The man behind Long Duk Dong speaks out
by Carmen Van Kerckhove
NPR did an interesting story on Long Duk Dong recently - the Asian exchange student in the movie Sixteen Candles - a racist caricature of a character who has become a thorn in the side of pretty much every Asian-American male born after 1970. (Hat tip to Angry Asian Man.)
They also interview actor Gedde Watanabe (who is now 52!) and ask how he feels about having taken the role:
“People still come up to me to this day and quote my lines,” he says. “‘What’s happenin’, hot stuff?’ ‘Oh, sexy girlfriend.’”
Watanabe says making Sixteen Candles was a great experience, but one that, in retrospect, he realizes he was “a bit naive” about.
“I was making people laugh,” he says. “I didn’t realize how it was going to affect people.”
In 1984, when Sixteen Candles came out, some Asian-American groups decried Long Duk Dong as stereotypical, racist and part of a long history of Hollywood’s offensive depictions of Asian men.
“It took me a while to understand that,” Watanabe says. “In fact, I was working at the Metropolitan Museum of Art, and I was accosted a couple of times by a couple of women who were just really irate and angry. They asked, ‘How could you do a role like that?’ But it’s funny, too, because at the same time I laugh at the character. It’s an odd animal.”
We know that actors of color have to eat, like everyone else. But what responsibility do you think they should take for perpetuating racist stereotypes in the media? What factors should they keep in mind as they decide which roles to accept and which to pass over?
Carmen Van Kerckhove is co-founder and president of 
jmn wrote:
I just about died lauging when I read Adrian Tomine’s one page comic “The Donger and Me” http://www.npr.org/programs/atc/features/2008/mar/in_character/donger_1.html
It’s a must read for anyone who’s ever trembled with rage over Long Duk Dong.
Posted 26 Mar 2008 at 8:14 am ¶
Irene wrote:
It’s a good question… I’ll go to a horrible film with Asian American actors in it to support them, but at the same time, NOT perpetuating racist stereotypes ESPECIALLY in media I do feel is a responsibility we have to carry. Would I rather see Asian American actors on the big screen even if it means in stereotypical/false roles? Dilemma…
Posted 26 Mar 2008 at 8:54 am ¶
Anonymous wrote:
Watanabe was not some naive teenager when he took on the role of Long Duk Dong, but a grown adult man who SHOULD have known better. It just takes some common sense to realize when people are laughing with you and when people are laughing at you. When Watanabe passes away, his celebrity obituaries will no doubt mention his role as “Long Duk Dong.” What a wonderful way to be remembered.
That said, John Hughes, obviously, is even more to blame for the Dong character. As much as many of us like to rail against Watanabe, who actually wrote and “developed” the character in the first place? Not the Asian guy.
Posted 26 Mar 2008 at 9:00 am ¶
Orville wrote:
Carmen this is a tough and tricky question and a good one. The actor in Sixteen Candles maybe to his defense he was much younger back then and he just wanted to work. I am sure in 1984 roles for Asian actors was even harder then right now. Its a tough question. I remember Kal Penn was interviewed by New York Magazine and he said why couldn’t he play a terrorist on 24? Kal Penn thought the role was challenging even though he also thought it was a form of racial profiling. But he wanted the work and he wanted to take the role. Maybe the real question should be why can’t the screenwriters think more expand outside of the box and move beyond these stereotypes?
Posted 26 Mar 2008 at 9:48 am ¶
nola wrote:
I agree with Orville. Blame the screenwriters or the directors not the actors. They have the least amount of power in this situation, especially those in minor roles /non-A listers.
Sometimes a persons gotta eat.
Posted 26 Mar 2008 at 10:58 am ¶
miss girl wrote:
There’s a good post on LDD: http://poplicks.com/
OW introduced an interpretation I never considered.
Posted 26 Mar 2008 at 11:10 am ¶
Thea wrote:
Anonymous makes a good point about the problem being with John Hughes (and racism in Hollywood) rather than Watanabe.
At the same time I have a hard time with this - I don’t think that Asian American actors (or members of any marginalised group) should have to have amazing politics and constantly be advocating for equity. At the same time though, when, for instance, an Asian Canadian writer writes something about how race is totally benign or writes all white characters, I feel more frustrated than I might if it was a white person creating the art. I guess I just can’t make up my mind? One thing I do know for sure is that when I saw Sixteen Candles for the first time, I was stunned and hurt by Watanabe’s character.
Re: Kal Penn - I remember the Arab actors who played the terrorists in United 93 making similar comments about how at first they were disinterested in the role, because off the bat it seemed to perpetuate stereotypes that were hurtful - but upon learning more about the film they agreed to do it because they felt like it was a nuanced/fair portrayal.
