On "Wokeness" and the Wheel of Time - Be Thoughtful in Responding

[Ralph]

1 minute ago, king of nowhere said:

actually, that kind of stuff (that wot was feminist for its time, and he would be trying to update that) has already been stated in interviews years ago. it's really nothing new.

And explicitly so regarding the gender essentialism

[MasterAblar]

Honestly its a change that may not have a massive impact on the story (although I've hardly thought of all the repurcussions), but its a change that really doesn't make me trust the showrunners.

 

When I read this:

 

It’s a very fundamental change actually to make to the book series, and it has a lot of ripple effects, and we’ll continue to do things like that I think are more reflective of what hopefully Robert Jordan would be writing if he was writing today.

 

It just makes me very worried about their approach. It would be one thing if this series had been adapted a thousand time like sherlock holmes or something. But taking this kind of blatant liberty with essential aspects of the WoT world makes me wonder what changes they'll consider for later on.

 

I'll still watch the show and it could still be fantastic. But if they continue on this path its gonna be hard to reconcile the show with the books.

Edited November 10, 2021 by MasterAblar

[Rose]

41 minutes ago, swollymammoth said:

Exactly. Amazon's diversity playbook literally says that hirers should be wary of hiring based on experience because it might lead to too many white people working on set. 

 

For Amazon: Skin color > Experience 

 

Sorry for explaining the joke there, Beidomon. 

 

At the risk wading into hot waters unnecessarily, I would like to explore this for a minute.

 

Disclaimer: I haven't actually seen this document, so I'm only going off of what's being paraphrased here.

 

"hirers should be wary of hiring based on experience because it might lead to too many white people working on set."

 

Okay. Why would hiring based on experience lead to too many white people being hired? Is it because white people are inherently better at their jobs?

 

No, of course not. It's because white people tend to get hired more by default, which leads them to accumulating more experience than their non-white counterparts.

 

Why, then, do white people get hired more? Is it because they're inherently more deserving of being hired?

 

Again, no. It's because there's an imbalance in the industry to be begin with. There are disproportionately more roles, and especially major roles, available to white actors in Hollywood right now. White actors have an easier time finding work, and especially major roles, than non-white actors. Which leads them to accumulating more experience and recognition. Which means that when hiring based on experience only, they have the advantage, because everyone else has has a much harder time landing jobs. Which leads them to landing even more jobs. Which leads to... I'm sure you get the picture.

 

So. When these diversity handbooks say these kinds of things, this is typically the reasoning behind them. There's already an imbalance in the industry, one which disproportionately keeps non-white actors from landing big roles, and this imbalance will continue to be exacerbated by sheer virtue of the way the system works unless we actively counter it.

 

Luckily, it's not hard to counter the imbalance, because there are many many incredibly talented non-white actors to pick from who will do an amazing job if only they're given the chance, instead of being excluded for reasons that stem from a flawed system.

 

So it's not that skin color > experience.

 

It's that talent > skin color, but the system is set up so that experience is not a good indicator of talent.

Edited November 10, 2021 by Rose

[swollymammoth]

23 minutes ago, notpropaganda73 said:

I hope you're not characterising my responses as rabid because I've been anything but.

No, you are a very civil and respectful person. Unlike me haha I could learn a lot from your measured responses. 

[DojoToad]

24 minutes ago, Elder_Haman said:

Yeah, I don't like this at all. Still gonna watch.

Ditto

[TheDreadReader]

31 minutes ago, Flamen said:

As expected WOT tv show will be radical "Woke"

 

Judkins: I think—well, I can’t tell you all of them, but in the books, there’s an idea that if you’re born as a man in one life, you’d be born as a man in the next life in the show. We’re not doing that. We’re approaching it as you are a soul and you move through different bodies through whatever life that you’re in. So that’s one. It’s a very fundamental change actually to make to the book series, and it has a lot of ripple effects, and we’ll continue to do things like that I think are more reflective of what hopefully Robert Jordan would be writing if he was writing today.

 

 

While I do enjoy a certain schadenfreude with some reactions.   

 

It's a lore change but it may not really be all that significant of one.

 

RJ says there are multiple champions of light.  When there is call for a female champion the Amerasu soul gets spun out.  When there is a call for a male champion the Dragon soul gets spun out.  It isn't all that hard to square his statement with a simple.... There is only one Champion of Light and that champion is always called the Dragon regardless of what gender they are.

 

How many characters in the show are we actually aware of their previous lives in a plot-critical way?

 

 

 

[Skipp]

1 minute ago, TheDreadReader said:

 

 

While I do enjoy a certain schadenfreude with some reactions.   

 

It's a lore change but it may not really be all that significant of one.

 

RJ says there are multiple champions of light.  When there is call for a female champion the Amerasu soul gets spun out.  When there is a call for a male champion the Dragon soul gets spun out.  It isn't all that hard to square his statement with a simple.... There is only one Champion of Light and that champion is always called the Dragon regardless of what gender they are.

