Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
The Watch (Terry Pratchett) [BBC America]
Options
Comments
-
-
Scarlet for ya. The artwork on the books reflects how Pratchett imagined the characters. Lady Sybil was not a black slim vigilante and the Patrician was a man. Now people can get their panties in a bunch and insult other posters as much as they like but it will not change the reality that the American version is nothing but a woke attempt at marketing a different story to a new audience by pretending to be something it isn't.
Book reading Pratchett fans will be appalled but non Pratchett readers seeing it on TV will probably lap it up. It is not The Watch and I'll be giving it a miss.
I agree with you it's an American version, and for reasons known only to themselves they are trying to be 'edgy' - call that 'woke' if you like, and it's not what Pratchett wrote so, imo, they should just go off and create their own original story if they want and leave his alone.
But it's not the fault of feminism.
And the book covers are chosen by the publishers - rarely do the authors get a say - and which version? I bought each work as they were first published so I have them going back to the 80s right up to the Shepard's Crown and the artwork changes according to publication editions/dates.
You know what they say about judging a book by it's cover
0 -
-
-
Join Date:Posts: 33867
As far as I know Pratchett had little enough to do with the covers.
Sure, in the first book, Twoflower is drawn as a sort of four-eyed mutant because the artist didn't understand that they were describing glasses.
Wait, what? Really? LOL, mortified for the illustrator in that case!
*goes off to google*0 -
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
Bannasidhe wrote: »I agree with you it's an American version, and for reasons known only to themselves they are trying to be 'edgy' - call that 'woke' if you like, and it's not what Pratchett wrote so, imo, they should just go off and create their own original story if they want and leave his alone.
But it's not the fault of feminism.
And the book covers are chosen by the publishers - rarely do the authors get a say - and which version? I bought each work as they were first published so I have them going back to the 80s right up to the Shepard's Crown and the artwork changes according to publication editions/dates.
You know what they say about judging a book by it's cover
I never suggested blaming feminism. Pratchett female characters are usually strong capable independent women who don't rely on men to save them, in fact it's more likely them that saves the day. It's just another example of changing things for the sake of diversity. Yes, diversity is important but there's no need to change ethnicity of characters.
As soon as someone suggested having a black woman play a white female character it became a race issue. I'd agree that where a characters skin colour isn't a factor then it doesn't matter but most people imagine Lady Sybil as a middle aged white woman, not a young black woman. It's only a book, but the books are like old friends that I read again over the years so it is annoying to see that the television version isn't the same as the book, then again I won't be watching it. 0 -
I never suggested blaming feminism. Pratchett female characters are usually strong capable independent women who don't rely on men to save them, in fact it's more likely them that saves the day. It's just another example of changing things for the sake of diversity. Yes, diversity is important but there's no need to change ethnicity of characters.
As soon as someone suggested having a black woman play a white female character it became a race issue. I'd agree that where a characters skin colour isn't a factor then it doesn't matter but most people imagine Lady Sybil as a middle aged white woman, not a young black woman. It's only a book, but the books are like old friends that I read again over the years so it is annoying to see that the television version isn't the same as the book, then again I won't be watching it.
Apologies. You didn't. It was another poster. I just added that as a general comment in my reply to you.0 -
Advertisement
-
Stop moaning ffs wrote: »I’ve no idea what woke means but well aware of the people that use the term. Let’s leave it there.
That's a very juvenile statement to make, we'll have to agree to disagree. Some people can make a point and back it up, others jump on a high horse and don't notice that it's a donkey.
0 -
That's a very juvenile statement to make, we'll have to agree to disagree. Some people can make a point and back it up, others jump on a high horse and don't notice that it's a donkey.
Juvenile is using ridiculous terminology from the American far right and airlifting it and the accusation of ‘agenda’ into every single conversation possible.
It’s so transparent and tiresome.
You’re probably ‘triggered’ by the ‘trans’ in that last bit too given your earlier post0 -
-
Mark Hamill wrote: »She is white in the books but the white is never attached to anything so what difference does it make if its changed? How is it a factor? I don't think most readers would care if the only change was that she was now black.
The bigger issue is how she is good bit younger and how far her character is changed. That's the big problem with the whole thing - the heavy-handed alteration of character backgrounds and motivations. The relationships and character interactions are a large part of what makes Discworld so good. Substantially changing even a few of the main characters personalities is going to have knock-on effects and it's going to be very hard for it still feel connected and real.
