The Flash >> View Post
·
Post By
Knight

Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
In Reply To
Daveym 
Moderator

Location: Lancashire
Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Subj: Amen to this! Well said. *NT*
Posted: Mon Dec 21, 2015 at 05:17:24 pm GMT (Viewed 337 times)
Reply Subj: Re: Why are people against Wally being black and not Iris being black?
Posted: Tue Dec 15, 2015 at 07:03:10 am GMT (Viewed 369 times)




    Quote:


      Quote:
      There's very little diversity in the silver age. So why not recast someone of color in a heroic role?



      Quote:
      - l.k.



    Quote:
    Why recast a popular existing character at all is my objection.
    If you can't be bothered to create an all-new character concept who is an ethnic representation then the second-best way to go ideally is to replace, not recast. The new Ms Marvel is an example of replacing, so too is Michael Holt as Mr Terrific, Marvel replaced Nick Fury snr with jnr, Shiera Saunders replaced Saera Hall, Ryan Choi replaced Ray Palmer, ‎Kimiyo Hoshi became the new Doctor Light, Val-Zod replaced Kal-el on Earth-2....
    None of these examples were "recasting", the were new characters replacing old and usually defunct or tired originals. And all proved extremely successful and popular.



    Quote:
    When you recast rather than replace you are asking for the wrath of the readership as there is going to be an obvious enormous difference and controversy between 'recasting' a semi-obscure character like Pete Ross and recasting the frontline likes of Wally West, who was the much loved Flash people grew up with for over two decades. That doesn't even take into account the fact that in the current set-up Wally (Black or White) is utterly redundant and uncalled for given the 'back-to-basics' approach today and that Bart Allen is also out there active... it reeks of tokenism and an attempt to court controversy and the resultant headlines.



    Quote:
    But as history has shown it is far better to replace than recast. \(coffee\)








It's interesting that a hero/villain performs one amazing feat, or use a power they haven't used for 20+ years, and that automatically propels them to a high status despite scans and evidence to the contrary. I don't know what is worse, selective feat picking that has only been done once or twice 20, or more, years ago or ignoring evidence from scans or the lack thereof. We need to stop putting our favorite heroes/villains on pedestals and start putting them where they really belong. But it's evident that people never will because they would rather accuse others of cherry picking feats, when they don't, and being 'morally superior' when they aren't. I guess being honest and as fair as possible only opens one up to being the target of childish accusations and fault finding by those who insist on acting petty and childish. What happened to a good debate between two civil, mature, adults?
Posted with Mozilla 11.0 on Windows 7
Alvaro's Comicboards powered by On Topic™ © 2003-2022 Powermad Software
All the content of these boards Copyright © 1996-2022 by Comicboards/TVShowboards. Software Copyright © 2003-2022 Powermad Software