Sunday, July 15, 2012

Star Wars and Racism

One of the harshest criticisms that has been bandied about about the Prequel Trilogy is the charge that it is chock-full of offensive racist stereotypes. It's an uncommon complaint, but it worms its way into the discussion if left long enough, as such accusations often do. However, people tend to forget two things.

1. People said the same thing about the Original Trilogy when they came out, and 2. In both cases, it's complete and utter bull.




Now, I feel that I must preface this article. And I realize that such prefaces tend to do more harm than good, but I need to say it. Racism is never all right. Racism, Sexism, Ableism, Homophobia, and all other forms of Xenophobia are one of the more horrible personality traits of the human race and it needs to stop. We've come a long way as a society in regards to that, but it does still exist.

All things considered, the races/sexes/orientations/religions/cultures are equal. They have the equal propensity to be good and bad. That's why always showing a particular group as positive role models is just as odious as always showing the same group as negative. Also, for the sake of possible commenters, there is no such thing as "reverse racism." The reverse of bigotry is acceptance. Prejudice is prejudice no matter where it comes from or towards whom it's directed. And it's disgusting in any form.

With that out of the way, how the hell does it relate to Star Wars?

If I were to simplify it, I'd say that people overreacted to what was essentially (to paraphrase Mel Brooks) a bunch of stupid accents. But simplifying only exacerbates the issue, so this article shall elaborate.

A number of I-III detractors have written them off as racist because they feel that several characters introduced in The Phantom Menace are offensive stereotypes. Never mind the fact that all of the characters in question are completely alien and like most non-human characters in fantasy and sci-fi have a host of different cultures as their inspiration. No, because two out of the three are technically villains and the third is perceived as a "bad" character despite being a hero, it counts as a negative portrayal of whatever race they remind people of the most.

Truth be told, I could kind of see how someone with those racist stereotypes on their mind (either as a victim or a perpetrator) could look at these characters extremely briefly out of context and have a knee-jerk reaction. However, I didn't notice it until someone told me, since I was actually watching the film, paying attention to the story, and seeing the characters as characters, the way it was meant to be. Also, they are clearly aliens and not at all analogous to one specific subset of human.

Let's take this one at a time.

The Nemoidians of the Trade Federation are seen as Asian stereotypes. This is odd because Asians are mostly stereotyped for positive traits that the Nemoidians do not posess. And the few truly negative parts of the classic Asian stereotype also don't fit the Nemoidians: they are not exotic or mystical, and their faces don't reflect the disgusting "Yellow Peril" image in the slightest. So where's the connection? Well, it's in the accent. The Nemodian's accents in Phantom and Clones (only Nute Gunray keeps it in Sith) do seem vaguely Asian, but nowhere near Charlie Chan standards. And besides, Lucas described it as "Transylvanian," which now that he mentions it I hear a little bit of mixed in (Grievous is the true Dracula here, though). Since the Nemoidians are greedy, easily-manipulated cowards, an accent like that must represent someone, right? Well, it does represent someone: The Nemoidians.

Let's look at this in-universe. To reiterate, the Nemoidians are greedy, easily-manipulated, and a bunch of cowards. It seems the perfect patsy race, no? It's hinted at in the films and spelled out in the Expanded Universe that the Empire is very anti-alien. Palpatine engineered it that way, by making the Seperatist leaders during the Clone Wars aliens (with the obvious exception of Dooku), offering the slimy non-humans as the bad guys for the Republic (soon to be the Empire). Now, why Palpatine was so hell-bent on human superiority when both his master (Darth Plaguis) and his first apprentice (Darth Maul) were aliens is unclear, but what is clear is that Lucas connected bigotry with one of the most evil institutions in fiction. I personally find it hard to accuse the man of racism after that.

Then there's Watto. Watto is mostly seen as anti-Semitic. As a Jew myself, I found that hard to believe. He is greedy, but he's also a gambler (a miser would never gamble). His accent sounded more Italian than Semitic (and speaking also as someone of Italian descent, this never bothered me), and this was the direction confirmed by his voice actor Andrew Secombre.

