Subject:
|
Re: Concerns with Racial Attitudes and Lego
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Fri, 11 Aug 2000 16:28:53 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
818 times
|
| |
|
|
"Dave Schuler" <orrex@excite.com> wrote in message
news:Fz4rAo.HHF@lugnet.com...
> In lugnet.starwars, Tim Courtney writes:
> > But, as an interesting aside, I'm looking at a couple pieces of • literature.
>
> **snip of several recent, anecdotal examples**
>
> These are fine, of course, and it's great to see that Lego has opened • its
> marketing to a broader cross-section of consumers. However, the examples • you
> give are all rather recent, and the yellow minifig has been around since • the
> early 70's. Do we have any examples of sales or marketing literature from
> that time that was similarly broad in scope? I don't recall any, though I • may
> be wrong.
But what does that matter? That was done in the past, and this is today.
The question is, how will making black (and other color for that matter)
minifigs effect TLC and its users politically *today.* The argument I
believe started over Star Wars figs, and then vigilantly expanded into a
'lets take over the whole product line.'
> > So really, is LEGO marketed any less towards any particular race? I • would
> > think not - because LEGO is a truly worldwide company, and the literature
> > I've seen portrays people of a variety of different races being involved
> > with LEGO bricks.
>
> The point is that, when the minifig was introduced, marketing was more
> caucasian-oriented, and many have inferred, right or wrong, the uniformity • of
> minifig color to indicate a "racial" characteristic.
I'm afraid I don't see this as 'the point' at all. If anything, its great
that TLC has expanded its market in recent past - that's a step in the right
direction. Why complain about what they have done years ago when they're
changing stuff that is being done now.
Lego is a very popular toy in Japan. We see a heavy Japanese Lugnet
population, and some simply *amazing* creations coming from them too.
Arguably, Japanese and Caucasian are two distinctly different races. But,
they don't feel the need to have their race represented clearly in the Lego
product line. Sure, they're light skinned, everyone knows that. So if
yellow were to represent a skin color (which subconsicously it does,
apparently) they would fall under it.
For Lego to even attempt to be politically correct is a no-win situation.
Its a no-win situation in our society, in our workplace. Because no matter
who bends over backwards to accomodate who (racially, disability wise,
philosophically), someone is gonna cry discriminatoin and demand to be
treated 'equally.' Where I would say that person is the one with the
problem (this is my opinion). The person who can look at another person and
not see a skin color, not see a disability is the one who isn't racist, or
isn't discriminatory.
> > Back to the quote - I am again in agreement with Jason's statement. We • are
> > all human beings. That's the first thing that ties us all together, our
> > humanity, and secondarily our distinct genetic variations.
>
> The following is idle speculation--not directed at anyone in particular:
> Considering that the AFOL community (in the US, at least), to judge by • all
> of the pictures I've seen on the web, and from other adult shoppers I see • at
> stores, reflects a sharply skewed demographic. Since we are not speaking
> among an even remotely integrated community, I have to wonder how the • noble
> platitudes of "we're all one race" would stand in an environment truly
> representative of the world's population and displaying a much broader • range
> of experiences re: race.
Yes, there is a skewed demographic in place. Is it unfortunate, is it not?
That's not for me to decide. And is it a direct effect of the way TLC has
marketed its product? Only surveys and studies could tell you that.
> > I leave now with the strong feeling this was used by people to cry • racism.
> > That's unfortunate, because (at least from my POV) LEGO is not acting • with any
> > racial motivation whatsoever in its product line.
>
> I haven't read every message in the thread, but I don't recall anyone
> actually asserting racism as the issue. Rather, people have expressed • their
> concerns that a possible yellow Lando minifig will seem more odd than a • yellow
> Han minifig. Further, Lego might not pursue "any racial motivation" in • its
> product line, but, as many have pointed out, the fact that Duplo offers a
> multi-hued figure pack demonstrates irrefutably that Lego sees some • benefit in
> offering more than one color of figure.
The Duplo figures was something that I had totally forgotten about. And
IIRC, they've been doing that for quite some time. Tell me, are those figs
available in the retail catalogs, or only through S@H? I believe I only saw
them in the S@H catalogs.
