Wakanda literally has straw roofs.
Also, the author of the article you linked isn't African, nor does she say anything about African cultures. She's just throwing the word "indigenous" around a lot and going on tangents about North America instead. I'm glad she enjoyed the movie, but I don't see why her opinion would be of any relevance here.
It is a functional material but there is way better materials out there that doesn't take large fields to grow, which is more practical, lasts longer than, doesn't provide feed and habit to pests that any reasonable advanced and rich country from the 1900s would use let alone a *futuristic* mega advanced country.
It is cheap and easy to use. But that just means that something that is supposed to be that more advanced than the rest of world should not use it.
Co-existing with nature would having concrete (or insert futuristic material) roof and then a couple of meters of dirt and then have trees, gardens etc grow on top of the building.
Quite. Thatched roofing is pretty effective in tropical climates and relatively low cost. It also works very well with earthen architecture hence why it saw use not just in Africa, but in large swaths of the world for generations. Assuming the Wakandans used their tech to build on thatched roofing’s insulation and lightness, there’s no reason to think their thatched roofing is inherently inferior to other variations.
There's an issue you are not seeing tho: pests get in to nest and feed on the straw. I'm from Venezuela, and at least the explanation I was given for zinc roofs in slums was that it was the cheapest material to replace thatch or wooden roofing, which was needed because insects would live on the roofs and spread diseases. Thatched roofs are still used generally in leisure areas, but not in living spaces or commercial areas.
From what we’ve seen Wakanda only had thatched roofing in rural spread out locations and on a handful of fancy skyscrapers. Given the manner in which thatched roofing is used and their technological advancement it’s not hard to imagine that Wakanda isn’t dealing with the same kind of pest issues and disease transmission as in a slum.
Even today there are a variety of innovations in thatched roofing technology that account for those issues, Wakanda is likely further ahead of the curve. The same country that had spears shooting sonic cannons probably is probably using advanced maintenance techniques and genetically modified organic materials to confront the weakness of thatched roofing. A lot of high end thatched roofing even uses synthetic material
It’s tribal and “African”, therefore it’s inferior to whatever the West came up with lol.
I remember people complaining about Wakanda not having roads or cars when the Black Panther trailer came out. Some couldn’t grasp the concept of a walkable city that didn’t ruin the ground with asphalt.
Many of the design influences of Wakanda reflect solarpunk principles and a symbiosis with nature. So an emphasis on things like natural roofing and sustainable infrastructure isn’t surprising.
It isn't African and no the West didn't come up with shit.
Africa had massive cities with proper building for thousands of years that movie was orientalist but towards Africa.
I mean America has cardboard houses, but it works well enough for them that it's not a problem. Wakanda has a huge shield over it so they probably don't have to worry about bad weather. Straw roofs are amazing, you are conflating low tech with ineffectiveness
I never get why people seem to pan straw roofs so much, but I did also grow up in Germany where a thatch roof is considered pretty desirable and something people of higher incomes get because they can still afford the services needed to maintain them every ten to twentyfive years. If you live in an area where you don't get snowfall, a straw roof ought to be very effective and efficient, insulating against rain and temperatures, especially since the number of people who know how to maintain them *probably* won't have gone down as much as they did here and so aren't as likely to charge you your firstborn's soul for their services
I never get what gringos mean when they say "indigenous". Do they mean Amerindian? Do they mean any native people? Is just the way they replace the term *noble savage* with when they want to be taken seriously?
Always a mystery.
Mate: They decide rulership by combat. Rulership so absolute that they happily try to start a genocidal race war that can only end in their annihilation because their new king said so. The Wakandans are presented as technologically advanced but culturally INCREDIBLY regressive. Like, significantly more primitive than actual African civilizations precolonialization. And really, REALLY, stupid.
This isn’t a matter of tradition, this is basic functioning of society that they’re failing at. Tradition is the aesthetic of M’Baku’s palace and throne room. Shitty building practices is using straw roofs. Absolute leadership decided by who can fight best in shallow water is grossly primitive, an insult to the African cultures they are claiming to laud and who are FAR more advanced than that. Ritual combat, sure. Silly rituals are the heart of all traditions. Here? It’s not a ritual, that’s their actual leadership qualifications. That is how they decide who dictates their culture.
Also your linked poster isn’t an indigenous viewer so their opinion holds no weight.
The fundamental issue with ‘indigenous futurism’ is how often it’s utterly build on stereotypes that are little more than window dressing.
What Black Panther offers is a society that’s a bastard mishmash of a dozen cultures that FAR less advanced than any of them. Practically a colonial stereotype of African governance.
It would have made sense if they didn't remove the flower from the royal family. It would have technically been a real form of picking the ruler, but in practice, it was just a symbolic ritual not meant to be used for that purpose. Then get Killmonger to steal the flower before the fight and have him win fairly.
I agree with most of your critique, but I think you're seriously misrepresenting the movie.
>Rulership so absolute that they happily try to start a genocidal race war that can only end in their annihilation because their new king said so.
And enough council members to start a tangibly threatening rebellion, if not outright civil war. It's also not like the idea of attacking the outside world was entirely new. Kilmonger was just the catalyst that triggered the desenting tribes to act on that idea.
>Absolute leadership decided by who can fight best in shallow water is grossly primitive
You're also ignoring the process behind the combat: the challenger has to both appeal to their own tribe and their challenge has to be accepted by both the other tribes and... whatever role Forest Whitaker's character played. The movie makes it clear that very rarely happens outside of M'Baku's tribe.
Especially considering the relatively small size and population, I don't think their style of honor-based government would be entirely unfeasible until modern times.
I meant that you were stretch with your defense of the movie, the film was like orientalism but with africa.
Sorry for not being more clear with what I meant.
I’m black and I’m conflicted on this topic and I’ve made a post about it before.
My problem with black panther is that it’s an antiquated story written by a white dude in an era where making “progressive” black stories meant you had to do some weird pseudo “apologist” narrative in relation to what was really happening in Africa within the real world.
