I'm not upset or even really concerned at the idea of Digory being portrayed as having an Indian father and a white mother. It's not how Lewis imagined the character, obviously, but there's no reason why it should have a negative impact on the story.

I do think it's a bit ahistorical, in that, while of course there were intermarriages (or just relationships) between Indian people and the British colonisers, these were not very common and wouldn't have been widely seen as socially acceptable. From the colonisers' point of view, after all, marrying one of the "natives" (let alone having children with them) implicitly means accepting them as your equal, which then makes it a bit difficult to justify your country ruling and subjugating theirs. 

And of course, having Digory as half-British and half-Indian in London in 1900 means he will stand out very visibly as "mixed race" — because however modern-day period dramas may like to revise things, late 19th / early 20th-century London was nowhere near as ethnically diverse as London is today. If this is going to be played realistically, Anglo-Indian Digory will experience racism in Britain for sure. And if he was born in India, he would be seen as "different" / "not quite one of us" by not only the white British colonials, but probably by a lot of Indian people as well.

This could actually lead to some quite interesting angles on the story, making Digory all the more lonely and outcast and underscoring how significant it is that Polly (presumably white British) doesn't have any problem with being friends with him. It's a different take, for sure, and it's not something that's a factor at all in the original story, but if it's done thoughtfully, it might very well enhance and deepen the story rather than detracting from it.

On the other hand, if it's done clumsily, it could end up just looking like an exercise in diversity box-ticking. But the very fact that they are asking specifically for a British boy of Indian descent suggests that they have thought that through as part of his character, not that they're just trying to fill the role with someone of non-white ethnic background merely for the optics of it.

(I could be a bit cynical about it and suggest that somebody just read the story superficially, noticed that it says Digory's father was in India, and jumped to the conclusion that this means his father must be Indian, without stopping to think about the history of British imperialism and the reasons why there were quite a lot of white British people in India in the late Victorian era and for some decades afterwards. But I would hope the writers of this aren't that badly informed when it comes to history. )

All in all, this is not an issue for me, especially compared to the purported Aslan gender-swap (which, unlike Digory's skin colour, DOES have a major effect on the portrayal of an ultra-important character).

I'm much more concerned about the revelation from the casting call that they're looking for another boy of the same age, described as "British" and as an "important character" and as one of the leads, implicitly equal with the girl who we suppose is Polly. That's the really burning question — who is Boy Two?? Are they expanding the cast somehow? Given that it's implied this is a third main character, I doubt it will be a flashback to the childhood of Uncle Andrew or Frank.

I'm definitely going to have to watch this film when it comes out, that's for sure, if only to see what on earth they have done with it, and whether or not it stands up well as a film in its own right even if it bears very little resemblance to canonical Narnia... 

In my own view, this was to be expected and more or less a non-issue. Hollywood does not cast an all-Caucasian cast of lead characters anymore, so with that in mind, this particular interpretation is fine with me. I'm not sure it's historically accurate, but at least there's a loose link to it in the book. 

In terms of Digory in the book, even if not explicitly described as such, he is clearly written as White. Particularly in LWW where he is essentially written as a proxy character for Lewis himself, and is based on his own experiences of taking in evacuees during the war.

Plus when you factor in the inherited wealth, the country mansion, the occupation of professor, a surname like "Kirke" - it's all very white middle-class.

That said, I don't necessarily think his specific ethnicity makes much of a difference to the plot. However, it's worth noting that even in the original casting call, there has never been a stipulated requirement for him, or anyone else, to be white in this movie.

But that's why I'm still not certain that Boy 1 is for Digory...

Boy 2 and a Girl 1 are described in equal terms and of equal significance. That feels like a better description of the Digory/Polly dynamic in the book to me.

We've already seen plenty of kids apply to the original casting call, even directly auditioning for the "Isadore" part, and none of them have been British-Asian. Sure, they could be using the Isadore lines for both boy role auditions, but something about it still doesn't add up in my book.

