When an argument begins with personal attacks and insults, then I know you have no ground on which to stand and no basis for facts you claim.
As for ‘English’ and all other remarks, you are very well to laugh at what you believe to see in others.
Left is not Right.
Up is not Down.
Sweet is not sour.
Trees are not Rocks.
…save in the world of the Fool.
Skäl.
Well I mean you’re here pretending I’m in a froth to discredit me, so not like I’m coming out of nowhere.
And yup, pretty much, and you continue to make it clearer and clearer what you are.
Yes, it does.
I see no reason to usurp the representation and vitality of a culture, simply for entertainment.
Especially when there are so many other cultures that have been totally ignored!
Skäl
You make it sound like a casting decision is sapping a culture of its precious bodily fluids.
Exactly!
Here, have some 
.
and, in seriousness, culture IS the lifeblood of a people.
Skäl.
And cultures grows and gains flavor as we grow and find new influences rather than stagnating and trying to preserve a snapshot of one moment of a culture as if it were the whole of it.
When these come naturally, in the regular course of growth and curiousity, yes.
When forced, for an agenda, never.
Like there…?-Raising_the_Flag_on_Iwo_Jima%2C_larger_-_edit1.jpg
Do you want to know more?
Skäl.
More stuff like the Académie française which exists to try and exert a grasp on the french language to preserve its purity from loan words. Fighting the natural evolution of language in order to try and preserve this imaginary ideal.
The French have always been like that; its their culture. As for ‘natural evolution of language’ , that falls to my earlier statement about agendas. so…thank you.
Years ago, when I visited certain relatives in a certain ancestral land, they were both shocked and surprise to hear me speak as them.
Having taken the trouble to keep as much as my old culture as possible was helpful and we got on like two drops of water.
When Alex Haily was researching his book ‘Roots’, he went to the source; his family. bit by bit, he reconstructed the whole long sad tale all the way back to ‘The African’. The rest of that tale is well documented; makes for a good read.
The first thing a dominant culture does, is try to wipe out what came before;
either by genocide or propaganda or both.
So I, and others like me, fight back.
And that is why Ariel should not be black. Or Asian. or whatever.
Story is from Europe, so keep her European.
Skäl.
Ahh yes, the fictional mermaid story. From Europe.
“She” (nonsense; there is no “she”, but I digress…) is Danish, by the way. Therefore, any “English / Anglo” version of “her” is an appropriation.
In order to be “true” to the “roots” (yeah, all these quotes are intentional), one would have to make a Danish version of this Andersen fairy tale, in Danish, subtitled in English. Anything less is a “non-dominant culture allowing themselves to be wiped out.” Actually, screw the subtitles; learn Danish if you want to see it “properly.”
There are also many elements of the original that were discarded for the Disney version. Oh, OHH, failure to stay true to culture! What have they done?!
Well, for one, they gave Ariel anti-depressants, because she was much more melancholy and quiet in the original. Disney also changed the entire “moral” of the story, which in the original, was that self-sacrifice can be rewarding. The Disney version, on the other hand, teaches us that “The Dreams of Teenage Girls Really Do Come True!! 
”
Where exactly do you get the idea that the Disney version is the version by which all others must be judged? Shouldn’t the Hans Christian Andersen version be the version by which all others are judged?
Do that, and the Disney version becomes the bastardized, culturally appropriated version.
Why would you judge derivative works of fiction against anything other than the original? Makes smart, logical sense to compare everything with what the original artist (author) created.
I still say make her half polka dot, half green, and say she is from rural Uzbekistan, but of Congolese descent, because this whole argument is academic. It’s fiction, and fiction is up for interpretation any way we, as humans, see fit. Make her a dude instead. Make her an alien.
It doesn’t matter. Why? Well, is Ghostbusters any less of a masterpiece given the ridiculous travesty that was “Ghostbusters II”, or the newer all-female reboot? Um, nope. They don’t diminish the original at all for me - if people love the sequels, more power to 'em. I’m gonna keep pretending Janosz Poha doesn’t exist, thanks very much, though.