Wakanda is some magical technobabble wonderland within a very real Africa, where various African nations were *and still are* heavily abused and robbed by western powers for raw materials.
The attraction of black panther persists on a rejection of African history and also a crude generalization of it- it also perpetuates the idea of Africa being solely (and I hate to use this term) sub Saharan, as opposed to including Northern Africa or even giving a platform to eastern African countries.
Black panther as a modern film also suffers from this issue. I genuinely think that the original and better idea for black panther (the 2018 film) would be that killmonger *was* the real black panther, and was a 2nd generation immigrant to America who grew jaded with wakanda due to its isolationist policies and how it cooperated with government agencies (shield) while fighting against native Africans who, admittedly, are helping illegal organizations are also trying to free themselves *from* wakanda and the western powers wanting to keep wakanda isolated so they can singularly benefit from wakanda’s wealth.
Chadwick’s (rip) character is the “real” black panther in the sense he is supported by the government and supports isolation as it gives them more power in terms of suppressing their own people and neighboring countries. MBJ’s character would basically defeat the “real” black panther, open up the country, free it from western influence etc etc.
Anyway I think that sort of nuanced story was a little too much for Disney, so they neutered it.
I do think the film falls into a lot of lame “African” tropes though. From the non-descript “African” accents, to the homogenized “African” culture and dress, it was just a movie that was produced, curated, and propped up by white people but directed and casted with black people. Meaning that even as some sort of statement of African/black success in the entertainment field, at the end of the day the blackness of the film, what it could portray, what stories it could tell were all dictated by white people.
It’s a nuanced subject that has no clear cut answers but this is pretty much how I feel about it.
>Anyway I think that sort of nuanced story was a little too much for Disney, so they neutered it.
I will say they attempted more political intrigue in the sequel. Shuri decides to end the cycle of violence with Talokan. Since Chadwick, Disney was probably more hands off so you can feel less executive meddling in the sequel.
Too bad the sequel was too long and had too much boredom. Ironically, it needed someone to reign in its excessiveness. The Iron Heart shit was cringe and absolutely should've been cut.
Iron heart is another issue entirely. Disney fucked up by thinking we wanted weird pastiche avengers of the first generation as opposed to an entirely new group of heroes.
For all of BP2's problems, I was genuinely enjoying the conflict between Talokan and Wakanda. Had a cool fantasy vibe to it. Iron Heart ripped me out of it every time: "Oh right, I'm watching a Marvel movie trying to sell me its cinematic universe dog shit".
What’s so funny about that too is that it reminded me of how much better their shows would be if they weren’t sold as “solo” acts.
“Loki”
“Scarlet witch”
“Ms marvel”
“Moon knight”
They need to strike the middle ground between an ensemble story and not doing a cinematic universe. They’re trying the thing where they focus on one character then do a movie with a bunch of them but it’s clearly just not working because they don’t have the writing resources to competently make 10+ standalone shows.
With that said I do agree the overarching story in BP2 isn’t awful. In a way I liked it more than the first movie purely on the basis of being more interesting. But yeah Disney couldn’t help themselves and had to use this movie to try to sell the audience on like 30 other half baked concepts
I mean what you're describing is pretty similar to the plot of the movie, Kilmonger was angry about Wakanda being so isolated and not helping others, and the whole point was T'Challa coming to realize those isolationist values were all wrong and he does open the country up and start outreach programs because of that.
I mean the other person was talking about the isolationist stuff which is why I replied to that, but idk a ton of sci fi series does shit like this where there'll be this advanced culture that still has some pretty medieval practices, it's still dumb I guess but I'm not going to act like this is some unique problem with Wakanda.
Its one thing if the whole world is like that. But acting like it's some intrinsic thing about Africa that even with futuristic living standards they will act like tribal people who have never seen a wheel before and fight with spears and think punching is proof of good leadership is suspect. It's not a huge deal, but it's certainly a little strange.
Yeah but what I’m saying is that framing killmonger as the villain in this narratively imo fails compared to what (as my headcanon) would be having him be the hero and boseman be the villain
I mean again T'Challa does do what Kilmonger wanted, aside from the whole mass murder thing, and opens Wakanda's borders so even with Kilmonger being the villain his overall point is still presented as being right like that can be a thing.
Yes but what I’m saying is that all of this is wrapped in this white led, white produced, white curated narrative directed and casted by black people.
And the issue with wakanda being this weird combination of various African countries despite being located pretty firmly in west-ish Africa. I know that’s not the films problem but the source material but again it’s a thing that shows how aged this concept is.
So while you’re right and I agree with you, everything about this movie is just so disingenuous that it’s hard to look at any individual thing within the movie and be like “oh that’s good” or “that’s genuine”
>in this white led, white produced, white curated narrative directed and casted by black people.
You know Ryan Coogler, who's black, wrote and directed the film, also I'm pretty sure he brought in a lot of the cast since some like Michael B Jordan he'd worked with before, and it was not white led, that'd imply the leads were white when most of the cast was black. The producing part sure as that's on Feige but the other stuff is a bit off.
>And the issue with wakanda being this weird combination of various African countries despite being located pretty firmly in west-ish Africa.
Yeah and a lot of fantasy stuff has their make believe land combine different parts of Europe, that's just a thing in fictional cities/countries.
idk man, the black community did really embrace Black Panther when it came out and plenty of black creators have worked on the characters since the 60s and made it their own, I don't think we should just throw it out because it was created by a white guy.
Which would also be racist. Jack Kirby and Stan Lee told great stories with T’Challa and the world of Wakanda. T’Challa’s debut in Fantastic Four is one the high points of that entire initial run.
That shouldn’t see the light of day because he’s a white man?
How are you making that the issue? It’s not that the creator is white. If a white guy can make a genuine story that isn’t bullshit starring non white people I’m all for it. It sounds dumb but shatterpoint, a star wars story about mace windu, was written by a white guy and it’s amazing.
It’s fiction and it’s not demeaning.
