Get an Indian voice actor in, at the very least, given how regular a character he is.
I dont see how anyone can have a problem with that.
Get a voice actor in who can do a better Indian accent.
Indian guys tend to be the best at Indian accents. That was much of the point of the post.
Probably, but I am not a racist.
There is more to the job than just reading from a script and if the part is to be accurate it is not a pure Indian accent, it is the voice of an Indian who has lived most of his life in America. There maybe Americans of Indian or Pakistan heritage better suited to the part? There are some great mimics that are neither of American or Asian heritage that maybe better and could cover more than just one character like at present?
Best not to prejudge things I find.
Do you think it would be racist to advertise for an Indian actor for a voice over?
Do you think one should advertise a job with a preconceived idea what races you are going to exclude from getting the job?
Have... have you just implied I'm a racist?! Or am I reading that completely wrong?
As for the part itself - Apu is ethnically Indian. Have an ethnically Indian guy voice him.
When it comes to your questions - if you're specifically looking for an Indian accent, then no it's not racist to ask for an Indian person.
Advertising a job where race is not a determining factor in how well someone can play the role and racially discriminating is, of course, racist.
If you're about to say something like "Aha! But a voiceover is just a voice!" - then, well, no. If a white man is doing an Indian accent then it contributes to a lack of ethnically diverse representation in acting, and there's the chance that the accent may offend.
Why not minimise risk and stay true to a character's background by getting someone of the same background to voice him?
This thread is full of self important people posing silly questions thinking they GOTCHA! and that's on a topic that truly has no relevance to their life in any way, shape or form. It is really bizarre.
Everyone take a step back and think about who's lives are being directly affected by this issue. Oh, not yours? Then stop being so bloody obtuse about it all, you make yourself look ignorant.
Get an Indian voice actor in, at the very least, given how regular a character he is.
I dont see how anyone can have a problem with that.
They need to get a really Hill Billy in at least to play Cletus.
Did you just not read my above post at all, then?
I did and thought it raised some good points, the mocking was towards to PC mob not yourself, although I can see how you took it like that, for which I apologise, I just think this whole saga is laughable(laughable being the key here we should all be able to have a giggle at each other’s differences and cultures without outrage, particularly over a cartoon).
I would get this if it was a white person getting offended on a minority's behalf. I haven't seen the documentary but people of Asian heritage are allowed to speak up if they get offended and find something racist. As mention many times above society has changed, comedy in the 70s can be a hard watch.
I wonder what was taboo in the 70s is now funny today? Simpsons was pretty controversial when it first came out and now looks very tame compared to Family Guy and South Park. God knows how those shows have escaped all of this!
South Park's line on the whole City Wok thing is basically 'yeah this is racist, deal with it', which is, at least, up front about it. I do like SP but they're not afraid to offend
I mean, there was an absolutely incredible SP episode called Cash For Gold a few years ago that nailed every target it aimed at, except it also had a minute of unbridled Chinese stereotyping in the middle. It's like they can't help themselves. I'd still recommend the episode but yeah, be prepared for that
I mean, there was an absolutely incredible SP episode called Cash For Gold a few years ago that nailed every target it aimed at, except it also had a minute of unbridled Chinese stereotyping in the middle. It's like they can't help themselves. I'd still recommend the episode but yeah, be prepared for that
This thread is full of self important people posing silly questions thinking they GOTCHA! and that's on a topic that truly has no relevance to their life in any way, shape or form. It is really bizarre.
Everyone take a step back and think about who's lives are being directly affected by this issue. Oh, not yours? Then stop being so bloody obtuse about it all, you make yourself look ignorant.
This thread is full of self important people posing silly questions thinking they GOTCHA! and that's on a topic that truly has no relevance to their life in any way, shape or form. It is really bizarre.
Everyone take a step back and think about who's lives are being directly affected by this issue. Oh, not yours? Then stop being so bloody obtuse about it all, you make yourself look ignorant.
Don't you realise that by saying that, YOU'RE the intolerant one? When's it going to end? Soon we won't even be able to leave our houses without the PC police saying we're discriminating against being indoors
Anyway, back to the issue at hand, and that is Apu. I think @Manicmania raises several completely valid points in his post near the top of P2, but I'd like to comment on some of them:
- Apu's story arc is excellent. Yes. I see Much Apu About Nothing in the same ballpark as Homer's Phobia, in terms of how societal issues were challenged. However, it's a little disingenuous to focus on a handful of episodes considering there have been 600+ in the show's run. Equally - you're absolutely right MM in that the show has dealt with issues he'd be affected by really rather well.
