Posted by: @courtenay

Not quite sure where you're coming from here — of course it's implied that the Tisroc is a villain, being the tyrannical ruler of the villainous nation, though he's not one who plays a huge role in the story itself. But that isn't the point I was getting at, and I can't quite see how it fits the topic of this thread.

Maybe this would help-

“Go, my son,” he said. “And do as you have said. But expect no help nor countenance from me. I will not avenge you if you are killed and I will not deliver you if the barbarians cast you into prison. And if, either in success or failure, you shed a drop more than you need of Narnian noble blood and open war arises from it, my favor shall never fall upon you again and your next brother shall have your place in Calormen. Now go. Be swift, secret, and fortunate. May the strength of Tash the inexorable, the irresistible be in your sword and lance.”

“To hear is to obey,” cried Rabadash, and after kneeling for a moment to kiss his father’s hands he rushed from the room. Greatly to the disappointment of Aravis, who was now horribly cramped, the Tisroc and the Vizier remained.

So it would seem that if Rabadash got killed or thrown into prison, the Tisroc would not avenge him or deliver him. What kind of a father would do that to his son? How would they portray the relationship between Rabadash and the Tisroc? The father-son relationship there is twisted!

Posted by: @courtenay

What I keep trying to say is that the basic characters — the personal natures — of the various Calormenes can be kept much the same as in the books, for the most part. It's their outward appearance — and whether or not it looks like an insulting caricature of particular people and cultures in our world — that's the main problem for casting and design.

I think what CS Lewis wrote in the books are great. But in a movie, how can you accomplish that? As I've mentioned, I think it would be great if there could be some more sympathetic Calormenes in the movies (not as main characters, but more kept in the background).

In a movie, wouldn't that be a great reveal that Aravis and Emeth are not the only Calormenes in Aslan's Country? It could show that not all them liked living in the culture of Calormen or being under the Tisroc's rules in HHB or even being under Rishda's rule in LB.

Posted by: @jasmine_tarkheena

So it would seem that if Rabadash got killed or thrown into prison, the Tisroc would not avenge him or deliver him. What kind of a father would do that to his son? How would they portray the relationship between Rabadash and the Tisroc? The father-son relationship there is twisted!

Yes, exactly — I don't see any arguments against that. It shows how deeply unjust and downright awful Calormene society is, at least in the ruling class (which, in its own view, is the only sector of society that matters) — that a father could have that attitude towards his own son.

As I've mentioned, I think it would be great if there could be some more sympathetic Calormenes in the movies (not as main characters, but more kept in the background).

In a movie, wouldn't that be a great reveal that Aravis and Emeth are not the only Calormenes in Aslan's Country? It could show that not all them liked living in the culture of Calormen or being under the Tisroc's rules in HHB or even being under Rishda's rule in LB.

Now THAT would be fantastic and I really hope they will do that!!  

Yes, it would be. Hey, not all Telmarines liked being under Miraz's rule in PC, and quite a lot of them were happy that the old days are back. So I wouldn't see why Calormenes like to live in the Calormene society

Plus, Caspian X isn’t the only Telmarine listed in Aslan’s Country; Lord Drinian and Lord Bern are also listed. So I wouldn’t see why Aravis and Emeth would be the only Calormenes there. That could be a big surprise for us that there are some other Calormenes in Aslan’s Country as well. 

I think that the easy way to get around any issue of being called racist is just simply how the world of Narnia is set up.

Archenlanders should be in between the skin tone of Narnia and Calormens. Archenlanders married the naiads and wood nymphs. So, naiads and wood nymphs should have a different skin tone than the Narnians. Calormens come from the Archenlanders so, they can be a darker skin because the naiads and wood nymphs have a darker skin tone. 

For a the Netflix version, they might make Queen Helen a darker skintone thus causing her kids to have those genes even if they do not show up in their skintone right away. 

Dwarves might even marry into the human line later like in Prince Caspian. 

I'm going to write something controversial here. I don't think they should add any positive Calormene characters to The Horse and his Boy.

