Racial Diversity in FE

[Interdimensional Observer]

5 hours ago, Extrasolar said:

100% for more skin tones for an Avatar, and more varied than the ones we got in Pokemon too.

Bring to mind the Pokemon Battle Revolution addition of skin tones in the international release and the changing of some its characters' skin tones to the new darker ones. Had to bring that up just to please ya Extrasolar. I'll personally say that the localization change was good.

 

6 hours ago, Jotari said:

Not for the sake of racial diversity but because Robin's father simply aint white. I'm not sure what he is but that's not the sort of complexion I'd expect from Robin's father.

Validar is not human. He is a knockoff generic Disney villain. I guess IS thought Disney rejects weren't a bad idea after getting more than their five cent's worth out of Tibarn, but gosh they were wrong. Seriously, in the Validar "dies" sequence, he looks totally inhuman and I can't get over that.

[Tolvir]

11 hours ago, Extrasolar said:

I'm all for adding diversity in FE in order to reflect the real world and their own fanbase. It's nice to finally get some more non-white (or non European-coded/pale-skinned) characters outside of the very few we've gotten in the past. Hope IS continues this in FE switch and beyond.

....Considering that the old characters had very little in the way of actual character, how is changing their skin color completely changing their characters? You said it yourself. "Their names and roles in the story stayed." So....

Its about keeping the source material the way it was intended. When you start changing things from the source material, you start losing respect for what was originally there. Sure Fire Emblem Gaiden was very bare bones and had technical limitations, but that doesnt mean we should start changing things about what was there.

I find it less of a deal here, since it really wont effect much of anything. But I have a huge problem with this in our live action media, like changing the race of a well known character for the sake of diversity. It is a sign that the people on the project are willing to outright defy what was in the source material, and therefore lack respect for what the original writers intended.

Fire Emblem largely is based on European cultures. Nohr was heavily based on Rome, Valm seems to be based on Northern Europe, etc. Throwing in diversity for the sake of diversity wouldnt make sense. If there is suddenly a black guy in there, I want to know why he is there. Is he a traveling merchant from another country? A Mercenary? Why is he here in a country that is clearly not his home country? So essentially, dont just shoehorn it in without explenation. Give me a story why they are there. Explain they are from another continent/country, give me a reason why they left, etc. Which is what they did with Kamui in SoV. He is clearly asian, and is explained to come from another country. Perfect. That is what I want with it. Have it make sense in the story, and I will be fine.

So I am fine with diversity in FE, just dont shoehorn it in. And especially dont change the source material. Gaiden may not be as big of a deal due to their overall vagueness, but I dont want to see a ton of characters in Tellius suddenly asian. Respect the source material and the story the original writers put together.

Edited March 16, 2017 by Tolvir

[Jotari]

14 minutes ago, Tolvir said:

Its about keeping the source material the way it was intended. When you start changing things from the source material, you start losing respect for what was originally there. Sure Fire Emblem Gaiden was very bare bones and had technical limitations, but that doesnt mean we should start changing things about what was there.

I find it less of a deal here, since it really wont effect much of anything. But I have a huge problem with this in our live action media, like changing the race of a well known character for the sake of diversity. It is a sign that the people on the project are willing to outright defy what was in the source material, and therefore lack respect for what the original writers intended.

Fire Emblem largely is based on European cultures. Nohr was heavily based on Rome, Valm seems to be based on Northern Europe, etc. Throwing in diversity for the sake of diversity wouldnt make sense. If there is suddenly a black guy in there, I want to know why he is there. Is he a traveling merchant from another country? A Mercenary? Why is he here in a country that is clearly not his home country? So essentially, dont just shoehorn it in without explenation. Give me a story why they are there. Explain they are from another continent/country, give me a reason why they left, etc. Which is what they did with Kamui in SoV. He is clearly asian, and is explained to come from another country. Perfect. That is what I want with it. Have it make sense in the story, and I will be fine.

So I am fine with diversity in FE, just dont shoehorn it in. And especially dont change the source material. Gaiden may not be as big of a deal due to their overall vagueness, but I dont want to see a ton of characters in Tellius suddenly asian. Respect the source material and the story the original writers put together.

Respecting the source material is certainly important but these aren't holy texts. You still need to be willing to change things otherwise what was the point of even adapting something in the first place? Also Valencia is not based on Northern European. It's aesthetic was largely more Roman in Gaiden with pillars and statues making up the bulk of the castles (and also several notable shrines which I don't believe tend to be a feature in Northern Europe. At least not in the same way it is in Greece and Rome).

Edited March 16, 2017 by Jotari

[Extrasolar]

2 hours ago, Tolvir said:

Fire Emblem largely is based on European cultures. Nohr was heavily based on Rome, Valm seems to be based on Northern Europe, etc. Throwing in diversity for the sake of diversity wouldnt make sense. If there is suddenly a black guy in there, I want to know why he is there. Is he a traveling merchant from another country? A Mercenary? Why is he here in a country that is clearly not his home country? So essentially, dont just shoehorn it in without explenation. Give me a story why they are there. Explain they are from another continent/country, give me a reason why they left, etc. Which is what they did with Kamui in SoV. He is clearly asian, and is explained to come from another country. Perfect. That is what I want with it. Have it make sense in the story, and I will be fine.

You're assuming that there weren't non-white people living, working, and integrated into European cultures, which is a common thing because of what we're taught, and I fell into that same trap way back when. But there were tons of non-white people all over Europe. A lot of them. Asia and Europe and Africa and Europe are actually pretty close together, and there was no magical barrier preventing non-white people from entry. Trade, travel, and everything passed between them. Just speaking of one famous example: the Moors, African Muslims, conquered and ruled Spain for centuries. Plenty of black people thus had settled and integrated, and were living normal lives.

So a black person or Asian person in a European setting is not "shoehorned." There needs no explanation for people that were already naturally there in the first place. (Now, in a setting like isolationist Japan, yeah, you're getting pretty inexplicable if you've got a non-Japanese person there - not that it didn't happen, but it was exceedingly rare since the Emperor banned foreigners from Japan's shores.) If anything, it accurately reflects the reality that our own medieval Europe and such was. This blog opened my eyes to the sheer amount of non-white presence in Europe. Pretty cool.
 

