Avatar: Cultural Appreciation or Appropriation?

I love Avatar: the Last Airbender. Obviously I do, because I run a fan blog on it. But make no mistake: it is a show built upon cultural appropriation. And you know what? For the longest time, as an Asian-American kid, I never saw it that way.

There are plenty of reasons why I never realized this as a kid, but I’ve narrowed it down to a few reasons. One is that I was desperate to watch a show with characters that looked like me in it that wasn’t anime (nothing wrong with anime, it’s just not my thing). Another is that I am East Asian (I have Taiwanese and Korean ancestry) and in general, despite being the outward “bad guys”, the East Asian cultural aspects of Avatar are respected far more than South Asian, Middle Eastern, and other influences. A third is that it’s easy to dismiss the negative parts of a show you really like, so I kind of ignored the issue for a while. I’m going to explain my own perspective on these reasons, and why I think we need to have a nuanced discussion about it. This is pretty long, so if you want to keep reading, it’s under the cut.

Obviously, the leadership behind ATLA was mostly white. We all know the co-creators Bryan Konietzko and Michael Dante DiMartino (colloquially known as Bryke) are white. So were most of the other episodic directors and writers, like Aaron Ehasz, Lauren Montgomery, and Joaquim Dos Santos. This does not mean they were unable to treat Asian cultures with respect, and I honestly do believe that they tried their best! But it does mean they have certain blinders, certain perceptions of what is interesting and enjoyable to watch. Avatar was applauded in its time for being based mostly on Asian and Native American cultures, but one has to wonder: how much of that choice was based on actual respect for these people, and how much was based on what they considered to be “interesting”, “quirky”, or “exotic”?

The aesthetic of the show, with its bending styles based on various martial arts forms, written language all in Chinese text, and characters all decked out in the latest Han dynasty fashions, is obviously directly derivative of Asian cultures. Fine. That’s great! They hired real martial artists to copy the bending styles accurately, had an actual Chinese calligrapher do all the lettering, and clearly did their research on what clothing, hair, and makeup looked like. The animation studios were in South Korea, so Korean animators were the ones who did the work. Overall, this is looking more like appreciation for a beautiful culture, and that’s exactly what we want in a rapidly diversifying world of media.

But there’s always going to be some cherry-picking, because it’s inevitable. What’s easy to animate, what appeals to modern American audiences, and what is practical for the world all come to mind as reasons. It’s just that… they kinda lump cultures together weirdly. Song from Book 2 (that girl whose ostrich-horse Zuko steals) wears a hanbok, a traditionally Korean outfit. It’s immediately recognizable as a hanbok, and these dresses are exclusive to Korea. Are we meant to assume that this little corner of the mostly Chinese Earth Kingdom is Korea? Because otherwise, it’s just treated as another little corner of the Earth Kingdom. Korea isn’t part of China. It’s its own country with its own culture, history, and language. Other aspects of Korean culture are ignored, possibly because there wasn’t time for it, but also probably because the creators thought the hanbok was cute and therefore they could just stick it in somewhere. But this is a pretty minor issue in the grand scheme of things (super minor, compared to some other things which I will discuss later on).

It’s not the lack of research that’s the issue. It’s not even the lack of consideration. But any Asian-American can tell you: it’s all too easy for the Asian kids to get lumped together, to become pan-Asian. To become the equivalent of the Earth Kingdom, a mass of Asians without specific borders or national identities. It’s just sort of uncomfortable for someone with that experience to watch a show that does that and then gets praised for being so sensitive about it. I don’t want you to think I’m from China or Vietnam or Japan; not because there’s anything wrong with them, but because I’m not! How would a French person like to be called British? It would really piss them off. Yet this happens all the time to Asian-Americans and we are expected to go along with it. And… we kind of do, because we’ve been taught to.

1. Growing Up Asian-American

I grew up in the early to mid-2000s, the era of High School Musical and Hannah Montana and iCarly, the era of Spongebob and The Amazing World of Gumball and Fairly Odd Parents. So I didn’t really see a ton of Asian characters onscreen in popular shows (not anime) that I could talk about with my white friends at school. One exception I recall was London from Suite Life, who was hardly a role model and was mostly played up for laughs more than actual nuance. Shows for adults weren’t exactly up to par back then either, with characters like the painfully stereotypical Raj from Big Bang Theory being one of the era that comes to mind.

So I was so grateful, so happy, to see characters that looked like me in Avatar when I first watched it. Look! I could dress up as Azula for Halloween and not Mulan for the third time! Nice! I didn’t question it. These were Asian characters who actually looked Asian and did cool stuff like shoot fireballs and throw knives and were allowed to have depth and character development. This was the first reason why I never questioned this cultural appropriation. I was simply happy to get any representation at all. This is not the same for others, though.

