# Peter Jackson and the N word **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [September 21, 2007, 12:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/peter-jackson-and-the-n-word/419930 "2007-09-21T00:22:23Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2007, 5:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/peter-jackson-and-the-n-word/419930/61 "2007-09-21T17:59:38Z")
[QUOTE=you with the face] It would be bad if the story of good guys overcoming Nazi evil is any way eclipsed by the unintentional irony associated with the hero’s dog being named after a racial slur used to dehumanize another race of people. [/QUOTE] Out of curiousity, how would you feel about it if the irony were intentional? ---
**Author:** ![Indistinguishable](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/90ced4/32.png) [@Indistinguishable](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Indistinguishable)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2007, 6:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/peter-jackson-and-the-n-word/419930/62 "2007-09-21T18:09:14Z")
[QUOTE=saoirse] /Quick hijack Do you really think so? I actually saw that movie about a hundred times, and I saw it as his fury over the bathetic treatment of the death of a dog in the war in which 50 million people died, and “the high command/ took my daddy from me.” The dog’s name was just a little absurdist icing on the cake. / [/QUOTE] There was no seriousness in my comment; it was meant to be a joke. I don’t seem to be doing well with those lately… ---
**Author:** ![jsc1953](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/5daacb/32.png) [@jsc1953](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jsc1953)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2007, 6:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/peter-jackson-and-the-n-word/419930/63 "2007-09-21T18:16:46Z")
[QUOTE=Frylock] For different reasons, it would also be bizarre to make the film historically accurate w.r.t. the name and the way it was used. Bit of a double bind here. But then, I guess that’s what the OP is pointing out. -FrL- [/QUOTE] Change the name, and you piss off a few dozen historian/perfectionists. Keep the name, and you piss off everyone else. It’s a needless controversy, completely irrelevant to the larger plot. Ditch it. Ditch the dog completely, if it’ll make everyone feel better. ---
**Author:** ![Mrs.Cake](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/2acd7d/32.png) [@Mrs.Cake](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mrs.Cake)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2007, 6:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/peter-jackson-and-the-n-word/419930/64 "2007-09-21T18:23:21Z")
If I had to guess, I’d say that PJ will keep the dog’s name, but the deal with the US distributor will include overdubbing it to something similar, or do multiple cuts like the first HP movie, where Americans got to hear “Sorcerer’s” instead of “Philosopher’s”. A kind of highly selective censorship. ---
**Author:** ![saoirse](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/5daacb/32.png) [@saoirse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/saoirse)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2007, 6:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/peter-jackson-and-the-n-word/419930/65 "2007-09-21T18:40:26Z")
[QUOTE=jsc1953] Change the name, and you piss off a few dozen historian/perfectionists. Keep the name, and you piss off everyone else. It’s a needless controversy, completely irrelevant to the larger plot. Ditch it. Ditch the dog completely, if it’ll make everyone feel better. [/QUOTE] This seems to be a recurring theme in this argument. I’m going to assume that the decision the producers makes is going to be the one that makes the most business sense. Whether it is or not would be better discussed on a message board for accountants. That doesn’t answer the question of what Jackson ought to do. ETA **Indistinguishable** , it was probably me. ---
**Author:** ![you\_with\_the\_face](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/ecccb3/32.png) [@you\_with\_the\_face](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/you_with_the_face)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2007, 7:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/peter-jackson-and-the-n-word/419930/66 "2007-09-21T19:04:57Z")
[QUOTE=Miller] Out of curiousity, how would you feel about it if the irony were intentional? [/QUOTE] I think I would like it. Maybe even love it. Of course, it would have to be done right. Hero: “We will find those horrible evil, racist, murdering Nazi and wish they had never laid a finger on those innocent Jews!” Dog (from a distance): Ruff ruff! Hero: “Oh hi, Nigger! Come here, boy! Come to me, Nigger, and fetch me my shoes while you’re at it!” But then we’re getting into _Airplane!_ territory, aren’t we? ---
**Author:** ![cochrane](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cochrane/32/10441_2.png) [@cochrane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cochrane)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2007, 7:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/peter-jackson-and-the-n-word/419930/67 "2007-09-21T19:10:42Z")
[QUOTE=KneadToKnow] Why not do what George Lucas did and call the dog Chewbacca? [/QUOTE] As long as they don’t call him “Jar-Jar”. ---
