Amazon tries to stop The Rings of Power trolls with 3-day review delay

[Bluescreendeath]

The Rohirrim of the Mark are based on the Anglo-Saxon kingdom of Mercia -- the word "Mark" itself is a corruption of the Saxon word "Mearc" for Mercia, and the major characters from Rohan have Mercian names.

The most common adjective used to describe them in the books is "swarthy". And the worst of the orcs are the black-skinned Uruks of Mordor -- who speak the appropriate-named "black speech"; sometimes called the "dark tongue"

They are based on Mercia, and they are ALSO based on steppe people. Rohan has an almost exclusively cavalry army - which is what the steppe peoples had and is not something that was ever used by the historical Mercia kingdom. The name Rohirrim is also Sindarin for "Horse-lords," and Rohan meant "Land of the Horse-lords." These are names historically used for steppe peoples.

As for swarthy, some Gondorians are also described as Swarthy, specifically the Southern Gondorians who bordered the Haradrim. This is a quote from the Return of the King: "There dwelt a hardy folk between the mountains and the sea. They were reckoned men of Gondor, yet blood was mingled, and there were short and swarthy folk among them whose sires came more from forgotten men who housed in the shadow of the hills in the Dark Years ere the coming of the kings. But beyond, in the great fief of Belfalas, dwelt Prince Imrahil in his castle of Dol Amroth by the sea, and he was of high blood, and his folk also, tall men and proud with sea-grey eyes."

So the Gondorians were basically Mediterranean Greco-Romans, and the southern Gondorians may be Greco Romans with some more Middle Eastern influences.

Uruks are a subgroup of orcs. Yes, there are black skinned Uruk Orcs. The regular orcs who make up the bulk of Sauron's armies are described as sallow - an unhealthy pale or sickly yellow in color. Orcs were originally corrupted elves in the Silmarillion.

 

[McMurdeR]

To me the woke stuff is the biggest problem with just about everything made these days. They are just trying way too hard to pander to that audience. To me you really ruin the content by bringing these current world social issues into them. It's like Wheel of time....oh man was it over the top with woke crap and imo it hurt the show.

WOT was good! And the casting was great for the most part (funny enough the two white lads who played Rand and Mat were the least convincing). Not only that, but the source material explicitly deals with female power as a central theme. Have you actually read it? You're throwing lazy tropes like "woke" around like you think it sounds cool, but it only highlights the fact that you don't have a whole lot to contribute to culture except to complain about things that you don't seem to understand.

 

[Ohnooze]

WOT was good! And the casting was great for the most part (funny enough the two white lads who played Rand and Mat were the least convincing). Not only that, but the source material explicitly deals with female power as a central theme. Have you actually read it? You're throwing lazy tropes like "woke" around like you think it sounds cool, but it only highlights the fact that you don't have a whole lot to contribute to culture except to complain about things that you don't seem to understand.

Actually I liked Wheel of Time enough to ignore the stuff I saw as woke. It kind of lagged in the middle but got really good towards the end. I assumed the show and book were the same as the females having the powers. I mean it would have been pretty difficult to change that being it's kind of the main theme. I have not read the books. To be fair the books may have been as woke as the show, I don't honestly know. Maybe a bad example having not read them but the gay relationships seemed poorly done imo. It was a bit like "LOOK HOW GAY WE ARE" to me. But that was just my take on it. I would be curious to know if the books relationships matched the films.

No I don't think woke sounds cool but I do find it over the top annoying in some content. When it feels shoehorned in then it tends to annoy me.

 

[EdmondRC]

The legitimate concerns are about that. But there are plenty of much less legitimate concerns. Some of the comments here seem to be revolving around the fact they brought in a black dude as an elf in LOTR and talking about how Game Of Thrones had too many women characters by the end... rather than talking about the legitimate issues such as potential poor quality of the writing.

Many of the review bombers who gave a negative review immediately upon release without even watching the show would really be criticizing the show for these use of minorities and women rather than the poor quality of writing, acting, etc.