2. My Own Biases

Obviously, one can only truly speak for what they experience in their own life. I am East Asian and that is arguably the only culture that is treated with great depth in Avatar.

I don’t speak for South Asians, but I’ve certainly seen many people criticize Guru Pathik, the only character who is explicitly South Asian (and rightly so. He’s a stereotype played up for laughs and the whole thing with chakras is in my opinion one of the biggest plotholes in the show). They’ve also discussed how Avatar: The Last Airbender lifts heavily from Hinduism (with chakras, the word Avatar itself, and the Eye of Shiva used by Combustion Man to blow things up). Others have expressed how they feel the sandbenders, who are portrayed as immoral thieves who deviously kidnap Appa for money, are a direct insult to Middle Eastern and North African cultures. People have noted that it makes no sense that a culture based on Inuit and other Native groups like the Water Tribe would become industrialized as they did in the North & South comics, since these are people that historically (and in modern day!) opposed extreme industrialization. The Air Nomads, based on the Tibetan people, are weirdly homogeneous in their Buddhist-inspired orange robes and hyperspiritual lifestyle. So too have Southeast Asians commented on the Foggy Swamp characters, whose lifestyles are made fun of as being dirty and somehow inferior. The list goes on.

These things, unlike the elaborate and highly researched elements of East Asian culture, were not treated with respect and are therefore cultural appropriation. As a kid, I had the privilege of not noticing these things. Now I do.

White privilege is real, but every person has privileges of some kind, and in this case, I was in the wrong for not realizing that. Yes, I was a kid; but it took a long time for me to see that not everyone’s culture was respected the way mine was. They weren’t considered *aesthetic* enough, and therefore weren’t worth researching and accurately portraying to the creators. It’s easy for a lot of East Asians to argue, “No! I’ve experienced racism! I’m not privileged!” News flash: I’ve experienced racism too. But I’ve also experienced privilege. If white people can take their privilege for granted, so too can other races. Shocking, I know. And I know now how my privilege blinded me to the fact that not everybody felt the same euphoria I did seeing characters that looked like them onscreen. Not if they were a narrow and offensive portrayal of their race. There are enough good-guy Asian characters that Fire Lord Ozai is allowed to be evil; but can you imagine if he was the only one?

3. What It Does Right

This is sounding really down on Avatar, which I don’t want to do. It’s a great show with a lot of fantastic themes that don’t show up a lot in kids’ media. It isn’t superficial or sugarcoating in its portrayal of the impacts of war, imperialism, colonialism, disability, and sexism, just to name a few. There are characters like Katara, a brown girl allowed to get angry but is not defined by it. There are characters like Aang, who is the complete opposite of toxic masculinity. There are characters like Toph, who is widely known as a great example of how to write a disabled character.

But all of these good things sort of masked the issues with the show. It’s easy to sweep an issue under the rug when there’s so many great things to stack on top and keep it down. Alternatively, one little problem in a show seems to make-or-break media for some people. Cancel culture is the most obvious example of this gone too far. Celebrity says one ignorant thing? Boom, cancelled. But… kind of not really, and also, they’re now terrified of saying anything at all because their apologies are mocked and their future decisions are scrutinized. It encourages a closed system of creators writing only what they know for fear of straying too far out of their lane. Avatar does do a lot of great things, and I think it would be silly and immature to say that its cultural appropriation invalidates all of these things. At the same time, this issue is an issue that should be addressed. Criticizing one part of the show doesn’t mean that the other parts of it aren’t good, or that you shouldn’t be a fan.

If Avatar’s cultural appropriation does make you uncomfortable enough to stop watching, go for it. Stop watching. No single show appeals to every single person. At the same time, if you’re a massive fan, take a sec (honestly, if you’ve made it this far, you’ve taken many secs) to check your own privilege, and think about how the blurred line between cultural appreciation (of East Asia) and appropriation (basically everybody else) formed. Is it because we as viewers were also captivated by the aesthetic and overall story, and so forgive the more problematic aspects? Is it because we’ve been conditioned so fully into never expecting rep that when we get it, we cling to it?

I’m no media critic or expert on race, cultural appropriation, or anything of the sort. I’m just an Asian-American teenager who hopes that her own opinion can be put out there into the world, and maybe resonate with someone else. I hope that it’s given you new insight into why Avatar: The Last Airbender is a show with both cultural appropriation and appreciation, and why these things coexist. Thank you for reading!

Hi! I love your work! I came here after reading your Dramione fics but I stayed for the Bridgerton fics as well. I'm so very excited about your new fic which is going to be the best of both worlds.

