While I do really like aspects of this story (I’m really a sucker for Victoriana) a lot of elements both within the story and from the production side of things are inexcusable even for the 1970s. I know a major issue was the result of actors unions, who the BBC made the show use, had very few Asian actors. For instance in the Mind of Evil (1971) the only reason Pik-Sen Lim was able to play Chin Lee was because she was married to me of the writers and they were able to use nepotism to rig things in their favour, otherwise there was no one else. For background actors they were able to use non unionized actors and they did try to get the ethnicity right as early as Marco Polo but there are many exceptions. But even in other stories where they could have used white actors and we’d have not said anything they used non-white actors. There is an African reporter in the War Machines for example. Could they have done better, yes of course, but at least they tried… sometimes. As for John Bennett’s performance as Li H’sen Chang, I think there is a lot to say here. I think there is a bit of nuance in his performance, wherein he exaggerates the stereotypical elements for when the character is performing on stage, as many Asian people in the performing arts had to in the 1800s (arguably still thought to even today) in order to please their white audiences (that’s a whole other can of historical worms that can be discussed). I think there is a lot to say there but when the person doing the performance is wearing a pound of prosthetics and paint to look Asian the point is understandably, and almost ironically, lost. Likewise I don’t think the story is entirely uncritical of the Racism it presents but a lot of it is underplayed and done as sarcasm. Chang’s “I understand we all look the same” and the Doctors responses to Lightfoot’s assumption that the people who broke into his house were Chinese are blink and you miss it moments, and while it may be obvious to some, they are not as clear, or plentiful, as they should be. But at the same time I’m an not surprised especially since the BBC still had a Minstrel show that only ended a year after Talons Aired in ‘77 (running from 1958-1978) and on which the Daleks appeared (in 1964, episode lost). I think a lot of this was systematic. The BBC forcing unions to be used, and said unions underrepresenting certain races seems intentional to stifle any attempts any creatives made to try to utilize those actors. That being said, the story itself has many deep issues. It has a lot of negative Asian stereotypes in it. In some stories you can use this sort of thing but it is a very fine line that also requires positive Asian characters, you know ones who don’t fall between thug and megalomaniac. People claim it’s a product of it’s time, and while that is partially the case, they really don’t realize how controversial it was around the time it came out. It was very negatively received in some territories, hence why Ontario, Canada for example, which had a decently large Asian population, refused to broadcast it back in the 80s. Sorry about the length but there are so many aspects that can be discussed regarding this. Honestly you could write a book’s worth TLDR: There was a lot of systematic racism at the BBC in the 60s and 70s, and while Doctor Who, at times, tried to avoid it and actively tried to go against it, they were limited in what they could do. That does not excuse the content of the story itself though, just *some* of the production things. Also it was wrong then and it still is.
Grow a thicker skin, if your gonna complain about this stop watching doctor who altogether It was a different time, its like complaining about bless this house saying a woman's place was in the home How about the racism in diff'rent strokes, oh wait remembrance of the daleks is a story wholely revolving around racism, white supremacists against black minority during the 60s (very subtle) I dream of jeannie may offend you too considering its about a woman that does whatever her master wishes, she's a genie, she grants wishes How about 3s company and the main character pretending to be gay Bet your 1 of those who complains about a genocidal alien wanting to blow up the earth but is beaten by a football star "flash Gordon" yeah I don't know many of them but just because ming the merciless is based on a man of Chinese decent we've all got to be offended Get real Its just TV and film how does it effect you on a base level I don't understand your generation at all or maybe I just don't see these things your referring to being an issue as they are a product of the time You know who I feel sorry for, the people that people like you tend to the limelight, oh it offends you, funny, Britain was 1 of the leader in abolishing slavery and yet we don't moan about being enslaved by the Romans but do we bring that up, no, talk to people directly and they will tell you it's the overuse of them in media that offends them whether it's alphabet squad or race, its all offensive to someone who isn't that Laugh at our misgivings, it's funnier to think that the BBC is doing the same things again just to make itself look better but guess what they've made the same mistakes, we now have a doctor that is incompetent has a sonic that looks like a dildo, a console that looks like a buttplug and is being directed by a miss-ing Wang, yeah changing the sex was a fantastic idea
@@snakedaemongaming6590 I agree 100 percent... this sort of rant is what's WRONG with modernity..... the time we live in now is, in my opinion the most racist and sexist time for tv and movies ever.....