2 hours ago, Tolvir said:

Respect the source material and the story the original writers put together.

I don't see this as an excuse. Changing the races of characters that were originally made white just because back then non-white people weren't allowed to be in non-stereotypical or non-demeaning roles isn't "not respecting the source material." White was everywhere because it was a more overtly racist/discriminatory time, and non-white people weren't see as comparatively 'human.' Why is a character's skin color/race this untouchable, holy grail? Non-white people have just as much emotional range to react to things, pathos, and story as white people. You'd still have the same story with a brown-skinned character that you'd have with a white-skinned character, while at the same time giving much-needed representation to darker-skinned people.

That is, unless you somehow see race inherently as a marker of "other"? Or that you consider someone's race to be inherently tied to their character? Because while that may be true in some stories that explore race and race relations, the majority of FE isn't that way at all. Giving someone like Lyn, for example, darker skin is not going to sudden ruin all of Blazing Blade and be tantamount to spitting upon the creators' vision.
 

2 hours ago, Interdimensional Observer said:

Validar is not human. He is a knockoff generic Disney villain. I guess IS thought Disney rejects weren't a bad idea after getting more than their five cent's worth out of Tibarn, but gosh they were wrong. Seriously, in the Validar "dies" sequence, he looks totally inhuman and I can't get over that.

Validar's still designed as a human. Sure, he has obvious villain coding (really tall and thin, very sharp features, etc.), but he's still designed as a human and is darker-skinned.

Edited March 16, 2017 by Extrasolar

[Interdimensional Observer]

My Validar critique was less me not liking his skin or denying that he is human (he is), as it was me just harpooning his design in general. It's so bad. Sure it stands out vs. Gharnef/Judah/Manfroy/Veld/Nergal/Lyon, but in an atrocious way.

[Res]

13 hours ago, Extrasolar said:

I'm all for adding diversity in FE in order to reflect the real world and their own fanbase. It's nice to finally get some more non-white (or non European-coded/pale-skinned) characters outside of the very few we've gotten in the past. Hope IS continues this in FE switch and beyond.

Yes; this is how I feel. 

12 hours ago, Thor Odinson said:

Also I feel a lot of people--not particular about this thread, but just fandom in general--don't see the Hoshidans as Japanese for some reason (possibilities include not being portrayed as an "other").

Ugh.

And yeah, what's with the propensity to code everything not explicitly non-white as white? (I mean, I know the real answer, so it's a rhetorical question, but still. People disappoint every day with their racism). 

9 hours ago, L9999 said:

Established designs my shoelaces, nobody in Gaiden had a consistent artwork. The characters are also from freaking 1992, in that time no one did artwork for anything, and if it existed it looked either stupid or bland. 

Seriously, every change so far has just made things 1000 x better.

8 hours ago, Extrasolar said:

I say, so what? If the butthurt fans can't handle people in games that don't always look like them 100% of the time, then we're better off without them. Stuff like a lot of the new Marvel comics and more diverse films have attracted huge audiences interested in seeing representations of themselves on screen, so the whiny bigots can go shove it if they don't like it, quite frankly.

Thumbs up!

2 hours ago, Tolvir said:

Its about keeping the source material the way it was intended. When you start changing things from the source material, you start losing respect for what was originally there. Sure Fire Emblem Gaiden was very bare bones and had technical limitations, but that doesnt mean we should start changing things about what was there.

But why is respect lost?

As long as the story keeps the personalities of characters integral, I've never once found that different interpretations of my favourite source materials have caused me to lose any respect. I've enjoyed many adaptations where the races, genders and names have been changed. 

And like Extrasolar says, non-white people have been present in Europe for millennia; they've just often been written out of history (or records don't tell us much in the first place). There is plenty of evidence that black people were present in Northern Europe for over 2,000 years, too - we're not just talking Southern Europe, either. 

[Irysa]

So skin tone being changed is disrespectful but changing the design other ways (hairstyles, facial structure, etc) is not.

https://i.redd.it/5u9zvss1yily.png

Okay. Kinda telling how nobody feels the need to call those out. Some of you are in denial about something.

Edited March 16, 2017 by Irysa

[Tolvir]

3 hours ago, Res said:

But why is respect lost?

As long as the story keeps the personalities of characters integral, I've never once found that different interpretations of my favourite source materials have caused me to lose any respect. I've enjoyed many adaptations where the races, genders and names have been changed. 

And like Extrasolar says, non-white people have been present in Europe for millennia; they've just often been written out of history (or records don't tell us much in the first place). There is plenty of evidence that black people were present in Northern Europe for over 2,000 years, too - we're not just talking Southern Europe, either. 

Respect is lost because it changes the character and story in a way as it wasnt originally supposed to be. For example, changing the race of Johnny Storm in the Fantastic Four remake upset a couple things about the characters. First being that Sue and Johnny Storm are supposed to be brother and sister. When they changed Johnny Storm's race, so did the characters back story. In order to solve this issue they had to make their father black as well, and make Sue adopted.

 

Sometimes these changes can even be outright offensive. For example, Marvels recent move in the comics was to make Captain America a member of Hydra, a Nazi organization. This is an outright slap in the face of the original creators of Captain America, considering two of them were Jewish. This in turn caused Marvel to have to go back and rewrite Hydra's history, changing decades of comic book history in order to change the problem, which still didnt change much as they were still allied with the Nazis in the comics.

 

That is the problem with changing characters race/ethnicity/name/heritage/history/etc. It can cause a lot of problems with the character and who they were supposed to be.

4 hours ago, Extrasolar said:

You're assuming that there weren't non-white people living, working, and integrated into European cultures, which is a common thing because of what we're taught, and I fell into that same trap way back when. But there were tons of non-white people all over Europe. A lot of them. Asia and Europe and Africa and Europe are actually pretty close together, and there was no magical barrier preventing non-white people from entry. Trade, travel, and everything passed between them. Just speaking of one famous example: the Moors, African Muslims, conquered and ruled Spain for centuries. Plenty of black people thus had settled and integrated, and were living normal lives.