I'm normally a silent lurker on Tumblr but I don't know why right now I just can't. Today in the morning when I saw on your blog about the Netflix announcement about Kate I just got so damn angry about how she's going to be changed to someone of Indian descent. Before you think that I'm just another rascist I would like to point out that I'm NOT one. I'm just the opposite I'm actually an Indian. So I know I should be happy with the casting but I'm so very disappointed in Netflix because it seems like they have done little to no research before changing Kate's descent.

Bridgerton is set in the Regency Era and if they had researched then they would have gotten to know that there weren't any Indians present in Britain at that time. Britain only had commerce and trade relations set up with India at that time. Their rule in India started around 1858 when the regency period had ended. Also, the people who would have went to England in late 19th century were mostly of labour class or scholars. Thus, they would absolutely not have been part of London's elite or the ton.

I know that Bridgerton is not an accurate display of the scene in Britain at that time since they have done a colour blind casting. I'm so NOT against it. I would only like to commend them on this. The point I'm angry is that they have fallen into the trend of atleast having someone in the cast of Indian descent but not doing a better research for the role. The portrayal of our culture is not accurate and that is what hurts the most. At that time period India was very orthodox even more so than Britain and in some aspects it still is. I know the western world would think that it is a very backward way of living but it is our culture and it is evolving at its own pace and it should be respected. What made me angry is that the show is just going to throw the name and say it's of Indian descent and then make the actress wear a corset and follow British etiquettes which was so not the case. Netflix and Shondaland may wanna show the world how inclusive they are of all the races but when their portrayal of said race is not correct they may end up in hurting them.

It's completely fine if you ignore this but I wanted to let you know the opinion of someone who's actually Indian and how they feel when their culture is represented not accurately. I'm sorry for coming here and venting but I just wanted to tell someone how I was feeling and not a lot of my friends have watched or read Bridgerton so they won't understand. I really hope that you're not offended by anything I said. Like I mentioned I love your work and I'm looking forward to it!!

I’m going to be honest, I hadn’t thought about it from this perspective, and I’m glad you shared this.

Here’s the thing, I really really really hope they’re going to bring in someone with experience with Indian costuming, and actually have her in lovely lovely dresses that are NOT corsets and stays. 

We don’t know anything yet about how they’re changing things, but I think the name was a great first step, and I hope that Shonda continues.

The only hate I’ve seen so far has all been from white women that are just soooo upset because there would NEVEr be an Indian woman in regency and it’s just soooo unrealistic... and it’s painfully obvious that they’re just being racist, they have nothing to add to the conversation, and their complaints have nothing to do with cultural identity, just being upset that someone not white is going to be the heroine.

So thank you for sharing this, because we need to be more aware on how various cultures are being represented, particularly in relation to how Imperial Britain treated other cultures.

I’m excited that we have a white Lord marrying an Indian Lady. I just really really hope that we respect Indian culture, and that they have the right people on staff. We shall see what they do.

I think there’s a huge opportunity here to have diverse cultures and casting, but it’s all about what Shonda does with it.

Fingers crossed they get it right.

celticaurora said: OH HO HO MORE PERIOD DRAMAS ABOUT THE ANARCHY??? Truly an underrated time period, how have I not heard of Cadfael before????

Did someone say my favourite medieval detective show ever? (yes, me) Well if you’re looking to watch a show that combined murder mystery, medieval history, nuanced portrayals of organised religion and gentle herbology then put on your slippers and get comfy, pal, because you are in for a smooth ride.

Cadfael is one of those cosy british murder mysteries like Poirot and Midsomer Murders that you used to watch with your gran on a rainy Sunday afternoon. Unlike most murder mysteries, however, it’s set in the middle ages - which makes it even better, because what’s a good mystery without a few swords to brighten things up?

it’s the 12th century, and England is in the middle of the Anarchy, our first proper civil war centuries before Cromwell made it cool (yes, I am salty that it’s never recognised as such by historians). The Empress Maude and King Stephen are fighting for the crown, the country is in turmoil, and with so much bloodshed, who has the time or the inclination to investigate unlawful murders in these dark and dangerous times? Our boy Cadfael, that’s who. Cadfael is a former soldier and crusader who’s since settled down and become a monk-slash-pharmacist in Shrewsbury Abbey. His general know-how and tendency to care about teensy little things like cold-blooded murder mean he’s often off solving unexplained deaths and dangerous political scrapes that the abbey finds itself drawn into.

Be warned, the show was put together in the mid-nineties, and you can definitely tell, with such classics as Patented Plastic Swords, Wounds With No Bloodshed, and Knitted Chainmail. Fortunately there’s not much you can do to screw up a monk’s cowl and habit.

The show is based on a series of books by Ellis Peters (real name Edith Pargeter), and they are just as good, if not better, as the show. Would highly recommend.

