Representation vs Tokenism | READUS 101
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 26 сен 2024
- For "Today's Lesson," I'm using two different yet similar situations to explain the difference between two different yet similar terminologies. I use the fact that Simon Pegg made the decision to make the current Star Trek movie-verse version of Hikaru Sulu a member of the LGBT community despite George Takei's disapproval to explain tokenism, and use Riri Williams taking over as Iron Man in Marvel Comics -- along with other prominent changes made to both their company and characters -- to explain representation.
_____________________
Music
"Wisdom Tooth" by B-RadGfromOV
www.newgrounds....
Readus 101 Theme:
"Phantom" by B-RadGfromOV
www.newgrounds....
Facebook: readus101
Twitter: Readus_101
Tumblr: www.readus101.tumblr.com
Instagram: readus101
Snapchat: Readus101
Basically, you don't put in a minority character because "here's your minority's face, so stop complaining", you do it because "putting in a minority character opens up your storytelling to new ideas and situations that would not have been viable through JUST having white characters." Don't just value our skin or sexuality: value our EXPERIENCE.
I do think it kind of depends. I really do want to see our stories explored more in media, and I’m pretty over shows that try and score brownie points with bare-bones representation, but at the same time, people write straight white characters all the time without their race or sexuality directly contributing to the plot, but no one really looks at them and says “Yeah, but did this character really have to be white?” or “What is accomplished by having a straight romance here instead of a queer one?” Not to say that that’s what you mean, it’s just a sentiment I see a lot that a character has to narratively justify any deviations they might make from the “default”. Personally, I’d like to see stories that delve into minority experiences with queer and non-white characters in their main cast, while also leaving space for background characters who don’t necessarily need that level of exploration to exist. Unfortunately, I imagine a lot of writers will only choose the latter, since it’s easier than just writing what’s been done.
Preech
This is made more difficuld, because the original "Star Trek" is explicitely utopian Science Fiction. The race of Uhura or Sulu is never the subject of any plotline, because, instead of reflecting on current events, they chose to present a future society, in which the characters had, maybe, heard about racism in school, but never thought to connect it wit themselves, because it was as distant for them as the Spanish inquisition is for us.
So, the most faithful and most effective way of representation of queer people would probably be none. In the sense of just having some of the characters have gay relationships or change their gender and it doesn't attract any particular reaction at all, because these people don't even get the idea of making artificial distinctions between homosexual and heterosexual or between cis and trans, etc.
Dude, respect. Love this video. I prefer representation, because it allows for people to be 100% people instead of a caricature of a single trait. When I see someone as a single trait, I can more easily dismiss them; it's reductive by nature. However, when I see a whole person, with all their imperfections and perfections, I actually have the chance to understand and relate. That's as much true in real life as it is for comic book writing.
I did a video about this same topic not too long ago, mainly bc I thought nobody had covered it that well, but i somehow missed this tho! good vid
@T1J
I've been meaning to do a video on this topic myself, because passing tokenism off as "representation," in current media has come to irritate me.
It's irritating to see white folks express the sentiment of being dumb and proud of it... But engh, c'est la vie...
One "change" to an established characters sexuality that I see as genuine representation is Jughead Jones in the new Archie comics. Because not only does making him aromantic and asexual fit in every possible way with how his character has always been, it is also worked into his stories in a way that feels real and does that aspect of him justice.
Dude, your videos are fucking great. I don’t understand how you don’t have more subscribers.
Confession time: I'm an X-Men fan. La'Ron has said in the past that he is not.
Specifically, my favorite Marvel character of all time - hell, my favorite *fictional* character of all time, period - is Storm. To the point where I actually try and pattern my own morality around 'WWOD?' - "What Would Ororo Do?" in a given situation. It's helped me make bettter decisions and be braver than I otherwise would have.
However, as a Storm fan, I have not seen her done justice in any medium in about 5 years. Greg Pak wrote an excellent ongoing Storm series...which was cancelled after one year. And while there have been good portrayals of her in other media, they've all suffered from a case of "always the bridesmaid, never the bride". The first black female -possibly bisexual- Claremontian superhero, and that ends up being what defines her more than the decades of history or any inate character traits she might possess.
Movies aside (because only Days of Future Past and Apocalypse even APPROACHED anything resembling a decent Storm), each iteration of the X-Men in media has gotten farther and farther from the Storm I used to know (yeah, yeah, queue up the Gotye).