**Author:** ![OneCentStamp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/13edae/32.png) [@OneCentStamp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/OneCentStamp)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2007, 7:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/peter-jackson-and-the-n-word/419930/68 "2007-09-21T19:19:42Z")
[QUOTE=Indistinguishable] It’s no “Enola Gay”, admittedly, but it’s something a fair number of people would be aware of and noticing deviations from, moreso than many other details. [/QUOTE] I think you mean “Enola Same-Sex Oriented,” don’t you? :dubious: ---
**Author:** ![Johnny\_L.A](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johnny_l.a/32/1084_2.png) [@Johnny\_L.A](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johnny_L.A)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2007, 7:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/peter-jackson-and-the-n-word/419930/69 "2007-09-21T19:27:12Z")
[QUOTE=lissener] Thence, another uproar, for whitewashing history. [/QUOTE] That’s somewhat offensive. Can’t you say ‘caucasianwash’? Seriously though, was ‘nigger’ used by the British as a term for Africans? Or was it a term for Indians? (‘Little Black Sambo’ was Indian.) > [@Miller](#): > > How many people are aware of the name of the dog owned by the captain who flew the mission to blow up the Ruhr dams? How many people are aware of the mission to blow up the Ruhr dams in the first place? One of the models I built when I was a kid was Revell’s ‘Dambuster’ Lancaster bomber. When I was about eight I had a book (from the _Ballantine’s History Of The Violent Century_ series) about Lancasters, and it features a chapter on the dambusters. I first saw the film on TV when I was a kid (and have it on DVD now). I think there are probably a lot of people who are familiar with the salient points of Operation Chastise, Barnes-Wallis’s development of the bombs, and even the name of the dog. Would being historically correct cause an uproar? Yes. But in history things ‘are what they are’. Not liking what things were isn’t going to change them. If someone is going to be so shallow as to be offended by a factual historical reference then he’s being too sensitive. Things have changed in nearly 70 years. Most of society have progressed beyond such racially insensitive things as naming one’s dog with an epithet. It was what it was, and things are different now. What is the point of an historical film? Is it education? Is it nostalgia? Is it just entertainment? I think it’s a combination. In order to appreciate a true story, one must be able to understand the spirit of the times. As a space junkie who was born in the Space Age, the '60s are an exciting time for me. I see the '60s as a time of Striving For The Future. But there’s no denying that a lot of bad things happened. Racism and the battle over Civil Rights, assasinations, the war in Vietnam, the Cold War… These things happened, and can’t be denied if a film is going to be set in that era and the subject matter includes the not-so-nice aspects of the times. Abraham Lincoln said [paraphrasing] ‘If I can save the Union by freeing all of the slaves, I’ll do it. If I can save the Union by freeing none of the slaves, I’ll do that. If I can save the Union by freeing some of the slaves and leaving the others alone, then I’ll do that.’ Should this aspect of history be left out because it might cast The Great Emancipator in a poor light? Guy Gibson had a dog named ‘Nigger’. That’s a fact. ‘Nigger’ was the codeword for the breaching of the Möhne dam. That’s a fact. We can’t go back in time and cause Gibson to give his dog another name. With our current knowledge of physics, that’s a fact. I think Nigger should be Nigger. (Man, I hate saying that word!) It’s not nice, but it is what it is. Otherwise we may slide into the dreck that was _Pearl Harbor_ or the wrongness of _Memphis Belle_. It ain’t a true story unless you tell the truth. It’s ‘inspired by true events’. ---
**Author:** ![saoirse](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/5daacb/32.png) [@saoirse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/saoirse)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2007, 7:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/peter-jackson-and-the-n-word/419930/70 "2007-09-21T19:40:02Z")
[QUOTE=you with the face] Hero: “We will find those horrible evil, racist, murdering Nazi and wish they had never laid a finger on those innocent Jews!” Dog (from a distance): Ruff ruff! Hero: “Oh hi, Nigger! Come here, boy! Come to me, Nigger, and fetch me my shoes while you’re at it!” But then we’re getting into _Airplane!_ territory, aren’t we? [/QUOTE] That would be too dumb even for _Police Squad_. The idea that the English were fighting to protect the Jews is really idiotic. They were fighting to protect the English. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2007, 7:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/peter-jackson-and-the-n-word/419930/71 "2007-09-21T19:46:51Z")