Reasons for watching:

The Anarchy. A truly underappreciated period in British history (because it was interesting, not because it was particularly fun); Cadfael proves a neat introduction if you’re looking to get a bit more into that wacky time when we had a war for nineteen years all because Henry I never had a legitimate son. While it shows some clever insight into the various politics and events that took place (even though I’ll never get over the show’s painfully inaccurate portrayal of Stephen) it’s particularly good at portraying what life was like for ordinary people who had no real interest in whether Stephen or Maude ruled, but found themselves swept up in the conflict.

Murder Mystery Bros

Before Sherlock and Watson made it cool, England had Brother Cadfael and Undersheriff Hugh Beringar. Crime-fighting duos are always fun, but the broship between Kindly Badass Cadfael and Death-before-Dishonour Beringar is really lovely to watch. (with the slight proviso that Beringar’s appearance changes...more than once.)

One-Dimensional Religious Characters? Never Met Them

One thing I love about this series is because it’s set in an abbey, it covers all the different spectrums of how you could be a Christian in 12th century England and basically goes ‘the Church was an institution made up of humans and like all other such institutions was capable of great grace and kindness, and unbelievable dickbaggery’. Where else would you get such a span of characters ranging from:

Cadfael, who’s basically that one bloke that atheists on tumblr will say ‘oh, I don’t like organised religion but that one Christian dude’s pretty cool, why aren’t the rest of you like that: kind, cares about the down-trodden, deeply pious but also pretty worldly-wise. Brother Oswin: lovely and earnest in his faith but also essentially useless when it comes to doing anything practical. Abbot Heribert: nice cuddly grandpa abbot who’s very lovely but doesn’t do all that much. Abbot Radulphus: firm but fair Reasonable Authority Figure (tm). Prior Robert: pompous stuck-up git who exhibits all of the authoritarian tendencies of the medieval church without actually being downright evil. Brother Jerome: equally fundamentalist tattling little sod who’s nonetheless so pathetic that you occasionally pity him, if only because it can’t be fun being that unlikable.

The one problem with this is that there are no female regular characters, monasteries being famously non-female-centric. Plenty of awesome female guest characters though.

(Also, the conflicts between Cadfael and his more conservative colleagues? Not Politically Correct History, this was actually a thing! Neo-Aristotelian thought was a way of thinking that arose in the Middle East (Cadfael was a crusader) that relied on logic and reasoning, as opposed to the blind acceptance of authority demanded by orthodox Augustinianism; and this became a big intellectual Thing amongst academics during Western Europe at this time. Not only did Ellis Peters write a historically accurate character we can relate to, it’s a humongous fuck you to anyone who thinks medieval Europe was full of cavemen still working out how to make fire.)

Cadfael Himself

Sir Derek Jacobi playing a lovely old soldier-turned-monk whose main cares are promoting peace over bloodshed and seeking justice for the underdog (as well as usually setting up the Couple of the Week amidst his sleuthing, because of course). With plenty of snark. What’s not to love?

-

Also if you’re interested in reading about the Anarchy, may I humbly suggest Sharon Penman’s When Christ and His Saints Slept? Penman’s storytelling isn’t always the best – it’s sometimes less historical fiction and more dramatic retelling of the facts with some additional characters popped in  - but it’s pretty good fun and fully introduced me to the sheer chaotic madness of the Anarchy. (Also for those of us who’ve been burned by medieval authors’ inability to write a well-founded female character to save their life, her stories always seem to stray clear of the typical pitfalls; eg gross sexual assault/this woman really likes sex so she’s obvs a harlot/this woman dislikes sex so she’s obvs a prude/i am a Strong Female Woman and anything Feminine is Beneath Me, which is a definite plus.)

Telegraph parody piece

COMMENT

Finding Freedom makes one thing clear: the Americans know nothing about us Brits

Don’t the Americans get it? We don’t care about Meghan’s perfect packing, faith or ‘work ethic’. We want the ugly, fun and real

REBECCA REID14 August 2020 • 11:08am

Totally out of touch: Finding Freedom CREDIT: PA

If Finding Freedom was designed as a piece of PR for the Duchess of Sussex, then her team needs sacking. Because once again, the people trying to make Meghan “likeable” have done a woeful job. Her characterisation in the book is painfully earnest, and eager, and completely – sorry, friends across the Pond – American. 

Finding Freedom doubles down on this characterisation, using anecdotes and descriptions that I would never dare use in fiction for fear of the red-pen treatment my editor would give me. Case in point: “Theirs was a love story that took hold in Africa – where now Meghan, on the last day of an incredible three-week stay, stretched her body into the perfect warrior pose.

“She quietly took in her surroundings from the grounds of their final home away from home on this trip, a modern villa in Livingstone, Zambia, just under ten miles upstream from Victoria Falls. The rising sun washed over her makeshift yoga garden, while an exotic flock of birds that looked as if they had just had their tails dipped in pots of colourful paints serenaded her.”

