Ruminations of an Old Goat

Last week, there was a flurry of controversy on the web generated by a blog entry on the science fiction site IO9. It was titled "The last thing Spider-Man should be is another white guy." The blogger did a fairly good job explaining why he felt there was nothing about Peter Parker's background that required him to be a played by a white guy, other than the fact that Peter Parker has always been a white guy.

Before I go any farther, let me toss out a minor confession. For a brief time -- a very brief time -- an actual movie producer showed some interest in producing a movie based the Southern Knights. For those of you who haven't been reading the Friday Challenge site since it began, the Southern Knights was a small press superhero team comic book I co-created and wrote. All of the members of the team are white. One of the first things my partners and I did once we heard a movie might be possible was discuss which character should be played by a black actor because we felt the movie had a better chance of being produced if one of the main characters was black.

I tell that story so you will believe me when I say that I couldn't care less about the race of the next actor who plays Peter Parker. Honestly, unless the next Spider-Man movie a lot better than the third one, I won't be going to see it anyway. So, if I don't care about the race of the next actor to land the role, what the heck am I doing writing about it?

I'm writing about it because the debate sparked by the original blog very quickly turned racial. Yeah, there's a shocker. Anyone who wanted to keep Peter Parker white was labeled a racist troll. Anyone in favor of making Peter Parker anything but white was an enlightened and superior human being. That's what I had trouble with and it's why I'm writing about this whole issue today.

Why is it racist for someone to want to keep Peter Parker white because they believe there's no reason to change his race? Why is it not racist for someone to insist that Peter Parker should be non-white because they believe there's no reason not to change his race? Both arguments boil down to "because I said so," with the exception that those insisting Parker be non-white don't even have the history of the character on their side. On top of that, the original blogger insists that he is taking a colorblind approach to the issue by insisting that color be a major consideration when casting the actor. If the blogger truly wanted to be colorblind, he would have suggested that Peter Parker be played by the best actor for the role, regardless of the actor's race. I was left with a very definite impression that the blogger would have protested if the best actor turned out to be white.

That's being color conscious -- extremely color conscious -- rather than colorblind. When Will Smith was cast as James West in the Wild, Wild West movie, anyone who pointed out that the original James West was white was labeled a racist. (Considering the steaming pile of crap the movie turned out to be, I wonder if Smith wishes a white guy had been cast for the role.) It's also racist to protest the casting of Samuel L. Jackson as Nick Fury -- who is still white in the comic books -- in the latest Iron Man movie. Those same people who claim it's racist to prefer white actors play characters originally written as white also claim it's racist to cast a white actor in the role of a character who was originally written as a minority. The controversies over the casting of white actors to play the leads in Prince of Persia and Avatar: The Last Airbender are perfect examples.

The claim is that the characters in those movies would be Persians or Asians and should be cast as such. Persians actually are Caucasians, though it seems very few people let facts get in the way of a good rant on racism. That same argument cannot be made about Asians, so I suppose one could say that claim holds water. Except the argument simply returns to the claim that the characters in the movie should be Asian because that's what they are in the cartoon on which the movie is based. Call me crazy, but isn't that sort of like claiming a white guy should play Peter Parker because Peter Parker is white in the comic books on which the movie is based?

But, hey, let's try something more American. As a professional storyteller, I love American folk and tall tales. One that has been a favorite of mine since I was a child is the story of John Henry. I can argue pretty persuasively that there's nothing truly "black" about the character John Henry other than the fact that he's black in the folk tale. A child born to a poverty stricken white family -- of which there were many in the post Civil War South -- would have led much the same life as the folk tale's John Henry led. While speculation abounds as to whether John Henry really existed, there is no actual proof either way. Any claim that John Henry is black because the real John Henry was black cannot be backed up with actual facts. Now, imagine what would happen if someone in Hollywood decided to make a movie based on John Henry and cast a white actor as John Henry. Cries of racism -- many from the same people who clamor for a non-white Spider-Man -- would abound, backed by the claim that John Henry must be played by a black actor because John Henry is black in the original folk tale.

Some, including the blogger whose blog inspired this column, claim they are in favor of having minority actors play characters who were originally white as a means of expanding heroic roles for minorities. I think that's a highly debatable position, but at least there is more to the argument than "because we can." The problem is, that so many of those taking that position and also claim to be colorblind, as well. Can they truly not see the double standard?

Again, I don't care which side anyone takes in this argument -- as long as they agree that their position applies equally for all races and all roles.

And if you disagree with me, you're probably a racist.