So a black person or Asian person in a European setting is not "shoehorned." There needs no explanation for people that were already naturally there in the first place. (Now, in a setting like isolationist Japan, yeah, you're getting pretty inexplicable if you've got a non-Japanese person there - not that it didn't happen, but it was exceedingly rare since the Emperor banned foreigners from Japan's shores.) If anything, it accurately reflects the reality that our own medieval Europe and such was. This blog opened my eyes to the sheer amount of non-white presence in Europe. Pretty cool.
 

I don't see this as an excuse. Changing the races of characters that were originally made white just because back then non-white people weren't allowed to be in non-stereotypical or non-demeaning roles isn't "not respecting the source material." White was everywhere because it was a more overtly racist/discriminatory time, and non-white people weren't see as comparatively 'human.' Why is a character's skin color/race this untouchable, holy grail? Non-white people have just as much emotional range to react to things, pathos, and story as white people. You'd still have the same story with a brown-skinned character that you'd have with a white-skinned character, while at the same time giving much-needed representation to darker-skinned people.

That is, unless you somehow see race inherently as a marker of "other"? Or that you consider someone's race to be inherently tied to their character? Because while that may be true in some stories that explore race and race relations, the majority of FE isn't that way at all. Giving someone like Lyn, for example, darker skin is not going to sudden ruin all of Blazing Blade and be tantamount to spitting upon the creators' vision.

Did you not pay attention to what I wrote? I said merchants, mercenaries, etc. I wanted an explenation for it, just like any other character. I dont have an issue with them being there, I just want to know why. Is there a problem with giving explanations or should we just throw characters all over the place for no reason? Wasnt this our issue with Fates? No explanations for anything?

It is not respecting the source material. Unless you are adapting something that was overtly racist, then there is no need to change the original content. Just as my statement above said, there can be huge amounts of changes from the source material just from changing the race of a character, or their affilation. And since you brought this entirely into the race spectrum and brought racism into this, it isnt just about race. I am against changing anything from the source material outside of minor details. Whether that be name, race, background, gender, etc. 

6 hours ago, Jotari said:

Respecting the source material is certainly important but these aren't holy texts. You still need to be willing to change things otherwise what was the point of even adapting something in the first place? Also Valencia is not based on Northern European. It's aesthetic was largely more Roman in Gaiden with pillars and statues making up the bulk of the castles (and also several notable shrines which I don't believe tend to be a feature in Northern Europe. At least not in the same way it is in Greece and Rome).

To bring things into a different medium, whether that be books, movies, television ,etc. Doesnt mean there needs to be huge changes. Minor ones sure, as I said before I am against changing everything outside minor details. I am all for updating something for the modern times, but this doesnt mean we should just start changing things all we want.

 

Here is my issue with changing these larger details, since I dont think I specified it well enough with just respecting the source material. My problem with it is where does it end? Where does the updating to a modern audience end, and just changing for the sake of changing it start? If we are completely ok with race and ethnicity changed, then why are we against their back story changing? Why are we against their name changing? The details about their character? At what point do we stop someone from adapting the source material, and completely changing the source material into a completely different story?

 

My issue isn't with diversity, in fact I am all for adding diversity. My issue is with changing already established characters and stories for any reason. At what point does it change from adapting and updating to just changing without respect for the source material. That is my issue with the modern Star Trek movies. No race was changed, no details about any characters, but the problem with it is that the overall idea of Star Trek was changed. It changed from a story about space exploration from a guy who was looking to the future that inspired generations of children, into a generic action sci fi movie with crazy aliens and fun CGI action sequences. It lost the essence of what Star Trek is supposed to be because they started changing the source material. They lost respect for what it was originally meant to be, and therefore created something completely different and attached to the original in name only. That is my problem with allowing these changes.

 

Edited March 16, 2017 by Tolvir

[Tryhard]

On the bright side, they are keeping Juda's skin blue.

That's real diversity right there.

[Extrasolar]

11 minutes ago, Tolvir said:

Did you not pay attention to what I wrote? I said merchants, mercenaries, etc. I wanted an explenation for it, just like any other character. I dont have an issue with them being there, I just want to know why. Is there a problem with giving explanations or should we just throw characters all over the place for no reason? Wasnt this our issue with Fates? No explanations for anything?

No, I read what you wrote. It essentially boiled down to "Why is this non-white person in a European setting?! That's obviously unnatural, so I need an explanation for this!" I gave you evidence why it's not unnatural and no explanation is needed.

You didn't demand an explanation for why Alm and Celica were there, for example...but Alm and Celica are white. See the problem with this?

The issues with Fates was the lack of worldbuilding, not the racial dynamics.
 

11 minutes ago, Tolvir said:

That is the problem with changing characters race/ethnicity/name/heritage/history/etc. It can cause a lot of problems with the character and who they were supposed to be.

But most of the time it just doesn't. No FE story has been "this person is white! it's important to the story!" Sure, we've gotten the laguz as allegories for racism, but the laguz are animal people (and most of them are white/light-skinned, if not orange-skinned in the case of the dragons). They were clearly marked as "other" and the theme was explored as such.

No FE story would change by having a nonwhite protagonist, since FE is not about race. Would making Ike black suddenly make the game not about him defeating Ashnard and saving Crimea, or defeating Ashera and saving all of Tellius? Would the game have to stop and say "hold on, Ike, you're not white. We have to make the story about this now!"

No. No it wouldn't.
 

11 minutes ago, Tolvir said:

Sometimes these changes can even be outright offensive. For example, Marvels recent move in the comics was to make Captain America a member of Hydra, a Nazi organization. This is an outright slap in the face of the original creators of Captain America, considering two of them were Jewish. This in turn caused Marvel to have to go back and rewrite Hydra's history, changing decades of comic book history in order to change the problem, which still didnt change much as they were still allied with the Nazis in the comics.

Yeah, stuff like this is tacky, because of the cultural significance to Captain America being created by Jewish creators. But this is not the same as racial diversity in most stories and FE. For example, there's no relevance to Hal Jordan being a white man. He was created white because he was created in an overly racist time, where non-white people weren't seen as human or developed as such. Making Hal Jordan Mexican, black, Asian, what have you, would not change him from being the cocky, devil-may-care badass Green Lantern that he is.

