Then you have the problem of what to do about nearly 30 years of reruns which are still widely aired and the bread-and-butter of at least one cable network. Do you remove from rotation all the episodes featuring Apu no matter how short his appearance is?
Yeah, fair call, and I think that’s one of the problems. With a show this long and this old, everyone is going to be selective in what they focus on. I was a casual viewer, and not recently. I remember Apu as one of a number of exaggerated stereotypes that, depending on the story being told, was either clever commentary on stereotypes or a lazy punchline. At around the time I stopped watching, the “lazy punchline” was starting to dominate a lot of the storytelling.
I’m not going to contradict if someone feels that Apu was the first TV character to truly represent them and give them a voice and role model, any more than I’m going to contradict someone who says they got bullied at school because of the way Apu was depicted. The point is that the show is still running now, and so it’s either going to be badly outdated in an offensive way, or its got to be very self-aware.
I think an important issue for a lot of us is that both of these things are equally true. App was the first representation we got, and he was also a perpetuation of harmful imagery. And my understanding is that Hari Kondabolu makes both these points for himself as well.
NDP - I don’t know. Not my problem, all right? But when a show has been on that long and been through that many producers and that many writers, “It’s always been like that!” isn’t an excuse. Times change, people become more understanding, people become more considerate, people wise up.
Okay, I’ll grant you this. If Apu were to go out with a real bang…something along the lines of Homer Simpson’s mother (don’t remember the name)…nobody should have any qualms about syndication. He was just laying low, playing along, putting on a nice face all this time. Heck, that would almost be enough to redeem Hans Moleman or Gil. Or Kirk Van Houten. Or Patti and Selma.
Mona. And huh?
Agreed. If you’re a white man not talented enough to get steady work in Hollywood, just move to Mumbai and grow a mustache long enough to twirl and you’ll never go hungry playing British military officers in Imperial times.
The only worse characters in Bollywood films are gay men, who are all simpering nellies.
Hank Azaria goes on Colbert and says he’s sorry, is pained that South Asians were teased over the character, disagrees with the Simpsons’ recent in-show comment on the issue, wants South Asians writing for the show and would step aside from voicing the character or even stopping it.
A summary of his interview from CNN: 'Simpsons' voice actor has regret over Apu - CNN Video
That response from Azaria is compassionate and, IMO, the right approach. That he and the writers had no malicious intent doesn’t mean that they couldn’t have been doing something insensitive that might have made life just a tad bit harder for some kids, and it’s appropriate IMO to recognize that and try to fix it. It doesn’t mean the Simpsons writers and producers are evil. This is how decent people respond when they’ve made a mistake that might have hurt some people, IMO.
Yep. I’ve been really impressed with Azaria’s response to all of this. That should have been the official response, rather than doubling down on it.
I think one of the things that they’re missing (or maybe they’re not, but they don’t seem to be expressing this publicly) is that when the Simpsons started, it was kind of on the cheap and they did what any other cartoon does – hire a handful of voice talents to handle a number of (increasing, as it turns out) characters. They could easily say that of course it wasn’t their intent to make a racially tone deaf character and they just wanted to make another goofy Springfield resident (like the goofy newscaster, the goofy sea captain, or the goofy TV show sidekick with a bone in his hair). Now they have the resources, I would think, to take a corrective course with Apu. They have the money to hire an appropriate actor and they can easily move him from store clerk to something else. They could expand the Kwik-E-Mart into a bunch of Whole Foods-like stores and make him the CEO or Buzz Cola distributor or just about anything else.
^This. The producers made a lot of unnecessary trouble for themselves with the infamous “some things will be dealt with at a later date… if at all” scene in the April 8 episode. They should, instead, have sent Azaria out, that week. His response was reasonable and considerate of those who have felt harm.
Now Hank Azaria is in a lousy spot. Could he really do the voice again?
Is Family Guy right after **The Simpsons **these days?
I really hate Family Guy and HAVE been offended by some of it’s content. Especially the jokes they make at the expense of the physically handicap, (Joe, the wheelchair guy - and, no, not I’m not personally physically handicap myself). That said, they can do what they want so long as advertisers and viewers are on board.
I don’t know how to deal with Apu. I don’t know if I should be ashamed of this, but he was one of my favorite characters. I think he’s one of the more beloved characters.
I would rather see them retire the character instead of changing his voice. Perhaps he finds fortune in another part of the world with a new job opportunity that’s not a stereotype. If they want to replace his character with another actor of Indian heritage, that’s fine. As for reruns? What can you do?
But where might it end? If one character is retired, then all the other stereotypes are in jeopardy. Apu’s case is kind of unique though.
Zero debate in my mind that here Groening is just being an ass.
Honestly, if the Simpsons staff would have just ignored that article it would probably have blown over after a while. Now there are an increasing number of South Asians in popular culture, Apu’s “representation” of Indians to those who aren’t exposed to more of them is an issue that would have resolved itself. But now they’re just digging a sensitivity hole for themselves that is likely to damage their brand.
Being offended sucks. Faking it sucks, since you basically have to do the same thing. It’s emotionally draining. You might be able to do it for a short period, but keeping it up and having a consistent reaction is hard work. And that’s just the outrage. When you actually have to sit down and write about the reasons why and make a compelling case, that’s even harder. It’s hard to be believable if you don’t feel it, and it’s hard to clam down enough to make sense if you do. I hate having to explain why I’m upset.
Why has this fiction caught on so well? Why did anyone ever believe this nonsense? Hell, is it even current anymore, or is Groening also behind the times on the talking points against offended people? Where’s the “snowflake” accusations? At least those assume people are serious.
Does Groening have any day to day involvement anymore?
He co-wrote the episode that inspired this thread.
That seems like a good idea. Have Apu go become a successful entrepreneur in another city, and have a relative (voiced by someone of Indian heritage, as you say) come to Springfield and have a complex and varied life and career, with no stereotype-reinforcing elements.
You could then have a special episode somewhere down the line, in which Apu and his family come back to visit Springfield—but it turns out that Apu has laryngitis.