[QUOTE=saoirse] That would be too dumb even for _Police Squad_. The idea that the English were fighting to protect the Jews is really idiotic. They were fighting to protect the English. [/QUOTE] I think you got whooshed a little bit there. ---
**Author:** ![carnivorousplant](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnivorousplant/32/3563_2.png) [@carnivorousplant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/carnivorousplant)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2007, 7:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/peter-jackson-and-the-n-word/419930/72 "2007-09-21T19:47:39Z")
I submit would could complain that the movie was not realistic because the actors do not look like the historical characters with the same fervor. I’d sure be annoyed if the dog were named “Heb”. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![jsc1953](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/5daacb/32.png) [@jsc1953](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jsc1953)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2007, 7:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/peter-jackson-and-the-n-word/419930/73 "2007-09-21T19:49:06Z")
[QUOTE=Johnny L.A.] Would being historically correct cause an uproar? Yes. But in history things ‘are what they are’. Not liking what things were isn’t going to change them. If someone is going to be so shallow as to be offended by a factual historical reference then he’s being too sensitive. …It ain’t a true story unless you tell the truth. It’s ‘inspired by true events’. [/QUOTE] But there has probably never been an historical film that told the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth: it would be overly long and dreadfully dull in parts. Events are compressed, characters combined, details omitted. That will undoubtedly be true in this film, over and above what they decide to do with the dog/codeword. So if they decide to omit the dog entirely it’ll just be one small demerit on the overall ledger of the film’s accuracy. ---
**Author:** ![carnivorousplant](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnivorousplant/32/3563_2.png) [@carnivorousplant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/carnivorousplant)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2007, 7:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/peter-jackson-and-the-n-word/419930/74 "2007-09-21T19:51:33Z")
[QUOTE=saoirse] The idea that the English were fighting to protect the Jews is really idiotic. They were fighting to protect the English. [/QUOTE] Heck yes. They just got rid of them in 1290. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![foolsguinea](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/foolsguinea/32/14751_2.png) [@foolsguinea](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/foolsguinea)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2007, 8:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/peter-jackson-and-the-n-word/419930/75 "2007-09-21T20:09:30Z")
[QUOTE=OtakuLoki] … if Jackson is going to be telling an essentially modern story set to please modern sensibilities, I don’t see why there’s any need to include the admittedly callous and embarassing detail of the dog’s name. [/QUOTE] OK, this is why I think the real name should be used. I don’t think it _will_ be, mind, it’s not the smart commercial choice. But in the culture & context of the time, it wasn’t callous, it wasn’t insensitive, it was just a name. And as someone who wants people to really understand language, including the cultural subjectiveness of semantics, I think this needs to be understood. But it won’t be. ---
**Author:** ![you\_with\_the\_face](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/ecccb3/32.png) [@you\_with\_the\_face](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/you_with_the_face)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2007, 8:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/peter-jackson-and-the-n-word/419930/76 "2007-09-21T20:17:14Z")
[QUOTE=foolsguinea] And as someone who wants people to really understand language, including the cultural subjectiveness of semantics, I think this needs to be understood. [/quote] I’d only agree with this if the movie is supposed to be a lesson on language and semantics. If it’s not, then leaving out the name is no different than using a good looking actor to portray someone who was unattractive in real life. ---
**Author:** ![Johnny\_L.A](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johnny_l.a/32/1084_2.png) [@Johnny\_L.A](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johnny_L.A)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2007, 8:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/peter-jackson-and-the-n-word/419930/77 "2007-09-21T20:26:13Z")
[QUOTE=you with the face] If it’s not, then leaving out the name is no different than using a good looking actor to portray someone who was unattractive in real life. [/QUOTE] Which is one thing that bothered me about _Pancho Barnes_, which starred Valerie Bertinelli in the title role; and _From The Earth To The Moon_’s Ted Levine as Alan Shepard, who looked nothing like him. ---
