Lord of the Rings TV Series Purchased by Amazon

[rhorle]

You say in this post that you have not stated that racism against whites is okay. Let me repeat: You said inclusivity policies are not bad.

You can repeat all you want but it still doesn't change that I never said that racism against white people is okay. You clearly don't understand how a scale is balanced. Not surprising that you also dismiss a source when it doesn't agree with your view. You don't even address any of the claims from those sources before declaring them factually invalid. It is evident that Europe was diverse if you do a little big of digging on the topic. Something you seem to want to avoid to keep a wrong view for some reason.

[Dhrizzle]

Do they elaborate on what that means? I want to know if that is an intention of Tolkien or if that is just the show runners interpretation of what man-maiden means, or the excuse for making her so mannish when the way she is portrayed when Tolkien writes her does not fit the way she was portrayed in Season 1 at all, not even close.

I am all too familiar how phrases can be used by people to mean whatever they want when the author could have meant something very different from what they put it too, yet if it is the intention of the author, then it's worth noting and exploring what that means.

As well as Galadriel's height she had a tendency towards traditionally masculine pursuits, initially in Aman this was athletic pursuits where she was said be a march for most of the male Elves. Tolkien described her as having an "Amazon disposition," a term he usually used to refer to female soldiers, she had the "eye of a commander" when considering the military prospects of the dwarves and a desire to rule over lands of her own which initially prompted her to leave for Middle-earth. Note that among the Noldor while gender roles were a matter of tradition and natural inclination of the sexes they weren't set in stone so Galadriel's tendency may have been unusual but not frowned upon or forbidden, it contrasts nicely with Elrond who was lauded as a great healer despite healing being a traditionally female pursuit.

Tolkien didn't explicitly put Galadriel fighting in any battles of the Second Age but his son believed he was gearing up to rewrite the whole thing with her given a proper role (Galadriel was created for Lord of the Rings after much of the history was written.) He does mention her fighting ferociously against Fëanor's forces (perhaps against Feanor himself) at the first Kinslaying but Tolkien says all Elves would fight defensively if needed and the females were no less capable than the males.

[micwini]

You can repeat all you want but it still doesn't change that I never said that racism against white people is okay. You clearly don't understand how a scale is balanced. Not surprising that you also dismiss a source when it doesn't agree with your view. You don't even address any of the claims from those sources before declaring them factually invalid. It is evident that Europe was diverse if you do a little big of digging on the topic. Something you seem to want to avoid to keep a wrong view for some reason.

The source you linked is reddit. Lol. You googled a phrase and just posted the first few links you could find. Great research!! /s

Again: You said inclusivity policies are not bad. The link you posted contained an inclusivity policy that is racist against white people.
Therefore, you have said that racism against white people is not bad.

If you say racism against white people is not bad, that means you have said that racism against white people is OK.

It is commonly known that Europe was 99.9% white (hyperbole: Exceptions exist). All non-natives came to Europe in the post-colonial era and more recently post WW2 during the rebuilding of the continent.
You can grab any European history book and read all about it. In those books, we also cover how you Americans almost completely exterminated the natives on the continent you currently live in.

[rhorle]

you said 'Aragorn, Boromir and Faramir should have been beardless', why? what does having a beard change in respect to the story being told?

Isn't that exactly the point? Not every change impacts the story. For Rings of Power skin tones are the same as having a beard versus not having one. It doesn't change anything in respect to the story being told. It doesn't change anything to Tolkien's story either because skin tone was not a central and important feature.

That is entirely different to something like making T'challa white. It changes the fundamental nature of the story both because of the real world importance and origin of the character and the in-world character itself. The comics do have an adoptive brother of the Wakandian royal family that is white and goes by the super hero/villain name of White Wolf. There is room to have another Black Panther that is white but not as a replacement for T'challa.

https://www.marvel.com/characters/white-wolf-hunter

- - - Updated - - -

The source you linked is reddit. Lol. You googled a phrase and just posted the first few links you could find. Great research!! /s

Did you read them? I did. Can you point out the factual errors? No? I have never said that racism against white people is not bad. So by your own comment I haven't said it. You are the one that keeps saying I've said it but only have your interpretation as evidence.