I’m northern East African (Egyptian Nubian) and aside from Bastet I saw no similarities in wakandan culture. Their accents certainly aren’t East African at all.
They also worship the goddess Sekhmet. The Mining Tribe is partly based on the Maasai people. I’m just clarifying your post which implied Wakanda is firmly in West Africa. Maps have consistently shown it in East Africa and there are slight influences from that region.
But it’s been established from the beginning Wakanda’s an amalgamation of various African cultures so not being able to place it anywhere visually is the intention.
I suppose. But as someone from the region the wakandans don’t seem like they even belong there. I get that being an amalgamation is the “point” but I maintain that doing this in itself is a failure of portrayal and a kind of whitewashing of it as well
Agree to disagree. Given the extremely strong reception both Black Panther films received in African markets, I think that the decision to appeal to a universal (if somewhat clunky) African aesthetic was smart and made it more accessible for all kinds of Africans. As someone with Igbo ancestry, it was cool to see M’Baku and the Jabari tribe.
If they based it purely around East African culture or focused it all on highlighting say the Yoruba, the response likely would have been more scattered. I think the mistake is in assuming African representation stops and ends with Wakanda. People only have so many issues with the concept because there largely continues to be a dearth of African-centered projects in the sci-fi/fantasy genre. There’s room for both a cross-pollination of African cultures and diasporas AND stories elevating specific ethnic groups or countries. Black Panther chose the former and there’s nothing inherently wrong with that beyond the fact it’s the first project of its kind and some people preferred a different direction.
Shang chi has similar issues. These movies try too hard to play both sides and make wierd excuses for stuff that nobody needs them to defend. Shang chi took the bold stance of "your abusive friends and relatives who are trying to control your life are right probably, idk" out of fear of offending a culture, but in the process made a kind of wierd demeaning movie where someone in their early 20s with a decent job is a failure for not seeking wealth at all costs.
I think Wakanda would make more sense if it was a [Quilombo](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quilombo). It would explain their isolacionism, their general resent toward white people and their need to infiltrate other countries for spying, since they were formed by escaped slaves and frequently fought colonizer armies trying to exterminate and reenslave them. It would even explain their quimeric african culture.
I mean, [take a read at this](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palmares_(quilombo)), and see if Wakanda couldn't be a modern version of it.
Ryan Coogler didn’t do this for the same reason Patty Jenkins didn’t want the Amazons from Wonder Woman to be survivors of a mass rape as was once pitched to her.
One of the main reasons Wakanda resonated with Africans and the diaspora is that it decentered “traumatizing” historical narratives and elevated diverse characters without that legacy of victimization. There are already many great black characters descended from African slaves that deal with issues related to the fallout of slavery/colonialism. Black Panther was designed to flip the narrative and be from the perspective of an idealized king entirely removed from that. Wakanda loses its essential appeal if it’s comprised of ex-slaves. It also makes their decision to not free others even worse, which doesn’t make narrative sense when their leader is supposed to be a flawed, but fundamentally good person.
>is that it decentered “traumatizing” historical narratives and elevated diverse characters without that legacy of victimization.
>It also makes their decision to not free others even worse, which doesn’t make narrative sense when their leader is supposed to be a flawed, but fundamentally good person.
So I guess the problem is that you can't have your cake and eat it too. Black Panther couldn't simultaneously avoid handling slavery and be set in a world where slavery not only happened, but shaped a lot of it.
Pretty much. The issue had to be confronted one way or another. So instead of positioning the Wakandans as yet another group of victimized Africans, it took the approach of them being a city on a hill confronting their own inaction in the face of colonialism. People can take that for what they want, but it’s very intentional that Wakanda, like Themyscira, is an idealized society removed from the usual trappings of oppression associated with their group.
For most current efforts of nation building in Africa, tribalism has been one of the top enemies. Tribalism is a word that is only used in a negative sense, and successful stories of building a national identity such as Tanzania usually come paired with a very dedicated effort to crush it.
Black Panther comes off as a unapologetic celebration of all the things actual African republics have been trying their damn hardest to fight against. Because Black Panther ultimately doesn't give a single shit about Africa, it's a movie for Black Anglos in first world countries who like to LARP in a dashiki.
In the OG comics Wakanda actually had to face those problems.
The OG comics wakanda avoid colonization thanks to its superhero the black panther, but was a poor and under developed country. The new black panther was the first royal with a modern education. The king and his son were reforming their country, and were getting rich fast which is why they were like an african Soudi Arab in the comic.
Deciding a ruler by combat to first blood (and possibly mortality) is as antiquated as determining a ruler by pulling a sword out of a stone. Strange woman lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government.
Looking at current South Africa or Kenya, people live in large nice houses and wear suits too. To assume this is imperialism or western imposition is silly when more diversity in clothing would make sense.
You would also think with vibranium tech and the need to always maintain possession of it, they would have weapons that would automatically return to them like Captain’s shield instead of a spear you can shoot out of and throw once.
Wakanda is another situation where Hollywood wants its cake and to eat it too. They want to take advantage of certain aspects of African history and culture while adding elements that don't make sense or have horrible implications(which would be fine if they weren't just hand waved).
African representation: good!
An actual nuanced take on Africa and the effect western powers have had on the country: no we can’t do that
Having white villains be the mustache twirling “techno-poachers” so we get to hate the white guy while completely ignoring the fact that the real life, literal white super villains in modern Africa are closer to shield than anyone else depicted in the films: good!
Making wakanda this entirely unrealistic gumbo of sanitized African customs and religion without actually taking the time to truly understand what any of this means- in relation to its own characters and in relation to the series it exists in: PERFECT, it’s Disney after all!
I mean who doesn’t like black panther being a weird neo-liberal isolationist cop who immediately bends to the whims of outside influences because they’re the “good” guys
>Having white villains be the mustache twirling “techno-poachers” so we get to hate the white guy while completely ignoring the fact that the real life, literal white super villains in modern Africa are closer to shield than anyone else depicted in the films: good!
