Talk:Magical negro

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Magical negro article.
This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.
Article policies
On 2007-03-19, Magical negro was linked from Los Angeles Times, a high-traffic website.
All prior and subsequent edits are noted in the revision history.

Contents

[edit] No more examples, please

Please do not attempt to provide any more "Examples." Additions like "That black dude in rudy" or "Fortune (Charles S. Dutton) in the film Rudy (1993)", no matter how well formatted, violate the official Wikipedia policy of WP:No Original Research and may be immediately deleted by any editor. That section begins ...

Examples of magical negroes as published by social commentators include:

There are enough examples already, and ALL of them have at least one citation (some have multiple) as per WP:Reliable Sources, i.e., it's not just, "I think that so-and-so is an example." Please, let's not hear any more suggestions or debates ... if you cannot provide a {{cite web}} or {{cite journal}} tag to back it up, don't add it, and if it doesn't have one, feel free to revert it. This has been discussed since before Mar 23, 2004 (see below), but I have moved the consensus view to the top of this Talk page for the newcomers to read first. —72.75.93.131 (talk • contribs) 19:05, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

I dont understand how you can make this rule and make it law? makes no sense, it isnt OR research if the def and the charecter in a film fit. Star trek is a perfectly valid example. The examples should help the reader, and the more popular examples the better. That is the purpose of this page to bring clarity, not to have some harsh law, if you apply that law to wiki it would be impossible to add content just because one editor says "NO MORE".--HalaTruth(ሐላቃህ) 01:11, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
It's not one ditor, it's the consensus ... see WP:NOR, WP:V, and the history of edits on this article (this particular example has been removed several times already) ... this was becoming a crufty list ... the examples all have citations to published articles ... that was the consensus, and the comment at the begining of the section CLEARLY STATES **WARNING** Do not add an example unless you have a reference!!. --141.156.216.67 03:26, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

I find what you are doing to be very strange, look at the description, that is original research there is no source, so who are you to say that obvious examples cannot be added. it is not building the quality of this article by selecting what can contain or and what cannot. And even if a choir has an agreement this is open to be chanellenged to improve the article. I will now add OR tags to prove this imbalance.--HalaTruth(ሐላቃህ) 03:53, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] More Examples

Would Jim from Huck Finn count? He doesn't have special powers or anything, but he is presented as wiser than Huck (at least in some settings). Just a thought--I haven't added it to the article yet, nor will I without confirmation. Meelar 05:25, 23 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I think it's key that the Magical Negro archetype have magical powers of some guide, not just be a guide or moral leader--therefore Jim wouldn't qual. jengod 06:56, Mar 23, 2004 (UTC)

Jim wouldn't qualify also because he's an adult, but the contrast is almost more powerful since Huck is a child capable of power over him. -- Mbowen 08:53, September 23 2005 (UTC)

Here's a question: would Krishna count? He's black, basically, but he's not "negro" in the sense specific to America, of course. But he definitely fits the magical advisor in a subordinate social position thing perfectly. Almost definitively. -- कुक्कुरोवाच|Talk‽

A thought -- since Bagger Vance is based on the B. Gita, and that movie's on the list, then maybe Krishna would too. --Arcadian 02:03, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Definitely not. This article is about a very specific archetype in American fiction. It has nothing at all to do with Krishna.--Pharos 03:53, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

I'm not sure that the handcar pumper from O Brother... should count here, unless you want to consider Homer the original Magic Negro--which he most definitely was not! Jengod's criterion is also a reason that Red from Shawshank should not be on this list--no magical powers there. If anything, Andy was the key figure in Red's redemption, and not the other way around. --69.109.58.99 07:52, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

So's Andy's the Magical Honky. A first in film.--Skeev 20:08, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

What about the charecter from M. Night Shyamalan's Unbreakble - Mr. Glass?

How does everyone feel about Whoopi Goldberg in Star Trek Next Generation? She doesn't seem to posess any magical qualities (although her near-agelessness is mentioned in one of the movies, I think), although she is there specifically to be a sort of psychologist: soothe their souls. I'd say remove, but I'm not 100%, so I thought I'd ask. Sir Isaac Lime 23:06, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

I'd say her charachter would apply, she is the ageless "wise" charachter that troubled people come to and she really just explains away thier problems.--Skeev 20:08, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] is there any way black people can be shown in a film that won't piss of some jerk?