@@snakedaemongaming6590 I think the majority agree, but of course its the vocal minority that give the incorrect appearance that most people agree with the dreadful current state of the woke media... and yes, 20 years from now, I imagine people will look back at this current era in amazement at how badly the woke media got it wrong... sadly however, we have to love through it and take the long way round..
Extremely privileged, affluent middle class white people getting upset about supposed neo-colonial attitudes in an entertainment show made over 40 years ago. Extremism at its best.
If the Talons of Weng-Chiang is controversial, what of Marco Polo, the Crusade, the Savages etc if they were ever recovered? If we were to get rid of casting and production like yellowface and blackface and they did use genuine actors and not racist make-up, the Troughton era's writing is possibly the most racist: Kemel, Toberman, Julius Silverstein. What do you mean by the female companions? Why the Ark, though?
I’ve never had an issue with the misrepresentation in any sort of media if it’s treated as a product of it’s time. The creators looking back know it’s wrong and have admitted so, but it’s important to preserve these things rather than try and sweep them under the rug and forget about them as it’s a reminder of what not to do. Talons is still one of the best Tom Baker stories but it’s reputation for being racist is what it’ll more be known for than anything due to the time period.
I 100% get that. Its important to remember the past choices (both good and bad for this story) and while it's obviously great to enjoy this story, i just hope people don't ever forget about the problems or make excuses for it.
I think a lot of people make a big deal out of any perceived "racist" elements in stories, and with respect, the majority of it seems to be people getting offended on behalf of others. The common one is Toberman in Tomb. In the original script I believe, Toberman was intended to be deaf. For whatever reason, those elements got left out of the story. It was later included in the novelisation. Toberman's arc in the story of breaking through the Cyber-Control modifications to his brain and showing not only his physical, but mental strength makes him one of the most compelling characters. Indeed, he sacrifices himself to severely damage the Cyber-Controller and seal the Cybermen in. The "product of it's time" defence for Talons and other stories is perfectly acceptable. Judging stories by modern standards is the problem, and if you're thinking more about the "problematic" elements of a story than the story itself, I'm not sure what you hope to gain out of watching that piece of media.
I can accept shows and movies as a product of their times. One big example is the old Charlie Chan movies from the 1930s and 1940s. The actors playing the title character was non-Asian with make-up to make him look Asian. The other characters in the Chan family are played by Asian actors though.
my view, if i may, is that she did a wonderful job. there are much fewer roles for minority actors in the uk (hence actors like riz ahmed needing to go the us) so it really isn't the same as the reverse at all.
@@ryanhlfc Thats ridiculous as an argument! Imagine as an experiment, they chose a white actor to play an historical Black person. YOU know there would be outrage! This is pure race bating for the hell of it. If there aren't enough roles for black actors then we need to see more writers invent them - they don't change history to create work!
@@robertbooth9633 as I explained. One group faces discrimination. One doesn't. So its nowhere near the same. And I agree there should be more roles for black people. But a drama that races wars a character is not "rewriting history"
Oh and I forgot in the mind of evil many of the Chinese people were not actually actors they were from the local Chinese restaurant up the road from the bbc at the time because they just couldn’t find many Asian actors in the uk at the time but I think it’s amazing how much Britain has changed and for the better since then so no I don’t think racism was ever intended you can’t judge these productions with a modern lens you got ti look at the context first people get too offended over everything these days