Posted 26 Mar 2008 at 11:13 am ¶
Black Canseco wrote:
I feel bad for L2D. Seriously. You’re almost screwed either way. Either play the ethnic fool or not work at all. It reminds me a bit of the evolution of Black films in recent decades.
With the exception of 1971’s Sweetback’s Badass Song which was written and directed by Melvin Van Peebles and was intended as an indie flick, all the Blaxploitation films of the 70s were written, produced, funded and marketed by white Hollywood studios. (Even Shaft was originally a white film scheduled to go into production pre-Sweetback but was recast after SBS’s success.)
SBS was an indie flick because Peebles couldn’t get a studio to do because it was the only the second movie to feature a black male character fighting police/government and engaging in interracial relationships who didn’t die. (It was an unwritten rule in Hollywood that black characters had to be “punished” for that type of behavior in the script.)
So, were actors like Pam Grier, Richard Roundtree, Jim Kelly, Jim Brown, etc simply not to work at all as opposed to doing the movies they did?
Should black actors not work when presented with stereotypical roles? Beyond Tyler Perry, Spike Lee and a couple other heavy hitters, Black actors only get a handful of non-stereotypical roles a year from Hollywood. And everyone doesn’t have the loot to finance their own projects.
Similar to Long Duk Dong, i’m not sure what the answer is. This guy wasn’t gonna work for John Hughes, who was the biggest most profitable producer/writer in Hollywood in the 1980s—any other way beyond doing stereotypical work.
Any fan of JH’s work will also note that Hughes had a habit of painting racist charicatures of blacks, latinos as well. I think a Racialicious John Hughes retrospective is in order.
Posted 26 Mar 2008 at 11:46 am ¶
Black Canseco wrote:
Wantabee’s got a responsibility, but again, given Hollywood’s constructs in the 1980s (and today for that matter) he’d have probably been a struggling no-name actor.
Posted 26 Mar 2008 at 11:47 am ¶
Black Canseco wrote:
One more thing:
Anybody follow the Indie Awards that they do at Sundance or on the IFC network? It’s pretty interesting how despite the fact that “indie movies” were started by black and hispanic writers and directors such as Oscar Micheaux, Spike Lee, Van Peebles, Gordon Parks, etc., that the whole “indie genre” is almost exclusively white.
They’re as exclusionary against ethnic stories and flicks as so-called mainstream Hollywood. It makes it that much harder for ethnic stories to be told and that much easier for ethnic stereotypes to remain.
Posted 26 Mar 2008 at 11:50 am ¶
Gregory A. Butler wrote:
I agree with nola and Orville - we can’t really blame the actors for this. These folks love their craft - but the reality is, there are very few jobs for actors ESPECIALLY actors of color, and doubly especially for Asian actors, so they often have little choice but to take the racist parts that they get.
On the other hand, the producers, writers and directors - and the corporations they make their films for - are fully at fault here, for developing these racist characters and essentially forcing Asian actors to choose between playing racist roles and not acting professionally at all.
Posted 26 Mar 2008 at 12:09 pm ¶
Arturo wrote:
Anybody else thinking of Hollywood Shuffle after reading this thread?
Posted 26 Mar 2008 at 12:23 pm ¶
The Cruel Secretary wrote:
A dilemma, indeed.
I’m with Orville and nola in the sense that H’wood screenwriters and directors (and let’s not forget the producers) are to blame for perpertuating stereotypes around race and ethnicity, especially nowadays with, a click of a mouse, they can find a plethora of information debunking the very images they want to commit to film.
As much as I *know* that actors of colors need to eat and have clothes on their backs and roofs over their heads, they are also thinking folks making conscientious decisions. So–even without the fantastic politics–I feel they can also reject scripts that play to the stereotypes.
My in-progress criteria (please feel free to add on, Racialicious Crew):
1) How does this role fit into the constellation of portrayals of people of color. (As much as actors looove to talk about researching their roles, IMO, researching the stereotypes should be a part. Anymore, one can google that information.)
2) Consideration of the research (”Racialicious ran down the history of the neo-mammy!), personal feelings (”How am I feeling about playing this role in light of what Racialicious said?”), and posterity (”Do I *really* want this neo-mammy role in my obituary?)
3) Material reality and dignity (”I know I gotta eat and I really what to be considered for those Kerry Washington/Sanaa Lathan roles, but do I need to trade my dignity of playing this neo-mammy role–I was told it would be *the* break-out role for me–for the fame and the multimillions?).
This also means that there may be a dearth of seeing actors of color on the big and small screens because the great roles simply aren’t being written, directed, or financed. I think, though, that I’m at the point where I’ll risk the dearth if it means seeing less Martin Lawrence and Masi Oka buffooning.
