Montana Smith
Active member
Rocket Surgeon said:So the racism is subjective, or biased...which of course is prejudice in favor of one thing, which in turn is a preconceived opinion not based on reason.
I don't think racism is ever based on reason.
It might be reasonable to dislike small groups of people for the values they express, but never a whole race, since a whole race does not think or act alike.
Every race has its racist elements, but I don't think Lucas and Spielberg would intentionally set out to offend large sections of the world when they're in the business of producing something for a global market. Hence there are positive representations of race throughout the films, along with negative ones.
From t'other thread:
Smiffy said:Charges of racism made by the victims are a means towards self-empowerment. In many cases, as illustrated by history, the charges are well founded.
In post-colonial studies the views of dominant and subaltern can sometimes get a little bent out of shape. Cultures who have every right to be outraged by the imperialism of the past sometimes tackle instances in the media as if nothing has changed.
Something like Temple of Doom isn't a statement of fact, a recreation of past actions, or an assertion one way or another. Something like Temple of Doom is also more problematic, since exposing its failings exposes only the failings of the past, moderated by some modern sensibilities.
Lucas took the non-politically correct past and replayed it for a modern audience. Not as a political statement, but a cultural one, i.e., cinematic.
By 1930s/40s standards ROTLA Indy is a hero. By later standards he’s an anti-hero sometimes displaying unfashionable attitudes towards Third World peoples.
In TOD we see Indy forced to confront his own attitudes. He puts aside fortune and glory to do the better thing. This part of his character derives from his conception in the later twentieth century. Yet, he is always an inspiration of earlier imperialistic times. The Idol-grabbing Indiana Jones of 1936 still stands, because, barring 'Special Editions', that was the alternately heroic/anti-heroic character which Lucas and Spielberg wanted to present.
Indy is a conflicted character who spans the attitudes of the 1930s and the 1980s. And not to mention that the world he inhabits isn't really ours, but one of Lucas and Spielberg's imagination. Hence the China and India of TOD and their respective cultures and histories do not exactly match those that exist (and existed) in our world.