Oda Mae Brown was faaaaaaaaar from "wise"


I 'almost' added the following to the list of examples:

  • Andy Fidler (Eugene Levy) in the film "The Man" (2005) flips the race-roles stereotype in what may be a useful 'blunt force example' to present to the 'insistently race-conscious blind'.

But I figure it might be better to discuss first. I see a character like this as being an attempt to get people who are persistant in their denial to go 'ooooooh, yeah, I get it now...' by flipping the roles around while keeping the elements intact. Not that I trust those in denial to open their minds enough, but I see the attempt nevertheless. Thoughts?

Sure she wasnt wise, specially in that part where she says "you can use my body" and both souls, Demi Moore and Patrick Swayze, reunite... no, there was nothing Wise at all there. And magical?, hell no, she could only talk with the dead, and thats obviously not magical as anyone knows that all black people out there have soulful powers that are inprinted on them because of all the years they went through slavery (we shall call it... the uncle Tom cromosome...).
And yes, im glad about you should mention The Man, now there's a movie that has oscar written all over it, as influential as citizen kane...

[edit] And...

Would not Danny Glover in "Grand Canyon" fit in here?

I disagree with the following: Gossett in “An Officer and a Gentleman” - the drill sergeant role was not particularly different than white versions of the type; Shaq in “Kazaam;” “The Dude” in “Gladiator” - he displayed no particular authority, and was an interesting device to show how most in the world would have been utterly amazed with Rome; and, Chris Rock in “Dogma,” yes, he’s an angel, but so are a lot of the characters. I don't see significant differentiation.

In the judicial venue, in the 1980/90's there were a proliferation of television and film judges who would fit the motif. Today, 2005, black judges portray the same crankiness or collegiality as the white ones.

[edit] Lucius Fox

How is Lucius Fox from Batman Begins an example of this? He's only poorer than Bruce Wayne because Wayne is the richest man in Gotham (or near to it) and he's not "magical", he's a scientist. Wayne's butler, if anyone, is the "magical negroe"--except that he's white. A magical Briton perhaps? --Daveswagon 04:03, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

I agree. I removed it. He in no way furthers any spiritual awakening in Bruce Wayne, or any other characters. Sir Isaac Lime 02:35, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Theres nothing special about Lucious Fox, except in the way that is played by Morgan Freeman, who always plays his characters pretty much like Red from Shawshank Redemption, wich is in a soulful way.

[edit] Juba from Gladiator

The Nubian is an example of the magical negro archetype. he possesses knowledge that Maximus does not (how to treat the wound on Maximus's shoulder) and he helps the protagonist. And Juba may not have been able the same great things that the hero does. Whoever left the Edit summary "Juba is not magical" when they deleted him from the list misunderstands the archetype; the magical negro doesn't necessarily have to put on a wizard's hat and cast spells with a wand to be "magical". Gatherton 05:49, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] God? Lucius? Rufus? Kazaam?

How in the name of God is... God part of this stereotype? God is an uneducated simpleton?

The list is frankly ridiculous. Basically it boils down to "black people who help the protagonist but aren't the protagonist".

I agree, God really shouldn't be on that list. God, in Bruce Almighty, isn't helping the white protagonist in the same sense as the Magical Negro - if God so wanted, he could strike down Bruce with a lightning bolt. Insofar as the God character is supposed to reflect some idea of the Christian God, He helps specifically because he is a being who is superior in all respects to the white protagonist of the film, not because he is somehow a convenient subservient character to whom the protagonist turns when he needs help solving a problem.

[edit] Morgan Freeman

Wow. Four entries. He really made quite a lot of his career playing MNs. Speaking of which, would his role in Hard Rain count as well?

