Yikes. I’ve never read Asterix and Obelix, but did they really make (I assume) the only black character a straight up knuckle-dragging gorilla imitation? 😬
He’s possibly the only reoccurring black character, and yes it is very much a product of its time.
In defense of the authors the Gauls are all depicted with large bulbous noses, the Romans with Roman noses, etc; all cariceturs. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caricature.
In the attached image you can see Obelix is also depicted as a “knuckle dragger” (at times). The character leading them is a Roman.
Cartoons back then were a little bit sambo so to speak, but the intent wasn’t strictly malicious, just uninformed.
You use the words/concepts you know to express something to an audience. If society tells you that native Americans wear headdresses, then you will likely add a headdress when introducing a new native american character, not neccesarily realising the damage of the stereotype behind it.
Yikes. I’ve never read Asterix and Obelix, but did they really make (I assume) the only black character a straight up knuckle-dragging gorilla imitation? 😬
He’s possibly the only reoccurring black character, and yes it is very much a product of its time.
In defense of the authors the Gauls are all depicted with large bulbous noses, the Romans with Roman noses, etc; all cariceturs. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caricature.
In the attached image you can see Obelix is also depicted as a “knuckle dragger” (at times). The character leading them is a Roman.
This second example shows the Vikings.
Cartoons back then were a little bit sambo so to speak, but the intent wasn’t strictly malicious, just uninformed.
You use the words/concepts you know to express something to an audience. If society tells you that native Americans wear headdresses, then you will likely add a headdress when introducing a new native american character, not neccesarily realising the damage of the stereotype behind it.