MovieChat Forums > Spider-Man (1967) Discussion > Racist remark in 'The fiendish fakir'

Racist remark in 'The fiendish fakir'

posted 11 years ago by varuns-1
13 replies | jump to latest

During the course of the episode "The Fiendish Fakir", about the attempted theft of a diamond( or ruby), Spiderman, in his alter ego Peter Parker, makes what would now be certainly seen as a blatantly racist remark.

When the older lady says that a certain raja would not try to steal the gem from her, since he originally gave it to her, Parker says that maybe the raja is an "East Indian giver".

If that line appeared in any show nowadays, there would be a serious uproar, followed by suspension if not outright cancellation of the programme.

The standards of so called 'political correctness' must have been quite low back in 1967, for that remark to go by uncensored and seemingly( I wasn't around then) unopposed and unresisted. It can still be seen in repeats of the show that go on in syndication in the present. You would think the scene would be altered at least, with a voice over.

It's pretty disgusting, even taking into account the time period. Actually, we were not so unenlightened back then. The 60's were a time of ferment, and questioning of old ways and values. Including racial slurs. Evidently, "Spiderman" didn't reflect the times.

[–] Kurt_Stein 10 years ago

Don't be so uptight - it sounds like a witty line! Besides, it really isn't that "racist" of a line.

[–] varuns-1 10 years ago

The expression "Indian Giver" is an archaic, stupid and racist description of a perceived type of aboriginal Indian, someone who takes something back. It's not meant to praise the Indians. So, "East Indian Giver" is not witty, it's insulting and demeaning. It would not appear on any modern TV show, certainly not in that form. If it did, the idea would be to ridicule or denigrate, not the Indian or East Indian, but the moron who used it.

[–] joshua_carpino 10 years ago

you think that's bad,don't watch "the one eyed idol" episode.

[–] varuns-1 10 years ago

Agree. It was disgusting with its "nice doggy, nice doggy" lines. What were the producers and writers thinking? They can't be excused with the "It was 1967, not 2014" explanation. 1967 was if anything, the cusp of a new era. The people behind it should be taken to task, big time.

[–] mcgill-646-33556 10 years ago

While we're critiquing racist attitudes from nearly forty years ago, perhaps you could turn your attention to Breakfast at Tiffany's and see if see if there has ever been a satisfactory explanation for Mickey Rooney's take on the Japanese tenant.

[–] Ten-Inch-Toni 10 years ago

While we're critiquing racist attitudes from nearly forty years ago, perhaps you could turn your attention to Breakfast at Tiffany's and see if see if there has ever been a satisfactory explanation for Mickey Rooney's take on the Japanese tenant.

Please don't get him started on that McGill. He only seems to be offended by perceived East Indian insults, in any case.

[–] varuns-1 10 years ago

Haven't seen "Breakfast at Tiffany's", but if there was some stupid remark about a Japanese tenant, I denounce it unreservedly. True, I'm concerned more about anti-East Indian insults and racist drivel. Somebody ought to be. Anti-Black and anti-Jewish sentiment from history is brought up repeatedly, it's overdue for East Indians. Breakfast at Tiffany's was if I'm not mistaken, from 1961. Derogatory scenes or remarks involving East Indians continued to be displayed in police shows and cartoons well after 1967, into the 80's and 90's.

[–] Ten-Inch-Toni 10 years ago

Agree. It was disgusting with its "nice doggy, nice doggy" lines. What were the producers and writers thinking? They can't be excused with the "It was 1967, not 2014" explanation. 1967 was if anything, the cusp of a new era. The people behind it should be taken to task, big time.

So Varuns, what is it you want? Do you expect a formal apology from the creators of the cartoon? From the network? What do you want?

[–] varuns-1 10 years ago

Yes, that would be nice for a start, with perhaps a public shaming of the idiots as well. What's wrong with raising weightier issues in these forums?

[–] Duragizer 10 years ago

I wonder why no one ever brings up the sexist comments towards women or the use of Irish cops on the show. Both occurred far more frequently than any overt racism towards dark-skinned people.

I'm Laura Bertram's husband in another universe.

[–] varuns-1 10 years ago

Well why don't you bring it up, and we'll discuss it. Often, comments like yours are made, not out of sincerity, but to conceal the reality of the other type of prejudice i.e against those dark skinned people.

[–] Duragizer 10 years ago

I conceal nothing -- racism is racism. I bring it up to expose the blindness/disregard of posters such as yourself to the other groups the show discriminates against.

I'm Laura Bertram's husband in another universe.

[–] varuns-1 10 years ago

You should start a thread, about sexist/chauvinistic scenes in Spiderman, rather than suggesting that I denounce those segments the way I do the racist ones. My concern is much more with derogatory remarks about East Indians, partly because I'm of that background, and partly because it's not an issue that's raised the way anti-Black or anti-Semitic portrayals are. If I have a worthwhile remark to make, I will. As for images of Irish cops, that by itself is not equivalent to the disgusting "East Indian giver" slur. An equivalent would be a reference to a hard drinking Irishman, to contrast him to a lighter drinking one. And such a scene would appear as a one-off portrayal, with no counter-portrayals of Irishmen shown. There was only one depiction of East Indians in the whole "Spiderman" series, and it was sour and negative.