Non-whites existed in Europe prior to the post-colonial era, lol. Yes, Native Americans were invaded by Europeans and subjugated for years. Even ethnicities, like Irish and Italians, were discriminated against in the United States. That has nothing to do with anything said and you are creating a strawman and nation bashing in an effort to bully when your wit has failed.

[Mace]

As well as Galadriel's height she had a tendency towards traditionally masculine pursuits, initially in Aman this was athletic pursuits where she was said be a march for most of the male Elves. Tolkien described her as having an "Amazon disposition," a term he usually used to refer to female soldiers, she had the "eye of a commander" when considering the military prospects of the dwarves and a desire to rule over lands of her own which initially prompted her to leave for Middle-earth. Note that among the Noldor while gender roles were a matter of tradition and natural inclination of the sexes they weren't set in stone so Galadriel's tendency may have been unusual but not frowned upon or forbidden, it contrasts nicely with Elrond who was lauded as a great healer despite healing being a traditionally female pursuit.

Tolkien didn't explicitly put Galadriel fighting in any battles of the Second Age but his son believed he was gearing up to rewrite the whole thing with her given a proper role (Galadriel was created for Lord of the Rings after much of the history was written.) He does mention her fighting ferociously against Fëanor's forces (perhaps against Feanor himself) at the first Kinslaying but Tolkien says all Elves would fight defensively if needed and the females were no less capable than the males.

Was healing a traditionally female pursuit in Middle-Earth? I know it is in modern fantasy games, in WW2 and most of the early half of the 20th century, most physicians were male, understanding Tolkien's time is relevant to interpreting his work .

And what exactly did he mean by Amazonian? [Amazon prime? - j/k btw -but yeh, this is an example of how man-maiden can be twisted to go far beyond the author's original intention] again, I think Amazonian as more of the early 80s and 70s shows/comics like Wonder Woman, or athletic women, skillful and well versed i combat as portrayed in those fantasies, but a female and a woman, funny , like She-ra in the Masters of the Universe 80s cartoons ( I watched in the 90s/00s as a kid), I never felt those characters to be mannish, despite their rather masculine roles of fighting and combat.. i just felt they were women who could fight well and thought them cool. .they never fel t like men.


This Galadriel in the show, she feels like a man, ,not one of those old time Amazons or She-Ra, she came across like an angry young male adult, and not a very good or very nice person either Lots of questionable moral decisions that I didn't like nor thought was cool. But like I mentioned previously, today's Hollywood women of action, many leads in the Galadriel mould do not come of as strong fighting women, they come off as men in women's bodies and it is often weird. But Galadriel, the character in Season 1 was not likeable.


I shall give a watch of a bit more of the first episode of season 2 when I have dinner, and see if they change her, but season 1 really did ruin the character.. how do you walk that back? It's not just her mannish behaviou though, the character does some really dodgy stuff I just thought, that's downright evil, not cunning, and far removed from what I expected an elf to be, and expected Galadriel to be. but maybe some like it, the consensus I have observed in ratings and reviews, is that most do not.

- - - Updated - - -

Nah, stop projecting. The topic of the discussion was black actors existing in Rings of Power because of a mandated quota. You ranted about qoutas. You projected me calling you an incel neckbeard. You made the connection of it being rubbish to the topic of qoutas.

I am not always right. The irony is that you are saying you are right about the topic and/or me and that you can't be wrong. You are the only one that is showing that they can't be reasoned with. I don't require anyone to hold indetical beliefs as I do. That is again you projecting and being irrational because you can't cope with someone not agreeing with you.

Galadriel is not a man. That is bigotry and you continuing to use misgender her is not an innocent mistake.

You seem to have short term memory , either that or very selective memory.

[micwini]

Isn't that exactly the point? Not every change impacts the story. For Rings of Power skin tones are the same as having a beard versus not having one. It doesn't change anything in respect to the story being told. It doesn't change anything to Tolkien's story either because skin tone was not a central and important feature.

That is entirely different to something like making T'challa white. It changes the fundamental nature of the story both because of the real world importance and origin of the character and the in-world character itself. The comics do have an adoptive brother of the Wakandian royal family that is white and goes by the super hero/villain name of White Wolf. There is room to have another Black Panther that is white but not as a replacement for T'challa.

https://www.marvel.com/characters/white-wolf-hunter

- - - Updated - - -



Did you read them? I did. Can you point out the factual errors? No? I have never said that racism against white people is not bad. So by your own comment I haven't said it. You are the one that keeps saying I've said it but only have your interpretation as evidence.

