First Ever Hype?

HGohwell 2020-11-01 23:32:58 UTC #1

How much do you genuinely care if a character or story is "the first ever"?

For instance, Disney's constant "the first X minority character", which is often code for "in the background for five seconds but we want the credit for representation". I remember when Star Twinkle Precure came out, there was a lot of hype around Cure Soleil being the first Cure of colour (let's ignore if this is accurate or not, there was a lot of discussion about whether this erased the Aloha Cures at the very least, and "hang on aren't they supposed to be Japanese anyway?" but that's a discussion for somewhere else). I remember people getting hyped about ZLS for being the first ever anime to casually but explicitly have a transcharacter (again, how accurate that really is, is not important). But is that important?

Now, let's be clear, I'm not arguing the importance of representation. I'm not, for instance, saying that having a Cure of colour (a Cure with darker skin, since they are Japanese anyway) isn't big deal and isn't great. It is. It's great to see anime and other media evolving.

What I am asking, is how much does people going "the first ever" really matter to you? Are you more likely to watching something because it's "the first ever" as opposed to not the first ever? Running with the Cures, would Star Twinkle having "the first ever" Cure of colour make you more likely to watch it than a series further down the line with a Cure of colour that isn't "the first ever"? Does "first ever" representation matter that much more than normal representation? Or does a lot of it just come across as Disney's common wanting credit for not doing much?

aqua03 2020-11-01 23:35:15 UTC #2

Behold! The FIRST EVER reply to this topic!

Thank you for beholding. have a great day.

Jenny-Toons 2020-11-01 23:39:01 UTC #3

For a lot of the time, I see it as doing the bare minimum because it's mostly connected to stuff that does the bare minimum?

Like, with a lot of media that have done amazing representation and talked about some hard-hitting topics (regardless if it's towards kids or adults), it's never really attached to "the first ever X". They just do it, and they generally do it well.

So I guess for me, it really doesn't matter if it's supposed to be "the first ever X", especially when I feel it came out rushed. From what I've seen, the stuff that always hits and hits well don't rely on that. They don't care if they're the "first ever" because in the end, those are the stories known for "being THAT story that talked about XYZ pretty well" or "that story that dived into ABC and added to the discussion."

Slow and steady sometimes wins the race.

KoreanTacos 2020-11-01 23:41:50 UTC #4

I instantly think of the one eyed one horned flying purple people eating first lesbian cop from Pixars master piece onward, I felt so inspired when she said her one line that can be easily edited out for Chinese markets

Seaby 2020-11-02 00:08:51 UTC #5

I don't consider it as special if something is the first ever in media. As a rule, media made by major companies like Disney aren't doing it as a show of support or a sincere desire to increase representation, they're doing it as a cash grab. And while their doing so may have an influence on the representation of these groups with viewer and coming media, it is a result of their popularity. The reason why it doesn't make sense to show such appreciation towards these 'first ever' displays of people of color/marginalized groups is because it's, as @Jenny-Toons said, basically rewarding them for doing the bare minimum. Like, yeah, you guys should have been including them from the get-go, you don't get a prize for treating them the same as anyone else.

Japan is a different topic, however. I'm sure there's far more to it than I can tell you, but I believe the poor representation is due to the country's overall limited interaction with foreigners. Anime and larger Japanese media that also caters to a foreign audience may try to diversify their casts, but even then they tend to hold more importance towards what Japanese audiences will enjoy and relate to.

KRWright 2020-11-02 00:25:58 UTC #6

I think it depends. There are, genuinely, 'first evers' that are important. When certain stories are told for the 'first time ever' in a medium though, I think it needs to be much more specific than a general group that's as large as "Cure of colour" for example.

So for example, the first documentary to cover a certain topic specifically through the voices of those involved would be a legitimate "first ever" buzz for me. Like, getting to hear about the topic or event from first person accounts is super important, so long as it's alongside other critical analysis.

There's some other 'first evers' that get me excited too. Cemetery Boys had the first trans Latinx author hit the NYT bestsellers list. That's amazing and shows that at least some legwork has been done in the publishing industry to allow not only an own voices book to reach the NYT lists, but also that intersectionality is being taken more and more into account when publishing is looking at stories to uplift and tell.

Another example is that Star Trek Discovery brought in their first human non-binary character this season and I am here for it. They did it right, brought in a non-binary actor to play the character, and have made them a relatively major character as well. There's such little representation of human non-binary people on TV that I am here for this first and I will celebrate it as a victory if I can. It also fits with the values and vision that Star Trek, as a series, has generally upheld throughout it's 50+ years on television, of progressive values that show us that humanity and the future is hopeful.

Basically, I think that when it's specifically about people and celebrating their achievements, then I'm all aboard that hype train.

IndigoShirtProd 2020-11-02 00:55:43 UTC #7

Like @Jenny-Toons said, sometimes is does feel like a bare-minimum effort and an unecessary thing to bring up when it comes to characters of color. When companies mention that a POC character is "the first ever," it kind of just brings into question why they weren't doing it before.

