This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | → | Archive 5 |
Title of this list strikes me as inherently pejorative, and the narrative doesn't support using the term "whitewashed" as an accepted description of what the list contains. I respectfully suggest reconsidering the title and/or description in the narrative. Townlake ( talk) 20:12, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
The list title (and even the article/list itself) is inherently problematic for numerous reasons, including: (1) The term "whitewash" has an entirely different and un-related meaning in its common figurative usage, so it's confusing if not misleading here. (2) Using Caucasian, or part-Caucasian, actors for non-Caucasian, or part-Caucasian, roles is so ubiquitous and longstanding (more the rule than the exception) that the list should comprise hundreds or thousands of films, especially if non-lead characters are being included. (3) The fact that non-lead roles are being included makes the list problematic in that every single film with even a tiny non-Caucasian character played by a Caucasian or part-Caucasian actor could be WP:COATRACKED into the list. (4) The text part of the article is simplistic, POV, pointy, and polemic, and does not by any means adequately cover the reasons that any given actor is cast in any given part; instead, the lede resorts to POV-pushing and politicizing of the very common practice. (5) Nor does the text cover Japanese characters played by Chinese actors (and vice versa, etc.) or any other Asian cross-casting; European characters played by Americans (and vice versa); gay characters played by straight actors (and vice versa); and so on and so on. (6) The list currently includes screenplays based on source material where races were changed (not cross-cast) in the screenplay, which is a different issue entirely, and therefore should not be included in the same list. There are more problems, but I'll stop here for convenience's sake. Softlavender ( talk) 06:22, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
Regarding deletion, per WP:NOTESAL, there are numerous reliable sources about the list topic. "One accepted reason why a list topic is considered notable is if it has been discussed as a group or set by independent reliable sources, per the above guidelines; notable list topics are appropriate for a stand-alone list." There were many films on this list reiterated because of Aloha being whitewashed. There are reliable sources talking about Stonewall being whitewashed. When Pan gets released, the topic will come up yet again. Wikipedia summarizes coverage from reliable sources, and that is being done here.
Regarding renaming, I said above, "...looking through the guidelines, WP:NPOVTITLE seems applicable here. First, it's definitely not 'a descriptive title created by Wikipedia editors', as evidenced by the sources. The subsection WP:NPOVNAME talks about the prevalence of the term in reliable sources being a factor in actually using it for the Wikipedia article's title. The term 'whitewash' and its variants seem to be more common in the 2000s and 2010s to date, so I don't see it as merely a trendy slogan that will pass."
Lastly, this list does not mean that there are not other kinds of racial casting disputes, but white actors playing nonwhite roles is much more prevalent because of the lack of either nonwhite actors or nonwhite roles in Hollywood. That's why the article states that it is prevalent in the film industry. The news articles, writing about whitewashing in the past decade, talk about this. Erik II ( talk | contrib) ( ping me) 11:52, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
I'm still deciding whether I think the list should be deleted or just renamed. But it raises the issue of scope - what is the list meant to be? The point is made above that it could potentially include thousands of films. But the only two categories are both U.S.-based: Category:History of racism in the cinema of the United States (which is certainly tipping our hand that "whitewashing" means racist) and Category:Lists of American films - even though there are British ( Lawrence of Arabia) and Australian ( The Year of Living Dangerously) films included. St Anselm ( talk) 08:19, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
Regarding Softlavender's concerns about the list criteria, we can establish specific criteria. WP:NOTESAL says, "One accepted reason why a list topic is considered notable is if it has been discussed as a group or set by independent reliable sources, per the above guidelines; notable list topics are appropriate for a stand-alone list. The entirety of the list does not need to be documented in sources for notability, only that the grouping or set in general has been. Because the group or set is notable, the individual items in the list do not need to be independently notable, although editors may, at their discretion, choose to limit large lists by only including entries for independently notable items or those with Wikipedia articles." I agree that we would not want to include thousands of films, so we should limit this list to films that are named as part of a group. I believe that all of these films already appear in a list. Erik II ( talk | contrib) ( ping me) 12:00, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
WP:CSC is a similar guideline to consider here. Erik II ( talk | contrib) ( ping me) 11:11, 9 September 2015 (UTC)
I am starting a separate thread for discussing this article's neutrality. It appears that the concern is that decisions to cast white actors in nonwhite roles are not being explained enough. I will need to track down the specific commentary, which may be more available in non-list sources, but generally speaking, it has to do with the prevalent whiteness of Hollywood and so-called racially blind casting that reinforces that. For some individual films, especially the most recent ones, there is a lot more commentary that can be included. Exodus has Ridley Scott saying, "I can't mount a film of this budget, where I have to rely on tax rebates in Spain, and say that my lead actor is Mohammad so-and-so from such-and-such. I’m just not going to get it financed. So the question doesn’t even come up." So we can include that kind of commentary to show why decisions were made. This is not available across the board, though, due to the normalcy of the practice, so some listed films will not have much more to say, and we should definitely avoid opining. Erik II ( talk | contrib) ( ping me) 12:12, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
I have added commentary now, which essentially cites white vs. nonwhite bankability on the studios' part. Erik II ( talk | contrib) ( ping me) 13:14, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
The Rothman quote, at least in the context in which it is presented, is very non-neutral and is phrased such that it implies an editorial position that the practice is inherently "institutional racism". -- Cruxador ( talk) 23:55, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: no consensus, leaning not moved. While the current title is clearly POV and that is generally a good argument for renaming, those opposing have given reasonable arguments that "whitewashed"/"whitewashing" is the clear common name in reliable sources and those supporting have not provided sources for their preferred title. Deletion arguments are outside the scope of RM and so were largely ignored in assessing the consensus here, but I do agree with them and think this article belongs at AfD – I fail to see what benefit it provides the encyclopedia. In the event it does survive AfD, I'd say no prejudice against renaming it to List of films featuring whitewashed casting as most of those who want the "whitewashed" title preferred that alternative. Jenks24 ( talk) 07:20, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
List of films featuring whitewashed roles →
List of American films featuring white actors in non-white roles – I would also be happy with
List of films featuring white actors in non-white roles if there is consensus to make the scope of the article broader than just American films. But the current title is hopelessly POV. Even the wikipedia article on the subject is a
racebending. "Whitewashing" is a pejorative", and suggests "racist". Allegations of "whitewashing" in a negative sense have been denied by producers of various films. The proposed title is a neutral, objective way of expressing the same thing.