Authors Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand have been working the royal beat for years, but without wanting to question their expertise, I’ve got some thoughts on how they could have done it.

Let’s take a line about Meghan’s childhood. Finding Freedom reads: “Meghan’s willingness to help others and her drive to excel meant she often was deemed ‘fake’ by classmates at school who felt it was impossible for anyone to be that ‘perfect.’”

A more Brit-friendly line would have been something like: “Meghan’s willingness to skive lessons and share her stolen Marlboro behind the PE block, or use her older sister’s ID to buy bottles of White Strike, meant that she was deemed a ‘total legend’ by classmates at school.”

Can't we hear the real stuff? Meghan Markle, as she once was CREDIT: Mark Large

Finding Freedom tells us: “A good friend of Meghan’s called her Grace Under Fire, because despite whatever pressure she was under, she didn’t fall apart.”

Her work ethic is described thus: “From the time she was a student, juggling school and jobs, through her years grinding out auditions for bit parts, to her becoming a successful TV star who continued to push the boundaries of her career by launching a popular lifestyle website, Meghan always had a plan.”

In my Meghan propaganda, it’s slightly tweaked to read: “From the time she was a student, she knew how to do the absolute bare minimum and get away with it. She’d turn up to work half an hour late for work, carrying an industrial coffee and swallow down a fistful of paracetamol. But she always knew which bars would have creepy old dudes who’d ply you with free drinks – Meghan always had a plan.”

The line that many Brits will find hardest to read without squirming is when the book dips into issues ecumenical: ‘‘Part of what helped Meghan get through this difficult time was her faith. Her relationship with God and with the church is extremely important to her,” a close friend said. “That’s something most people do not know about her.”

A proposed rewrite on the topic of spirituality would go something like: “She probably believes there’s something up there – I mean it’s a nice thought isn’t it? Anyway, how have you been? Terribly hot recently isn’t it? More tea?”

It’s not Meghan’s fault that we’re a nation of horrible cynics who only really like watching other people fail, and it’s not the book’s authors’ fault either. But the woman presented in Finding Freedom, however accurate a portrayal it may or may not be, is not the kind of woman the British public were ever going to be able to hold to their chest.

We don’t like people who do yoga and look at sunsets on holiday. We like people who drink three double gin-and-tonics before dinner and then try to speak Spanish by doing English with a slightly offensive accent.

A royal affair: the newlyweds leave Windsor Castle in May 2018 CREDIT: PA

We don’t like people who pack their suitcases using dryer sheets (a story recounted in the book). We do like people who shove two outfits into a duffle bag and turn their pants inside out if needs be. The only part of the book that seems to do the Duchess any real favours is the bit where they claim she was very happy to urinate in the bushes on a camping trip with Prince Harry. 

Because the Sussexes have become earnest LA types, they’ve become more and more like characters in the kind of soap opera that the middle classes who consider Hollyoaks beneath them can permit themselves to enjoy: entertainment puppets, who are useful given that The Archers is currently unrecognisable, but not an ideal outcome for a couple who seem to crave the affection of the world. 

If they’re reading any news at all, they can’t be unaware that the tide of public opinion is often against them, which must be a miserable thing to live with. Despite the fact that both the couple and the authors have been clear that no interviews were given for the book, it seems plausible that they hoped Finding Freedom might help their popularity.

It is, on the face of it, a very sympathetic portrayal of a beautiful young couple in love, striving to find their place in the world. But then, perhaps the misplaced belief that the characters in this book are likeable to your average Brit is born of the same thinking which caused some of the Sussex Royal problems in the first place. 

Read more:

HBO's Comedy Series Camping is an Unpleasant Trip

The world of fiction boasts a long, proud history of stories of deeply unpleasant people you somehow care about, in spite of that visceral unpleasantness. (Mostly, they’re men.) These stories can be wearying, but when they’re good, they’re also rewarding. We recognize in these people the nastiest, ugliest corners of ourselves; we also recognize their, and our, humanity. We cringe, we laugh, and sometimes, we’re better for it. It’s like magic. If only “Camping” could manage such a trick. But hey, at least it pulls off the unpleasantness.