And I also agree with @KRWright too. I think the point of contention is why the person is the first ever. Are they, for example, an author who writes a great book and happens to also be X, Y, and Z. Or, is it "Look! As as afterthought, we added someone who is X, Y, and Z to our cast" or "We chose this person to give the impression of diversity without be authentic about it."

HGohwell 2020-11-02 00:57:00 UTC #8

I just want to clarify on this specifically, I use the term Cure of colour because that's the term most people will use. And this is generally the point of my question. When people ask "why should I watch Twinkle Star?" they get "because it's got the first ever Cure of colour!" and not "because it's got a dark skinned Cure of mixed race, specifically Hispanic and Japanese, who gets a plot line/arc about the mixing of alien species as a metaphor for her own mixed heritage and how it's ok" or even anything about the plot of the show. And it is kinda a big deal for this kind of thing to happen. It's a big deal that there's a main magical girl of colour in such a prominent series without backlash (at least not noticeable, because I'm sure there was some somewhere). But it's reduced to "first ever" by many fans as if that's more important than her actual story or the series story. In the same way Hugtto, the season before Star Twinkle, should be watched for "the first ever boy Cure" above everything else.

And while I acknowledge representation of non-binary people, especially not as robots or aliens, is lower than that of POC, I'm not entirely sure how your Star Trek example is all that different to the Cures.

DokiDokiTsuna 2020-11-02 01:05:06 UTC #9

Short answer: Not much.

Long answer: Eeeeeeeeeeeeeehhh kinda/sorta but not much overall.

Call it maturity, jaded-ness, or whatever, but I've been around long enough to know that it doesn't really mean much. Doing something 'for the first time ever' and advertising it as such is easy; writing a good story/making an enjoyable product is still as hard as it's always been. ^^;

For example, I actually watched Star Twinkle Pretty Cure...the whole thing (* cries *) and as proud as I am that Soleil exists and has a backstory that actually dared to tiptoe into a real discussion of discrimination...she's a boring character. And the show kinda sucks. =/

Furthermore, I feel like buying into it when artists emphasize how 'groundbreaking' they are just rewards them for handing crumbs to people who really crave and deserve that representation. Like when people go, "oh, you have problems with this character? Keep in mind that they were the FIRST EVER; the show creators didn't have to put them in; you should be grateful--"

No, no...just no. I'll be grateful for good things, not things that are simply shiny and new.

spadedigsbutts 2020-11-02 01:08:08 UTC #10

I feel like it depends on context for me. REP IS GOOD AND THE FACT "first ever" CAN ACTUALLY BE USED AS A MEANS TO GET PEOPLE HYPED MEANS MAINSTREAM MEDIA IS SLOWLY ALLOWING MORE REP YAY (I wish it would go faster but what you gonna do). I absolutely want more representation and its inclusion should be celebrated, I just don't like when it is touted as an advertisement for how "woke" a company that historically has probably oppressed those same minorities uses them to advertise To people. I'm overall happy we are slowly getting there, but yeah when i see those "first ever" things it can bother me a bit because i can just feel those slimy big company manipulation vibes. So basically it's a mix bag....it's like a good omen of better things to come...but I'm also like HMMM AM I BEING MANIPULATED BY A COMPANY

DiegoPalacios 2020-11-02 01:12:11 UTC #11

Diversity is like salt in a story. Just like salt can improve the taste in a dish, is a nice touch that can improve a story if excecuted well, but just like people would not eat a dish completely made of salt. Diversity can't be the only selling point of a story.

Today, i see the "First X ever" as a cheap marketing tactic to get more of that sweet money and is slowly becomming a buzz word that makes me roll my eyes. Bonus eyeroll if it that first x ever has already been made.

KRWright 2020-11-02 01:13:42 UTC #12

I think you're misunderstanding a little bit of what I meant there. I'm not familiar with the Cure line beyond kid's pencil cases and merchandise in general, and you didn't mention anything about specific identity (Hispanic/Japanese) in your original post - only that she was dark-skinned Japanese...

In your initial post, you didn't say that the representation was deep at all - or focused on actually representing a certain experience of a character or group of people. It made it sound like it was her skintone alone that was getting the "first ever" treatment rather than the inclusion of a character with nuance and depth. You've explained that now.

So my initial response was: Should we be celebrating the 'first ever' when the 'first ever' is a bare minimum? No. But should we when there's been some actual research and efforts to include and represent a community that has been historically underrepresented? Hell yes. When it comes to the Cure line, if the character has a well-thought out plotline that is really trying to bring representation of the experiences of mixed race children to the attention of other Japanese children and give representation to the large Hispanic/Japanese community? Why shouldn't it be celebrated?

However, if it's a cynical cashgrab that is doing the bare minimum representationally, and is just applying aesthetic principles without doing the legwork to bake something into the series or attempt to create something that involves the community represented... Eh. I'm not so interested in that. Both of my examples were people from traditionally marginalised communities being brought into large franchises/industries to create more inclusion in those franchises/industries. The representation is by and for the people being represented in both of those cases.

HGohwell 2020-11-02 01:22:41 UTC #13

To be controversial for a moment: Precure peaked at Heartcatch and as never reached those heights again (and Smile is severely underrated, fight me Precure fandom!).