Posted 26 Mar 2008 at 12:37 pm ¶
Persia wrote:
“The Donger and Me” is so, so funny. One thing I think that should be mentioned is that I doubt the script was as racist as the eventual movie treatment was (though it’s possible). I haven’t seen the movie but the thing that really struck me was the sound effects– having a gong strike every time the character showed up. Things like that can make a really difference in how a character is presented and perceived. I doubt Long Duk Dong seemed like a pioneering role on the page, but I think it might have come off as less offensive than the eventual movie treatment.
Posted 26 Mar 2008 at 12:38 pm ¶
Black Canseco wrote:
If you check virtually very John Hughes movie he deals in ethnic stereotypes, not to mention stupid adults. The white kids/teens in his movies are always the heroes, the smart ones the most humane.
You still see way too much of this in Hollywood today.
Posted 26 Mar 2008 at 1:08 pm ¶
jmn wrote:
Not to go too far off topic, but you know who else shoulders responsibility for the dearth of minorities/non-whites in film? It’s the casting directors. When a film character is written generically 9.99 out of 10 times, that role will go to a white actor. Hello? Why not take a chance? Why not show what American society really looks like?
Justin Lin had to fight for Roger Lin’s role in Annapolis. Why can’t the casting directors make the same leap?
Posted 26 Mar 2008 at 1:09 pm ¶
johnjihoonchang wrote:
As an Asian American would-be in the entertainment industry, it’s definitely difficult to navigate. Part of the problem is solely representation. Like it or not, as a minority actor/writer/director/etc, you become one of very few in an industry with not a lot of room for you. Consequently, any time you take the part of an Asian character, or create an Asian character, it instantly becomes representative of the whole minority in the mainstream consciousness.
The Long Duk Dong character is certainly racist, but I feel that he’s primarily so in the context of representation. Imagine if there were lots of representation of Asian Americans in mainstream media. If such an accurate representation were present, then a single Long Duk Dong character would really just be an odd duck in a sea of regular Americans of Asian descent, as opposed to a fully racist character. I do believe that there really are people out there that share some semblance to LDD–does that make their own Asian stories any less authentic or does it make them racist caricatures?
I can’t say this is an “always” thing, but the fact that LDD is a racist caricature really actually points to the racist nature of the business and the consuming public at large. After all, we can point fingers at actors, writers, directors and even producers, but each still struggle against a still greater power structure in the business. A brave group of actors/writers/directors can go off and make their indie film with a prominent emphasis on race/culture and no one will buy it. A producer can fight to have a integrated multi-ethnic cast with nuanced portrayals and the money men can kill his underwriting because they just don’t think it will sell to mainstream America. And I’m not letting the creative types off the hook–I’ve seen and read more than my fare share of racist trash–but I am saying that our efforts as creative types will always remain a huge struggle without a greater social movement *in the mainstream* to demand more accurate portrayal, numerically and qualitatively, of minorities.
I have a billion things I could write about this, but I’ll stop now. LDD is a problematic portrayal (especially that damned gong sound), but that he is a problematic portrayal actually points to a bigger racism problem in the industry.
Posted 26 Mar 2008 at 1:36 pm ¶
johnjihoonchang wrote:
“The Long Duk Dong character is certainly racist” - I meant to write that LDD is certainly a racist caricature.
Posted 26 Mar 2008 at 1:39 pm ¶
johnjihoonchang wrote:
“more than my fare share of racist trash” - “fare” ought to be “fair”. I need to do better proofing.
Posted 26 Mar 2008 at 1:41 pm ¶
Cynthia wrote:
Well, the big studios are making movies for the already dumbed down America, so of course, they’re not going to go diverse.
Posted 26 Mar 2008 at 1:52 pm ¶
Sean wrote:
Re comment #12
Yeah Arturo, me too….. with a side order of “Bamboozled”.
Posted 26 Mar 2008 at 2:54 pm ¶
gatamala wrote:
Anybody follow the Indie Awards that they do at Sundance or on the IFC network? It’s pretty interesting how despite the fact that “indie movies” were started by black and hispanic writers and directors such as Oscar Micheaux, Spike Lee, Van Peebles, Gordon Parks, etc., that the whole “indie genre” is almost exclusively white.
They’re as exclusionary against ethnic stories and flicks as so-called mainstream Hollywood. It makes it that much harder for ethnic stories to be told and that much easier for ethnic stereotypes to remain.
I noticed this. Instead of just the golf course, it’s Park City.
I must say, I can’t believe Gedde is 52. Consider the range he could play b/c of his youthful look. What a waste.
