Next on the cringometer: a ten year old boy is voiced by a girl. Gender appropriation!
The show’s characterizations hit some profiles harder than others. The Spucklers, Cookie Kwan and others aren’t portrayed favorably. None of the characters are, and that’s the whole point of the show, as noted upthread. In the case of Apu, the racial reference is more specific, and I could see someone from that culture being bothered. Better said, if someone from that culture (who seems reasonable) says it bothers them, I’d give it some thought.
The most caustic, no-one-is-safe kind of humor is the most stimulating (for a couple of reasons), but it must be implicitly understood that there’s no ill will. Some of the dialogue in 48 Hours, or the parade scene in Animal House where the black and white hands are forced apart (not to mention Otis Day) might not fly today. I still think those scenes are brilliantly hilarious, probably not so much if taken out of context.
Hank Azaria didn’t use the Apu voice, but he did dress the part of an Indian in Mystery Men.
The problem is not that Apu is a satirical stereotype. The problem is that one of the only portrayals of an Indian character on tv is a satirical stereotype. The main reason why most white men do not find Homer, or Moe, or even Ned offensive is that there are literally hundreds of realistic respectful portrayals of white men on tv. Hell, even on the Simpsons there’s dozens of different portrayals of white men; showing that even in stereotypes not all white men fit into one. It’s easier to take the hit But Apu is one of the few (if not the only) portrayal of an Indian man, stereotypically or not.
If the only character representation of who I am was a satirical one, I could easily become annoyed and find it offensive. If every third person I ran into said “thank you, come again” in some unrealistic amalgam of dialects, I would probably be angry about it, and you probably would, too.
mc
And they are all named Patel.
Middle schoolers suck. They ought to be banned.
It sounds to me like what you’re saying is that the character of Apu, while not necessarily derogatory or offensive, made it easier for people to be derogatory and offensive. That’s unfortunate. But what could The Simpsons do now that would change that?
This strikes me as correct.
If you see a person of South Asian descent and your mind instantly goes to Apu, maybe it’s partly because there aren’t enough other places for your mind to go.
Wellll… technically he was playing a British man who wore that style of dress.
Around here, the stereotype is probably just as much that they’re physicians or pharmacists. But still named Patel. (Or Shah.)
But it’s a fair question. I’ve always found him a little cringey, just like Groundskeeper Willie, but, yes, it does amuse me. It’s just that in the Simpsons universe and style of humor, it feels slightly out of place to me, unlike Family Guy or South Park, where that sort of stuff is routine and expected and doesn’t bug me in the least bit.
Yes, that would indeed be better. It’s not ideal, because you’re clearly creating a reduccio ad absurdum argument, but what you describe would be better.
The ideal would just be for him not to be a stereotype. Flesh him out and make him important. You can have Bart still make fun of him, but also let us know that he’s as “real” as any other character. Get rid of the hateful part of the joke.
To be honest, I had assumed they’d already done this. I haven’t watched the show in a long time, but surely they’d have to. You’d have to be insane to continue pushing a racist stereotype today.
And if they are unsure how to deal with him, it’s a good thing that there’s this documentary coming out, explaining the problems. And thus people who you can engage in a dialog with to figure out what can be done.
Telling people not to have a cow about it is not really the best way to handle that. I can only think they were drumming up controversy for ratings’ sake.
He was actually playing an American man pretending to be a British Man from India.
I once went into a 7-11 and was getting snacks and some kids were making jokes about the kwiki mart and I asked the guy behind the register if it bothered him … he said no but general attitude on how they were ran was true like all the questionable short cuts on the prepared food and such and some of them he had to bail out were ran with the specific goal of ripping off everyone they possibly could
His job was to fix ones that had been taken back by the company so they could be resold … .
Of course for the whoosh factor I know that’s aimed at bart simpson himself …
If this becomes a thing that 90-98 percent of cartoons will go out of business ,
Because that’s been done for 40 or so years …but will people trade all their pokemon animated show stuff ? because the 10 year old boy has been exclusively voiced by females for 20-25 years now (I think there on the 3rd actress now)
Funny story tho … One of my nephews friends had a "pokemon was a boys only thing " my nephew pointed out that couldn’t be because he knew a girl did the most of the voices in the cartoon … he had to show a video of her doing the voice before the friend believed him … .
I thought they had. Not commenting on whether he is or is not offensive, but Apu is one of the more rounded out minor characters. We know way more about him than Lenny or Carl, for example. He’s more than an Indian stereotype*. Others may treat him as a stereotype, but there is more to him than that. He is a proud man. And intelligent.
At least he was prior to 2002, when I quit watching.
*even if he played on the bowling team named “The Stereotypes”. 
…what could they do now?
What they could do now is listen to Hari Kondabolu’s thoughtful and incisive critique and acknowledge that the portrayal of Apu was and is problematic. What they could do now is not do “what they did”, and treat the whole thing as a fucking joke.
But here’s the sticking point for a lot of us… what should the show actually do moving forward? Say, The Simpsons admits Apu was and is problematic. Then what?
For the record, I am a white male.
I’ve been a fan of the Simpsons since the beginning. I don’t understand why they wrote that dialogue to address this issue. In my opinion, they would have been better off just ignoring the issue in show. I mean Apu isn’t one of the main characters, they could easily just write around his unexplained absence. Frankly, I think’s its just petty the way they did respond.
P.S. Is Matt Groening still involved creatively with the show?
…I’ve just told you what they should do moving forward. Don’t make fucking jokes about it.
Lets not worry about the “then what” part until they Simpsons creators acknowledge that the portrayal of Apu was and is problematic.
Slow your roll pal.
I didn’t. And no you didn’t.
The “then what” IS important. The “then what” is EVERYTHING.
I figured this would be fucked up. I get it: this is the Simpsons, dammit - comedy absolutists and if you don’t get the humor well then fuck it.
It feels like they are dying on a stupid battlefield. When the Simpsons are on the same side as the Washington Redskins, that’s weird in a…weird way.
You know what I remember about Apu? I remember other characters on the show making fun of him and his culture, and him pointing out that they’re being disrespectful. How could they better address the issue?
…don’t tell me what to do.
Generic “you.” And I did.
No it isn’t “everything.”
Acknowledging the problematic nature of Apu is “everything.” There is no use assuming “the Simpsons creators admits Apu was and is problematic” when it is pretty crystal clear that the creators have no intention of admitting that Apu was and is problematic. To quote Hari Kondabolu:
Hari started a conversation. The Simpsons creators response was essentially “fuck you.” We can’t move past that “fuck you” into some hypothetical about “then what.” There is not “then what” until we resolve the “fuck you”.