Same character. Skin tone is irrelevant in that case. In fact, it's better, because non-white people are getting a character they can see themselves in, as opposed to the hundreds and thousands if not millions of white characters we have.
 

11 minutes ago, Tolvir said:

Respect is lost because it changes the character and story in a way as it wasnt originally supposed to be. For example, changing the race of Johnny Storm in the Fantastic Four remake upset a couple things about the characters. First being that Sue and Johnny Storm are supposed to be brother and sister. When they changed Johnny Storm's race, so did the characters back story. In order to solve this issue they had to make their father black as well, and make Sue adopted.

And what's wrong with this? Sorry, but the narrative fidelity of the Fantastic Four doesn't hinge on all of the characters being white. At no point in-story is it said "you guys are white! if you weren't, then we'd have to make the story entirely about you being non-white!"

"The way it wasn't supposed to be" means jack when it doesn't affect the story in any way. Fantastic Four didn't suddenly turn into The Color Purple because Johnny was nonwhite. The movie sucked because of awful writing and pacing, but it wasn't because Johnny was black.

Johnny and Sue are still brother and sister, adopted or not. If anything, adopted kids get to see a representation of themselves too. (Granted, such a sucky movie isn't the best place to get that, but still...)
 

11 minutes ago, Tolvir said:

I am against changing anything from the source material outside of minor details. Whether that be name, race, background, gender, etc. 

I mean, if you feel that way you feel that way. But it's hypocritical to say that it's "insulting to the creators" or "ruining the story" when nothing but the skin colors are changed. Because skin colors aren't important to the vast majority of stories. That's what I'm saying. If you don't like it you don't like it, I can't change your mind on that. But being upset over other people getting representation when you've got tons of white characters is...selfish, to say the least.

You'll always have your white Spider-Man and white most other hero stories. Let other people have their day too.

Edited March 16, 2017 by Extrasolar

[Dragrath]

11 minutes ago, Irysa said:

So skin tone being changed is disrespectful but changing the design other ways (hairstyles, facial structure, etc) is not.

https://i.redd.it/5u9zvss1yily.png

Okay. Kinda telling how nobody feels the need to call those out. Some of you are in denial about something.

Aye racism is a sad thing that often lurks below the surface...

 

A point that needs to be brought up is the features that we call black White or Asian are in fact environmental adaptations nothing more nothing less.

The typical sub Saharan Africans hair has evolved to minimize the a amount of UV radiation reaching their scalp in order to reduce the occurrence of skin cancer(which eventually kills you w/out surgery/chemotherapy etc.)

Darker skin is a side effect of the levels of melanin which predominately is used as a means of protecting from UV radiation. The reason for skin color variation is that humans actually need a certain amount of UV radiation in order to produce Vitamin D a critical vitamin we do not naturally obtain with our diet.

Now due to the tilt of the earth the incidence of UV radiation drops off as one moves further away from the equator.

Too much UV radiation and you get severe Cancer and die to little radiation and you can suffer fatal Vitamin D deficiency(no longer an issue today in the developed world thanks to the invention of vitamin D fortified Milk)

 

Thus as people moved to more northern latitudes people with darker skin didn't fare well and thus mutations that resulted in a deficiency or absence of melanin(the latter causes red hair If I recall correctly) The fact is lighter skin is a mutation that has occurred multiple times racism against darker skin is completely unfounded. 

Now people have form hundreds of thousands of years at the very least migrated around the planet to an astonishing scale (The Americas for instance were at the very least colonized two separate times by genetically distinct people one from ocean down in South America and once across the Bearing Strait then we also know that Celtic and Viking people had reached the New world and left genetic markers in ancestral Native American populations) 

In fact many African Americans Genetically are more similar to Caucasian and Asian populations than they are to African populations however they are still being classified as African Americans because they inherited the genes related to physiological features interpreted as "black".

The manner of racism born out of the European Slave trade is an abomination. There has never been a single "pure" ethnic race ever... 

 

Now personally I like that FE is trying to better represent humanity and considering the nightmarish quality of FE2 art I can't see any legitimate claim that it is defiling these characters somehow when there was no consistent characterization in the first Place... FE like most of Japan has actually been very slow to address ethnic and cultural diversity but it is nice to finally see some progress here.

 

[ping]

Just slap some multiverse theory on it, and all is bene.

More seriously, I find that canon as concept is overrated and that changing an estabished fact from an older publishment really isn't a big deal. Or rather, it is when it happens in one continuous series; for exampe a superhero losing and gaining powers as it is convenient for the writer is not a good thing. But if it's a revamp of some work of fiction, in which the writers start with the same concepts in characters and settings but derive a different plot from them, I really don't mind if certain aspects of a character change. If the writers changed the very core of a character - for example making Hermione a stupid, malicious brat - I would wonder why they chose to keep calling the character 'Hermione', but if the change does not completely undermine the role of the character, I'm completely fine with it. And that includes stuff like skin color, religion or sexuality in most cases - there are obviously settings in which they matter (a black student at a white university in the 50ies; a jew in Germany 1932; a homosexual sex worker), but would it really have a big impact on the story if Picard occasionally tried to adjust his prayer rug towards Mekka?

[Tolvir]

1 hour ago, Extrasolar said:

No, I read what you wrote. It essentially boiled down to "Why is this non-white person in a European setting?! That's obviously unnatural, so I need an explanation for this!" I gave you evidence why it's not unnatural and no explanation is needed.

You didn't demand an explanation for why Alm and Celica were there, for example...but Alm and Celica are white. See the problem with this?

The issues with Fates was the lack of worldbuilding, not the racial dynamics.
 

But most of the time it just doesn't. No FE story has been "this person is white! it's important to the story!" Sure, we've gotten the laguz as allegories for racism, but the laguz are animal people (and most of them are white/light-skinned, if not orange-skinned in the case of the dragons). They were clearly marked as "other" and the theme was explored as such.