The first reason is that such additions won't fulfill their obvious purpose to the make people be less offended by the negative depiction of Calormen in general. The fact that it'd be so obvious those characters were just invented to show the culture in a more positive light would reinforce people's cynicism. They'd say that the fact that the writers were trying not to be racist proves they are racist. Maybe that's not fair, but it's the world in which we live. The whole premise of the story is that it's bad for Shasta, Aravis, Bree and Hwin to live in Calormen and much better for them to live in Archenland or Narnia. Sympathetic Calormenes don't arise naturally from the plot.

Which brings me to my second point. The Horse and his Boy has an enjoyably lean narrative, at least, until we get to Narnia. Every scene either establishes something that will be important later or shows the characters doing something to accomplish their immediate goals. Any scene that exists solely to include token good Calormenes would slow down that engaging pacing. 

Mind you, I don't think token good Calormenes couldn't be well written. (Emeth from The Last Battle, I would consider well written.) But, after racking my brains, I can only think of three ways to insert them into HHB that wouldn't be contrived. (a) The farmers, etc., from whom the protagonists steal their disguises for Tashbaan, could give them to them willingly after hearing their story. As I wrote above, this would slow down the pacing, but it wouldn't change the story too much. (b) The old slave who forges the letter for Aravis could be given more screentime. I think he's an intriguing character in the book, so I can kind of get behind this idea, but I don't want Aravis's backstory to be shown until the point where we're told it in the book. Doing otherwise, would spoil the reveal that she's a girl and Hwin can talk. (Of course, the commercials will probably spoil those things anyway.) (c) Make Lasaraleen less of a materialistic ditz and stress her genuine friendliness and helpfulness to Aravis. I would be against this because I love her ditzy materialistic character in the book. She's hilarious! I don't want her changed to be less funny. 

Of course, you could argue that if the choice is between an adaptation of The Horse and his Boy, which makes adaptation decisions to seem less racist that don't work and which gets accused of racism anyway, and no adaptation of The Horse and his Boy, the former choice is better.

I'm going to avoid expressing myself too strongly since I don't live in a nation that colonized very much; even if they did portray Calormenes as they were in the book, wouldn't Aravis, Emmet, Aravis' Slave, etc. be sufficient to show that they aren't all villains? If you were to look at the reciprocal view of "they aren't all bad," which would be "they are all bad," then those three characters previously listed would contradict that view. Since there is only a personal portrayal of a handful of Calormenes, and the few portrayed are only the ruling class, we don't have enough information to say for sure that they are all bad. Lewis' does refer to Calormen as being a cruel nation, but there are many cruel nations in the world whose populations are perfectly decent people. 

I believe someone in the conversation mentioned possible sensitivities about the portrayal because of Western Colonialism. At what point are people not going to be as sensitive about that anymore? Most of the colonization ended a long time ago. We don't have any hard feelings about the Germans because of WWII, and we don't even associate contemporary Germany with 1940s Germany. 

Overall, I think that an accurate adaption of the books will last longer than one that is influenced by the problems of today. That is a reason "The Lord of the Rings" is popular with fans after 2 decades; it's an opportunity to relax and immerse yourself in a world that doesn't have 21st-century problems.

Perhaps it can also be true that culture doesn’t have to define the individual. Let’s not forget that Aravis was a high-born Calormene herself, and both Shift and Ginger were Narnian talking beasts.

Posted by: @azog-the-defiler

Wouldn't Aravis, Emmet, Aravis' Slave, etc. be sufficient to show that they aren't all villains? If you were to look at the reciprocal view of "they aren't all bad," which would be "they are all bad," then those three characters previously listed would contradict that view. Since there is only a personal portrayal of a handful of Calormenes, and the few portrayed are only the ruling class, we don't have enough information to say for sure that they are all bad. Lewis' does refer to Calormen as being a cruel nation, but there are many cruel nations in the world whose populations are perfectly decent people.

