Racism and casting

[kate_nepveu]

This makes me want to merge my anti-racism icon with my headdesk icon:

As for Dave Karnes, his role as one of two Marines to locate McLaughlin and Jimeno by searching the pile when the professional rescuers had backed off is based on reported accounts and fictionalization, since he didn't cooperate with the film's producers. . . .

Had the filmmakers convinced Karnes to work with them, they also might not have missed a more glaring blunder. [Karnes, the] other Marine who helped locate the two trapped men and who until recently had not come forward, is not white as he was portrayed by the filmmakers. He is black.

—Slate, Oliver Stone's World Trade Center Fiction: How the rescue really happened.

Words fail me.

Edit 8/12 5pm: I mis-read the second quoted paragraph, taking the extended opening "The other Marine who helped locate the two trapped men and who until recently had not come forward" as a reference back to Karnes, reminding the reader who he was. I thought it awkwardly phrased and confusing, and so I edited the sentence with the bracketed text as above in an attempt to make it read more smoothly. Upon re-reading after comments below, it seems that the incorrectly-portrayed man was not Karnes, but was the other man. It accordingly further appears that the author of the Slate article did not interview this unnamed second Marine. It is therefore possible that the malfeasance of the filmmakers is less than I had stated below—though I maintain that their incorrect assumption was a product of unconscious racism.

However, I must reserve judgment on the full culpability of the filmmakers, because from the article, it is not clear whether: anything at all about this unnamed second Marine was known before he came forward "recently"; how long ago "recently" was; and, finally, whether the filmmakers made any attempt to find out who he was. If anyone can point me to sources regarding any of these matters, I would appreciate it. end edit

Edit 8/13 10am: brett_dunbar, who pointed out my mis-reading above, provides two links: (1) a DoD profile of Karnes that extensively quotes him about the rescues, and which to my reading gives Thomas an important role in the rescues, and (2) a New Pittsburgh Courier article about Thomas, "'World Trade Center' omits Black soldier", that quotes Thomas about the rescue and the movie. Read, as they say, the whole thing, but here are the bits about the movie:

The World Trade Center movie tells the story of the rescues of New York Port Authority police officers John McLoughlin and Will Jimeno from Ground Zero, as well as that of the men who rescued them. In real life, the officers were rescued by sergeants Karnes and Thomas. In the film, however, they were rescued by Karnes and PFC Dave Thomas; a composite character, played by William Mapother, a white actor, who is meant to represent Thomas.

World Trade Center producer Michael Shamberg said that they knew about Sgt. Thomas's role in the rescue, but were unable to find him when creating the film. He said producers didn't discover Thomas was a Black man until after they had started the movie. He also said that in spite of the fact that the film was co-written by McLoughlin and Jimeno was consulted for authenticity, no one ever asked them for a physical description of the man who helped save their lives.

"Frankly, we goofed--we learned when we were filming that he was an African-American," said Shamberg. “We would change it if we could. I actually called him and apologized, and he said he didn't mind. He was very gracious about it.”

Shamberg also apologized for another African-American officer, Bruce Reynolds, who was also portrayed as white in the movie.

Thomas, meanwhile, didn't learn the film was about his story until he saw the unmistakable image of two marines peering into a whole at Ground Zero during a commercial for the movie. He said that while he wasn't angry about how the film turned out, he does wish it could have been more realistic.

"If you're going to tell a story, you should try to get it as accurate as possible," he said. "Some of the things did bother me to a certain degree--I'm an African-American male, and there's a white character being depicted as myself. But I'm not upset. It's bigger than myself-It's bigger than Staff Sgt. Kearns. A lot of people lost their lives. That's what needs to be remembered."

My emphasis. So, I'm back to being just as angry at the filmmakers as at the beginning. end edit

Relevant reading: rachelmanija on multicultural casting: part one, part two. Though really, the level of depth in those posts would probably be lost on those filmmakers.

