Another "Woke" Adaptation?

Even before the release of Amazon’s "Rings of Power," a loud group of fans of J. R. R. Tolkien and his works expressed their disapproval and hate regarding the series’ diverse casting. The online backlash demonstrated concerning signs of racist abuse towards cast members, who received personal hateful messages on social media and were told that they do not belong in Tolkien’s legendarium because Tolkien meant for it to be white. Unfortunately, such racism and hate are not new, nor is this an isolated phenomenon. Other adaptations such as Disney’s remake of "The Little Mermaid" and HBO’s prequel series "House of the Dragon" have faced similar racist backlash upon the casting of people of colour in leading roles. The backlash against "Rings of Power" has not escaped the notice of news media, which have fuelled the controversy and led to further discussion of Tolkien in relation to racism, and how the fantasy genre seems to perpetuate its “traditions of whiteness”. This study seeks to examine the discourse in selected articles from various news outlets in the USA and the UK, using a critical discourse analysis (CDA) approach to reveal their reception of and critique on the inclusion of diverse characters in Amazon’s "Rings of Power". The present study suggests that the conflict surrounding racism in this context has a strong political hue to it, where terms like “woke” and “forced diversity” are utilised to dismiss efforts to increase equality and inclusion as inauthentic and unfaithful to Tolkien’s vision. Amazon’s "Rings of Power" as well as other fantasy adaptations that make similar efforts are also accused of being part of a political agenda that seeks to force its ideologies “on the masses”. The findings further indicate that many journalists condemn and condone the racist backlash simultaneously, where the main argument often expresses support for the cast members and the series’ casting choices. At the same time, journalists tend to employ discursive strategies that suggest agreement with some of the fans’ justification of these cast members’ exclusion. The lexical choices that accompany these discursive strategies can influence the reader’s perception and understanding of the controversy, and demonstrate how power, ideology and discourse work together in such conflicts.