She was a badass in the 90s animated series, albeit one with a lot of really hammy dialogue (which I LOVED but that's just me), and one whose role got smaller and smaller as the show progressed (which I did NOT love). Then she was a level-headed teacher type in Evolution, but still powerful enough to be legitimately cool in the VERY few times she got to, you know, *do* anything (for the record, X-Men Evolution is the single best depiction of Jean Grey I have yet to experience). Then Wolverine and the X-Men...happened, and while several of my *other* favorite characters got a semi-decent boost (Nightcrawler, Scarlet Witch, Polaris), Ororo got shoved into the background to be the token non-white X-Man. When Wolverine was picked as leader of the X-Men over someone who's led the team more than once, and done a damn good job doing so, I pretty much gave up on the series. She's been relegated to support status, to being little more than a token character.
TL;DR: Storm went from representation to tokenism and it irritates the living piss out of me.
Even as a white girl, I looked up to Ororo in the animated series. She was so strong and beautiful, an intelligent and wise woman. I too am sickened by the way they've relegated her to the background and basically written her out of major events. I watched a review of Apocalypse and I swear that it seemed like Psylocke had more lines and action than Storm did. =/
Hot take maybe. Tokenism has somewhat of a purpose as a stepping stone to proper representation during the initial stages of a group being brought into mainstream media, but should be abandoned and considered unacceptable once real representation has been achieved.
Earnest question: I notice that a major determining factor is whether or not the creative team includes people from the group being portrayed. With that in mind, what do you recommend when the entire creative team is 1 person, such as with novels or some small video games? Do you have any advice for authors who necessarily can’t have the lived experiences of the characters they’d like to include?
Research & consultation are generally good strategies to go with. They may be writing the story alone, but research is basically always necessary for one subject or another. Just make the experiences of your LGBT/minority ethnicity characters a big point of research as well; find LGBT forums or communities, or talk to people you know; watch videos made by LGBT creators, read their blog posts, look at books with LGBT characters written by people in that demographic, et cetera.
(And then, ideally, pay respects to the people who helped you come to a better understanding of the subject in the credits or a dedication-- 'much appreciation to [person] for advising me on this subject', 'my gratitude to [person(s)] for their insightful [video/book/post] on this subject', etc.)
representation is much much more progressive in my eyes when trying to understanding people. like u said it shouldn't define anyone just another personality trait.
the most u can ever hope for with tokenism is, at least to me, lowbrow comedy. big ups for using South Parks token black for that very smart
I mean by the very definition you established, I would rather have more effort put into my art than not
Once upon a time Tokenism is all a minority group could potentially hope for as far as representation goes. Representation is an expansion, with actual attention and concern for the group being portrayed. We've got further to go, but we've come a long way baby.
Alliteration IS better than rhyming. You're right. (I mean you're right abotu the rest of it too but the alliteration thing was my TIL moment).
In my head, Sulu was always bisexual, and he just happened to meet and fall in love with different people in different timelines. (He had a wife in the original canon.)
Whatever Rodenberry thought about the character, it never really came out in the show. There was the mirror verse, but that Sulu was more rapy and power-hungry - that has nothing to do with sexual attraction. And then in (sigh) Star Trek 5 when Sulu and Chekhov are following around that extremely muscular - quite frankly manish Klingon lady. Everybody was staring at that woman. That's it. All we know about Sulu on the family front is that he has a daughter. We never heard about a wife or a girlfriend. Well he has a daughter in Beyond. And a husband. So what.
I actually really liked how it was handled. Yorktown being in danger is one thing. Yorktown being in danger with the family of one of the principle cast... that added an additional level of urgency. It wasn't going to be Spock's family or Uhura's because they had their own story going. Bones is divorced. Jim was talking about calling his mother which meant she couldn't be there. That would leave Chekhov or Sulu. And Sulu's the only one with established children. (Yeah, yeah, David Marcus, I know... we don't know if that's happening.)
So they gave Sulu a family. And they gave him a husband. And they didn't freeze frame the shot, put a big red circle around them and a giant arrow. It's just, there's his family. Moving on. It's a non-issue.
If they'd introduced a brand new gay character, Pegg is right, they would have been there just to be the gay character who's family is in danger and we may never see them again. *cough* Carol Marcus *cough*
I strongly disagree with you on Ghostbusters Reboot being true rep... That at it's core strikes me as more in the spirit of Tokenism then anything else. It was made to put women in the roles of the OG characters and no matter how good or how bad it was done. Just, feels very stupid... It could've worked if the movie was set up as more a Next Gen type of deal with the new team taking up the mantel of the OG team, but it isn't so it feels very more like just hollow tokenism at the end of the day. No matter how people like it or not... Even if they say it's not really tokenism but just to me it'll always come across as more Token-like then anything truly Rep worthy.