The analogy I use is that “Talons” is DW’s “Song Of The South.” It’s *just* historically important enough and *just* subversive-for-its-time enough that we can’t dismiss it or ignore it. Also, it’s pretty racist. The thing I can’t get over is casting a white dude and putting him in bad makeup to play the *only* Chinese character who has any lines. What makes that decision annoying in addition to being awful, is that Chang often appears to be Robert Holmes’ attempt to write an (ugh) “yellow peril” stereotype who actually has some depth to him. If they’d cast an actual Chinese guy, I’ll bet the line about how “I’m aware that we all look alike to you” would have been delivered with a lot more bite. That reading is definitely supported by Holmes’ script (Chang speaks “bad ethnic english” on stage, but speaks near perfect English off-stage, and there’s the implication he’s doing this because he knows the racist Brits in the audience will eat it up with a spoon.) Robert Holmes always showed empathy for his scripted villains to an extent, and you can kinda tell that Holmes’ empathy towards Chang had to do with his outsider status. Like, wouldn’t it suck to be the smartest guy in town by a mile, but no one takes you seriously because you’re just some wacky Chinese magician. Jago and Litefoot are the most heroic contemporary Brits in the episode and at least one of them’s kinda dumb. But. BUT. But this is something that would have come out more in the finished product *if they had cast an actual Chinese guy.* And none of that erases the fact that - though “Talons” may have been conceived with half a mind to comment on some of those old Victorian Penny Dreadful tropes, the fact of the matter is… it didn’t, really. It still has a bunch of evil kung fu guys jumping out of shadows and dollops of sneaky orientalism. It replicated the tropes really, really well - like, given what was available at the time in terms of tech and budget, it *looks* better than almost any classic DW episode ever. (Makes sense, cuz if you give the BBC props n’ costumes crew a Victorian setting to work with… well, they’ve done that once or twice, ya know?) But the problem with those particular tropes is that (white guys) of a certain age still think those tropes are *really* fun and would rather not question them. That’s true to some extent now, but it was even truer in 1977. So what’s uniquely frustrating about “Talons” is… it was always gonna have problems, but if they’d just cast Keye Luke or someone as Chang it would be a *lot* easier to defend it as a classic-with-problems. “Song of the South” was only ever subversive in as much as making any movie where white kids look up to and hang out with an older black guy was always going to come off as “subversive” in some places in 1946. It lacks even the mild self-awareness of “Talons.” On the other hand… at least they cast a real black guy in it…
Doctor Who fans don't do politics and if I were you I wouldn't watch Dalek invasion of Earth if I were you because the doctor threatens to spank Susan's bottom and it's not made out as a joke like it's made out in twice Upon a Time just like Susan I think you need a jolly good slap bottom stop calling things and people racist for something that happened decades and decades ago
Are you going to do a video about the flaws like Twin Dilemma, the Ark, and Vengeance. What about the female companions, all the female companions aren't the same.
As an Asian, racism, exoticism, and or any other colonialistic views like the ones in Talons are not something new for me. That's the product of their time from _that_ industry, and I understand how it happened, though that still don't make it right. However, I understand why people like Talons, and in that context, I don't really mind about it. Just as long as we keep the dialogue open about the issues, it's a progressive move.
Yes! That's so interesting to hear! I think if a story with these problems came out this century, or more accurately this decade, then it would a completely different conversation. However, the time it was made does not allow it to be okay, not one bit. But as long as we remember, understand, and work from these mistakes, we can enjoy the story, while moving on to a better represented future in media.
I can 100% respect your opinion as everyone is different For me personally, I can watch story and enjoy it (although I do still cringe at a lot of moments) but I can’t bring myself to give it a 10 or anything because of that because it was still bad and all I do is try to look around it instead of ignoring it. This isn’t the only story like this as there’s also the Celestial Toymaker and it’s use of the N-word Anyone who can not watch the story period is perfectly valid. I hope I worded that well (let me know if I haven’t BTW)
Yes that makes complete sense! (Honestly don't know how I forgot to mention the Celestial Toymaker). I'm happy as long as people aren't trying to make wild excuses for the problematic content or forgetting about it completely.
