J.K. Rowling Defends Casting Of South Korean Actress In 'Fantastic Beasts' Sequel

The author was accused of 'shoe-horning' in representation.

J.K. Rowling has responded to fans after being criticised for casting a South Korean actor to play a snake-like mythical creature in the newest instalment of ‘Fantastic Beasts’.

With the release of the latest trailer, it was revealed actor Claudia Kim would be playing Nagini, a human with cursed blood who has the ability to transform into a snake.

However some fans have been critical of the fact that the author’s choice to add representation of people of colour seems retrospective – as Nagini was thought only to be a snake in the books.

Claudia Kim as Nagini in the trailer
Claudia Kim as Nagini in the trailer
Warner Bros

The author came under fire shortly after the new trailer debuted, with Twitter user Jen Moulton flagging fans’ concerns.

“Listen Joanne, we get it, you didn’t include enough representation when you wrote the books,” she said. “But suddenly making Nagini into a Korean woman is garbage. Representation as an afterthought for more woke points is not good representation.”

@jk_rowling listen Joanne, we get it, you didn't include enough representation when you wrote the books. But suddenly making Nagini into a Korean woman is garbage.
Representation as an afterthought for more woke points is not good representation. https://t.co/UIrR7yiKQD

— Jen Moulton (@J_A_Moulton) September 26, 2018

In a reply to Jen, J.K.R. herself gave some context regarding the Naga, the mythical creature that inspired Nagini.

“They are sometimes depicted as winged, sometimes as half-human, half-snake,” she said. “Indonesia comprises a few hundred ethnic groups, including Javanese, Chinese and Betawi.”

The Naga are snake-like mythical creatures of Indonesian mythology, hence the name ‘Nagini.’ They are sometimes depicted as winged, sometimes as half-human, half-snake. Indonesia comprises a few hundred ethnic groups, including Javanese, Chinese and Betawi. Have a lovely day 🐍

— J.K. Rowling (@jk_rowling) September 26, 2018

Some fans, who were quickly jumping on board the thread, weren’t satisfied with the author’s explanation, reiterating Jen’s points and they hadn’t been adequately addressed.

How did this address Jen's point in any way? You repeatedly try to retroactively shoe horn representation into your books which did not exist in the texts, belittling the communities you're trying to take credit for championing we'd like to know why you think this is appropriate

— 🐤 Miss Cluck 🐔 (@Cooks_Books_) September 26, 2018

Literally the textbook definition of tokenism.

— Glenn Diaz (@GlennnDiaz) September 27, 2018

Twitter user Jen also took issue with one of the only people of colour in the film being cast to play an anthropomorphic snake, rather than a more fleshed-out character.

When challenged on why it was negative that the author might now be thinking more about representation, she wrote: “Because Nagini is an animal. She is not humanised, she eats people and Voldemort milks her for food.”

“To say suddenly that she was a real human person the whole time is really gross. To add that she is one of the very few POC [people of colour] in the [‘Harry Potter’] series, I think, is despicable.”

Because Nagini is an animal. She is not humanised, she eats people and Voldemort milks her for food. To say suddenly that she was a real human person the whole time is really gross. To add that she is one of the very few POC in the HP series, I think, is despicable. Wbu?

— Jen Moulton (@J_A_Moulton) September 26, 2018

Another Twitter user compared the seemingly retrospective thought about inclusivity to Rowling’s comments about Dumbledore’s sexuality:

She did the same thing with Dumbledore’s sexuality. She used it to get points with LGBTQ+ people and all but retracted it for the current Beast movie. While Ms Rowling is extremely talented one of those talents is not being inclusive. But does a bang up job pandering.

— A-Bomb (@bringurownsun) September 26, 2018

However, others have leapt to J.K.R.’s defence. “Don’t we want people to do better?” said another tweeter, Simen Sund, whilst Harun Wijanarko defended the author’s autonomy over her own universe.

What I don´t understand is (if we assume that your point is correct) why it is such a bad thing for a person to go back and ad more representation. Don´t we want people to do better?

— Simen Sund (@SimenSund) September 26, 2018

Never ever change @jk_rowling. The universe that you've made is still the universe that we all love. We have faith in you. Don't let anyone tamper with your writing. You have every right to write how you want to write, and surely we will love it and support you for it.

— Harun Wijanarko (@HarunWijanarko) September 26, 2018

The series, alongside the original ‘Harry Potter’ franchise, has been subject to criticism and debate surrounding the lack of inclusion of ethnic minority characters in the past.

J.K. Rowling
J.K. Rowling
Walter McBride via Getty Images

Since the conclusion of the original Harry Potter series, the author has since claimed that she had always intended Dumbledore’s character to be gay, and pointed out Hermione’s race was never specified, following the casting of Noma Dumezweni in the stage show ‘The Cursed Child’.

‘Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald’ will hit UK cinemas on 16 November.

Close

What's Hot