Non-natives existed in Europe prior to the post-colonial era, lol. Yes, Native Americans were invaded by Europeans and subjugated for years. That has nothing to do with anything said and you are creating a strawman and nation bashing in an effort to bully when your wit has failed.

I've actually read all these sources. If you did too, then you'd notice all the political lambaster and multitude of errors inside. You're just embarassing yourself by claiming you've read source material, when in fact, you have not. The proof is that you later claim in this post that Europeans subjucated natives, when it was by that point already America. There is no strawman in pointing out that your american education might have things wrong because of bias.

Furthermore: There is nothing to interpret about you saying 'inclusivity policies are not bad', then linking one that is in fact racist towards white people.
Again, a simple equation, using nothing more than your own posts. Your own posts are the evidence.

You're just a racist towards whites and keep lambasting others for being bigots for not liking your show because it contains characters that don't fit the setting.

There is a reason that you're fighting a losing battle against multiple posters on the same argument.
Racists always lose.

[Lorgar Aurelian]

That is entirely different to something like making T'challa white. It changes the fundamental nature of the story both because of the real world importance and origin of the character and the in-world character itself. The comics do have an adoptive brother of the Wakandian royal family that is white and goes by the super hero/villain name of White Wolf. There is room to have another Black Panther that is white but not as a replacement for T'challa.

https://www.marvel.com/characters/white-wolf-hunter

There is actually room for even a “white” T’challa replacement if you’re going off comics using the name black panther and all through he’s white tiger now.
https://marvel.fandom.com/wiki/Kevin_Cole_(Earth-616)

But there’s a reason no one remembers or wants the character.

[Triceron]

Not a personal attack or calling you racist or the such, but I have to wonder how you parse this?

Like some one with a black skin tone can have a completely different culture based on what African or Caribbean or if there African American, same with white people being Irish Scottish American, and of course other skin tones. Then of course there are mix raced people who can throw off even the idea of “they just don’t have the same culture” as they can vary greatly on how they look but share the exact same culture.

Through the use of an appropriate setting.

I've given examples before using Throne of Blood as an extreme example.

Throne of Blood is an adaptation of Macbeth with an all-Japanese cast. To make sense of this, the setting takes place in Feudal Japan, centering on historic culture as a backdrop for the story of Macbeth. Yet it would be a vastly different situation if the adaptation of Macbeth continued to remain in medieval Scotland, with all the Scottish culture and clothing intact, with an all-Japanese cast being race swapped into the story. It's a VASTLY different scenario. We can argue that the story of Macbeth would be exactly the same, but the disparate setting throws off our monkey brains when trying to understand what is actually being depicted here.

I'm not opposed to there being a Japanese actor in place of an adaptation of Macbeth, but that creative choice ultimately informs what kind of production it is. Is it meant to be a contemporary production that depicts the setting as a modern melting pot? Is it trying to represent some historic minority of Japanese people who migrated to Scotland in the 1100's? Is it simply doing it out of some diversity policy by the production company? These are all things that end up informing us what it means to identify 'culture' in the setting we're seeing.


When analyzing Rings of Power's creative decisions, it's clear that it is merely depicting fictional races as a reflection of our own modern melting pot social expectations. There's little more to it than that. The arguments against Tolkien writing skin tones is bunk. Even if he wasn't clear on Dwarven skin tones, he was clear on Elven ones being 'fair skin', and that doesn't explain why there are black Elves or Harfoots either. The choice has been a creative one across the board, not for the sake of the setting but for the sake of 'progressive' depictions of a diverse melting pot for all fictional races.

Having a wide spread of skin tones is jarring for the same reason that our brains tend to manifest a character as being 'white' when we read a novel, until we are given descriptions that say otherwise. It's a deeply psychological phenomenon. Anecdotally speaking, most people in these forums imagine that I am a white male even if I never identified my ethnicity. Same shit. It's all about expectations.