**Author:** ![carnivorousplant](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnivorousplant/32/3563_2.png) [@carnivorousplant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/carnivorousplant)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2007, 8:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/peter-jackson-and-the-n-word/419930/78 "2007-09-21T20:27:11Z")
[QUOTE=foolsguinea] But in the culture & context of the time, it wasn’t callous, it wasn’t insensitive, it was just a name. [/QUOTE] I believe you are mistaken. Consider Ian Fleming, more or less of that generation and the racism in his novels. ---
**Author:** ![delphica](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e9a140/32.png) [@delphica](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/delphica)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2007, 8:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/peter-jackson-and-the-n-word/419930/79 "2007-09-21T20:38:59Z")
[QUOTE=Johnny L.A.] Abraham Lincoln said [paraphrasing] ‘If I can save the Union by freeing all of the slaves, I’ll do it. If I can save the Union by freeing none of the slaves, I’ll do that. If I can save the Union by freeing some of the slaves and leaving the others alone, then I’ll do that.’ Should this aspect of history be left out because it might cast The Great Emancipator in a poor light? [/QUOTE] I feel like that’s a somewhat different thing than the dog’s name. If you are making a movie about Abraham Lincoln, and/or the Civil War, I’d imagine that slavery was a very important theme in your story, regardless of whether you were trying to emphasize Lincoln’s positive or negative qualities, or some mix in-between. Despite the fact that Mr. Lincoln no doubt spent a lot of his time focused on the Civil War and slavery, there were other social things going on in the 1860s. I believe this was the time when there was a growing interest in viewing homosexuality as a sickness, a pathology. If you were making a movie about the Civil War, it would be accurate to include some information about those sick homosexuals. That could be an interesting movie, but I think most audiences would expect such a film to include substantial and reflective content to place the “sick and demented homosexuals” in a context that helps me, the viewer, better understand it as an historical reference. If it didn’t, I for one would walk out of the movie thinking “What was UP with all those comments about how sick homosexuals are?” It would prevent me from focusing on other aspects of the film, perhaps those that you consider your main points, such as slavery. So, if Peter Jackson _wants_ his movie to be about a guy who thinks it is okay to call his dog Nigger, and why _in that historical time_ it was a perfectly normal thing to do, that could be a good movie … but a movie is only so long, so it would need more stuff about the dog and less stuff about blowing up the dam. If the main focus is on blowing up the dam, and the dog is called Nigger in passing, then I am going to leave the movie thinking Peter Jackson has lost his mind. ---
**Author:** ![Hostile\_Dialect](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/e495f1/32.png) [@Hostile\_Dialect](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hostile_Dialect)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2007, 8:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/peter-jackson-and-the-n-word/419930/80 "2007-09-21T20:59:25Z")
> [@lissener](#): > > Now, I’m of the opinion that he should include the dog, and leave the name as it was. Maybe we learn his name by the pilot introducing someone to him, and that other person will pause for a second, wondering whether or not to say anything, keep mum and go on with whatever he was doing. That would be a good way to do it, I think. Just enough to acknowledge that, yeah, that’s not kosher. Anyway, I’m of the opinion that it’s more important to remember what went wrong in history than to keep people feeling warm and fuzzy at war movies. MMV. Not that I have a dog in this fight. I’m not going to see it–I have better things to spend 4 hours on than another Peter Jackson film festival. > [@WotNot](#): > > because treating all these issues fairly would leave very little screen-time Ha! Have you _seen_ a Peter Jackson film? There is no such thing as “very little screen-time”. > [@you with the face](#): > > It would be bad if the story of good guys overcoming Nazi evil is any way eclipsed by the unintentional irony associated with the hero’s dog being named after a racial slur used to dehumanize another race of people. Don’t you think the shades of gray make it a subtler, more captivating story? I do. I’m sick and tired of the all-good-in-every-way versus the absolute-evil-who-do-stuff-just-to-be-evil thing. There are 7 million Disney movies and 13 million other movies that are all the same damn thing, why make the same damn movie over again–except longer? > [@Indistinguishable](#): > > There was no seriousness in my comment; it was meant to be a joke. I don’t seem to be doing well with those lately… You may find [this](http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/004935.html) interesting. Then again, I’m just a language geek, so you may not. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/peter-jackson-and-the-n-word/419930.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/peter-jackson-and-the-n-word/419930.md?page=5)