The kid literally inherited nothing from her. And, I kinda doubt that he will start showing oriental traits at thirtheen. Genetics are a funny thing, and a matter of someone from a theoretical future who has a gen-mod locked into her genome? Oh, boy...

Crew, I was using the term reverse racist to colloquially denote that racism was being used as a response to perceived racism. And the cry of "Honor can't be played by a white actress! She has chinese mother!" IS racist.

And my final point - Do not, I repeat DO NOT lump Evergreen with the rest of Hollywood. They have shown themselves ready to cooperate with MWW and us here to an unprecedented level so far. MWW trusts them to do things right. So do I. For all my yelling and Hollering for Wheaton as Theisman, I believe I will find whomever gets the role just as acceptable. I have faith in Evergreen.

crewdude48 wrote:"SNIP"
Taking one of the many many traditionally white roles in most movies, and casting a black man in it, (i.e. Heimdall in Thor) is very much a different thing that taking one of the rather fewer roles written for a minority and casting a white person in it. And it is even worse taking a canonically minority role and casting a white actress.

"Snip"

As for "reverse racism," there is no such thing. The definition of racism is prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone based on his or her race. The very fact that racism against whites is labeled "reverse racism" is, in and of it self, racist.
"Snip"

Casting a charactor, like Heimdall, as a black man, and Nick Fury, when both charactors are established white people should be just as bad as casting a white person for Mike or Elizabeth. Or when Anthony Hopkins played Othello in the play of the same name. It should makes no difference.
As for reverse racism, it does exist, it is when a person bases a decision against a white person on the fact that he is white, or, more clearly stated, on the fact that he is non-minority. This happens many times when dealing with job hiring and the need to proved they are an equal opprotunity employer so they hire a lesser quailified person to be more diverse.
It dons not always happen, just like people don't always get hired because they are white, but it exists. PERIOD.




I am thinking a Sean Connery from the hunto for the Red October days for Whitehaven.

Commodore Oakius wrote:

crewdude48 wrote:"SNIP"
Taking one of the many many traditionally white roles in most movies, and casting a black man in it, (i.e. Heimdall in Thor) is very much a different thing that taking one of the rather fewer roles written for a minority and casting a white person in it. And it is even worse taking a canonically minority role and casting a white actress.

"Snip"

As for "reverse racism," there is no such thing. The definition of racism is prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone based on his or her race. The very fact that racism against whites is labeled "reverse racism" is, in and of it self, racist.
"Snip"

Casting a charactor, like Heimdall, as a black man, and Nick Fury, when both charactors are established white people should be just as bad as casting a white person for Mike or Elizabeth. Or when Anthony Hopkins played Othello in the play of the same name. It should makes no difference.
As for reverse racism, it does exist, it is when a person bases a decision against a white person on the fact that he is white, or, more clearly stated, on the fact that he is non-minority. This happens many times when dealing with job hiring and the need to proved they are an equal opprotunity employer so they hire a lesser quailified person to be more diverse.
It dons not always happen, just like people don't always get hired because they are white, but it exists. PERIOD.




I am thinking a Sean Connery from the hunto for the Red October days for Whitehaven.

First, I am not saying that changing a character from white to a minority is not something, but there have been a lot fewer minority parts in general, so in order to present a reasonable depiction of race distribution, some of them will need to change. If you want an example of why it is different, watch breakfast at tiffany's. Yellowface and blackface were the norm for so long, that taking extra steps to avoid looking any thing remotely like it is a good thing.

But not being hired because you are white is not reverse anything, it is simply racism. The fact is that calling it reverse racisim implies that white people are at the top of the pile, and racism against them is so much more unthinkable than any other kind.

I think I would be more OK if they whitewashed Honor's family than if they had a white actress in yellowface. I would be upset mind you, but slightly less upset.