Maybe i'm trying to view it too favourably, but i think a lot of Talons is actually making fun of racism. For example, when Chang tells the policeman, "I understand we all look the same," he's making fun of Victorian (and often modern) views of ethnic minorities. The Doctor also makes fun of their views of 'savage' tribes by inventing a ridiculous story about Leela floating down the amazon. The setting itself is using the xenophobia that existed towards Chinese people in the east end in Victorian times, and trying to come up with a Doctor Who explanation for it. A more socially aware script would've used the opportunity to talk about racism, but it is there if you look for it in my opinion. That being said, the yellowface is really unfortunate and cannot be defended. I've learnt to love the story in spite of that, but it still makes for uncomfortable viewing
Hmmmm, Who - classic and new - has never shied away from social politics. It is basically a show about conflict and morality... On many occasions Classic Who, especially, projects issues of race and culture through monsters and non-human protagonists, as if distancing them from the human condition allows the viewer [perhaps] to perceive and form a view on the subject from outside of the 'bubble'. In other stories it is very very apparent indeed that it is Humankind that are the real monsters - The Mutants being the most famous racially themed story of all Who output, and indisputable Who highpoints like Genesis of the Daleks having some Kaled characters that are not even thinly veiled Nazi portrayals - such as the officer 'Ravon' that Guy Siner plays. Peter Myles' 'Nyder' is understated by comparison. Who does put a lot of very contentious characters and scenes out there - such as sexism, chauvinism, racism, war & torture, stereotyping and all manner of ignorance based phobias... what it doesn't do is say that they are ok. The job of digesting and deciding is left to the viewer. The dialogue and attitudes of characters in Talons of Wen Chiang are likely to have been fairly typical of the Victorian setting it portrays. The controversy over 'colouring up' to play different roles is more troublesome... and is a product of many pragmatic logistical / acting variables as well as the 'latent acceptability' of the time when it was filmed. There were exceedingly few *professional* ethnic TV actors in the UK at that time, and breaking through into the mainstream didn't happen for most non-white actors/actresses until the 1980s... and even then we still had The Two Ronnies regularly blacking-up to poke fun at the differences of other people, as also happened in Little Britain in the early 21st century. I agree, that Who can be an uncomfortable watch sometimes, for younger and older generations alike, for various sensitive and subjective reasons... The 1960s stories are a real eye opener at times, and that is just the TARDIS crew! I give Who credit though, for putting difficult subjects out there - warts and all, without condoning them or siding one way or the other, and letting the viewer explore their own feelings and morality to what is being shown. Quite how one is supposed to react to interspecies lesbianism between a Human female and a Silurian reptile is anyone's guess though - New Who pretty much blew minds with that one, with implications of possible 'bestiality', resulting from a very misguided and clumsy attempt at 'inclusiveness'.
Completely right of you to highlight this and other issues in Doctor Who's history. The programme has always reflected the times in which it was made, but that's no excuse. Fortunately, times and attitudes change. Hopefully we can all be wise enough to consider this whilst watching the episodes in question. It will be interesting to see how the RTD2 production differs from the first.
I agree on every point in this videos so much so it feels like it was made for me. I have the revisitation 1 box set and I just found it unwatchable. I might read the novelisation one day but until then I don’t see my opinions of it changing.
Yeah, it would be a bit silly to throw out a singular disk of a box set 😅. Additionally, I don't have a problem with people who have the DVD themselves obviously, no matter when they bought it.
My mother owns a copy of it on dvd, but I have never watched it. It gave off an aura to me, A negative aura I could not shake. Glad to know why I've been avoiding that one now
that's really interesting. seeing as though it's already accessible to you, it might not be a bad idea to give it a go and see what you really think of it, but i definitely can see why someone would avoid it
I watched it once and all I remember are all the racist parts from it and the rest of the story was pretty boring. It's uncomfortable to watch and I don't see how in 1977 it was seen as okay for what is essentially a children's television program. Even for 1977 standards, its pretty racist although considering Doctor Who did "yellow face" before this episode in the mostly missing Daleks Masterplan, I guess production thought it would slide past the viewer's heads. I listened to a Jago and Litefoot Big Finish story a while after but they just remind me they're a product of an extremely racist story and I just don't really find them essential characters who deserve like 15 boxsets. You also brought up Tomb of the Cybermen which I think what's really interesting about it and the episode before Evil of the Daleks, you have two silent characters that are basically just muscle to drive some parts of the plot while having no lines and those parts were given to two different people of colour who die at the end of both stories and as much I as liked those stories, those parts just took me out of the episode because its such obvious racism and it makes the episode uncomfortable to watch.
OMG!!! Yes, took me over a month to watch it in full, I wanted to know Jago and litefoot for big finish, but I can’t even enjoy the story as a result of the racism
It was a different time, its like complaining about bless this house saying a woman's place was in the home How about the racism in diff'rent strokes, oh wait remembrance of the daleks is a story wholely revolving around racism, white supremacists against black minority during the 60s (very subtle) Bet your 1 of those who complains about a genocidal alien wanting to blow up the earth but is beaten by a football star "flash Gordon" Get real Its just TV
While I do really like aspects of this story (I’m really a sucker for Victoriana) a lot of elements both within the story and from the production side of things are inexcusable even for the 1970s.
I know a major issue was the result of actors unions, who the BBC made the show use, had very few Asian actors. For instance in the Mind of Evil (1971) the only reason Pik-Sen Lim was able to play Chin Lee was because she was married to me of the writers and they were able to use nepotism to rig things in their favour, otherwise there was no one else. For background actors they were able to use non unionized actors and they did try to get the ethnicity right as early as Marco Polo but there are many exceptions. But even in other stories where they could have used white actors and we’d have not said anything they used non-white actors. There is an African reporter in the War Machines for example. Could they have done better, yes of course, but at least they tried… sometimes.