Edit 8/11 7pm: given that, as quoted in the article, "the filmmakers have repeatedly stated their desire to 'chronicle what happened as truthfully as we could,'", it is no longer permissible to say that the portrayal of Karnes was symbolic rather than historical. I will seriously lose my temper at the next person who attempts to use this as an excuse for the filmmakers casting a white person to portray a black person in a "truthful" portrayal of actual events. Understood? end edit

Comments

[scifantasy.livejournal.com]

No, I read you right, and I don't deny that it's really a stupid case. What I was saying was, the World Trade Center has a lot of weird racial repercussions.

[kate_nepveu]

Let's try this. You can "see how it would happen". How would that be?

[scifantasy.livejournal.com]

The way I can sort of see it, they didn't spend a lot of time (didn't spend enough time? Maybe) thinking about races in casting, because as with the statue, they thought in terms of "all races suffered." They didn't know Karnes's race, and he didn't step forward, and they didn't research it--which, yes, was a pretty stupid move--so they cast someone they liked. He's a symbol in the movie--the entire movie is a bloody symbol--so what his actual race is was not the focus of discussion in planning it.

[scifantasy.livejournal.com]

*cough* And by "cast someone they liked," I do not mean "someone white." I mean "someone they thought would do a good job in the role."

[kate_nepveu]

I am angry. Here's why:

1) I am angry at the film makers. I view this as a crystal-clear manifestation of racism, specifically the assumption that the default is white. This is particularly unforgiveable since they purport this movie to be a _truthful_ depiction of what happened, and had access to people who actually met and interviewed Karnes (the writer of the _Slate_ article), yet in their alleged pursuit of truth, never thought to check their default assumption that he was white.

2) I am angry at your statements. It is not accurate to say that Karnes is a symbol in the movie, or that the whole movie is a symbol, given the stated desires of those behind the movie to "chronicle what happened as truthfully as we could," as expressed in the linked article.

Based on this inaccurate and overly-generous assumption, your first comment spends twelve words on the example of racism that I posted about, where a racial minority is *excluded* from a work that purports to be the _truth_ of what happened, and nearly a hundred and fifty words on a different example, where racial minorities are *included* in a _symbol_ of what happened.

The two are not equivalent.

Do you understand why a comment linking the two seems to be dismissing the importance of the problem I posted about?

[scifantasy.livejournal.com]

Do you understand why a comment linking the two seems to be dismissing the importance of the problem I posted about?

Actually, yes, and I apologize for angering you. I guess the surface facts--the changing of a race of characters--brought the instance to mind. I just remembered the whole problem of race going completely out of whack after the attacks, and my memory latched onto the statue example which, in retrospect, was a bad one.

I'm not going to delete the comments...I don't like to rewrite history and un-say things, but I was wrong, and I do apologize.

never thought to check their default assumption that he was white

You're right. This is the central issue of it, and while again I can see that they did that, and it was and is a problem.

[scifantasy.livejournal.com]

while again I can see that they did that

This is a badly worded phrase, which I am a moron for reusing. What I mean is, I can understand what they did was not out of malice or overt racism, and it's not as if Oliver Stone and company are KKK members...but it's more subtle racism, and just as much (if not more) of a problem.

[kate_nepveu]

Thank you. I really appreciate that.

I've looked at a couple of reviews of the movie, and while a lot of them talk about it being meticulous *gnashes teeth*, all of them note the weird effect of the movie being so tightly focused on those specific events of that day, and very little discussion of the larger context. That's another reason I think it's really a shame that they cast a white actor to play a black rescuer; the presence of another non-white character would have helped hint at this larger context that you mentioned.

[scifantasy.livejournal.com]

Thank you. I really appreciate that.

Good. I didn't mean to upset you. My own feelings about the events and the events around it are...horribly confused, and mixed up with my memories. Including several things which I look back on and kick myself for. So I wrote quite confusedly...and badly.