[I always have to point out that Andrew Secombre is the son of Harry "Mr. Bumble" Secombre because that's just awesome.]

"Okay," you say, "so if he isn't offending Jews he's offending Italians." Except that the pervasive negative stereotype involving Italians deals with Organized Crime, and Watto is never directly connected with the Hutts.

The problem with Watto is simple. Watto is a slave owner. No matter what they did with him, he was going to offend someone due to that little tidbit. The fact that his nose is a Tapir-like trunk just gave people an easy target. It's so pervasive that the hat Watto wears in Clones is described as Hassidic when it looks more like he's wearing a dinner plate. The strange thing is I find Watto disturbingly likable (disturbing because, you know, slave owner).

Who I'm totally not disturbed that I like is Jar Jar Binks. Yeah, you knew he was coming. I've written before on what I think about Jar Jar. Jar Jar was clearly a throwback to Charlie Chaplin and Buster Keaton. Yes, the Gungans are kind of evocative of the kind of wacky wayside tribe common in old serials (that didn't quite subscribe to equality), but they're sufficiently advanced and portrayed positively. The Ewoks were way worse in this regard, and that's not the biggest point against them.

Jar Jar and the Gungans also speaks pidgen English. While most racist stereotypes use pidgen English, not all pidgen English is racist. It's kind of truth in television that someone with limited access to a language wouldn't be the best at it, and it makes the Star Wars universe seem much bigger. I've heard the accent described as Jamaican. If you want to hear a Jamaican accent in a fantasy setting, roll a Troll in World of Warcraft because Gunganeese sounds completely different. The only possible argument you could make for Jar Jar sounding at all African American is the fact that Ahmed Best just happens to be African American. That's like calling Qui-Gon an Irish stereotype because Liam Neeson lets his natural accent slip out once or twice.

The problem lies where it always has. Jar Jar's biggest haters are the ones that take is perceived uselessness, which sets up the point about everyone being useful despite appearances, at face-value. And the sad fact is that a big part of prejudice is about painting the victim as useless. So, a funny-talking useless thing? That just has to be racist to something, thereby giving the hateboys another reason to justify their hatred. It's also seeing in yourself some of the perceived negative traits of Jar Jar, and if you happen to be part of an ethnic group put down for supposedly possessing similar traits, it's going to cause a knee-jerk.

But the important thing to remember here is context. These are not African-Americans, or Asians, or Jews, or Jamaicans, or Arabs, or anything. They are aliens. they are fantasy races in a fantasy universe with no one cultural inspiration. They are mythic archetypes that have been a part of stories since there was such a thing as a "story", and they've been filled by every ethnic group under the sun at one point or another.

One more thing before I wrap this little treatise up. You remember way back at the beginning of the article when I mentioned that the same types of arguments were being levied at IV-VI during their release? Well, I'm sure if you're a Kevin Smith fan, you remember this scene from "Chasing Amy" (extreme language warning):

Now, this is played for laughs (spoiler alert: Jason Lee lives and it was all staged), because it is such a ridiculous notion and an obvious overreaction to the classic literary and theatrical motif of the villain in dark clothing. But what people don't remember is that the exact same argument was made during the initial release of IV-VI. The difference is the Internet. The Internet didn't exist back then, so the argument didn't have a chance to spread in the same way and was rarely taken seriously. Now, with everyone having such a great megaphone for their ideas and opinions, it's harder for the masses to sort the good points from the silly ramblings. Everything seems official, because there it is written in words.

It was a laughable argument then, and it is a laughable argument now. We need to stop this mislabeling of Star Wars if we are ever to have a reasonable discussion of it again.

27 comments:

  1. Hello Nilblog,

    Not a bad article. Since I am from Germany, I can guarantee you that the Neimoidians have a distinct French accent in the dubbed version (and I've heard that they have a German one in the French version - NAZIS in SPACE!!!111one invading peaceful Naboo! ;-) ).