As for John Bennett’s performance as Li H’sen Chang, I think there is a lot to say here. I think there is a bit of nuance in his performance, wherein he exaggerates the stereotypical elements for when the character is performing on stage, as many Asian people in the performing arts had to in the 1800s (arguably still thought to even today) in order to please their white audiences (that’s a whole other can of historical worms that can be discussed). I think there is a lot to say there but when the person doing the performance is wearing a pound of prosthetics and paint to look Asian the point is understandably, and almost ironically, lost.
Likewise I don’t think the story is entirely uncritical of the Racism it presents but a lot of it is underplayed and done as sarcasm. Chang’s “I understand we all look the same” and the Doctors responses to Lightfoot’s assumption that the people who broke into his house were Chinese are blink and you miss it moments, and while it may be obvious to some, they are not as clear, or plentiful, as they should be.
But at the same time I’m an not surprised especially since the BBC still had a Minstrel show that only ended a year after Talons Aired in ‘77 (running from 1958-1978) and on which the Daleks appeared (in 1964, episode lost). I think a lot of this was systematic. The BBC forcing unions to be used, and said unions underrepresenting certain races seems intentional to stifle any attempts any creatives made to try to utilize those actors.
That being said, the story itself has many deep issues. It has a lot of negative Asian stereotypes in it. In some stories you can use this sort of thing but it is a very fine line that also requires positive Asian characters, you know ones who don’t fall between thug and megalomaniac.
People claim it’s a product of it’s time, and while that is partially the case, they really don’t realize how controversial it was around the time it came out. It was very negatively received in some territories, hence why Ontario, Canada for example, which had a decently large Asian population, refused to broadcast it back in the 80s.
Sorry about the length but there are so many aspects that can be discussed regarding this. Honestly you could write a book’s worth
TLDR:
There was a lot of systematic racism at the BBC in the 60s and 70s, and while Doctor Who, at times, tried to avoid it and actively tried to go against it, they were limited in what they could do. That does not excuse the content of the story itself though, just *some* of the production things. Also it was wrong then and it still is.
You might just have to right that book yourself! Cause god knows I'd read it!
This is so interesting to see, thank you
@@SamThomas_YT Thanks, Glad you enjoyed it and took the time to read it!
Grow a thicker skin, if your gonna complain about this stop watching doctor who altogether
It was a different time, its like complaining about bless this house saying a woman's place was in the home
How about the racism in diff'rent strokes, oh wait remembrance of the daleks is a story wholely revolving around racism, white supremacists against black minority during the 60s (very subtle)
I dream of jeannie may offend you too considering its about a woman that does whatever her master wishes, she's a genie, she grants wishes
How about 3s company and the main character pretending to be gay
Bet your 1 of those who complains about a genocidal alien wanting to blow up the earth but is beaten by a football star "flash Gordon" yeah I don't know many of them but just because ming the merciless is based on a man of Chinese decent we've all got to be offended
Get real
Its just TV and film how does it effect you on a base level
I don't understand your generation at all or maybe I just don't see these things your referring to being an issue as they are a product of the time
You know who I feel sorry for, the people that people like you tend to the limelight, oh it offends you, funny, Britain was 1 of the leader in abolishing slavery and yet we don't moan about being enslaved by the Romans but do we bring that up, no, talk to people directly and they will tell you it's the overuse of them in media that offends them whether it's alphabet squad or race, its all offensive to someone who isn't that
Laugh at our misgivings, it's funnier to think that the BBC is doing the same things again just to make itself look better but guess what they've made the same mistakes, we now have a doctor that is incompetent has a sonic that looks like a dildo, a console that looks like a buttplug and is being directed by a miss-ing Wang, yeah changing the sex was a fantastic idea
@@snakedaemongaming6590 I agree 100 percent... this sort of rant is what's WRONG with modernity..... the time we live in now is, in my opinion the most racist and sexist time for tv and movies ever.....
@@snakedaemongaming6590 I think the majority agree, but of course its the vocal minority that give the incorrect appearance that most people agree with the dreadful current state of the woke media... and yes, 20 years from now, I imagine people will look back at this current era in amazement at how badly the woke media got it wrong... sadly however, we have to love through it and take the long way round..