[dd-b.livejournal.com]

This clarifies things some. Previously, what I was reading was that Karnes hadn't come forward. It sounded to me like the movie people could easily have *not known* his race. Now that you say they had easy access to people who had met Karnes in person, it sounds considerably different.

It's a symptom of this being a racist society that this matters so much. But it *is*, so it *does*, yes.

[kate_nepveu]

It sounded to me like the movie people could easily have *not known* his race

Sure. But in the absence of actual knowledge, they just relied on their default assumptions and made no effort to check it (or, possibly, they didn't even recognize that they were making an *assumption*)--which I deduce from the fact that they could have asked the _Slate_ writer who interviewed him and didn't.

Mind, if they hadn't had access to the _Slate_ writer, that wouldn't have excused them from trying to find out, given their stated goal of being truthful. I'm using the _Slate_ writer's knowledge as evidence of their lack of interest, nothing more.

[brett-dunbar.livejournal.com]

1) I am angry at the film makers. I view this as a crystal-clear manifestation of racism, specifically the assumption that the default is white. This is particularly unforgivable since they purport this movie to be a _truthful_ depiction of what happened, and had access to people who actually met and interviewed Karnes (the writer of the _Slate_ article), yet in their alleged pursuit of truth, never thought to check their default assumption that he was white.

It is a little more understandable if you are aware that less than 3% of New York City's firefighters are black, a little over 3% are hispanic. So something over 90% are white. I suppose Stone was more concerned with the symbolism of the story rather than precise details. He just assumed that Karnes was typical of New York firefighters, and didn't think that race mattered much.

The parallel with the proposed statue is that in both cases the artist was more interested in the overall theme than the details of the precise incident being used to illustrate the theme. The statue used three models of different races to symbolise unity in the face of attack, rather than either the actual firefighters or three generic white models. The difference the statue would have made the changes deliberately to make a specific comment, Stone made changes due to carelessness.

[kate_nepveu]

Karnes isn't a firefighter. He's a Marine. It says so right in the bit I quoted.

And people keep saying that the movie was more concerned with symbolism, when that is *explicitly contradicted* by the filmmakers' own statements.

I feel that your comment is attempting to minimize the seriousness of the racism expressed here, and I am not convinced.

[brett-dunbar.livejournal.com]

I think you are seeing racism where there isn't any. Laziness and complacency would seem to fit rather than racism, not checking every detail when making the film just checking those that seemed relevant. The filmmaker was concerned with conveying the important elements of that particular incident without fully checking some of the superficial details, like the eye colour, skin colour or hair colour of some of the participants.

Stone is an conspiracy theorist loon but doesn't seem from this to be a racist.

[kate_nepveu]

I am not saying that he is overtly racist. I am saying that he, or whoever cast Karnes, is unconsciously racist because, DESPITE SAYING that that they wanted the movie to be as truthful as possible, they ASSUMED that they knew the race of a major player, which just HAPPENED to be white.

In other words, laziness and complacency are NOT INCOMPATIBLE with racism. They are, in face, perfectly compatible.

And skin color is NOT a superficial detail when it means that a racial minority is erased from a purportedly-historical portrayal.

Further, I am not going to apologize for using all-caps, because I would actually be shouting at this point. I suggest you consider techniques 2 and 6 in How to Suppress Discussions of Racism if you need further explanation of why I am angry.

[brett-dunbar.livejournal.com]

Actually, on re-reading the article, Karnes himself is white, it's the other Marine involved in the rescue (who's name isn't given) who is black. Karnes had re-enlisted and was not easy to contact. The man in question had not, at the time, come forwards, so the filmmakers didn't know who he was and may not have had direct contact with anyone who actually knew who he was. Karnes knew but wasn't cooperating with the filmmakers and may not actually have mentioned it to anyone who was. The gaffe concerns the race of a minor character a fact which was actually fairly hard to check at the time.

[kate_nepveu]

You are correct that I misread the part about Karnes; I thought it was awkward wording trying to place Karnes back in context.

I maintain that the error is unconscious racism, which I note you have not addressed.