[edit] 132.241.245.49

this user made the folowing changes [[1]] and [[2]]. I think they were totally wrong and unfounded. they also summarizd the first edit with "dumbest article ever." I think this shows that they don't know what they're talking about. I reverted their edits and assume that the other users will back me up, since it was they who made those contributions originally. Additionally, those of us who edit this page must consider it something other than "the dumbest article ever." Gatherton 00:21, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Removed Lucius Fox

Much of this list is off-topic, but particularly Lucius Fox. He's not particularly mysterious, as he tells Wayne and the audience his story, and he has no magical powers of any sort. He's basically an ally, like Alfred & Commissioner Gordon, who happens to be black.

This list is just sad. Some people need to go have a good read up on archetype, sidekick, stock character, leading actor, role (performing arts) and related themes and come back when they're better informed.
Someone needs to take a hatchet to the "list of examples"--which is no longer a list of examples, which REALLY annoys me--I keep saying it. Anyway, if no one else prunes this, I shall.
Quill 00:51, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

Go for it. I took out a couple of the worst "examples." Really, doesn't "Baggar Vance" serve as the best example? Are any other necessary? Sir Isaac Lime 12:25, 11 February 2006 (UTC)


This is getting rediculous, why don't we take a vote? Post here with your opinion on the Lucious Fox issue. Gatherton 15:39, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

Remove it. Sir Isaac Lime 12:28, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

Remove it. --kchishol1970 14:45, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

Remove it. Good God Almighty--what are people thinking? Are people thinking???! Quill 00:44, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 5 Primary Examples?

Any chance we could agree on around 5 or fewer examples that show the Magical Negro stereotype? There is no reason for the article to become a definitive list of what is and isn't a stereotype, it should just explain it, and show a couple things COMMONLY thought of as belonging to that stereotype.

My votes would be for: Mother Abigail in The Stand, the Green Mile Guy, and Baggar Vance. Maybe Uncle Remus. Sir Isaac Lime 13:20, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

not the green mile, I don't think. John Coffey was the central figure, even if it wasn't told from his point of view. I thought the theme was one more of martydom. Novium 08:02, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
We should be using the term's Spike Lee's actual examples as a guide[3]. He coined the term, after all.--Pharos 23:33, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Kazaam

I removed the Kazaam entry. I've never seen any accusations, and intuitively, Shaq does not appear to have been cast as a genie for his mystical qualities, it was the whole hip-hop theme. RadioYeti 03:10, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

I would appreciate it if 24.0.91.81 would give some reasoning behind adding Kazaam back to the list, besides "obviously does" on the editing history. I don't want to start some sort of edit war but the addition seems sort of silly to me and I don't have whatever reasoning is behind it.RadioYeti 03:32, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Pulp Fiction

Jules Winfield, as played by Samuel L. Jackson, is a scripture quoting, bible toting, hit man. In the apartment gunfight scene, somehow he is magically able to avoid injury although many bullets from several guns are fired directly at him at point blank range. He begins to think that God has a greater plan for him, and seeks redemption. He is the only character to emerge unscathed at the end of the film.

Jackson is not supposed to be a magical negro in pulp fiction. His religious outlook and his surviving the scene in which he is shot at several times is meant to contrast the next scene in which John Travolta accidentally shoots the guy they're taking to vin rhames. He is not a magical negro, he's a plot device. I dont see why you keep removing the other two entries for Jackson. They fit the definition and are a notably demeaning portrayal of the magical negro. Please explain your reasoning, and when you leave a comment put four ~ (tildes) at the end so other users can see your signature. KI 02:36, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
Perhaps it is because you don't explain your additions. 155.84.57.253 14:14, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
Valid additions do not need to be discussed before they are added. Now it has been explainied nonetheless. KI 15:19, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Examples