- I've already talked about the other stereotypes, and how they're not as offensive. The key thing to think about is precedent. Was there already a precedent as to how South Asian people were viewed? No. And having Apu with a silly accent, working as a corner shop guy, saying "Thank you come again!", and so forth, reinforced stereotypes. And because he has different colour skin, apparently that's what all brown people are like - in some people's eyes. (Genuinely - if you're watching in a less ethnically diverse area of America, he's gonna be your only exposure to South Asian people, so what else would you think of them?)
- I don't find Bumblebee Man particularly funny, though he is based on a Univision Spanish language character, and I think that comes from a place of love for his slapstick (can't recall the guy's name at the minute). I'm not at ease with him.
- Many of the other stereotypes listed are of white peoples. I refer back to my point about societal precedent. When it comes to things like Homer in Brazil (which I thought was VERY tired), or when they visit Japan, the thing here is that these were one-off episodes. Thus, the lampooning isn't sustained like Apu's character, if that makes sense. (That, to me, doesn't make some aspects of these vacation episodes any less offensive. But I suppose part of the issue again is prevalence.)
- "But yeah focus on the silly accent." Yes, we should. Kumail Nanjiani, a Pakistani-American actor, was asked more than once to do "the Apu accent" to land roles. I mean, how offensive is that?!
---------------------
I hope I'm making sense here. But Apu needs to be reimagined, IMO. Get an Indian voice actor in, at the very least, given how regular a character he is.
Hi Paddy thanks for responding to some of my points (first person to do this) and for a fantastic post - I'm going to leave aside the first part of the post (mainly because you are absolutely right and I would have a hard time trying to refute it even if I wanted to) Hope you don't mind that although I accept if that sounds like a bit of a cop out - as I said before I am willing to admit when i'm in the wrong and your post has given me some pause.
I'd like to respond to a few of your other points if I may -
Point 1 - I disagree that it is disingenuous to say Apu has been involved in several high profile and major Simpsons storylines in the shows 600+ show run as if it should be more- this is not a show with 6 or 7 characters but hundreds of regular recurring characters - the fact that it was so easy and fast at hand for me to recall several episodes that Apu was central to should speak volumes for that.
I also think it's important to note that not all of those storylines I pointed out were race or even religion based - having affairs, issues with conception, losing ones job and purpose are universal and race played no part in them - for a show about stereotypes that says quite a lot?
I think you are probably right with your second point regarding precedent, minorities are criminally under represented and when they are they are nearly always stereotypes, however I feel that your argument is more valid for 25 years ago when the show started - that may have been the case back then but now there are other examples of Asians on US TV (big bang theory springs to mind immediately) so why does a change need to be made now rather than back then?
....Actually thinking back ER had an Asian character - (British Asian no less and a doctor) so other Asian characters were out there at the time as well and on big (at the time) shows.
Nothing to add on Bumblebee man - I agree with you.
The key for me is that the show is not discerning about what cultures and nationalities it lampoons - some jokes miss the mark, some are not used as much as others, but the examples are there and there is no clamour to remove or change any of those characters. Also as an endemic part of the show, even if the racial stereotypes are different surely there is a cumulative effect and a pattern there that should have been pointed out by now but hasn't? How many times do you need to see Kookie Kwan (stay off the west side) or Akira the chef with their appalling interpretations of accents before they cumulatively equal the portrayal of an Apu? In the context of this show where there is so many potentially offensive portrayals to different peoples of the world is it right or fair that only one example is being singled out for criticism? What message does that send out?
I understand what you are saying about the character of Apu being a big part of the show, so thus it being a sustained stereotype over and above any other examples I could come up with - that's a fair point, but that wasn't the case when he first started in the show was it? It was just another one note stereotype character that got popular and thus got more appearances. Also I think the fact that the character has been developed and changed so much from their first appearance to now (perhaps more so than any other character in the show I would argue) says a lot about the character, the portrayal and the positive response the character gets from fans and viewers. If the character didn't work or wasn't popular, he wouldn't be in the show half as much and thus the sustained role he plays is down to his success and popularity, rather than a nefarious plot to insult a race of people - which I think speaking of disingenuous assertions is one from from people on the other side of the debate as well.