No FE story would change by having a nonwhite protagonist, since FE is not about race. Would making Ike black suddenly make the game not about him defeating Ashnard and saving Crimea, or defeating Ashera and saving all of Tellius? Would the game have to stop and say "hold on, Ike, you're not white. We have to make the story about this now!"

No. No it wouldn't.
 

Yeah, stuff like this is tacky, because of the cultural significance to Captain America being created by Jewish creators. But this is not the same as racial diversity in most stories and FE. For example, there's no relevance to Hal Jordan being a white man. He was created white because he was created in an overly racist time, where non-white people weren't seen as human or developed as such. Making Hal Jordan Mexican, black, Asian, what have you, would not change him from being the cocky, devil-may-care badass Green Lantern that he is.

Same character. Skin tone is irrelevant in that case. In fact, it's better, because non-white people are getting a character they can see themselves in, as opposed to the hundreds and thousands if not millions of white characters we have.
 

And what's wrong with this? Sorry, but the narrative fidelity of the Fantastic Four doesn't hinge on all of the characters being white. At no point in-story is it said "you guys are white! if you weren't, then we'd have to make the story entirely about you being non-white!"

"The way it wasn't supposed to be" means jack when it doesn't affect the story in any way. Fantastic Four didn't suddenly turn into The Color Purple because Johnny was nonwhite. The movie sucked because of awful writing and pacing, but it wasn't because Johnny was black.

Johnny and Sue are still brother and sister, adopted or not. If anything, adopted kids get to see a representation of themselves too. (Granted, such a sucky movie isn't the best place to get that, but still...)
 

I mean, if you feel that way you feel that way. But it's hypocritical to say that it's "insulting to the creators" or "ruining the story" when nothing but the skin colors are changed. Because skin colors aren't important to the vast majority of stories. That's what I'm saying. If you don't like it you don't like it, I can't change your mind on that. But being upset over other people getting representation when you've got tons of white characters is...selfish, to say the least.

You'll always have your white Spider-Man and white most other hero stories. Let other people have their day too.

Not even going to comment on the fact of you saying that "I will always have a white Spider-Man" when time and time again I have tried to point out to your thick head that this isn't about race. I don't give a shit what race they are, I still dont want to see it changed. Clearly you cherry picked my argument though to make his point, because you left out my final part where I say what my overall issue with changing things is.

This isn't even about race. I have an issue of any characters race being changed. Including those of other races. Are you ok with changing a historically black character to Asian, or a historically Hispanic character to black? I would be just as pissed if Luke Cage was made to be Asian, or if Storm was made to be white. My issue is with charactersmof any race being changed, not the races themselves. 

And just because a character was white during the 50s to 60s means it was done for a racist reason? Do you not see how big of an assumption this is? It's no different than saying all people in Germany in the 1940s were racist. Marvel was one of the first to really spearhead having other races represented. Luke Cage and Black Panther were created in the 60s and 70s. The Xmen were created as a way to represent the problem of Civil Rights. Mutants being persecuted and hunted, and trying to fight for equal rights. Sound familiar?  But they also created Spider-Man in he 60s, but he was white. Does that mean Marvel where racists during that time?

I have an issue of characters being changed because the change does cause it to effect things. It did effect the Fantastic Four because it required a change in the story, and the characters. It may not change them in a big way, but it is still changing them for no reason when it isn't required. 

 

And if this was an issue with letting other races "have their time" then why not just create new characters and stories? Why do other characters need to be changed in order to achieve that? Why is it that traditionaly white characters need to be changed in order to have characters of other ethnicities? Can they not just have new characters of their own without having to rely on the history established by that white character to make it somewhere?

Edited March 16, 2017 by Tolvir

[Extrasolar]

51 minutes ago, Tolvir said:

Not even going to comment on the fact of you saying that "I will always have a white Spider-Man" when time and time again I have tried to point out to your thick head that this isn't about race. I don't give a shit what race they are, I still dont want to see it changed. Clearly you cherry picked my argument though to make his point, because you left out my final part where I say that.

Lol. Nice insult, bro. Just because you're starting to realize that I have a point doesn't mean you can throw a tantrum.

My thick head? I pointed out your hypocrisy in crying about skin color changes when you yourself said "I don't care if only minor details are changed..." When, by your own definition, the skin color of these characters is a minor detail. I didn't cherry pick anything. I see you never responded to me calling out why you're not demanding an explanation for Alm and Celica's existence when you want one for the darker-skinned characters? Why are they different? You know, besides the obvious? (Them being white.)

I'm bringing up facts to counter your argument and you're just sticking your fingers in your ears and ignoring it. I don't know who's really the thick-headed one around here....

Forreal though, bro, if you don't want white characters being changed to nonwhite, just say it. Don't try to justify it with "well it's not historically accurate" when it is, and saying "well it changes the story" when it 100% doesn't. Just admit it, holy shit.

51 minutes ago, Tolvir said:

And just because a character was white during the 50s to 60s means it was done for a racist reason? Do you not see how big of an assumption this is? It's no different than saying all people in Germany in the 1940s were racist. Marvel was one of the first to really spearhead having other races represented. Luke Cage and Black Panther were created in the 60s and 70s. The Xmen were created as a way to represent the problem of Civil Rights. Mutants being persecuted and hunted, and trying to fight for equal rights. Sound familiar?  But they also created Spider-Man in he 60s, but he was white. Does that mean Marvel where racists during that time?

For the most part, yes. White characters were seen as the default, the only 'human' and really deep character roles. Non-white people, for the most part, were reduced to comedic relief with names like "Pie Face" (Inuit character on Green Lantern...yeah, that's pretty unfortunate).

Now, I'm not saying that the creators were necessarily conscious white supremacists looking to undermine all non-white people, but inherent, subconscious biases are a thing, especially in white (and especially white men) people, who have never experienced racism. Now, it's not necessarily their fault for writing insulting and insensitive depictions in this case, because a lot of the time it's down to the climate of the time - what they were taught by the people around them. It is admirable that they took steps forward to change that - Black Panther, Luke Cage, and whatnot were great...but those are two characters in a sea of white characters.