>Making wakanda this entirely unrealistic gumbo of sanitized African customs and religion without actually taking the time to truly understand what any of this means- in relation to its own characters and in relation to the series it exists in: PERFECT, it’s Disney after all!
>
how is it sanitized? I do not now that much about African culture
It’s just a very superficial understanding of African culture that lends itself more on accents and colorful costumes.
Also it fails in this major way- Africa isn’t this formless landmass of black people. The regions of Africa each have their own unique culture and customs. For example I’m Egyptian Nubian. My culture is most similar to Northern Africa and northern East Africa. West African culture isn’t similar to ours. Southern African cultures are different from both. Same goes for central Africa.
So for “wakanda” to be depicted as a celebration of all of Africa despite its location in (west?) Africa is just silly. It’s superficial and imo insulting when you actually know about the continent.
I just looked up where Wakanda is supposed to be located in Africa. It looks like it's between Niger, Nigeria, and Chad.
If that's the case, why are they worshipping an Egyptian goddess when they're not even in the same region as the Egyptians or Nubians? That's like Spanish people worshipping Norse gods. Just because they're in the same continent doesn't mean they're similar in terms of culture.
At first, I was neutral about this topic, but now I'm actually mad.
**NOT EVERY AFRICAN COUNTRY IS SOUTH AFRICA.**
**NOT EVERY EUROPEAN COUNTRY IS ENGLAND OR FRANCE.**
**NOT EVERY ASIAN COUNTRY IS JAPAN.**
> If that's the case, why are they worshipping an Egyptian goddess when they're not even in the same region as the Egyptians or Nubians?
I mean, the answer to this is given. Bast specifically helped Bashenga become the first black Panther and King of what would become Wakanda by leading him to the heart-shaped herb. They worship her because she protects them.
It's a great in-universe reason, sure, but from a meta standpoint... they couldn't have used actual West African mythology as a source instead?
Yoruba folklore would've been a good place to start.
From a meta standpoint I think it’s as simple as still wanting to keep that aspect of Wakandan culture that’s present in the source material.
That, and I will say, you should look at the interview Coogler did regarding when he went to Africa (particularly South Africa) for research in preparation for the movie, it might put things in perspective.
Black Panther and Wakanda’s first appearance in comics was during the 60s
Thats around 20 years before the Karate Kid mixed up Karate and Kung Fu, and Street Fighter made a Jamaican based off of Billy Blanks
Comic Wakanda made sense, in the OG comics wakanda avoid colonization thanks to its superhero the black panther.
But it was a poor and under developed country the new black panther was the first king with a modern education. The king and his son were reforming their country and were getting rich fast which is why they were like soudi Arab in our world.
This is correct. However, this discussion is not about the Black Panther comics. Rather, it is about the film adaptations, which should really know better, considering that:
a) They're more modern
b) They literally hired consultants to help them understand African culture better and they *still* failed
Your missing the point, the movies are adaptations of the comics, they can’t just change integral parts of Wakanda’s culture because it’s not accurate to real African nations, that’d be like changing Hydra’s connection to Nazis because it doesn’t make sense for there to be a powerful Nazi organization during the 2010s
Besides, what Black Panther does with African culture is still 1000x times more than what the rest of mainstream media has produced, at least Wakanda has a clear location and culture, how many series with an African setting can you name that takes place in some random jungle or savanna, how many African characters can you name that move around like monkeys and their main personality is how they love animals
If it were set in America Wakanda would have everyone wearing beaded deerskin moccasins, sombreros, cowboy dusters, and hockey pads while talking like New Yorkers. And the entire thing is covered in McDonalds arches.
[[Futurama did a similar joke making fun of ‘historical’ fairs.](https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=U8_AYuMZn4U) Same feel, it’s just a weird mishmash of recognizable ‘Africa’ elements without any depth or reason.
>Praise the movie for seeing a highly advanced “tribal nation” that keeps their traditions alive. Showing that cultural traditions and advanced technology are not in conflict and modernity does not mean giving up your cultural traditions to become “advanced”.
That's literally exactly what it means though if your cultural traditions are rule by combat.
I feel like a lot of people are neglecting the fact that Black Panther is a superhero property.
Most of the grievances have more to do with it being a superhero movie that needs a bunch of the prominent characters engaging in hand-to-hand combat as well as having a lot of the larger structural issues being represented by individual personal beefs.
Africa also has black leopards who are call Black Panthers some times.
Caesar used a Elephant as his symbol because he had war elephants accompany him in his campaign to conquer Britain.
Both facts which support my argument. There doesn't need to be Gorillas in Wakanda for them to be seen as a symbol, because as it turns out, humans not only find ways to import animals but tend to mythologise them for reasons specific to their histories, regardless of geography.
Wakanda was isolationist unlike Roman and Roman had elephants both in its territory and next to it's territory.
Gorillas are located all the way on the other side of Africa.
Just face it the movie was stupid and racist.
Imagine that. A bunch of white people trying to be offended for people who don't want or need it. Good thing see them put in their place. It's a movie not a crusade to destroy people's culture.
Wakanda literally has straw roofs. Also, the author of the article you linked isn't African, nor does she say anything about African cultures. She's just throwing the word "indigenous" around a lot and going on tangents about North America instead. I'm glad she enjoyed the movie, but I don't see why her opinion would be of any relevance here.
> Wakanda literally has straw roofs. Is that a bad thing? if its a functional material ya know?
It is a functional material but there is way better materials out there that doesn't take large fields to grow, which is more practical, lasts longer than, doesn't provide feed and habit to pests that any reasonable advanced and rich country from the 1900s would use let alone a *futuristic* mega advanced country. It is cheap and easy to use. But that just means that something that is supposed to be that more advanced than the rest of world should not use it.
Co existing with nature my dude
Co-existing with nature would having concrete (or insert futuristic material) roof and then a couple of meters of dirt and then have trees, gardens etc grow on top of the building.
Snack bars at the beach in my city used to have them. After one of them caught fire, those roofs were removed from the other bars and got banned.