I am not necessarily sure you can use the handful of examples in Emmet and Aravis as disproving the rule that "All Calormen are Bad", since these characters seem to be defined within the story as being "exceptions to the rule", which obviously therefore predicates the rule existing in the first place. Perhaps that's just me though. I do take a lot of strong objections to some of the cringe-inducing ways the Calormen people are described in the book, so perhaps once removed from the text, the basic concept depicted on screen might not be so objectionable.

I do take your point though that many people in the world (from either side of the political spectrum) are more than capable of processing the fact that the ruling regimes of countries such as Saudi Arabia and Iran are objectively terrible, without them necessarily equating that to the notion that all people from such countries are terrible.

However, the problem is that there are unfortunately still a vast number of people in the world who aren't capable of processing such nuance, hence why racism is still such a huge issue in most countries. Also, even with the best intentions at heart, attempting to convey such socio-cultural nuance can be difficult to do on screen, particularly when adapting a story for children whose plot isn't really trying to say anything in particular about the nature of race relations. Hence the concern from many that the screenwriters would end up having to add in a tonne of additional narrative just to justify sticking with an out-dated and, in my opinion, fairly lazy colour-coding system for the villains, which isn't even in any way integral to the plot of the story, nor the fundamental message of the story,

I believe someone in the conversation mentioned possible sensitivities about the portrayal because of Western Colonialism. At what point are people not going to be as sensitive about that anymore? Most of the colonization ended a long time ago. We don't have any hard feelings about the Germans because of WWII, and we don't even associate contemporary Germany with 1940s Germany. 

I'm not really sure that the depiction of the Calormen has anything to do with Western Colonialism per se, its more about the suitability of using broad-brush ethnic stereotypes as a means to visually convey concepts of goodness and badness. I think we can be pretty clear cut about the fact that any artistic depictions which suggest a link between inherent moral quality and ethnic background are, by definition, racist.

Also, since you asked, I think sensitives about colonialism will probably abate once the societal inequalities begat by colonialism have been ironed out, but that's a whole other debate and really getting off-topic

@icarus

Posted by: @icarus

I am not necessarily sure you can use the handful of examples in Emmet and Aravis as disproving the rule that "All Calormen are Bad", since these characters seem to be defined within the story as being "exceptions to the rule"

In that case, in spite of Arsheesh's harsh upbringing of Cor/Shasta, he evidently had the humanity to save a child from starving in a boat. We're told about how he would box Shasta's ears if he didn't provide satisfactory work, but for the first 4 or 5 years of his life, it wouldn't have been possible for him to provide any work to Arsheesh at all, so the fisherman would presumably have paid for his upbringing out of his own pockets without having any immediate benefit from the relationship.

Posted by: @icarus

I do take a lot of strong objections to some of the cringe-inducing ways the Calormen people are described in the book,

Even if someone wrote about something that is wrong by our standards, I don't think that I can really judge someone who lived 70 years ago and who had different life experiences. It's unlikely that the portrayal would've pricked his conscience and he probably didn't think about how it would sound to someone from one of those cultures that he was stereotyping. I don't want to be judged after I'm dead for things I didn't know were wrong, so I'll show the same consideration to others.

Either way, it will likely be toned down. In the 2005 adaption of "The Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe," they changed the phrase "battles are ugly affairs, especially when women are involved" to simply "battles are ugly affairs." It wasn't really a deviation from the books, and it wouldn't give offense to 21st-century audiences.

Posted by: @icarus

However, the problem is that there are unfortunately still a vast number of people in the world who aren't capable of processing such nuance, hence why racism is still such a huge issue in most countries.

It's most unfortunate that we can't adapt a children's book to screen without bringing political sensitivities into the discussion. Tolkien got his inspiration from the orcs from WWII-era caricatures of the Japanese, but I haven't personally known anyone to take offense to that or to even bring it up. It may be because the orcs from Peter Jackson's Adaptions didn't really resemble that stereotype, but it's still something I would expect to be considered. I for one would like to merely see the mental images I received from reading put on a screen, without any political considerations and without anything added or subtracted.

Posted by: @icarus

However, the problem is that there are unfortunately still a vast number of people in the world who aren't capable of processing such nuance, hence why racism is still such a huge issue in most countries.

