| |
In lugnet.starwars, Bruce Schlickbernd writes:
> In lugnet.starwars, Tim Courtney writes:
> > Points have been brought up about the yellow minifig color being neutral • and
> > representing humanity in general. I suppose I would fall most closely in
> > that camp.
>
> I have never seen ANYTHING from Lego that explains that this is their policy.
> Not here. Not on rec.toys.lego. Not in any of their sets. Not on their
> website. Not in their magazine. I take it others have at some time (and I'm
> not arguing that point) - just how in the world do you expect the general
> public to understand the yellow=everyone policy? Is it truly a policy, or a
> retroactive excuse?
>
> Given the history of exclusion blacks have had in this country (USA), do you
> wonder why pale=everyone may be viewed as an EXTREMELY political choice? My
> suspicion is that a bunch of Danes were simply clueless about this - many
> americans are just as clueless, so I hardly expect Danes to be different at
> the time minifigs were first designed.
>
> If Lego really thought about all this from the start, if they really believe
> it, please explain Duplo's multi-skin tones. I sincerely doubt any Lego
> official will answer that. And that should give you pause.
I think the contrast between System minifigs and Duplo figs is important.
Having Duplo figs with different flesh tones and different sizes reinforces
for kids the importance of diversity. People are different colours and adults
are larger then children.
But in Legoland everyone is physically the same. Maybe I'm reading too much
into it, but I see this as a metaphor for political equality. As Bruce says,
"The lack of diversity in minifigs IS a political message." Liberal concepts
of equality have been extended through time. Ideas that were once only applied
to rich white adult men are now generally accepted as applying to all humans.
"Yellow=everyone" probably is a retroactive excuse. But it's also an active
possibility. The generic smiley is Anyone. It changes gender with a new
hairstyle, profession with a new tool, time period with a new costume. No
longer is it a little European child playing dress-up; now it's Anyone who can
do anything.
> > As to the Star Wars issue, I would have to agree that colored minifigs can
> > be introduced into Star Wars to provide accuracy to the film, without the
> > necessity or obligation to expand the line of DSMs (as I read it referred • to
> > as) into the regular product line. Overstepping those bounds would have
> > tremendous political consequences and cause more headache for TLC, as other
> > ethnic groups would be requesting equal treatment. I would really rather
> > leave race out of LEGO completely.
>
> Lego has basically four options:
>
> 1. If they don't make a bright yellow Lando or Mace figure, Lego has made a
> racial statement and lacked the courage of their convictions.
>
> 2. If the public does not accept bright yellow Lando/Maces if they do come
> out, then that should be a clue that they need to rethink their bright yellow
> policy.
>
> 3. If they come out, but not as bright yellow, then they have not had the
> courage of their convictions, and they should rethink their bright yellow
> policy.
>
> 4. If they come out with the figs and the public accepts them, then they are
> vindicated (but since they avoid public explanation of their policy, what are
> the odds this will happen). I think that if they really believe in their
> policy, they need to bring these figures out in bright yellow. Maybe they • are
> right!
I'm not convinced that Lego needs to make a DSM to represent Lando or Mace
Windu. The characters are played by black actors, but just as in Legoland
human races don't seem to really exist in the SW universe. This is just my
POV, and some people may argue that the physical attributes of the actors are
transferred directly onto the fictional characters they play. Given that human
races really do exist in our universe, and Lego has taken to making minifigs
that represent real humans (eg Zidane, Speilberg), the DSM question isn't
going to go away.
Bruce has stated the available options well. I sincerely hope that Lego goes
with option 4, and is fully prepared to support their action. Option 3, which
seems to be popular, is IMHO the worst possibility. What position would this
leave Lego in?
"Sure there are DSMs in the Star Wars universe, but they're just there because
there are black people in the SW universe. You see, white people are yellow,
and black people are DS. But there aren't any black people in Legoland, and
that's why the minifigs we've been making for nearly 25 years have always been
yellow. Because really, they're white."
The only DSM argument I find compelling is that the current lack of DSMs
discourages some kids from identifying with Lego, since they can't see
themselves in the place of the minifigs. But before they make DSMs, maybe Lego
can have a proper think about the patriarchal Aryan trash they market as
Belville.
--Dave
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
22 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
|
|
|
|