All of those involved in making movies- those who really love the art and aren’t just looking at the immediate bottom line - are shooting themselves in the foot by putting minorities in such a tiny box.
Posted 26 Mar 2008 at 3:11 pm ¶
The Cruel Secretary wrote:
Dang, Cynthia, I dig where you’re coming from, but I can’t get on the Dismal Dismissal Ship with you. At least, not on this issue.
Maybe I’m misreading what Carmen is getting at, but I think the underlying question is about *actors of color* exercising agency about their accepting and acting in roles that perpetuate racial/ethnic stereotypes. To say that Big Studios are catering the dumbed-down masses is too easy–and lets the individuals who take part in bringing films to the cineplex or the indie art-house near you–actors, producers, directors (including the casting directors) off the hook. The statement also insults the audiences’ intelligence. I mean, heck, you’re on a blog that has readers and commenters who are a very discerning audience of mass culture.
But let me get back on-topic: What if *actors of color* simply–and quietly (or loudly on a blog, if so desired)–turned down the, say, the latest variation of Black Big Momma/spicy Latina/oh-so-geo-spiritual Native American/nerdy Asian fella/Arab terrorist because they simply didn’t want to contribute to the Stereotype Canon? Even if it meant they’ll be temping/waiting tables/being box-office manager/what-have-you day job for that for that much longer?
Where does the responsibility of the actor of color rest in all of this, especially in consideration of his/her material reality (food/clothes/shelter) and aspirations?
Posted 26 Mar 2008 at 4:00 pm ¶
FeministPunk! wrote:
Even Black Americans are having a hard time getting “mainstream” roles in movies or on TV unless they’re big hot-shots like Will Smith or Jamie Foxx.
Now, imagine how hard it is for non-white/non-black “ethnic” actors in Hollywood…
Posted 26 Mar 2008 at 4:30 pm ¶
DivergentDana wrote:
“What if *actors of color* simply–and quietly (or loudly on a blog, if so desired)–turned down the, say, the latest variation of Black Big Momma/spicy Latina/oh-so-geo-spiritual Native American/nerdy Asian fella/Arab terrorist because they simply didn’t want to contribute to the Stereotype Canon?”
Mr. Yunioshi Redux?
Posted 26 Mar 2008 at 4:37 pm ¶
jmn wrote:
DivergentDana: “Mr Yunioshi Redux?”
It happened recently with Andy Richter’s character Benny Bang in “New York Minute.”
Posted 26 Mar 2008 at 4:58 pm ¶
TierList E wrote:
DivergentDana-
That would be a scene to behold- if it could be successfully coordinated.
The problem occurs with the ‘desperately seeking work’ dilemma and the real fear that the people that refuse to do the role will just be replaced with someone more willing, acheiving nothing. So you’d need everybody behind it to be affective. I fear how difficult that would end up being.
Lol, where the usually enheartening reality of knowing that all minorities aren’t the same and are truely individuals can become aggravating. Oh and I love the selective knowledge of those in power that will say all Y people are X but readily know when to divide and conquer.
Posted 26 Mar 2008 at 5:16 pm ¶
johnjihoonchang wrote:
The Cruel Secretary - A unified movement of actors would be awesome. However, I fear that the desperation/opportunism in this industry is so prevalent that even if 100 actors turn down the role, there will be an actor out there (or even non-actor with big dreams) that will seize the opportunity and take the part.
I think it’s more pragmatic to accept the part and, being conscious, do whatever you can in the part to break the stereotype once you’re in. Some actors will just play the part as it’s wanted–others might be more willing to fight for a less caricatured interpretation–or at least a more nuanced one.
It’s already a crazy sacrifice that you make to pursue acting as a PoC, because you’re pretty much throwing yourself into a low-wage, low-probability of success career. To sincerely and genuinely combat racism in the industry will require an even greater degree of personal sacrifice.
Of course, if there was a ridiculously wealthy benefactor with a lot of money and connections and the willingness to throw all that money at making quality movies/tv, with little to no chance of a rewarding investment, and push channels of distribution and exhibition–well, we might just have something there. I don’t know of any group with such leverage and altruism though.
J
Posted 26 Mar 2008 at 5:21 pm ¶
Black Canseco wrote:
Not to make a contest out of this but I bet if we spent 2 minutes we could come up with 2 lists–superstar black/non-white actors, and consistently working AOC’s in Hollywood and I can guarantee that you could fit them all in my living room.
Let’s see…
Males:
Sam Jackson
Jamie Foxx
Denzel Washington
Will Smith
Morgan Free
Delroy Lindo
Antonio Banderas
Jet Li
Jackie Chan
Chris Tucker
Eddie Murphy
Forrest Whitaker
Cuba Gooding?