    To offer a slightly different point of view, I've dug out an old article on starwarz.com from 2003 where they try to answer whether Star Wars (4-6 included) is racist or not. The conclusion is a bit different than yours, they state in fact:
    "While the charges of outright racism hold little merit, Lucas is certainly guilty of exploiting racial stereotypes. From Nute Gunray to Jar Jar to Watto, the undertones are there. I don't think it was a personal goal of Lucas to offend specific ethnic groups, but he certainly wasn't subtle in the way in which used them to create his characters."
    However, they conclude:
    "Sometimes, however, people take things way to seriously. If we remember that the STAR WARS saga is just movies meant to entertain, we'd be much better off. Let's focus on more important issues and leave the movie making, and character development to Lucas and company."

    The article (http://www.starwarz.com/tbone/index.php?categoryid=22&p2_articleid=51) offers a different perspective, but I think you make also some good points. However, I must confess I am more with the "Lucas uses stereotypes" than with your point of view, but I also think that Lucas did so in a naive way, if anything.

    BTW, I have never considered Darth Sidious to be a racist - that's not the impression I got when I watched the movies. I am however aware of the EU interpretation, but since I am not into the EU, I am not even sure whether I consider it to be part of my "personal canon". ;-)

    ReplyDelete
  2. Hm, Wookieepedia states that the Neimoidians have a Russian accent in the French version. So it's "Communists in Space invading the free world (of Naboo)!!!!!"

    ReplyDelete
  3. But regardless of what Lucas really thought when he and his team created Jar Jar, the Neimoidians etc... I definitely cannot see that anyone will become a racist because of the (possible) stereotypes used. I won't think that someone is a slave owner and only interested in money because he has a curved nose (like me, btw). The normal viewer will IMHO link possible negative aspects not to human beings that speak like the Neimoidians, but to the race of the Neimoidians itself.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's never been a stereotype against a race or races, it's a character archetype that's existed since the beginning of storytelling. The fact that racial stereotypes have filled these archetypal roles more often than we should be comfortable with is purely coincidental.

      Delete
  4. "But the important thing to remember here is context. These are not African-Americans, or Asians, or Jews, or Jamaicans, or Arabs, or anything. They are aliens. they are fantasy races in a fantasy universe with no one cultural inspiration."

    But they are written by a real-life person who is doubtlessly influenced by the culture around him. All sci-fi is grounded or connected in some way in real life (otherwise you get escapism, which is horrible in its own right). The problem with a character like Jar-Jar is that he's written as a tribute to old slapstick minstrel characters of the 30's and 40's (much of Lucas's Star Wars is a tribute to that era, after all), but didn't quite consider the unfortunate implications of such a character in modern cinema.

    There's a very good passage concerning racism in Phil Sandifer's TARDIS Eruditorum blog, in which he points out that most instances of racism aren't the writer cackling about how he'll put that race in their proper place or something similar, but rather that stereotypes become so commonplace as to become comfortable, and so the only time we would see, say, an Asian actor being cast in Star Wars would be for a part that's a distinctly foreign stereotype. It's accidental, but it's still racism.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. How do you know if Lucas was basing the character on slapstick minstrel shows since Jar Jar had never performed any musical numbers in "The Phantom Menace" and no blackface character ever became a senatorial representative in a minstrel show?

      Delete
    2. Just because Jar-Jar didn't perform any songs or a minstrel character never became a senatorial representative doesn't mean Jar-Jar still didn't take inspiration from such characters.

      If you ever watch a minstrel character from the 30s and compare them to Jar-Jar, a lot of the behaviors, movements, and such are extremely similar (not to mention the pidgin English, which I can't think of an instance when it's not used as part of a stereotype).

      Delete
    3. (Incidentally though, Jar-Jar's instances of racism really only extend to Phantom Menace. The sparsity of scenes in the later films and the fact that his narrative role is dramatically changed with Attack means that the racism is diminished almost entirely in the next two films. It still doesn't excuse the character as he appears in Phantom Menace, however)

      Delete
    4. Again, it's obvious Charlie Chaplin and Buster Keaton are Jar Jar's slapstick forebears, not the minstrel shows.