As for the culture parsing, it's the idea that skin tones denote different groups of peoples coming from different places. In a visual medium like film, this should be used to inform the audience of the setting. Having people of a small village be of the same skin tone is purposeful to showing how isolated their culture is. Having it diverse would give the opposite effect - it implies there are many migrants to this location, enough to sustain a diverse range of skin tones. Otherwise, biologically speaking, over generations everyone in the village should end up being a certain shade of 'brown' over time. We identify human and fictional humanoids under this basic understanding of biology. That's how our monkey brains operate. We don't idenify Humans having the genetic nature of Cats, where skin tones can skip a generation or two and manifest itself in full. And we project these same expectations onto fictional humanoid races, especially those that are being depicted by skin tones similar to our own.

When I see a show with a small village have a diverse melting pot, it doesn't tell me they're all of the same culture for generations. It tells me there exists many different people from far away places travelling to settle in the same place, and being accepted as a part of the village. There is a history there that's being implied, but not told. And yet when the depictions expect this to be normal across the board for all types of places, then it's not actually bridging in new ideas, it's muddling it all instead. Every biome has the same level of diversity. This doesn't make sense. This takes me out of the fantasy world, because it doesn't make sense in its own setting. Like the Harfoots - they should all relatively look the same because what we're being shown is a depiction of a small nomadic group that has chosen to isolate itself from all other like-races. They are not travellers who openly interact with other Halfling races. They do not engage in open trade. So how is their skin tone manifesting in such diverse tones despite being of one big 'family'? It doesn't make sense to my monkey brains. All the while, I can take a look at the depiction of the Shire and see all the Hobbits all look like each other, and my brain immediately clicks with it because that's what I'd expect out of a village that has chosen to be isolated from the outside world for a span of generations. This makes sense.

And as we question more and more about the subtext, and how it is jarring to our monkey brain expectations of how social structures should work, it just becomes more apparant that these creative choices aren't made for the sake of the setting, but for the sake of modernizing social expectations and being 'progressive'. And I think that's a problem, because it ignores and erases the meaning of diversity in the first place.


And I'll point to how Game of Thrones did it well by having most locations be depicted by certain ethnicities, and retaining a diverse melting pot society for cities where it makes sense, like Qarth. Or having the Dothraki be played by people of a certain skin tone, to make a character like Danaerys stand out amongst them. These situations work very well for both the setting and for the show. There are very prominent black actors in Game of Thrones, they just appear in the setting where they are best introduced, not just scattered in Winterfell and Kings Landing and as Wildlings. It is appropriate to the setting of the fictional universe.

IMO, this is what will have PJ's LOTR and Game of Thrones be more of a fictional classic that stands a test of time.
Rings of Power and Wheel of Time are choosing to become reflections of 'progressive' values that happen to be an accepted norm, here and now. I don't think it will last the test the time, and will be seen as neglectful of actual culture and diversity as we move forward in time. I see it as being just as bad as blackface or yellowface is, in the complete opposite direction. What we're seeing today is 'whiteface', having actors of different diversities portraying fictional 'white' character roles.

[micwini]

Through the use of an appropriate setting.

I've given examples before using Throne of Blood as an extreme example.

Throne of Blood is an adaptation of Macbeth with an all-Japanese cast. To make sense of this, the setting takes place in Feudal Japan, centering on historic culture as a backdrop for the story of Macbeth. Yet it would be a vastly different situation if the adaptation of Macbeth continued to remain in medieval Scotland, with all the Scottish culture and clothing intact, with an all-Japanese cast being race swapped into the story. It's a VASTLY different scenario. We can argue that the story of Macbeth would be exactly the same, but the disparate setting throws off our monkey brains when trying to understand what is actually being depicted here.

I'm not opposed to there being a Japanese actor in place of an adaptation of Macbeth, but that creative choice ultimately informs what kind of production it is. Is it meant to be a contemporary production that depicts the setting as a modern melting pot? Is it trying to represent some historic minority of Japanese people who migrated to Scotland in the 1100's? Is it simply doing it out of some diversity policy by the production company? These are all things that end up informing us what it means to identify 'culture' in the setting we're seeing.


When analyzing Rings of Power's creative decisions, it's clear that it is merely depicting fictional races as a reflection of our own modern melting pot social expectations. There's little more to it than that. The arguments against Tolkien writing skin tones is bunk. Even if he wasn't clear on Dwarven skin tones, he was clear on Elven ones being 'fair skin', and that doesn't explain why there are black Elves or Harfoots either. The choice has been a creative one across the board, not for the sake of the setting but for the sake of 'progressive' depictions of a diverse melting pot for all fictional races.