St
Anselm (
talk)
22:09, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
Are we going to list all 200 Cleopatras in film? If not, why are we listing one? Plus why are we implying that Cleopatra was a person of color? She was a Macedonian Greek, like Alexander the Great. Plus even had she actually been Egyptian, why would we then not list all other early Semites played by white Americans: Moses, Jesus, and so on? And are we going to list the 100 filmed Othellos played by white actors? And every Western from the dawn of filmmaking up through and including The Last of the Mohicans and beyond? And all of the tens of thousands of other films that contain white or part-white actors in non-white roles? This is only the tip of the iceberg of the problems with this article. Can anyone else see how ludicrous (and POV, cherry-picked, OR) this endeavor is? Softlavender ( talk) 05:13, 9 September 2015 (UTC); edited 07:24, 9 September 2015 (UTC)
We should add as many films as befit the trope and when its use can be sourced. To be honest the inclusion of Cleopatra as a non-white role is questionable to me. She was a member of the Ptolemaic dynasty who had no prominent Egyptian ancestry. There is a theory that her paternal grandmother was a native Egyptian based mostly on a single fact: Ptolemy XII Auletes, her father, was considered a "Nothos" (bastard). His actual mother is unknown. From the silence of sources, modern scholars have speculated that the mother was a concubine of lowly origin.
With Semitic people, the problem is that racially they are typically classified as part of a Caucasian race. They are not all that different in appearance to your average Indo-European speaker. Are they really non-white? With the Moors, the issue is that the term has been applied to people of Arab descent, people of Berber descent, people of North African descent, people of Sub-Saharan African descent (blacks), people of Iberian descent who converted to Islam, to Muslims in general, and even those of mixed ancestry.
Not all Westerns "from the dawn of time" actually had non-white roles, and when they did they sometimes cast non-white actors. For example, one of the earliest Western with an article on Wikipedia is the Buffalo Dance of 1894. The three dancers playing Native Americans were Sioux. Some of the 1970s revisionist Westerns actually cast notable Native Americans like Chief Dan George. Dimadick ( talk) 20:44, 9 September 2015 (UTC)
Interesting addition, though the author there seems to be favorable to the view that ancient Macedonians were not all "white". I have heard such arguments before, mostly because the origins of the historical dynasties can be traced to Greek mythology, which also includes non-Greek ancestors of its dynasties. The Macedonian royal dynasty, the Argead dynasty, traced their lineage to the city of Argos. Whose legendary kings and ancestors of that line include Danaus and his nephew and son-in-law Lynceus, both Egyptians. Danaus was the ancestor of Perseus, founder of the Perseid dynasty. The Perseid descendants include Heracles and the Heracleidae. The historical Argeads claimed direct descent from the Heracleidae. Philip II of Macedon was an Argead king of Macedonia and Ptolemy I Soter, Cleopatra's ancestor, was said to be his illegitimate son. Assuming that the entire giant genealogical tree has some bases in fact, Cleopatra would have genuine Egyptian ancestry... but dating to the 2nd millennium BC. Dimadick ( talk) 21:18, 9 September 2015 (UTC)
While this is not a reliable source, it highlights upcoming films where whitewashing appears to happen, and these films can be researched as they come out to see what is said about them in reliable sources. Erik II ( talk | contrib) ( ping me) 17:00, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
Some of the listed roles/actors are listed willy nilly. If this is really an article about prominent roles filled by "people of color" (a rather loose term) being taken by white/Caucasian actors then it should focus on the most egregious ones. Of course this would necessitate a uniform definition of race but instead of wading into that quagmire let's just compare some cases where the article and the sources actually whitewash to fit their own agendas.