"Alliteration is so much better than rhyme"
Yes it is. Great vid, very educational!
I guess if I had to choose one or the other, I would rather have representation than tokenism. Mainly because I feel like a lot of token characters in media create stereotypes in that when one sees a token character, one tends to see only one attribute. For example, if a person creates a character that has Autism and uses tokenism for it, then that characters personality will be nothing but the character being an Autistic person. Also, as someone who is an Autistic person, I would hate seeing that in media. I would rather have a character that has Autism using representation because I would want more from that characters personality other than just a character having a mental disability.
With you especially on the autism front, as somebody who's high-functioning. A good example of representation for people with Autism to me would be of Billy, the Blue Ranger in the recent Power Rangers movie. His autism is mentioned like only once in the movie, but his character extends beyond that, even as far as making him a driving force in uniting the Rangers against Rita.
4:01 He acknowledged Bunker more than DC did.
The only reason we *might* need Tokenism is to get "mainstream America" used to seeing people different than them in a way that won't freak them out so they can get blind sided by proper Rep. However, Tokenism Peaked in the 90's with the ensemble casts, each from a different background, and we're still seeing The Right boycott black and gay films so I don't think it's working.
I feel like the idea that only Muslim-Americans can write muslim-american characters or only a black woman should write for Riri Williams for example to be really dangerous and problematic. Limiting authors to only writing characters who share their race and/or life experience is very regressive and bigoted in its own way
@Voidsabre_
It is, because it's imposing a limitation on these groups, as if to imply that they don't understand cultures or people outside of their own culture or race.
Yup. I have to subscribe. You are brilliant.
Rep is always better than tokenism. But also, not just any rep, good rep. I'm sick of shoehorned lgbt+ rep in a villian role, or an over sexualized character, or being chalk-full of tropes that are bs.
As a straight white trekkie, im not against the change of zulu, thats not one of my many problems with the movies. only one i liked is the third one.. :p
This is a fairly good video, I agree and disagree with some points, I want to bring up a question when does it go from representation to self insert.
Disagree with some of your tastes.
Should I ask what you think about DC’s original Alan Scott turning out to be gay?
So the thing with this was I always thought Sulu was gay.
I see your point Readus, but what about minor characters that we dont wanna go all in depth to how theyr race/religion/sexuality affects them in all levels possible??? I mean, you cant make ALL youre minor characters white atheic heteros either, now you fall in the problem of "not enough minorities in less important characters" :/
I want diverse representation with a token majority character.
I'm honestly... Not really against tokenism, at least in some circumstances. When it comes to to side/one-off characters... Yes, I do think that using them just to superficially aknowlage that marginalized people exist is really that much of a bad thing!
you know I didnt know the exact circumstances of the Sulu thing and just went "!!!!" when I realized he was gay but now that I think about it it does feel a bit tacked on... I really like Sulu's character but. The least they could have done is having a bit MORE of a focus on him wanting to survive and come back his family (and. show said family some more...) what with him nearly being killed and stuff
But from my understanding that still would have made him a token character cause the reason would still have been to just "have a gay character", right?
EXCUSE ME Q IS A KING
As a hardcore as hell fan of Star Trek (though admittedly the original series falls low on my list of favorites) Sulu always came off as asexual to me, not gay. Even beyond the whole 'you know he has a child in the real show, right'? (Because gay and asexual people both can have kids so that point in moot)
But here's the thing: They don't care about anything in the original show(s). Because the new movies are garbage (to me) anyway. They've made it so clear that the original characters have little to nothing to do with the new characters. They don't care what sexuality the original Sulu may have potentially identified as anymore than they care about any of the original canon.
IMO, it's coming across like what they are doing is saying "I don't want to fall into the tokenism trap, I don't want to write a solid gay character from scratch, I don't really care about any of the original characters and their personalities (which has been clear from day one of these movies), and I want to reap the BENEFITS of tokenism" (ie: I want people to say I'm progressive without me having to put any effort into it).
Stamitz is great, and the doctoir, his husband is too. And both are new. And good on their own. Yes the dead thing was undone was fine.
My complaint is, why try to straightwash spock who wasnt. He was kirks lifepartner. Even if ace, thats the character you should have made bi/gay officially.That and kirk are the characters where little change was needed too. Ok khan but he is a villain.
Ugh, was hoping I could use this in the classroom but not with all the cursing. Bummed.