These are not the reviews that I'm seeing, the reviews that I'm seeing are critical of the writing, plot, and deviation from Tolkien. I think that Amazon, like Disney, are pointing to the reviews you mention to malign the real critical reviews that call out the poor writing. Just as an example, when I watched the Kenobi series, and I would call myself a amateur Star Wars fan, just from my own knowledge of the series I was able to call out many plot holes and poor writing. When I watched a review online I was completely vindicated as many others saw the same things. But, what does Disney react to? Not the legitimate criticisms, but the "racists" who apparently didn't like Reva's character (which was poorly written) because she was "black". That's why its a strawman, because they are using it as a means to ignore real criticisms about the poor writing and characters.

 

[Endymio]

The name Rohirrim is also Sindarin for "Horse-lords," and Rohan meant "Land of the Horse-lords." These are names historically used for steppe peoples.

Yes, but the original "steppe people" -- the nomadic pastoralist "horse-lords" -- from the Late Iron-Age Scythians up to the early-Medieval Goths were all Germanic / proto-Germanic peoples. King Theoden himself was influenced by the Goth king Theodoric, and the double line of burial mounds outside Rohan's Edoras is a direct duplicate of the royal mounds at Gamla Uppsala, in Southern Sweden.

Even the late-Medieval Mongols -- whom we now think of as the prototypical nomadic horsemen -- were originally quite different genetically than how we see them today. It wasn't until Genghis Khan and his sons took so many Chinese wives that the bloodlines changed dramatically. This is why, in fact, that depictions of Temujin a century or more after his death typically grant him East-Asian features.

Uruks are a subgroup of orcs. Yes, there are black skinned Uruk Orcs. The regular orcs who make up the bulk of Sauron's armies are described as sallow - an unhealthy pale or sickly yellow in color.

No. In Tolkien's time, "sallow" was the skin color of Orientals, whereas "swarthy" meant Middle Eastern. A West Asian (Indian) might be either. Orcs are black-skinned, swarthy, or sallow -- they are never "light skinned".

 

[axiomatic13]

Techspot comments are full of bigotry today. Some of you are really fragile about diversity.

 

[Ohnooze]

Techspot comments are full of bigotry today. Some of you are really fragile about diversity.

Can you point them out? I have seen not a bit of bigotry on the boards. I have seen accusations of pandering though.

 

[Bluescreendeath]

Yes, but the original "steppe people" -- the nomadic pastoralist "horse-lords" -- from the Late Iron-Age Scythians up to the early-Medieval Goths were all Germanic / proto-Germanic peoples. King Theoden himself was influenced by the Goth king Theodoric, and the double line of burial mounds outside Rohan's Edoras is a direct duplicate of the royal mounds at Gamla Uppsala, in Southern Sweden.

Even the late-Medieval Mongols -- whom we now think of as the prototypical nomadic horsemen -- were originally quite different genetically than how we see them today. It wasn't until Genghis Khan and his sons took so many Chinese wives that the bloodlines changed dramatically. This is why, in fact, that depictions of Temujin a century or more after his death typically grant him East-Asian features.

No. In Tolkien's time, "sallow" was the skin color of Orientals, whereas "swarthy" meant Middle Eastern. A West Asian (Indian) might be either. Orcs are black-skinned, swarthy, or sallow -- they are never "light skinned".

No. First, the Scythian nomads were not Germanic people. The Scythians were Indo-Iranians. The Scythians spoke Iranian languages and were completely different from and far removed from the people who spoke Germanic languages.

Second, the Germanic groups like the Goths, Visigoths, and Vandals were sedentary farmers, not horse pastoralists. The Germanic groups were not really horse lords and did not use mostly cavalry armies. The Roman records of various Germanic groups stated that they had some cavalry but mostly fought as infantry. Only steppe nomad armies in history used primarily cavalry armies.

Third, your claim about the Mongols is also incorrect. We know what the Mongols looked like, and we know who Genghis Khan's wives are, and they are Mongolian/Turkic/steppe people. Genghis Khan did not have any Chinese wives who gave birth to any official children.