Yes you are right - the people who asked Mr Nanjiani to do an "Apu" accent were completely offensive and racist. But why are we blaming the character for the actions and statements of a racist casting producer though?
Thanks again for the response sorry for all the long posts!
This thread is full of self important people posing silly questions thinking they GOTCHA! and that's on a topic that truly has no relevance to their life in any way, shape or form. It is really bizarre.
Everyone take a step back and think about who's lives are being directly affected by this issue. Oh, not yours? Then stop being so bloody obtuse about it all, you make yourself look ignorant.
People (on sites like this/traditional media/in the public sphere) are stepping up and trying to impose their personal morality on the rest of society. If there are huge holes in the points of view being out forward I think it's the duty of people who are less emotionally invested to point them out. Also it's quite good fun to poke sticks at those who regard themselves as being paragons of virtue :-)
Get an Indian voice actor in, at the very least, given how regular a character he is.
I dont see how anyone can have a problem with that.
Get a voice actor in who can do a better Indian accent.
Indian guys tend to be the best at Indian accents. That was much of the point of the post.
Probably, but I am not a racist.
There is more to the job than just reading from a script and if the part is to be accurate it is not a pure Indian accent, it is the voice of an Indian who has lived most of his life in America. There maybe Americans of Indian or Pakistan heritage better suited to the part? There are some great mimics that are neither of American or Asian heritage that maybe better and could cover more than just one character like at present?
Best not to prejudge things I find.
Do you think it would be racist to advertise for an Indian actor for a voice over?
Do you think one should advertise a job with a preconceived idea what races you are going to exclude from getting the job?
Have... have you just implied I'm a racist?! Or am I reading that completely wrong?
As for the part itself - Apu is ethnically Indian. Have an ethnically Indian guy voice him.
When it comes to your questions - if you're specifically looking for an Indian accent, then no it's not racist to ask for an Indian person.
Advertising a job where race is not a determining factor in how well someone can play the role and racially discriminating is, of course, racist.
If you're about to say something like "Aha! But a voiceover is just a voice!" - then, well, no. If a white man is doing an Indian accent then it contributes to a lack of ethnically diverse representation in acting, and there's the chance that the accent may offend.
Why not minimise risk and stay true to a character's background by getting someone of the same background to voice him?
(... Wow, am I really having to explain this?)
Wow, Have I really having to explain this AGAIN!
For a starter, “ a white man” may well be Indian. Spike Milligan was Indian. Ever heard a white Bajan talking? Or a white African?
Too far away? Ever heard a footballer who has learnt his English in (say) Liverpool, speak with a slightly scouse accent? Being white should not exclude someone from the job and you seem to have ruled them out.
Secondly, I made the point that Abu has lived in the USA for years so he would have picked up some of the accent and expressions of those he came in contact with. So for the character to “stay true” to that background you would be looking for someone with that background to play the voice. i.e an American with Asian background. Those criticising the program seemed to have missed this point, as you have.
I was not suggesting you or anyone else is racist, but the solutions suggested could be viewed as racist or wrong.
I can also do without the sanctimonious comments. I suspect you now feel the same.
As an aside: James Bond the most English of spy’s. Should Sean Connery have been allowed to play the part?
I have a more general point aimed at the rest of the thread. In the 80's/early 90's there was a show called Desmonds. It starred a group of Afro-Caribbean actors who all had Caribbean accents. When I was at school I heard many white children mocking that accent and aiming their mocking at black (British) kids.
Desmonds was ground breaking, progressive (and great) TV at the time but was still mocked by kids who weren't brought up right and thought it was ok. That was the antithesis of a racist show and yet it was still used by ignorant white kids.
Does anyone really think if Apu had been voiced by a genuine South Asian that kids and ignorant people wouldn't have used the accent anyway to be racist to others?
As with everything, its about education and being brought up to respect people and their differences - ignorance and stupidity knows no bounds.
