Subject:
|
Racial issues in LEGO (was: who's feelin the black pack?)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.starwars
|
Date:
|
Mon, 7 Aug 2000 20:20:50 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1129 times
|
| |
|
|
> > In lugnet.starwars, Damien Nesbit writes:
<snip my comments>
> First things first, jay,
Ok, Day. Don't give me a nickname and I will not give you one.
> I really want to curse you out for your condescending
> remark that I am "just [...] bored [and] trolling."
I think now that you are sincere. Your first posts seemed almost
satirical. I withdraw this comment.
> it really upsets me that TLG would try to market a
> Star Wars line while ignoring it's black heroes. It's simply f@#%ed-up on
> TLG's part.
I must ask. Why do you have to refer to them as "the black heros"? What is
your agenda here? Do you think LTG is on purpose, or even de facto, racist?
Does it seem marketed toward non-blacks? (A term I use from your comments, as I
have a real problem in trying to judge that fine line as to who is black and
who isn't, based on skin tone or cultural preference. I'd rather us all be just
human beings).
> As per your other comments, let's go down the line:
> Toys have been political, since the inception of the rag-doll or the toy
> soldier, or the stick imagined to be a sabre by the young children in days of
> old.
I disagree. Certainly some toys are overly political. But many are
exceptions. I judge LEGO non political, and say . . . GI Joe vs. the Commies
overtly political. You can read anything into any political agenda if you
wish. In Aristotle's view, everything IS political. But there is huge
difference between pushing an agenda or targeting a specific group, and trying
to appeal to a large consumer base.
> or the classic tale of genocide and ethnic
> cleansing, Cowboys and Indians.
This is a valid point. But let's not confuse genocide and Star Wars minifigs,
ok?
> I guess that I am arguing a few different ideologies here. One is of racial
> equality with a focus on investigating the effect that the popular media's
> portrayal of minorities has on the greater population's perception of this
> issue.
How does making these minifigs a "special skin tone" achieve this? As has been
mentioned, certainly if TLG makes a "black" skin tone, and uses it, they must
change their entire minifig line. Well, they don't have to, but they probably
would. Why? Seems ludicrous to me, just for a few characters.
> So what are my overall
> objectives? Mainly to get TLG to produce Lando Calrissian and Mace Windu
> minifigs
Hmmm. This I can see. Personally, and I'm sure there is a lot of support for
this viewpoint, TLG should make minifigs as multi-role as possible. The C3PO
and Chewbacca head in the Millienium Falcon are cute, but IMHO go against
LEGO's appeal. The ability to switch parts, even minifig parts, is a big
appeal. So you want a "black" head to make Shaft. Paint it. Don't try to
shame TLG into making it for you. I don'd represent them, but if I were them,
I would try to minimize the race issue as much as possible. The "Cowboys and
Indians" theme suprised me. Personally I bought some of the soldiers, but one
of the "Indians". They are not reuseable enough for me.
> What do you think would constitute taking this "all the way"...
Try to get along with and accept all races. Try not to push agendas for one
race, but for all races. Try to be tolerant, not intolerant. If you REALLY
think TLG is racist, then don't buy LEGOs. Come up with a better reason for
this than "no black minifigs".
> No, I don't want to see a black headpiece with white details (at least not as
> representations of SW characters). What exactly do you mean when you say that
> the Darth Maul head was "an existing color?"
Dull black. An existing color is one that they have ABS for right now. I also
mentioned borwn, if you read my words. Or did I? Well, I meant to if I didn't.
> One can compare
> your "Leave the minifigs yellow. It is a neutral color that does not really
> exist in the spectrum of human skin." comment to the Simpsons television
> show. The simpons are represented as a yellow-orange, yet Dr. Hibbert,
> Bleeding Gums, and Apu are all represented in colors more akin to the races
> that they represent. So should lando and mace be represented in a similar
> manner when the are realized in lego form.
Notice that "The Simpsons" is a TV show, with its own background, with an
ongoing story, with many points of reference. Now, compare this to LEGOs,
which provide really no story other than a few building ideas. Very shaky
analogy.
> As far as some
> of the questions posed by others in this thread concerning the availability of
> alternate race minifigs, I see it as similar to the plight of female lego fans
> who are the victims of a gross underrepresentation in minifig form.
Hmmmm. This may be. I think TLG has addressed this reasonably, but it never
hurts. It's much less intrusive to add a different hairpiece. The whole point
of my arguemnt boils down to this: TLG should stay out of the race/ethnicity
game. They have come close with the Japanese and Native American sets. But
another poster made an excallent point. If different skin tones were added
(other than yellow) would you be offended if the first set featuring these skin
tones had "brownish" skintone as a cook, or a waiter, or something else not
"exciting"?
> I'll conclude this posting by noting that the issue of race and minifigs would
> not be so important to me if lego had never ventured into the Star Wars
> realm. i mean, if lucas saw it as important to include black actors as heroes
> in his storyline, why does lego ignore this?
To my knowledge, the race of the character makes ABSOLUTELY no difference.
Mace Windu could be asian. Lando could be Italian. To my knowledge, Billy Dee
Williams was chosen for the part becasue he was "smooth", as Lando needed to
be, and Samuel Jackson was chosen becasue he has always wanted to be in a Star
Wars movie, and Lucas was kind of doing him a favor. The parts were not "black
man needed" (e.g. Shaft).
To sum: I want TLG to stay out of race issues and race portrayal. Personally
I am fine with a darker skin tone for a minifig. I could always use the
diversity in my stories. On my web site, "XCOMMIE", I have a story that deals
with an international group. I could not include any race that was not already
made by LEGO. On PRINCIPAL, though, I think LEGO should NOT declare a race of
minifig, as it would be costly, offensive to some people, and race is always a
tricky situation to deal with. TLG does not need the headache, and it's more
trouble than its worth. I can see making a Lando minifig, even though he is a
minor character. And really, I can see giving him a special "ethnic" feature,
such as a special hairpiece with textured hair, for use ONLY with that minifig.
I CANNOT see making the "black hero pack". Bad, racially motivated idea.
Jason
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: who's feelin the black pack?
|
| (...) be (...) with (...) in (...) First things first, jay, I really want to curse you out for your condescending remark that I am "just [...] bored [and] trolling." To insinuate that I'd try to stir up controversy around this issue without being (...) (24 years ago, 7-Aug-00, to lugnet.starwars)
|
63 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
|
|
|
|