There are actual paintings of Genghis Khan's grandson Kublai Khan dating to around the same timeperiod in the 1200s, and the painting depicts Kublai Khan as an East Asian Mongolian-looking person. For example, the artist Araniko actually met Kublai Khan and worked in his court, and painted a painting of Kulbai Khan after he died...and Genghis Khan looks like a typical modern Mongolian dude: https://www.worldhistory.org/uploads/images/11204.jpg?v=1606401002

Kublai Khan was born to Mongolian parents Tolui and Beki, and Tolu was the fourth son of Genghis Khan. You can look up the Mongolian lineages as they were clearly recorded.

There are also modern reconstructions of medieval and ancient Mongolian faces based on the remains of their skulls...and they look like East Asian Mongolians not much different from modern day Mongolians.

Fourth, there were Indo-Iranian-European steppe nomads and mixed Eurasian nomads on the steppes alongside the East Asian nomads. But these nomads were not Germanic people and did not speak Germanic languages. They would've been mixed Turkic peoples, Indo-Iranian peoples, etc.

 

[Bluescreendeath]

No. In Tolkien's time, "sallow" was the skin color of Orientals, whereas "swarthy" meant Middle Eastern. A West Asian (Indian) might be either. Orcs are black-skinned, swarthy, or sallow -- they are never "light skinned".

In Tolkein's time, Oriental means the Middle East, not East Asia. If you want to refer to modern East Asia, then East Asians are actually light skinned rather than dark skinned. Sallow means sickly pale or off white+yellowish color. That makes sallow not a dark skin, but a light skin color.

We also do have the Middle Earth equivalent of more direct influences from Central or East Asia though - it's called Rhun or the Easterlings. The Easterlings were described as sallow to olive in skin tone, with straight dark hair. IIRC, some of their ancestors were described as swarthy. Ironically, the ancestors of the Easterlings included people with Norse names like "Bor" and "Ulfang."

So the nations and factions in Lord of the Rings basically blended a bunch of different real world peoples and cultures together.

 

[Endymio]

Sallow means sickly pale or off white+yellowish color. That makes sallow not a dark skin, but a light skin color.

Sallow: (adj) of an unhealthy yellow or pale brown color. From the Old English salo ‘dusky’.

No. First, the Scythian nomads were not Germanic people. The Scythians were Indo-Iranians

"In 2017, a genetic study of 96 various Scythian samples [found] that Late Bronze Age and early Iron Age Scythians harbored nearly exclusively European-related ancestry, close or identical to the earlier Sintashta, Andronovo, and Afanasievo cultures..."

We also do have the Middle Earth equivalent of more direct influences from Central or East Asia though - it's called Rhun or the Easterlings. The Easterlings were described as sallow to olive in skin tone, with straight dark hair. IIRC, some of their ancestors were described as swarthy.

Yes, and the Rhun fought in Sauron's army. They were the bad guys, not the good.

There are actual paintings of Genghis Khan's grandson Kublai Khan dating to around the same timeperiod in the 1200s

Kublai Khai was two generations after Ghengis; genetically entirely different from him. I can give you references for this if you wish.

 

[Bluescreendeath]

These are not the reviews that I'm seeing, the reviews that I'm seeing are critical of the writing, plot, and deviation from Tolkien. I think that Amazon, like Disney, are pointing to the reviews you mention to malign the real critical reviews that call out the poor writing. Just as an example, when I watched the Kenobi series, and I would call myself a amateur Star Wars fan, just from my own knowledge of the series I was able to call out many plot holes and poor writing. When I watched a review online I was completely vindicated as many others saw the same things. But, what does Disney react to? Not the legitimate criticisms, but the "racists" who apparently didn't like Reva's character (which was poorly written) because she was "black". That's why its a strawman, because they are using it as a means to ignore real criticisms about the poor writing and characters.

