actually, as the essay progresses he starts to show his own ignorance.
Venecians, and in fact most Northern Italians, are white. Their genetic heritage is predominantly celtic and german. The general prevailing belief is that the etruscans that were there at the time of the roman monarchy and before were proto-celt, a caucasian race of about the same age as the celts but slightly different cultural aspects. That region was then conquered by Celts - the ones that sacked Rome in 354 BC didn't exactly leave.
The Romans were also conquerers of the peninsula from the north, not from the coast. While yes there should in any Roman history program be people of darker skin, the Emperors, the Senators, the heads of houses, and most of the local merchants were most assuredly white. Venice, too, was predominantly white (though slightly more egalitarian to its non-white residents than other cities were, as its ancestral roots are still germanic and greek (and there again, the darker-skin is a post Ottoman influence).
So his expectation that things never changed, that the Italians were always the dark-skinned, predominantly dark-haired people they are stereotyped to be today is, well, just that, a stereotype that pays no attention to the larger cultural and genetic heritage of the area, or, well, to actually seeing the area today. I've been through Florence/Tuscany, Venice, and Rome, and saw as wide a variety of colors of skin tone, hair and eyes as I do here in America.
I also note he gripes about productions that get it wrong, but then complains about productions that have tighter reasons for casting what they do (because of specifics of the source material) while at the same time saying nothing about those that do better (Firefly/Serenity being a great example). Saying "they're doing it wrong" without a better example of what to do right (or what has been done right) isn't saying much.
The other problem with picking on Harry Potter is ignoring the fact that it was not written to be a world-wide smash. It was written by an English woman, for a young English audience. She wrote the initial work to reflect England as she knew it. Yes there are minorities, and this is key: the minorities do not in and of themselves divide up into the 'sides'. Their status as minorities has no influence on their ranks as wizards (Kingsley), nor their choice to be good or bad.
If anything, the fascinating thing is that she relates the children to the experiences of classes and minorities in an objective manner - by using the Houses of the school, and the use of muggles and mudbloods, to show that stereotyping and discrimination can exist on ANY criteria, not just what you see in front of you. Young readers do eventually make those connections, even if it appears this author didn't.
(no subject)
Venecians, and in fact most Northern Italians, are white. Their genetic heritage is predominantly celtic and german. The general prevailing belief is that the etruscans that were there at the time of the roman monarchy and before were proto-celt, a caucasian race of about the same age as the celts but slightly different cultural aspects. That region was then conquered by Celts - the ones that sacked Rome in 354 BC didn't exactly leave.
The Romans were also conquerers of the peninsula from the north, not from the coast. While yes there should in any Roman history program be people of darker skin, the Emperors, the Senators, the heads of houses, and most of the local merchants were most assuredly white. Venice, too, was predominantly white (though slightly more egalitarian to its non-white residents than other cities were, as its ancestral roots are still germanic and greek (and there again, the darker-skin is a post Ottoman influence).
So his expectation that things never changed, that the Italians were always the dark-skinned, predominantly dark-haired people they are stereotyped to be today is, well, just that, a stereotype that pays no attention to the larger cultural and genetic heritage of the area, or, well, to actually seeing the area today. I've been through Florence/Tuscany, Venice, and Rome, and saw as wide a variety of colors of skin tone, hair and eyes as I do here in America.
I also note he gripes about productions that get it wrong, but then complains about productions that have tighter reasons for casting what they do (because of specifics of the source material) while at the same time saying nothing about those that do better (Firefly/Serenity being a great example). Saying "they're doing it wrong" without a better example of what to do right (or what has been done right) isn't saying much.
(no subject)
If anything, the fascinating thing is that she relates the children to the experiences of classes and minorities in an objective manner - by using the Houses of the school, and the use of muggles and mudbloods, to show that stereotyping and discrimination can exist on ANY criteria, not just what you see in front of you. Young readers do eventually make those connections, even if it appears this author didn't.