Examples should be limited to those that actually fit the archetype and clearly explain the qualities inherent. All these additions of every black character is ridiculous. (Particularly the Three Wise Men.) We really need to find a couple primary examples. Perhaps it should be limited to those that are discussed in the external links (Stephen King's characters, Baggar Vance, et cetera). Sir Isaac Lime 22:50, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Just re-removed many of the characters that clearly do not fit the archetype or are not justified in the links. Perhaps any additions to the list should be annotated with were they appear in discussions of the Magical Negro. I left characters in that I did not know whether or not they applied. Since Can'tStandYa persists in reverting every edit that I do, I'd like to ask that he/she justify the inclusion of those names deleted from the list. Sir Isaac Lime 23:02, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
Okay, this is absurd. Please, to those reverting back changes with no justification, give your reasons for the examples on this page. That is what it is for. Sir Isaac Lime 02:56, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
You have been warned for vandalism on other pages in the past. Clearly you understand that mass deleting entries without any consensus falls under vandalism. No one else wants those removed. That's why you're edits have been repeatedly reverted. Also, when adding a new topic for discussion, add the topic at the bottom of the page, not the top. Thanks. KI 03:40, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
Sorry about putting this post at the top originally. I believe the following examples are incorrect for the following reasons:

The Three Wise Men- Please. The three are nearly identical, there is no subservience apparent in the African wiseman. He does not help the main character understand himself. The Magical Negro is, as another user said, and American archetype.
Gus Gorman (Richard Pryor in Superman III)- Has no magical powers. Does not help Superman's soul. Simply your standard comic foil.
Oda Mae Brown- Discussed elsewhere. Not subservient.
Kazaam- Discussed above. Silly.
Apostle Rufus- Not subservient. Not any more magical than anyone else in the movie. Does not help anyone reach an understanding. Simply there (like most characters in the movie) for a couple one-liners and to get the characters on their way.
The Oracle - Not subservient. Not cut and dry, but I think it is vague enough that it doesn't make a valid example.

Holy Cow! I disagree with that. Her entire purpose is to midwife the birth of the chosen one. Like some metrosexual black widow spider, he might as well bite her head off and eat her after she's done her bit.

Mateo from In America - Doesn't come close to fitting the stereotype. Not subservient, not magical. Does not help the main character's soul, the children help his soul, and he helps with money. In a way, the opposite of a Magical Negro.
Eko from Lost - Not subservient. Not magical. Does not help character make peace. Essentially a similar character to Locke, but African.
Rose from Lost - Not subservient. Not magical. A real stretch to include her. She is simply a normal person in nearly every way possible.
Sam from Danny the Dog - Not subservient; Jet Li is not "above" Sam. If he were, there would be a valid case for it, but as it is, no.
Priestess Elosha - From what I have seen of the show (just first season), there is nothing to support this. Simply a priestess. A minor character, does not have any of the qualities of the Magical Negro.
Guinan from Star Trek - I think not really. Posted further about it above.
What does everyone else think? Sir Isaac Lime 06:07, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

There is no need to catalog every instance of the archetype, lets keep the list low enough to provide the most blatant examples. The point of examples is to illuminate, not to provoke controversy. Wikipedia is not a battleground. hateless 23:02, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
I've kept the list as is but moved it to a separate page. I dont mind deleting a lot of those though. KI 23:34, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

There's discussion on AfD about merging the list into this article. I think it is sensible, and I think Sir Arthur Lime's suggestion that references be made to where the characters were referred to as "magical negros" would be helpful. Ones that don't cut it could be kept on the talk page until consensus is formed. Other examples I can think of are the "It's A Wonderful Chest" skit from Chappelle's Show (MN played by Dave Chappelle) and the magical negro skit from The Man Show played by Jerry Minor. Esquizombi 08:11, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Trimmed Examples List