I've seen reviews like this all over. Here is a Google review from "Tony G" for example:

"Firstly I will point out that I am a huge Tolkien fan and have read almost everything he’s written and also enjoyed all of Peter Jackson’s films. So knowing this had none of Tolkien’s real writings other than one or two vague links to the Silmarillion, in order to give this as much leeway as possible decided to try and watch it as a stand alone series. I’ve watched both episodes so far and have to say it looks like a stinker. The characters are typical of today’s desperate desire to tick all the PC boxes, (though no handicapped women of Chinese extraction so far) but maybe episode 3 will prove me wrong. Furthermore did anyone tell the scriptwriters that hobbits are not leprechauns? In closing I can’t help but think that Netflix or HBO would have done this so much better."

The review doesn't talk about whether the plot, acting, production, etc is good or bad...and the review just focuses how he doesn't like the PC boxes (is this because it has minorities? idk, I haven't seen it and don't plan to).

Personally, I've seen this done to other shows like Invincible, The Boys, etc where people review bomb it without even watching it or commenting on legitimate issues.

 

[Bluescreendeath]

Sallow: (adj) of an unhealthy yellow or pale brown color. From the Old English salo ‘dusky’.

"In 2017, a genetic study of 96 various Scythian samples [found] that Late Bronze Age and early Iron Age Scythians harbored nearly exclusively European-related ancestry, close or identical to the earlier Sintashta, Andronovo, and Afanasievo cultures..."

Yes, and the Rhun fought in Sauron's army. They were the bad guys, not the good.

Kublai Khai was two generations after Ghengis; genetically entirely different from him. I can give you references for this if you wish.

1. "adjective, sal·low·er, sal·low·est.
of a sickly, yellowish or lightish brown color:"

Dictionary.com | Meanings & Definitions of English Words

The world's leading online dictionary: English definitions, synonyms, word origins, example sentences, word games, and more. A trusted authority for 25+ years!

www.dictionary.com

So yellow is dark skinned to you? Light brown people (eg. Italians or Mediterraneans) are dark skinned now? People from China or Japan are dark skinned? Sallow, eg. sickly yellow or light brown, especially if referring to East Asians, is still light skinned.

2. Europeans =/= Germans. The two terms are not interchangeable. Europeans are a vast group of diverse people who spoke many different language families and language groups. Germans are a very specific branch of European people who speak a Germanic language and/or are descended from Germanic speakers. The Iranian Scythians belong to an even more vast group called Indo-Iranian-Europeans. The groups of people referred to in your wiki article - the Sintashta, Andronovo, and Afanasievo cultures are proto-Indo-European people who migrated into Europe, India, the Middle East, etc.

"From the Sintashta culture the Indo-Iranian followed the migrations of the Indo-Iranians to Anatolia, India and Iran" -wiki

Scythians of different regions also have different influences:

"In 2017, a genetic study of various Scythian cultures, including the Scythians, was published in Nature Communications. The study suggested that the Scythians arose as admixture between European-related groups from the Yamnaya culture and East Asian/Siberian groups. While the origin of the Scythian material culture is disputed, their evidence suggest an origin in the East. Modern populations relative closely related to the ancient Scythians were found to be populations living in proximity to the sites studied, suggesting genetic continuity."

"The shift toward the Iranian-related gene pool is found as early as ~650 BCE in one Eleke_Sazy_650BCE individual (ESZ002) retrieved from an elite Saka burial, while three of four individuals from one of the earliest Tian Shan Saka site of Caspan_700BCE fall within the Tasmola/Pazyryk cloud."

https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.abe4414

3. Rhun are not dark skinned people. If they're sallow then they're light skinned. Gondor also has swarthy skinned people. So that disproves your claim that darker/dark skinned = bad in Lord of the Rings.

4. Kublai Khan was descended directly from Mongolian nobles and Mongolian wives. That means he is genetically similar to Genghis Khan and would have looked like Genghis Khan. Kublai Khan's father was Genghis Khan's son, and his mother was another Mongolian woman. Mongols who marry Mongols will have children who look like Mongols.

I can give you more references to Kublai Khan's lineage if you wish. The Mongol lineage were carefully recorded and it shows him being descended from Mongolians of the time.