The Social Network: "In the drama film, white actor Max Minghella plays the Facebook co-founder Divya Narendra, who is of Indian descent", well Max Minghella, while British is largely of Chinese descent. If half (or slightly more) white counts as "white" then many more roles would need to be put on this list, including many roles filled by biracial people or potentially even light skinned people of color or those that fit a "Eurocentric" standard of beauty.
The King and I (1956 film): "In the musical film, white actor Yul Brynner plays the Thai king Mongkut." Once again, Yul Brynner was also of Eurasian descent, he might have been sufficiently ambiguous to "pass" in Hollywood but as his own article notes, he was open about his Eurasian background.
Aloha (film) & Star Trek Into Darkness: Pale skinned, blue eyed anglo actors are shamelessly cast to fill (Eur)Asian roles (forgive my focus on these accounts but as a person of mixed descent I feel compelled to speak on this). While I am somewhat sympathetic to Emma Stone’s characterization of a partially Chinese woman who has to defend her heritage to those who think appearance=ancestry, Emma Stone’s character is supposed to be half Asian. No amount of genetic handwaving can get over that. Having Bennedict Cumberbatch play Khan is also particularly insulting to Sikhs. While it is (nigh im)possible that someone from India could look like that thanks to the miracle of genetics, the explanation for that would belong more on a Stormfront forum post than a casting sheet.
The House of the Spirits (film): A film no more guilty of colorism than Univision, Chile does indeed have white people. Demanding that a White-Chilean actor play a White-Chilean role and setting the same standard for all films would then widen this list exponentially. My German and Flemish Chilean forefathers who came to America were no less “White” than those Europeans who came directly to America, it did not make them people of color. The film also accurately depicts the racial stratification left over from Spanish colonization, though Antonio Banderas is supposed to play a mestitzo man.
I will refrain from further clogging up this thread but I felt compelled to present my case. Peranakan-24 ( talk) 02:08, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
Good points about the descent of both the fictional characters and the actors. I would like to see some sources that raise the same issues. Dimadick ( talk) 09:04, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
The Social Network 2010 [5][27]
This article states that "In the drama film, white actor Max Minghella plays the Facebook co-founder Divya Narendra, who is of Indian descent", but Max Minghella is only half Caucasian. His mother is Chinese, and he is dark eyed, black-haired and tan skinned. So, technically, with India being included in the continent of "Asia", he is at least the same (vague) ethnicity - "Asian". His father was the son of Italian immigrants who moved to the UK - also dark featured. So, I don't think calling Max Minghella a "white actor" is fair or accurate. This film shouldn't be listed in this article, simply because the one example of whitewashing in the movie is not whitewashing at all - it's a different ethnicity choice.
Celticcherokee ( talk) 15:24, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
What ethnicity were the characters in this film, and what ethnicity should have played them? It's misleading to say the film was "whitewashed" and had an "all-white cast" without mentioning that two of the actors were Jewish. If Jews can't star in a biblical movie based on the Old Testament, then who can? Either mention they're Jewish or remove the note about Noah. Obtrisgo ( talk) 22:04, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
Obtrisgo, Biblical epics have long been questioned for whitewashing. It happened for Noah, and the filmmakers did not even apply your argument in defending it, but a different kind of argument, which has been included in the article. I looked into your claims out of curiosity, and the figures of lore are not even Jewish. So the actors' backgrounds do not even apply here. There is zero source about this film that mentions their backgrounds as part of an argument or counter-argument, so I see no grounds for mentioning it as a counterpoint to whitewashing. Are you still believing that the actors' Jewish backgrounds, in spite of their characters preceding Judaism in biblical lore, help "protect" this film from the claims of whitewashing? Erik ( talk | contrib) ( ping me) 12:45, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
StAnselm's problem with the article was its title, which hasn't been changed. Obtrisgo ( talk) 01:03, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
Jews don't believe that Noah was Jewish. Jews believe that the first Jew was Abraham. -- Dweller ( talk) 09:56, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
The Greeks, Spaniards, Romans and Middle Easterners (not counting those from the Arabian peninsula) tend to lookalike, and are pretty much of the same "Mediterranean race". Both have light featured and dark folks, equally. Not sure why those in Western Asia are considered a "different" race? As such, if Russel Crowe, a man of Anglo-Celtic descent, plays a Spaniard in Gladiator, who are southern Europeans, and let's face it, darker than Celts, wouldn't the role of Maximus be "whitewashed" too? This list is rather biased and "Eurocentric" on this account. Either count Middle Eastern part of the Caucasian/white race, or list all the Anglo-Celtic actors who played Romans or Greeks in film as "whitewashed", because, let's face it, the average Southern European does not look like Russel Crowe and Sam Worthington ( Clash of the Titans). But nah, because Mediterranean people are from Europe, despite their darker skin and curlier hair, they'd have more in common with Celts than a Jew or a Lebanese...(*sigh*).... Meganesia ( talk) 9:26, 8 October 2015 (UTC)
This article is absurd. Is there also a list of European characters who've been portrayed by non-European actors? How about black actors who've played other nationalities, like Chiwetel Ejiofor playing an Indian in The Martian? And what about Omar Sharif playing Mexicans, Russians, Germans, or the King of Siam - where's he on the list? Should casting directors only ever cast actors who are the exact nationality and ethnicity of the character? Do actors need full genetic screenings before going to a casting call? Shame on you Wikipedians - Wikipedia is about factual information, not soap-box grinding personal political axes. This nonsense has no place on here. Gymnophoria ( talk) 00:02, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
"The Greeks, Spaniards, Romans and Middle Easterners" Greeks and Romans are considered European/White people, though in Antiquity they spread through three continents (Europe, Asia, Africa) and assimilated or partially assimilated many other ethnic groups. Just look at the categories we have about Romans and you can find Romanized Greeks, Thracians, Dacians, Illyrians, Celts, Germanics, Punics, Berbers, Syrians, Arabs, and Jews. Examples include
The Spaniards are also considered white, but the ancestry of the ethnic group is thought to lie in an admixture of the various ancient and medieval people of the Iberian Peninsula: Iberians, Celts, Celtiberians, Tartessians, Turdetani, Phoenicians, Greeks, Carthaginians, Romans, Vandals, Suebi, Alans, Visigoths, Berbers, Arabs, Moors, Guanches, and a few minorities.
