The other day, I happened to see the trailer for Noah. To use my son’s lingo, it’s epic. Without a doubt, it’s action-packed and pulls at your heart-strings. But, (and I bet you know what I’m about to write) why are all the people light-skinned? How is it possible that filmmakers still create a representation of the past that is devoid of people of color?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_OSaJE2rqxU
Not being a biblical scholar, I had to do a bit of reading, and settled on this. I’m sure there are numerous other resources, but I have neither the time, nor interest, to do more detailed research. My issue, I know.
I simply find it odd (annoying, discouraging, unsettling) that in a world filled with various shades of black, blockbuster filmmakers consistently, and repeatedly, show biblical history with the lightest shade.
I did do a little reading about genetics and found this from MIT:
Mitochondrial DNA indicates that all living humans descend from one maternal source—christened Mitochondrial Eve—who lived in Africa between 100,000 and 200,000 years ago. Similarly, the Y chromosome shows that all men have a common ancestor, Y-chromosome Adam, who lived at the same time. (Actually, both analyses indicate that modern humans descend from a small founding population of about 5000 men and an equal number of women.) The time estimates are based on assumptions on how frequently genetic mutations occur. The mutation clocks of mitochondrial DNA and the Y chromosome tick at different speeds, so the fact that they both indicate humans emerged at the same historical moment makes this evidence much more convincing.
In other words, ”white people” do not share a common genetic heritage; instead, they come from different lineages that migrated from Africa and Asia. Such mixing is true for every race. ”All living humans go back to one common ancestor in Africa,” explains Paabo. ”But if you look at any history subsequent to that,” then every group is a blend of shallower pedigrees. So, he says, ”I might be closer in my DNA to an African than to another European in the street.” Genetics, he concludes, ”should be the last nail in the coffin for racism.”
What does all of this have to do with “rethinking character descriptions?” Hang on, ’cause I’m about to tell you.
Let me back up a minute first. When I created the character Dezeray Jackson in 2005, I had (and still have) an image in my mind’s eye of what she physically looks like. I’m not going to share that with you. It’s not important. And, that last statement is critical. What she actually looks like to me doesn’t matter. It’s a book. The reader should feel free to fill in some blanks. I decided that this, was one of those blanks.
When I asked Christopher Brown to create the book cover, I gave him very specific information. His initial drawing showed Dez from the front. I rejected it. The most important thing to me, for the cover, was not allowing the reader to really see Dez. You, the reader, know that she has curly hair. You can determine that she’s fit. I might have even mentioned her height at some point. But, I haven’t specifically said anything about her race. I might, but it hasn’t been relevant to the story, yet. As you read Deadly Sins II (Scheduled for release in a few months) , you might assume that Patrick Murphy is a white, Irish guy. That’s fine. It might not be accurate from my perspective, but if that’s the image you get in your head, there’s nothing wrong with that. And, you might think Haithem Nazari is Arab. You might be right. The point is, as a reader, you should be able to create images of my characters in your head, without me, the writer, interfering too much.
So, that brings me back to filmmakers creating movies from books. The minute some filmmaker decides what someone should look like, that image is immortalized. Think Tom Cruise playing Lestat or Jason O’Mara playing Morelli. I don’t know about you, but Cruise wasn’t the image in my head, when I read Interview with a Vampire. And, O’Mara wasn’t as hot as the image of Morelli in my head. I don’t know who I would have selected, but it wasn’t him. These are simple, inoffensive examples. And, at least in Evanovich’s case, she does describe the main characters in enough detail that Katherine Heigl had to die her hair for the movie.
But, what happens when filmmakers create something like Noah?
“It’s only a movie, Kori!”
No, it’s not. It’s what our children watch, and internalize. How many times has your child watched a superhero flick, and internalized that sense of being a hero — saving the day?
I don’t want my children, or your children, believing that all the significant world events — all the supposed good things that happened — were only done by the lighter shade of black. That’s an inaccurate representation of world events.
I want my children to see all of the shades, in all of their glory, being represented accurately in books, TV, and movies.
As a kid, I’d watch movies with my father. When a black character enter the picture, we’d count how many scenes before the character was killed. It was incredibly rare for that character to make it to the end of the movie.
Our children shouldn’t have the same experience that I had more than 30 years ago.
Filmmakers and writers could take a few lessons from American playwright, Chuck Mee.
Here’s his casting note as it appeared in the original article:
Casting Note: In my plays, as in life itself, the female romantic lead can be played by a woman in a wheelchair. The male romantic lead can be played by an Indian man. And that is not the subject of the play. There is not a single role in any one of my plays that must be played by a physically intact white person. And directors should go very far out of their way to avoid creating the bizarre, artificial world of all intact white people, a world that no longer exists where I live, in casting my plays.
As a writer, it’s not always necessary that we describe every physical detail of our characters. We are a diverse and beautiful race. That should be reflected in the literature, and other media, we leave on this earth in our wake.