The Oscar nominations were revealed two days ago. As such, the film industry and movie fans once again are ripe with speculation about who will win an Academy Award. One of the most enduring movie franchises ever is that of the James Bond series, featuring leading actors such as Sean Connery, Roger Moore, Pierce Brosnan, and Daniel Craig in the title role.
When Daniel Craig's final James Bond movie was released, an acquaintance and I discussed who might replace him. My conversation partner suggested that it was time for a woman to take on the role of 007. I found this view to be odd; James Bond, in Ian Fleming's series, unquestionably is a man. My colleague contended that whether it's James Bond or any superhero, it’s important that characters evolve over time to reflect diversity.
Spare me!
If someone wants to devise a female spy character, they are free to create their own novel, screenplay, or play. To claim that Bond needs to become a woman in the name of diversity is essentially saying that those who want a female Bond lack the creativity to create their own, original character.
As you guessed, my acquaintance is on the left politically. I said that if we start down the path where major characters from books, movies, theatre productions, etc., throughout history, must change their gender, race, or some other core trait to promote diversity, we are undermining the integrity of literature, the arts, and entertainment as a whole.
Inappropriate Appropriation
Why are Leftists so eager to appropriate and alter existing stories, changing characters’ identities or roles, rather than writing their own new stories? Is it a lack of imagination, a lack of talent, or just a lack of creativity? One immediate conclusion: it is all three. Mostly, Leftists can't create anything enduring – what they can do is latch onto, and invariably destroy, what others have already built.
If you survey popular culture, it becomes apparent that the Left's lack of originality and independent thought is on display everywhere. One result of this ineptness is that they seek to reshape other people’s fictional works to suit their own agenda.
My colleague pointed out that "M," the head of MI6 in the Bond series, was a male character for many decades before Judi Dench was given the role. I agreed that it’s feasible for a female to hold such a position within Britain’s spy network. Such a role assignment doesn’t materially damage Ian Fleming’s original creation. Claiming that James Bond must be female, however, is a complete distortion of the author’s intent.
Compromising the Author’s Intent
Fleming supposedly modeled Bond after himself, a man. If so, he had every right to create the character as he did. If publishers sought to publish his books, and they did, that was their choice. If movie producers wanted to make films about Bond, and they did, that was and is their prerogative. If audiences want to watch those films, that's their right as well.
Today, there are endless vehicles for creating artistic works and countless opportunities for promoting them. If someone on the Left, or any political ideology, seeks to create their own female British spy character, or any other character of any other origin, that's their right and the opportunity awaits. Nothing is holding them back.
From my experience with others on the Left, apparently their basic mode of engagement in the arts (certainly not exclusively) is to alter, contort, homogenize, or destroy -- not to create. Many are predisposed to tear down what came before them, often without contributing anything of their own, and certainly not offering anything better instead.
En masse, they come off as uninspired and largely unoriginal – contributing little to either the arts or to society in general.
Reverse Roles
To gain a clearer perspective, reverse the roles. Imagine if the heroine of The Girl Who Kicked the Hornet's Nest (or the rest of Stieg Larsson’s MillenniumTrilogy) were changed into a young male character in future books. How would fans of the genre respond?
What if the Laura Croft series was re-written to feature an adventurous young man? Would it be considered acceptable? Would the Left not loudly exclaim that it is a bastardization of the author’s original work? We know the answer: they’d be screaming at the top of their lungs.
If someone were to write a compelling novel, screenplay, or play featuring a female British spy, I would support it as a customer or patron. As a case in point, Cate Blanchett’s role as a spy in the recent movie Black Bag could be worthy of spinoffs.
Respect for Original Intent
The world doesn’t need more artistic destruction; it can use original ideas. The issue that the Left perpetually faces is respecting the original work and the intent of its creator.
To those who would rather distort and diminish what has come before them in popular culture, instead of seeking to hijack other people’s work, either strive to be creative and devise something of your own, or get the heck out of the way.
Amusingly, after brutally mocking the political, cultural, and economic shibboleths that globalist “elites” hold dear, President Trump took the opportunity to thank Secretary of State Marco Rubio for “teaching” him how to be “diplomatic.” It was a funny moment in which the president managed to praise Rubio and poke fun at himself. The American delegation at WEF is working as a well-oiled machine. Trump owned the room. It wouldn’t have been surprising to hear him say that he had plans to buy the ski resort and rename the Swiss luxury hamlet “Trumptown.” He did make sure to end on an exclamatory note: “The United States is back -- bigger, stronger, and better than ever before.”