Just wanted to re-post this comment at the end of the Articles for Deletion/List of Magical Negros discussion. "Comment from the closing admin: The main article explains the matter well, and has enough examples. This one is full of items that don't fit, and doesn't have a single reference. It's not listcruft. Cruft is a mass of useless true things; this is a list of potentially useful but completely unverifiable things. Merging was not a possibility; it would've moved the problems from here to the main article. --Pablo D. Flores (Talk) 02:46, 18 March 2006 (UTC)" Rather then full reverts to the old list, I'm of the opinion that relevant, supported examples should be added individually. Sir Isaac Lime 22:18, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Didn't want to start an edit war, so I'll just ask here. 155.84.57.253 is of the opinion that everyone on the list qualifies as a Magical Negro. I believe the article should just mention those mentioned in other sources. To cite Wikipedia's Vefifiability policy:
Information on Wikipedia must be reliable. Facts, viewpoints, theories, and arguments may only be included in articles if they have already been published by reliable and reputable sources. Articles should cite these sources whenever possible. Any unsourced material may be challenged and removed.
I had footnoted a couple of those examples with their sources, so that others could add others to the list, footnoted in a similar fashion. (See my edit on 22 March). However, 155.84.57.253 has decided to revert (with a snarky comment) the whole page, despite the many posts on this page and on the "List of Magical Negros" discussion page that the examples list is too long, not from a neutral point of view, and original research. Any one want to weigh in? Sir Isaac Lime 21:12, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
Okay, so I was weak and reverted the page one last time. I figured that, since a vote was taken on the List of Magical Negros page to delete the list, when merging was a possibility, the list has been deemed, by the community, as unnecessary. Again, I'm not saying some of those deleted examples shouldn't be on the list, I'm just saying they need to be cited. Sir Isaac Lime 20:30, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Tommy Johnson from O Brother Where Art Thou?

Just another suggestion. --Steerpike 22:41, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Can you find multiple citations? Sir Isaac Lime 23:02, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Annotating Examples

Please reference all examples added. All examples should be mentioned in another source/sources in regards to the Magical Negro archetype. Remember, no original research. Previously, this list became a catch-all list of all African-Americans in movies, almost all of them unsupported. The Magical Negro is a very specific archetype, and adding examples that isn't a glaring example weakens the overall article. I don't think Wikipedia should be here to say what is and isn't an example of a Magical Negro, but merely to point out to people the most glaring examples of this archetype.

I have been using the standard Wikipedia Footnote system. You can check the Wikipedia:Footnotes page for more information on how to add footnotes. For those articles already footnoted, you can use the same name in the footnote, so they show up as the same footnote number in the references section (and are not repeated). You can then reference that footnote by merely using <ref name="NAME OF FOOTNOTE" />. This also saves copying the whole URL. Make sure you use it after a previous usage of that footnote, however. The names already used are:

As with any article about a contentious subject, the article has had to go through some major overhauls in the past. Since many examples were not clear-cut, they were frequently added, removed, added, discussed, removed, and so on (as looking at the early discussions and history of the article shows). Keeping everything referenced will hopefully keep that from happening again. Thanks, Sir Isaac Lime 20:26, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] God

I don't think that God in Bruce Almighty is a Magycal Negro. At less not so much as God in Bedazzled :) By the way, I think that Juba in Gladiator and Frozono in The Incredibles were perfect Magycal Negroes.

Unless you can find a reputable source that says as much, the point is moot. Remember, Wikipedia is not for original research. This is a very specific archetype, as discussed by various social commentators. If the list were merely "Do you think about this character who is of African descent isn't all that great?" (as it once was), it would quickly become a free-for-all of people adding and removing characters with no logical reason.
Frozone is a perfect example. I, for instance, would disagree. He fails to have any of the main attributes of the Magical Negro. He is not mystical (note that mystical implies not superpowers, but a mystic ability to see into characters), he is not part of the plot merely to save the day at an opportune time, but instead a deliberate parody of all sidekicks. He is, if anything, closer to a Tonto (Lone Ranger character) type character than a Magical Negro. Whether or not we disagree, however, the important thing is that other sources do not claim he is a Magical Negro, so he is not on the list. Sir Isaac Lime 20:17, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
ROFL! When I dropped into this discussion, I thought you were talking about Fasto from Minoriteam, not Frozone ... both of them are better examples of the Stepin Fetchit kind of negro archetype.
But the point remains, just because a black character has some kind of power does not automagically make them a Magical negro, anymore than George Burns playing God makes him a Magical Jew. (Jebus, didn't it explicitly exclude "playing God" from the frelling definition?) --Dennette 03:32, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Girl, Interrupted (film)

The Contoversy section of that article contains the phrase, "... the sympathetic nurse character played by Whoopi Goldberg embodies the magic negro stereotype."

After researching the character's name and adding an entry to this article, someone summarily deleted it ... maybe because I didn't include an explicit reference to the above mentioned Wiki article as the source?