Females:
Uh…
Angela Bassett?
Queen Latifah
Lucy Lui
Sonya “Viagra”
Eva Mendez
Roselyn Sanchez
Sanaa Lathan
America Ferrara
Salma Hayek
Halle Berry
Irma P. Hall
Whoever Will Smith and Denzel hire to play their love interests
Whoever Tyler Perry hires…
Conversely, there’s an obscenely absurd number of white actors/actress working, more becoming stars even more going on to be power brokers and “character actors” plus directors/producers.
Posted 26 Mar 2008 at 5:58 pm ¶
The Cruel Secretary wrote:
johnjihoonchang–I really appreciate your thoughtful response to my last comment. Honestly, I don’t completely agree with what you said. I bet you, for example, Denzel Washington thought he was bringing the nuance in “Training Day,” but, he portrayed a variation of The Violent Black Man (a violent Black cop, in this case) who corrupted his white newbie partner–and Mr. Washington was given an bloody Oscar for that horrid portrayal. Watching his acceptance speech for that award, I thought Mr. Washington had a “I-can’t-believe-you-jokers-gave-me-this-for-*that*” look on his face. I do, though, see what you mean by the practicality and how actors attempt to offer a more nuanced interpretation, i.e. Regina Taylor in “I’ll Fly Away.” Still, what if and what are…
DivergentDana and jmn–
Let me get this right: what you’re saying is if an actor of color doesn’t play the stereotyped role, a white actor will take up the part and mangle it even further? So, therefore, are you saying that we’re better off having actors of color perpetuating the stereotypes than white ones?
I’m sincerely asking you this…
Posted 26 Mar 2008 at 6:47 pm ¶
BuFu wrote:
At least he gets the white girl at the end and you don’t see that too often even today!
Posted 26 Mar 2008 at 7:32 pm ¶
Sudy wrote:
A great question -
I think that there is responsibility for everyone, but particularly those in entertainment not to perpetuate negative stereotypes.
However, there also needs to be room for human development and racial impact. I don’t think I genuinely understood racial stereotyping until I was in my adult years. Who of us has never done something in our naive years, well before we were aware of the ramifications of our actions?
One big difference is that ours are not caught on film.
Posted 26 Mar 2008 at 9:01 pm ¶
Black Canseco wrote:
Watching his acceptance speech for that award, I thought Mr. Washington had a “I-can’t-believe-you-jokers-gave-me-this-for-*that*” look on his face.
I thought i was the only one who picked up on that. lol…
same deal with Whoopi Goldberg’s win for playing the sistah-girl-hustler in Ghost.
And is it just me or is Halle Berry gonna go down as the Marisa Tomei of our generation. Am i the only one who thinks that she’s just not that spectacular of an actress?
Oh… add Regina King to my list of steady working black actresses.
Posted 26 Mar 2008 at 9:41 pm ¶
johnjihoonchang wrote:
The Cruel Secretary - I definitely agree that a lot of actors and other creative folk won’t get it right, but better to have a more thoughtful person take the role than have all the more thoughtful people choose to not take a role, only to have it taken by the likes of a William Hung or other naive would-be actor, right?
I like to look at Justin Lin in taking on Fast and Furious 3: Tokyo Drift as an example. When he was originally hired for the work, it was terribly Orientalist, but being a thoughtful and conscientious director, he worked with and fought with the producers to get something that was much less racially exploitative.
Although it’s true that talent is always going to be restrained by money, there’s still room for negotiation and I imagine that any unified movement of actors will still leave a number of naive people of color that will be exploited into greater racist caricatures than if a conscientious person of color took the role and tried to negotiate a more reasonable characterization.
But having worked with actors and now having some insight into how this business works, I can also tell you that not every actor is going to care about whether they are doing public harm by taking on racist caricatures as roles. Some people just want to make it and do it by whatever means that they can. Thus, my point of pragmatism.
Honestly, I wish it weren’t this way and I wish that by banding together and refusing any whiff of racism in the industry as creatives we’ll somehow bring down the underlying racism pervasive in both the producers and the consumers of mainstream media, but I think if we all refused (by that, I mean those conscious of racism in media), then we’d probably end up with a mainstream media environment even worse than it is now.
Posted 26 Mar 2008 at 9:41 pm ¶
Orville wrote:
What about John Cho he is gorgeous and very talented. I sense John Cho is going to become a real leading man he is already a rising star. Harold and Kumar new movie is coming out next month. John Cho has the sex appeal and the talent to match. Kal Penn is also another Asian American male actor with the looks and sex appeal. I believe both Cho and Penn are legitimate Hollywood superstars. Support Harold and Kumar the second movie.