The Middle East was never really dominated by any single language or ethnic group. The history of Western Asia involves multiple multiethnic empires like Akkad, Babylon, Assyria, the Asian provinces of Ancient Egypt, the Hittites, the Greek colonies and Hellenistic Kingdoms, the Lydians, the various Elamite, Median, Persian, and Parthian kingdoms, empires and dynasties, the Armenian dynasties, the Asian provinces of the Roman and Byzantine Empires, the Arabian caliphates and their Arabic, Iranian, Turkic, Mongol, and Tatar successors, the Crusade states, and various short-lived European colonial administrations. Not to mention relatively minor states like the Kingdom of Israel, Kingdom of Judah, and any number of tribal kingdoms, city-states, and loose alliances. I seriously doubt that an average Middle Eastern appearance can be described.
The Mediterranean race was a concept used to describe a sub-type of the wider Caucasian race. "It is characterized by medium to tall stature, long (dolichocephalic) or moderate (mesocephalic) skull, a narrow and often slightly aquiline nose, prevalence of dark hair and eyes, and pink to reddish to light or dark brown skin tone; olive complexion being especially common." Thomas Henry Huxley tried to further define what people are included: "Melanochroi, or dark whites. Under its best form this type is exhibited by many Irishmen, Welshmen, and Bretons, by Spaniards, South Italians, Greeks, Armenians, Arabs, and high-caste Brahmins."
Giuseppe Sergi had his own definition of what people where Mediterraneans since antiquity. " Ancient Egypt, Ancient Greece, Ancient Persia, Ancient Rome, Carthage, Hittite Anatolia, Land of Punt, Mesopotamia and Phoenicia. The four great branches of the Mediterranean stock were the Libyans, the Ligurians, the Pelasgians and the Iberians." He considered the Ancient Egyptians, Ethiopians and Somalis to be closer to the original look of the race.
The concept of the Mediterranean race has largely fallen out of fashion since the 1960s, though some recent genetic studies seem to confirm common ancestry from the Mediterranean area for many of the populations included in the original concept.
So are we to consider this people as white or not? They were certainly as mixed in origin as some modern populations. Dimadick ( talk) 01:28, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
There are examples within this article of Italian actors playing characters from other parts of the Mediterranean - these should clearly be removed if this article is to retain any level of credibility.
Regarding the supposed issue of actors of Northern European descent portraying characters of Mediterranean or Middle Eastern descent - if these are to remain, caveats or explanations must be included, as this issue is at best ambiguous or unresolved. Most definitions of the racial group "white" would include people of Middle Eastern Arab origin, and nearly all definitions would include people of Turkish or Persian origin, so the argument that these are examples of "whitewashing" is certainly open to challenge at the very least. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.97.220.61 ( talk) 17:02, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
How can Dragonball Evolution be a whitewash when the main character(and the antagonist) is an alien? Is he from Space Japan? If using the manga or anime as a reference, most of the characters also appear to be Caucasian or at least racially ambiguous. I guess you could probably call this movie a "yellowash", since all of the racially ambiguous characters from the source material were cast as Asians. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.164.8.241 ( talk) 11:13, 19 October 2015 (UTC)
Regarding this, it is not necessary to have an inline citation after every sentence. The sentences you tagged are supported by the first following inline citation. In addition, you changed someone's quote from "are" to "is", and you cannot change a quote like that. I think it is grammatically correct because the key word is "shortage", not the plural forms that fall under the word. Erik ( talk | contrib) ( ping me) 02:19, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
What is the criteria for determining whether a role has been "white-washed"? I'm not sure all the films belong on this list. - theWOLFchild 02:30, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
Can we come with a better term, especially for the article title? - theWOLFchild 02:31, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
For the sake of balance, will this article address roles that were originally or typically a white person, but were in some instance played instead by a minority or person of colour? - theWOLFchild 02:39, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
This information is definitely relevant to the Argo section. Tony Mendez's father was Mexican and his mother was of Irish and Italian descent. Obtrisgo ( talk) 04:58, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | → | Archive 5 |
Title of this list strikes me as inherently pejorative, and the narrative doesn't support using the term "whitewashed" as an accepted description of what the list contains. I respectfully suggest reconsidering the title and/or description in the narrative. Townlake ( talk) 20:12, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
The list title (and even the article/list itself) is inherently problematic for numerous reasons, including: (1) The term "whitewash" has an entirely different and un-related meaning in its common figurative usage, so it's confusing if not misleading here. (2) Using Caucasian, or part-Caucasian, actors for non-Caucasian, or part-Caucasian, roles is so ubiquitous and longstanding (more the rule than the exception) that the list should comprise hundreds or thousands of films, especially if non-lead characters are being included. (3) The fact that non-lead roles are being included makes the list problematic in that every single film with even a tiny non-Caucasian character played by a Caucasian or part-Caucasian actor could be WP:COATRACKED into the list. (4) The text part of the article is simplistic, POV, pointy, and polemic, and does not by any means adequately cover the reasons that any given actor is cast in any given part; instead, the lede resorts to POV-pushing and politicizing of the very common practice. (5) Nor does the text cover Japanese characters played by Chinese actors (and vice versa, etc.) or any other Asian cross-casting; European characters played by Americans (and vice versa); gay characters played by straight actors (and vice versa); and so on and so on. (6) The list currently includes screenplays based on source material where races were changed (not cross-cast) in the screenplay, which is a different issue entirely, and therefore should not be included in the same list. There are more problems, but I'll stop here for convenience's sake. Softlavender ( talk) 06:22, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