And Black Panther and Luke Cage depend on them being black. Black Panther is an African king of a traditional, but technologically advanced African kingdom. He's come into contact and fought against colonizers and conquerors. That's a very black/African experience, and you'd lose that meaning with a white character. Same deal with Luke Cage. Luke Cage is a story all about racism and prejudice in 70s Harlem that black people - but not white people - faced and struggled against. A bulletproof black man who fought racism was culturally relevant - does what happened to MLK Jr. ring a bell?

And while the X-Men are indeed an allegory for racism, they're an imperfect one...because all of the original X-Men were white. Missing the mark a little bit.

Other stories do not depend on characters being certain races. Thus, by their very nature, someone like Gray and Boey being non-white are the definition of minor details. Does it change the story at all? No. No it doesn't.
 

51 minutes ago, Tolvir said:

I have an issue of characters being changed because the change does cause it to effect things. It did effect the Fantastic Four because it required a change in the story, and the characters. It may not change them in a big way, but it is still changing them for no reason when it isn't required. 

But you yourself said you don't care about the minor details. Skin color is a minor detail, especially in this case. It did not affect the overall plot (this being an origin story of them, at least) - FF gets powers, fights Doctor Doom. Horribly bastardized version of Doctor Doom, yeah, but still. That doesn't change the story. And it doesn't change the characters. Johnny is still young cocky kid, black or not. If anything, it doesn't make sense why you make such a big deal about it....

51 minutes ago, Tolvir said:

And if this was an issue with letting other races "have their time" then why not just create new characters and stories? Why do other characters need to be changed in order to achieve that? Why is it that traditionaly white characters need to be changed in order to have characters of other ethnicities? Can they not just have new characters of their own without having to rely on the history established by that white character to make it somewhere?

We have. And they don't get the recognition and push that stories with white casts do.

And why does it matter? Like I said, if the story doesn't depend on race as a context, skin color isn't an untouchable holy grail. I think you need to start examining why you take it so personally when white characters are made non-white... Think deep, man.

When it changes the story in no way other than seeing a brown person on the screen, and yet you're still upset... Hmm....

Edited March 16, 2017 by Extrasolar

[Tryhard]

A better example would be in the recent calling of the "whitewashing" controversy of the Major in the new Ghost in the Shell movie. Does her race matter at all? Especially when she's 

 

a cyborg who most likely was intended to not have a nationality in the first place as far as I know outside of the Japanese name

A question for consistency, because I don't give a shit about either direction of these changes.

Edited March 16, 2017 by Tryhard

[Slumber]

I just want to ask, do people realize which characters got their skin tones changed when they say that it's disrespectful to the characters?

If you can come up with more than 3 quotes of Boey/Gray from the original Gaiden, or if you can describe their personalities in more than two sentences without just listing their relations to other characters, you may have have a leg to stand on.

... but even if you can, even the biggest Gaiden fans would admit that these are probably the most shallow characters in FE history. There's nothing to "respect" with these characters. The script of FE2 could fit on a napkin.

Edited March 16, 2017 by Slumber

[Extrasolar]

10 minutes ago, Tryhard said:

A better example would be in the recent calling of the "whitewashing" controversy of the Major in the new Ghost in the Shell movie. Does her race matter at all? Especially when she's 

  Reveal hidden contents

a cyborg who most likely was intended to not have a nationality in the first place as far as I know outside of the Japanese name

A question for consistency, because I don't give a shit about either direction of these changes.

A Japanese name is nationality.

Ghost in the Shell is a very Japanese story to begin with. It's the same as that Akira thing, where they're making all the characters American...in a story based on the nuclear bombing. Just...eugh. Here, check this article out for more on GITS and why it's a Japanese story

Edited March 16, 2017 by Extrasolar

[Tryhard]

Why does their name matter if they're an artificially created cyborg? Also, I'm not even sure what that twitter rant is trying to say. Most anime stories are set in Japan because they're made in Japan.

Seems arbitrary at best, and more like you're only concerned when characters who aren't depicted originally as being white get portrayals as white or by white actors at worst.

I assume you wouldn't have any problem with a character like Devdan or Garret (or the alternative being they changed Garret's design for an FE6 remake or something like that) being played by a white actor if there was ever a hypothetical Fire Emblem movie? After all, there is no precedent to care about their race, name or such.

Edited March 16, 2017 by Tryhard

[Extrasolar]

11 minutes ago, Tryhard said:

Why does their name matter if they're an artificially created human? Also, I'm not even sure what that twitter rant is trying to say. Most anime stories are set in Japan because they're made in Japan.

Because they still exist in an Asian setting around other Asian characters. It's trying to say that a lot of the context and background depends on it being set in Japan - being forcibly demilitarized, technology being a huge, budding thing to the point that it took over Japanese exports and markets, the unique relationship that the Japanese have with technology as a result.

And that's not necessarily true. There are plenty of anime and manga that aren't set in Japan with non-Japanese characters. I can name a bunch right now. Full Metal Alchemist, D.Gray-man, Attack on Titan, and tons more. And those characters have non-Japanese names, and aren't meant to represent Japanese people.

However, those that are set in Japan with Japanese characters shouldn't have these aspects changed, especially if the experience within is unique to the culture.
 

11 minutes ago, Tryhard said:

Seems arbitrary at best, and more like you're only concerned when characters who aren't depicted originally as being white get portrayals as white or by white actors at worst.

Well, yeah. Because not only do non-white people need representation (and don't get it nearly as often as white people), but non-white people have historically and traditionally been erased from areas where they exist. There's a reason why people don't think non-white people existed in Europe. Because a lot of the documents and things have been changed and erased to obscure them. Did you know Alexander Dumas, renown French novelist and author of The Three Musketeers, was black? I didn't, for the longest time, because his race is often erased when he's brought up.

That's why we need more non-white people in FE, and people can cry all they want about white characters getting changed to non-white. I celebrate it, because it's what we need.
 

11 minutes ago, Tryhard said:

I assume you wouldn't have any problem with a character like Devdan or Garret being played by a white actor if there was ever a hypothetical Fire Emblem movie? After all, there is no precedent to care about their race, name or such.