I have watched the documentary for a second time and made a number of notes and questions as I did - its quite a long post and I want to go over it again before I put it up so I won't post it today, but I'm not having that dismissive "pc gone mad" accusation levelled at me, and I hope it wasn't, as I think I have argued my points so far in a fair way and listened and considered the responses carefully - apart from one or two who have actually responded to the points I've made all I have heard is "watch the documentary" and that isn't a discussion, that's a dismissal designed to shut down the debate.
Anyway I have watched it now. Twice. And I have a lot to say about it.
Oh and before you all say it, yes I do have too much time on my hands I'm off work with a broken leg and bored out of my mind!
I have watched the documentary for a second time and made a number of notes and questions as I did - its quite a long post and I want to go over it again before I put it up so I won't post it today, but I'm not having that dismissive "pc gone mad" accusation levelled at me, and I hope it wasn't, as I think I have argued my points so far in a fair way and listened and considered the responses carefully - apart from one or two who have actually responded to the points I've made all I have heard is "watch the documentary" and that isn't a discussion, that's a dismissal designed to shut down the debate.
Anyway I have watched it now. Twice. And I have a lot to say about it.
Oh and before you all say it, yes I do have too much time on my hands I'm off work with a broken leg and bored out of my mind!
Good, glad you watched it. Hope you're on the mend soon.
I have a more general point aimed at the rest of the thread. In the 80's/early 90's there was a show called Desmonds. It starred a group of Afro-Caribbean actors who all had Caribbean accents. When I was at school I heard many white children mocking that accent and aiming their mocking at black (British) kids.
Desmonds was ground breaking, progressive (and great) TV at the time but was still mocked by kids who weren't brought up right and thought it was ok. That was the antithesis of a racist show and yet it was still used by ignorant white kids.
Does anyone really think if Apu had been voiced by a genuine South Asian that kids and ignorant people wouldn't have used the accent anyway to be racist to others?
As with everything, its about education and being brought up to respect people and their differences - ignorance and stupidity knows no bounds.
It would make no difference.
Kids will be kids...trying to find their place in the herd.
In my day - Joey Deacon was the butt of all jokes.
I have a more general point aimed at the rest of the thread. In the 80's/early 90's there was a show called Desmonds. It starred a group of Afro-Caribbean actors who all had Caribbean accents. When I was at school I heard many white children mocking that accent and aiming their mocking at black (British) kids.
Desmonds was ground breaking, progressive (and great) TV at the time but was still mocked by kids who weren't brought up right and thought it was ok. That was the antithesis of a racist show and yet it was still used by ignorant white kids.
Does anyone really think if Apu had been voiced by a genuine South Asian that kids and ignorant people wouldn't have used the accent anyway to be racist to others?
As with everything, its about education and being brought up to respect people and their differences - ignorance and stupidity knows no bounds.
It would make no difference.
Kids will be kids...trying to find their place in the herd.
In my day - Joey Deacon was the butt of all jokes.
And in mine, Fat Thin Big nose Big ears Ginger Tall Short
The list is endless, children can very cruel and thoughtless, their own survival in a large number of people takes precedent.
So I just ported my post onto word to spell check and stuff and realised the word count is legit 945 words - I can't subject you guys to that and it would be nigh on impossible to debate, so I'm just going to take some of my stronger points and questions and leave some of the more superficial issues with the documentary...
First off I want to make it clear that my intention in this isn't to belittle or denigrate the documentary makers views, he knows more than me about his situation, culture and history better than I ever could, and my views are far less important on these issues. I am also not suggesting he is wrong about Apu being a racist stereotype in any way (he is)
Here's some issues though;
My biggest gripe; The Whoopi Goldberg interview; - They literally compared the voicing and portrayal of Apu with black-face/minstrel shows. That may be arguably a fair comparison, but why was it not even mentioned that white people literally voice black characters on the show? - that definitely IS a valid comparison and it wasn't even touched on. It wasn't even hinted at that Hank Azaria voices Carl and Officer Lou, Harry Shearer voices Dr Hibbert etc etc. I understand that the topic may have been from an South Asian perspective and doesn't fit the narrative but how the hell can you talk about blackface and not call out that clear example of it for contrast??