Regarding deletion, per WP:NOTESAL, there are numerous reliable sources about the list topic. "One accepted reason why a list topic is considered notable is if it has been discussed as a group or set by independent reliable sources, per the above guidelines; notable list topics are appropriate for a stand-alone list." There were many films on this list reiterated because of Aloha being whitewashed. There are reliable sources talking about Stonewall being whitewashed. When Pan gets released, the topic will come up yet again. Wikipedia summarizes coverage from reliable sources, and that is being done here.
Regarding renaming, I said above, "...looking through the guidelines, WP:NPOVTITLE seems applicable here. First, it's definitely not 'a descriptive title created by Wikipedia editors', as evidenced by the sources. The subsection WP:NPOVNAME talks about the prevalence of the term in reliable sources being a factor in actually using it for the Wikipedia article's title. The term 'whitewash' and its variants seem to be more common in the 2000s and 2010s to date, so I don't see it as merely a trendy slogan that will pass."
Lastly, this list does not mean that there are not other kinds of racial casting disputes, but white actors playing nonwhite roles is much more prevalent because of the lack of either nonwhite actors or nonwhite roles in Hollywood. That's why the article states that it is prevalent in the film industry. The news articles, writing about whitewashing in the past decade, talk about this. Erik II ( talk | contrib) ( ping me) 11:52, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
I'm still deciding whether I think the list should be deleted or just renamed. But it raises the issue of scope - what is the list meant to be? The point is made above that it could potentially include thousands of films. But the only two categories are both U.S.-based: Category:History of racism in the cinema of the United States (which is certainly tipping our hand that "whitewashing" means racist) and Category:Lists of American films - even though there are British ( Lawrence of Arabia) and Australian ( The Year of Living Dangerously) films included. St Anselm ( talk) 08:19, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
Regarding Softlavender's concerns about the list criteria, we can establish specific criteria. WP:NOTESAL says, "One accepted reason why a list topic is considered notable is if it has been discussed as a group or set by independent reliable sources, per the above guidelines; notable list topics are appropriate for a stand-alone list. The entirety of the list does not need to be documented in sources for notability, only that the grouping or set in general has been. Because the group or set is notable, the individual items in the list do not need to be independently notable, although editors may, at their discretion, choose to limit large lists by only including entries for independently notable items or those with Wikipedia articles." I agree that we would not want to include thousands of films, so we should limit this list to films that are named as part of a group. I believe that all of these films already appear in a list. Erik II ( talk | contrib) ( ping me) 12:00, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
WP:CSC is a similar guideline to consider here. Erik II ( talk | contrib) ( ping me) 11:11, 9 September 2015 (UTC)
I am starting a separate thread for discussing this article's neutrality. It appears that the concern is that decisions to cast white actors in nonwhite roles are not being explained enough. I will need to track down the specific commentary, which may be more available in non-list sources, but generally speaking, it has to do with the prevalent whiteness of Hollywood and so-called racially blind casting that reinforces that. For some individual films, especially the most recent ones, there is a lot more commentary that can be included. Exodus has Ridley Scott saying, "I can't mount a film of this budget, where I have to rely on tax rebates in Spain, and say that my lead actor is Mohammad so-and-so from such-and-such. I’m just not going to get it financed. So the question doesn’t even come up." So we can include that kind of commentary to show why decisions were made. This is not available across the board, though, due to the normalcy of the practice, so some listed films will not have much more to say, and we should definitely avoid opining. Erik II ( talk | contrib) ( ping me) 12:12, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
I have added commentary now, which essentially cites white vs. nonwhite bankability on the studios' part. Erik II ( talk | contrib) ( ping me) 13:14, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
The Rothman quote, at least in the context in which it is presented, is very non-neutral and is phrased such that it implies an editorial position that the practice is inherently "institutional racism". -- Cruxador ( talk) 23:55, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: no consensus, leaning not moved. While the current title is clearly POV and that is generally a good argument for renaming, those opposing have given reasonable arguments that "whitewashed"/"whitewashing" is the clear common name in reliable sources and those supporting have not provided sources for their preferred title. Deletion arguments are outside the scope of RM and so were largely ignored in assessing the consensus here, but I do agree with them and think this article belongs at AfD – I fail to see what benefit it provides the encyclopedia. In the event it does survive AfD, I'd say no prejudice against renaming it to List of films featuring whitewashed casting as most of those who want the "whitewashed" title preferred that alternative. Jenks24 ( talk) 07:20, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
List of films featuring whitewashed roles →
List of American films featuring white actors in non-white roles – I would also be happy with
List of films featuring white actors in non-white roles if there is consensus to make the scope of the article broader than just American films. But the current title is hopelessly POV. Even the wikipedia article on the subject is a
racebending. "Whitewashing" is a pejorative", and suggests "racist". Allegations of "whitewashing" in a negative sense have been denied by producers of various films. The proposed title is a neutral, objective way of expressing the same thing.