I also don't buy that Digory is substantively more of a "main" character than Polly (at least in terms of screen time), and I don't see the logic of adding in a second Boy character who is of equal significance to Polly, but isn't Digory.

Boy 1 is the anomaly in this report, and I feel like there's something way more complex going on here behind-the-scenes.... I just can't place what it is right now.

Posted by: @icarus

In terms of Digory in the book, even if not explicitly described as such, he is clearly written as White. Particularly in LWW where he is essentially written as a proxy character for Lewis himself, and is based on his own experiences of taking in evacuees during the war.

Plus when you factor in the inherited wealth, the country mansion, the occupation of professor, a surname like "Kirke" - it's all very white middle-class.

Totally agreed — I remember pointing those same things out in an earlier discussion here on NarniaWeb, well before this piece of casting news broke, when the question was raised as to whether Digory's father could have been Indian and therefore Digory could be cast as mixed-race.

If "Boy 1" in the casting call is Digory, with an Indian father and white mother, then that does change those canonical things about his background, particularly the inherited English country mansion on his father's side. And obviously, his surname wouldn't be Kirke!

However, the inherited mansion could potentially come from his mother's side of the family (slightly less likely in historical terms, but not impossible), and having the surname of Kirke is not essential to the story itself either — it's famously Lewis's tribute to his most influential tutor, William Kirkpatrick. That's an "Easter egg" (to use a modern term) for those who know Lewis's life story, but it doesn't have any impact on the plot of either MN or LWW. (In fact, the Professor's surname is never mentioned in LWW, only in MN and LB.)

And it's not impossible that Anglo-Indian Digory, with wealth on presumably both his mother's and father's side, could go on to attend prestigious British schools and either Oxford or Cambridge for university, and become a Professor as an adult. A perhaps even slightly more exotic and mysterious Professor than the one we're all used to thinking of in LWW, being half Indian — still unusual in England by the time we get to the 1940s.

On top of this, I've just had a brainwave for the casting of the future adaptation of LWW, if Digory is half British and half Indian. There is already an absolutely legendary veteran actor of exactly that ancestry who would be PERFECT for this version of Digory as the elderly professor. Ben Kingsley!!!   

(I know at over 80, he's older than Digory is in LWW according to Lewis's later and somewhat dodgy timeline of Narnia, which puts him at only 52 in 1940. But that to me is far too young for the "very old" and white-haired man described in LWW, and I put it down to Lewis never seriously planning out the Narnia books before he wrote them.)

However, it's worth noting that even in the original casting call, there has never been a stipulated requirement for him, or anyone else, to be white in this movie.

But that's why I'm still not certain that Boy 1 is for Digory...

Boy 2 and a Girl 1 are described in equal terms and of equal significance. That feels like a better description of the Digory/Polly dynamic in the book to me.

A good point, although I wouldn't say Digory and Polly are quite of equal significance in the book. We do meet Polly first, and the narrative point of view switches between her and Digory as needed, but Digory is overall more central to the plot. He IS the Magician's Nephew of the title, and his strange and sinister uncle plays a big role as well. Digory is the character with the most emotionally wrenching story as he wrestles with grief over his mother's impending death. He's the one whose impulsive and foolish action in Charn leads to Jadis awaking and evil entering Narnia, which is why Aslan gives Digory the task of fetching the apple whose seed will grow the Tree of Protection.

Polly is nearly as important, but by contrast, we learn almost nothing about her family and we never see any of them in person; there's no deep emotional aspect to her story; she doesn't make any serious mistakes that she needs to learn from and atone for (minor ones, like squabbling with Digory, but nothing that affects the fate of an entire world!); and indeed, in the book, she actually has to ask to be included in Digory's quest for the apple.

In fact, I'd say Polly could conceivably be cut out of the story entirely — although I don't think that would be a good idea! — and most of the basic plot would still be much the same, except that the premise for Digory taking one of the rings would have to be changed, since he wouldn't be driven by the need to rescue Polly. He also wouldn't have anyone to talk to (and argue with!) throughout his adventures, which would make it all rather boring. But the fact is that Polly really isn't as active a part of the overall plot as Digory is.

