I'll try to answer this in parts, if that's okay. Again, know that this is simply for the sake of the argument and has no antipathy on my end towards you or anyone else
But the only people who would ever think of whiteness as "generic" are white people. It's a luxury afforded to those who don't have to deal with that stuff on a regular basis; being the racial majority doesn't make one devoid of racial identity. You think that a minority looks at a white person and thinks, "Well, that sure is generic, I sure don't see any 'race' there at all"? We are all "the other" to other people.
Yes, that's why I was careful to say that this is the norm for Western fiction. I agree with you completely that it isn't an excuse, that it should not be a luxury, and that being the racial majority does not nullify racial identity. But as for whatever otherness is created, it's like you said, we are all 'the other' for other people. But the key toward cultural cohabitation should encourage to destroy otherness in all its forms. It's unfortunate even with the advent of things like globalisation that Western ideals are dominant everywhere, and that western sense of 'generic' is spewing over different cultures as well, but we're not arguing that are we? We are concerned with the implications of changing an otherwise white character's race. I never meant "interesting" in the negative connotation you might have taken it to be. What I am suggesting is that when it comes to characterisation there can be changes, there can be shifts, and reinventions. These are, at the end of the day, characters serving a purpose to the story, not definitive human beings with individual rights. Whether or not the character is truly identified in terms of his or her race does matter, one cannot ignore that. I am saying that within the context of Western fiction, white really is generic because the same sense of 'other' and 'self' is at work, whether consciously or not.
Now if the racial change is meant to serve something as ostensible as "lets make so and so black because it'll be interesting" (in the negative sense), it would be racist. But what if the author is seeking diversity and he consciously places a black, an Hispanic, and an Asian character to tag along with our Aryan Boy? Would that be racist? The answer is that it depends on how you look at it. Addressing 'race' does not make you a racist.
And what, after all, does it take to be "specifically characterized as a white character?" I understand that Etta's ethnicity has never been significant to the character on the broad basis of her being a fictional character in fictional stories, but I don't need to see Etta constantly bombarded with stories associated with her race to know that she is a white woman.
What it takes is an explicit display, or evidence, that shows that the character's ethnicity matters. In the spirit of reinvention (or in this case adaptation) you are allowed to change things about a character. You need to consider what is really important about her, and if her ethnicity does in fact play a role in her characterisation or not. This is true especially for comics where ethnicity is played out significantly. But lets forget that for the moment. Let's say we have preserved everything that makes Etta her own lovable, WooWoo ing self but she's sporting a little more melanin in her skin. Would that really effect the character at all? I think readers are much more open than that.
And it's as I've said before, she is more prominently a minority, if anything is needed to reassess that point in the decades since she first appeared, then by all means change what you must! Again, I know it's terrible, but that's just how it works. Characters in fiction have a dynamic existence.
And the idea that a white woman is interchangeable with a black woman, fictional or otherwise, is a really disturbing that I think creators should think about more carefully before they enact it. Again, would you ever say that someone like Blade or even the new Aqualad are "specifically characterized as black characters?" They don't really have stories being all about their race and making it a big deal to the character, but I doubt anyone would say they're interchangeable with white versions of themselves.
Now that's pushing it, I never suggested you exchange a white woman with a black one. I'm saying that there comes a point where we shouldn't be judging individuals based on their race. As for Blade or Aqualad, no I wouldn't say that, but can there be a White or Yellow Aqualad? Of course there can be. For Blade, that's a different story. I think in the recesses of the pop-cultural mind, with the success of the films and even the current vampire craze he has found a niche as a definitive 'Cool Black Vampire-Ass-Kickin Guy'. But I understand what you're trying to establish here.
It's strange though, for all we know Etta's ethnicity probably wouldn't even matter that much at all. I'm reminded of Pete Ross from SV, and to be honest I wasn't effected by his change at all. Modern retellings will always change something about the character to make it superficially contemporary. Seeing a black Pete in a small American town with Clark Kent wasn't exactly the end of the world.
I feel like most people aren't even aware of how awkward this dichotomy is, and I don't think they're making a clear distinction over how "important" race has to be for a character before they aren't allowed to change that race, so long as it isn't pivotal like it would be for Magneto or Black Panther. I mean, I feel like race is either important or it isn't, you can't have it both ways without setting a really unfortunate precedent.
Not at all, it isn't, and should never be, either of those extremes. What of an individual identity which transcends nationality, race, and even gender? Surely suggesting that wouldn't bring on the the White Man's Burden? In addition to that, you can't just go on and say that a character's real characterisation is just as important as his racial identity when it hasn't even been addressed?
Nor is the discussion limited to supporting characters. Remember how there was all that talk about making Spider-Man black a while back -- mostly amongst the nerddom, not amongst the actual filmmakers -- with the exact same rationales that are being given here: "His race isn't important to his character; It would be interesting." Like being a straight white male aka the height of demographical privilege in America, which is a term I made up right this second, is interchangeable with being a black man. Sure, if you pare anyone down to the most elemental and basic tropes of a character -- "is a nerd, has spiderish powers"; "comic relief, cheerful, likes to eat" -- then it's hard to say that race matters so much, but...it's not the same.
I don't remember the Spidey dilemma, but you're saying this yourself: being the "height of demographical privilege in America" (great term btw
) is not interchangable, but that is not what Etta Candy is! She is the opposite of that, and if you change her ethnicity to highlight that even more firmly why is that suddenly such a bad thing?
As for the
Last Airbender .... meh... I didn't watch the movie. I think I saved a lot of time by making that decision.
moment like the one with elements. They re trying to be deep but its crap.