Extremely privileged, affluent middle class white people getting upset about supposed neo-colonial attitudes in an entertainment show made over 40 years ago. Extremism at its best.
What was the issue with Vengeance on Varos?
You're going round in circles. Also Weng Chiang is NOT A BLOODY EPISODE, it's a SERIAL in 6 parts.
If the Talons of Weng-Chiang is controversial, what of Marco Polo, the Crusade, the Savages etc if they were ever recovered? If we were to get rid of casting and production like yellowface and blackface and they did use genuine actors and not racist make-up, the Troughton era's writing is possibly the most racist: Kemel, Toberman, Julius Silverstein. What do you mean by the female companions? Why the Ark, though?
I’ve never had an issue with the misrepresentation in any sort of media if it’s treated as a product of it’s time. The creators looking back know it’s wrong and have admitted so, but it’s important to preserve these things rather than try and sweep them under the rug and forget about them as it’s a reminder of what not to do. Talons is still one of the best Tom Baker stories but it’s reputation for being racist is what it’ll more be known for than anything due to the time period.
I 100% get that. Its important to remember the past choices (both good and bad for this story) and while it's obviously great to enjoy this story, i just hope people don't ever forget about the problems or make excuses for it.
I think a lot of people make a big deal out of any perceived "racist" elements in stories, and with respect, the majority of it seems to be people getting offended on behalf of others.
The common one is Toberman in Tomb. In the original script I believe, Toberman was intended to be deaf. For whatever reason, those elements got left out of the story. It was later included in the novelisation. Toberman's arc in the story of breaking through the Cyber-Control modifications to his brain and showing not only his physical, but mental strength makes him one of the most compelling characters.
Indeed, he sacrifices himself to severely damage the Cyber-Controller and seal the Cybermen in.
The "product of it's time" defence for Talons and other stories is perfectly acceptable. Judging stories by modern standards is the problem, and if you're thinking more about the "problematic" elements of a story than the story itself, I'm not sure what you hope to gain out of watching that piece of media.
I can accept shows and movies as a product of their times. One big example is the old Charlie Chan movies from the 1930s and 1940s. The actors playing the title character was non-Asian with make-up to make him look Asian. The other characters in the Chan family are played by Asian actors though.
What is your view on a black actress playing the historical character of Anne Boleyn ?
my view, if i may, is that she did a wonderful job. there are much fewer roles for minority actors in the uk (hence actors like riz ahmed needing to go the us) so it really isn't the same as the reverse at all.
@@ryanhlfc Thats ridiculous as an argument!
Imagine as an experiment, they chose a white actor to play an historical Black person. YOU know there would be outrage!
This is pure race bating for the hell of it. If there aren't enough roles for black actors then we need to see more writers invent them - they don't change history to create work!
@@robertbooth9633 as I explained. One group faces discrimination. One doesn't. So its nowhere near the same. And I agree there should be more roles for black people. But a drama that races wars a character is not "rewriting history"
Race swaps*
Stupid woke politics and double standards
Oh and I forgot in the mind of evil many of the Chinese people were not actually actors they were from the local Chinese restaurant up the road from the bbc at the time because they just couldn’t find many Asian actors in the uk at the time but I think it’s amazing how much Britain has changed and for the better since then so no I don’t think racism was ever intended you can’t judge these productions with a modern lens you got ti look at the context first people get too offended over everything these days
The analogy I use is that “Talons” is DW’s “Song Of The South.” It’s *just* historically important enough and *just* subversive-for-its-time enough that we can’t dismiss it or ignore it. Also, it’s pretty racist.
The thing I can’t get over is casting a white dude and putting him in bad makeup to play the *only* Chinese character who has any lines. What makes that decision annoying in addition to being awful, is that Chang often appears to be Robert Holmes’ attempt to write an (ugh) “yellow peril” stereotype who actually has some depth to him. If they’d cast an actual Chinese guy, I’ll bet the line about how “I’m aware that we all look alike to you” would have been delivered with a lot more bite. That reading is definitely supported by Holmes’ script (Chang speaks “bad ethnic english” on stage, but speaks near perfect English off-stage, and there’s the implication he’s doing this because he knows the racist Brits in the audience will eat it up with a spoon.) Robert Holmes always showed empathy for his scripted villains to an extent, and you can kinda tell that Holmes’ empathy towards Chang had to do with his outsider status. Like, wouldn’t it suck to be the smartest guy in town by a mile, but no one takes you seriously because you’re just some wacky Chinese magician. Jago and Litefoot are the most heroic contemporary Brits in the episode and at least one of them’s kinda dumb.