The last joint project from Lena Dunham and Jenni Konner (“Girls”), who announced the end of their writing partnership this summer, “Camping” is an American take of the British series of the same name, which was created by Julia Davis. It centers on a group of what one might be tempted to call friends, but which could more accurately be described as a loose collection of people who know each other, most of whom like at least a few people the people there and can barely tolerate others. They’ve come to celebrate Walt’s (David Tennant) birthday, a weekend-long event organized by his peevish, abrasive, and overzealous wife Catherine (Jennifer Garner, working extremely hard). Among them: Nina-Joy (Janicza Bravo), whose tension with Catherine threatens to capsize the weekend from moment one, and her husband George (Brett Gelman); Catherine’s tentative sister Carleen (Ione Skye), her boyfriend Joe (Chris Sullivan), who left his A.A. 30-day chip as a tip at a diner, and his teenage daughter Sol (Cheyenne Haynes); and Miguel (Arturo Del Puerto), whose recent separation from his wife makes the others believe he won’t show. But show he does, bringing a force of chaos in his wake: Jandice (Juliette Lewis), a DJing, reiki-practicing, pill-dispensing notary who some would call a free spirit and others would call unhinged. The weekend, unsurprisingly, goes badly.

It’s not that unpleasant people who treat those around them like garbage can’t be great TV. “Mad Men” comes to mind. So does “Girls,” for that matter. The problem with “Camping” is not that Catherine, Jandice, and company—but especially Catherine and Jandice—are people with whom you’d never in a million years want to share a campsite. No, the issue is that they’re not really people. For every glimmer of humanity or odd moment of self-recognition, there are 10 that bear no resemblance to reality without so much as a glimmer of the engagingly absurd. They are sketches, and they’re not entertaining ones; they say things that might be funny, if a human being said them, but as lines delivered by the caricature of a really disagreeable person, they’re just off-putting.

Nowhere is this a bigger problem than with Catherine, played with admirable but uneffective gusto by Garner. It would be easy to say that she was simply miscast as Catherine, a bitter, manipulative, painfully un-self-aware woman seemingly incapable of casual pleasant interactions. And admittedly, it’s not a perfect fit—"off-putting" is perhaps more in Garner’s wheelhouse than “loathsome.” But there are glimmers throughout the four episodes screened for critics of what might have been, had the writing for those episodes presented her with anything coherent to play. A scene in an emergency room in which a spiraling Catherine tells her young son Orvis (Duncan Joiner) that it’s possible to look fine but feel terrible plays simply and beautifully, a moment of recognizably human conversation that’s so welcome that viewers, if they’re anything like me, will drink it in as greedily as if it were an ice-cold beer on a very hot day in the middle of an interminable camping trip with some incredibly lousy people.

There are similar moments, some quiet, and hard to watch—she’s especially good with Tennant, who we’ll return to in a moment—but they’re depressingly rare. The rest is all blitzing through paragraphs about Instagram followers and detailed schedules and chronic pain and pelvic floors and near-constant assertions that everyone around her is constantly ruining her life, at every moment. When one line would get the point across—“Checking in, eight adults one child four nights at the Groupon rate,” in one breath, to the campground’s bemused proprietor (Bridget Everett)—there are usually four, and at least half are gruesomely on the nose. On “Alias,” Garner successfully sold the Rambaldi mythology, which involved Da Vinci and big red floating balls of goo. She got four Emmy nominations for that show. She can’t even kind of make this junk work.

Others fare better. The only remotely shaky thing about Tennant’s performance is his often comically thick American accent; in all other respects, he carefully crafts a portrayal of a loving, supportive man who is just about at the end of his gosh-darned rope and completely unsure of how to handle that. As the similarly put-upon Nina-Joy, Bravo gets to play something like the straight man, but instead of being the solid wall off which jokes can bounce, she’s the reasonably sane, clear-eyed person who reaffirms that yes, this is all crazy. She does it all with appealing reserve and emotional resonance. The same is true of Chris Sullivan’s Joe, who imbues his spiraling jackass with enough vulnerability and self-loathing to avoid making him another loathsome object. And while there’s nothing subtle about it, Lewis’ turn as the wild Jandice is so damned entertaining that it’s hard not to hunger for more. She’s occasionally funny, bless the Lord, but more importantly, she’s a force, an energy. Jandice enters the frame and things change.

“Camping” seemingly never stops, never shuts up, and yet somehow it still takes a good long while before it seems to be getting anywhere. Yet paradoxically, the slowest moments are the ones in which the best of the series seems to emerge. It’s not just that the acting is best in those quiet moments. When the characters take a breath, a real sense of place seeps in between the sentences. Directors Konner, John Riggi, and Wendey Stanzler—the last of whom directed the “Parks and Recreation” episode “Flu Season,” one of the best sitcom outings of the century so far—each evocatively capture the vast, dark, loud-quietness of a campground after dark, while Stanzler in particular makes every beige tent feel insanely cramped and small. In the former case, the cameras wander down paths, creeping up on the characters or catching sight of them from a distance. In the latter, it’s always crammed in somehow, one more unwelcome presence in a space that’s way too small to contain such uncomfortable people.