False equivalence. We have infinitely more white characters than we have non-white characters. Hell, Devdan is literally the only black guy in Tellius, as it seems. And Garret is much of the same. Black people and people of all non-white races and ethnicities deserve to see themselves represented. White people have plenty, plenty of representation. That's like eating a huge lobster dinner and complaining that the guy across from you isn't sharing his peanut butter and jelly sandwich.

It's not the same at all. White people don't have problems with erasure that non-white people have.

Edited March 16, 2017 by Extrasolar

[Tryhard]

19 minutes ago, Extrasolar said:

False equivalence. We have infinitely more white characters than we have non-white characters. Hell, Devdan is literally the only black guy in Tellius, as it seems. And Garret is much of the same.

It's not the same at all. White people don't have problems with erasure that non-white people have.

Let's take a look at Garret.

http://fireemblem.wikia.com/wiki/Garret

If we're discounting skin colour, and we probably should, he's a boring character with almost no lines with a pretty dull appearance. Just like Boey and Gray from Gaiden. I'm not sure anyone why anyone would complain over him getting an appearance uplift in a potential FE6 remake, and if that meant altering his skin tone, then I don't really care if the outcome is better.

19 minutes ago, Extrasolar said:

That's why we need more non-white people in FE, and people can cry all they want about white characters getting changed to non-white. I celebrate it, because it's what we need.

False equivalence. We have infinitely more white characters than we have non-white characters. Hell, Devdan is literally the only black guy in Tellius, as it seems. And Garret is much of the same. Black people and people of all non-white races and ethnicities deserve to see themselves represented. White people have plenty, plenty of representation. That's like eating a huge lobster dinner and complaining that the guy across from you isn't sharing his peanut butter and jelly sandwich.

It's not the same at all. White people don't have problems with erasure that non-white people have.

Need is a strong word. I'll welcome it if it comes, but the developers and directors can do what they want.

You think I care about white representation, though. I fucking don't. Taking comfort or the accomplishments in other people or characters because of their skin colour sounds like what a racist does. I truly believe you don't need the same skin colour to relate. 

If you think that I'm saying that more black or asian characters should be white, I'm not.

Edited March 16, 2017 by Tryhard

[Sunwoo]

... I was going to make a comment, but then I came in and saw that this thread is slowly devolving into a shitstorm.

So I'm just going to leave it at this. Some people care more about representation than others. Some people need to see someone in the media who looks like them, while other people really don't give a shit. I don't really give too much of a shit. Yeah, there are things that would be nice to see in media in terms of representation. But it doesn't affect me if it doesn't happen either. There are some cases in which I'd be seriously opposed to changing a character's race or gender, but that's limited to cases like "this character was based on a real person" or "their personality and history depends on them being a certain race/sex". And that's an extreme case either way.

Give me a character who's written well, and I don't give a shit what race or gender they are.

[Extrasolar]

9 minutes ago, Tryhard said:

Need is a strong word. I'll welcome if it comes, but the developers and directors can do what they want.

You think I care about white representation, though. I fucking don't. Taking comfort and accomplishments in other people or characters because of their skin colour sounds like what a racist does. I truly believe you don't need the same skin colour to relate.

You don't think so (and I'm honestly glad that you're one of the people who thinks that way), but the problem is as a whole, a lot of people do. When people see non-white characters they immediate see them as unnatural or strange, or need an "explanation" for their existence when they wouldn't demand the same of white characters. And you know why? Because "white is the default, non-white as the other" has been drilled into their head so much, just because of how much white characters and white representation pervades the media.

Sure, people can do what they want at the end of the day, but it doesn't change the fact that not representing people that exist and consume media is a shitty thing to do. And in our society which contains a lot of racism to this day, good, well-written and frequent depictions of non-white people to show white people (and people of other ethnicities) that non-white people are just as human, emotional, and interesting is what we need. Yes, need. I don't know about you, but I'd like society and race relations to improve, even as slowly as it's going.
 

9 minutes ago, Tryhard said:

Let's take a look at Garret.

http://fireemblem.wikia.com/wiki/Garret

If we're discounting skin colour, and we probably should, he's a boring character with almost no lines with a pretty dull appearance. Just like Boey and Gray from Gaiden. I'm not sure anyone why anyone would complain over him getting an appearance uplift in a potential FE6 remake, and if that meant altering his skin tone, then I don't really care if the outcome is better.

No, but there's an important difference. Plenty of non-white people have historically in the past been erased (the example of Alexander Dumas just being one in a long, long line of them). Changed to "raceless" or even white, simply because people are uncomfortable with the idea of non-white people being prominent and important. White people, on the other hand, have never fallen victim to this.

Changing a non-white character (even a flat, boring one) into a white character is that same erasure. Sure, Garret may not be the most interesting person in the world, but he's still a non pale-skinned dude, and other non pale-skinned people can see a character that looks like them and realize that they should be seen in media just as much as white people. Changing him to a pale-skinned dude is erasure.

It doesn't apply to the reverse, simple because white people have never been victims of erasure, and white characters have saturated media since before visual mediums were even a thing.

Edited March 16, 2017 by Extrasolar

[Tolvir]

1 hour ago, Slumber said:

I just want to ask, do people realize which characters got their skin tones changed when they say that it's disrespectful to the characters?

If you can come up with more than 3 quotes of Boey/Gray from the original Gaiden, or if you can describe their personalities in more than two sentences without just listing their relations to other characters, you may have have a leg to stand on.

... but even if you can, even the biggest Gaiden fans would admit that these are probably the most shallow characters in FE history. There's nothing to "respect" with these characters. The script of FE2 could fit on a napkin.

At this point I'm not even arguing that. The argument I have been having isn't even on topic anymore.

 

Honestly I don't have an issue with the characters from Gaiden being changed as their source material and what they were changed so many times that it was never clear. Boey has gone through almost 4 hair color/style changes since his first appearance. 

1 hour ago, Extrasolar said:

Lol. Nice insult, bro. Just because you're starting to realize that I have a point doesn't mean you can throw a tantrum.