So for that reason, I'm not really convinced that Boy 1 isn't Digory and Boy 2 is. It's not impossible, but I can't think in that case who Boy 1, the Anglo-Indian character, could be! My money's still on Boy 1 being Digory. (Or would be if I were into gambling, which I'm not. )

Now this is something I’m very open to and I can’t think of any reason it would negatively impact the film. While there are some plausibility concerns, as Icarus pointed out, there’s enough of a connection to the book that it feels like fair game to me. 

It's completely fine. In fact, I love the idea of Digory being half-Indian and half-white. It doesn't change any significant details and it adds to why Digory's father is off in India, and maybe we'll get an idea why he's so far away since his wife is literally on her deathbed.

As for the discussions considering his father's race and his surname, and the estate, I'm going to wait and see how that pans out before getting into the realism of the times where this book takes place. Being a fan of the show Bridgerton, I know that parts of that show aren't realistic for the Regency era, but I enjoy it otherwise.

Plus, I have a little acting friend from a acting course we take in our agency. He's 12 and is Indian-white. I will be passing this casting info to him since they are seeking talent in the US as well.

If Digory’s grandfather (a white Kirke) married an Indian woman, their offspring would naturally still carry the Kirke name while embodying a multicultural identity? While the casting call states a "(Indian father, white mother)", it doesn't state whether his father is also of mixed heritage.

TMN is not a historical drama. There's a talking-lion god, a witch from a different dimension, and also Atlantis was apparently a real place. Why are some of you so bothered by the mere possibility of Digory being anything else than white?

Posted by: @son-of-eve

Why are some of you so bothered by the mere possibility of Digory being anything else than white?

I can't speak for everyone, especially since I'm not someone who is actually in the category of being bothered by it, however I would wager that it has less to do with the incidental details of the casting and more to do with the purposeful intent of the casting.

So for example, in the original casting call, there were no specific ethnicities required, and I think that most people were probably cool with the idea that whichever child ended up being right for the part, regardless of ethnic background, would get the role incidentally.

But I think because it is now purposefully requiring that the role be British-Asian, some people may logically assume that the movie has a thematic requirement for doing that - such as in Steve McQueen's "Blitz" from last year which cast a mixed race boy as the lead in order to explore the ideas of race relations in WW2 London (a great film btw, I would recommend)..

Therefore you are either left with the conclusion that they are purposely casting a British-Asian because they are seeking to explore the concept of race relations in society within the film (which is a noble endeavour, but not one of the themes in the book) or that they are merely casting a British-Asian lead for tokenism, which can feel like corporate exploitation of important social issues for financial gain.

(One of the alternative theories is that the casting is intended to match another role which they've already cast)

Overall, there are probably a multitude of legitimate reasons why people might feel uneasy one way or the other, regardless of political affiliations or social viewpoints.

I also think some of the pushback is attributed to confusion more than it is a negative reaction to possible race-bending. I think if the casting call simply hinted that Digory would be race-bent, the conversation would be streamlined and while yes some are not into the idea, the clarity would help, but since we have this third male child in the casting call, everythings up in the air and we're all pulling at certain threads to try and make sense of it.

Luckily, we're all quite reasonable in our assessments, I dread to think whats going to happen when this casting call, whether sooner or later than cast announcements, hits the larger spaces of the internet, because a certain corner of it isn't going to be happy, whether fans of the source material or not.

Posted by: @son-of-eve

TMN is not a historical drama. There's a talking-lion god, a witch from a different dimension, and also Atlantis was apparently a real place. Why are some of you so bothered by the mere possibility of Digory being anything else than white?

I'm not one of the people bothered but in addition to the things Icarus mentioned, the stuff you mention is supposed to be a contrast to the everyday life in London that Digory and Polly normally experience. If the movie takes place in a fantastical version of Victorian England where being Anglo-Indian wasn't considered a big deal, then some of that everyday reality vs fantasy element is lost. 