Anywho, if anyone else agrees with me, would you please put it back? (That way it's not just my opinion. :-) -- Dennette 23:15, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, that was probably me. There are a lot of superfluous examples added to this article, and if they're not referenced, I delete them (there's a long story, and many community discussions behind this). By all means add it back, just try to find where someone outside of Wikipedia said that the character was an example of the Magical Negro archetype. Then just add the URL for that site or sites at the end of her name, on this page, or according to the footnotes description above. Hope I didn't make you feel like your contribution was without merit, it just got thrown out with the bathwater. Like I said, find a citation. Also, it seems that the part of the Girl, Interrupted article you mentioned was deleted for the same reason: no citation. Sir Isaac Lime 01:21, 19 July 2006 (UTC) (EDIT: My mistake, I was looking at the page for the book, not the movie. However, after you find some citations, I'd say add them to this page and the Girl, Interrupted (film) page.Sir Isaac Lime 01:23, 19 July 2006 (UTC))
Uhh ... that was the question ... can a link to the Wiki page for Girl, Interrupted (film) be used as the citation? Isn't it sufficient that Magical negro has Girl, Interrupted on its What links here page? Or must there be an explicit citation from a non-Wiki source?
Oh, wait ... you're implying that the mention on the Girl, Interrupted page also needs an external citation, aren't you? Belgium! --Dennette 03:51, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
Exactly. They both need outside citations.Sir Isaac Lime 04:02, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Scatman Crothers in The Twilight Zone

Doesn't he qaulify as being the Magical Negro in the Rest Home bit of the movie. He certainly was magical, he was wise, he helped the white residents acknowledge and overcome thier faults. I think he's a perfect example.

Score two for Scatman with Morgan in the lead still. --Skeev 20:15, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

If you can find and cite a reputable source outside of Wikipedia that says Scatman in The Twilight Zone is a blatant example of the Magical Negro archetype, then add it. Otherwise, it is considered original research. The page doesn't need to list every time the archetype is used, just the most blatant ones, to give readers a better idea of the topic being discussed. Sir Isaac Lime 00:06, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] God in Bruce Almighty

People keep adding Morgan Freeman as God in Bruce Almighty as an example of a Magical Negro ... they have totally failed to grasp the concept of this archetype. The character of God could just as easily have been played by a white man, or by a woman (like Alanis Morissette in Dogma) ... this was a casting decision, pure and simple. They will never find a reputable source to cite for this example! --72.75.71.147 14:48, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Cited. And the point is *any* of the magical negro characters could have been played by any race, but were cast as black to fit the archetype. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Dejitaru (talk • contribs) 08:21, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
That is not the point at all ... the majority are created that way by the authors (see the Stephen King examples), i.e., their physical description, backstory, and scripted dialog all preculde them being "played by any race", rather than having been "casting" decisions.
The point is that "God" is not a fictional character created by the author, and in this specific instance, a "little old Polish cleaning woman" could have read the same lines in nearly every scene as the "elderly African American janitor", since they were neither race nor gender specific, quite unlike the fictional "13th Apostle" character in Dogma, who repeatedly blames his obscurity on institutional racism ("A brother can't catch a break!") ... you could not have cast Alanis Morissette in that role!
But this entire discussion is now moot ... a citation has been found to support the opinion that this is a valid example of the archetype ... please, just don't add "Queen Latifah a ghetto goddess in Bringing Down the House" as another example just because it's in the same article ... I think that we have enough examples already. --72.75.105.165 05:17, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Fortune in Rudy

I changed an earlier addition of "That black dude in rudy" to "Fortune (Charles S. Dutton) in the film Rudy (1993)" to make the reference meet basic style requirements. However, I do not remember anything magical about Fortune. He shared bits of wisdom with Rudy, was a friend, and turned a blind eye to certain things, but that does not make him magical. I would like other opinions. --Willscrlt 11:20, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