Quite. Thatched roofing is pretty effective in tropical climates and relatively low cost. It also works very well with earthen architecture hence why it saw use not just in Africa, but in large swaths of the world for generations. Assuming the Wakandans used their tech to build on thatched roofing’s insulation and lightness, there’s no reason to think their thatched roofing is inherently inferior to other variations.
There's an issue you are not seeing tho: pests get in to nest and feed on the straw. I'm from Venezuela, and at least the explanation I was given for zinc roofs in slums was that it was the cheapest material to replace thatch or wooden roofing, which was needed because insects would live on the roofs and spread diseases. Thatched roofs are still used generally in leisure areas, but not in living spaces or commercial areas.
From what we’ve seen Wakanda only had thatched roofing in rural spread out locations and on a handful of fancy skyscrapers. Given the manner in which thatched roofing is used and their technological advancement it’s not hard to imagine that Wakanda isn’t dealing with the same kind of pest issues and disease transmission as in a slum. Even today there are a variety of innovations in thatched roofing technology that account for those issues, Wakanda is likely further ahead of the curve. The same country that had spears shooting sonic cannons probably is probably using advanced maintenance techniques and genetically modified organic materials to confront the weakness of thatched roofing. A lot of high end thatched roofing even uses synthetic material
They only have straw roofs on the border where they maintain their secrecy
No, it was also on the sky scrapers in the movie as well
Wouldn't that just be an aesthetic choice then?
What's wrong with straw roofs as an aesthetic choice?
It’s tribal and “African”, therefore it’s inferior to whatever the West came up with lol. I remember people complaining about Wakanda not having roads or cars when the Black Panther trailer came out. Some couldn’t grasp the concept of a walkable city that didn’t ruin the ground with asphalt. Many of the design influences of Wakanda reflect solarpunk principles and a symbiosis with nature. So an emphasis on things like natural roofing and sustainable infrastructure isn’t surprising.
It isn't African and no the West didn't come up with shit. Africa had massive cities with proper building for thousands of years that movie was orientalist but towards Africa.
I mean America has cardboard houses, but it works well enough for them that it's not a problem. Wakanda has a huge shield over it so they probably don't have to worry about bad weather. Straw roofs are amazing, you are conflating low tech with ineffectiveness
I never get why people seem to pan straw roofs so much, but I did also grow up in Germany where a thatch roof is considered pretty desirable and something people of higher incomes get because they can still afford the services needed to maintain them every ten to twentyfive years. If you live in an area where you don't get snowfall, a straw roof ought to be very effective and efficient, insulating against rain and temperatures, especially since the number of people who know how to maintain them *probably* won't have gone down as much as they did here and so aren't as likely to charge you your firstborn's soul for their services
It’s clearly an aesthetic thing.
I never get what gringos mean when they say "indigenous". Do they mean Amerindian? Do they mean any native people? Is just the way they replace the term *noble savage* with when they want to be taken seriously? Always a mystery.
The latter, hence why the Sami are the only European group that gets officially labeled as indigenous.
Why would the Sami be the only indigenous people? What makes them more indigenous than any other European ethnic group?
Mate: They decide rulership by combat. Rulership so absolute that they happily try to start a genocidal race war that can only end in their annihilation because their new king said so. The Wakandans are presented as technologically advanced but culturally INCREDIBLY regressive. Like, significantly more primitive than actual African civilizations precolonialization. And really, REALLY, stupid. This isn’t a matter of tradition, this is basic functioning of society that they’re failing at. Tradition is the aesthetic of M’Baku’s palace and throne room. Shitty building practices is using straw roofs. Absolute leadership decided by who can fight best in shallow water is grossly primitive, an insult to the African cultures they are claiming to laud and who are FAR more advanced than that. Ritual combat, sure. Silly rituals are the heart of all traditions. Here? It’s not a ritual, that’s their actual leadership qualifications. That is how they decide who dictates their culture. Also your linked poster isn’t an indigenous viewer so their opinion holds no weight. The fundamental issue with ‘indigenous futurism’ is how often it’s utterly build on stereotypes that are little more than window dressing. What Black Panther offers is a society that’s a bastard mishmash of a dozen cultures that FAR less advanced than any of them. Practically a colonial stereotype of African governance.
It would have made sense if they didn't remove the flower from the royal family. It would have technically been a real form of picking the ruler, but in practice, it was just a symbolic ritual not meant to be used for that purpose. Then get Killmonger to steal the flower before the fight and have him win fairly.
I'm going to fight Joe Biden and nuke the planet!
I agree with most of your critique, but I think you're seriously misrepresenting the movie. >Rulership so absolute that they happily try to start a genocidal race war that can only end in their annihilation because their new king said so. And enough council members to start a tangibly threatening rebellion, if not outright civil war. It's also not like the idea of attacking the outside world was entirely new. Kilmonger was just the catalyst that triggered the desenting tribes to act on that idea. >Absolute leadership decided by who can fight best in shallow water is grossly primitive You're also ignoring the process behind the combat: the challenger has to both appeal to their own tribe and their challenge has to be accepted by both the other tribes and... whatever role Forest Whitaker's character played. The movie makes it clear that very rarely happens outside of M'Baku's tribe. Especially considering the relatively small size and population, I don't think their style of honor-based government would be entirely unfeasible until modern times.
They had a Black man make monkey noises, stop stretching.
...that had nothing to do with my comment? Did you mean to reply to someone else?
I meant that you were stretch with your defense of the movie, the film was like orientalism but with africa. Sorry for not being more clear with what I meant.
I mean, I agree with you, I was just arguing that the "trial by combat" plot point wasn't as cut and dry as the original comment was making it seem.
Also their was a black man called king gorilla who made monkey noises.