[brett-dunbar.livejournal.com]

Possibly it does, although as you do have to cast somebody in the role and that somebody will have a race, it might not. It hard to determine the presence of this kind of unconsious assumption without a lot more incidents.

According to this Karnes knew the other guy only as Sgt Thomas. (http://www.defendamerica.mil/profiles/sep2003/pr091203a.html) Sgt Jason L. Thomas's own views on the matter are reported here (http://newpittsburghcourieronline.com/articlelive/articles/35730/1/World-Trade-Center-omits-Black-soldier/WTC-movies-unsung-hero.html)

[rilina.livejournal.com]

It hard to determine the presence of this kind of unconsious assumption without a lot more incidents.

Well, given that there's a long tradition in American pop culture of (1) not telling minority stories or (2) actively white-washing minorities out of stories, I think the existence of the white default and its pernicious effects is pretty well established.

Example of #1: Consider the racial representation found on most American tv shows. Diverse casts tend to be the exception rather than the rule; even when minority actors are cast, they are often limited to minor and/or stereotypical roles.

Example of #2: The recent miniseries adaptation of Ursula K. Le Guin's Earthsea books cast white actors in roles that are explicitly describes as those of people of color in the book. One of the few exceptions in this white-washing was the role of Ogion, played by Danny Glover. However, the net result of leaving this one role black in an otherwise almost wholly white cast was that Ogion became little more than an example of the magical negro.

[kate_nepveu]

Thanks for finding those links.

It sounds to me from reading them that Thomas's role in the rescue was quite significant, nearly as much as Karnes'; Karnes is presented as the one planning to go on the search & rescue mission, but Thomas was the first, and for a while only, one to go with him.

There's also a picture of Thomas in the second article of him in uniform in front of a great deal of wreckage; it's not explicitly stated that it was taken at the WTC, but I think that's a reasonable assumption.

Most importantly, here's what the second article says:

The World Trade Center movie tells the story of the rescues of New York Port Authority police officers John McLoughlin and Will Jimeno from Ground Zero, as well as that of the men who rescued them. In real life, the officers were rescued by sergeants Karnes and Thomas. In the film, however, they were rescued by Karnes and PFC Dave Thomas; a composite character, played by William Mapother, a white actor, who is meant to represent Thomas.

World Trade Center producer Michael Shamberg said that they knew about Sgt. Thomas’s role in the rescue, but were unable to find him when creating the film. He said producers didn’t discover Thomas was a Black man until after they had started the movie. He also said that in spite of the fact that the film was co-written by McLoughlin and Jimeno was consulted for authenticity, no one ever asked them for a physical description of the man who helped save their lives.

“Frankly, we goofed--we learned when we were filming that he was an African-American,” said Shamberg. “We would change it if we could. I actually called him and apologized, and he said he didn’t mind. He was very gracious about it.”

Shamberg also apologized for another African-American officer, Bruce Reynolds, who was also portrayed as white in the movie.

Thomas, meanwhile, didn’t learn the film was about his story until he saw the unmistakable image of two marines peering into a whole at Ground Zero during a commercial for the movie. He said that while he wasn’t angry about how the film turned out, he does wish it could have been more realistic.

My emphasis.

It hadn't even occured to me that the rescued men might be a source; it wasn't clear to me whether they were conscious during the rescue, which seems to be what's implied by the first part I bolded.

As far as unconscious assumptions, what rilina said.

Thanks again for finding those links. I will edit the post (again!) to refer to them.

[kate_nepveu]

Oh, and number five, too.

[pnh.livejournal.com]

"I think you are seeing racism where there isn't any. Laziness and complacency would seem to fit rather than racism"

Quite the contrary, laziness and complacency are (along with fear) racism's primary engines.

Most racism doesn't look like Bull Connor.

[kate_nepveu]

Thank you.

[montoya.livejournal.com]

Like Stephen Colbert, they don't see color.

[kate_nepveu]

Stephen Colbert rocks.