Having a wide spread of skin tones is jarring for the same reason that our brains tend to manifest a character as being 'white' when we read a novel, until we are given descriptions that say otherwise. It's a deeply psychological phenomenon. Anecdotally speaking, most people in these forums imagine that I am a white male even if I never identified my ethnicity. Same shit. It's all about expectations.


As for the culture parsing, it's the idea that skin tones denote different groups of peoples coming from different places. In a visual medium like film, this should be used to inform the audience of the setting. Having people of a small village be of the same skin tone is purposeful to showing how isolated their culture is. Having it diverse would give the opposite effect - it implies there are many migrants to this location, enough to sustain a diverse range of skin tones. Otherwise, biologically speaking, over generations everyone in the village should end up being a certain shade of 'brown' over time. We identify human and fictional humanoids under this basic understanding of biology. That's how our monkey brains operate. We don't idenify Humans having the genetic nature of Cats, where skin tones can skip a generation or two and manifest itself in full. And we project these same expectations onto fictional humanoid races, especially those that are being depicted by skin tones similar to our own.

When I see a show with a small village have a diverse melting pot, it doesn't tell me they're all of the same culture for generations. It tells me there exists many different people from far away places travelling to settle in the same place, and being accepted as a part of the village. There is a history there that's being implied, but not told. And yet when the depictions expect this to be normal across the board for all types of places, then it's not actually bridging in new ideas, it's muddling it all instead. Every biome has the same level of diversity. This doesn't make sense. This takes me out of the fantasy world, because it doesn't make sense in its own setting. Like the Harfoots - they should all relatively look the same because what we're being shown is a depiction of a small nomadic group that has chosen to isolate itself from all other like-races. They are not travellers who openly interact with other Halfling races. They do not engage in open trade. So how is their skin tone manifesting in such diverse tones despite being of one big 'family'? It doesn't make sense to my monkey brains. All the while, I can take a look at the depiction of the Shire and see all the Hobbits all look like each other, and my brain immediately clicks with it because that's what I'd expect out of a village that has chosen to be isolated from the outside world for a span of generations. This makes sense.

And as we question more and more about the subtext, and how it is jarring to our monkey brain expectations of how social structures should work, it just becomes more apparant that these creative choices aren't made for the sake of the setting, but for the sake of modernizing social expectations and being 'progressive'. And I think that's a problem, because it ignores and erases the meaning of diversity in the first place.


And I'll point to how Game of Thrones did it well by having most locations be depicted by certain ethnicities, and retaining a diverse melting pot society for cities where it makes sense, like Qarth. Or having the Dothraki be played by people of a certain skin tone, to make a character like Danaerys stand out amongst them. These situations work very well for both the setting and for the show. There are very prominent black actors in Game of Thrones, they just appear in the setting where they are best introduced, not just scattered in Winterfell and Kings Landing and as Wildlings. It is appropriate to the setting of the fictional universe.

Thank you for this amazing write up. This is 100% what the core issue is I feel like.
I can not imagine being such a caveman that any type of skintone upsets them.

However, it is very much an issue when there is 'diversity' in settings where it doesnt make sense.

I think Star Wars is the best (and probably only) example of a setting where diversity and current casting trends make sense.

[Lorgar Aurelian]

Through the use of an appropriate setting.

More understandable I suppose even if I don’t quite agree.

We don't idenify Humans having the genetic nature of Cats, where skin tones can skip a generation or two and manifest itself in full.

This also can happen with mix races couples though of course super rare.

https://www.thetech.org/ask-a-geneti...cs-skin-color/

[Askyl]

I see, so you think Season 2 is better than season 1 and she improves? I wasn't able to watch past the first few mins of season 2 without losing interest, if it turns around, I might give it a go.

Did Tolkien define Galadriel's nick name? or was that something from the Rings of power writers? Giving her a nickname for the type of character they created?

Yes, I saw someone else replied. It's straight from Tolkien. Her names were Nerwen and Artanis given to her by her mother and father. Nerwen means Man-Maiden och Altáriel means "Noble Maiden" pretty much.

When the light of the two trees of Valinor attaches it self to her hair she's called Altariel, which turns into Galadriel when she change her name from Quenya to Sindar. Alta/Galad is radiant, Riel is hair or gown.

Tolkien also described Galadriel as Amazonian. A women of power, strength and courage. A great fighter.