NickRowler 2020-11-02 01:44:45 UTC #14

I don’t mind people taking a attempt to represent under represented groups. However, companies like Disney often use it as PR stunts, which can be a bit insulting. And a lot of times, be it for PR or being genuine, it may not be the best way to represent said group. [Insert Steven Universe rant here]

I have also seen people use some of these as political points. I once heard someone say, “If you dislike Korra, than you hate bisexuals”. I’m bi and I dislike the show and it has nothing to do her sexuality. And saying that people have to like it because she is bisexual is an odd statement.

When it comes to my own work, I honestly don’t care. I might have characters that might “be the first”, but I don’t really want to make that my main selling point or shame people into liking my work because of it.

HGohwell 2020-11-02 01:58:25 UTC #15

This is something very prominent, at least in some circles, with Cure Soleil at the time, and in some places still. Even times when I would say something as mild as above, that I just didn't think it was The Best Season and there were some places that would declare you or your statements racist. And haven help you if you said something like you didn't like the season. It's frustrating to say the least.

This is a lot of what I feel. I appreciate these first a lot. As I say, I appreciate Cure Soleil and what she represents a lot, I think it's a big deal for children to see themselves represented in shows like Precure, but it does feel frustrating when it becomes the selling point for the entire show, or the character is reduced to first of X minority, as if that minority is a marketing gimmick rather than representation.

DasIstWunderblyat 2020-11-02 02:45:11 UTC #16

I don't buy "First evers" by big companies.
There is always more obscure creators who have done it before, and not using it as a promotion slogan.

Prometheus 2020-11-02 02:55:38 UTC #17

I think representation is good, but it’s not what brings me to a story. Especially if it comes down to only being there for views. I like stories that are about people, and about different people. Not to have different races, genders, or other things to be there just to be there because. Does that make sense? A lot of times it can feel like it’s there out of a falsified genuine thought by the creators, or like it’s a point to force across to the audience sometimes, when I think it’s most important to just write about people, no matter race or sexuality or gender. At the end of it all, we’re all people. With that being said, I do think representation is good, if it’s not being used as a device to push agendas, if that makes sense.

thedude3445 2020-11-02 02:57:06 UTC #18

I can't stand when "first ever" is done with something incredibly minor like what Disney does when they have their first gay character in each series who is edited out for Chinese audiences. Or in the third recent Star Trek movie where they made a huge marketing fuss about Sulu being married to a man and then it only appears for half a second in the background of another shot. Or some semi-recent Cartoon Network show where two dudes danced together in the background of a scene at prom. It's the kind of stuff where it has absolutely no relevance to the work at hand, but the media hypes it up for marketing points.

I think it's when minority characters are shoehorned into an existing property that it gets me miffed. Not because they are doing anything wrong, but because they are always doing it for the wrong reasons, which is "a few headlines."

On the other hand, I love it in media when it just sort of happens. Someone's always got to be first, but what about second and third and fourth? Steven Universe made waves for its queer representation, and that was always the subject of news and such, but the show was never that popular. However, that show being first is what allowed so much other queer representation in animated media over the past five or so years. And the representation has gotten better and better!

It's the same thing with certain cartoons in the 90s finally featuring Black, Latino, Jewish (and sometimes even Asian) main characters that paved the way for the explosion of diverse casts throughout the 00s, with so many shows I'd have trouble listing them all. (Hollywood ALMOST went down that path, but in the 00s they decided to chase four-quadrant blockbusters and back came all the generic white dude protagonists for everything.) Nobody really remembers what came first, even if there was a fuss about it at the time, but it's vital that they came first, because something always had to.

So, I love representation of all peoples in all groups, but I hate when that fact becomes a huge marketing point for stuff that doesn't actually deserve it.

KRWright 2020-11-02 03:02:07 UTC #19

A counterpoint argument (it's a Star Trek heavy thread now), but this article on the first ever interracial kiss on TV goes through why sometimes, these first evers are important on a larger scale:

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/arts-culture/fifty-years-ago-star-trek-aired-tvs-first-interracial-kiss-180970204/#:~:text=22%2C%201968%2C%20an%20episode%20of,to%20sing%2C%20dance%20and%20kiss.

thedude3445 2020-11-02 06:50:10 UTC #20

That one is extremely important and historic, though I feel like it is very different than something like, Disney touting some minor Pixar character with a few lines that get cut in censored countries. For one, that interracial kiss was still illegal in some U.S. states at the time. Whether or not it was a marketing tactic, the execution was done in a way that could have seriously hurt their ratings or even cancel the show. I think the boldness of making it in such a way where censors couldn't possibly cut it was what made that First Ever so important and special.

A good, sadly-also-cartoon example that I feel is similar is that Arthur spinoff cartoon with Buster, where the character meets children with lesbian moms. Back in 2005 that alone was enough to cause a major controversy and most PBS affiliate stations wouldn't even air the episode. But a few did, and that First Ever was really important.

I feel like I am much less cynical about the entire prospect just having written two posts about it lol