PS, duckk, please don't lock this thread. I feel that this discussion is getting interesting, and has remained non-insulting. If it does get bad, just say "one more post from each of you, then drop it," and I think we will.

roseandheather wrote:Snip
First of all, Honor is canonically half-Asian - Allison is "of nearly pure Old Earth Oriental extraction." That's a direct quote. So yes, she is half-Asian.
Snip

I just finished the 3rd comic, I know I am way late on this , but do you feel that they portrayed her as asian in the comic? I have to say I don't, but that is my opinion. I agree, she should be a part asian actress, just debating your calling it racism if it turns out to be white. If it was a calculated call, someone saying, "You know what, I know she has asian decent in her but we should make her pure caucasian because I think a white actress (any white actress in this example) can do it better." That would be racism. Just her being played by a white actress who happenes to be better at the role then the asian actresses who audition, that is not racism. IT has to be a delibrate attempt to suppress the asian side.

crewdude48 wrote:Snip
But not being hired because you are white is not reverse anything, it is simply racism. The fact is that calling it reverse racisim implies that white people are at the top of the pile, and racism against them is so much more unthinkable than any other kind.
Snip
PS, duckk, please don't lock this thread. I feel that this discussion is getting interesting, and has remained non-insulting. If it does get bad, just say "one more post from each of you, then drop it," and I think we will.

Touche, I will agree that calling it reverse racism could be misconstrued. In my defense, and others also I feel, but they can deny my actions and words , in discussions with others racism has a conotation of white against others, not the, sorry have to say it this way, not the reverse ( little joke). By saying reverse racsim, while I see your point as possible, I think it more probable that they will get the understanding intended and meant, not the one that leads to further issues.

And i second your point about the convo. If I have offended then please forgive, I don't think anyone did, but to be safe . We could alwasy transfer this convo to a free range post.

Here I must disagree:

crewdude48 wrote:First, I am not saying that changing a character from white to a minority is not something, but there have been a lot fewer minority parts in general, so in order to present a reasonable depiction of race distribution, some of them will need to change. If you want an example of why it is different, watch breakfast at tiffany's. Yellowface and blackface were the norm for so long, that taking extra steps to avoid looking any thing remotely like it is a good thing.

I bolded a part I have a question on:
Why do we need this reasonable depiction of race distribution? And why do we need to change white roles to minority to achieve it?
I dont see why he have to present this depiction. Please elaborate on your reasons. If the story is written a certain way, then thats the way it is.
And, if you want to have more minorities in movies, then the stories should be written that way, not changing the charactor from what exists.

Commodore Oakius wrote:Why do we need this reasonable depiction of race distribution?

Perhaps reasonable was not the correct word. Maybe "accurate" would have been better. In the US, we have a population that is about 65% white, 15% black, 15% hispanic, 5% asian. That means in any random group of 10 people, the odds of them being all white is just over 13 in 1000. It does happen, but unless you are trying to do it, it is kind of rare. If a movie is set in Finland or in the state of Vermont, both with 96+% white population, that is one thing; but if it is set in New York City, with a 45% white population, and the only minority people we see are in the background, it is something else.

Commodore Oakius wrote: And why do we need to change white roles to minority to achieve it?

Because of the fact that about 95% of leading roles are written for white charterers. It is just unrealistic.

Commodore Oakius wrote:I dont see why he have to present this depiction. Please elaborate on your reasons. If the story is written a certain way, then thats the way it is.

The example of Nick Fury is an excellent one. The character first appeared in 1963. At that point in time, there were basically no black comic book (or movie for that matter) characters who were not out and out stereotypical and highly offensive depictions of black people. When you are adapting something from that long ago, part of the updating is chipping off the whitewash. Having an all white cast would be as out of place today as a "high tech communicator" that was the size of a briefcase.

Commodore Oakius wrote:And, if you want to have more minorities in movies, then the stories should be written that way, not changing the charactor from what exists.

The Honorverse IS written that way. That is why some of us are so very very against a white actress in Honor's role.

I am not getting frustrated or anything but most of your points I have to disagree with. Not your actual points, such as the % of whites vs others, but things like taking a charactor, written white, and making it minority. It shouldn't be done. Neither should a half asain woman be cast as a white woman, unless the description of the woman states it. I need to go back and re-read the discriptions of honr to get a good feel of her looks. Someone mentioned it was just her eyes?
Regardless, I think we have to agree to disagree on the politics of the issue.

As stated before, I think an actress of asian decent should play Honor, and in the spirit of that, Linda Park, Hoshi for Star Trek Enterprise. She seems all meek and mild but re-watch the mirrorverse episode with her being all agressive. I think she could pull it off. Might just fit the age range needed too.