And if you’re still saying, “she was white in the Andersen version, it’s specifically stated on many instances,” then you would be correct. The original “Little Mermaid” had white skin, per the Andersen version.
As a counterpoint, and an explanation of why varying versions of fictional art can be not only good, but groundbreaking or excellent, I offer this:
Akira Kurosawa was an amazing director; one of the best in film history and, forever more, one of the best of all time. This is an objective fact accepted by those who study film, regardless of whether you subjectively “like” Kurosawa’s movies or not. He has his own chapters in textbooks, put it that way.
Also realize that many of his finest works were culturally appropriated from Spaghetti Westerns, as well as the works of internationally famous directors from America (John Ford), Russia (Sergei Eisenstein), Germany (Fritz Lang) and Italy (Sergio Leone).
We’d have no Seven Samurai if it weren’t for appropriation of a lot of elements out of John Ford films… including changing all of the actors and settings, in what were traditionally tales of American “Old West” culture, to Japanese.
There are dozens of examples of international influence on Kurosawa’s work. And still, he turned out masterpieces that “culturally originated” globally, not just in Japan. He re-imagined Anglo tales such as “King Lear” and “MacBeth”, converting all the white/English elements to Japanese.
MAH CULTURE! Kurosawa was a travesty!
(Actually, no, he was a friggin’ genius. Honestly. And historical proof that the race and/or color of those involved in fictional stories doesn’t matter. At all. Even if the cultural change isn’t “true to the original.”)
Kurosawa, and both his body of work and his legacy, should be enough to “prove” my point to another reasonable person, but I’ll stop short of a “QED.”
So you, and everyone who agrees with you, are okay with whitewashing?
EDIT: btw, where does all this rage come from, from you and yours? Why do you all REALLY care about what does or does not happen to various cultures. I’ve explained my position; lets see yours.
and NO, the old ‘its just fiction’ doesn’t fly: ‘fiction’, as YOU define it, is a part of a people’s culture.
Skäl.
So you, do you actually care about that issue, or are you bringing it up to try and get a gotcha moment on people who don’t agree on your ridiculous views of the sanctity of casting?
Oh and again, I know at least for myself, we’re not the ones raging about how the purity of our culture is being stolen by some shadowy conspiracy because the make believe princess fish-woman isn’t a fair skinned redhead.
It’s a nonsense term we made up so we could be angry about a non-issue. We do that a lot as people, and it’s not something to be proud of. It’s a way to release pressure and pain that are being caused by real world issues - fair enough - but it’s detrimental to our handling of real face-to-face racism, both domestically, and globally.
Getting upset over the color of fictional characters in media is a shameful waste of time, given that actual racism is happening, here, in our country and on our planet, as you read this. I’m not going to give an iota of my being towards combating “whitewashing” until there haven’t been any people shot and killed for their race or creed or sexuality for a long, long time.
I’d also note that changing Ariel from the original Danish to the “California Teenager” she was in the Disney version is the base definition of “whitewashing.”
Bullet points on racial accuracy in media, lest I risk being mistaken for a raging forum poster:
Next, yeah, let me address your claims of “rage”.
First of all, for one who has complained directly to me a few times on these forums about personal attacks, you just can’t stay away from launching them yourself, can you?. My “mood” has no bearing on the topic at hand, and you shouldn’t be bringing it up at all. It’s irrelevant.
And anyway, you mistake my passion for rage.
I write, and I read. And I write. All my life. For pleasure, for knowledge, or sometimes just to pass the time.
When I write ten paragraphs on something, that’s passion. Not rage. If you read everything I write, and try to let me set the tone (instead of applying an incorrect tone, via your own brain), then maybe you would understand.
I’ve explained it ninety-six different ways, and if I try to go further, you’re just going to think I’m “raging” again because of the word count.
Ghostbusters. Kurosawa. Hans Christian Andersen. I’ve made my point of view known, very clearly.