I would like to state that I have been fortunate enough to have not witnessed that personally. 

Posted by: @icarus

I do take your point though that many people in the world (from either side of the political spectrum) are more than capable of processing the fact that the ruling regimes of countries such as Saudi Arabia and Iran are objectively terrible, without them necessarily equating that to the notion that all people from such countries are terrible.

However, the problem is that there are unfortunately still a vast number of people in the world who aren't capable of processing such nuance, hence why racism is still such a huge issue in most countries. Also, even with the best intentions at heart, attempting to convey such socio-cultural nuance can be difficult to do on screen, particularly when adapting a story for children whose plot isn't really trying to say anything in particular about the nature of race relations. Hence the concern from many that the screenwriters would end up having to add in a tonne of additional narrative just to justify sticking with an out-dated and, in my opinion, fairly lazy colour-coding system for the villains, which isn't even in any way integral to the plot of the story, nor the fundamental message of the story,

This is pretty much straight out what I've been trying to say repeatedly in these discussions on the Calormenes as well — I'm wondering if you were referring to my posts, @azog-the-defiler, in mentioning "possible sensitivities about the portrayal because of Western Colonialism".

I'm not trying or even wanting at all to get into debates over history, who colonised whom and what the ongoing effects are in today's world and whose fault it is or isn't and what should be done about it. That's an extremely complex and controversial topic and I'm not always sure where best to stand on it myself. When it comes to the Calormenes, though, I'm simply referring to what icarus says — the "out-dated... colour-coding system for the villains, which isn't even in any way integral to the plot of the story, nor the fundamental message of the story."

I wouldn't want anything in the books themselves to be changed to suit modern tastes, even though there are some passages (mostly brief ones that aren't utterly vital to the plot) that definitely don't sit well in a much more interconnected world than when they were written. They're a product of their time (as is every piece of literature, including those being published today) and they reflect that. Lewis was simply using tropes and stereotypes that were very common in English literature (and elsewhere) in that era and well back into his childhood, and what he does with them is nowhere near as cringe-worthy as some of the other books and films etc. that were around in that time. Readers today, even young ones, should be able to understand the Chronicles in that context; I know I could, even as a young reader growing up in late-20th-century Australia.

But when it comes to any modern adaptation of the Chronicles for the screen — and neither of the (only!) two stories that directly involve the Calormenes, The Horse and His Boy and The Last Battle, have ever been adapted for film or TV so far — that's a different matter. The simple fact is that if you play the Calormenes "by the book", so to speak, you have the straight-up scenario of noble, benevolent, light-skinned, Western-European-looking heroes who are clearly meant to be Christians (let's face it, it's no great secret who Aslan is intended to be), versus (mostly) cruel, scheming, dark-skinned, Middle-Eastern-or-Indian-looking villains who bear a suspicious resemblance to Muslims.

Honestly, is it so hard to understand why NO modern-day studio is ever going to accept that as a script???

This is why I keep saying — if only the directors / producers / screen-writers are creative and thoughtful enough, there should be ways that the Calormenes can be portrayed as different from the Narnians, and opposed to the good values that Narnia stands for, without making them into a blatant ethnic stereotype. If that's done well, then those two stories should come through with a positive message that gets to the heart of what Narnia is really about, without any wince-inducing caricatures to detract from that. I really hope that might happen, if only some studio (Netflix or others in the future) could have the guts to do it and do a good job of it...

Posted by: @courtenay

The simple fact is that if you play the Calormenes "by the book", so to speak, you have the straight-up scenario of noble, benevolent, light-skinned, Western-European-looking heroes who are clearly meant to be Christians (let's face it, it's no great secret who Aslan is intended to be), versus (mostly) cruel, scheming, dark-skinned, Middle-Eastern-or-Indian-looking villains who bear a suspicious resemblance to Muslims.