I'm surprised at Whoopi as an African American person not pointing that out there - My only conclusion is she either didn't know, or she DID point that out and it was edited out of the documentary because it would have taken away from the impact the maker was trying to emphasise. To me leaving out facts like that really weakens the argument as a whole and makes it look like it's less about reporting the whole truth and more about reporting selected truth.
There was also a segment with Vox pops with the public that emphasised that point - essentially the people interviewed were informed about the fact Apu was voiced by a white guy and they were all filmed showing their shocked reactions. That included an African American woman - wouldn't she have been more shocked and angry to learn that white people were voicing the black characters? Again wasn't even touched upon.
Even the very first picture of Hank Azaria in the film, where the film maker introduces him to the screen and explains he is a voice actor who voices various characters, below his picture are the images of 5 Simpsons characters he also voices - all white ones. It seemed very deliberate to me, and I believe it is because he knows it doesn't back up his assertion that Apu is the only problem with the show (which he says he likes apart from that one character - Apu)
I have other examples of this selective reporting of the facts to lead the audience but I realise I have already gone on longer than I intended even with this shortened post so i'll leave it there.
But would anyone care to explain that one to me? I find it unethical and it makes me mistrustful of the maker - somebody less informed than me on The Simpsons that watched that documentary would come away with the impression that Apu is the only non white character that is voiced by a white guy - which is not the truth - is it any wonder people find the conclusions shocking and demand a change without understanding the context of the other non white characters? (I can name 14 non white characters in the show that are voiced by white people by the way)
Does not the fact that people were shocked to learn that Apu’s was voiced by a white person and were completely unaware they were voicing other black characters suggest that this should and is a non issue? If they didn’t know, they were not offended.
There is nothing even slightly racist in this at all. The guy is getting paid to do a job. Are we going to pass a law that no one can try to imitate anyone else not of their race? Dual nationality people will be hard one to draft!
The program makers have tried to use this to sensationalise it. If the voice was performed by a shop keeper from Nagpur it would not change anything.
If that was the compromise offered, would everyone then be happy?
I would suggest that they failed, which would be a pity.
Does not the fact that people were shocked to learn that Apu’s was voiced by a white person and were completely unaware they were voicing other black characters suggest that this should and is a non issue? If they didn’t know, they were not offended.
There is nothing even slightly racist in this at all. The guy is getting paid to do a job. Are we going to pass a law that no one can try to imitate anyone else not of their race? Dual nationality people will be hard one to draft!
The program makers have tried to use this to sensationalise it. If the voice was performed by a shop keeper from Nagpur it would not change anything.
If that was the compromise offered, would everyone then be happy?
I would suggest that they failed, which would be a pity.
Well it was a sample size of three people a white male, a white female and an African American woman - not exactly huge or representative, only one of them infers any sort of interest in the show in the interview (the man says he found out a lot later on that he was voiced by a white guy suggesting he is a watcher - the other two don't even say that they watched the show - that section is all edited to death and choppy like a lot of these interview style documentaries are so it's hard to get a proper handle on who really knows what or even what the full question was from the interviewer).
Nearly everyone else in the programme seems to be well aware of it (lots of people of Indian descent were interviewed and to a person they all knew, hated the character and thought it was racist - one interviewee was even on the actual show as a member of Apu's family but as a second generation who was without an accent) so I don't think it's fair to say that it is a non-issue - it was for them.
I won't beat about the bush, there is no doubt in my mind that the accent is racist and if a white guy was in the street doing that exact accent it would not be appropriate or acceptable behaviour - if he was doing it aimed at a South Asian man also on the street then i'm actually fairly certain that WOULD be breaking the law as well.
None of that was my point regarding the documentary, I am coming from a completely different angle - the whole show is full of stereotypes, racist characters and accents, and one group of people getting offended shouldn't be dismissed, but shouldn't be pandered to either since the show is so indiscriminate in who it mocks and lampoons - your argument seems to be that there is no racism at all, which is yours to make but I respectfully disagree - racism is all over the show - trouble is if you watch the documentary then apparently it's just a "problem with Apu" and the rest of the show is fine - (that was said directly by the maker of the documentary)
Comments
Everyone take a step back and think about who's lives are being directly affected by this issue. Oh, not yours? Then stop being so bloody obtuse about it all, you make yourself look ignorant.
I wonder what was taboo in the 70s is now funny today? Simpsons was pretty controversial when it first came out and now looks very tame compared to Family Guy and South Park. God knows how those shows have escaped all of this!