Rings of Power is actually using this character well within how Tolkien described her... Except for the unnecessary snarkiness and that she seems to be everywhere except for where she actually was. Her teeny and snarky behaviour is way toned down in Season 2, she's a much more lovable character.

First 3 episodes of the second season are without a doubt the weakest, but they're actually still quite good. But as soon as Annatar and Celebrimor get their fuzzy friendship going it's fantastic. Celebrimbor is not in any way what I had envisioned when I think of that character, but Charles performance makes this odd miscast justice many times over.

Second season feels like what first and second should have been all along... Not sure why they decided to give the show and world a 1 season long backstory as they did, when they easily could have done that and still kept the lore more in tact.

[Triceron]

More understandable I suppose even if I don’t quite agree.



This also can happen with mix races couples though of course super rare.

https://www.thetech.org/ask-a-geneti...cs-skin-color/

It can, but then it goes into question what the show actually wants to depict, not just what 'makes sense in RL'.

Are we all expected to interpret that Disa is black because of a rare case of Dwarfish melanism because RL melanism is a thing? I don't want to presume that. It should be something that the show elaborates on. It doesn't have to focus on it, it doesn'' have to make a big deal out of it, it merely should have a reasonable explanation to make sense of this creative choice in world building. And if it chooses not to, then I'll continue to regard it as being the product of external agendas that were never meant to be explained in the fictional setting. It's honestly not on us to explain, all we're doing is trying to make sense out of what's on the plate.

[micwini]

More understandable I suppose even if I don’t quite agree.



This also can happen with mix races couples though of course super rare.

https://www.thetech.org/ask-a-geneti...cs-skin-color/

I think it is mostly what you care about more: A coherent setting that makes sense from a worldbuilding perspective VS I don't care and politics and quota's are more important to me for the casting.

Also the article is quite weird. Seems almost pseudoscience. Especially the 'lol you can just go tan' section was really off.

[Triceron]

Rings of Power is actually using this character well within how Tolkien described her... Except for the unnecessary snarkiness and that she seems to be everywhere except for where she actually was. Her teeny and snarky behaviour is way toned down in Season 2, she's a much more lovable character.

The snarkiness was by far what I disliked the most out of watching S1. I'm glad it's toned down for S2.

[Askyl]

I think it is mostly what you care about more: A coherent setting that makes sense from a worldbuilding perspective VS I don't care and politics and quota's are more important to me for the casting.

Also the article is quite weird. Seems almost pseudoscience. Especially the 'lol you can just go tan' section was really off.

A normal person don't care that much, that's kind of the point. I haven't talked to a single person IRL that have mentioned skin color of any character in either House of the Dragon or Rings of Power. No one literally cares as long as they don't do anything really weird like having an african woman without hair play Galadriel.

[Lorgar Aurelian]

It can, but then it goes into question what the show actually wants to depict, not just what 'makes sense'.

Are we all expected to interpret that Disa is black because of a rare case of Dwarfish melanism because RL melanism is a thing? I don't want to presume that. It should be something that the show elaborates on. It doesn't have to focus on it, it doesn'' have to make a big deal out of it, it merely should have a reasonable explanation to make sense of this creative choice in world building. And if it chooses not to, then I'll continue to regard it as being the product of external agendas that were never meant to be explained in the fictional setting. It's honestly not on us to explain, all we're doing is trying to make sense out of what's on the plate.

As far as the show it self goes (still can’t speak for season two), it’s just an obvious failure of thinking about what they are doing or token casting.

If they weren’t failing so hard you’d expect there to be more then a single black dwarf or elf and it would be a natural mix through background characters which wouldn’t draw attention to one actor/character alone.

I think not addressing why black dwarfs are there is fine, but having just a single one is a failure from any way you look at it.

[Triceron]

A normal person don't care that much, that's kind of the point. I haven't talked to a single person IRL that have mentioned skin color of any character in either House of the Dragon or Rings of Power. No one literally cares as long as they don't do anything really weird like having an african woman without hair play Galadriel.

Is anything that micwini is saying considered abnormal? Is it not normal to care about the world building and the expectations behind the depictions of certain fictional races?

I get that you can say there are people who don't have a problem with it, but that doesn't mean a problem doesn't exist to everyone else. Nor do I think the use of 'normal person' is very good when that implies that anyone who has a problem isn't normal, and I'm not sure if that's the message you are wanting to get across.