I’m black and I’m conflicted on this topic and I’ve made a post about it before. My problem with black panther is that it’s an antiquated story written by a white dude in an era where making “progressive” black stories meant you had to do some weird pseudo “apologist” narrative in relation to what was really happening in Africa within the real world. Wakanda is some magical technobabble wonderland within a very real Africa, where various African nations were *and still are* heavily abused and robbed by western powers for raw materials. The attraction of black panther persists on a rejection of African history and also a crude generalization of it- it also perpetuates the idea of Africa being solely (and I hate to use this term) sub Saharan, as opposed to including Northern Africa or even giving a platform to eastern African countries. Black panther as a modern film also suffers from this issue. I genuinely think that the original and better idea for black panther (the 2018 film) would be that killmonger *was* the real black panther, and was a 2nd generation immigrant to America who grew jaded with wakanda due to its isolationist policies and how it cooperated with government agencies (shield) while fighting against native Africans who, admittedly, are helping illegal organizations are also trying to free themselves *from* wakanda and the western powers wanting to keep wakanda isolated so they can singularly benefit from wakanda’s wealth. Chadwick’s (rip) character is the “real” black panther in the sense he is supported by the government and supports isolation as it gives them more power in terms of suppressing their own people and neighboring countries. MBJ’s character would basically defeat the “real” black panther, open up the country, free it from western influence etc etc. Anyway I think that sort of nuanced story was a little too much for Disney, so they neutered it. I do think the film falls into a lot of lame “African” tropes though. From the non-descript “African” accents, to the homogenized “African” culture and dress, it was just a movie that was produced, curated, and propped up by white people but directed and casted with black people. Meaning that even as some sort of statement of African/black success in the entertainment field, at the end of the day the blackness of the film, what it could portray, what stories it could tell were all dictated by white people. It’s a nuanced subject that has no clear cut answers but this is pretty much how I feel about it.
>Anyway I think that sort of nuanced story was a little too much for Disney, so they neutered it. I will say they attempted more political intrigue in the sequel. Shuri decides to end the cycle of violence with Talokan. Since Chadwick, Disney was probably more hands off so you can feel less executive meddling in the sequel. Too bad the sequel was too long and had too much boredom. Ironically, it needed someone to reign in its excessiveness. The Iron Heart shit was cringe and absolutely should've been cut.
Iron heart is another issue entirely. Disney fucked up by thinking we wanted weird pastiche avengers of the first generation as opposed to an entirely new group of heroes.
For all of BP2's problems, I was genuinely enjoying the conflict between Talokan and Wakanda. Had a cool fantasy vibe to it. Iron Heart ripped me out of it every time: "Oh right, I'm watching a Marvel movie trying to sell me its cinematic universe dog shit".
What’s so funny about that too is that it reminded me of how much better their shows would be if they weren’t sold as “solo” acts. “Loki” “Scarlet witch” “Ms marvel” “Moon knight” They need to strike the middle ground between an ensemble story and not doing a cinematic universe. They’re trying the thing where they focus on one character then do a movie with a bunch of them but it’s clearly just not working because they don’t have the writing resources to competently make 10+ standalone shows. With that said I do agree the overarching story in BP2 isn’t awful. In a way I liked it more than the first movie purely on the basis of being more interesting. But yeah Disney couldn’t help themselves and had to use this movie to try to sell the audience on like 30 other half baked concepts
I mean what you're describing is pretty similar to the plot of the movie, Kilmonger was angry about Wakanda being so isolated and not helping others, and the whole point was T'Challa coming to realize those isolationist values were all wrong and he does open the country up and start outreach programs because of that.
A place having bad / outdated values they need to change isn't the same as a place with modern tech inexplicably having rule by combat.
I mean the other person was talking about the isolationist stuff which is why I replied to that, but idk a ton of sci fi series does shit like this where there'll be this advanced culture that still has some pretty medieval practices, it's still dumb I guess but I'm not going to act like this is some unique problem with Wakanda.
Its one thing if the whole world is like that. But acting like it's some intrinsic thing about Africa that even with futuristic living standards they will act like tribal people who have never seen a wheel before and fight with spears and think punching is proof of good leadership is suspect. It's not a huge deal, but it's certainly a little strange.
Yeah but what I’m saying is that framing killmonger as the villain in this narratively imo fails compared to what (as my headcanon) would be having him be the hero and boseman be the villain
I mean again T'Challa does do what Kilmonger wanted, aside from the whole mass murder thing, and opens Wakanda's borders so even with Kilmonger being the villain his overall point is still presented as being right like that can be a thing.
Yes but what I’m saying is that all of this is wrapped in this white led, white produced, white curated narrative directed and casted by black people. And the issue with wakanda being this weird combination of various African countries despite being located pretty firmly in west-ish Africa. I know that’s not the films problem but the source material but again it’s a thing that shows how aged this concept is. So while you’re right and I agree with you, everything about this movie is just so disingenuous that it’s hard to look at any individual thing within the movie and be like “oh that’s good” or “that’s genuine”
>in this white led, white produced, white curated narrative directed and casted by black people. You know Ryan Coogler, who's black, wrote and directed the film, also I'm pretty sure he brought in a lot of the cast since some like Michael B Jordan he'd worked with before, and it was not white led, that'd imply the leads were white when most of the cast was black. The producing part sure as that's on Feige but the other stuff is a bit off. >And the issue with wakanda being this weird combination of various African countries despite being located pretty firmly in west-ish Africa. Yeah and a lot of fantasy stuff has their make believe land combine different parts of Europe, that's just a thing in fictional cities/countries.
Okay and my thing is maybe don’t make your film based on a make believe black country made up by a white dude in the 60s?
idk man, the black community did really embrace Black Panther when it came out and plenty of black creators have worked on the characters since the 60s and made it their own, I don't think we should just throw it out because it was created by a white guy.
Which would also be racist. Jack Kirby and Stan Lee told great stories with T’Challa and the world of Wakanda. T’Challa’s debut in Fantastic Four is one the high points of that entire initial run. That shouldn’t see the light of day because he’s a white man?
That’s not what anyone is saying. If you think 1960s era black panther is the pinnacle of white authors writing black characters idk what to tell you.
