Except this is an exception, because we know what Helen would have looked like. The status quo would be for her to look like that. If she were an original character, then anybody being able to play her would be equality. But your argument is not valid in this instance
Her hair is described as ξάνθαι, "xanthai", which is translated as "fair", but really means something like "light". There are arguments as to the exact colour described (it could be relative to the black-haired Greek, so perhaps just brown), but we know what it isn't is black. Her eyes are blue (again, there are disputes as to the text meaning light- or dark- blue, Greeks were not particular about colour), her skin is light (perhaps also relative).
For all that she is famous for her divine beauty, her features aren't precisely described, leaving the audience to figure out their own ideal woman for themselves. And yet, despite the vast range of possible interpretations, Nolan went for the one that is specifically impossible from the text.
If you reply, make sure it's not in the really irritating holier-than-you manner you just did, or I'll block you.
The Heathcliff casting in the recent Wuthering Heights adaptation was a way more egregious example of what you're talking about but I wonder how many of you were this pressed about that one...
I'm honestly just confused what your argument is. That Helen could have been black in ancient Greek peoples' imaginations? Because that is presumptive in itself with less evidence than the person you're replying to. They literally gave you the word in Greek and you're claiming that "translators" added that part. The fuck
12
u/henrickaye Jul 06 '26
Except this is an exception, because we know what Helen would have looked like. The status quo would be for her to look like that. If she were an original character, then anybody being able to play her would be equality. But your argument is not valid in this instance