CaptainWaggett

It's not just Americans who find the word offensive. I find it incredible that people would think it an acceptable word to use in a film unless it's intended to demonstrate that the person using it was a racist (whatever the intention at the time). If it were used, there would either need to be some very distracting dialogue explaining it away or it would give completely the wrong impression of Gibson's character to any member of the audience under about 30. I suspect there would be a certain amount of reluctance on the part of some actors to even saying the word because of its loaded connotations.

batman

How do you know this? Is their documented evidence regarding Gibson's racial views? Although he was a great hero, the man did call his dog N----r and is alleged to have been not very nice. Also, I think you have made an unfair generalisation, many people under 30 know a great deal about WW2 and the participants in it.

Don't miss out on a chance to win a rare film in Bat-Quiz 13 closing date - 31/8/8.

CaptainWaggett

Actually I've no idea whether Gibson was a racist or not. As you say, he seems not to have been a very nice chap but I don't have any reason to believe that he gave the dog the name as a racist slur. There was a particular shade called n---r brown that you can still see in ads in 1950s or even 1960s magazines so I assume it was like calling the dog Blackie or Sandy.

My point about under 30s (which, admittedly, I forgot to make!) is not that they don't know about WW2 ( a frequent complaint about history teaching in secondary schools is that they don't study anything else!). But when I was at school in the 1970s, the n-word wasn't commonly used as a racist insult (I'm sure we all know what the words of choice were but I hasten to say I've never used any of them). But it's a lot more common now and pretty well the worst word a white person can use. I recently saw a Neil LaBute play at a matinee with a lot of 15-16 year olds there. Much of it was a monologue by a personable white guy who gradually let his prejudice show. When he finally used the n-word there was an audible gasp from most of the kids. Nothing else would have shocked them so much. I do really think that once you give dog that name, you would make it very hard for a lot of the audience to see the film the same way (just as the use of word in Huckleberry Finn makes it really difficult for many people to see the book as the anti-racist work it is).

batman

My point was not about the current use of the N-word or that I think Gibson was a racist. As I said in an earlier post I have no problem with them changing the name of the dog. My comment was re you stating it would give people the wrong impression of Gibson's character. That is an assumption which needs citation.

Re the under thirties, I misread your earlier post and now get what you you meant. However, when I was at school in the 70s the N-word was still regularly used as an insult alongside all the other usual suspects.

Don't miss out on a chance to win a rare film in Bat-Quiz 13 closing date - 31/8/8.

penfold

AFAIK there is no documented evidence either way regarding Gibson's view on race....so we have to give him the benefit of the doubt. The word may well have had the power of offensiveness then, that it has now for a black man, but I doubt many men of Gibson's class and background would have been that aware of it in the war years...at least until the late fifties I would guess. For that matter, do we know for sure who named the dog? It may not have been Gibson himself, but a parent, or somesuch. As for him not being very nice...well, can anyone here really imagine what sort of stress he must have been under, an active bomber pilot and Squadron Leader for what was his entire adult life ???
I do agree with you that many younger people do take an interest in WW2....but we are talking about the entire potential global audience, and those who haven't taken an interest, potentially getting the wrong end of the stick about one of our greatest heroes.

Bit of a Bay Window, what??

CaptainWaggett

Actually, if it's known that Gibson was a racist (and I suspect that, like most white Brits at the time, he didn't have any contact with non-white people until the war or even then), then there's a good reason for keeping the dog's name the same as it would add an interesting dimension to the film if he were not portrayed as a complete hero. But certainly was still being used as a name for dogs in the 1950s by people who definitely weren't racists (Geoffrey Trease, member of the ILP and pioneering writer of leftie children's books used in a book in the 1950s and clearly didn't think of it as a possible cause of offence).

It would be very odd to call a dog, who you presumably like, after a group of people you despise if that really were Gibson's motivation.

batman

I yield to no one in my admiration for Gibson. He is a true hero. With regard to the global audience you are probably right, which is why I have no problem with a name change for the dog. A large section of the global audience probably wouldn't have known the name of the real dog in the first place.

Don't miss out on a chance to win a rare film in Bat-Quiz 13 closing date - 31/8/8.

CaptainWaggett

They certainly wouldn't they only know the story from seeing the film on tv since it's usually bleeped out!

Frank63

When I was a kid others used to call me " specky four eyes" but.....

........ I grew up and got over it.

" I never forget a face, but in your case I'll make an exception" Groucho Marx

Steve Crook

I should hope that you did. But if that's the worst they called you, you got off lightly. It's nowhere near worthy of comparison with generations of actual slavery and then virtual slavery and being treated as second class citizens

Steve

716Jones

But Nigger was the code word for breaching the Moehne dam as well as the dog's name. Why change history to suit the sensibilities of a few people.

CaptainWaggett

The film-makers will presumably make lots of changes - conflating characters, simplifying timescales and so on. Like every work of fiction does. And 99% of their changes won't bother anyone. So why do people think that keeping in an offensive term (is the black English-speaking population of the world really 'a few people') is so important?

One word changed is nothing compared to what happened to the The Great Escape. It's not like they're going to make Gibson American (at least, I hope not!)

Steve Crook

A few people?

Steve

christoph404

Its an interesting point, if one is to depict a historical figure and historical event there is an argument to leave the names as they were. Wouldn't the debate then be about how casually words like that were used in the 40s and 50s? as opposed to now when they are totally unacceptable? And to leave the words and names as they were is merely reflecting the attitudes of the time? Would that mean changing expressions like "the Hun", "Krauts" and "Gerrys"? Im sure those expressions are quite offensive to German people, but you could argue that they are representative of the language used to refer to Germas during WW2. Of course attitudes have changed and those words are deemed offensive today. In the film "Zulu" Michael Caine says the lines " damned fuzzy wuzzies" and "cowardly blacks" Highly offensive comments by todays standards but those are the comments of a character based in the 1860s. I think the reality is that terms like "nigger" were probably used on a very casual basis in those days (1940s) as was the word "wog" and "golly wog". Of course we can change the names and terminology from what was actually used and bring it all up to date and pretend that Guy Gibson didn't call his dog "Nigger", the truth is that he did. I would agree that quite a lot of people could be offended by that inclusion, on the other hand people might view it in its historical context and be inclined not to apply modern day standards of PC to a character from the 1940s. I have no doubt that Guy Gibson called his dog "nigger" because the dog was black and "nigger"was the term to describe black people in South Africa and in the US. I just think that is the truth of it and I think todays modern society has trouble coming to terms with the fact that a national war hero would seem ( by todays standards) to be an insensitive racist! I don't think he was a racist, I think he just followed in with general sensibility and terminology of the day in calling his dog Nigger. I wonder if the name should be left as it were and let people decide for themselves? Changing it would certainly protect Gibson's name from any controversy I suppose and protect members of the audience who might be offended, but it would be a bit of a lie wouldn't it? I guess it depends how accurate the film makers want to be,this is a film about a real person and a real event after all. It makes me feel uncomfortable to think that people had such a casual attitude to using those words and thank goodness those days seem to have gone, it also makes me feel uncomfortable that people now advocate changing the details of history and somehow erasing any trace of that kind of thing from our past.

earlb

I'm not as articulate as Cristoph404 but I whole heartedly agree with his posting. It is History and so should remain taking into account the time period and context.

I'd give my right arm to be ambidextrous.