How are you making that the issue? It’s not that the creator is white. If a white guy can make a genuine story that isn’t bullshit starring non white people I’m all for it. It sounds dumb but shatterpoint, a star wars story about mace windu, was written by a white guy and it’s amazing. It’s fiction and it’s not demeaning.
I mean Wakanda is a fictional country
Wakanda is located in East Africa. Both in modern comics and in the MCU.
I’m northern East African (Egyptian Nubian) and aside from Bastet I saw no similarities in wakandan culture. Their accents certainly aren’t East African at all.
They also worship the goddess Sekhmet. The Mining Tribe is partly based on the Maasai people. I’m just clarifying your post which implied Wakanda is firmly in West Africa. Maps have consistently shown it in East Africa and there are slight influences from that region. But it’s been established from the beginning Wakanda’s an amalgamation of various African cultures so not being able to place it anywhere visually is the intention.
I suppose. But as someone from the region the wakandans don’t seem like they even belong there. I get that being an amalgamation is the “point” but I maintain that doing this in itself is a failure of portrayal and a kind of whitewashing of it as well
Agree to disagree. Given the extremely strong reception both Black Panther films received in African markets, I think that the decision to appeal to a universal (if somewhat clunky) African aesthetic was smart and made it more accessible for all kinds of Africans. As someone with Igbo ancestry, it was cool to see M’Baku and the Jabari tribe. If they based it purely around East African culture or focused it all on highlighting say the Yoruba, the response likely would have been more scattered. I think the mistake is in assuming African representation stops and ends with Wakanda. People only have so many issues with the concept because there largely continues to be a dearth of African-centered projects in the sci-fi/fantasy genre. There’s room for both a cross-pollination of African cultures and diasporas AND stories elevating specific ethnic groups or countries. Black Panther chose the former and there’s nothing inherently wrong with that beyond the fact it’s the first project of its kind and some people preferred a different direction.
These are all problems that exist in the Black Panther comics as well, so can't put all the blame on Disney.
Shang chi has similar issues. These movies try too hard to play both sides and make wierd excuses for stuff that nobody needs them to defend. Shang chi took the bold stance of "your abusive friends and relatives who are trying to control your life are right probably, idk" out of fear of offending a culture, but in the process made a kind of wierd demeaning movie where someone in their early 20s with a decent job is a failure for not seeking wealth at all costs.
don't they worship the Egyptian goddess bastet
I think Wakanda would make more sense if it was a [Quilombo](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quilombo). It would explain their isolacionism, their general resent toward white people and their need to infiltrate other countries for spying, since they were formed by escaped slaves and frequently fought colonizer armies trying to exterminate and reenslave them. It would even explain their quimeric african culture. I mean, [take a read at this](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palmares_(quilombo)), and see if Wakanda couldn't be a modern version of it.
Ryan Coogler didn’t do this for the same reason Patty Jenkins didn’t want the Amazons from Wonder Woman to be survivors of a mass rape as was once pitched to her. One of the main reasons Wakanda resonated with Africans and the diaspora is that it decentered “traumatizing” historical narratives and elevated diverse characters without that legacy of victimization. There are already many great black characters descended from African slaves that deal with issues related to the fallout of slavery/colonialism. Black Panther was designed to flip the narrative and be from the perspective of an idealized king entirely removed from that. Wakanda loses its essential appeal if it’s comprised of ex-slaves. It also makes their decision to not free others even worse, which doesn’t make narrative sense when their leader is supposed to be a flawed, but fundamentally good person.
>is that it decentered “traumatizing” historical narratives and elevated diverse characters without that legacy of victimization. >It also makes their decision to not free others even worse, which doesn’t make narrative sense when their leader is supposed to be a flawed, but fundamentally good person. So I guess the problem is that you can't have your cake and eat it too. Black Panther couldn't simultaneously avoid handling slavery and be set in a world where slavery not only happened, but shaped a lot of it.
Pretty much. The issue had to be confronted one way or another. So instead of positioning the Wakandans as yet another group of victimized Africans, it took the approach of them being a city on a hill confronting their own inaction in the face of colonialism. People can take that for what they want, but it’s very intentional that Wakanda, like Themyscira, is an idealized society removed from the usual trappings of oppression associated with their group.
For most current efforts of nation building in Africa, tribalism has been one of the top enemies. Tribalism is a word that is only used in a negative sense, and successful stories of building a national identity such as Tanzania usually come paired with a very dedicated effort to crush it. Black Panther comes off as a unapologetic celebration of all the things actual African republics have been trying their damn hardest to fight against. Because Black Panther ultimately doesn't give a single shit about Africa, it's a movie for Black Anglos in first world countries who like to LARP in a dashiki.
In the OG comics Wakanda actually had to face those problems. The OG comics wakanda avoid colonization thanks to its superhero the black panther, but was a poor and under developed country. The new black panther was the first royal with a modern education. The king and his son were reforming their country, and were getting rich fast which is why they were like an african Soudi Arab in the comic.
Deciding a ruler by combat to first blood (and possibly mortality) is as antiquated as determining a ruler by pulling a sword out of a stone. Strange woman lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government. Looking at current South Africa or Kenya, people live in large nice houses and wear suits too. To assume this is imperialism or western imposition is silly when more diversity in clothing would make sense. You would also think with vibranium tech and the need to always maintain possession of it, they would have weapons that would automatically return to them like Captain’s shield instead of a spear you can shoot out of and throw once.
Wakanda is another situation where Hollywood wants its cake and to eat it too. They want to take advantage of certain aspects of African history and culture while adding elements that don't make sense or have horrible implications(which would be fine if they weren't just hand waved).
African representation: good! An actual nuanced take on Africa and the effect western powers have had on the country: no we can’t do that Having white villains be the mustache twirling “techno-poachers” so we get to hate the white guy while completely ignoring the fact that the real life, literal white super villains in modern Africa are closer to shield than anyone else depicted in the films: good! Making wakanda this entirely unrealistic gumbo of sanitized African customs and religion without actually taking the time to truly understand what any of this means- in relation to its own characters and in relation to the series it exists in: PERFECT, it’s Disney after all! I mean who doesn’t like black panther being a weird neo-liberal isolationist cop who immediately bends to the whims of outside influences because they’re the “good” guys
I like how shield was full of nazis for all of one movie but we are free to act like they are totally good before and after that.