      Delete
    5. How obvious? Again, if you were to watch old minstrel characters, there's a lot of similarities.

      I'd like to quote from Patricia William's article on the racism (back from 1999, about a month after the film came out). The whole article's worth a read, she offers a very mature and informed take on the issue:

      "Whether intentionally or not, Jar Jar's pratfalls and high jinks borrow heavily from the genre of minstrelsy. Despite the amphibian get-up, his relentless, panicky, manchild-like idiocy is imported directly from the days of Amos 'N' Andy. And whether it were a white man, a black woman or Al Jolson himself beneath the mask, what would still make all the clowning so particularly insulting is the fact that Jar Jar's speech is a weird pidgin mush of West African, Caribbean and African-American linguistic styles.

      Jar Jar bubbles with soundbites: "You-sa Jedi not all you-sa cracked up to be." "Me berry berry scay-yud." "We-sa goin in da wah-tah, okeyday?" Or, every time he does something so buffoonish as to require outright sanction: "Why me-sa always da one?" None of the Gungans have mastered much in the way of oratory. Indeed, Star Wars Episode I: The Visual Dictionary, now peddled in bookstores everywhere, assures us that "few Gungans speak the pure Gungan language." Yet English (or "Galactic Basic," as the dictionary calls it) is also beyond their command. The fat-faced, toadlike ruler of the Gungan race, who is called Boss Nass and who seems to be wearing the distinctive West African robe known as a boubou, expresses his resentment of his grammatically coherent planetary neighbors, the Naboo, in the following terms: "Dey tink dey so smartee, dey tink dey brains so big."

      The Phantom Menace is filled with the hierarchies of accent and class status. The Jedi knights speak in full paragraphs, resonant baritones and crisp British accents. White slaves (like Anakin Skywalker and his mother) and the graceful conquered women of the Naboo speak with the brusque, determined innocence of middle-class Americans. The "status-obsessed," hive-dwelling Neimoidians, on the other hand--who are "known for their exceptional organizing abilities," and who lead "a labyrinthine organization of bureaucrats and trade officials from many worlds that has insinuated itself throughout the galaxy"--speak like Charlie Chan. (In the dictionary, pictures of the Neimoidians are embellished with explanatory captions like: "underhanded gesture," "wheedling expression" and "insincere gesture of innocence.")"

      Delete
    6. Jar Jar never once says the first line, and she's got the inflection of the other two completely off (it's "underwater" not "in da water", and it's "scared" not "scay-yud"). "Why Meesa Always the One" was in print books only, and is hardly a racist sentiment. Nass' line is correct, but it's for laughs with no racist connotation.

      Which brings me back to my point. The Gungans are relatively primitive but at the end of the day are just as capable and noble as the humans, despite rather glaring differences they are living beings and worth representation. Any racism is in the mind of these reviewers making the accusations. We should be sensitive to racial issues, but not so sensitive that we keep perpetuating these false positives because of some coincidental similarities.

      Delete
    7. Even if she does miss the inflection of the lines (it has been forever since I've seen TPM, so I can't comment that specifically myself), the language of the Gungans is still one made mostly of pidgin English, and much derived from films of yesteryear. Lucas may not have meant it intentionally (racism rarely happens that way), but that doesn't mean it isn't there.

      It's mostly the third paragraph that I wanted to bring attention to, though- that's where the really difficult parts of the film come into play (incidentally, a larger issue with Star Wars (including the OT) is that all the bad guys are foreigners. Just saying...).

      Delete
    8. Like I had said, Pidgin does not equal Racist. It's truth in television and one of the ways that the heroes look down on the Gungans to their own detriment. To say that the Gungans are inherently racist because they speak a pidgin is missing the forest for the trees.

      And again, I thought I made the point that the Nemoidians aren't exactly speaking an Asian accent in the first place, and they're supposed to sound weird because they are Palpatine's scapegoats. Palpatine is exploiting them. They're merely businessmen. Greedy with little scruples, but businessmen.

