In recent years, casting decisions have sparked increasing controversy, with debates over whether they respect or distort the original vision of beloved characters. Consider Rachel Zegler’s casting as Snow White, the portrayal of a gay Black samurai in Assassin’s Creed Shadows, and—perhaps the most polarizing for me—the rumored casting of Paapa Essiedu as Severus Snape in HBO’s upcoming Harry Potter series. Each of these choices has ignited heated discussions online. But how do I feel about this, both as a writer and on a personal level?
As a writer, I put a lot of time into creating my characters. I carefully consider their backgrounds, personalities, and even the smallest details of their appearance—the color of their hair, the shape of their nose—you name it, I’ve thought about it. When I visualize my characters, they become more real to me, making it easier to bring my story to life.
My goal is to become successful, so let’s imagine a scenario where my books get adapted into a movie or TV series. When casting begins, my characters’ appearances will be clearly established, both in my writing and in my vision. I can’t imagine a situation where the casting team would choose to go in a completely different direction—and frankly, I wouldn’t allow it. Staying true to the source material is essential. If you’re adapting a story, why would you drastically alter its core elements, including the characters’ identities? To me, as a writer, it just doesn’t make sense to let that happen.
Personally, even outside of my perspective as a writer, my opinion doesn’t change. Take the Harry Potter casting as an example. I’ve been a fan since the books were first released, made sure to attend every movie premiere, and to this day, I rewatch all the films at least once a year. Honestly, I don’t even think this upcoming TV show is necessary—but that’s a whole different discussion.
The whole point of this adaptation was to stay true to the source material and provide a more faithful representation of the books. If executed well, it could still be a success. But the moment you start changing the race of clearly described characters—especially fan favorites—you’re setting yourself up for failure. You lose me, and many others, when you claim to honor the original story but then take it in a completely different direction. Haven’t recent flops already proven that this isn’t what audiences want?
Another issue with this trend is how it’s done. Have you noticed that they always seem to change well-loved, established characters, forcing a different interpretation onto the audience? Or when they push diversity, instead of creating meaningful representation, they take an existing minority character, completely rewrite them, and expect us not to notice?
Most people—aside from the usual outliers—don’t actually care about a character’s race, gender, or background as long as it stays true to the story or historical context. If there’s a genuine concern about a lack of representation, why not create new stories that authentically highlight those perspectives? Why not introduce original characters that bring fresh narratives to the table, instead of rewriting what already exists? That, to me, would be a far better way to celebrate diversity without undermining the integrity of established stories.
In conclusion:
- Keep characters true to their original vision.
- Portray history as it was, not as you wish it to be.
- Stay faithful to the source material—respect the story and its characters.
- If representation is the goal, create new and exciting stories with a diverse cast that fits your vision.
At the end of the day, storytelling thrives on authenticity. Changing beloved characters for the sake of modern agendas doesn’t honor diversity—it undermines both the original work and meaningful representation. If a story is worth telling, it’s worth telling right.