St
Anselm (
talk)
22:09, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
Are we going to list all 200 Cleopatras in film? If not, why are we listing one? Plus why are we implying that Cleopatra was a person of color? She was a Macedonian Greek, like Alexander the Great. Plus even had she actually been Egyptian, why would we then not list all other early Semites played by white Americans: Moses, Jesus, and so on? And are we going to list the 100 filmed Othellos played by white actors? And every Western from the dawn of filmmaking up through and including The Last of the Mohicans and beyond? And all of the tens of thousands of other films that contain white or part-white actors in non-white roles? This is only the tip of the iceberg of the problems with this article. Can anyone else see how ludicrous (and POV, cherry-picked, OR) this endeavor is? Softlavender ( talk) 05:13, 9 September 2015 (UTC); edited 07:24, 9 September 2015 (UTC)
We should add as many films as befit the trope and when its use can be sourced. To be honest the inclusion of Cleopatra as a non-white role is questionable to me. She was a member of the Ptolemaic dynasty who had no prominent Egyptian ancestry. There is a theory that her paternal grandmother was a native Egyptian based mostly on a single fact: Ptolemy XII Auletes, her father, was considered a "Nothos" (bastard). His actual mother is unknown. From the silence of sources, modern scholars have speculated that the mother was a concubine of lowly origin.
With Semitic people, the problem is that racially they are typically classified as part of a Caucasian race. They are not all that different in appearance to your average Indo-European speaker. Are they really non-white? With the Moors, the issue is that the term has been applied to people of Arab descent, people of Berber descent, people of North African descent, people of Sub-Saharan African descent (blacks), people of Iberian descent who converted to Islam, to Muslims in general, and even those of mixed ancestry.
Not all Westerns "from the dawn of time" actually had non-white roles, and when they did they sometimes cast non-white actors. For example, one of the earliest Western with an article on Wikipedia is the Buffalo Dance of 1894. The three dancers playing Native Americans were Sioux. Some of the 1970s revisionist Westerns actually cast notable Native Americans like Chief Dan George. Dimadick ( talk) 20:44, 9 September 2015 (UTC)
Interesting addition, though the author there seems to be favorable to the view that ancient Macedonians were not all "white". I have heard such arguments before, mostly because the origins of the historical dynasties can be traced to Greek mythology, which also includes non-Greek ancestors of its dynasties. The Macedonian royal dynasty, the Argead dynasty, traced their lineage to the city of Argos. Whose legendary kings and ancestors of that line include Danaus and his nephew and son-in-law Lynceus, both Egyptians. Danaus was the ancestor of Perseus, founder of the Perseid dynasty. The Perseid descendants include Heracles and the Heracleidae. The historical Argeads claimed direct descent from the Heracleidae. Philip II of Macedon was an Argead king of Macedonia and Ptolemy I Soter, Cleopatra's ancestor, was said to be his illegitimate son. Assuming that the entire giant genealogical tree has some bases in fact, Cleopatra would have genuine Egyptian ancestry... but dating to the 2nd millennium BC. Dimadick ( talk) 21:18, 9 September 2015 (UTC)
While this is not a reliable source, it highlights upcoming films where whitewashing appears to happen, and these films can be researched as they come out to see what is said about them in reliable sources. Erik II ( talk | contrib) ( ping me) 17:00, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
Some of the listed roles/actors are listed willy nilly. If this is really an article about prominent roles filled by "people of color" (a rather loose term) being taken by white/Caucasian actors then it should focus on the most egregious ones. Of course this would necessitate a uniform definition of race but instead of wading into that quagmire let's just compare some cases where the article and the sources actually whitewash to fit their own agendas.