As soon as someone suggested a black actress it was an issue. When casting for an actress for someone to play the character of Sybil a black actress would not even have been on the radar but somebody decided that they needed a strong black female character. Now while the black actress in Watchmen is absolutely fantastic the character of Lady Sybil is an entirely different fish. The fact that they've made her even younger is another aspect entirely.
This version seems to be like going to the cinema to see a film about Lassie and getting a film about Giraffes. I'm not really surprised that it's being shown in America and not the UK, European readers would be horrified. Diversity is a good thing, but we don't need to go out of the way to make white characters black for the sake of it. Lady Sybil is no more a young black woman than James Bond is black or a woman. Even with the female wizard, I mean they really couldn't have missed the point any worse than they did.
The Witches are portrayed as much better and more practical and clever than the Wizards and make do without all the fancy robes and spells and big dinners. The Witches are out in the world doing the real work and getting on with it while the Wizards are in USU stuffing themselves, bitching and sniping at each other. 0 -
-
-
Scarlet for ya. The artwork on the books reflects how Pratchett imagined the characters. Lady Sybil was not a black slim vigilante and the Patrician was a man. Now people can get their panties in a bunch and insult other posters as much as they like but it will not change the reality that the American version is nothing but a woke attempt at marketing a different story to a new audience by pretending to be something it isn't.
Book reading Pratchett fans will be appalled but non Pratchett readers seeing it on TV will probably lap it up. It is not The Watch and I'll be giving it a miss.
Scarlet for YOU. The covers are what Josh Kirby and Paul Kidby imagined the characters to be.
And which cover is The Colour of Magic that pops out to you?
Or none of the above?0 -
As soon as someone suggested a black actress it was an issue. When casting for an actress for someone to play the character of Sybil a black actress would not even have been on the radar but somebody decided that they needed a strong black female character. Now while the black actress in Watchmen is absolutely fantastic the character of Lady Sybil is an entirely different fish. The fact that they've made her even younger is another aspect entirely.
This version seems to be like going to the cinema to see a film about Lassie and getting a film about Giraffes. I'm not really surprised that it's being shown in America and not the UK, European readers would be horrified. Diversity is a good thing, but we don't need to go out of the way to make white characters black for the sake of it. Lady Sybil is no more a young black woman than James Bond is black or a woman.
Are you saying the difference between white and black people is like the difference between dogs and giraffes?
You are conflating the issue of changing her character (her motivations and her age, which impacted storylines in the books) with changing her race (which had no impact in books).
I don't see any problem with a black James Bond, Idris Elba would have made a good one without needing to change anything of the essence of the character. A female James Bond would require a bit of a change for the character as it is very strongly defined as male (that doesn't mean it would impossible, but better to make a different female character altogether).
Did you have an issue when they changed Red's character in the Shawshank Redemption movie? (White Irish in the book, Morgan Freeman in the movie).Even with the female wizard, I mean they really couldn't have missed the point any worse than they did.
The Witches are portrayed as much better and more practical and clever than the Wizards and make do without all the fancy robes and spells and big dinners. The Witches are out in the world doing the real work and getting on with it while the Wizards are in USU stuffing themselves, bitching and sniping at each other.
I agree that having a female wizard does miss the point, but that's because wizards in the book have specific hangups about women and there are books exploring this. Having a woman wizard would negate those books. However, I didn't actually see any announcement of female wizard, do you have a link?0 -
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
Sofiztikated wrote: »Scarlet for YOU. The covers are what Josh Kirby and Paul Kidby imagined the characters to be.
And which cover is The Colour of Magic that pops out to you?
Or none of the above?
Perhaps you could explain why you are posting images of the Colour of Magic when the thread is about The Watch? By casting an attractive young black actress in the role of an overweight middle aged upper class white woman they deliberately discriminated against actresses over the age of 40 and against white actresses. You might find that positive discrimination personally I find it ageist and racist. For many years now the leading actresses have complained that once they reach 30 they have huge problems getting roles in films. But you keep beating that it doesn't matter drum. You just aren't getting it. By all means, feel free to post an image from a Pratchett book with a young black Lady Sybil.0 -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
Advertisement