Alexey Cruz

Professor Orwig

FIQWS 10105

10-01-24

    In the articles, “I Don’t Want a Black Ariel”. Why we Shouldnt Be Satisfied With Race Switching by the Final cutback, and “The white nostalgia fueling the ‘Little Mermaid’ backlash by Brooke Newman, both Authors address the cultural conversation about representation, race, and media. Each article discusses the backlash to Disney’s decision to cast Halle Bailey, a black actress, as Ariel in the Live action Little Mermaid film. However they approach the backlash from different perspectives.

    The author of “I Don’t Want A Black Ariel”. Writes under the username The Final Cutback, so while his identity isn’t clear, their writing definitely communicates the issues surrounding race and media representation, especially in poor attempts to bring about diversity. Because the author is anonymous this allows the focus to be on the argument instead of their own personal background. The author expresses frustration with Hollywood’s tendency to race swap characters without addressing inequalities for minority communities or creating original stories instead.

    On the other hand, Brooke Newman is a historian who often explores historical and cultural issues surrounding race and power. Because Newman is a scholar this gives her argument more credibility, and it shows in her writing with her authoritarian tone. Her knowledge allows her to connect the backlash with a larger historical context, tying it to patterns of “White Nostalgia” and resistance to change. Furthermore, Newman’s knowledge on cultural history is important because it allows her to make connections between modern day backlash to broader historical issues. 

    The intended audiences for the two articles contrast. The final cutback targets readers who are familiar with Hollywood’s approach to diversity. This audience could include people from underrepresented communities who are frustrated with unfaithful representations in media. The article’s criticism resonates with readers who are looking for meaningful representations rather than simply race swapping beloved fictional characters. For example, the author states “We deserve more than hand-me-down roles,” this shows the author connecting with readers who seek original and authentic representations of their cultures.

    Newmans’s article, however, targets a broader audience, including people who may be unfamiliar with racial and cultural discussions. Her purpose is to educate readers about the roots of backlash and to challenge those clinging to “nostalgia” without considering the racial implications it may have. Her use of historical context allows her to inform those unaware of the societal meaning as well. When she explains concepts like “white nostalgia” she makes her analysis understandable while encouraging readers to reflect on their own.

    The articles also have an extended audience. The Final Cutback may influence entertainment/ media creators to consider investing in origincal, diverse stories. Additionally, Newman’s article may resonate with educators, and historians who are analyzing patterns of resistance to diversity in society.

    The social and cultural context of both articles is necessary for understanding their arguments. Disney’s decision to cast Halle Bailey as Ariel sparked debates about race, representation, and nostalgia. For underrepresented communities, this casting represented progress, but to others this was a disrespect to the original little mermaid character. The Final Cutback criticizes the real issue in Hollywood, which is the lack of original diverse stories. The author’s frustration stems from the media’s poor attempts of inclusion with race swapping beloved characters.

   Newman’s context is similarly connected to the social backlash, but she connects this to a broader historical resistance to diversity. She ties the outage to historical cases, showing how nostalgia has often been used in situations such as these. Her piece adds context to the debate on a racial switch that seems innocent but in reality contains a serious issue in society.

    Both authors use rhetorical elements to connect with their audiences. The final cutback heavily relies on pathos, using emotional language to resonate with readers. For example statements like “Race-Switching feels like table scraps’ brings a sense of anger. However, they also use logos to criticize Hollywood’s unfaithful representations.

    Newman, however, uses logos and ethos to build a more formal and persuasive argument. Her use of historical evidence boosts her credibility, while her logical connections between nostalgia and resistance make her argument plausible. The pathos included also allows readers to come to their own conclusions.

    Both the Final cutback and Brooke Newman tackle the backlash of The Little mermaid casting with respect to their audiences. The Final cutback criticizes Hollywood’s shallow approach to diversity and inclusion, while Brooke Newman connects the issue to an underlying historical issue. Either way both serve as valuable insights on the topic.