Posted 26 Mar 2008 at 11:00 pm ¶
michael wrote:
Antonio Banderas is NOT and “actor of color”. He’s a european spaniard.
Posted 26 Mar 2008 at 11:55 pm ¶
Black Canseco wrote:
Antonio Banderas on the list because, well… why not. Spaniards and Euros sorta have the best of both worlds, They can embrace their ethnicity as they see fit while enjoying that appealing status of “safe other”, “cooly exotic” and white-skinned privilege.
Russell Crowe, gerard depardieu, mel Gibson, colin farrell, Nicole Kidman, charleze theron(?) for example are “ethnic” but they’re embraced as white yet it’s cool when they talk up their roots.
Posted 27 Mar 2008 at 2:20 am ¶
DivergentDana wrote:
“Let me get this right: what you’re saying is if an actor of color doesn’t play the stereotyped role, a white actor will take up the part and mangle it even further? So, therefore, are you saying that we’re better off having actors of color perpetuating the stereotypes than white ones?
I’m sincerely asking you this…”
No, that’s not what I’m saying… I’m merely expressing cynicism regarding the actors’ ability to affect real change from the bottom… and being snarky.
“Antonio Banderas is NOT an “actor of color”. He’s a european spaniard.”
I was going to say… we can have an extensive discussion on his classification as a POC alone… even though I personally have a difficult time looking at Penelope Cruz and thinking of her as a “white lady.”
Posted 27 Mar 2008 at 5:10 am ¶
DivergentDana wrote:
“Kal Penn is also another Asian American male actor with the looks and sex appeal.”
*Wistful sigh*
Posted 27 Mar 2008 at 5:11 am ¶
Orville wrote:
Yes Antonio Banderas, Penelope Cruz are Europeans they are Spaniards. In Europe the Spaniards are viewed as Southern Europeans. I know the USA has a different kind of system but in Spain and the rest of the world Spaniards are viewed as Europeans.
Posted 27 Mar 2008 at 9:08 am ¶
The Cruel Secretary wrote:
@DivergentDana–thanks for the clarification. And I second the wistful sigh.
@johnjihoonchang–I dig where you’re coming from, J., especially around 1) having the one conscientious creative take a stereotypical role and wring out something less racially exploitative and 2) having the conscientious creative standing in that breach so someone more naive and/or uncaring may not get exploited into doing something even worse.
But…as a (hopefully) thinking pop-culture consumer, what I’m overwhelmingly seeing on screens is, regardless if the actor of color is Oscar-winningly nuanced or minstrelly broad, is–to this day–the actors of color in these stereotyping roles, even after study after commentary after blog states the detrimental effects of people of color, white people, and race relations. Mr. Washington in “Training Day” and Tyrese in “Waist Deep” are *still* contributing to The Violent Black Man image; Gedde Watanabe (then) and Masi Oki (now) are still perpetuating the nerdy Asian guy stereotype.
When blogs like Racialicious are seriously questioning what happening and Phil Yu at Angry Asian Man (for example) posts the effed-up casting requirements movies and TV are looking for, then, IMO, the will and the desire to see something better nowadays than the Steretype Canon is *there.* Can’t there be some will and desire on the AOC end, too, to say enough of this ish? (Not some even in some fantastically coordinated way complete with press conference and logo’d t-shirts and coffee mugs, but perhaps a bunch of “thanks, but no thanks?)
Our exchange really brings Carmen’s initial question into high relief:
*But what responsibility do you think they should take for perpetuating racist stereotypes in the media?
*What factors should they keep in mind as they decide which roles to accept and which to pass over?
Again, J., I feel you. I just don’t agree with you, that’s all. All love from here…
Posted 27 Mar 2008 at 11:03 am ¶
Mary wrote:
” if an actor of color doesn’t play the stereotyped role, a white actor will take up the part and mangle it even further?”
To complicate this question somewhat, I’ve read interviews with the guys on the Axis of Evil comedy tour (Middle Eastern comics). One of their running jokes is that they need to take the terrorist roles in movies because if they don’t, “they’ll just hire a Latino guy.” Which is a little un-PC, but pragmatically is probably true, and so I question how cross-ethnic hiring might be a factor in perpetuating stereotypes. I.e. the Middle Eastern actor might turn down a stereotypical role, but someone who’s not Middle Eastern either won’t pick up on the stereotypical elements of it or won’t care as much.
I think it was Maz Jobrani who also said that when he was younger he idealistically thought he could try to imbue the terrorist roles with more humanity and realism than a non-Muslim non-Middle Eastern actor would care about doing. But of course in editing, they would take all of the humane parts out and only leave in the “screaming Middle Eastern guy” part of the role.