That being said, I'm hoping they ignore historical social realities and just don't treat Digory's ethnicity as a big deal. I understand why people feel it's insulting to real people who have suffered because of racism but the alternative is to make racism a theme in the story with which it has really nothing to do. (I guess you could say that dehumanize others just as Jadis and Uncle Andrew do their victims, but they do that indiscriminately.) It'd make more sense to explore racism in an adaptation of Prince Caspian. 

Posted by: @col-klink

That being said, I'm hoping they ignore historical social realities and just don't treat Digory's ethnicity as a big deal. I understand why people feel it's insulting to real people who have suffered because of racism but the alternative is to make racism a theme in the story with which it has really nothing to do. (I guess you could say that dehumanize others just as Jadis and Uncle Andrew do their victims, but they do that indiscriminately.) It'd make more sense to explore racism in an adaptation of Prince Caspian. 

I'm sure I've said this somewhere else fairly recently (and I can't remember where), but if I were directing adaptations of all seven of the Chronicles, I would cast Jill Pole as mixed-race. She's the only one of the main child characters from our world whose entire background is a mystery — we never hear anything about her parents or other family members, where she grew up and what kind of life she has at home. It would easily work to make her noticeably brown-skinned — no need to specify an exact ancestry — and, in the opening scenes of The Silver Chair, show her being harassed by the all-white gang of bullies in an otherwise all-white school. No need even for any actual racial slurs or references to her ethnic background. Just make it clear that she's visibly different and she doesn't fit in. Instant relatability on a whole lot of levels.

On top of that, to explain the fact that we never hear anything about Jill's family, I would also heavily imply that she's an orphan. Maybe in her initial conversation with Eustace, when she notes how he's completely changed from the nasty character he was last term, he could remark "My parents think I've gone barmy..." — "At least you've got parents!" Jill could cut in, and Scrubb, realising he's hit a raw nerve, quickly switches to telling her more about why he's changed so much. Again, no further explanation needed than that. (I think part of the reason that comes to me is that Jill is among the characters in LB who die in our world and go to Aslan's country, and establishing that she's got no real family means that we aren't left feeling awful about her parents grieving for her.)

All of that is a bit off topic, but these are just the kinds of ideas I toy with from time to time when wondering how the Chronicles could be adapted in ways that cater for the (understandable) desire these days to have more diversity in casting, while preferably not doing anything that goes glaringly against the original books!

And on that note, back to Digory — as I said, I don't have any issue with him being cast as half Indian, and I don't see anyone else here objecting either. It's slightly more "against canon" than what I just suggested for Jill — because we do know enough about Digory's parentage in the book to establish that he's implicitly white British on both sides — but it adds diversity and possibly an extra layer of interest without necessarily pulling the story off track. Well, hopefully not. But since we still really don't know what they're actually planning for this film, it looks like it's going to remain a mystery for a while longer...

But it's not like Digory's race has to be a the forefront? I think it could be pretty interesting (if done right) to actually explore the social realities of Digory's ethnicity, even just briefly or subtley, if we're right and the boy of mixed-heritage is Digory?

I just think as another layer to everything else that's going on with Digory's character, if that element is introduced, it could be something that enriches the character even more? It's not something that would need to take precedence over other elements of Digory's character like how he's affected by mother's illness for example, so why not? It would be a mistake for anyone to assume that such an element would need to "go big or go home".

Posted by: @son-of-eve

TMN is not a historical drama. There's a talking-lion god, a witch from a different dimension, and also Atlantis was apparently a real place. Why are some of you so bothered by the mere possibility of Digory being anything else than white?

To the extent that I am bothered by it, it's mainly because of the hypocrisy and bigotry of most of those advocating this sort of race swapping, who will allow it in only one direction.

Fantasy is an odd genre. We  can easily suspend our disbelief when it comes to dragons and magic and other fantasy creations because they are so outside our everyday experience. But a grossly implausible historical detail can break that suspension of disbelief far more easily than the most outrageous magical creature. Paradoxically, the more fantastical a story is, the more rooted in reality the mundane parts of it need to be.