- - - Updated - - -

I think not addressing why black dwarfs are there is fine, but having just a single one is a failure from any way you look at it.

That's more or less my whole point on the whole debacle.

It's intentionally chosen to put an elephant in the room. And for whatever reason, there are people adamantly defending the show's choice to put an elephant in the room and calling anyone who says otherwise a racist bigot. It muddles the whole point.

And I'll even point to other productions like War of the Rohirrim choosing to depict historic Rohan as an all-white society, not a melting pot. I don't see there being anything wrong with this as a creative choice, and animation is a medium where any character can be given any skin tone imagineable; it has no limit to it. Yet it's absolutely a creative choice for the setting, and I consider that very important for the world building, and ultimately to the story. It doesn't need to be made into a conversation about racist ideals or whatnot.

[Lorgar Aurelian]

I think it is mostly what you care about more: A coherent setting that makes sense from a worldbuilding perspective VS I don't care and politics and quota's are more important to me for the casting.

I’d agree that there is such a split among a lot of people, but that there is also the opinion that a coherent setting and world building can also fit hitting “quota’s” depending on the quota and how you do it.

Tolkiens work is even a good example for this with the dwarfs as the setting and world building never gives a skin tone so it’s easy to have mixed dwarfs rather you want to say there from X clan or even within Y clan they vary. Rop of course fails at this by not having the clan be mixed and instead it’s just a one off.

Also the article is quite weird. Seems almost pseudoscience. Especially the 'lol you can just go tan' section was really off.

I don’t know if there are any actual science esc articles about the topic given how rare it is.

It happens and you could likely find an actual report on it but there but I’d bet it’s nearly impossible to find under tabloid stuff. Though Mabye some one better with google could find it easier.

[Kumorii]

I think it sticks out equally much about Disa's eyes as her being the only black dwarf in there. They never touched upon that either which also just feels like they made her eyes special just for the sake of being special. I was really curious in season 1 if we were gonna get an explanation on them but, nope...

[rhorle]

Furthermore: There is nothing to interpret about you saying 'inclusivity policies are not bad', then linking one that is in fact racist towards white people.

You are lying. If I said what you are claiming that you wouldn't need a link to interpret what I said. The reddit comments I linked to do not contain any information about American history so it is again clear you are lying. Europeans are the primary immigrants to early America and through out much of the early history of the country. Those immigrants are the ones that subjagated Native Americans. If you will deny that simple fact it calls into question everything else you claim is a lie.

It is a straw man to bring up American education because my nation of origin has no bearing anything being discussed. You brought it up as a way to insult me. I have never said people are bigots for not liking Rings of Power. Again you lie and create a strawman. People are bigots for making bigoted statements in regards to skin color. That is a simple fact.

Just because multiple people support bigotry as long as it is used to be critical of the show doesn't mean you, or they, are right. I'm sure you know this because it is why you are so focused on making me out to be a racist so you can dismiss anything I say rather then put forth an actual argument. Even when you could have engaged with diversity in the time period Lord of the Rings is based on you dismissed it and brought up American's being racist. Strange, right?

- - - Updated - - -

I think it is mostly what you care about more: A coherent setting that makes sense from a worldbuilding perspective VS I don't care and politics and quota's are more important to me for the casting.

It does make sense and is coherent world building if you assume it has always existed and is something that can exist. There doesn't need to be an in-depth explanation. In the world of the adaptation it is just something that is. It doesn't have to be politics and quotas if they are the best actor for the character created. That is a division you are making because it can only be book-faithful or qouta/racist-against-white-people in your mind. Has there ever been a report of an actor for those roles being turned away because of the color of their skin? If it happened it would have likely come out like it did with Peter Jackson's film and the casting of an extra.


Even Tolkien ignored his own world building which makes your argument more of a dog whistle then you might realize. As Gondor should have had a mix of Rhun and Harad/Far-Harad skin tones but has been primarily been depicted as not having those. Their borders have been fluid over the years and both have invaded each other as well. Looking at how skin tones are distributed in the real world it isn't a hard line but gradual changes based on location to each other.

Plus, men first awoke in Rhun which Tolkien depicted as having an olive skin tone. Which would mean we should see more of a variety in tones if it follow similar real world changes as populations moved out of Africa.