Posted 27 Mar 2008 at 12:12 pm ¶
johnjihoonchang wrote:
The Cruel Secretary - I actually feel like you do agree with me after all, but just have a different perspective. I, too, think that there is some considerable onus on the actors to be conscious of the roles that they accept and how they portray themselves in those roles.
As a non-working (not necessarily because I don’t want to) AoC myself, I know that I wouldn’t be capable of fighting the powers that be when it came to how a role should be portrayed and that I don’t think I have the skill to bring extra degrees of depth to a potentially shallow stereotyped character, so I pretty much ignore every role that smacks of stereotype. And I’m not working at all as an actor as a result, since I don’t have the exposure or credits to really secure anything outside of extra work otherwise.
Those messed up casting calls that AAM puts up? Well, they get filled. When movies requiring wacky Asian characters (like Balls of Fury) can cast all their Asian roles, I’m pretty sure it’s not because there aren’t a lot of actors turning down the roles because they perpetuate racist stereotypes. Knowing plenty of AoC’s myself, I know that most of them choose to be not-working as a result of not wanting to take those roles. So, the desire is more than present and the will is acted on. And most of them end up with very little work in film and TV as a result, typically in background work and the occasional commercial/industrial video and deriving the lion’s share of their limited income from flexible, but not lucrative, day jobs; they work their craft in small community theater ensembles on the side.
A large number of AoC’s do say “no”. It’s just that there are still many who say “yes” regardless, either not aware or not caring about the perpetuation of racist stereotypes.
In regards to Carmen’s questions:
1) Actors should be responsible for everything within their power as an actor to combat racist stereotypes in media. If it comes to it, that includes not responding to casting calls asking for racially exploitative characters. Or, even, going for those parts to cause a little havoc and possibly some enlightenment on the set (but only if the AoC has the steel to go through with that).
2) They should try to find out as much about the production as possible and how sympathetic the powers-that-be (director, producer and above) would be to an actor that wants to bring depth or at least counter-stereotypical readings to a role. (That said, this is often terribly difficult to know ahead of time, because the casting process isn’t always perfectly clear on what it is that you’ll be involved in.) If you suspect that there is no room for conscious interpretation and that the role will continue to perpetuate racist stereotypes, then reject the part.
I think that’s as much as an actor can control.
Posted 27 Mar 2008 at 12:50 pm ¶
The Cruel Secretary wrote:
*The Cruel Secretry nods slowly*
@Mary–yeah, true. But I also think that brings up the idea of getting informed about the role before taking it and jibing that with some transracial understanding and empathy (i.e. “Would I want a brown-skinned non-Latino actor represent me and my group of color as a stereotype?”) That’s why some people of color became so riled up with Eddie Murphy’s disgusting characterization of a Asian man in “Norbit.”
@J.–I think I agree with you, too. Thanks for being such an engaging commenter. All love…
Posted 27 Mar 2008 at 1:26 pm ¶
Jay wrote:
Gedde Watanabe (then) and Masi Oki (now) are still perpetuating the nerdy Asian guy stereotype.
Hmmm, which brings up an interesting point.
Both Gedde in Sixteen and Masi Oka “get the girl” in their respective roles, yet the nerdy thing still overshadows that (another one that’s similar would be Parry Shen’s role in the New Guy).
Why do you think that is? Is it because they’re not perceived to be leading? They’re not perceived to be “normal”?
Do we only accept men as sexy in Hollywood if they’re the womanizing type?
Posted 27 Mar 2008 at 8:51 pm ¶
Orville wrote:
I know this won’t sound politically correct but Masi Oka is not John Cho. John Cho is tall and gorgeous and clearly has the looks and ability to be leading man material. Masi Oka is going to get typecast in Hollywood differently because he doesn’t have the look of the leading man.
So what choice does a man like Masi Oka really have? I admit sometimes I cringe when I watch Heroes because I know Oka’s character is a stereotype. But then I think he has a passion for acting he is making good money he’s paying his bills. Maybe one day Oka can get another kind of role beyond the whole Asian nerd stereotype?
Maybe the Hiro character can help him to get more textured, layered roles? After all, if Oka didn’t take the Hiro role someone else will. So its tough. Oka is on a hit TV show that will definitely get into syndication after the third season meaning he will make even more money. And because of Heroes he has the attention of casting agents and Hollywood.
Posted 28 Mar 2008 at 6:32 am ¶
sharon wrote:
Black Canseco, I cant believe you left Vin Diesel, Laurence Fishbourne, Don Cheadle and Dwayne ‘the Rock’ Johnson off your list.