I'm down for representation but at the same time with new IP. I get that that's harder, but it helps to dodge salt while making the character or series more than simply an iteration of something else. The hope being that the IP could hold some longevity and not get swept into the growing bag of alternate universes when the idea's run it's course. Actually, to that end, i kinda wonder what your take on Daisy Ridley and John Boyega being leads in the new Star Wars films falls into category wise? I had fun with em as they played off each other pretty well and with humans as a race being barely banded together in star wars, i'd have to say it's more representation. Still, it also kinda felt reeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeally on the nose. Like they were just there for the last show of a Star Wars amusement ride before the old actors ultimately retired from the gig, only for shit to get a bit heavy at the end of episode VII.
Dr. Cultbert and Lt. Stamets deliver us from evil
I think this video needs to be revisited. Because two years later and the Majority of the Marvel Characters listed, their books sucked. They ended up crossing that line between Tokenism and Representation. Also, Ghost Busters 2016 sucked. Which is why it needed controversy to sell tickets.
I'm going to be real I don't care about gender or skin color or sexuality I just want a good story
No one wants tokenism. The argument though has become though what is defined as tokenism and what isn't. I do agree. At the end of the day it is about the execution and how we react to it.
I do disagree on the fact that a black character has to have a black writer though. I think a good character should also be able to go beyond that. Something we are seeing with Jim Zub and Peter David taking on duties of writing Kamala or the diverse Champions
It comes down to what is the storyteller interested in, what are they trying to do and whats the setting?
The fundamental problem is whether by quota initiative or wilful ignorance on part of creators, people arent looking at the human, art becomes a zero sum game of represenation, and we end up having propagandistic depictions of who we consider 'other' instead of honest depictions. Even with little or loads of screen time.
We tend to make what is more familiar to us. Its a balance in looking at the less considered aspects of whatever world youre building, and asking whats essential to make the story.
was about to give a like... then you mentioned Ghost Busters
Why you gotta talk about bend is like this
When you mentioned ghostbusters 2016 I freaked out! Love that movie, Kate McKinnon owns my heart!
..I have to confess I didn't realise the difference between tokenism and representation or that Sulu counts as tokenism before this video. Thank you.
It depends on the franchise. Star Trek wouldn't work with an all white cast. It's premise demands an ethnically international cast as much as it needed Mr. Spock to show the crew to be intergalactic as well. As Takai has said, "It was spaceship earth exploring the universe." It also didn't hurt that they got an original cast that had remarkable on-screen chemistry.
By contrast, Star Wars (1977) had an on-screen all-white cast that worked beautifully. The film was a huge hit, and one could argue the aliens seemed even wilder with such casting. To the extent one wanted to add minority representation, it made far more sense for them to be on the rebel side instead of the "Space Nazi" Imperial side. This is why the new Disney franchise sucks as it does. It not only doesn't know how to write a compelling story, they don't even understand the underlying themes. Finn is no Lando that's for damn sure.
How is the Black Panther writers a good example, both those creatives are American, and Black Panther is an african character?
8:04 And now the comment section will turn into a universe of garbage and shit.
Both need to be used in the correct manner
Representation all day, tokenism was finewhen we were kids but give us some real representation give us a narrative!
Heh, I'm dissapointed Bendis couldn't in the end let go of his creations until he just walked away. Hope they give black creators Riri's adventures after this return of Toni Starku story is done.
It nice to see characters people -especially minorities-can relate to.
As someone with Autism, I often feel under-represented.
"No taxation without Representation!" I will not support that which doesn't value me enough to represent me. Marvel has gotten it right on a few occasions, but they too have examples of tokenism (i.e. Falcon and Warmachine)in the Captain America and Ironman movies. In those movies the characters are barely sidekicks. If you are going to include them in the movie they should have a better presence than "soldier 1", especially with Don Cheadle as they actor.
Would Iceman coming out count as tokenism? Legitimate question.
In the run where he was outed, possibly. It was mentioned only twice and kept secret from most of the team.
But his follow-up solo series kept with the Marvel pattern. Both the writer and cover artist were gay, and his sexuality was a factor, but not the driving force behind the book.
For the record, I don't think you absolutely NEED writers/artists/creators from that particular community on all fronts (especially since there's often too much diversity within a group to get there - the writer of Ms. Marvel is Muslim, but she's also white and not South Asian), but it generally has a much lower rate of tokenism, since a lot of the time people from out of the group end up either defining that character only by their race or sexuality, or underplay it so much it's barely part of the story and more like a random piece of trivia.