But. BUT.
But this is something that would have come out more in the finished product *if they had cast an actual Chinese guy.* And none of that erases the fact that - though “Talons” may have been conceived with half a mind to comment on some of those old Victorian Penny Dreadful tropes, the fact of the matter is… it didn’t, really. It still has a bunch of evil kung fu guys jumping out of shadows and dollops of sneaky orientalism. It replicated the tropes really, really well - like, given what was available at the time in terms of tech and budget, it *looks* better than almost any classic DW episode ever. (Makes sense, cuz if you give the BBC props n’ costumes crew a Victorian setting to work with… well, they’ve done that once or twice, ya know?) But the problem with those particular tropes is that (white guys) of a certain age still think those tropes are *really* fun and would rather not question them. That’s true to some extent now, but it was even truer in 1977. So what’s uniquely frustrating about “Talons” is… it was always gonna have problems, but if they’d just cast Keye Luke or someone as Chang it would be a *lot* easier to defend it as a classic-with-problems.
“Song of the South” was only ever subversive in as much as making any movie where white kids look up to and hang out with an older black guy was always going to come off as “subversive” in some places in 1946. It lacks even the mild self-awareness of “Talons.” On the other hand… at least they cast a real black guy in it…
Doctor Who fans don't do politics and if I were you I wouldn't watch Dalek invasion of Earth if I were you because the doctor threatens to spank Susan's bottom and it's not made out as a joke like it's made out in twice Upon a Time just like Susan I think you need a jolly good slap bottom stop calling things and people racist for something that happened decades and decades ago
Are you going to do a video about the flaws like Twin Dilemma, the Ark, and Vengeance. What about the female companions, all the female companions aren't the same.
So you haven't actually watched it?
I have watched it, quite a while ago I admit, but it gave a lasting impression
@@SamThomas_YT Ah ok, that's fair enough then.
As an Asian, racism, exoticism, and or any other colonialistic views like the ones in Talons are not something new for me. That's the product of their time from _that_ industry, and I understand how it happened, though that still don't make it right. However, I understand why people like Talons, and in that context, I don't really mind about it. Just as long as we keep the dialogue open about the issues, it's a progressive move.
Yes! That's so interesting to hear! I think if a story with these problems came out this century, or more accurately this decade, then it would a completely different conversation. However, the time it was made does not allow it to be okay, not one bit. But as long as we remember, understand, and work from these mistakes, we can enjoy the story, while moving on to a better represented future in media.
What episode
Animations, the webcasts??
maybe.. 👀
I can 100% respect your opinion as everyone is different
For me personally, I can watch story and enjoy it (although I do still cringe at a lot of moments) but I can’t bring myself to give it a 10 or anything because of that because it was still bad and all I do is try to look around it instead of ignoring it. This isn’t the only story like this as there’s also the Celestial Toymaker and it’s use of the N-word
Anyone who can not watch the story period is perfectly valid.
I hope I worded that well (let me know if I haven’t BTW)
Yes that makes complete sense! (Honestly don't know how I forgot to mention the Celestial Toymaker). I'm happy as long as people aren't trying to make wild excuses for the problematic content or forgetting about it completely.
Sad rant.
Maybe i'm trying to view it too favourably, but i think a lot of Talons is actually making fun of racism. For example, when Chang tells the policeman, "I understand we all look the same," he's making fun of Victorian (and often modern) views of ethnic minorities. The Doctor also makes fun of their views of 'savage' tribes by inventing a ridiculous story about Leela floating down the amazon.
The setting itself is using the xenophobia that existed towards Chinese people in the east end in Victorian times, and trying to come up with a Doctor Who explanation for it. A more socially aware script would've used the opportunity to talk about racism, but it is there if you look for it in my opinion.