The Social Network: "In the drama film, white actor Max Minghella plays the Facebook co-founder Divya Narendra, who is of Indian descent", well Max Minghella, while British is largely of Chinese descent. If half (or slightly more) white counts as "white" then many more roles would need to be put on this list, including many roles filled by biracial people or potentially even light skinned people of color or those that fit a "Eurocentric" standard of beauty.
The King and I (1956 film): "In the musical film, white actor Yul Brynner plays the Thai king Mongkut." Once again, Yul Brynner was also of Eurasian descent, he might have been sufficiently ambiguous to "pass" in Hollywood but as his own article notes, he was open about his Eurasian background.
Aloha (film) & Star Trek Into Darkness: Pale skinned, blue eyed anglo actors are shamelessly cast to fill (Eur)Asian roles (forgive my focus on these accounts but as a person of mixed descent I feel compelled to speak on this). While I am somewhat sympathetic to Emma Stone’s characterization of a partially Chinese woman who has to defend her heritage to those who think appearance=ancestry, Emma Stone’s character is supposed to be half Asian. No amount of genetic handwaving can get over that. Having Bennedict Cumberbatch play Khan is also particularly insulting to Sikhs. While it is (nigh im)possible that someone from India could look like that thanks to the miracle of genetics, the explanation for that would belong more on a Stormfront forum post than a casting sheet.
The House of the Spirits (film): A film no more guilty of colorism than Univision, Chile does indeed have white people. Demanding that a White-Chilean actor play a White-Chilean role and setting the same standard for all films would then widen this list exponentially. My German and Flemish Chilean forefathers who came to America were no less “White” than those Europeans who came directly to America, it did not make them people of color. The film also accurately depicts the racial stratification left over from Spanish colonization, though Antonio Banderas is supposed to play a mestitzo man.
I will refrain from further clogging up this thread but I felt compelled to present my case. Peranakan-24 ( talk) 02:08, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
Good points about the descent of both the fictional characters and the actors. I would like to see some sources that raise the same issues. Dimadick ( talk) 09:04, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
The Social Network 2010 [5][27]
This article states that "In the drama film, white actor Max Minghella plays the Facebook co-founder Divya Narendra, who is of Indian descent", but Max Minghella is only half Caucasian. His mother is Chinese, and he is dark eyed, black-haired and tan skinned. So, technically, with India being included in the continent of "Asia", he is at least the same (vague) ethnicity - "Asian". His father was the son of Italian immigrants who moved to the UK - also dark featured. So, I don't think calling Max Minghella a "white actor" is fair or accurate. This film shouldn't be listed in this article, simply because the one example of whitewashing in the movie is not whitewashing at all - it's a different ethnicity choice.
Celticcherokee ( talk) 15:24, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
What ethnicity were the characters in this film, and what ethnicity should have played them? It's misleading to say the film was "whitewashed" and had an "all-white cast" without mentioning that two of the actors were Jewish. If Jews can't star in a biblical movie based on the Old Testament, then who can? Either mention they're Jewish or remove the note about Noah. Obtrisgo ( talk) 22:04, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
Obtrisgo, Biblical epics have long been questioned for whitewashing. It happened for Noah, and the filmmakers did not even apply your argument in defending it, but a different kind of argument, which has been included in the article. I looked into your claims out of curiosity, and the figures of lore are not even Jewish. So the actors' backgrounds do not even apply here. There is zero source about this film that mentions their backgrounds as part of an argument or counter-argument, so I see no grounds for mentioning it as a counterpoint to whitewashing. Are you still believing that the actors' Jewish backgrounds, in spite of their characters preceding Judaism in biblical lore, help "protect" this film from the claims of whitewashing? Erik ( talk | contrib) ( ping me) 12:45, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
StAnselm's problem with the article was its title, which hasn't been changed. Obtrisgo ( talk) 01:03, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
Jews don't believe that Noah was Jewish. Jews believe that the first Jew was Abraham. -- Dweller ( talk) 09:56, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
The Greeks, Spaniards, Romans and Middle Easterners (not counting those from the Arabian peninsula) tend to lookalike, and are pretty much of the same "Mediterranean race". Both have light featured and dark folks, equally. Not sure why those in Western Asia are considered a "different" race? As such, if Russel Crowe, a man of Anglo-Celtic descent, plays a Spaniard in Gladiator, who are southern Europeans, and let's face it, darker than Celts, wouldn't the role of Maximus be "whitewashed" too? This list is rather biased and "Eurocentric" on this account. Either count Middle Eastern part of the Caucasian/white race, or list all the Anglo-Celtic actors who played Romans or Greeks in film as "whitewashed", because, let's face it, the average Southern European does not look like Russel Crowe and Sam Worthington ( Clash of the Titans). But nah, because Mediterranean people are from Europe, despite their darker skin and curlier hair, they'd have more in common with Celts than a Jew or a Lebanese...(*sigh*).... Meganesia ( talk) 9:26, 8 October 2015 (UTC)
This article is absurd. Is there also a list of European characters who've been portrayed by non-European actors? How about black actors who've played other nationalities, like Chiwetel Ejiofor playing an Indian in The Martian? And what about Omar Sharif playing Mexicans, Russians, Germans, or the King of Siam - where's he on the list? Should casting directors only ever cast actors who are the exact nationality and ethnicity of the character? Do actors need full genetic screenings before going to a casting call? Shame on you Wikipedians - Wikipedia is about factual information, not soap-box grinding personal political axes. This nonsense has no place on here. Gymnophoria ( talk) 00:02, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
"The Greeks, Spaniards, Romans and Middle Easterners" Greeks and Romans are considered European/White people, though in Antiquity they spread through three continents (Europe, Asia, Africa) and assimilated or partially assimilated many other ethnic groups. Just look at the categories we have about Romans and you can find Romanized Greeks, Thracians, Dacians, Illyrians, Celts, Germanics, Punics, Berbers, Syrians, Arabs, and Jews. Examples include
The Spaniards are also considered white, but the ancestry of the ethnic group is thought to lie in an admixture of the various ancient and medieval people of the Iberian Peninsula: Iberians, Celts, Celtiberians, Tartessians, Turdetani, Phoenicians, Greeks, Carthaginians, Romans, Vandals, Suebi, Alans, Visigoths, Berbers, Arabs, Moors, Guanches, and a few minorities.