      Delete
    9. Pidgin is pretty much racist, at least when applied to foreign cultures. You're right that there's a certain amount of realism to it, but generally it's used as shorthand for us to either think detrimentally or kindly about a particular race (East of Eden and Pacific Overtures comments on its use quite well). I'm not saying they're racist caricatures merely because of the language, I'm saying they're racist because every decision made towards they're design lends itself to a rather racist view of African culture (to the point that Boss Nass practically wears a boubou). A case could be made that the Gungans are allegorical for Africans and as such their usage in the film is intended to be an anti-racist message, but it's still botched in how it's handled.

      As for the Nemoidians, the accents are for my money entirely Asian, and the qualities you listed are all Asian stereotypes (particularly of the Chinese). Obviously in the film they're made that way to fit their particular role, but consider that they could've been given any accent- an English or American one would've done just as well. Instead, we get an English actor doing an Asian impersonation (and as the paragraph I quotes points out, the language in the script is specifically written in cut phrases and the like- in script and execution, they're troublesome characters).

      Delete
    10. I suppose we'll have to agree to disagree. I believe it is unfair and plain wrong to assume that broken English is inherently racist. Though it can and often has been used to that effect, the two are hardly mutually inclusive. Obviously you believe very differently and I'll admit it's a very ambiguous topic. Therefore, knowing that we'll probably never be able to convince each other, I'd like to end this amicably rather than keep going on and on risking repetition and rudeness.

      Delete
  5. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    2. Well, at least you have an awesome Nicodemus avatar...

      Delete
  6. Lucas hasn't been the only one to face this kind of criticism. Look at the backlash that James Cameron dealt with after "Avatar": people were drawing comparisons between the Na'avi and Native Americans and labeling the film a "White Messiah" story simply because a white man led a race of aliens to victory. Even Disney was accused by hyena biologists of speciesism because of the way hyenas were portrayed in "The Lion King".

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well, Avatar is pretty galling when it comes to its morals and politics (I wouldn't accuse it of racism, but it has a host of other problems anyways).

      Delete
    2. I like Avatar a lot, though I'll admit its message is slightly anvilicious and slightly muddled. The Hyenas of Lion King are based on common misconceptions that are untrue and the truth does need to be spread. However, I love The Lion King as well, and in fact knowing the truth of Hyenas makes me feel more for what the three characters are going through, but I'll tackle that in my Anniversary review (in about two years)

      Delete
  7. I note that no one ever accuses Lucas of saying something about the British because the Imperial officers almost all have some sort of English accent.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Eddie Izzard did a bit on it once. He used it to segue into a bit on how Vader wouldn't have been as menacing with the same kind of British accent (which dailies of Prowse prove).

      Delete
  8. Star Wars fans didn't even know who Stepin Fetchit was until some stupid critic tried to say that Jar Jar was based on him. And then they all just used it to pile on, because they hated CG, Jar Jar's voice and physical comedy. When Return of the Jedi was in theatres, the biggest laugh came when Wicket hit himself in the face with a bolo. Lighten up, people.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There is a difference, and I feel a big one, between an African-American putting on a silly voice, and someone putting on a "silly black voice". The latter is almost always racist, but there's nothing wrong at all with the former. Sometimes, and this applies to people of all ethnicities, it can be difficult to hide our natural vocal qualities no matter how versitile we are (Kevin Clash being one notable exception).

      Delete
    2. Black voices can be funny. Just think about how Danny Glover says "I'm gettin' too old fo' this shit." It adds character. It wouldn't be as funny if it was a white man TV announcer voice. "I'm getting too old for this shit!" Black accents are down to earth. With Jar Jar, as an outcast, the black actor sounded unpretentious, which added to his wholesome character and likeability, in contrast with the stuffy characters. "Tellin' it like it is." Appreciate, don't hate.

      Delete
    3. Again, though, my point is that Ahmed Best isn't doing amy voice other than a silly alien voice. It's just enough of his natural voice came through that people mistook it for something more sinister.

      As much as I think people make too much of accents, there is a fine line between character flavor and ethnic stereotyping, so you need to tread VERY carefully when using something like that.

      Delete