 

How many characters in the show are we actually aware of their previous lives in a plot-critical way?

 

 

 

This is how I choose to take that quote.  We'll see how it plays out in the show.  It could change everything or it might change nothing aside from "lore".

 

Still going to wait and watch and hopefully enjoy.

[DojoToad]

3 minutes ago, MasterAblar said:

Honestly its a change that may not have a massive impact on the story (although I've hardly though of all the repurcussions), but its a change that really doesn't make me trust the showrunners.

 

When I read this:

 

It’s a very fundamental change actually to make to the book series, and it has a lot of ripple effects, and we’ll continue to do things like that I think are more reflective of what hopefully Robert Jordan would be writing if he was writing today.

 

It just makes me very worried about their approach. It would be one thing if this series had been adapted a thousand time like sherlock holmes or something. But taking this kind of blatant liberty with essential aspects of the WoT world makes me wonder what changes they'll consider for later on.

 

I'll still watch the show and it could still be fantastic. But if they continue on this path its gonna be hard to reconcile the show with the books.

I don't need to reconcile the show with the books.  I'm fine with them being different from each other - but if it is different and I hate it...  At this point I am cautiously horrified.

[MasterAblar]

3 minutes ago, DojoToad said:

I don't need to reconcile the show with the books.  I'm fine with them being different from each other - but if it is different and I hate it...  At this point I am cautiously horrified.

 

Of course I can enjoy something even if it takes fairly generous liberties compared to the source. But I'll still feel like something is missing sadly.

Edited November 10, 2021 by MasterAblar

[Katherine]

3 minutes ago, TheDreadReader said:

 

 

While I do enjoy a certain schadenfreude with some reactions.   

 

It's a lore change but it may not really be all that significant of one.

 

RJ says there are multiple champions of light.  When there is call for a female champion the Amerasu soul gets spun out.  When there is a call for a male champion the Dragon soul gets spun out.  It isn't all that hard to square his statement with a simple.... There is only one Champion of Light and that champion is always called the Dragon regardless of what gender they are.

 

How many characters in the show are we actually aware of their previous lives in a plot-critical way?

 

 

 

It changes channeling. 

Is the "soul" connected to Saidin/Saidar or is the body? 

Whatever the answer is.... it will fundamentally change the entire world. 

 

This means they will have to change a ton of other plot points ranging from unimportant to major. 

 

And all for nothing. 

THis is tha crux here. This change did not need to be made. It will please very few people. At best, many book readers will tolerate it. Many will hate it and stop watching. The show won't grow in fan base and we won't get a third season. 

 

I wanted this to be sooo good, but IMO the writing is on the wall. 

[Ralph]

Just now, Katherine said:

It changes channeling. 

Is the "soul" connected to Saidin/Saidar or is the body? 

Whatever the answer is.... it will fundamentally change the entire world. 

 

 

 

If it is the body (which I hope and expect) what does it change? 

[Beidomon]

17 minutes ago, TheMountain said:

So much for Sarah and Harriet being involved making sure that the show is true to the books...

 

I listened to a few of Sarah's interviews, and it is pretty clear that while she is the super-est of super fans, she is just thrilled to be involved in the production and she wants to keep it that way, which means offering her input when requested but she's gonna stay in her lane and not push back too hard against changes by the creative types.

[Arthellion]

It's a change made not with respect to the previous work but to drive the showrunner's own personal political leanings and worldview.

 

If you were making your own work and seeking to make a statement about society, totally fine with that. Changing the source material that came before on this basis is not showing respect to the source material.

 

The only thing this does is polarize those with a great deal of respect for the source material and satisfy a small subset of the watching population. This change did not have to be made and it is detrimental to the success of the show. 

[king of nowhere]

7 minutes ago, Rose said:

 

At the risk wading into hot waters unnecessarily, I would like to explore this for a minute.

 

Disclaimer: I haven't actually seen this document, so I'm only going off of what's being paraphrased here.

 

"hirers should be wary of hiring based on experience because it might lead to too many white people working on set."

 

Okay. Why would hiring based on experience lead to too many white people being hired? Is it because white people are inherently better at their jobs?

 

No, of course not. It's because white people tend to get hired more by default, which leads them to accumulating more experience than their non-white counterparts.

 

Why, then, do white people get hired more? Is it because they're inherently more deserving of being hired?

 

Again, no. It's because there's an imbalance in the industry to be begin with.

 

this is all true. but it is very tricky business. it's extremely easy to get carried away with this and end up with discrimination in the opposite way. an even worse discrimination, because it would be written in law, and good luck as a white male complaining you're being discriminated.

I am not familiar with the movie industry, but when i did my PhD, the call for young researchers mentioned explicitly that, all else being equal, women were to be preferred over men. I can see where this comes from, and how women are underrepresented and face additional obstacles, but as they say, two wrongs don't make one right.