The Middle East was never really dominated by any single language or ethnic group. The history of Western Asia involves multiple multiethnic empires like Akkad, Babylon, Assyria, the Asian provinces of Ancient Egypt, the Hittites, the Greek colonies and Hellenistic Kingdoms, the Lydians, the various Elamite, Median, Persian, and Parthian kingdoms, empires and dynasties, the Armenian dynasties, the Asian provinces of the Roman and Byzantine Empires, the Arabian caliphates and their Arabic, Iranian, Turkic, Mongol, and Tatar successors, the Crusade states, and various short-lived European colonial administrations. Not to mention relatively minor states like the Kingdom of Israel, Kingdom of Judah, and any number of tribal kingdoms, city-states, and loose alliances. I seriously doubt that an average Middle Eastern appearance can be described.
The Mediterranean race was a concept used to describe a sub-type of the wider Caucasian race. "It is characterized by medium to tall stature, long (dolichocephalic) or moderate (mesocephalic) skull, a narrow and often slightly aquiline nose, prevalence of dark hair and eyes, and pink to reddish to light or dark brown skin tone; olive complexion being especially common." Thomas Henry Huxley tried to further define what people are included: "Melanochroi, or dark whites. Under its best form this type is exhibited by many Irishmen, Welshmen, and Bretons, by Spaniards, South Italians, Greeks, Armenians, Arabs, and high-caste Brahmins."
Giuseppe Sergi had his own definition of what people where Mediterraneans since antiquity. " Ancient Egypt, Ancient Greece, Ancient Persia, Ancient Rome, Carthage, Hittite Anatolia, Land of Punt, Mesopotamia and Phoenicia. The four great branches of the Mediterranean stock were the Libyans, the Ligurians, the Pelasgians and the Iberians." He considered the Ancient Egyptians, Ethiopians and Somalis to be closer to the original look of the race.
The concept of the Mediterranean race has largely fallen out of fashion since the 1960s, though some recent genetic studies seem to confirm common ancestry from the Mediterranean area for many of the populations included in the original concept.
So are we to consider this people as white or not? They were certainly as mixed in origin as some modern populations. Dimadick ( talk) 01:28, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
There are examples within this article of Italian actors playing characters from other parts of the Mediterranean - these should clearly be removed if this article is to retain any level of credibility.
Regarding the supposed issue of actors of Northern European descent portraying characters of Mediterranean or Middle Eastern descent - if these are to remain, caveats or explanations must be included, as this issue is at best ambiguous or unresolved. Most definitions of the racial group "white" would include people of Middle Eastern Arab origin, and nearly all definitions would include people of Turkish or Persian origin, so the argument that these are examples of "whitewashing" is certainly open to challenge at the very least. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.97.220.61 ( talk) 17:02, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
How can Dragonball Evolution be a whitewash when the main character(and the antagonist) is an alien? Is he from Space Japan? If using the manga or anime as a reference, most of the characters also appear to be Caucasian or at least racially ambiguous. I guess you could probably call this movie a "yellowash", since all of the racially ambiguous characters from the source material were cast as Asians. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.164.8.241 ( talk) 11:13, 19 October 2015 (UTC)
Regarding this, it is not necessary to have an inline citation after every sentence. The sentences you tagged are supported by the first following inline citation. In addition, you changed someone's quote from "are" to "is", and you cannot change a quote like that. I think it is grammatically correct because the key word is "shortage", not the plural forms that fall under the word. Erik ( talk | contrib) ( ping me) 02:19, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
What is the criteria for determining whether a role has been "white-washed"? I'm not sure all the films belong on this list. - theWOLFchild 02:30, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
Can we come with a better term, especially for the article title? - theWOLFchild 02:31, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
For the sake of balance, will this article address roles that were originally or typically a white person, but were in some instance played instead by a minority or person of colour? - theWOLFchild 02:39, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
This information is definitely relevant to the Argo section. Tony Mendez's father was Mexican and his mother was of Irish and Italian descent. Obtrisgo ( talk) 04:58, 19 November 2015 (UTC)