My thick head? I pointed out your hypocrisy in crying about skin color changes when you yourself said "I don't care if only minor details are changed..." When, by your own definition, the skin color of these characters is a minor detail. I didn't cherry pick anything. I see you never responded to me calling out why you're not demanding an explanation for Alm and Celica's existence when you want one for the darker-skinned characters? Why are they different? You know, besides the obvious? (Them being white.)

I'm bringing up facts to counter you're argument and you're just sticking your fingers in your ears and ignoring it. I don't know who's really the thick-headed one around here....

Forreal though, bro, if you don't want white characters being changed to nonwhite, just say it. Don't try to justify it with "well it's not historically accurate" when it is, and saying "well it changes the story" when it 100% doesn't. Just admit it, holy shit.

For the most part, yes. White characters were seen as the default, the only 'human' and really deep character roles. Non-white people, for the most part, were reduced to comedic relief with names like "Pie Face" (Inuit character on Green Lantern...yeah, that's pretty unfortunate).

Now, I'm not saying that the creators were necessarily conscious white supremacists looking to undermine all non-white people, but inherent, subconscious biases are a thing, especially in white (and especially white men) people, who have never experienced racism. Now, it's not necessarily their fault for writing insulting and insensitive depictions in this case, because a lot of the time it's down to the climate of the time - what they were taught by the people around them. It is admirable that they took steps forward to change that - Black Panther, Luke Cage, and whatnot were great...but those are two characters in a sea of white characters.

And Black Panther and Luke Cage depend on them being black. Black Panther is an African king of a traditional, but technologically advanced African kingdom. He's come into contact and fought against colonizers and conquerors. That's a very black/African experience, and you'd lose that meaning with a white character. Same deal with Luke Cage. Luke Cage is a story all about racism and prejudice in 70s Harlem that black people - but not white people - faced and struggled against. A bulletproof black man who fought racism was culturally relevant - does what happened to MLK Jr. ring a bell?

And while the X-Men are indeed an allegory for racism, they're an imperfect one...because all of the original X-Men were white. Missing the mark a little bit.

Other stories do not depend on characters being certain races. Thus, by their very nature, someone like Gray and Boey being non-white are the definition of minor details. Does it change the story at all? No. No it doesn't.
 

But you yourself said you don't care about the minor details. Skin color is a minor detail, especially in this case. It did not affect the overall plot (this being an origin story of them, at least) - FF gets powers, fights Doctor Doom. Horribly bastardized version of Doctor Doom, yeah, but still. That doesn't change the story. And it doesn't change the characters. Johnny is still young cocky kid, black or not. If anything, it doesn't make sense why you make such a big deal about it....

We have. And they don't get the recognition and push that stories with white casts do.

And why does it matter? Like I said, if the story doesn't depend on race as a context, skin color isn't an untouchable holy grail. I think you need to start examining why you take it so personally when white characters are made non-white... Think deep, man.

When it changes the story in no way other than seeing a brown person on the screen, and yet you're still upset... Hmm....

Keeping count on the amount of ways you are calling me racist. Which is quite the assumption. Think we are up to three now. 

First, as I have said again and again but you keep ignoring it, I have a problem with any character of any race being changed. Any. Race. I had an issue with Ghost in the shell's casting (at least until the original producer, a Japanese man, was fine with it, along side many die hard fans of the series. In Japan)as much as I did with Heimdal being cast as black in Thor. 

the story with the Xmen was meant to be subtle. Wouldn't be all that subtle if they were all black and fighting racism in the time that was actually occuring. But no, they missed the mark and didn't do anything just because of their skin color. I guess the Laguz and the Faunus all need to be black as well in order to have any relevance for social commentary on racism then? 

This has really gone off track. I don't know how I am somehow a racist when all I have said is that regardless of race and ethnicity I don't think a character should be changed at all. (Honestly Boey and Gray aren't a big deal considering how very little there is about them. And after looking up Boey a bit more, the poor guy has gone under numerous redesigns. This just being one of many.) As I have said I don't care what race it is, it shouldn't be changed. But at somehow means I am a racist.

Maybe I should start raising my hand in the air and shout Zeig Heil.

Edited March 16, 2017 by Tolvir

[Etrurian emperor]

Generally speaking I'm not in favor of changing the race of an established character. If you want more black characters then the better option would just be to make a new character and let him be a black one. But that's also where I find myself a bit more accepting to the practice in this remake since its not like the Gaiden cast was all that defined to begin with. 

I also heavily agree with Tolvir that for a black character in a medieval European setting to work some sort of explanation should be given rather then just having a black farmer prowl around with everyone acting as if its the norm. That needn't be a hard affair at all, especially with supports.

[Extrasolar]

1 minute ago, Tolvir said:

Keeping count on the amount of ways you are calling me racist. Which is quite the assumption considering. Think we are up to three now. 

I never called you racist. I was calling you out on how strange and/or hypocritical it was that you were upset about skin colors being changed, with the reasons you gave making no sense (I gave you plenty of evidence that non-white people in Europe is historically accurate, and brought up the fact that changing skin colors in FE does nothing to impact the story in any way). You proceeded to insult me and ignore my points. That's how we got to this point. If anything, you're making yourself look that way just by your volatile reactions.
 

3 minutes ago, Tolvir said:

This has really gone off track. I don't know how I am somehow a racist when all I have said is that regardless of race and ethnicity I don't think a character should be changed at all. (Honestly Boey and Gray aren't a big deal considering how very little there is about them. And after looking up Boey a bit more, the poor guy has gone under numerous redesigns. This just being one of many.) As I have said I don't care what race it is, it shouldn't be changed. But at somehow means I am a racist.

...But you were literally just complaining about the skin colors being changed because it was "disrespectful to the creators" "disrespectful to the source material" "ruined the characters" and "ruined the story." I'm not imagining that. I read that. You were literally just making a big deal about that, but now you're suddenly changing your tune because I called you out on how that doesn't make any sense.

And you were bringing up "I need evidence for a non-white character in a European setting to exist," and yet, needed no explanation for a white character. I asked you about this, and you never addressed it. I mean, it's not that big of a leap in logic to question that bit. And I gave you evidence that non-white people have and do exist in European settings forever. It was ignored.

It's not hard to see how I arrive at these conclusions.