Posted 28 Mar 2008 at 9:30 am ¶
Orville wrote:
But does Vin Diesel want to be identified with blacks? I heard a rumor that he doesn’t want to be identified with black people. Now I can be wrong but this is the story I heard?
Don Cheadle is he a star? I am not sure? He certainly doesn’t have the star quality of a leading man.
I do think Dwayne Johnson is a star though.
Posted 28 Mar 2008 at 10:21 am ¶
Linda wrote:
I actually fancy Masi more than I do John. Seeing his talk shows he seem to be humbler, nicer, and smarter than John. He’s the same appeal that Seth Rogen would have to many people.
When he’s in the Future Hiro costume, he’s hot as well. There is nothing nerdy about that.
Posted 28 Mar 2008 at 10:35 am ¶
The Cruel Secretary wrote:
@Orville–
May your fingers cleave to your keyboard! J/K…Don Cheadle has worked in leading-man roles (”Hotel Rwanda” and “Talk to Me”) and has star quality:
http://www.ew.com/ew/gallery/0,,355456,00.html
But your statement of “star quality” brings us back to Jay’s question about what defines sexy in Hollywood, especially in light of Asian/Asian American actors and the nerdy Asian guy stereotype:
*Why do you think that is? Is it because they’re not perceived to be leading? They’re not perceived to be “normal”?
*Do we only accept men as sexy in Hollywood if they’re the womanizing type?
@Jay, I’m still thinking about my response to your insightful questions….
Posted 28 Mar 2008 at 11:15 am ¶
DivergentDana wrote:
“Do we only accept men as sexy in Hollywood if they’re the womanizing type?”
But that implies that non-womanizing automatically = nerdy and vice versa. There’s tons of non-womanizing leading man characterizations that couldn’t possibly be interpreted as “nerdy,” and it’s not merely a coincidence that Asian male actors are disproportionately given nerdy characters to work with and through.
“Masi Oka is going to get typecast in Hollywood differently because he doesn’t have the look of the leading man.”
This is true. I’ve seen Future Hiro — I don’t watch the show, but I wanted to see if they could indeed “heat him up” — and ah… I just don’t see it. Daniel Dae Kim, John Cho, Sendhil Ramamurthy, Rick Yune, Jack Yang and Kal Penn are physically “leading man” types… Masi Oka, not so much.
Posted 28 Mar 2008 at 12:00 pm ¶
Orville wrote:
Yes Daniel Dae Kim, Rick Yune, Sendhil, Kal Penn, John Cho, Perry Shen now those guys are just gorgeous!
Don Cheadle is definitely a solid actor but there is just nothing about him that is sexually appealing. Now Henry Simmons, Jensen Atwood, Will Smith and the hots guys in Tyler Perry’s movies are worth the price of admission to the movie theatre.
Posted 28 Mar 2008 at 12:58 pm ¶
Orville wrote:
I think a leading man has to be sexy he’s got to be tall, he’s got to be physically fit, and he has to be able to act. A leading man doesn’t have to be a womanizer but he has to have a masculine quality of strength and determination. Don Cheadle is a nice actor but I don’t see him as a leading man type. I would rather Wesley Snipes or someone that has that testosterone strength the firm muscles, the intoxicating personality to match.
Posted 28 Mar 2008 at 1:03 pm ¶
The Cruel Secretary wrote:
@DivergentDana–thanks so much for your response. You said what I thought perfectly.
@Orville and DD–Daniel Dae Kim, John Cho, Sendhil Ramamurthy, Rick Yune, Jack Yang and Kal Penn…all swoon-tastic men (especially Sendhil). Not feeling your Black Male Hottie roll-call, Orville, but we’ll just have to agree to disagree before this thread derails into “Defend Your Celebrity Hottie.” All love from here…
Posted 28 Mar 2008 at 1:31 pm ¶
marge twain wrote:
Vin Diesel refuses to discuss his racial background. Good for him, it’s nobody’s business who want to put him in a box.
I have more beef with Eddie Murphy and Tyler Perry who have money and production companies and perpetute racist caricatures than I do with LDD or Kal Penn in his terrorist role on 24. Will Smith and Jada Pinkett Smith on the other hand produce movies and television that portray black people in a realistic fashion, in a variety of roles, which shows that it’s possible for others to do the same.
Posted 28 Mar 2008 at 2:07 pm ¶
sharon wrote:
Vin Diesel did identify himself as a person of color; Don Cheadle may not be considered a leading man but the brother is working (Talk to Me was one of 2007’s best). Also add to the list my fav Jeffery Wright who’s now best known as Felix Leiter in the James Bond series.
Posted 30 Mar 2008 at 11:13 am ¶