| DonFerrari said: You see the problem is when you try to put people not liking it as outraged to put as if it is irrational thinking of others. In case you don't know in Brazil we had a lot of black people with black slaves (I think it is also possible that it happened in USA as well), one of then is today celebrated by all as a black people freedom fighter (Zumbi dos Palmares). He was the head of what we call Quilombo (a place where the fled black slaves gone) and while at that he had slaves of himself. Sure a story based on USA could have the slave owners as black and the slaves as white (even if we would see a lot of backlash from people saying that was made to show black people as bad or minimizing the suffering from black people), that would work if you had as general all white as slaves and all black as free people and/or slave owners. But if you make a single white guy a slave for a black person while all the rest is black slaves for white people then you better explain why that is the case because people would see it as odd if not. Same way as someone black being children from all white family in an all white country and being royalty no less. No, people are complaining that making her non-white break the lore based on her heritage ( I already gave a solution, make all the family and country of that ethnicity). But you and the other people are trying to put as racism because for you guys that would be the only reason for someone to not applaud it. DNA and heritage aren't tradition, and breaking it without giving a very good explanation can impair the story (and even giving the explanation may also change the lore as well). Because if it was "the white skin give her power" it would make no difference "the green skin gives her power" or any other skin color. But when the reason for white skin is genetics and the parents then changing it is unnecessary and the cover up may make it even worse. |
Uh, where in my posts have I claimed that anyone bothered by this is racist? I am saying because it is a story and one that is adapted to a new medium, it's its own property and we don't need to be so outraged.
When I say outraged, I am talking about people who are cursing up and down on this thread and saying they won't even give the show a shot because the experience has been ruined for them despite them not even watching a single scene.
Yes, I agree that that solution you stated could work. But we haven't seen the show to know why Ciri is black while her family is white and her countrymen are white. Maybe the story has changed to the point that her origin is different (adopted from another land, whatever). That may be a reason for contention, because fans of the series may want a more faithful adaptation. I don't see anything wrong with that. Just the vitriol expressed and the outrage over that one change is a bit much, in my honest opinion. It's even become politicized because "this is just another SJW move" when guess what? This is adaptation is an independent property. The games do a good job of adapting the books (or so I've heard, never read the books) so if you want to see the books brought to life, I guess that is an alternative. It's my opinion that this change is not a deal breaker, but everyone is entitled to their own opinion. Just some people are very fervent when anything is different (especially something as small as one character's skin color in a story that is rich with lore and characters) and are repelled by change, and it's fairly jarring to witness.