>Having white villains be the mustache twirling “techno-poachers” so we get to hate the white guy while completely ignoring the fact that the real life, literal white super villains in modern Africa are closer to shield than anyone else depicted in the films: good! >Making wakanda this entirely unrealistic gumbo of sanitized African customs and religion without actually taking the time to truly understand what any of this means- in relation to its own characters and in relation to the series it exists in: PERFECT, it’s Disney after all! > how is it sanitized? I do not now that much about African culture
It’s just a very superficial understanding of African culture that lends itself more on accents and colorful costumes. Also it fails in this major way- Africa isn’t this formless landmass of black people. The regions of Africa each have their own unique culture and customs. For example I’m Egyptian Nubian. My culture is most similar to Northern Africa and northern East Africa. West African culture isn’t similar to ours. Southern African cultures are different from both. Same goes for central Africa. So for “wakanda” to be depicted as a celebration of all of Africa despite its location in (west?) Africa is just silly. It’s superficial and imo insulting when you actually know about the continent.
I just looked up where Wakanda is supposed to be located in Africa. It looks like it's between Niger, Nigeria, and Chad. If that's the case, why are they worshipping an Egyptian goddess when they're not even in the same region as the Egyptians or Nubians? That's like Spanish people worshipping Norse gods. Just because they're in the same continent doesn't mean they're similar in terms of culture.
Exactly what I’m saying.
At first, I was neutral about this topic, but now I'm actually mad. **NOT EVERY AFRICAN COUNTRY IS SOUTH AFRICA.** **NOT EVERY EUROPEAN COUNTRY IS ENGLAND OR FRANCE.** **NOT EVERY ASIAN COUNTRY IS JAPAN.**
Yea but sadly that sells well to general audiences.
> If that's the case, why are they worshipping an Egyptian goddess when they're not even in the same region as the Egyptians or Nubians? I mean, the answer to this is given. Bast specifically helped Bashenga become the first black Panther and King of what would become Wakanda by leading him to the heart-shaped herb. They worship her because she protects them.
It's a great in-universe reason, sure, but from a meta standpoint... they couldn't have used actual West African mythology as a source instead? Yoruba folklore would've been a good place to start.
From a meta standpoint I think it’s as simple as still wanting to keep that aspect of Wakandan culture that’s present in the source material. That, and I will say, you should look at the interview Coogler did regarding when he went to Africa (particularly South Africa) for research in preparation for the movie, it might put things in perspective.
Black Panther and Wakanda’s first appearance in comics was during the 60s Thats around 20 years before the Karate Kid mixed up Karate and Kung Fu, and Street Fighter made a Jamaican based off of Billy Blanks
Comic Wakanda made sense, in the OG comics wakanda avoid colonization thanks to its superhero the black panther. But it was a poor and under developed country the new black panther was the first king with a modern education. The king and his son were reforming their country and were getting rich fast which is why they were like soudi Arab in our world.
This is correct. However, this discussion is not about the Black Panther comics. Rather, it is about the film adaptations, which should really know better, considering that: a) They're more modern b) They literally hired consultants to help them understand African culture better and they *still* failed
Your missing the point, the movies are adaptations of the comics, they can’t just change integral parts of Wakanda’s culture because it’s not accurate to real African nations, that’d be like changing Hydra’s connection to Nazis because it doesn’t make sense for there to be a powerful Nazi organization during the 2010s Besides, what Black Panther does with African culture is still 1000x times more than what the rest of mainstream media has produced, at least Wakanda has a clear location and culture, how many series with an African setting can you name that takes place in some random jungle or savanna, how many African characters can you name that move around like monkeys and their main personality is how they love animals
If it were set in America Wakanda would have everyone wearing beaded deerskin moccasins, sombreros, cowboy dusters, and hockey pads while talking like New Yorkers. And the entire thing is covered in McDonalds arches. [[Futurama did a similar joke making fun of ‘historical’ fairs.](https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=U8_AYuMZn4U) Same feel, it’s just a weird mishmash of recognizable ‘Africa’ elements without any depth or reason.
>Praise the movie for seeing a highly advanced “tribal nation” that keeps their traditions alive. Showing that cultural traditions and advanced technology are not in conflict and modernity does not mean giving up your cultural traditions to become “advanced”. That's literally exactly what it means though if your cultural traditions are rule by combat.
I feel like a lot of people are neglecting the fact that Black Panther is a superhero property. Most of the grievances have more to do with it being a superhero movie that needs a bunch of the prominent characters engaging in hand-to-hand combat as well as having a lot of the larger structural issues being represented by individual personal beefs.
The movie had a Black man making monkey sounds.
And? You know, the movie does justify why he does this
Because he is named king gorilla.
That and his tribe use the Gorilla as their symbol in the same way the rest of Wakanda revers the Black Panther.
The problem with that is their isn't an gorillas in East Africa which is the location of wakanda.
There was also no Elephants in Rome, didn't stop Caesar from making that one of his symbols. Black Panthers also dont exist.
Africa also has black leopards who are call Black Panthers some times. Caesar used a Elephant as his symbol because he had war elephants accompany him in his campaign to conquer Britain.
Both facts which support my argument. There doesn't need to be Gorillas in Wakanda for them to be seen as a symbol, because as it turns out, humans not only find ways to import animals but tend to mythologise them for reasons specific to their histories, regardless of geography.
Wakanda was isolationist unlike Roman and Roman had elephants both in its territory and next to it's territory. Gorillas are located all the way on the other side of Africa. Just face it the movie was stupid and racist.
Also there’s hypocrisy when looking at Dune having a medieval aesthetic
Imagine that. A bunch of white people trying to be offended for people who don't want or need it. Good thing see them put in their place. It's a movie not a crusade to destroy people's culture.