It’s effective stuff, but perhaps too effective at times. “Camping” traps eight adults, two children, in a campground at the Groupon rate for a weekend from hell. On such weekends, every day is too long, every irritation heightened. It’s not a good state in which to live, but it could be ripe material for comedy, or for good storytelling. What you’re given here is a camping trip you’d never want to take, with people you’d never like to meet, doing things you’re almost embarrassed to watch. With all that discomfort, there may not be much to stop audiences from packing up their shit and moving on.

from All Content https://ift.tt/2IRuLDn

Avatar: Cultural Appreciation or Appropriation?

I love Avatar: the Last Airbender. Obviously I do, because I run a fan blog on it. But make no mistake: it is a show built upon cultural appropriation. And you know what? For the longest time, as an Asian-American kid, I never saw it that way.

There are plenty of reasons why I never realized this as a kid, but I’ve narrowed it down to a few reasons. One is that I was desperate to watch a show with characters that looked like me in it that wasn’t anime (nothing wrong with anime, it’s just not my thing). Another is that I am East Asian (I have Taiwanese and Korean ancestry) and in general, despite being the outward “bad guys”, the East Asian cultural aspects of Avatar are respected far more than South Asian, Middle Eastern, and other influences. A third is that it’s easy to dismiss the negative parts of a show you really like, so I kind of ignored the issue for a while. I’m going to explain my own perspective on these reasons, and why I think we need to have a nuanced discussion about it. 

Obviously, the leadership behind ATLA was mostly white. We all know the co-creators Bryan Konietzko and Michael Dante DiMartino (colloquially known as Bryke) are white. So were most of the other episodic directors and writers, like Aaron Ehasz, Lauren Montgomery, and Joaquim Dos Santos. This does not mean they were unable to treat Asian cultures with respect, and I honestly do believe that they tried their best! But it does mean they have certain blinders, certain perceptions of what is interesting and enjoyable to watch. Avatar was applauded in its time for being based mostly on Asian and Native American cultures, but one has to wonder: how much of that choice was based on actual respect for these people, and how much was based on what they considered to be “interesting”, “quirky”, or “exotic”?

The aesthetic of the show, with its bending styles based on various martial arts forms, written language all in Chinese text, and characters all decked out in the latest Han dynasty fashions, is obviously directly derivative of Asian cultures. Fine. That’s great! They hired real martial artists to copy the bending styles accurately, had an actual Chinese calligrapher do all the lettering, and clearly did their research on what clothing, hair, and makeup looked like. The animation studios were in South Korea, so Korean animators were the ones who did the work. Overall, this is looking more like appreciation for a beautiful culture, and that’s exactly what we want in a rapidly diversifying world of media.

But there’s always going to be some cherry-picking, because it’s inevitable. What’s easy to animate, what appeals to modern American audiences, and what is practical for the world all come to mind as reasons. It’s just that… they kinda lump cultures together weirdly. Song from Book 2 (that girl whose ostrich-horse Zuko steals) wears a hanbok, a traditionally Korean outfit. It’s immediately recognizable as a hanbok, and these dresses are exclusive to Korea. Are we meant to assume that this little corner of the mostly Chinese Earth Kingdom is Korea? Because otherwise, it’s just treated as another little corner of the Earth Kingdom. Korea isn’t part of China. It’s its own country with its own culture, history, and language. Other aspects of Korean culture are ignored, possibly because there wasn’t time for it, but also probably because the creators thought the hanbok was cute and therefore they could just stick it in somewhere. But this is a pretty minor issue in the grand scheme of things (super minor, compared to some other things which I will discuss later on).

It’s not the lack of research that’s the issue. It’s not even the lack of consideration. But any Asian-American can tell you: it’s all too easy for the Asian kids to get lumped together, to become pan-Asian. To become the equivalent of the Earth Kingdom, a mass of Asians without specific borders or national identities. It’s just sort of uncomfortable for someone with that experience to watch a show that does that and then gets praised for being so sensitive about it. I don’t want you to think I’m from China or Vietnam or Japan; not because there’s anything wrong with them, but because I’m not! How would a French person like to be called British? It would really piss them off. Yet this happens all the time to Asian-Americans and we are expected to go along with it. And… we kind of do, because we’ve been taught to.

1. Growing Up Asian-American

I grew up in the early to mid-2000s, the era of High School Musical and Hannah Montana and iCarly, the era of Spongebob and The Amazing World of Gumball and Fairly Odd Parents. So I didn’t really see a ton of Asian characters onscreen in popular shows (not anime) that I could talk about with my white friends at school. One exception I recall was London from Suite Life, who was hardly a role model and was mostly played up for laughs more than actual nuance. Shows for adults weren’t exactly up to par back then either, with characters like the painfully stereotypical Raj from Big Bang Theory being one of the era that comes to mind.