I'd like to respond to a few of your other points if I may -
Point 1 - I disagree that it is disingenuous to say Apu has been involved in several high profile and major Simpsons storylines in the shows 600+ show run as if it should be more- this is not a show with 6 or 7 characters but hundreds of regular recurring characters - the fact that it was so easy and fast at hand for me to recall several episodes that Apu was central to should speak volumes for that.
I also think it's important to note that not all of those storylines I pointed out were race or even religion based - having affairs, issues with conception, losing ones job and purpose are universal and race played no part in them - for a show about stereotypes that says quite a lot?
I think you are probably right with your second point regarding precedent, minorities are criminally under represented and when they are they are nearly always stereotypes, however I feel that your argument is more valid for 25 years ago when the show started - that may have been the case back then but now there are other examples of Asians on US TV (big bang theory springs to mind immediately) so why does a change need to be made now rather than back then?
....Actually thinking back ER had an Asian character - (British Asian no less and a doctor) so other Asian characters were out there at the time as well and on big (at the time) shows.
Nothing to add on Bumblebee man - I agree with you.
The key for me is that the show is not discerning about what cultures and nationalities it lampoons - some jokes miss the mark, some are not used as much as others, but the examples are there and there is no clamour to remove or change any of those characters.
Also as an endemic part of the show, even if the racial stereotypes are different surely there is a cumulative effect and a pattern there that should have been pointed out by now but hasn't? How many times do you need to see Kookie Kwan (stay off the west side) or Akira the chef with their appalling interpretations of accents before they cumulatively equal the portrayal of an Apu? In the context of this show where there is so many potentially offensive portrayals to different peoples of the world is it right or fair that only one example is being singled out for criticism? What message does that send out?
I understand what you are saying about the character of Apu being a big part of the show, so thus it being a sustained stereotype over and above any other examples I could come up with - that's a fair point, but that wasn't the case when he first started in the show was it? It was just another one note stereotype character that got popular and thus got more appearances.
Also I think the fact that the character has been developed and changed so much from their first appearance to now (perhaps more so than any other character in the show I would argue) says a lot about the character, the portrayal and the positive response the character gets from fans and viewers. If the character didn't work or wasn't popular, he wouldn't be in the show half as much and thus the sustained role he plays is down to his success and popularity, rather than a nefarious plot to insult a race of people - which I think speaking of disingenuous assertions is one from from people on the other side of the debate as well.
Yes you are right - the people who asked Mr Nanjiani to do an "Apu" accent were completely offensive and racist. But why are we blaming the character for the actions and statements of a racist casting producer though?
Thanks again for the response sorry for all the long posts!
For a starter, “ a white man” may well be Indian. Spike Milligan was Indian. Ever heard a white Bajan talking? Or a white African?
Too far away? Ever heard a footballer who has learnt his English in (say) Liverpool, speak with a slightly scouse accent? Being white should not exclude someone from the job and you seem to have ruled them out.
Secondly, I made the point that Abu has lived in the USA for years so he would have picked up some of the accent and expressions of those he came in contact with. So for the character to “stay true” to that background you would be looking for someone with that background to play the voice. i.e an American with Asian background. Those criticising the program seemed to have missed this point, as you have.
I was not suggesting you or anyone else is racist, but the solutions suggested could be viewed as racist or wrong.
I can also do without the sanctimonious comments. I suspect you now feel the same.
As an aside: James Bond the most English of spy’s. Should Sean Connery have been allowed to play the part?
Desmonds was ground breaking, progressive (and great) TV at the time but was still mocked by kids who weren't brought up right and thought it was ok. That was the antithesis of a racist show and yet it was still used by ignorant white kids.
Does anyone really think if Apu had been voiced by a genuine South Asian that kids and ignorant people wouldn't have used the accent anyway to be racist to others?
As with everything, its about education and being brought up to respect people and their differences - ignorance and stupidity knows no bounds.
Just by a show of hands, who here has seen Hari Kondabolu's documentary? Once again it addresses everything brought up on here and many things not.
I was pretty confident I could predict the “PC gone mad” crap that would be spouted by the usual suspects. I wasn’t wrong.