I believe that I read on LOTR wiki that the Haradrim and Easterlings in "The Lord of the Rings" movies were inspired by the Saracens and Kiribati Pacific Islanders. The Gondorians were likely inspired by the Byzantines, and the Rohirrim were likely inspired by the Anglo-Saxons and Goths. That would show the similar struggle between "Western-based good guys" and "Eastern-based bad guys" that is causing controversy in the Narnia adaptions. Those peoples were able to be adapted in a similar manner without causing any offense that I'm aware of, so I hope the Narnia producers can be creative and find a way to depict the Calormenes both accurately and inoffensively.

I suppose that this decade probably isn't the best one to be adapting any movies since it seems like most of the creative movie adaptions were all made before the 2020s and 2010s. I believe that I heard "The Silver Chair" was canceled because of modern politics, but I don't remember the details. The political climate is rather hostile today and I personally have withdrawn from following the news because I want no part in modern hostilities, but I can't even escape from it in something as harmless as entertainment.

Posted by: @icarus

I do take a lot of strong objections to some of the cringe-inducing ways the Calormen people are described in the book, so perhaps once removed from the text, the basic concept depicted on screen might not be so objectionable.

Yeah, I actually feel like the most racially offensive parts of the books have to do with things that won't be part of movie or TV adaptations because of the simple change in medium. (It's not like there's going to be a narrator in the movie describing the Calormenes as having "flashing eyes" that contrast with their dark skin or whatever.) Of course, people will still feel insulted, but I imagine those people can just not watch The Horse and his Boy. That's what I try to do with things I'm sure will annoy or disgust me.

I definitely think I'd be a more passionate advocate for sticking with a book accurate depiction of the Calormen if they just weren't so boring.

I mean, Narnia is a land of Witches and Wizards, of Monsters and Magic, Talking Animals and Sentient Trees ... But the Calormen are just this run-of-the-mill villainous kingdom that is seemingly ripped from an Arabian Nights cliche.

At least ditching the whole "dark skinned villain" trope would give the screenwriters the chance to do something more interesting with them.

Can anyone suggest something I'm missing? Steering this conversation away from the whole massive racism issue, is there something about the Calormen that people find genuinely interesting and unique that you would like to see depicted on-screen?

Posted by: @icarus

I mean, Narnia is a land of Witches and Wizards, of Monsters and Magic, Talking Animals and Sentient Trees ... But the Calormen are just this run-of-the-mill villainous kingdom that is seemingly ripped from an Arabian Nights cliche.

I think stereotypically Arabian Nights-style costumes and architecture can be beautiful and every other culture in Narnia is stereotypically European, so while it may certainly reflect jingoism on C. S. Lewis's part, I think it makes for a fun change of pace in the series. (The book that has evil Europeans, Prince Caspian, is the one that gets criticized the most for being boring FWIW.)

And while it's not healthy to view some countries as totally good and some countries as totally evil in real life, fantasy stories about good kingdoms vs. evil kingdoms can be refreshing in their simplicity. 

I realize those answers aren't going to satisfy anyone who dislike The Horse and his Boy or The Last Battle. They probably even reinforce the impression that they appeal to unhealthy, tribalistic instincts. But, well, I assume people reading this want honest answers as long they're not too rude or hateful.  

I think it would be great if they flesh out Emeth's character. I mean, keep in the notion what we know about him, yet broaden out his character. He's been a devoted follower of Tash. He can actually feel conflicted about "having to work by lies and trickery". I can almost picture him saying, "We have to wait upon a monkey?" He can also feel the anger when he realizes that Rishda doesn't believe in Tash at all. That's actually a crucial part of the story- about who a character is really devoted to. So I would like to see Emeth's character broaden out in a LB movie or series adaption.

I have said in another thread that if a Narnia film or series turn Emeth into a light blond, I would totally flip out! Even though it's likely he would have dark hair, it may not necessarily be black. I'm actually not too worried about him having black hair. I think they could get by with him being a deep brunette or a brunette.

And hopefully, they can get my favorite scene, where Emeth meets with Aslan, right. As much as I hope that it is a 100% from the book, it may not be very likely. As longs they do it right and not make it too cheesy, it will still count for something.