> > On a lighthearted sidenote, I know someone who made their own black • minifig,
> > and it was really cool! He is black himself, and what I appreciated the
> > most is he didn't take on an attitude that it was an injustice needing to • be
> > corrected - he did it because he wanted a fig to represent himself.
>
> This is the essence of the problem, isn't it? If your friend saw the • need
> to alter a minifig (blasphemy to some Lego purists) to represent his skin
> color, then the "yellow represents everybody" argument fails obviously • fails,
> at least for your friend. Does it seem likely that your friend is the only
> person to feel this way? I grant you, when I set out to make a "me" • minifig to
> put on my desk, I sought one with glasses and brown hair and didn't bother
> with "white" skin. If I were blue or green, however, it would require a
> greater suspension of disbelief for me to imagine the pale yellow figure • to
> represent my skin color.
It may fail for him, but I'm saying that he chose not to make a huge issue
about it. He didn't cry racism when he made the fig, and he wasn't trying
to send a message, from what I gathered. EVERYONE at the event (Legoland
CA, Kidvention) absolutely loved the fig and thought it was cool, and
hilarious! But he didn't use that platform to talk to us all about
discrimination. He had fun with it.
I believe he's also a TLC employee, at the Mall of America.
> Interestingly, MegaBloks figures several years ago were white, and they • look
> really weird. In the last few years, though, they've offered a range of • skin
> hues.
Vaguely recalling the white figs - my best friend had some, cause to his
mom, 'they're all Legos.' :\ They did look rather silly, and even
horror-film-ish.
> > And his attitude towards it was positive, fun, and definitely • constructive to
> > the hobby. He didn't have any overt political agenda in creating his own
> > custom minifig.
>
> Neither do we have such an agenda here; we're asserting that a • non-yellow
> Lando/Mace/Panaka minifig would be cool and would do a better job of
> representing the character than the yellow minfigs now in use.
I would agree. Following TLC's current path with Star Wars sets, it would
be logical for them to pursue this. But I feel they can contain the feature
to their Star Wars products, which are under license.
But - I'll bet that those sets will FLY off the shelves, for people to
gather up those colored minifig heads and hands.
> It is interesting that so many (not you specifically, Tim) wish to • dismiss
> the argument out of turn as racially-motivated, when in fact it is not.
Read the few references in my post in reply to Eric - that's where I feel
this has become racially motivated.
> Instead, it is a matter of how effectively a character can be depicted. • The
> Star Wars group has been littered with complaints about the color schemes • of
> the Millennium Falcon and Darth Vader's TIE Fighter, but no one rose up to
> dismiss those concerns as "racist" or "ship color-ist". It was generally
> agreed in those cases that the inaccurate colors prevented satisfactory
> representation of the respective ships, without any forced subtext of • racism.
> Why, then, can we not discuss a minifig's color without calling it racism?
How does the color of a spaceship relate to racism, even in the least?? A
correlation cannot be drawn there. Its a difference between paint scheme,
and human (or whatever life form if we're referring to Star Wars) genetics.
> > And yes, when I was a kid, I was one who wanted to see black minifigs
> > introduced, and was curious as to why they didn't make them.
>
> When did this change? And why?
>
> Dave!
This changed over time when I have participated in RTL/Lugnet and come to
the realization that it just isn't gonna fly in our society today. Because
as I said earlier, there will always be someone to play the race, or
discrimination card, and TLC (nor any other company) can satisfy everyone.
Too many protests, too many lawsuits. They should just stay out of it
alltogether.
--
Tim Courtney - tim@zacktron.com
http://www.ldraw.org - Centralized LDraw Resources
http://www.zacktron.com - Zacktron Alliance
ICQ: 23951114
AIM: TimCourtne
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Concerns with Racial Attitudes and Lego
|
| (...) Certainly it is great that TLC has in some ways opened its eyes to a broader demographic, but it is unfortunate that certain spectres from their past still linger. Because minifigs have persisted more or less unchanged for over two decades, it (...) (24 years ago, 11-Aug-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Concerns with Racial Attitudes and Lego
|
| (...) No one in any argument here has suggested that skin color has any effect on a person's human-ness. (...) **snip of several recent, anecdotal examples** These are fine, of course, and it's great to see that Lego has opened its marketing to a (...) (24 years ago, 11-Aug-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
37 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