Just like picking someone because he's white is an injustice, so is picking someone because he's not white.

And no, i don't have a magical solution for this. Nobody has one. I can only invite everyone to caution and moderation. the only way we can make this work is by trial and error. This requires that everyone is ready to learn from past mistakes and improve on what's not working. which can't happen if everyone is so ideologically stuck on their positions that they'll refuse to change

[Rose]

2 minutes ago, Katherine said:

It changes channeling. 

Is the "soul" connected to Saidin/Saidar or is the body? 

 

The way I interpret it (I could be wrong), they're de-gendering souls. So you could be a man in one life and a woman in another. I would imagine men still channel saidin and women saidar. This means the magic system remains gendered, but which half you can channel will depend on what gender you are in your current life.

[swollymammoth]

5 minutes ago, Katherine said:

And all for nothing. 

THis is tha crux here. This change did not need to be made. It will please very few people. At best, many book readers will tolerate it. Many will hate it and stop watching

This is the point that so many people on this forum don't get. Yeah, these changes don't bother some people, but they're still alienating fans unnecessarily for no reason. Changing nothing would have resulted in 0 people angry. 

[Arthellion]

2 minutes ago, Beidomon said:

 

I listened to a few of Sarah's interviews, and it is pretty clear that while she is the super-est of super fans, she is just thrilled to be involved in the production and she wants to keep it that way, which means offering her input when requested but she's gonna stay in her lane and not push back too hard against changes by the creative types.

 

 

Can't get away from this song playing in my head at this point. 

[TheMountain]

What about Mat and all his past lives? Are some of them going to be women? Are we going to have a sexually confused Mat? Now *that* is going to cause some major body dysmorphia.

[Flamen]

Unfortunately, currently it is not posible to have even remotely faithful book adaptation/maybe before 10 years like GOT/. The collaboration bettwen corporate streaming platforms and 100% woke Hollywood could produce only generic and soulless product with some "cool" CGI.

[swollymammoth]

8 minutes ago, Beidomon said:

 

I listened to a few of Sarah's interviews, and it is pretty clear that while she is the super-est of super fans, she is just thrilled to be involved in the production and she wants to keep it that way, which means offering her input when requested but she's gonna stay in her lane and not push back too hard against changes by the creative types.

For anyone who thought that including Sarah was anything other than a symbolic gesture to the fans and that she was actually going to act as a corrective force on the show, I've got some ocean front property in Arizona you might be interested in.  

[Rose]

4 minutes ago, king of nowhere said:

this is all true. but it is very tricky business. it's extremely easy to get carried away with this and end up with discrimination in the opposite way. an even worse discrimination, because it would be written in law, and good luck as a white male complaining you're being discriminated.

I am not familiar with the movie industry, but when i did my PhD, the call for young researchers mentioned explicitly that, all else being equal, women were to be preferred over men. I can see where this comes from, and how women are underrepresented and face additional obstacles, but as they say, two wrongs don't make one right.

Just like picking someone because he's white is an injustice, so is picking someone because he's not white.

And no, i don't have a magical solution for this. Nobody has one. I can only invite everyone to caution and moderation. the only way we can make this work is by trial and error. This requires that everyone is ready to learn from past mistakes and improve on what's not working. which can't happen if everyone is so ideologically stuck on their positions that they'll refuse to change

 

Well, if it makes you feel any better, there are still more white than non-white actors in the WoT TV show cast.

[DaddyFinn]

4 minutes ago, swollymammoth said:

Changing nothing would have resulted in 0 people angry. 

Except the people that want this change..

[WalterKohl]

1 minute ago, TheMountain said:

What about Mat and all his past lives? Are some of them going to be women? Are we going to have a sexually confused Mat? Now *that* is going to cause some major body dysmorphia.

Did the books every say that his memories were his past lives or just the memories that the Alefin and Elafin (sp?) had harvested and shoved in his head?  

[Katherine]

11 minutes ago, Ralph said:

 

If it is the body (which I hope and expect) what does it change? 

 

8 minutes ago, Rose said:

 

The way I interpret it (I could be wrong), they're de-gendering souls. So you could be a man in one life and a woman in another. I would imagine men still channel saidin and women saidar. This means the magic system remains gendered, but which half you can channel will depend on what gender you are in your current life.

In the book it is the soul.... which makes more sense than the body I guess.  The thing is.. this is a gendered magic system, and degendering everything will make NO SENSE in the context of the book. 

 

Again... just unnecessary change that raises more questions.... why would magic care more about the body than the soul? 

[Arthellion]

Honestly, best tactic now is to hope that they mostly ignore this deeper lore in the show and we get the same story play out with limited changes. Just...very few deep dives into the lore and the places where this was changed is only small mentions or off hand comments.