Watch the documentary
Anyway I have watched it now. Twice. And I have a lot to say about it.
Oh and before you all say it, yes I do have too much time on my hands I'm off work with a broken leg and bored out of my mind!
Kids will be kids...trying to find their place in the herd.
In my day - Joey Deacon was the butt of all jokes.
Fat
Thin
Big nose
Big ears
Ginger
Tall
Short
The list is endless, children can very cruel and thoughtless, their own survival in a large number of people takes precedent.
First off I want to make it clear that my intention in this isn't to belittle or denigrate the documentary makers views, he knows more than me about his situation, culture and history better than I ever could, and my views are far less important on these issues. I am also not suggesting he is wrong about Apu being a racist stereotype in any way (he is)
Here's some issues though;
My biggest gripe; The Whoopi Goldberg interview; - They literally compared the voicing and portrayal of Apu with black-face/minstrel shows. That may be arguably a fair comparison, but why was it not even mentioned that white people literally voice black characters on the show? - that definitely IS a valid comparison and it wasn't even touched on. It wasn't even hinted at that Hank Azaria voices Carl and Officer Lou, Harry Shearer voices Dr Hibbert etc etc. I understand that the topic may have been from an South Asian perspective and doesn't fit the narrative but how the hell can you talk about blackface and not call out that clear example of it for contrast??
I'm surprised at Whoopi as an African American person not pointing that out there -
My only conclusion is she either didn't know, or she DID point that out and it was edited out of the documentary because it would have taken away from the impact the maker was trying to emphasise. To me leaving out facts like that really weakens the argument as a whole and makes it look like it's less about reporting the whole truth and more about reporting selected truth.
There was also a segment with Vox pops with the public that emphasised that point - essentially the people interviewed were informed about the fact Apu was voiced by a white guy and they were all filmed showing their shocked reactions. That included an African American woman - wouldn't she have been more shocked and angry to learn that white people were voicing the black characters? Again wasn't even touched upon.
Even the very first picture of Hank Azaria in the film, where the film maker introduces him to the screen and explains he is a voice actor who voices various characters, below his picture are the images of 5 Simpsons characters he also voices - all white ones. It seemed very deliberate to me, and I believe it is because he knows it doesn't back up his assertion that Apu is the only problem with the show (which he says he likes apart from that one character - Apu)
I have other examples of this selective reporting of the facts to lead the audience but I realise I have already gone on longer than I intended even with this shortened post so i'll leave it there.
But would anyone care to explain that one to me? I find it unethical and it makes me mistrustful of the maker - somebody less informed than me on The Simpsons that watched that documentary would come away with the impression that Apu is the only non white character that is voiced by a white guy - which is not the truth - is it any wonder people find the conclusions shocking and demand a change without understanding the context of the other non white characters? (I can name 14 non white characters in the show that are voiced by white people by the way)
There is nothing even slightly racist in this at all. The guy is getting paid to do a job. Are we going to pass a law that no one can try to imitate anyone else not of their race? Dual nationality people will be hard one to draft!
The program makers have tried to use this to sensationalise it. If the voice was performed by a shop keeper from Nagpur it would not change anything.
If that was the compromise offered, would everyone then be happy?
I would suggest that they failed, which would be a pity.
Nearly everyone else in the programme seems to be well aware of it (lots of people of Indian descent were interviewed and to a person they all knew, hated the character and thought it was racist - one interviewee was even on the actual show as a member of Apu's family but as a second generation who was without an accent) so I don't think it's fair to say that it is a non-issue - it was for them.
I won't beat about the bush, there is no doubt in my mind that the accent is racist and if a white guy was in the street doing that exact accent it would not be appropriate or acceptable behaviour - if he was doing it aimed at a South Asian man also on the street then i'm actually fairly certain that WOULD be breaking the law as well.
None of that was my point regarding the documentary, I am coming from a completely different angle - the whole show is full of stereotypes, racist characters and accents, and one group of people getting offended shouldn't be dismissed, but shouldn't be pandered to either since the show is so indiscriminate in who it mocks and lampoons - your argument seems to be that there is no racism at all, which is yours to make but I respectfully disagree - racism is all over the show - trouble is if you watch the documentary then apparently it's just a "problem with Apu" and the rest of the show is fine - (that was said directly by the maker of the documentary)