So I was so grateful, so happy, to see characters that looked like me in Avatar when I first watched it. Look! I could dress up as Azula for Halloween and not Mulan for the third time! Nice! I didn’t question it. These were Asian characters who actually looked Asian and did cool stuff like shoot fireballs and throw knives and were allowed to have depth and character development. This was the first reason why I never questioned this cultural appropriation. I was simply happy to get any representation at all. This is not the same for others, though.

2. My Own Biases

Obviously, one can only truly speak for what they experience in their own life. I am East Asian and that is arguably the only culture that is treated with great depth in Avatar.

I don’t speak for South Asians, but I’ve certainly seen many people criticize Guru Pathik, the only character who is explicitly South Asian (and rightly so. He’s a stereotype played up for laughs and the whole thing with chakras is in my opinion one of the biggest plotholes in the show). They’ve also discussed how Avatar: The Last Airbender lifts heavily from Hinduism (with chakras, the word Avatar itself, and the Eye of Shiva used by Combustion Man to blow things up). Others have expressed how they feel the sandbenders, who are portrayed as immoral thieves who deviously kidnap Appa for money, are a direct insult to Middle Eastern and North African cultures. People have noted that it makes no sense that a culture based on Inuit and other Native groups like the Water Tribe would become industrialized as they did in the North & South comics, since these are people that historically (and in modern day!) opposed extreme industrialization. The Air Nomads, based on the Tibetan people, are weirdly homogeneous in their Buddhist-inspired orange robes and hyperspiritual lifestyle. So too have Southeast Asians commented on the Foggy Swamp characters, whose lifestyles are made fun of as being dirty and somehow inferior. The list goes on.

These things, unlike the elaborate and highly researched elements of East Asian culture, were not treated with respect and are therefore cultural appropriation. As a kid, I had the privilege of not noticing these things. Now I do.

White privilege is real, but every person has privileges of some kind, and in this case, I was in the wrong for not realizing that. Yes, I was a kid; but it took a long time for me to see that not everyone’s culture was respected the way mine was. They weren’t considered *aesthetic* enough, and therefore weren’t worth researching and accurately portraying to the creators. It’s easy for a lot of East Asians to argue, “No! I’ve experienced racism! I’m not privileged!” News flash: I’ve experienced racism too. But I’ve also experienced privilege. If white people can take their privilege for granted, so too can other races. Shocking, I know. And I know now how my privilege blinded me to the fact that not everybody felt the same euphoria I did seeing characters that looked like them onscreen. Not if they were a narrow and offensive portrayal of their race. There are enough good-guy Asian characters that Fire Lord Ozai is allowed to be evil; but can you imagine if he was the only one?

3. What It Does Right

This is sounding really down on Avatar, which I don’t want to do. It’s a great show with a lot of fantastic themes that don’t show up a lot in kids’ media. It isn’t superficial or sugarcoating in its portrayal of the impacts of war, imperialism, colonialism, disability, and sexism, just to name a few. There are characters like Katara, a brown girl allowed to get angry but is not defined by it. There are characters like Aang, who is the complete opposite of toxic masculinity. There are characters like Toph, who is widely known as a great example of how to write a disabled character.

But all of these good things sort of masked the issues with the show. It’s easy to sweep an issue under the rug when there’s so many great things to stack on top and keep it down. Alternatively, one little problem in a show seems to make-or-break media for some people. Cancel culture is the most obvious example of this gone too far. Celebrity says one ignorant thing? Boom, cancelled. But… kind of not really, and also, they’re now terrified of saying anything at all because their apologies are mocked and their future decisions are scrutinized. It encourages a closed system of creators writing only what they know for fear of straying too far out of their lane. Avatar does do a lot of great things, and I think it would be silly and immature to say that its cultural appropriation invalidates all of these things. At the same time, this issue is an issue that should be addressed. Criticizing one part of the show doesn’t mean that the other parts of it aren’t good, or that you shouldn’t be a fan.

If Avatar’s cultural appropriation does make you uncomfortable enough to stop watching, go for it. Stop watching. No single show appeals to every single person. At the same time, if you’re a massive fan, take a sec (honestly, if you’ve made it this far, you’ve taken many secs) to check your own privilege, and think about how the blurred line between cultural appreciation (of East Asia) and appropriation (basically everybody else) formed. Is it because we as viewers were also captivated by the aesthetic and overall story, and so forgive the more problematic aspects? Is it because we’ve been conditioned so fully into never expecting rep that when we get it, we cling to it?

I’m no media critic or expert on race, cultural appropriation, or anything of the sort. I’m just an Asian-American teenager who hopes that her own opinion can be put out there into the world, and maybe resonate with someone else. I hope that it’s given you new insight into why Avatar: The Last Airbender is a show with both cultural appropriation and appreciation, and why these things coexist. Thank you for reading!