You are correct ... this is not a valid example, so I have reverted that entry (and that editor's vandalism) ... when you edit the section, it clearly states:
**WARNING** Do not add an example unless you have a reference!!
Otherwise, such entries violate WP:NOR, and this article has already become a cruft magnet for movie fanboys, like this reference to Rudy. —72.75.93.131 (talk • contribs) 14:01, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
Thanks. I knew the info as-submitted was worthless, but I thought I'd clean it up a bit and wait for a second opinion. :-) --Willscrlt 01:08, 4 December 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Agreement among a choir

I dont think there can be an agreement which last a 1000 years blocking. Blatent examples are being hidden from the reader this violates the development of this article. Editors cannot have a rule which is so strictly applied to only one section of teh article, they also cannot add WARNINGS telling other editors what they can add by some choir agreement. The entire description violates WP:NOR. This article must be open to others to investigate what exactly is going on here. Please do not continue to remove examples because of some broad application of OR, when the description has ZERO refernces and thus is OR by that standard! This page seems to be edited by a sub-group of wiki which picks which rules to use and where to apply these rules, where in OR does it say you can do this?--HalaTruth(ሐላቃህ) 04:00, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

The reason the OR rule was applied more strictly to the list of examples is because that is where the most egregious errors were. The page had become a listing of every character played by a black actor. This watered down and confused the issue of dealing with what, exactly, this stereotype is and why it is harmful.
The description had no references, true, but that's because it needed them. If one area does not contain references, that does not mean that the entire article can be free of citations. Please see previous edits of the article, and read through the talk page, for an understanding of how a consensus was reached in regards to examples in this article.Sir Isaac Lime 17:03, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Here via the Request for Comments. Tagging parts of the article as possible original research was appropriate; those things should be cited, and anything that remains unsourced after 2 or 3 weeks should be cut. However, the fact that not everything in the article has a citation yet is not a justification for adding uncited items to an otherwise well-cited list. It's not essential to the article to name every possible example, anyway; a few of the best and most commonly named ones is enough.

If Guinan is such a good example, then there should be good sources saying so. Why not look for those sources rather than trying to fight a very well-established policy? —Celithemis 23:25, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

  • I also came via the RfC. Quite simply, there must be a reference in order to add material to a page like this. This is a pervasive problem on wikipedia - for example, look at List of flops in entertainment, which I nominated for deletion. Dozens of editors have simply added what they feel to be appropriate examples, with no references. Frequently these examples are simply wrong. This is not a matter of any editors out to "get" HalaTruth, nor is it a broad application of the OR rule, it is the OR rule.-Dmz5*Edits**Talk* 15:06, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

the issue has been fixed as all editors have agreed sources r needed everywhere. wish someone would apply this rule to the rest of wiki.--HalaTruth(ሐላቃህ) 17:40, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

I get the impression that sources were not emphasized nearly as much a year or 2 or 3 ago; it's relatively recent that a consensus has developed to make this as reliable a resource as possible. So there is now a constant battle to improve existing articles without deleting them or ruining them. Cases like this article are a relatively easy fix - just don't add to a list without a source. -Dmz5*Edits**Talk* 03:17, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Drudge / LA Times

This article was linked to by the LA Times, mislinked actually "http://en.-wikipedia.org/wiki/Magical_Negro". Drudge has linked to this article, so expect high traffic. (Ehrenstein, David. "Obama the 'Magic Negro'", Los Angeles Times, 2007-03-19. Retrieved on March 19, 2007.) — Steven Andrew Miller (talk) 21:29, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Keep it Topical, Not Political

Removed the reference to David Ehrenstein's article. One statement by one opinion writer in one newspaper is not sufficient justification for making a link between the archetype and Barack Obama. 64.173.255.7 00:46, 20 March 2007 (UTC)Brandon P


[edit] Try looking at it from this angle

Maybe the use of 'magical negros' is needed to show the difference in the experiences of the two major races here (white and black). The MN is used to show that the 'hero' that needs help is having a hard time because his spoiled ass has never had to overcome adversity. While the MN has had to endure racism, slavery, etc...

I can see how this is not the best light to show African-Americans, Negros, what have you, in - but I posit that it does show a respect for wisdom and strength while in the same breadth acknowledging the white mans easier road and immaturity as a result of no proverbial mountain to climb.

