before anyone get’s too excited: the spanking part in the headline is not meant literally : (
I like this tweet, though; from the same exchange
https://twitter.com/chevalier_cygne/status/732130495551700992
Sorry, I missed the bit that means he has an irrational fear of foreigners.
ÂFTFA
Well at least now we know that casting Scarlett Johannson as the lead for Ghost in the Shell is okay, glad that’s settled.
Yeah, but it’s clearly a WHITE swan.
I’m a UKIP councillor too and I don’t have an irrational fear of foreigners. So which bit of his tweet indicates an irrational fear of foreigners?
does that mean you don’t fear foreigners, or that your fear is “rational” ?
Exactly what in the “smart” answer from the historian justify casting an actress with dark skin? Historically the fact that they thought she descended from a swan could be because her skin was actually very light and pale, which was probably quite common in Lorraine…
The BBC used a work of Shakespeare, based on a historical figure mixed with myths, to create a faux-historical TV series. So the “smart” part was for me the pointing out of the myths to ridicule the “historical accuracy” statement. The Shakespearean history plays are more or less fictional, why should an adaption try to follow the scientific knowledge?
He was merely wondering why… uhm… they needed to, uh, cast a fully human actress for the part… is the BBC attempting to say that there were… no women who were once, uhm… swans… capable of playing the part?
Of course this way you can do whatever you want with a “fictional” work even if it’s based on “real” people. For example you can cast a white caucasian to play Moses or Jesus, or a white actress to play the role of the lead character of a japanese manga/anime and no one would be upset… no wait…
Why does it need to be justified? Is there something wrong with a dark-skinned actress playing a historical figure from the UK? Should they be hiring white actresses who are not as skilled for the role just because they’re white? Under what conditions is it acceptable to you for a representation to diverge from the source material?
I wonder if this is modern people misreading medieval imagery. There, apparently, were portraits of her mother:
Her wikipedia page suggests that she seems to have had an interesting life too.
it’s not my genre*, so I have to ask - are there any movies with a actor from Mid East playing Jesus?
* the only Christian drama I can name is the Gibson thingy, and Jim Caviezel looks rather white
Looking down this list, I see one name that looks Middle Eastern: Ahmad Soleimani Nia in the Iranian film [The Messiah] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Messiah_(2007_film)).
Of course, that’s not to say that all of the other people on the list are white Caucasians — just that I can’t spot any obvious names that would indicate otherwise.
Ok… sooo, just curious then. Obviously she wasn’t a swan. What was her ancestry? I don’t really care if they mix things up as to which actors play what (who?). But even though the manuscript is about swan metamorphosis, it doesn’t really counter the argument that historically she was white.
Who is countering the argument that historically she was white?
I personally don’t give a damn about who plays who. But if there’s a historical inaccuracy and someone (even if a stupid someone) points that out, I don’t see how that kind of response is going to be useful in any way.
OH, I thought that was the whole point of the twitter war.
But to be honest, I don’t get twitter so maybe it’s just me.
