Charlie Chan: Racist?

Melissa Hung
June 20, 2006

He goes on:

Are the Chan films racist? Not, I think, by the standards of their time. Mr. Biggers is said to have created Chan (based on a real detective, Chang Apana, who worked for the Honolulu police) to counter the negative images of Asians being fueled by the Hearst papers' "yellow peril" campaigns and embodied most repellently by Sax Rohmer's sadistic "Oriental" villain, Dr. Fu Manchu. Mr. Oland, a popular heavy of the silent era who played practically every ethnicity available (including, on occasion, a Swede), was the screen's first Fu Manchu, in the 1929 "Mysterious Doctor Fu Manchu" and three subsequent films for Paramount.

Recruited by Fox in 1931 for "Charlie Chan Carries On," a film that is now lost, Mr. Oland seemed to spend the balance of his life and career making up for the excesses of the Fu Manchu character. In the Fox set, both "Charlie Chan in London" (1934) and "Charlie Chan in Paris" (1935) contain scenes in which Chan coolly and wittily dispatches other characters' racist remarks. Chan, whose huge intellect mysteriously did not extend to an ability to master English articles ("Joy in heart more desirable than bullet"), might have been a stereotype, but he was a stereotype on the side of the angels.

Is something not racist because it was well-intentioned? Is it unfair to judge it by the standards of today? What's your verdict? Charlie Chan -- Racist? Not racist?

Contributor: 

Melissa Hung

Founding Editor

Melissa Hung is the founding editor of Hyphen. She was editor in chief for the magazine's first five years and went on to serve in many other leadership roles on the staff and board for more than a decade. A writer and freelance journalist, Melissa has written for NPR, Vogue, Pacific Standard, Longreads, and Catapult. She grew up in Texas, the eldest child of immigrants.

Comments

Comments

Goober wrote on Fri, 08/11/2006 - 8:30pm
I got the boxed set, I enjoyed it. I always liked the Oland Chan flix. I don't see him as being any worse than Charles Bronson playing Apaches or Mexicans, Anthony Quinn playing a Greek in 'Zorba' etc. or Alec Guinness playing an Arab in 'Lawrence of Arabia'. It's a part. He was an actor. At least it was decently made if nothing else. I DO have rampant troubles w/ Stepin Fetchit in 'Egypt', and there's also Mantan Moreland in the later, garbage-time Chans of the late 40's. He was funny in a Lou Costello way, but they did make him out to be an idiot. Why they didn't cast an Asian American of sorts to play Chan in the '30's I donno. Heck I like the Mr Motos too-and those have Peter Lorre. Maybe it's just the series were good.
Puberty Sucks wrote on Wed, 06/21/2006 - 9:13pm
Racist. If they had kept it true to who the bad-ass Chang Apana truly was with his bullwhip and cleaning up of Honolulu's red light district instead making Charlie Chan the portly gentle wiseman with bad grammar, then maybe it wouldn't have been racist. But even then it most likely still would have been racist.
pleiotroph wrote on Thu, 06/22/2006 - 10:08am
I agree with the reviewer's comments.It was a flawed attempt to promote a positive image. The intention was apparently benign, but the result was a bit stereotypical.I think the publicity surrounding the release should focus on the historical context of the Charlie Chan series: the yellow-perilism, Fu Manchu stereotypes, and the racist casting in Hollywood -- all of which still extend to the present day.
rebecca wrote on Tue, 06/27/2006 - 2:41pm
I agree with the previous commenter's regarding the contextualization of Charlie Chan, although I don't think it's possible to use a stereotype "on the side of angels," as the reviewer puts it. As intensely as I dislike the Charlie Chan figure, I don't believe the films should be made unavailable. It's a piece of history. Maybe dvds for these types of films should include information on the stereotype as part of their special features.One thing that could really affect our present--getting JACKIE Chan to play a different type of role.
nina wrote on Tue, 06/27/2006 - 8:09pm
like previous posters have mentioned, just because something is well intentioned doesn't keep it from being racist. furthermore, i think part of the issue here is that the fact that these dvds are being rereleased, puts them in a context where they are now unarguably racist. The reality is, stereotypes are stereotypes, and simply because they are working towards against institutionally built ones doesn't make them better. I mean the actor wasn't even ASIAN. I hardly think society would release a dvd collectible series of a White Man in black face, even if he was portraying against black male stereotypes.
B.Takahashi wrote on Wed, 07/12/2006 - 1:25am
Stop complaining. When was the last time in recent history where there was a straight Asian Male who was a detective, policeman, fireman, etc.? (And no, Chow-Yan Fat is an import, so he doesn't count.) And Harry Kim on Star Trek Voyager? Just a Mama's boy...- Will the Real Straight and Strong Asian Man Please Stand Up!!!
aden wrote on Wed, 07/12/2006 - 11:10am
Straight Asian male? Perhaps you didn't read the part about how he's White. I don't see how putting on yellow face and reciting platitdues in an accent is necessarily a good representation of a straight Asian man.
B.Takahashi wrote on Wed, 07/12/2006 - 11:40pm
Right...like Asians don't emulate whites. It's about high time that whites started emulating Asians. Besides, the point was made with irony -- representation of Asian men in certain roles is so lacking that you can only find it in yellow-face. Open Your Eyes and maybe you'll see.
BingCherry wrote on Sun, 10/15/2006 - 9:09pm
How about David Carradine in the YellowBook (no pun intended?)commercials? Talk about Whites emulating Asians...This guy has fashioned an entire career playing some pseudo-Confucius...He's a joke!
bruce wrote on Wed, 09/27/2006 - 7:21pm
get over it people it's a movie. lifes to short to make a big deal about. These movies were made for entertainment.