The MN is grown and stronger helping a child on his way. Not the worst way to look at it right? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 128.122.253.196 (talk) 23:55, 19 March 2007 (UTC).

Thanks for your remarks. The article does make a strong case. However the contrarian in me wants to look at the other side too. The magical wizard, helper, advisor to the hero is a common feature in many stories. Look at Gandalf, Merlin, Olbi Wan Kanobi. They filled much the same role as the magic negroes, yet they were not black. Besides, the casting of black actors in these roles at least gives them some work. :-) Seriously, there are many movies with blacks in the lead roles as well. Steve Dufour 12:03, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Obama the 'Magic Negro'

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Bnguyen (talk • contribs) 08:45, 20 March 2007 (UTC).

Text dump of copyrighted article removed; people can click on the link to read it. -- Infrogmation 23:44, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Temporary semi-protection

As The LA Times article mentions and links to this article and we seem to be getting some related anon vandalism, I've semi-protected (no edits by anon or just signed up users) for a week. -- Infrogmation 23:44, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Is this paragraph needed?

For these reasons, a black actor performing as God in a film (like Morgan Freeman in Bruce Almighty) is not generally considered an example of the magical negro archetype, although one commentator does.[2] Since God is not a character created by the author, and has neither race nor gender, a person of any race or gender could also be selected to perform the role, like Alanis Morissette in Dogma (although another commentator asserts that, "Chris Rock’s Thirteenth Apostle in Dogma is one example."[6])

There is nothing wrong with it with WP policy. However, it is hard to understand the point it is trying to make. Is the race of an actor playing the role of God an issue that comes up very often? Do you want the article to end on this note? Thanks. Steve Dufour 12:11, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes, that very issue comes up way too often ... there were frequent edit reverts about it several months ago, and not for the first time ... anon. editors kept adding it without a source, so others kept removing it ... this article had become an OR magnet, as the discussions here show, and every newbie wanted to be the first one to add it to the list "because it obviously fits the description." —141.156.235.132 (talk • contribs) 15:36, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Why was a citation request deleted and not addressed?

Why was the [citation needed] attached to the assertion that this term has been used since the 1950s deleted and not addressed? This is contrary to Wikipedia practice.

For that matter, why is this page currently protected? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 64.132.236.33 (talk • contribs) 20:39, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Why don't you provide an edit summary or sign your posts? For that matter, why don't you bother reading these discussion pages before you ask questions that have already been answered? (See Talk:Magical negro#Temporary semi-protection.) --141.156.235.132 22:53, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
I deleted the citation request and said something like "it may have been used" in its place. If you think the information about the expression being used in the 1950s is wrong then just remove it. I thought that the person who put it in must have had a reason and it is interesting information that doesn't do any harm. The need for the citation is still clear without the tag and the readers are not distracted. If you feel the tag is needed put it back and I will not remove it again. Steve Dufour 03:26, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] http://sonypictures.com/movies/reignoverme/index.html

Can this movie be a considered a "current" example? If no more examples are to be allowed than perhaps a discussion should be initiated as to why it continues. Why does America need a "magical Negro"? I'll start it with the notion of guilt abatement; Does the "magical Negro" mollify white guilt? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 151.203.22.54 (talk • contribs) 00:57, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes, that is part of it. I think the point was made in the article. If not find someone who wrote about it and put it in with a cite. Steve Dufour 02:44, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] guilt

I have read up and acknowledge the pre-points made (LA Times). The true basis of the phenomenon has yet to be explored thoroughly though. Agreement on the "guilt factor" seems to have been established in part at this time. There is also the psychological,societal,economic,and class factors that need to be explored and sorted out. Anyone game?, History, sociology and psychology talent would be appreciated. Yes, I will eventually sign on officially but until then let's discuss!!! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 151.203.22.54 (talk • contribs) 15:38, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

You could write an essay on it and send it in to your local newspaper to be published. Then we could cite your findings in the article. Steve Dufour 16:39, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
BTW Because of reading this article I went to Blockbuster to rent Bagger Vance but they were out of it. Steve Dufour 02:15, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../m/a/g/Talk%7EMagical_negro_f876.html"