That being said, the yellowface is really unfortunate and cannot be defended. I've learnt to love the story in spite of that, but it still makes for uncomfortable viewing
Hmmmm, Who - classic and new - has never shied away from social politics. It is basically a show about conflict and morality... On many occasions Classic Who, especially, projects issues of race and culture through monsters and non-human protagonists, as if distancing them from the human condition allows the viewer [perhaps] to perceive and form a view on the subject from outside of the 'bubble'. In other stories it is very very apparent indeed that it is Humankind that are the real monsters - The Mutants being the most famous racially themed story of all Who output, and indisputable Who highpoints like Genesis of the Daleks having some Kaled characters that are not even thinly veiled Nazi portrayals - such as the officer 'Ravon' that Guy Siner plays. Peter Myles' 'Nyder' is understated by comparison. Who does put a lot of very contentious characters and scenes out there - such as sexism, chauvinism, racism, war & torture, stereotyping and all manner of ignorance based phobias... what it doesn't do is say that they are ok. The job of digesting and deciding is left to the viewer. The dialogue and attitudes of characters in Talons of Wen Chiang are likely to have been fairly typical of the Victorian setting it portrays. The controversy over 'colouring up' to play different roles is more troublesome... and is a product of many pragmatic logistical / acting variables as well as the 'latent acceptability' of the time when it was filmed. There were exceedingly few *professional* ethnic TV actors in the UK at that time, and breaking through into the mainstream didn't happen for most non-white actors/actresses until the 1980s... and even then we still had The Two Ronnies regularly blacking-up to poke fun at the differences of other people, as also happened in Little Britain in the early 21st century. I agree, that Who can be an uncomfortable watch sometimes, for younger and older generations alike, for various sensitive and subjective reasons... The 1960s stories are a real eye opener at times, and that is just the TARDIS crew! I give Who credit though, for putting difficult subjects out there - warts and all, without condoning them or siding one way or the other, and letting the viewer explore their own feelings and morality to what is being shown. Quite how one is supposed to react to interspecies lesbianism between a Human female and a Silurian reptile is anyone's guess though - New Who pretty much blew minds with that one, with implications of possible 'bestiality', resulting from a very misguided and clumsy attempt at 'inclusiveness'.
Completely right of you to highlight this and other issues in Doctor Who's history. The programme has always reflected the times in which it was made, but that's no excuse. Fortunately, times and attitudes change. Hopefully we can all be wise enough to consider this whilst watching the episodes in question. It will be interesting to see how the RTD2 production differs from the first.
I agree on every point in this videos so much so it feels like it was made for me.
I have the revisitation 1 box set and I just found it unwatchable. I might read the novelisation one day but until then I don’t see my opinions of it changing.
why are a lot of people wearing hats now? great video though, more doctor who content please
haha it was quite windy that day, didn't want my flying hair to be a distraction
@@SamThomas_YT understandable. your videos are so good i need more! :) are you going to do one on the abominable snowmen when it comes out? 🤞🤞
I agree with this, I wouldnt buy Talons on its own either. Only in a box set.
Yeah, it would be a bit silly to throw out a singular disk of a box set 😅.
Additionally, I don't have a problem with people who have the DVD themselves obviously, no matter when they bought it.
My mother owns a copy of it on dvd, but I have never watched it. It gave off an aura to me, A negative aura I could not shake. Glad to know why I've been avoiding that one now
that's really interesting. seeing as though it's already accessible to you, it might not be a bad idea to give it a go and see what you really think of it, but i definitely can see why someone would avoid it
I watched it once and all I remember are all the racist parts from it and the rest of the story was pretty boring. It's uncomfortable to watch and I don't see how in 1977 it was seen as okay for what is essentially a children's television program. Even for 1977 standards, its pretty racist although considering Doctor Who did "yellow face" before this episode in the mostly missing Daleks Masterplan, I guess production thought it would slide past the viewer's heads.
I listened to a Jago and Litefoot Big Finish story a while after but they just remind me they're a product of an extremely racist story and I just don't really find them essential characters who deserve like 15 boxsets.
You also brought up Tomb of the Cybermen which I think what's really interesting about it and the episode before Evil of the Daleks, you have two silent characters that are basically just muscle to drive some parts of the plot while having no lines and those parts were given to two different people of colour who die at the end of both stories and as much I as liked those stories, those parts just took me out of the episode because its such obvious racism and it makes the episode uncomfortable to watch.
OMG!!! Yes, took me over a month to watch it in full, I wanted to know Jago and litefoot for big finish, but I can’t even enjoy the story as a result of the racism
It was a different time, its like complaining about bless this house saying a woman's place was in the home
How about the racism in diff'rent strokes, oh wait remembrance of the daleks is a story wholely revolving around racism, white supremacists against black minority during the 60s (very subtle)
Bet your 1 of those who complains about a genocidal alien wanting to blow up the earth but is beaten by a football star "flash Gordon"
Get real
Its just TV