Just because a story / legend / myth originated at one geographical point on our globe, does not make it automatically immune to re-tellings or alternate versions, by locals, or by humans at some other geographical point on the globe.
Nor is a re-telling or an alternate version intrinsically disrespectful towards the originating culture and people. It can be crafted as such, intentionally, but that isn’t what we are talking about here.
So, I disagree, because of reasons I’ve already stated. Probably twice. Probably so many different ways that you mistook it for rage.
Bullet points, tho, just in case:
Stopped reading, right there.
Since you truly believe that it is not an issue , then you are just typing nonsense to hear your keys rattle.
/shoo.
Fair enough. I explained all of my points clearly, and since you “stopped reading right there,” my specific point was:
This is an obvious point to any reasonable person. Real lives are just a bit more important than the colors of cartoon or movie or television characters. My viewpoint on everything else that matters has been clearly stated above, in multiple posts that I put a good amount of effort into creating.
If you want to stop at an introductory sentence without gathering context (something you should have learned not to do when you were learning how to read) that’s your prerogative, but it’s not productive, it’s not furthering your point or explaining new logical ideas behind what you say. It’s certainly not moving the discussion along.
What it does do, however, is make it easier for me, because I can see there’s no value in trying to communicate with you.
That’s very mature. I’m sure the anti-whitewashing crew is happy to have such sharp, and yet reasonable, intellect on their side.
Reading an early line in written material and then dismissing the material as a whole, on the basis of that line, is ludicrous. That doesn’t fly anywhere, not in school, not at work, not in life. You debated not one of my points, then took the first easy out you could find.
“He said this, so I’m OUT! Gonna be condescending as I slink away so he’s sure to know I still think he’s wrong, though.”
Thanks for the discourse, or rather lack thereof. Still good mental exercise for me anyway, I guess. As I said, I like to write, but this discussion has come to nil. I’m putting in all the effort; you’re putting in none. You seem disgusted by my standpoint on whitewashing, but you’ve brought no reasons, no backup, no logic, no examples, not even an opinion on why you feel it’s so important. How about the counterpoint to my quote about whitewashing above? Nah? That’s what I thought.
Honestly, if you want to truly discuss anything I said, reply in some manner that is befitting of the posts I created. Then, I’ll be happy to talk, and interested in what you have to say. Yep, this comes across as patronizing - and for that I am sorry - but I don’t know how else to put it. I’d like a challenge equal to the discussion I am putting forth. Dismissing me out of hand with a couple sentences and then running - that’s a very cheap and shallow way to debate something.
Any other ad hominem you come up with, though, about my rage or my typing, or telling me to “shoo” (LOL!), I’m just gonna dismiss, and then you’ll be the official holder of the last word, OK? 
I just don’t do live action remakes. I think the Ghost in the Shell one would be great, Scarlet looks EXACTLY like Major… but there was ridiculous outrage and I just haven’t gotten around to watching it. Really annoying how there’s outrage from both sides instead of just enjoying a movie.
The live action Death Note wasn’t terrible, but the story was changed a bit too much for my tastes. Still had fun watching it with my mom!
The Dark Tower.
Idris did a good job, don’t get me wrong, however his casting was completely off. The movie did flop so we’ll never see how the whole Detta/Odettta thing would have played out.
Long story short, the novels constantly remind us that the main character is a white guy and that Black folks were actually pretty rare. The one black character is actually commented on a few times throughout the series.
I wouldn’t have had any issues with the casting had it been otherwise. Yeah, consistency when making an SK movie is actually pretty rare but this was a really bad error on their end.
They even tried to play the whole “It’s a sequel to the series” angle, which was pretty lame.
Little Mermaid took place near Norway, yes?
Denmark actually but be careful.
There are people haunting this thread who will tell you that the apparent country of origin is irrelevant to who and how it should be cast.
Skäl.
So, can you point out anywhere in the Disney movie, or in fact the HCA tale exactly where the story takes place?