The 'N' word in the film 'Dambusters'.

[PaulB]

Read in the news yesterday that Steven Fry has kow-towed to demands from above to change Guy Gibson's dog's name in the screenplay he's writing for 'Dambusters' from n***** to 'digger'! Can that be right? Okay, the word can't be said (by non-blacks) NOW but it was said, in some cases without prejudice, in the 40s.

This hero's dog was called n***** and the word was used as code for a successful breach of one of the target dams. In the original film, Barnes Wallace was to be seen punching the air when the word 'n*****' was received from one of the bomber crews.

In my opinion, if they change a basic like that, the film has no credibility as what else can they have changed? It should have stayed as it was or not been re-made.


What is the opinion of the good people of this forum on this issue?

 

[Angelfishsolo]

I agree with you. It is historical fact and so can not be seen a racist in any way.

Read in the news yesterday that Steven Fry has kow-towed to demands from above to change Guy Gibson's dog's name in the screenplay he's writing for 'Dambusters' from n***** to 'digger'! Can that be right? Okay, the word can't be said (by non-blacks) NOW but it was said, in some cases without prejudice, in the 40s.

This hero's dog was called n***** and the word was used as code for a successful breach of one of the target dams. In the original film, Barnes Wallace was to be seen punching the air when the word 'n*****' was received from one of the bomber crews.

In my opinion, if they change a basic like that, the film has no credibility as what else can they have changed? It should have stayed as it was or not been re-made.


What is the opinion of the good people of this forum on this issue?

 

[PBancroft]

I'm not convinced it would really affect the film. People get offended by odd things, and they need to avoid negative publicity.

In a previous job I worked for a company which sold a 'children in art' calendar. One of the pictures was titled 'N***** Boy' and was painted some time in the 18th century iirc.

One post office refused to stock it, and returned all our other products too. Quite sad, especially as it was produced for charity.

 

[Archie_tect]

Film promotion and free advertising for the film is precisely why it has been done.

If you and the marketeers and hadn't mentioned it to generate media attention to promote the film it would have gone unnoticed except, perhaps by those people old enough and keen-eared enough to have heard the original... it's just a dog's name.

 

[PaulB]

Film promotion and free advertising for the film is precisely why it has been done.

If you and the marketeers and hadn't mentioned it to generate media attention to promote the film it would have gone unnoticed except, perhaps by those people old enough and keen-eared enough to have heard the original... it's just a dog's name.

Wrong. You MUST do better.

 

[Archie_tect]

? You think Stephen Fry doesn't manipulate the media?

 

[asterix]

You wait, those Lancs will be Flying Fortresses, mark my words..

 

[ohnovino]

Film promotion and free advertising for the film is precisely why it has been done.

I must admit, this is the first I've heard of a new Dambusters film.

 

[PaulB]

You wait, those Lancs will be Flying Fortresses, mark my words..

Wouldn't surprise me. With Brad Pitt flying one and Tom Cruise another. They HAVE to get some American element, which turns out to be crucial to the success of the mission, into the film. It also wouldn't surprise me to see several ethnic minorities and sexual orientations represented.

And I just read that one of the planes was nicknamed 'Popsie', the name proudly emblazoned on its nose. It wouldn't shock me to see this one re-named as heaven forfend it would upset certain members of a certain community who could be offended by such a word.

 

[vernon]

Film promotion and free advertising for the film is precisely why it has been done.

If you and the marketeers and hadn't mentioned it to generate media attention to promote the film it would have gone unnoticed except, perhaps by those people old enough and keen-eared enough to have heard the original... it's just a dog's name.

It's rather simplistic to consider the word nigger as just a dog's name.

It is a word it has a meaning and there's no need to asterisk out a lot of the letters to avoid offending people.

Too many folk are offended by proxy and it beats me why the white population should be offended on behalf of the black population. There are commercial pressures and groups of people who find it politically expedient to protest on behalf of supressed/repressed/discriminated fellow members of the human race. I find it entertaining when I am informed that I ought to be offended by racist terms by people who have never been victims of racist behaviour and attitudes and in the grand scheme of things will never be subjected to them.

I would have liked to see Nigger retain his name in the film - and the codeword Nigger retained in the script but I don't think that the integrity of the film has been greatly affected by the revisionism but is it the first small steps of totally re-writing history? I personally don't think so. After all it is a film produced for entertainment and is not intended to be a totally accurate historical record of events. Which will attract the most protests outside the cinema:

• A script including a dog called Nigger?
• A script including a dog called Digger?

I look forward to seeing the film. I will probably mentally correct the name of the dog while watching the film and not care about the storm in an egg cup that the renaming of a labrador has caused.

 

[Andy in Sig]

If we can't cope with a historical fact then we are in a pretty sorry state, culturally speaking. I think I could accept some sort of explanatory notice coming up with the titles at the start of the film.

To say that you can't use the dog's real name in the film is also incredibly insulting to black people because it implies that they aren't capable of dealing with the fact that the world was different a few years ago. I would imagine that most black people are far less bothered about this than is the average right on resident of N London.

 

[PaulB]

If we can't cope with a historical fact then we are in a pretty sorry state, culturally speaking. I think I could accept some sort of explanatory notice coming up with the titles at the start of the film.

To say that you can't use the dog's real name in the film is also incredibly insulting to black people because it implies that they aren't capable of dealing with the fact that the world was different a few years ago. I would imagine that most black people are far less bothered about this than is the average right on resident of N London.

According to Steven Fry this is solely to not disenfranchise the film in the American market as it's accepted the film would be denied a release over there if the original name was used. Your point would be understood with, I imagine, most people in Europe but you try that line of reasoning in America and you would get short shrift (does anyone know what shrift actually is?)

 

[aberal]

Do we really need another WWII film anyway? Especially a retelling of an old tale.

 

[Dave Davenport]

I preferred the Carling advert version anyway.

 

[2Loose]

I take it that this is for Peter Jackson\Christian Rivers version of the film?

Hmm, I guess it really is a small concession to allow access to the wider American market.

I hope it is the only such concession, after all, giving them the chance to learn a little accurate history (especially the World War 2) hasn't really been tried before

and I'd hate to see it fail at the first hurdle.