Tuesday, May 30, 2023

Aragorn's What Now?

If I had a nickel for every racially-coded faux-controversy online, the last 9 years alone would’ve made me a millionaire. It doesn’t help that most of the controversies are so ridiculous that I can poke a hole through them without getting a paper cut. But they keep on coming, as if the internet doesn’t have hobbies. It’ll happen again in the future with something equally ridiculous, but for now I’ll zoom-in on one I can’t believe warranted this much backlash. Let’s discuss everyone’s favourite high-fantasy series.


Lord of the Rings is a popular franchise. It’s been around since post-WWII, inspired decades of counter-cultural dialogue and has been the source of most contemporary fantasy tropes and stories. It’s also spawned a trilogy largely-regarded as one of the best put to screen. Even non-fans have begrudgingly accepted its impact, such that it’s hard not to hear “In a hole in the ground, there lived a Hobbit” without thinking of their prequel. Essentially, they’re a big deal.

I happen to love Lord of the Rings. Granted, I love the movies more than the books (which took two-and-a-half years to read), but the IP JRR Tolkien made is rich with detail and world-building I only dream of emulating a fraction of. In some cases it might be excessive, but that’s for another time. And while I understand that the series has less-than-savoury aspects too, I still think it’s gold standard of fantasy storytelling. I mean that sincerely.

That said, I sometimes wish the fans weren’t embarrassing to be associated with. But they are, with frequent arguments over topics like whether or not Éowyn’s speech to The Witch King is “feminist virtue signalling”. And with Magic: The Gathering, arguably the most-popular fantasy card game, having added a Lord of the Rings character to its canon, I’m seeing toxicity there too. It’s exhausting, if we’re being honest. Enough so that I feel a need to respond.

Magic: The Gathering recently added some Aragorn cards to its roster. Not a bad idea, fans of the game most-likely know Aragorn, but him as a black man with a goatee has caused a stir. It’s gotten so bad that people have complained online, and I wouldn’t be surprised if it starts trending. Or maybe it already has. Regardless, fans aren’t happy.

I fail to see the controversy. For all of Western fantasy’s strengths, one of its shortcomings has always been its Euro-centricity. This is starting to change slowly, but as a general rule the genre’s pretty…white. This trickles down to how the different races are portrayed, such that the heroes have generally been lighter-skinned. Even the Lord of the Rings movies were guilty of this. And let’s not mince words, this is an issue!

The lack of diversity in Western fantasy has kneecapped it; after all, there’s only so much you can do with “white people good, brown and black people bad”! So when there’s an attempt to try and shake the formula up, you’d think that’d be celebrated, right? Well, no. Because how dare the outsiders play with our toys! Why not create new characters, instead of take what’s rightfully ours? #NotMyAragorn!

There’s a lot to deconstruct. Firstly, regarding Aragorn being white, where’s that in the books? He’s never described that way, even if he has a “pale face”. Also, “pale face” in relation to what? Like The Balrog and whether or not it has wings, there’s plenty of assuming here.

Secondly, even if Aragorn’s “white”, so what? He’s not real. This isn’t Abraham Lincoln, there’s no insulting someone’s memory. Additionally, if we’re using “book accuracy”, Aragorn doesn’t have a beard. That’s an invention of Peter Jackson and Viggo Mortensen, and it raises plenty of questions. If we’re going by “book accuracy”, shouldn’t that be criticized too?

Thirdly, Aragorn’s been non-white before. The 1978 adaptation had him voiced by the late-John Hurt, a man who, yes, was white, but his on-screen portrayal was more Native American. There’s a whole discussion to be had about cultural appropriation there, but that’s not for now. The point is that Aragorn skin colour isn’t set in stone. Him being black, therefore, isn’t a stretch.

And finally, why does it matter? Are we ignoring how cool his pose is? Or how awesome he looks? Are we ignoring his stats because he’s no longer white? There’s plenty of ire directed at a change that, honestly, was never a big deal.

Really though, this is one of the least-interesting controversies surrounding Lord of the Rings. The franchise has survived a lot! It overcame a mediocre prequel trilogy adaptation of The Hobbit. It’s also survived an Amazon Prime series that’s both making its lore up and continuing despite The WGA’s strike. Even going back decades, it survived “Where There’s a Whip, (There’s a Way)”. Speaking of which, has anyone listened to that song? It’s something else!

If past experience is indicative, once the smoke clears, the franchise will continue like nothing’s happened. It doesn’t mean the “blemishes” don’t exist, they do, but they’re not enough to kill the franchise. If Lord of the Rings can survive what it has, I doubt this “nontroversy” will hurt it. After all, it’s Lord of the Rings! The pinnacle of fantasy storytelling! Isn’t that enough?

Yes, Magic: The Gathering updating Aragorn now, of all times, is weird. But not for the reasons those who are complaining think. If anything, it’s because of the influence Lord of the Rings has had on fantasy, card games included. Why update Aragorn now, instead of 20 years ago? Or 30 years ago?

This is absolutely a step in the right direction. Fantasy has a long way to go to be racially-equitable, something most Western fiction struggles with too. But it’s not nothing. It’s not only gotten people talking, obviously, it’s opened the door for future opportunities. Also, if you’re including Aragorn in a series of cards, then go all the way with Lord of the Rings inclusions? That’s my stance, at least.

Either way, it’s ridiculous. And it highlights how entitled fans are. Maybe focus on real problems, perhaps?

No comments:

Post a Comment