And the actual painting of Mongolians in the 1200s AD portray them as similar to modern day Mongolians. Not just the painting of Kublai Khan, but others too. There are also paintings of Ogedei Khan, the direct son of Genghis Khan and a Mongol woman, portraying him as a Mongol looking dude not much different from modern Mongolians. Look up the Yuan era painting of Ogedei Khan. https://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Ögedei_Khan

I'm thinking you are probably confused by anchronistic Persian references to blue-green colors that created a conspiracy that Genghis Khan was somehow European looking. That is a later Persian writing that mistranslated the honorary title "blue wolf" into a physical trait. There are also references to some Mongols with red hair, because red hair also evolved in Eastern Eurasia and exists naturally among some Central and East Asian populations in China, Mongolia, Korea, etc. Neanderthals, Europeans, and Central & East Asians all have genetic mutations for red hair. These genes either evolved independently or may have been inherited from Neanderthals. Some very dark skinned Africans and Australian Aborigenes have natural blonde hair, so these traits are unpredictable.

 

[EdmondRC]

I've seen reviews like this all over. Here is a Google review from "Tony G" for example:

"Firstly I will point out that I am a huge Tolkien fan and have read almost everything he’s written and also enjoyed all of Peter Jackson’s films. So knowing this had none of Tolkien’s real writings other than one or two vague links to the Silmarillion, in order to give this as much leeway as possible decided to try and watch it as a stand alone series. I’ve watched both episodes so far and have to say it looks like a stinker. The characters are typical of today’s desperate desire to tick all the PC boxes, (though no handicapped women of Chinese extraction so far) but maybe episode 3 will prove me wrong. Furthermore did anyone tell the scriptwriters that hobbits are not leprechauns? In closing I can’t help but think that Netflix or HBO would have done this so much better."

The review doesn't talk about whether the plot, acting, production, etc is good or bad...and the review just focuses how he doesn't like the PC boxes (is this because it has minorities? idk, I haven't seen it and don't plan to).

Personally, I've seen this done to other shows like Invincible, The Boys, etc where people review bomb it without even watching it or commenting on legitimate issues.

Many people see a lot of new movies and television series focusing on modern social concerns over plot, character development, etc. Go back and watch some of the previews where the actors are talking about their role in ROP and you will see where these criticisms come from. There are scores of interviews where the actors are talking about how its bringing "diversity" to TLOR as if it is something that was missing to begin with, a "wrong to be righted" with the original films and books. This is why you get fan reactions like this. I'm sure if you dig enough you'll find real racist reviews, but that is not the point I'm trying to make here. The point is that these interviews literally told us that diversity was one of the main focuses of this series. When you couple that with poorly written characters and plot, then you can see why people might write reviews like the one you pulled here. Amazon set themselves up to be review bombed, and the series itself vindicated the feelings of TLOR fans. Instead of trying to focus on making a story coherent with the TLOR world, Amazon literally told us that they were more concerned with making TLOR world look more like the modern world in terms of diversity. So there is that.

 

[McMurdeR]

No I don't think woke sounds cool but I do find it over the top annoying in some content. When it feels shoehorned in then it tends to annoy me.

Actually I liked Wheel of Time enough to ignore the stuff I saw as woke. It kind of lagged in the middle but got really good towards the end. I assumed the show and book were the same as the females having the powers. I mean it would have been pretty difficult to change that being it's kind of the main theme. I have not read the books. To be fair the books may have been as woke as the show, I don't honestly know. Maybe a bad example having not read them but the gay relationships seemed poorly done imo. It was a bit like "LOOK HOW GAY WE ARE" to me. But that was just my take on it. I would be curious to know if the books relationships matched the films.

No I don't think woke sounds cool but I do find it over the top annoying in some content. When it feels shoehorned in then it tends to annoy me.

So by your own admission you don't know anything about the source material, but can still assume that the adaptation is out to antagonise your political social sensibilities? Do you not see the willful ignorance in that?

In any case, as someone who has plenty of relatives and friends will all kinds of sexual orientation, I can tell you that it isn't "shoehorned" into their lives. It's bang up reality, and it's a relief to see mainstream culture finally catching up with it.