Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

brainburger t1_j1nokmj wrote

Reply to comment by jlnxr in My African parents couldn't find a dark-skinned virgin Mary, so they they put Mary in blackface by rhapsodygreen

> is that it's perfectly acceptable to make them whatever race, whatever style clothing, time period, etc. if done in a respectful matter.

Hmm. It does make one wonder about the prospect of other black historical figures portrayed by white actors, and so on. We wouldn't accept a white Nelson Mandela.

−10

pogotc t1_j1nrrcj wrote

No, but then Nelson Mandela isn’t a fictional character.

6

brainburger t1_j1pspc5 wrote

Generally the portrayal of historic or traditional black characters, by white actors is now firmly frowned-upon. Jesus is treated as a special exception. This is probably because there are just so many portrayals of him as white that it has normalized if for most Christians. It is worth considering whether its time for this to change in new portrayals. Religion should not be immune to advances n morality.

1

Bubbagumpredditor t1_j1nsv7b wrote

Well, that's also a character where his ethnicity is a main point of his story.

Like a black guy playing Winston Churchill might not be historically accurate, but his ethnicity is not a main point of the story.

2

brainburger t1_j1pri31 wrote

> Well, that's also a character where his ethnicity is a main point of his story.

The Jewishness of Jesus is a very important aspect of his story though. That is erased by the typical European portrayal of him.

3

Hoelie t1_j1q2d7v wrote

He should look less white for sure. Like bernie Sanders

1

jlnxr t1_j1ofg3t wrote

Well sure it would be pretty offense to have a white Nelson Mandela, but people seemed cool with a black Alexander Hamilton. Turns out, context matters.

In any case if you believe Jesus is literally God incarnate his race is probably not that important, even if historical Jesus (which even secular scholars generally agree existed) was obviously a middle eastern jew.

2

brainburger t1_j1prb9o wrote

> Well sure it would be pretty offense to have a white Nelson Mandela, but people seemed cool with a black Alexander Hamilton. Turns out, context matters.

As you might be aware its not the practice of cross-racial portrayal that is problematic in itself. It's not quite the same when a black actor plays a white person, as when a white actor plays a black person. The difference is that 'blackface' alludes to the systematic oppression of black people, and 'minstrel' performing. There is not the same connotation when it is the other way around.

In the case of Jesus, there is some attempt at erasure going on, certainly historically. It seems white Christians often don't like the prospect of being saved by a middle-Eastern Jew so they tend to obscure the fact in Christian art. (or at least that is a valid uncharitable interpretation) . In contrast we would not find it acceptable to present an alternate history of South Africa in which universal suffrage was obtained using the lifelong activism and sacrifice of a white man.

−4

Jsimpson059 t1_j1oi2ow wrote

Nelson Mandela is a modern historical figure, we literally have pictures of likeness to go off of, living memory of him, his ethnicity is an undeniable part of his identity, we dont know anything about Jesus other than an accounts by authors after the fact compiling his teachings from oral to written accounts.

There is a reason why the western personifcation of God and Zues have similar designs.

Also during the reniassance there would be other political redesigns such as the more modern look of Jesus being based off of I shit you not Cesare Borgia.

2

brainburger t1_j1ps83k wrote

> Nelson Mandela is a modern historical figure, we literally have pictures of likeness to go off of, living memory of him, his ethnicity is an undeniable part of his identity, we dont know anything about Jesus other than an accounts by authors after the fact compiling his teachings from oral to written accounts.

That does occur to me, but we have a pretty good idea what Jesus should look like, and he is often portrayed in a way which we know cannot be accurate. In the past when people did not travel as easily some mis-representation is understandable. It makes sense for people in the UK, say, to portray the fruit from the Adam and Eve story as an apple, as the audience wouldn't know what a fig, or many of the other candidate fruits looked like.

I do think, in all seriousness, it is time we stopped making new portrayals of Jesus as a white man. He wasn't a white man. It really shouldn't cause any problems to show him as a middle Eastern Jew.

>I shit you not Cesare Borgia.

TIL thanks.

−1